Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

[MODELS OF CLINICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF CELL FREE FETAL DNA IN THE MATERNAL SERUM SCREENING TEST-ANALYSIS].
Akush Ginekol (Sofiia) 2015; 54(7):15-21AG

Abstract

Prenatal screening by definition is a way of identifying pregnancies, with a high enough risk to specific fetal damage as to justify the subsequent invasive diagnosis among the seemingly normal pregnancies. [1] The aim of the prenatal screening test is to reach the high diagnostic frequency (DR > 95%), with low false-positive rate (FPR < 1%). Several non-invasive prenatal tests (NIPT) are widely adopted and use in clinical practice: 1st Trimester Combined screening (First trimester Combined Screening) and 2nd trimester biochemical screening (Second trimester biochemical screening) and in the last few years through screening Fetal DNA in Maternal serum (cfDNA screening). Since the introduction of the sfDNA test were examined and discussed the results of several ways of application: (1) as a primary screening method without preceding the result of 1st trimester combined screening for chromosomal abnormalities, (2) as a contingent test after 1st trimester combined screening in high risk pregnancies (> 1:100) (3) as a contingent test after 1st trimester combined screening, when the calculated risk is between (1:10 to 1:2500). The purpose of the study: to compare the results of different ways of application screening through cfDNA: detection rate (DR) for Tri21, Tri18 and Tri13, procentage of invasive diagnostics and cost-effectiveness ratio of cfDNA test in comparison with the 1st trimester combined screening. To establish the most suitable algorithm for application of cfDNA test.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Analyzed were the results of several randomized multi-center clinical studies whose data are processed through a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

cfDNA-test has a higher DR for Tri21 for lower FPR, compared to the combined screening in 1st trimester (cfDNA-DR 99%, 1st trimester screening-DR 96% and 0.4%FPR, respectively FPR 5%), but although it is with better results and reduces the incidence of invasive tests, does not justify the significant difference in price-performance ratio. On the other hand cfDNA-test is with a lower detection rate for Tri 18 or 13 (93-95%), which makes it worse for a primary screening test instead of combined screening in the 1st trimester.

CONCLUSIONS

The performance of cfDNA-test in terms of the three most common Trisomies: 21,18 and 13 is highest when used after (contingent to) 1st trimester screening and only for patients with an intermediate risk from 1-st trimester screening (risk > 1:10 and 1:2500, around 27% of all pregnancies), as it increases the diagnostic rate of combined screening for Down syndrome (from 90% to 98%), and significantly reduces the percentage of invasive diagnostics (from 3% to 0.7-1%) and that way we are able to achieve optimal result in price-performance result.

Authors

No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Meta-Analysis

Language

bul

PubMed ID

27025103

Citation

Yankova, M, et al. "[MODELS of CLINICAL IMPLEMENTATION of CELL FREE FETAL DNA in the MATERNAL SERUM SCREENING TEST-ANALYSIS]." Akusherstvo I Ginekologiia, vol. 54, no. 7, 2015, pp. 15-21.
Yankova M, Chaveeva P, Stratieva V. [MODELS OF CLINICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF CELL FREE FETAL DNA IN THE MATERNAL SERUM SCREENING TEST-ANALYSIS]. Akush Ginekol (Sofiia). 2015;54(7):15-21.
Yankova, M., Chaveeva, P., & Stratieva, V. (2015). [MODELS OF CLINICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF CELL FREE FETAL DNA IN THE MATERNAL SERUM SCREENING TEST-ANALYSIS]. Akusherstvo I Ginekologiia, 54(7), pp. 15-21.
Yankova M, Chaveeva P, Stratieva V. [MODELS of CLINICAL IMPLEMENTATION of CELL FREE FETAL DNA in the MATERNAL SERUM SCREENING TEST-ANALYSIS]. Akush Ginekol (Sofiia). 2015;54(7):15-21. PubMed PMID: 27025103.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - [MODELS OF CLINICAL IMPLEMENTATION OF CELL FREE FETAL DNA IN THE MATERNAL SERUM SCREENING TEST-ANALYSIS]. AU - Yankova,M, AU - Chaveeva,P, AU - Stratieva,V, PY - 2016/3/31/entrez PY - 2015/1/1/pubmed PY - 2016/5/18/medline SP - 15 EP - 21 JF - Akusherstvo i ginekologiia JO - Akush Ginekol (Sofiia) VL - 54 IS - 7 N2 - UNLABELLED: Prenatal screening by definition is a way of identifying pregnancies, with a high enough risk to specific fetal damage as to justify the subsequent invasive diagnosis among the seemingly normal pregnancies. [1] The aim of the prenatal screening test is to reach the high diagnostic frequency (DR > 95%), with low false-positive rate (FPR < 1%). Several non-invasive prenatal tests (NIPT) are widely adopted and use in clinical practice: 1st Trimester Combined screening (First trimester Combined Screening) and 2nd trimester biochemical screening (Second trimester biochemical screening) and in the last few years through screening Fetal DNA in Maternal serum (cfDNA screening). Since the introduction of the sfDNA test were examined and discussed the results of several ways of application: (1) as a primary screening method without preceding the result of 1st trimester combined screening for chromosomal abnormalities, (2) as a contingent test after 1st trimester combined screening in high risk pregnancies (> 1:100) (3) as a contingent test after 1st trimester combined screening, when the calculated risk is between (1:10 to 1:2500). The purpose of the study: to compare the results of different ways of application screening through cfDNA: detection rate (DR) for Tri21, Tri18 and Tri13, procentage of invasive diagnostics and cost-effectiveness ratio of cfDNA test in comparison with the 1st trimester combined screening. To establish the most suitable algorithm for application of cfDNA test. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Analyzed were the results of several randomized multi-center clinical studies whose data are processed through a meta-analysis. RESULTS: cfDNA-test has a higher DR for Tri21 for lower FPR, compared to the combined screening in 1st trimester (cfDNA-DR 99%, 1st trimester screening-DR 96% and 0.4%FPR, respectively FPR 5%), but although it is with better results and reduces the incidence of invasive tests, does not justify the significant difference in price-performance ratio. On the other hand cfDNA-test is with a lower detection rate for Tri 18 or 13 (93-95%), which makes it worse for a primary screening test instead of combined screening in the 1st trimester. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of cfDNA-test in terms of the three most common Trisomies: 21,18 and 13 is highest when used after (contingent to) 1st trimester screening and only for patients with an intermediate risk from 1-st trimester screening (risk > 1:10 and 1:2500, around 27% of all pregnancies), as it increases the diagnostic rate of combined screening for Down syndrome (from 90% to 98%), and significantly reduces the percentage of invasive diagnostics (from 3% to 0.7-1%) and that way we are able to achieve optimal result in price-performance result. SN - 0324-0959 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/27025103/[MODELS_OF_CLINICAL_IMPLEMENTATION_OF_CELL_FREE_FETAL_DNA_IN_THE_MATERNAL_SERUM_SCREENING_TEST_ANALYSIS]_ L2 - https://medlineplus.gov/downsyndrome.html DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -