IONA test for first-trimester detection of trisomies 21, 18 and 13

A Critical Evaluation of Validation and Clinical Experience Studies in Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and Monosomy X

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for trisomies 21, 18, 13 and monosomy X is widely utilized with massively parallel shotgun sequencing (MPSS), digital analysis of selected regions (DANSR), and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) analyses being the most widely reported methods. We searched the literature to find all NIPT clinical validation and clinical experience studies between January 2011 and January 2022. Meta-analyses were performed using bivariate random-effects and univariate regression models for estimating summary performance measures across studies. Bivariate meta-regression was performed to explore the influence of testing method and study design. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses evaluated factors that may have led to heterogeneity. Based on 55 validation studies, the detection rate (DR) was significantly higher for retrospective studies, while the false positive rate (FPR) was significantly lower for prospective studies. Comparing the performance of NIPT methods for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 combined, the SNP method had a higher DR and lower FPR than other methods, significantly so for MPSS, though not for DANSR. The performance of the different methods in the 84 clinical experience studies was consistent with validation studies. Clinical positive predictive values of all NIPT methods improved over the last decade. We conclude that all NIPT methods are highly effective for fetal aneuploidy screening, with performance differences across methodologies.

Secondary non-invasive prenatal screening for fetal trisomy: an effectiveness study in a public health setting

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of secondary screening using non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in a routine NHS setting including test performance, turn-around times (TATs) and no-call (failure to obtain result) rates. To examine the influence of maternal and fetal characteristics on test performance.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

London teaching hospital.

SAMPLE

A total of 8651 pregnancies undergoing screening for fetal trisomy using NIPT provided by an NHS cell-free DNA screening laboratory - the SAFE laboratory.

METHODS

Screening test evaluation and TATs. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis to identify significant predictors of no-call results and reported by low fetal fraction (<2%), very high fetal fraction (>40%) and processing failure.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Test performance, TATs and no-call rates, factors affecting no-call results.

RESULTS

Average TAT was 4.0 days (95% CI 4.0-4.2 days). Test sensitivities for trisomies 21 and 13/18 were 98.9% (95% CI 95.9-99.9%) and 90.4% (95% CI 80.0-96.8%), respectively. The overall no-call rate was 32/8651 (0.37%, 95% CI 0.26-0.52%). The overall risk of a no-call result was influenced by gestational age, dichorionic twin pregnancy, history of malignancy and pregnancies affected by trisomy 13/18, but not by maternal weight or use of low-molecular-weight heparin.

CONCLUSIONS

High-throughput NIPT can be effectively embedded into a public health NHS setting. TATs of 4 days and no-calls of <0.5% were well within clinically desirable tolerances. Gestational age, maternal weight, assisted reproductive techniques, use of low-molecular-weight heparin and past history of malignancy did not have major impacts on test no-call rates and should not constitute reasons for withholding the option of NIPT from women.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Turn-around times of 4 days, no-call (test failure) rates of 0.37% and highly accurate NIPT can be successfully embedded in the NHS.

Improving the calling of non-invasive prenatal testing on 13-/18-/21-trisomy by support vector machine discrimination

With the advance of next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies, non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has been developed and employed in fetal aneuploidy screening on 13-/18-/21-trisomies through detecting cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) in maternal blood. Although Z-test is widely used in NIPT NGS data analysis, there is still necessity to improve its accuracy for reducing a) false negatives and false positives, and b) the ratio of unclassified data, so as to lower the potential harm to patients as well as the induced cost of retests. Combining the multiple Z-tests with indexes of clinical signs and quality control, features were collected from the known samples and scaled for model training using support vector machine (SVM). We trained SVM models from the qualified NIPT NGS data that Z-test can discriminate and tested the performance on the data that Z-test cannot discriminate. On screenings of 13-/18-/21-trisomies, the trained SVM models achieved 100% accuracies in both internal validations and unknown sample predictions. It is shown that other machine learning (ML) models can also achieve similar high accuracy, and SVM model is most robust in this study. Moreover, four false positives and four false negatives caused by Z-test were corrected by using the SVM models. To our knowledge, this is one of the earliest studies to employ SVM in NIPT NGS data analysis. It is expected to replace Z-test in clinical practice.

Noninvasive Prenatal Testing: Comparison of Two Mappers and Influence in the Diagnostic Yield

Objective

The aim of this study was to determine if the use of different mappers for NIPT may vary the results considerably.

Methods

Peripheral blood was collected from 217 pregnant women, 58 pathological (34 pregnancies with trisomy 21, 18 with trisomy 18, and 6 with trisomy 13) and 159 euploid. MPS was performed following a manufacturer's modified protocol of semiconductor sequencing. Obtained reads were mapped with two different software programs: TMAP and HPG-Aligner, comparing the results.

