Factors affecting low fetal fraction in fetal screening with cell-free DNA in pregnant women: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Cell-free DNA
Fetal screening
Fetal soft marker
Low fetal fraction
Journal
BMC pregnancy and childbirth
ISSN: 1471-2393
Titre abrégé: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967799
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 Dec 2022
08 Dec 2022
Historique:
received:
21
08
2022
accepted:
16
11
2022
entrez:
9
12
2022
pubmed:
10
12
2022
medline:
15
12
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Cell-Free DNA (cfDNA) is a non-invasive perinatal test (NIPT) used to assess fetal anomalies. The ability to detect fetal chromosomal aneuploidies is directly related to a sample's fetal to total DNA fraction, known as the fetal fraction (FF). The minimum FF is considered 4%, and the test result below 4% is uncertain due to low fetal fraction (LFF). This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and a meta-analysis to determine the possible factors affecting LFF in cfDNA testing for fetal screening. PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Since Direct, Scopus, CINHAL, Cochrane Library, and Persian databases, including Scientific Information Database, Irandoc, and Magiran were searched for studies investigating factors affecting LFF in cfDNA testing from 2000 until the end of 2021. Gathered data were analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) software version 3.3.070. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal of Cohort Studies tool. Thirteen articles related to the topic were included, and seven related articles were reviewed for meta-analysis. The other six were reviewed qualitatively. Four factors were identified that might have a potential effect on the LFF, of which only gestational age had a significant association with LFF (Pooled mean difference= -1.111, SE = 0.515, 95% CI= -2.121, -0.101, (P-value < 0.05)). Maternal age (P-value = 0.573), maternal weight (P-value = 0.113), and Body Mass Index (P-value = 0.104) had no statically significant effect. The effect size was pooled by mean difference and 95% confidence interval. Lower gestational age is significantly associated with LFF. Thus, this factor can be considered when interpreting prenatal cfDNA screening tests.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Cell-Free DNA (cfDNA) is a non-invasive perinatal test (NIPT) used to assess fetal anomalies. The ability to detect fetal chromosomal aneuploidies is directly related to a sample's fetal to total DNA fraction, known as the fetal fraction (FF). The minimum FF is considered 4%, and the test result below 4% is uncertain due to low fetal fraction (LFF). This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and a meta-analysis to determine the possible factors affecting LFF in cfDNA testing for fetal screening.
METHODS
METHODS
PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Since Direct, Scopus, CINHAL, Cochrane Library, and Persian databases, including Scientific Information Database, Irandoc, and Magiran were searched for studies investigating factors affecting LFF in cfDNA testing from 2000 until the end of 2021. Gathered data were analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) software version 3.3.070. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal of Cohort Studies tool.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Thirteen articles related to the topic were included, and seven related articles were reviewed for meta-analysis. The other six were reviewed qualitatively. Four factors were identified that might have a potential effect on the LFF, of which only gestational age had a significant association with LFF (Pooled mean difference= -1.111, SE = 0.515, 95% CI= -2.121, -0.101, (P-value < 0.05)). Maternal age (P-value = 0.573), maternal weight (P-value = 0.113), and Body Mass Index (P-value = 0.104) had no statically significant effect. The effect size was pooled by mean difference and 95% confidence interval.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Lower gestational age is significantly associated with LFF. Thus, this factor can be considered when interpreting prenatal cfDNA screening tests.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36482322
doi: 10.1186/s12884-022-05224-7
pii: 10.1186/s12884-022-05224-7
pmc: PMC9733315
doi:
Substances chimiques
Cell-Free Nucleic Acids
0
Types de publication
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
918Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Prenat Diagn. 2019 Apr;39(5):361-368
pubmed: 30740743
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Jan;45(1):61-6
pubmed: 25297464
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Jun;47(6):698-704
pubmed: 26743020
Syst Rev. 2021 Mar 29;10(1):89
pubmed: 33781348
Prenat Diagn. 2015 Mar;35(3):289-93
pubmed: 25449554
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Apr;51(4):470-479
pubmed: 28640470
Prenat Diagn. 2007 May;27(5):415-8
pubmed: 17286310
Front Pediatr. 2022 Jan 27;10:812781
pubmed: 35155308
J Transl Med. 2018 Dec 3;16(1):335
pubmed: 30509296
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2021 Nov;3(6):100466
pubmed: 34418590
Prenat Diagn. 2017 Nov;37(11):1125-1129
pubmed: 28881030
Prenat Diagn. 2013 Jul;33(7):662-6
pubmed: 23553731
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Jan;41(1):26-32
pubmed: 23108725
Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2022 Sep;4(5):100671
pubmed: 35644526
Pregnancy Hypertens. 2020 Oct;22:101-108
pubmed: 32777709
Hum Reprod. 2018 Apr 1;33(4):572-578
pubmed: 29462319
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2018 Jul;31(14):1865-1872
pubmed: 28514925
J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2019 Oct;48(8):653-656
pubmed: 31276844
Prenat Diagn. 2013 Jul;33(7):667-74
pubmed: 23592541
J Hum Genet. 2016 Jul;61(7):647-52
pubmed: 26984559
Prenat Diagn. 2021 Sep;41(10):1287-1295
pubmed: 34350596
Am J Hum Genet. 1998 Apr;62(4):768-75
pubmed: 9529358
Prenat Diagn. 2015 Aug;35(8):816-22
pubmed: 26013964
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Jun;47(6):705-11
pubmed: 26970114
Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Aug;132(2):436-443
pubmed: 29995742
Prenat Diagn. 2020 Jun;40(7):838-845
pubmed: 32274797
Fetal Diagn Ther. 2020;47(3):228-236
pubmed: 31533106
Fetal Diagn Ther. 2010;27(1):1-7
pubmed: 20051662
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Aug;215(2):231.e1-7
pubmed: 26875947
Prenat Diagn. 2016 Mar;36(3):210-5
pubmed: 26783737
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Aug;207(2):137.e1-8
pubmed: 22742782
Clin Chem. 2004 Jan;50(1):88-92
pubmed: 14709639
Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Dec;120(6):1532-4
pubmed: 23168792
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Oct;221(4):345.e1-345.e11
pubmed: 31125545