Changing to NIPT as a first-tier screening test and future perspectives: Opinions of health professionals

Prenatal Diagnosis

Volumn 35, Issue 13, 2015, Pages 1316-1323

  Tamminga, Saskia ^a   van Schendel, Rachèl V ^a   Rommers, Wieke ^b   Bilardo, Caterina M ^b   Pajkrt, Eva ^c   Dondorp, Wybo J ^d   van Maarle, Merel ^c   Cornel, Martina C ^a   Henneman, Lidewij ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^c ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; FIRST TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; HEALTH PRACTITIONER; HIGH RISK PREGNANCY; HUMAN; MALE; NETHERLANDS; NEWBORN DEATH; NON INVASIVE MEASUREMENT; NUCHAL TRANSLUCENCY MEASUREMENT; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT COUNSELING; PREGNANT WOMAN; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK FACTOR; SCREENING TEST; AGED; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; MIDDLE AGED; QUESTIONNAIRE; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; AGED; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84954371206     PISSN: 01973851     EISSN: 10970223     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pd.4697     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Lo YMD, Corbetta N, Chamberlain PF, et al. Presence of fetal DNA in maternal plasma and serum. Lancet 1997;350:485-7.
2. Norton ME, Jacobsson B, Swamy GK, et al. Cell-free DNA analysis for noninvasive examination of trisomy. N Engl J Med 2015;372:1589-97.
3. Van Lith JM, Faas BH, Bianchi DW. Current controversies in prenatal diagnosis 1: NIPT for chromosome abnormalities should be offered to women with low a priori risk. Prenat Diagn 2015;35:8-14.
4. Allyse M, Minear MA, Berson E, et al. Non-invasive prenatal testing: a review of international implementation and challenges. Int J Wom Health 2015;7:113-26.
5. Langlois S, Brock J-A. Current status in non-invasive prenatal detection of Down syndrome, trisomy 18, and trisomy 13 using cell-free DNA in maternal plasma. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2013;35:177-81.
6. Malone FD, Canick JA, Ball RH, et al. First-trimester or second-trimester screening, or both, for Down's syndrome. N Engl J Med 2005;353:2001-11.
7. Gil MM, Quezada MS, Revello R, et al. Analysis of cell-free DNA in maternal blood in screening for fetal aneuploidies: updated meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015;45:249-66.
8. Ilumina. The assurance of knowing-Highly accurate noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) results [WWW document]. URL http://www.illumina.com/clinical/reproductive-genetic-health/clinical-labs/nipt.html [accessed on 15-6-2015].
9. Sequenom. Sequenom laboratories presents new data supporting the accuracy of the MaterniT21® Plus laboratory developed test In clinical setting [WWW document]. URL http://sequenom.investorroom.com/2014-09-22-Sequenom-Laboratories-Presents-New-Data-Supporting-The-Accuracy-Of-The-MaterniT21-Plus-Laboratory-Developed-Test-In-Clinical-Setting [accessed on 15-6-2015].
10. The Noninvasive Prenatal Screening Work Group of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. ACMG statement on noninvasive prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy. Genet Med 2013;15:395-8.
11. Benn P, Borell A, Chiu R, et al. Aneuploidy screening: a position statement from a Committee on behalf of the Board of the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis. 2012. Report No.: 33.
12. Benn P, Borrell A, Chiu RW, et al. Position statement from the chromosome abnormality screening committee on behalf of the board of the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis. Prenat Diagn 2015;35:725-34. PositionStatementFinal04082015.pdf [accessed on 15-6-2015].
13. Dondorp W, de Wert G, Bombard Y, et al. Non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy and beyond: challenges of responsible innovation in prenatal screening. Eur J Hum Genet 2015, doi:10.1038/ejhg.2015.57.
14. Benn P, Chapman AR, Erickson K, et al. Obstetricians and gynecologists' practice and opinions of expanded carrier testing and noninvasive prenatal testing. Prenat Diagn 2014;34:145-52.
15. Musci TJ, Fairbrother G, Batey A, et al. Non-invasive prenatal testing with cell-free DNA: US physician attitudes toward implementation in clinical practice. Prenat Diagn 2013;33:424-8.
16. van Schendel RV, Kleinveld JH, Dondorp WJ, et al. Attitudes of pregnant women and male partners towards non-invasive prenatal testing and widening the scope of prenatal screening. Eur J Hum Genet 2014;1345-50.
17. van den Heuvel A, Chitty L, Dormandy E, et al. Will the introduction of non-invasive prenatal diagnostic testing erode informed choices? An experimental study of health care professionals. Patient Educ Couns 2010;78:24-8.
18. Beulen L, Grutters JP, Faas BH, et al. Women's and healthcare professionals' preferences for prenatal testing: a discrete choice experiment. Prenat Diagn 2015;35:549-57.
19. Hill M, Fisher J, Chitty LS, et al. Women's and health professionals' preferences for prenatal tests for Down syndrome: a discrete choice experiment to contrast noninvasive prenatal diagnosis with current invasive tests. Genet Med 2012;14:905-13.
20. Yotsumoto J, Sekizawa A, Koide K, et al. Attitudes toward non-invasive prenatal diagnosis among pregnant women and health professionals in Japan. Prenat Diagn 2012;32:674-9.
21. Kitzman JO, Snyder MW, Ventura M, et al. Noninvasive whole-genome sequencing of a human fetus. Sci Transl Med 2012;4:137ra76.
22. Lo YM, Chan KC, Sun H, et al. Maternal plasma DNA sequencing reveals the genome-wide genetic and mutational profile of the fetus. Sci Transl Med 2010;2:61ra91.
23. Soini S, Ibarreta D, Anastasiadou V, et al. The interface between assisted reproductive technologies and genetics: technical, social, ethical and legal issues. Eur J Hum Genet 2006;14:588-645.
24. de Jong A, Dondorp W, Krumeich A, et al. The scope of prenatal diagnosis for women at increased risk for aneuploidies: views and preferences of professionals and potential users. J Community Genet 2013;4:125-35.
25. Wiegers TA. The quality of maternity care services as experienced by women in the Netherlands. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2009;9:18.
26. Schielen P. Quality control parameters of Dutch Down's syndrome screening laboratories. Bilthoven: RIVM; 2010. Report No. 230083003/2012.
27. Gitsels-van der Wal JT, Mannien J, Gitsels LA, et al. Prenatal screening for congenital anomalies: exploring midwives' perceptions of counseling clients with religious backgrounds. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2014;14:237.
28. TRIDENT 2014. Trial by Dutch laboratories for evaluation of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT). [WWW document]. URL http://www.emgo.nl/research/quality-of-care/research-projects/1451/trident-study-trial-by-dutch-laboratories-for-evaluation-of-non-invasive-prenatal-testing-nipt/background/ [accessed on 15-6-2015].
29. van Schendel RV, Dondorp WJ, Timmermans DR, et al. NIPT-based screening for Down syndrome and beyond: what do pregnant women think? Prenat Diagn 2015;35:598-604.
30. Haymon L, Simi E, Moyer K, et al. Clinical implementation of noninvasive prenatal testing among maternal fetal medicine specialists. Prenat Diagn 2014;34:416-23.
31. Lichtenbelt KD, Diemel BD, Koster MP, et al. Detection of fetal chromosomal anomalies: does Nuchal Translucency measurement have an added value in the era of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing? Prenat Diagn 2015;31:765-72.
32. Bilardo CM, Timmerman E, Pajkrt E, et al. Increased nuchal translucency in euploid fetuses - what should we be telling the parents? Prenat Diagn 2010;30:93-102.
33. de Jong A, Dondorp WJ, Frints SGM, et al. Non-invasive prenatal diagnosis for aneuploidy: toward an integral ethical assessment. Hum Reprod 2011;26:2915-7.
34. Kuppermann M, Pena S, Bishop JT, et al. Effect of enhanced information, values clarification, and removal of financial barriers on use of prenatal genetic testing: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2014;312:1210-7.
35. de Jong A, de Wert GM. Prenatal screening: an ethical agenda for the near future. Bioethics 2015;29:46-55.