Results

Using TMAP, 57 pathological samples were correctly detected (sensitivity 98.28%, specificity 93.08%): 33 samples as trisomy 21 (sensitivity 97.06%, specificity 99.45%), 16 as trisomy 18 (sensibility 88.89%, specificity 93.97%), and 6 as trisomy 13 (sensibility 100%, specificity 100%). 11 false positives, 1 false negative, and 2 samples incorrectly identified were obtained. Using HPG-Aligner, all the 58 pathological samples were correctly identified (sensibility 100%, specificity 96.86%): 34 as trisomy 21 (sensibility 100%, specificity 98.91%), 18 as trisomy 18 (sensibility 100%, specificity 98.99%), and 6 as trisomy 13 (sensibility 100%, specificity 99.53%). 5 false positives were obtained.

Conclusion

Different mappers use slightly different algorithms, so the use of one mapper or another with the same batch file can provide different results.

Prenatal cell-free DNA screening test failures: a systematic review of failure rates, risks of Down syndrome, and impact of repeat testing

PURPOSE

We systematically reviewed the published literature on test failure rates for the sequencing of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in maternal plasma to identify Down syndrome.

METHODS

We searched peer-reviewed English publications with diagnostic results on all pregnancies that provided test failure rates. Data on the odds of failure in Down syndrome and euploid pregnancies and the impact of repeat testing were extracted. Random-effects modeling was then used to identify moderators that could explain variability.

RESULTS

Thirty articles satisfied the inclusion criteria for overall failure rates. Study location (Western and Asian with initial testing, and Western with repeat testing) were significant moderators with failure rates of 3.3, 0.6, and 1.2%, respectively (P = 0.001). The odds ratio for Down syndrome in successful versus failed tests was 0.98 (95% confidence interval: 0.62-1.55, I² = 0%). Repeat testing from 14 large clinical cohort studies found that 83% (range: 52-100%) of failures were repeated, with 79% (range: 46-97%) being successful.

CONCLUSION

Lower failure rates in Asian studies may be related to not routinely measuring the fetal fraction and to fewer obese women. Repeat cfDNA testing is effective in providing reliable results after initial failures. Protocols for primary cfDNA screening should focus on Down syndrome, with less common and more structurally abnormal trisomy 18 and 13 pregnancies treated as adjuncts.

Genomics-based non-invasive prenatal testing for detection of fetal chromosomal aneuploidy in pregnant women

BACKGROUND

Common fetal aneuploidies include Down syndrome (trisomy 21 or T21), Edward syndrome (trisomy 18 or T18), Patau syndrome (trisomy 13 or T13), Turner syndrome (45,X), Klinefelter syndrome (47,XXY), Triple X syndrome (47,XXX) and 47,XYY syndrome (47,XYY). Prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidies is standard care in many countries, but current biochemical and ultrasound tests have high false negative and false positive rates. The discovery of fetal circulating cell-free DNA (ccfDNA) in maternal blood offers the potential for genomics-based non-invasive prenatal testing (gNIPT) as a more accurate screening method. Two approaches used for gNIPT are massively parallel shotgun sequencing (MPSS) and targeted massively parallel sequencing (TMPS).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of MPSS and TMPS for gNIPT as a first-tier test in unselected populations of pregnant women undergoing aneuploidy screening or as a second-tier test in pregnant women considered to be high risk after first-tier screening for common fetal aneuploidies. The gNIPT results were confirmed by a reference standard such as fetal karyotype or neonatal clinical examination.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched 13 databases (including MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science) from 1 January 2007 to 12 July 2016 without any language, search filter or publication type restrictions. We also screened reference lists of relevant full-text articles, websites of private prenatal diagnosis companies and conference abstracts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies could include pregnant women of any age, ethnicity and gestational age with singleton or multifetal pregnancy. The women must have had a screening test for fetal aneuploidy by MPSS or TMPS and a reference standard such as fetal karyotype or medical records from birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently carried out study selection, data extraction and quality assessment (using the QUADAS-2 tool). Where possible, hierarchical models or simpler alternatives were used for meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-five studies of 86,139 pregnant women (3141 aneuploids and 82,998 euploids) were included. No study was judged to be at low risk of bias across the four domains of the QUADAS-2 tool but applicability concerns were generally low. Of the 65 studies, 42 enrolled pregnant women at high risk, five recruited an unselected population and 18 recruited cohorts with a mix of prior risk of fetal aneuploidy. Among the 65 studies, 44 evaluated MPSS and 21 evaluated TMPS; of these, five studies also compared gNIPT with a traditional screening test (biochemical, ultrasound or both). Forty-six out of 65 studies (71%) reported gNIPT assay failure rate, which ranged between 0% and 25% for MPSS, and between 0.8% and 7.5% for TMPS.In the population of unselected pregnant women, MPSS was evaluated by only one study; the study assessed T21, T18 and T13. TMPS was assessed for T21 in four studies involving unselected cohorts; three of the studies also assessed T18 and 13. In pooled analyses (88 T21 cases, 22 T18 cases, eight T13 cases and 20,649 unaffected pregnancies (non T21, T18 and T13)), the clinical sensitivity (95% confidence interval (CI)) of TMPS was 99.2% (78.2% to 100%), 90.9% (70.0% to 97.7%) and 65.1% (9.16% to 97.2%) for T21, T18 and T13, respectively. The corresponding clinical specificity was above 99.9% for T21, T18 and T13.In high-risk populations, MPSS was assessed for T21, T18, T13 and 45,X in 30, 28, 20 and 12 studies, respectively. In pooled analyses (1048 T21 cases, 332 T18 cases, 128 T13 cases and 15,797 unaffected pregnancies), the clinical sensitivity (95% confidence interval (CI)) of MPSS was 99.7% (98.0% to 100%), 97.8% (92.5% to 99.4%), 95.8% (86.1% to 98.9%) and 91.7% (78.3% to 97.1%) for T21, T18, T13 and 45,X, respectively. The corresponding clinical specificities (95% CI) were 99.9% (99.8% to 100%), 99.9% (99.8% to 100%), 99.8% (99.8% to 99.9%) and 99.6% (98.9% to 99.8%). In this risk group, TMPS was assessed for T21, T18, T13 and 45,X in six, five, two and four studies. In pooled analyses (246 T21 cases, 112 T18 cases, 20 T13 cases and 4282 unaffected pregnancies), the clinical sensitivity (95% CI) of TMPS was 99.2% (96.8% to 99.8%), 98.2% (93.1% to 99.6%), 100% (83.9% to 100%) and 92.4% (84.1% to 96.5%) for T21, T18, T13 and 45,X respectively. The clinical specificities were above 100% for T21, T18 and T13 and 99.8% (98.3% to 100%) for 45,X. Indirect comparisons of MPSS and TMPS for T21, T18 and 45,X showed no statistical difference in clinical sensitivity, clinical specificity or both. Due to limited data, comparative meta-analysis of MPSS and TMPS was not possible for T13.We were unable to perform meta-analyses of gNIPT for 47,XXX, 47,XXY and 47,XYY because there were very few or no studies in one or more risk groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

