Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

DNA sequencing versus standard prenatal aneuploidy screening.
N Engl J Med 2014; 370(9):799-808NEJM

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In high-risk pregnant women, noninvasive prenatal testing with the use of massively parallel sequencing of maternal plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA testing) accurately detects fetal autosomal aneuploidy. Its performance in low-risk women is unclear.

METHODS

At 21 centers in the United States, we collected blood samples from women with singleton pregnancies who were undergoing standard aneuploidy screening (serum biochemical assays with or without nuchal translucency measurement). We performed massively parallel sequencing in a blinded fashion to determine the chromosome dosage for each sample. The primary end point was a comparison of the false positive rates of detection of fetal trisomies 21 and 18 with the use of standard screening and cfDNA testing. Birth outcomes or karyotypes were the reference standard.

RESULTS

The primary series included 1914 women (mean age, 29.6 years) with an eligible sample, a singleton fetus without aneuploidy, results from cfDNA testing, and a risk classification based on standard screening. For trisomies 21 and 18, the false positive rates with cfDNA testing were significantly lower than those with standard screening (0.3% vs. 3.6% for trisomy 21, P<0.001; and 0.2% vs. 0.6% for trisomy 18, P=0.03). The use of cfDNA testing detected all cases of aneuploidy (5 for trisomy 21, 2 for trisomy 18, and 1 for trisomy 13; negative predictive value, 100% [95% confidence interval, 99.8 to 100]). The positive predictive values for cfDNA testing versus standard screening were 45.5% versus 4.2% for trisomy 21 and 40.0% versus 8.3% for trisomy 18.

CONCLUSIONS

In a general obstetrical population, prenatal testing with the use of cfDNA had significantly lower false positive rates and higher positive predictive values for detection of trisomies 21 and 18 than standard screening. (Funded by Illumina; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01663350.).

Authors+Show Affiliations

From the Mother Infant Research Institute, Tufts Medical Center and Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston (D.W.B.); Lyndhurst Clinical Research, Winston-Salem, NC (R.L.P.); the Group for Women, Norfolk, VA (J.W.); Long Island Jewish Medical Center, North Shore-LIJ Health Systems, New Hyde Park, NY (R.M.); West Coast OB/GYN, San Diego (C.S.), InClin, San Mateo (A.F.D.), and Illumina, Redwood City (D.I.C., P.L.D., K.W.J., K.O., R.P.R., A.J.S.) - all in California; and Colorado Permanente Medical Group, Denver (J.A.C.).No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

24571752

Citation

Bianchi, Diana W., et al. "DNA Sequencing Versus Standard Prenatal Aneuploidy Screening." The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 370, no. 9, 2014, pp. 799-808.
Bianchi DW, Parker RL, Wentworth J, et al. DNA sequencing versus standard prenatal aneuploidy screening. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(9):799-808.
Bianchi, D. W., Parker, R. L., Wentworth, J., Madankumar, R., Saffer, C., Das, A. F., ... Sehnert, A. J. (2014). DNA sequencing versus standard prenatal aneuploidy screening. The New England Journal of Medicine, 370(9), pp. 799-808. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1311037.
Bianchi DW, et al. DNA Sequencing Versus Standard Prenatal Aneuploidy Screening. N Engl J Med. 2014 Feb 27;370(9):799-808. PubMed PMID: 24571752.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - DNA sequencing versus standard prenatal aneuploidy screening. AU - Bianchi,Diana W, AU - Parker,R Lamar, AU - Wentworth,Jeffrey, AU - Madankumar,Rajeevi, AU - Saffer,Craig, AU - Das,Anita F, AU - Craig,Joseph A, AU - Chudova,Darya I, AU - Devers,Patricia L, AU - Jones,Keith W, AU - Oliver,Kelly, AU - Rava,Richard P, AU - Sehnert,Amy J, AU - ,, PY - 2014/2/28/entrez PY - 2014/2/28/pubmed PY - 2014/3/7/medline SP - 799 EP - 808 JF - The New England journal of medicine JO - N. Engl. J. Med. VL - 370 IS - 9 N2 - BACKGROUND: In high-risk pregnant women, noninvasive prenatal testing with the use of massively parallel sequencing of maternal plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA testing) accurately detects fetal autosomal aneuploidy. Its performance in low-risk women is unclear. METHODS: At 21 centers in the United States, we collected blood samples from women with singleton pregnancies who were undergoing standard aneuploidy screening (serum biochemical assays with or without nuchal translucency measurement). We performed massively parallel sequencing in a blinded fashion to determine the chromosome dosage for each sample. The primary end point was a comparison of the false positive rates of detection of fetal trisomies 21 and 18 with the use of standard screening and cfDNA testing. Birth outcomes or karyotypes were the reference standard. RESULTS: The primary series included 1914 women (mean age, 29.6 years) with an eligible sample, a singleton fetus without aneuploidy, results from cfDNA testing, and a risk classification based on standard screening. For trisomies 21 and 18, the false positive rates with cfDNA testing were significantly lower than those with standard screening (0.3% vs. 3.6% for trisomy 21, P<0.001; and 0.2% vs. 0.6% for trisomy 18, P=0.03). The use of cfDNA testing detected all cases of aneuploidy (5 for trisomy 21, 2 for trisomy 18, and 1 for trisomy 13; negative predictive value, 100% [95% confidence interval, 99.8 to 100]). The positive predictive values for cfDNA testing versus standard screening were 45.5% versus 4.2% for trisomy 21 and 40.0% versus 8.3% for trisomy 18. CONCLUSIONS: In a general obstetrical population, prenatal testing with the use of cfDNA had significantly lower false positive rates and higher positive predictive values for detection of trisomies 21 and 18 than standard screening. (Funded by Illumina; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01663350.). SN - 1533-4406 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/24571752/DNA_sequencing_versus_standard_prenatal_aneuploidy_screening_ L2 - http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1311037?url_ver=Z39.88-2003&amp;rfr_id=ori:rid:crossref.org&amp;rfr_dat=cr_pub=pubmed DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -