|
Comparison of noninvasive prenatal testing of cell‐free DNA in maternal blood and amniocentesis for evaluation of aneuploidy
|
Meisam Akhlaghdoust1    , Shahla Chaichian 2 |
1- General Practitioner, Pars Advanced and Minimally Invasive Medical Manners Research Center, Pars Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- Gynecologist, Minimally Invasive Techniques Research Center in Women, Islamic Azad University Tehran Medical Branch, Tehran , shchaichian@iautmu.ac.ir |
|
|
Abstract: (3100 Views) |
Background: The aim of this study was to compare noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) of cell‐free DNA in maternal blood and amniocentesis in the diagnosis of aneuploidy. This study was designed to evaluate sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of NIPT for detection of aneuploidies compared gold standard test of amniocentesis.
Materials and methods: This cross sectional study performed on Iranian pregnant women (GA≥12 weeks) and candidate for NIPT, referred to the Nilou laboratory in Tehran and 16 provinces of Iran between Aug 2016 and Aug 2018. Analysis study was performed by SPSS version 21.
Results: 11960 pregnant women which candidate for NIPT enrolled in this study and 139 persons detected as high risk for NIPT. The mean (±standard deviation) age of participants was 33.7 ± 6.4 years and 34.4 ± 5.2 years for amniocentesis and NIPT groups, respectively. Specificity of NIPT in the diagnosis of trisomies of T21, T18 and T13 was 99.94%, 99.95% and 99.97% respectively. Failure rate was calculated as 0.27.
Conclusion: Non-invasive prenatal testing has very high sensitivity and specificity for aneuploidies but should not be used as a final diagnosis test. |
|
| Keywords: Amniocentesis, NIPT, Cell-free fetal DNA, Aneuploidies. |
|
|
Full-Text [PDF 341 kb]
(2406 Downloads)
|
Semi-pilot: Survey/Cross Sectional/Descriptive |
Subject:
Gynecology
Received: 2019/05/14 | Accepted: 2019/07/2 | Published: 2020/04/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| References |
1. Mc Sweeney LC, Monteith C, Kelliher N, Cody F, Tully EC, Dicker P, et al. Changing patterns of invasive fetal diagnostic testing in the era of NIPT. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2018;218:S162-3. [ DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2017.10.180] 2. Hartwig TS, Ambye L, Sørensen S, Jørgensen FS. Discordant non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT)-a systematic review. Prenat Diagn 2017;37:527-39. [ DOI:10.1002/pd.5049] 3. Sikkema-Raddatz B, Johansson LF, De Boer EN, Boon EM, Suijkerbuijk RF, Bouman K, et al. an online tool for clinical interpretation of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) results. Sci Rep 2016;6:38359. [ DOI:10.1038/srep38359] 4. Norton ME, Jacobsson B, Swamy GK, Laurent LC, Ranzini AC, Brar H, et al. Cell-free DNA analysis for noninvasive examination of trisomy. New Eng J Med 2015;372:1589-97. [ DOI:10.1056/NEJMoa1407349] 5. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion: Cell-free DNA screening for fetal aneuploidy. Sci Rep 2015. 640:1-6. [ DOI:10.1097/AOG.0000000000001007] 6. Bianchi DW, Wilkins-Haug L. Integration of noninvasive DNA testing for aneuploidy into prenatal care: what has happened since the rubber met the road? Clin Chem 2014;60:78-87. [ DOI:10.1373/clinchem.2013.202663] 7. Stephanie CY, Chan KA, Zheng YW, Jiang P, Liao GJ, Sun H, et al. Size-based molecular diagnostics using plasma DNA for noninvasive prenatal testing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2014;111:8583-8. [ DOI:10.1073/pnas.1406103111] 8. Song K, Musci TJ, Caughey AB. Clinical utility and cost of non-invasive prenatal testing with cfDNA analysis in high-risk women based on a US population. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2013;26:1180-5. [ DOI:10.3109/14767058.2013.770464] 9. Wald NJ, Lau KW, Bestwick JP, Old RW, Huttly WJ, Cheng R. Specifying a Gold Standard for the Validation of Fetal Fraction Estimation in Prenatal Screening. Clin Chem 2018;64:1394-9. [ DOI:10.1373/clinchem.2018.288670] 10. Oepkes D, Page‐Christiaens GC, Bax CJ, Bekker MN, Bilardo CM, Boon EM, et al. Trial by Dutch laboratories for evaluation of non‐invasive prenatal testing. Part I-clinical impact. Prenat Diagn 2016;36:1083-90. [ DOI:10.1002/pd.4945] 11. Dey M, Sharma S, Aggarwal S. Prenatal screening methods for aneuploidies. North Am J Med Sci 2013;5:182. [ DOI:10.4103/1947-2714.109180] 12. Flöck A, Tu NC, Rüland A, Holzgreve W, Gembruch U, Geipel A. Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT): Europe's first multicenter post-market clinical follow-up study validating the quality in clinical routine. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2017;296:923-8. [ DOI:10.1007/s00404-017-4517-3] 13. Jiang T, Ding J, Zhang XQ, Zhang XJ, Zhang B, Wang T, et al. Analysis of Down syndrome failed to be diagnosed after prenatal screening: A multicenter study. Medicine 2017;96. [ DOI:10.1097/MD.0000000000007166] 14. Papageorghiou AT, Khalil A, Forman M, Hulme R, Mazey R, Mousa HA, et al. Clinical evaluation of the IONA test: a non‐invasive prenatal screening test for trisomies 21, 18 and 13. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016;47:188-93. [ DOI:10.1002/uog.15791] 15. Gil MM, Quezada MS, Bregant B, Ferraro M, Nicolaides KH. Implementation of maternal blood cell‐free DNA testing in early screening for aneuploidies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2013;42:34-40. [ DOI:10.1002/uog.12504] 16. Liao GJ, Gronowski AM, Zhao Z. Non-invasive prenatal testing using cell-free fetal DNA in maternal circulation. Clinica Chimica Acta 2014 ;428:44-50. [ DOI:10.1016/j.cca.2013.10.007] |
|
| Send email to the article author |
|
|
|
| Add your comments about this article |
|
|
|
|
Akhlaghdoust M, Chaichian S. Comparison of noninvasive prenatal testing of cell‐free DNA in maternal blood and amniocentesis for evaluation of aneuploidy. MEDICAL SCIENCES 2020; 30 (1) :75-81 URL: http://tmuj.iautmu.ac.ir/article-1-1744-en.html
|
