Validation of combinatorial probe-anchor ligation-based sequencing as non-invasive prenatal test for trisomy at a central laboratory

Noninvasive prenatal screening with conventional sequencing depth to screen fetal copy number variants: A retrospective study of 19 144 pregnant women

AIM

To investigate the detectability of noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) with conventional sequencing depth to detect fetal copy number variants.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study in a total of 19 144 pregnant women. Their cell-free plasma DNA were assessed for trisomy 21, trisomy 18, trisomy 13, sex chromosome aneuploidies, and genome-wide copy number variants by NIPS at conventional sequencing depth.

RESULTS

Three hundred seventy-four cases (2.0%, 374/19 144) with abnormal results were detected, which including 84 cases (0.4%, 84/19 144) with high risk of trisomy 21, 18, and 13, 90 cases (0.5%, 90/19 144) with high risk of sex chromosome abnormalities (SCA), and 44 cases (0.2%, 44/19 144) with high risk of other chromosome aneuploidies. One hundred fifty-six cases (0.8%, 156/19 144) with high risk of copy number variations (CNVs) were also detected. In following prenatal diagnosis, composite positive predictive value (PPV) of trisomy 21, 18, and 13 was 69.6% (48/69). The PPV of SCAs was 37.3% (19/51). And the PPVs for CNVs was detected as 51.0% (<5 Mb), 71.4% (5 Mb ≤ CNV ≤10 Mb), 56.5% (>10 Mb). Finally, a follow-up about the pregnancy outcomes were conducted for all available cases.

CONCLUSIONS

NIPS yielded high PPVs for trisomy 21, 18, and 13 aneuploidies and moderate PPVs for SCAs and CNVs. The screening effectiveness was closely related to the size of CNV fragments. Larger CNVs, especially larger than 5 Mb, could be detected more accurately by NIPS in our analytic technique. Meanwhile, diagnostic confirmation by microarray analysis was highly recommended.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Screening Strategies Involving Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomy 21

Introduction

In accordance with social development, the proportion of advanced maternal age (AMA) increased and the cost of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) decreased.

Objective

We aimed to investigate the benefits and cost-effectiveness of NIPT as primary or contingent strategies limited to the high-risk population of trisomy 21 (T21).

Methods

Referring to parameters from publications or on-site verification, a theoretical model involving 1,000,000 single pregnancies was established. We presented five screening scenarios, primary NIPT (Strategy 1), contingent NIPT after traditional triple serum screening higher than 1/300 or 1/1,000 (Strategy 2-1 or 2-2), and age-based Strategy 3. Strategy 3 was stratified, with the following options: (1) for advanced maternal age (AMA) of 40 years and more, diagnostic testing was offered, (2) for AMA of 35-39 years, NIPT was introduced, (3) if younger than 35 years of age, contingent NIPT with risk higher than 1:300 (Strategy 3-1) or 1:1,000 (Strategy 3-2) will be offered. The primary outcome was an incremental cost analysis on the baseline and alternative assumptions, taking aging society, NIPT price, and compliance into consideration. The strategy was "appropriate" when the incremental cost was less than the cost of raising one T21 child (0.215 million US$). The second outcome included total cost, cost-effect, cost-benefit analysis, and screening efficiency.

Results

Strategy1 was costly, while detecting most T21. Strategy 2-1 reduced unnecessary prenatal diagnosis (PD) and was optimal in total cost, cost-effect, and cost-benefit analysis, nevertheless, T21 detection was the least. Strategy 3 induced most of the PD procedures. Then, setting Strategy2-1 as a baseline for incremental cost analysis, Strategy 3-1 was appropriate. In sensitivity analysis, when the NIPT price was lower than 47 US$, Strategy 1 was the most appropriate. In a society with more than 20% of people older than 35 years of age, the incremental cost of Strategy 3-2 was proper.

Conclusion

Combined strategies involving NIPT reduced unnecessary diagnostic tests. The AMA proportion and NIPT price played critical roles in the strategic decision. The age-based strategy was optimal in incremental cost analysis and was presented to be prominent as AMA proportion and NIPT acceptance increased. The primary NIPT was the most effective, but only at a certain price, it became the most cost-effective strategy.

Retrospective analysis of the risk factors associated with failure in obtaining effective noninvasive prenatal test results and pregnancy outcomes: a case-control study

OBJECTIVE

: To explore the pregnancy outcomes of women who could not obtain effective results from noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) and examine the factors leading to test failure.

METHODS

: From April 2017 to December 2019, 120,041 pregnant women enrolled for voluntary NIPT. The case group comprised of 274 (274/120,041) women who failed to obtain effective NIPT results, and the control group (n = 540) was from the same population who obtained effective NIPT results and matched by age at a 1:2 ratio. Abnormal pregnancy rates between the two groups were analyzed using Chi-square analysis. NIPT failure risk factors were analyzed using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

: Logistic regression analysis showed that increased maternal age (OR=0.988; 95% CI = 0.982-0.994), increased pregnancy age (OR=0.989; 95%CI = 0.988-0.991), and decreased cell-free fetal DNA concentration (OR=1.050; 95%CI=1.043-1.058) were independent risk factors for NIPT failure. 15 cases showed fetus loss in cases of NIPT failure. There was a significant difference in abnormal pregnancy rate between the NIPT success and failure groups (χ2 = 50.943, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

: The specific interventions, guidance, and precautions are needed for pregnant women during perinatal period, especially those who have no effective NIPT results.

