Trial by Dutch laboratories for evaluation of non-invasive prenatal testing. Part I—clinical impact

Prenatal Diagnosis

Volumn 36, Issue 12, 2016, Pages 1083-1090

  Oepkes, Dick ^a   Page Christiaens, G C Lieve ^b   Bax, Caroline J ^c   Bekker, Mireille N ^b,d   Bilardo, Catia M ^e   Boon, Elles M J ^a   Schuring Blom, G Heleen ^b   Coumans, Audrey B C ^f   Faas, Brigitte H ^d   Galjaard, Robert Jan H ^g   Go, Attie T ^g   Henneman, Lidewij ^c   Macville, Merryn V E ^f   Pajkrt, Eva ^h   Suijkerbuijk, Ron F ^e   Huijsdens van Amsterdam, Karin ^h   Van Opstal, Diane ^g   Verweij, E J Joanne ^a   Weiss, Marjan M ^c   Sistermans, Erik A ^c  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^c VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^e UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^f MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^g ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^h ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AMNIOCENTESIS; ARTICLE; CHROMOSOME ABERRATION; CHROMOSOME DELETION 22Q11; CLINICAL EVALUATION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIGEORGE SYNDROME; DISEASE SEVERITY; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; FETUS DISEASE; FIRST TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; GENETIC RISK; GENOME-WIDE ASSOCIATION STUDY; HUMAN; KARYOTYPING; LABORATORY TEST; MATERNAL AGE; MOSAICISM; NETHERLANDS; NON INVASIVE PROCEDURE; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PRENATAL SCREENING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TRISOMY 13; TRISOMY 18; TRISOMY 21; TRISOMY 8; BLOOD; CHROMOSOME 13; CHROMOSOME 18; CHROMOSOME DISORDER; DNA SEQUENCE; DOWN SYNDROME; EDWARDS SYNDROME; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FETUS ECHOGRAPHY; FOLLOW UP; HIGH THROUGHPUT SEQUENCING; NUCHAL TRANSLUCENCY MEASUREMENT; PREGNANCY; PROCEDURES; TIME FACTOR; TRISOMY;

DNA;

ADULT; CHROMOSOME DISORDERS; CHROMOSOMES, HUMAN, PAIR 13; CHROMOSOMES, HUMAN, PAIR 18; DNA; DOWN SYNDROME; FALSE NEGATIVE REACTIONS; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HIGH-THROUGHPUT NUCLEOTIDE SEQUENCING; HUMANS; NETHERLANDS; NUCHAL TRANSLUCENCY MEASUREMENT; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY TRIMESTER, FIRST; SEQUENCE ANALYSIS, DNA; TIME FACTORS; TRISOMY; TRISOMY 13 SYNDROME; TRISOMY 18 SYNDROME; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, PRENATAL;

