First-trimester risk assessment based on ultrasound and cell-free DNA vs combined screening: a randomized controlled trial

The value of combined detailed first-trimester ultrasound-biochemical analysis for screening fetal aneuploidy in the era of non-invasive prenatal testing

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the performance, cost-effectiveness and additional findings of combined detailed ultrasound and biochemical screening for risks of major fetal trisomies in the first-trimester.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis study, we estimated the risk of trisomies 21, 18 and 13 based on maternal age, fetal nuchal translucency thickness, nasal bone, ductus venosus pulsatility index velocity, tricuspid regurgitation, fetal heart rate, free beta-human chorionic gonadotropin, and pregnancy-associated plasma protein A in singleton pregnant women, and performed non-invasive prenatal testing for women with risks of trisomy 21 between 1:500 and 1:300. Invasive diagnostic testing was performed for women with positive or failed non-invasive prenatal testing result and in the high-risk group of this screening method. The direct costs were compared between this strategy and the non-invasive prenatal testing which alone used as first-line screening for all pregnant women.

RESULTS

Among 25,155 singleton pregnant women who underwent screening, 24,361 were available for analysis, of these, 194 cases underwent non-invasive prenatal testing. Among the 24,361 women, 39, 19, and 7 had trisomies 21, 18 and 13, respectively. The use of this strategy could potentially detect approximately 94.87% of trisomy 21 cases, 100% of trisomy 18 cases, and 100% of trisomy 13 cases, with false-positive rates of 2.49%, 0.41%, and 0.49%, respectively. The overall detection rate and overall false-positive rates were 96.92% and 2.52%, respectively. The detection rate was 100% in the advanced age group and 94.12% in the general age group. Additionally, structural abnormalities were detected in 137 fetuses, and 44 fetuses had other chromosomal abnormalities. The total cost of this strategy was $3,730,843.30, and the cost per person tested was $153.15. The total cost of using non-invasive prenatal testing as the first-line strategy would be $6,813,387.04 and the cost per person tested was $279.68.

CONCLUSIONS

Our strategy is an efficient and cost-effective approach for detecting major trisomies and identifying more fetuses with a potential abnormality. Therefore, this strategy is a valuable screening method and highly feasible in the clinical setting.

Current Perspectives of Prenatal Cell-free DNA Screening in Clinical Management of First-Trimester Septated Cystic Hygroma

First-trimester septated cystic hygroma occurs in approximately 1 in 268 pregnancies and has long been associated with a markedly increased risk of fetal aneuploidy and, among euploid fetuses, an increased risk of structural anomalies primarily affecting the cardiac and skeletal systems. Invasive prenatal diagnosis – chorionic villus sampling and/or amniocentesis – encompasses the time-honored clinical tools for the next step in management following prenatal sonographic diagnosis of first-trimester septated cystic hygroma. Currently, prenatal cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening for fetal aneuploidy with select microdeletions is gradually replacing the considerably less sensitive, and labor-intensive combined first-trimester screening. These new technologies have opened potential new venues in the clinical management of this ominous late first-trimester sonographic diagnosis. Advances in cfDNA technologies are now permitting detection of chromosomal copy number variants (CNV) larger than 7Mb across genome and select serious single-gene disorders (mainly impacting skeletal and neurological development), affecting quality of life and may benefit from medical and/or surgical management. This commentary will address the available non-invasive prenatal screening technologies, which clearly enhance immediate genetic analysis modalities applicable in the presence of the complex sonographic finding of first-trimester septated cystic hygroma.

Systematic evidence-based review: The application of noninvasive prenatal screening using cell-free DNA in general-risk pregnancies

PURPOSE

Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) using cell-free DNA has been assimilated into prenatal care. Prior studies examined clinical validity and technical performance in high-risk populations. This systematic evidence review evaluates NIPS performance in a general-risk population.

METHODS

Medline (PubMed) and Embase were used to identify studies examining detection of Down syndrome (T21), trisomy 18 (T18), trisomy 13 (T13), sex chromosome aneuploidies, rare autosomal trisomies, copy number variants, and maternal conditions, as well as studies assessing the psychological impact of NIPS and the rate of subsequent diagnostic testing. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to calculate pooled estimates of NIPS performance (P < .05). Heterogeneity was investigated through subgroup analyses. Risk of bias was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 87 studies met inclusion criteria. Diagnostic odds ratios were significant (P < .0001) for T21, T18, and T13 for singleton and twin pregnancies. NIPS was accurate (≥99.78%) in detecting sex chromosome aneuploidies. Performance for rare autosomal trisomies and copy number variants was variable. Use of NIPS reduced diagnostic tests by 31% to 79%. Conclusions regarding psychosocial outcomes could not be drawn owing to lack of data. Identification of maternal conditions was rare.

CONCLUSION

NIPS is a highly accurate screening method for T21, T18, and T13 in both singleton and twin pregnancies.

First Trimester Ultrasound in the Age of Cell-Free DNA Screening: What Are We Missing?

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the utility of first trimester (FT) ultrasound (US) between 10 to 14 weeks gestation in identifying fetal findings that would impact clinical management.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of FT US associated with an abnormal ICD-10 code from August 2016 to December 2018. Results of FT US, genetic testing, and management decisions were abstracted from the electronic health record.

RESULTS

A total of 20,594 FT US were performed within our study period, representing 6,064 unique patients. Of these, 278 ultrasounds were noted to have fetal findings (278/6064, 4.6%). The most frequent fetal finding were fetal demises (98, 35.3%), followed by increased NT/cystic hygroma (67, 24.1%), and multiple anomalies (35, 12.6%). There was a significant difference between the frequency of fetal findings between patients considered advanced maternal age (AMA) and those who were not (p=0.017). However, there was no significant difference in the frequency of specific anomalies between these two groups (p=0.103).

CONCLUSION

FT US provides clinical information outside the scope of cfDNA screening in both AMA and non-AMA populations regarding viability and fetal anatomy. Earlier detection of these findings is crucial to allow for the opportunity of informed discussion of testing strategy and decision making. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

The impact of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy on prenatal screening

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) is associated with a reduced risk of abnormal conventional prenatal screening results in singleton pregnancies conceived using in vitro fertilization (IVF).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of singleton IVF pregnancies conceived from a single tertiary care center between January 2014 and September 2019. Exclusion criteria included mosaic embryo transfers, vanishing twin pregnancies, and cycles with missing outcome data. Two cases of prenatally diagnosed aneuploidy that resulted in early voluntary terminations were also excluded. The primary outcome of abnormal first or second-trimester combined screening results was compared between two groups: pregnancy conceived after transfer of a euploid embryo by PGT-A vs. transfer of an untested embryo. Multivariable backwards-stepwise logistic regression with Firth method was used to adjust for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Of the 419 pregnancies included, 208 (49.6%) were conceived after transfer of a euploid embryo by PGT-A, and 211 (50.4%) were conceived after transfer of an untested embryo. PGT-A was not associated with a lower likelihood of abnormal first-trimester (adjusted OR 1.64, 95% CI 0.82-3.39) or second-trimester screening results (adjusted OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.56-1.64). The incidences of cell-free DNA testing, fetal sonographic abnormalities, genetic counseling, and invasive prenatal diagnostic testing were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that PGT-A is not associated with a change in the likelihood of abnormal prenatal screening results or utilization of invasive prenatal diagnostic testing. Counseling this patient population regarding the importance of prenatal screening and prenatal diagnostic testing, where appropriate, remains essential.

Antenatal screening for chromosomal abnormalities

Screening for chromosomal disorders, especially for trisomy 21, has undergone a number of changes in the last 50 years. Today, cell-free DNA analysis (cfDNA) is the gold standard in screening for trisomy 21. Despite the advantages that cfDNA offers in screening for common trisomies, it must be recognized that it does not address many other chromosomal disorders and any of the structural fetal anomalies. In the first trimester, the optimal approach is to combine an ultrasound assessment of the fetus, which includes an NT measurement, with cfDNA testing. If fetal structural defects are detected or if the NT thickness is increased, an amniocentesis or a CVS with at least chromosomal microarray should be offered.

Number and quality of randomized controlled trials in obstetrics published in the top general medical and obstetrics and gynecology journals

BACKGROUND

There has been an increasing number of randomized controlled trials published in obstetrics and maternal-fetal medicine to reduce biases of treatment effect and to provide insights on the cause-effect of the relationship between treatment and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify obstetrical randomized controlled trials published in top weekly general medical journals and monthly obstetrics and gynecology journals, to assess their quality in reporting and identify factors associated with publication in different journals.

STUDY DESIGN

The 4 weekly medical journals with the highest 2019 impact factor (New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, The Journal of the American Medical Association, and British Medical Journal), the top 4 monthly obstetrics and gynecology journals with obstetrics-related research (American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology, Obstetrics & Gynecology, and the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology), and the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Maternal-Fetal Medicine were searched for obstetrical randomized controlled trials in the years 2018 to 2020. The primary outcome was the number of obstetrical randomized controlled trials published in the obstetrics and gynecology journals vs the weekly medical journals and the percentage of trials published, overall and per journal. The secondary outcomes included the proportion of positive vs negative trials overall and per journal and the assessment of the study characteristics of published trials, including quality assessment criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 4024 original research articles published in the 9 journals during the 3-year study period, 1221 (30.3%) were randomized controlled trials, with 137 (11.2%) randomized controlled trials being in obstetrics (46 in 2018, 47 in 2019, and 44 studies in 2020). Furthermore, 33 (24.1%) were published in weekly medical journals, and 104 (75.9%) were published in obstetrics and gynecology journals. The percentage of obstetrical randomized controlled trials published ranged from 1.5% to 9.6% per journal. Overall, 34.3% of obstetrical trials were statistically significant or "positive" for the primary outcome. Notably, 24.8% of the trials were retrospectively registered after the enrollment of the first study patient. Trials published in the 4 weekly medical journals enrolled significantly more patients (1801 vs 180; P<.001), received more often funding from the federal government (78.8% vs 35.6%; P<.001), and were more likely to be multicenter (90.9% vs 42.3%; P<.001), non-United States based (69.7% vs 49.0%; P=.03), and double blinded (45.5% vs 18.3%; P=.003) than trials published in the obstetrics and gynecology journals. There was no difference in study type (noninferiority vs superiority) and trial quality characteristics, including pretrial registration, ethics approval statement, informed consent statement, and adherence to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines statement between studies published in weekly medical journals and studies published in obstetrics and gynecology journals.

CONCLUSION

Approximately 45 trials in obstetrics are being published every year in the highest impact journals, with one-fourth being in the weekly medical journals and the remainder in the obstetrics and gynecology journals. Only about a third of published obstetrical trials are positive. Trials published in weekly medical journals are larger, more likely to be funded by the government, multicenter, international, and double blinded. Quality metrics are similar between weekly medical journals and obstetrics and gynecology journals.

Management of Pregnancy in Women of Advanced Maternal Age: Improving Outcomes for Mother and Baby

Pregnancy at advanced maternal age (age >35 years old) is considered a risk factor for adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. Yet, pregnancies of advanced maternal age have become more prevalent over the last few decades. Possible maternal complications of pregnancy at age 35 or older include increased risk of spontaneous miscarriage, preterm labor, gestational diabetes mellitus, pre-eclampsia, stillbirth, chromosomal abnormalities, and cesarean delivery. Possible adverse fetal outcomes include infants small for gestational age and intrauterine growth restrictions, low Apgar score, admission to neonatal intensive care units, and an autism spectrum disorder. This paper aims to present an up-to-date review of the literature, summarizing the most current studies and implications for the management of pregnancy of advanced maternal age.

A fetal reduction from twin to singleton based on sonography and cell-free fetal DNA testing: A sequential approach to old pitfalls

OBJECTIVE

We examined the potential value of combining ultrasound and non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) of maternal blood to screen for major aneuploidies as an early approach before selective fetal reduction from twin pregnancy to singleton.

STUDY DESIGN

The sample was composed of pregnant women with di-chorionic di-amniotic twins who chose to undergo fetal reduction to singleton at 12-24 weeks of gestation. These women were asked to provide a blood sample for cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) testing prior to fetal reduction.

RESULTS

A total of 24 pregnant women with a twin pregnancy prior to fetal reduction to singleton were enrolled. There were 8 cases with structural anomalies (33.3%) in one twin that dictated fetal reduction. The proportion of patients who underwent selective fetal reduction for fetal abnormalities was larger than in several other studies. The NIPS identified 1 case of Trisomy 13 (4.2%). The other 15 cases (62.5%) had no structural or chromosomal anomalies. The decision to undergo elective reduction of twin pregnancy to singleton was made for social reasons or upon the parents' request. Given the 33% of structural anomalies in the cohort, a cost analysis indicated that this procedure was 6.6-fold less expensive (vs. 4.6-fold with 4% structural anomalies in other publications) than conducting invasive procedures for the entire cohort.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that an early anatomical scan and cffDNA can increase the overall safety margin and reduce interventional procedures before elective reduction of twin pregnancy to singleton. However, a larger cohort is needed to confirm these results.

Screening for Fetal Chromosomal Abnormalities: ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 226

Prenatal testing for chromosomal abnormalities is designed to provide an accurate assessment of a patient's risk of carrying a fetus with a chromosomal disorder. A wide variety of prenatal screening and diagnostic tests are available; each offers varying levels of information and performance, and each has relative advantages and limitations. When considering screening test characteristics, no one test is superior in all circumstances, which results in the need for nuanced, patient-centered counseling from the obstetric care professional and complex decision making by the patient. Each patient should be counseled in each pregnancy about options for testing for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. It is important that obstetric care professionals be prepared to discuss not only the risk of fetal chromosomal abnormalities but also the relative benefits and limitations of the available screening and diagnostic tests. Testing for chromosomal abnormalities should be an informed patient choice based on provision of adequate and accurate information, the patient's clinical context, accessible health care resources, values, interests, and goals. All patients should be offered both screening and diagnostic tests, and all patients have the right to accept or decline testing after counseling.The purpose of this Practice Bulletin is to provide current information regarding the available screening test options available for fetal chromosomal abnormalities and to review their benefits, performance characteristics, and limitations. For information regarding prenatal diagnostic testing for genetic disorders, refer to Practice Bulletin No. 162, Prenatal Diagnostic Testing for Genetic Disorders. For additional information regarding counseling about genetic testing and communicating test results, refer to Committee Opinion No. 693, Counseling About Genetic Testing and Communication of Genetic Test Results. For information regarding carrier screening for genetic conditions, refer to Committee Opinion No. 690, Carrier Screening in the Age of Genomic Medicine and Committee Opinion No. 691, Carrier Screening for Genetic Conditions. This Practice Bulletin has been revised to further clarify methods of screening for fetal chromosomal abnormalities, including expanded information regarding the use of cell-free DNA in all patients regardless of maternal age or baseline risk, and to add guidance related to patient counseling.

First Trimester Screening for Common Trisomies and Microdeletion 22q11.2 Syndrome Using Cell-Free DNA: A Prospective Clinical Study

OBJECTIVES

The aims of the study were to assess the false-positive and uninformative test rate with first trimester cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening for common trisomies and microdeletion 22q11.2 (22q11.2DS) and to examine women's attitudes toward such an approach.

METHODS

This is a prospective study at the Prenatal Medicine Department of the University of Tübingen, Germany, at 11-13 weeks. In all pregnancies, a detailed ultrasound examination was carried out, followed by a cfDNA analysis for common trisomies and 22q11.2DS. In cases where the cfDNA analysis indicated 22q11.2DS, invasive prenatal diagnostic testing and parental testing were performed. After delivery, a detailed neonatal clinical examination was carried out including further genetic testing. Prior to counselling about the study, we asked the pregnant women who were potentially eligible for the study to anonymously report on their knowledge about 22q11.2DS.

RESULTS

A total of 1,127 pregnancies were included in the final analysis of the study. The first cfDNA test was uninformative in 15 (1.33%) pregnancies. In 10 (0.89%) cases, the test remained uninformative, even after the second blood sample. There were 3 (0.27%) cases with a positive cfDNA test for 22q11.2DS. In all, 983 women returned the anonymous questionnaire prior to study participation. Only 80 (8.1%) women responded that they felt familiar or very familiar with 22q11.2DS.

CONCLUSION

The addition of 22q11.2DS in first trimester cfDNA screening for common trisomies is feasible. The uninformative test rate for common trisomies and 22q11.2DS is 0.9%, and the false-positive rate for 22q11.2DS is 0.3%. Awareness and education around 22q11.2DS should be improved.

Confirmation rate of cell free DNA screening for sex chromosomal abnormalities according to the method of confirmatory testing

OBJECTIVE

To examine the positive predictive value (PPV) of cfDNA screening for sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCA) in a large series of over 90 000 patients.

METHODS

Retrospective study based on samples that were sent to Cenata, a private laboratory which uses the Harmony Prenatal Test. The SCA high-risk results were stratified according to the method of diagnostic testing and according to karyotype result.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 144 cases. The CfDNA test indicated monosomy X, XXX, XXY, and XYY in 62, 37, 40, and 5 cases, respectively. The overall PPV was 38.9% (30.9-47.4), 29.0% (18.2-42.9) for monosomy X, 29.7% (15.9-47.9) for 47,XXX, 57.5% (40.9-73.0) for 47,XXY, and 80.0% (28.4-99.5) for 47,XYY). A total of 112 (77.8%) women with a high-risk result for SCAs opted for prenatal karyotyping. In this group, there were significant differences in the PPV if the karyotype was assessed by amniocentesis or by CVS: 29.5% vs 50.0%. This significant difference was driven by the monosomy X result which shows a significantly higher PPV in CVS (54.6% (23.4-83.3) vs 17.1% (6.6-33.6)). For the other SCAs, the differences were not significant.

CONCLUSION

PPV of an abnormal cfDNA test for SCAs is low, particularly for monosomy X. The confirmation rate depends on the type of confirmatory test.

First-trimester screening based on cell-free DNA vs combined screening: A randomized clinical trial on women's experience

OBJECTIVE

To compare women's experience of first-trimester combined screening (FTCS), with women's experience of an approach that uses the combination of a detailed early anatomy scan and cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis.

METHODS

This was single-center, open label, parallel group, randomized clinical trial. Pregnant women were randomized at the time of their first prenatal visit to either a policy of first-trimester risk assessment based on FTCS, or to a policy of first-trimester risk assessment based on ultrasound findings and cfDNA. FTCS included ultrasound evaluation with crown-rump length, nuchal translucency (NT) measurement, and a detailed ultrasound scan, along with biochemistry (PAPP-A and free beta hCG). In this group, invasive diagnostic testing was offered to patients with risk >1 in 100, or NT >3.5 mm, or any fetal abnormalities on ultrasound. Women randomized in the intervention group received an approach of first-trimester risk assessment based on ultrasound findings and cfDNA. cfDNA analysis included a simultaneous microarray-based assay of non-polymorphic (chromosomes 13, 18, 21, X and Y) and polymorphic loci to estimate chromosome proportion and fetal fraction. In the intervention group, invasive diagnostic testing was offered to patients with abnormal cfDNA screening results, or NT >3.5 mm, or any fetal abnormalities on ultrasound. Participants received pre-test and post-test questionnaires regarding to measure reassurance, satisfaction, and anxiety. The primary outcome was the post-test reassurance, defined as mean score of reassurance post-test questionnaire. The effect of the assigned screening test on the mean of each outcome was quantified as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Forty women with singleton gestations were enrolled in the trial. Mean score for reassurance was significantly higher in the cfDNA group compared to the FTCS group in the pre-test questionnaire (MD 0.80 points, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.33) and in the post-test questionnaire (MD 16.50 points, 95% CI 2.18 to 30.82). Women randomized to the cfDNA group had higher satisfaction and lower mean anxiety score as assessed in the STAI pre-test questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

First-trimester risk assessment for fetal aneuploidy with a combination of a detailed ultrasound examination and cfDNA is associated with better maternal reassurance and better maternal satisfaction compared to the standard first-trimester combined screening with nuchal translucency, and biochemistry.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04077060.

Incidence of chromosomal abnormalities in fetuses with first trimester ultrasound anomalies and a low-risk cell-free DNA test for common trisomies

OBJECTIVE

To examine the incidence and type of chromosomal abnormalities in fetuses with first trimester ultrasound anomalies and a low-risk cfDNA test for common trisomies.

METHODS

In 486 singleton pregnancies undergoing invasive testing after combined screening, a detailed first trimester ultrasound assessment was carried out and a maternal blood sample was sent for cfDNA analysis. Ultrasound and cfDNA data were analyzed in relation to fetal karyotype.

