Usefulness and reliability of cell free fetal DNA screening for main trisomies in case of atypical profile on first trimester maternal serum screening.
Atypical maternal serum biomarkers
Cell free fetal DNA
High HCG
Intra uterine growth restriction
Low PAPP-A
Non-invasive prenatal testing
Trisomy 21
Journal
Journal of translational medicine
ISSN: 1479-5876
Titre abrégé: J Transl Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101190741
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 11 2019
28 11 2019
Historique:
received:
03
08
2019
accepted:
22
11
2019
entrez:
30
11
2019
pubmed:
30
11
2019
medline:
17
9
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
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. 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. 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. 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). cfDNA assay is an effective and reliable tool for women with atypical profile of first trimester serum biomarkers.
Sections du résumé
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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31779618
doi: 10.1186/s12967-019-02152-7
pii: 10.1186/s12967-019-02152-7
pmc: PMC6883576
doi:
Substances chimiques
Cell-Free Nucleic Acids
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
398Références
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014 Nov;27(17):1761-4
pubmed: 24460472
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Dec;52(6):722-727
pubmed: 29318732
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jun;218(6):612.e1-612.e6
pubmed: 29505771
Prenat Diagn. 2009 Dec;29(12):1118-22
pubmed: 19816882
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Feb;188(2):480-4
pubmed: 12592259
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jul;52(1):52-59
pubmed: 29704277
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Apr;51(4):437-444
pubmed: 28925570
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Aug;52(2):186-195
pubmed: 29896812
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Apr;51(4):487-492
pubmed: 29226487
Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2004 Aug;32 Spec No 1:4-22
pubmed: 15597666
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018 May;224:165-169
pubmed: 29605711
N Engl J Med. 2017 Aug 17;377(7):613-622
pubmed: 28657417
Placenta. 2014 Feb;35 Suppl:S64-8
pubmed: 24388429
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Jun;49(6):751-755
pubmed: 28067011
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Aug;191(2):515-20
pubmed: 15343229
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Sep;50(3):302-314
pubmed: 28397325
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Mar;43(3):265-71
pubmed: 24375770
Prenat Diagn. 2010 May;30(5):471-7
pubmed: 20440736
Fetal Diagn Ther. 2018;43(4):266-273
pubmed: 28715818
Mol Med Rep. 2015 Apr;11(4):2367-72
pubmed: 25530428
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Oct;191(4):1446-51
pubmed: 15507981
J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2014 Nov;43(9):671-9
pubmed: 25218268
Prenat Diagn. 2005 Oct;25(10):949-53
pubmed: 16086443
Fetal Diagn Ther. 2016;40(4):255-262
pubmed: 26998901
Prenat Diagn. 2015 Aug;35(8):810-5
pubmed: 25967380
Prenat Diagn. 2013 Sep;33(9):839-47
pubmed: 23613261
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015 Aug 25;15:191
pubmed: 26303460
Singapore Med J. 2018 Jan;59(1):55-59
pubmed: 28451695
J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2008 Oct;30(10):918-932
pubmed: 19038077
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Mar;190(3):707-13
pubmed: 15042003
Prenat Diagn. 2003 May;23(5):385-8
pubmed: 12749035
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018 Aug;58(4):397-403
pubmed: 29900540
Prenat Diagn. 2010 Mar;30(3):235-40
pubmed: 20066674
Prenat Diagn. 2016 Mar;36(3):210-5
pubmed: 26783737
Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Jun;125(6):1330-7
pubmed: 26000504
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Nov;207(5):374.e1-6
pubmed: 23107079
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Jul;42(1):41-50
pubmed: 23744626
Sci Rep. 2018 Mar 14;8(1):4549
pubmed: 29540801
Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2015 Jun;43(6):469-71
pubmed: 25982782
Transfusion. 2013 Sep;53(9):1956-64
pubmed: 23320950
Clin Chim Acta. 2010 Nov 11;411(21-22):1547-52
pubmed: 20599860