EID: 85003712711     PISSN: 01973851     EISSN: 10970223     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pd.4945     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Warsof SL, Larion S, Abuhamad AZ. Overview of the impact of noninvasive prenatal testing on diagnostic procedures. Prenat Diagn 2015;35:972–9.
2. Jaques AM, Collins VR, Muggli EE, et al. Uptake of prenatal diagnostic testing and the effectiveness of prenatal screening for Down syndrome. Prenat Diagn 2010;30:522–30.
3. Chetty S, Garabedian MJ, Norton ME. Uptake of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in women following positive aneuploidy screening. Prenat Diagn 2013;33:542–6.
4. Lichtenbelt KD, Schuring-Blom GH, van derBurg N, et al. Factors determining uptake of invasive testing following first-trimester combined testing. Prenat Diagn 2013;33:328–33.
5. Green JM, Hewison J, Bekker HL, et al. Psychosocial aspects of genetic screening of pregnant women and newborns: a systematic review. Health Technol Assess 2004;8iii, ix-iii, 1–109.
6. Engels MA, Bhola SL, Twisk JW, et al. Evaluation of the introduction of the national Down syndrome screening program in the Netherlands: age-related uptake of prenatal screening and invasive diagnostic testing. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2014;174:59–63.
7. Schendel RV, Page-Christiaens LC, Beulen L, et al. Trial by Dutch laboratories for evaluation of non-invasive prenatal testing. Part II – women's perspectives. Prenat Diagn 2016, DOI: 10.1002/pd.4941.
8. Atsma F, Jansen B, Liefers J. Monitor 2013 Screeningsprogramma Downsyndroom en Structureel Echoscopisch Onderzoek. Radboudumc/Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare: Nijmegen; 2014.
9. Mersy E, Smits LJM, vanWinden LAAP, et al. Noninvasive detection of fetal trisomy 21: systematic review and report of quality and outcomes of diagnostic accuracy studies performed between 1997 and 2012. Hum Reprod Update 2013;19:318–29.
10. Straver R, Sistermans EA, Holstege H, et al. WISECONDOR: detection of fetal aberrations from shallow sequencing maternal plasma based on a within-sample comparison scheme. Nucleic Acids Res 2014;42:e31.
11. Gezondheidsraad (Health Council of the Netherlands). Wet op het bevolkingsonderzoek: niet-invasieve prenatale test bij verhoogd risico op trisomie. Den Haag; 2013. Report No.: 2013/38.
12. Gil MM, Akolekar R, Quezada MS, et al. Analysis of cell-free DNA in maternal blood in screening for aneuploidies: meta-analysis. Fetal Diagn Ther 2014;35:156–73.
13. Verweij EJ, Oepkes D, deVries M, et al. Non-invasive prenatal screening for trisomy 21: what women want and are willing to pay. Patient Educ Couns 2013;93:641–5.
14. Lewis C, Hill M, Silcock C, et al. Non-invasive prenatal testing for trisomy 21: a cross-sectional survey of service users' views and likely uptake. BJOG: Int J Obstet Gyn 2014;121:582–94.
15. Wallerstein R, Jelks A, Garabedian MJ. A new model for providing cell-free DNA and risk assessment for chromosome abnormalities in a public hospital setting. J Pregnancy 2014;2014:962720.
16. Taylor J, Chock V, Hudgins L. NIPT in a clinical setting: an analysis of uptake in the first months of clinical availability. J Genet Counsel 2014;23:72–8.
17. Lo YM. Noninvasive prenatal diagnosis: from dream to reality. Clin Chem 2015;61:32–7.
18. Van Opstal D, Srebniak MI, Polak J, et al. False negative NIPT results: risk figures for chromosomes 13, 18 and 21 based on chorionic villi results in 5967 cases and literature review. PLoS One 2016;11e0146794.
19. Smith M, Lewis KM, Holmes A, Visootsak J. A case of false negative NIPT for Down syndrome—lessons learned. Case Rep Genet 2014;2014:823504.
20. Willems PJ, Dierickx H, van den Akker E, et al. The first 3,000 non-invasive prenatal tests (NIPT) with the harmony test in Belgium and the Netherlands. Facts Views Vis Obgyn 2014;6:7–12.
21. Beulen L, Grutters JP, Faas BH, et al. The consequences of implementing non-invasive prenatal testing in Dutch national health care: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2014;182:53–61.
22. Friel LA, Czerwinski JL, Singletary CN. The impact of noninvasive prenatal testing on the practice of maternal–fetal medicine. Am J Perinatol 2014;31:759–64.
23. Larion S, Warsof SL, Romary L, et al. Association of combined first-trimester screen and noninvasive prenatal testing on diagnostic procedures. Obstet Gynecol 2014;123:1303–10.
24. Manegold-Brauer G, Kang BA, Hahn S, et al. A new era in prenatal care: non-invasive prenatal testing in Switzerland. Swiss Med Wkly 2014;144:w13915.
25. Benn P, Curnow KJ, Chapman S, et al. An economic analysis of cell-free DNA non-invasive prenatal testing in the US general pregnancy population. PLoS One 2015;10:e0132313.
26. Hui L, The S, McCarthy EA, Walker SP. Emerging issues in invasive prenatal diagnosis: safety and competency in the post-NIPT era. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2015;55:541–6.
27. Faas BH, deLigt J, Janssen I, et al. Non-invasive prenatal diagnosis of fetal aneuploidies using massively parallel sequencing-by-ligation and evidence that cell-free fetal DNA in the maternal plasma originates from cytotrophoblastic cells. Expert Opin Biol Ther 2012;12 Suppl 1:S19–26.
28. van denOever JM, Balkassmi S, Verweij EJ, et al. Single molecule sequencing of free DNA from maternal plasma for noninvasive trisomy 21 detection. Clin Chem 2012;58:699–706.
29. van denOever JM, Balkassmi S, Johansson LF, et al. Successful noninvasive trisomy 18 detection using single molecule sequencing. Clin Chem 2013;59:705–9.
30. Straver R, Oudejans CB, Sistermans EA, Reinders MJ. Calculating the fetal fraction for Non Invasive Prenatal Testing based on genome-wide nucleosome profiles. Prenat Diagn 2016;36:614–21.
31. Brady P, Brison N, Van Den Bogaert K, et al. Clinical implementation of NIPT—technical and biological challenges. Clin Genet 2016;89:523–30.
32. Helgeson J, Wardrop J, Boomer T, et al. Clinical outcome of subchromosomal events detected by whole-genome noninvasive prenatal testing. Prenat Diagn 2015;35:999–1004.
33. Norton ME, Jelliffe-Pawlowski LL, Currier RJ. Chromosome abnormalities detected by current prenatal screening and noninvasive prenatal testing. Obstet Gynecol 2014;124:979–86.
34. Grati FR, Bajaj K, Malvestiti F, et al. The type of feto-placental aneuploidy detected by cfDNA testing may influence the choice of confirmatory diagnostic procedure. Prenat Diagn 2015;35:994–8.
35. Kalousek DK, Vekemans M. Confined placental mosaicism. J Med Genet 1996;33:529–33.
36. Wilkins-Haug L, Quade B, Morton CC. Confined placental mosaicism as a risk factor among newborns with fetal growth restriction. Prenat Diagn 2006;26:428–32.
37. Van Opstal D, Srebniak MI. Cytogenetic confirmation of a positive NIPT result: evidence-based choice between chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis depending on chromosome aberration. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2016;16:513–20.
38. Nicolaides KH. Screening for fetal aneuploidies at 11 to 13 weeks. Prenat Diagn 2011;31:7–15.
39. Engels MA, Heijboer AC, Blankenstein MA, vanVugt JM. Performance of first-trimester combined test for Down syndrome in different maternal age groups: reason for adjustments in screening policy? Prenat Diagn 2011;31:1241–5.
40. 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.