RESULTS

Invasive testing demonstrated a chromosomal abnormality in 157 (32.3%) of 486 fetuses. In 348 cases with a low-risk cfDNA test for common trisomies, NT ≥ 3.5 mm and/or a major structural defect were observed in 92 (26.4%) fetuses. A chromosomal abnormality was found in 17 (18.5%; 95%CI 10.55-26.41) of these pregnancies, including 1 (1.1%) case of trisomy 21 and 16 (17.4%) fetuses with abnormalities different from common trisomies. The respective incidence in the 256 cases with a low-risk cfDNA test result and no ultrasound anomalies was 2.3% (95% CI 0.49-4.20; n = 6).

CONCLUSIONS

In fetuses with first trimester ultrasound anomalies and a low-risk cfDNA result for trisomy 21, 18 and 13, diagnostic testing should be offered with the main objective to detect chromosomal abnormalities beyond common trisomies.

Advanced maternal age and adverse pregnancy outcomes

A wide range of adverse pregnancy outcomes are associated with women of advanced maternal age (AMA). These include increased risks for miscarriage, chromosomal abnormalities, stillbirth, foetal growth restriction, preterm birth, pre-eclampsia, gestational diabetes mellitus and caesarean section. While a wide body of literature has reported on these risks, varying definitions in both AMA and reported outcomes can make synthesizing the information difficult when counselling an individual women about her specific risks. In this chapter, we discuss the role of AMA on adverse pregnancy outcomes with a view to clarifying the magnitude of the risks for each outcome in the context to enable more informed clinical counselling and decision-making.

Antenatal screening for fetal trisomies using microarray-based cell-free DNA testing: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the test accuracy of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for fetal trisomy 21, 18, and 13 using cell-free (cf) DNA analysis in maternal plasma with microarray quantitation.

METHOD

Systematic review and meta-analysis. Searches in MEDLINE, Pre-MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library to 09.07.2018.

RESULTS

Five studies analyzing 3074 samples, including 187 trisomy 21, 43 trisomy 18, and 19 trisomy 13 cases, were identified. Risk of bias was high in all studies, introduced particularly by exclusions from analysis and by the role of the sponsor. Sensitivity of microarray-based cfDNA testing was 99.5% (95%CI 96.3%-99.9%) for trisomy 21, 97.7% (95%CI 87.9%-99.6%) for trisomy 18, and 100% (95%CI 83.2%-100%) for trisomy 13. Specificity was 100% (95% CI 99.87%-100%) for trisomy 21, 99.97% (95%CI 99.81%-99.99%) for trisomy 18, and 99.97% (95%CI 99.81%-99.99%) for trisomy 13. Pooled test failure rate was 1.1%. A direct comparison of microarray- and sequencing-based cfDNA found equivalent test accuracy.

CONCLUSION

Included studies suggest that NIPT using microarray-based cfDNA testing has high sensitivity and specificity for detecting fetal trisomy 21, 18, and 13. However, the evidence base is small and at high risk of bias.

Usefulness and reliability of cell free fetal DNA screening for main trisomies in case of atypical profile on first trimester maternal serum screening

Background

Patients with atypical values of HCG and/or PAPP-A are at higher risk of chromosomal abnormality and vascular complications of pregnancy. The performance of cfDNA in this particular population has not yet been evaluated.

Objectives

The primary objective was to evaluate the usefulness and reliability of cfDNA in screening for trisomy 21, 18 and 13 for patients with HCG < 0.25 multiple of median (MoM), HCG > 5.0 MoM and/or PAPP-A < 0.25 MoM, PAPP-A > 2.5 MoM. The secondary objective was to evaluate the contribution of cfDNA assay for the prediction of pregnancy’s vascular complications.

Method

Between June 2016 and July 2017, we analysed a women cohort from all over France who had at least one first trimester serum biomarker outside of normal range, in a retrospective, observational and multicentre study. Patients were included if they had a single pregnancy, normal first trimester ultrasound examination, whatever the result of the combined first trimester screening test was. The cfDNA was analysed by massive parallel sequencing technique. The accuracy of cfDNA assay was evaluated by calculation of sensitivity and specificity, and multivariate regression analysis was used to search for predictive factors for pregnancy’s vascular complications.

Results

Among the 498 patients who underwent a cfDNA assay in this context, twenty-one (4.2%) were excluded because of loss to follow-up. Out of 477, test failure occurred for four patients initially, reduced to two patients (0.4%) after redrawn. CfDNA was positive for Trisomy 21 (n = 19), Trisomy 18 (n = 6) and Trisomy 13 (n = 1) and negative in 449. The sensitivity of cfDNA assay for trisomy 21 screening was 100% (19/19) (IC 95% 82.4–100) and specificity 100% (458/458) (IC 95% 99.2–100). Among the 447 patients included for prediction of vascular complications, there were four cases of pregnancy induced hypertension and 10 cases of preeclampsia, for which no predictive factor was identified. Intra Uterine growth restriction under 5th percentile (n = 44, 9.8%) was significantly associated with a low fetal fraction (OR = 0.87, IC 95% 0.79–0.96, p = 0.006).

Conclusion

cfDNA assay is an effective and reliable tool for women with atypical profile of first trimester serum biomarkers.

False-positive rates in screening for trisomies 18 and 13: a comparison between first-trimester combined screening and a cfDNA-based approach

PURPOSE

To determine the false-positive rates (FPR) associated with screening for trisomy 18/13 using first-trimester combined screening (FTCS) and an ultrasound plus cfDNA-based approach (US-cfDNA), which includes a detailed ultrasound examination, a cfDNA analysis and a FTCS reflex backup test for cases with uninformative results.

METHODS

This is a sub-analysis of a randomized controlled trial, which was performed between 2015 and 2016. Pregnant women with a normal first-trimester ultrasound examination at 11-13 weeks' gestation (NT < 3.5 mm, no anomalies) were randomized into two groups: FTCS and US-cfDNA screening. The overall FPR in screening for trisomies 18/13 and 21 was compared with the FPR in screening for trisomy 21 alone. Pregnancies were considered screen positive if the risk for trisomy 21 was 1:100 and for trisomy 18 and 13, 1:20 each.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 688 pregnancies in each study arm. In the FCTS group, median delta NT was 0.0 mm, free beta-hCG and PAPP-A 0.96 and 1.11 MoM. In the US-cfDNA group, median delta NT was 0.0 mm. In 10 pregnancies, the cfDNA analysis was uninformative. In the FTCS and in the US-cfDNA group, the FPR in screening for trisomy 21 was 2.5% and 0%. In both groups, the overall FPR was not increased by adding screening algorithms for trisomies 18 and 13.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the addition of screening for trisomies 18 and 13 to screening for trisomy 21 does not significantly change FPR. This is true for both the FTCS and the US-cfDNA-based approach.

Contemporary prenatal aneuploidy screening practice in Australia: Frequently asked questions in the cell-free DNA era

Cell-free DNA screening has quickly become established in Australia as an accurate - albeit costly - prenatal screening test for trisomy 21, 18 and 13. It is also commonly used for the detection of sex chromosome abnormalities. The increasing number of prenatal screening pathways available to women has increased the complexity of pretest counselling. Concurrent advances in diagnostic testing with the widespread use of chromosomal microarrays create further challenges for the continuing education of clinicians and health consumers. This article aims to answer common clinical questions in this rapidly evolving field and complements the recently updated Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Statement on Prenatal Screening for Fetal Chromosome and Genetic Conditions.

First trimester screening for major cardiac defects based on the ductus venosus flow in fetuses with trisomy 21

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether in fetuses with trisomy 21 (T21), the ductus venosus (DV) flow differs in presence of a major cardiac defect (congenital cardiac defect [CHD]) and whether this affects the risk distribution in first trimester screening for T21.

METHODS

This retrospective study included pregnant women who underwent first trimester screening. This involves an examination of the crown-rump length, the nuchal translucency, the ductus venosus (DV) flow, and the heart. Three groups of fetuses were examined: euploid without CHD, T21 with CHD, and T21 without CHD. We examined the DV pulsatility index for veins, the direction of the a-wave, and ratios of velocities: v/S, v/D, a/S, a/D, and S/D.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 410 euploid fetuses and 136 with T21 (51 with CHD and 85 without CHD). In the 3 groups, the a-wave was reversed in 3.2%, 66.7%, and 57.6%. The DV flow ratios in T21 with and without CDH were significantly different compared with normal fetuses. When comparing the ratios between the 2 T21 groups, only the a/S and a/D ratio were significantly different. The risk distributions in screening for T21 with and without CDH were similar.

CONCLUSION

There are some small differences in the DV flow of T21 fetuses with and without CHD, but they are not clinically useful.