Nicht invasive Pränataldiagnostik mittels molekulargenetischer Tests (NIPT) zur Erkennung der Trisomien 13, 18 und 21

Hintergrund

Molekulargenetische Tests (NIPT) auf Trisomie sind längst Teil der nicht invasiven Pränataldiagnostik (NIPD). In Deutschland wird derzeit geprüft, ob und für wen diese Tests von den gesetzlichen Krankenkassen künftig bezahlt werden sollen.

Fragestellung

(I) Diagnostische Eigenschaften der NIPT zur Entdeckung der Trisomien 13, 18 und 21 und (II) hypothetische Berechnung der möglichen Anwendung der NIPT in verschiedenen Gruppen.

Methoden

(I) Systematische Recherche nach Primärliteratur und systematischen Übersichten in MEDLINE und vier weiteren Datenbanken. Einschlusskriterien: Studien mit schwangeren Frauen, Indextest: NIPT mittels molekulargenetischer Analyse von cffDNA im mütterlichen Blut zur Bestimmung des Trisomie-Risikos; Referenztest: zytogenetische Diagnostik oder postnatale klinische Untersuchung. (II) Orientierende Recherche. Hypothetische Berechnungen für (1) alle schwangeren Frauen nach aktuellem Vorgehen ohne NIPT am Beispiel von Ersttrimesterscreening (ETS), (2) Anwendung bei schwangeren Frauen mit erhöhtem Risiko, z. B. nach vorgeschaltetem auffälligem ETS und (3) NIPT in einer Population mit und ohne erhöhtes Risiko für eine Trisomie.

Ergebnisse

Bei 22 eingeschlossenen Studien lagen die Sensitivität und die Spezifität zur Erkennung der Trisomie 21 bei 99,13 % (95 %-KI: [97,39 %; 99,72 %]) und 99,95 % (95 %-KI: [99,88 %; 99,98 %]). Der mögliche Einfluss von Testversagern blieb bei den Berechnungen unberücksichtigt, womit die Sensitivität oder die Spezifität der NIPT möglicherweise überschätzt wurde. Für die Erkennung der Trisomien 13 und 18 konnte jeweils die Sensitivität nicht robust geschätzt werden.

Diskussion

Bei Frauen mit erhöhtem Risiko können NIPT die Zahl der invasiven Tests und damit der testbedingten Fehlgeburten vermutlich verringern.

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.

Analysis of cell-free DNA in maternal blood in screening for aneuploidies: updated meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To review clinical validation or implementation studies of maternal blood cell-free (cf) DNA analysis and define the performance of screening for fetal trisomies 21, 18 and 13 and sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCA).

METHODS

Searches of PubMed, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library were performed to identify all peer-reviewed articles on cfDNA testing in screening for aneuploidies between January 2011, when the first such study was published, and 31 December 2016. The inclusion criteria were peer-reviewed study reporting on clinical validation or implementation of maternal cfDNA testing in screening for aneuploidies, in which data on pregnancy outcome were provided for more than 85% of the study population. We excluded case-control studies, proof-of-principle articles and studies in which the laboratory scientists carrying out the tests were aware of fetal karyotype or pregnancy outcome. Pooled detection rates (DRs) and false-positive rates (FPRs) were calculated using bivariate random-effects regression models.

RESULTS

In total, 35 relevant studies were identified and these were used for the meta-analysis on the performance of cfDNA testing in screening for aneuploidies. These studies reported cfDNA results in relation to fetal karyotype from invasive testing or clinical outcome. In the combined total of 1963 cases of trisomy 21 and 223 932 non-trisomy 21 singleton pregnancies, the weighted pooled DR and FPR were 99.7% (95% CI, 99.1-99.9%) and 0.04% (95% CI, 0.02-0.07%), respectively. In a total of 563 cases of trisomy 18 and 222 013 non-trisomy 18 singleton pregnancies, the weighted pooled DR and FPR were 97.9% (95% CI, 94.9-99.1%) and 0.04% (95% CI, 0.03-0.07%), respectively. In a total of 119 cases of trisomy 13 and 212 883 non-trisomy 13 singleton pregnancies, the weighted pooled DR and FPR were 99.0% (95% CI, 65.8-100%) and 0.04% (95% CI, 0.02-0.07%), respectively. In a total of 36 cases of monosomy X and 7676 unaffected singleton pregnancies, the weighted pooled DR and FPR were 95.8% (95% CI, 70.3-99.5%) and 0.14% (95% CI, 0.05-0.38%), respectively. In a combined total of 17 cases of SCA other than monosomy X and 5400 unaffected singleton pregnancies, the weighted pooled DR and FPR were 100% (95% CI, 83.6-100%) and 0.004% (95% CI, 0.0-0.08%), respectively. For twin pregnancies, in a total of 24 cases of trisomy 21 and 1111 non-trisomy 21 cases, the DR was 100% (95% CI, 95.2-100%) and FPR was 0.0% (95% CI, 0.0-0.003%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening by analysis of cfDNA in maternal blood in singleton pregnancies could detect > 99% of fetuses with trisomy 21, 98% of trisomy 18 and 99% of trisomy 13 at a combined FPR of 0.13%. The number of reported cases of SCA is too small for accurate assessment of performance of screening. In twin pregnancies, performance of screening for trisomy 21 is encouraging but the number of cases reported is small. Copyright © 2017 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.