These results show that MPSS and TMPS perform similarly in terms of clinical sensitivity and specificity for the detection of fetal T31, T18, T13 and sex chromosome aneuploidy (SCA). However, no study compared the two approaches head-to-head in the same cohort of patients. The accuracy of gNIPT as a prenatal screening test has been mainly evaluated as a second-tier screening test to identify pregnancies at very low risk of fetal aneuploidies (T21, T18 and T13), thus avoiding invasive procedures. Genomics-based non-invasive prenatal testing methods appear to be sensitive and highly specific for detection of fetal trisomies 21, 18 and 13 in high-risk populations. There is paucity of data on the accuracy of gNIPT as a first-tier aneuploidy screening test in a population of unselected pregnant women. With respect to the replacement of invasive tests, the performance of gNIPT observed in this review is not sufficient to replace current invasive diagnostic tests.We conclude that given the current data on the performance of gNIPT, invasive fetal karyotyping is still the required diagnostic approach to confirm the presence of a chromosomal abnormality prior to making irreversible decisions relative to the pregnancy outcome. However, most of the gNIPT studies were prone to bias, especially in terms of the selection of participants.

The IONA® Test: Development of an Automated Cell-Free DNA-Based Screening Test for Fetal Trisomies 13, 18, and 21 That Employs the Ion Proton Semiconductor Sequencing Platform

OBJECTIVE

To develop a screening test for fetal trisomy 13, 18, and 21 using cell-free DNA from maternal blood with an automated workflow using the Ion Proton sequencing platform.

METHODS

An automated next-generation sequencing workflow was developed using the Ion Proton sequencing platform and software developed for straightforward bioinformatic analysis. An algorithm was developed using 239 samples to determine the likelihood of trisomy, using DNA fragment counts and a fetal fraction validity check; the results were compared with those from invasive diagnostic procedures. A further 111 samples were used to assess the tests' sensitivity (detection rate) and specificity (1 minus false-positive rate).

RESULTS

The 110 of a possible 111 valid samples used to verify the IONA® test gave 100% sensitivity and specificity, compared with invasive diagnostic procedures; one failed the fetal fraction validity check giving a sample failure rate of 0.29% across all 350 analysed samples.

CONCLUSION

The data indicate that the IONA test provides a robust, accurate automated workflow suitable for use on maternal blood samples to screen for trisomies 13, 18, and 21. The test has the potential to reduce the number of unnecessary invasive procedures performed and facilitate testing by screening laboratories.