Cell-free DNA screening for fetal aneuploidy as a clinical service.

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) through the analysis of cell free (cf)DNA is revolutionizing prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy. Current methods used in clinical practice include shotgun massively parallel sequencing (s-MPS); targeted (t-MPS); and an approach that takes advantage of single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) differences between mother and fetus. Efficacy of cfDNA testing for the common autosomal trisomies far exceeds that of conventional screening. Depending on the methodology used, reasons for discordancy between cfDNA results and fetal karyotype can include true fetal mosaicism, confined placental mosaicism, presence of a maternal karyotype abnormality, insufficient counting due to low fetal fraction, and a vanishing twin. Among the possible cfDNA strategies a Primary test has the highest performance but is expensive, while a Contingent cfDNA test can achieve high performance at a relatively low cost. Practicalities to be considered in the provision of testing include pretest counseling about the scope and accuracy of the testing, the interpretation of results when there is a low fetal fraction and follow-up studies for positive test results. The role of first trimester nuchal translucency measurement and conventional biochemical testing needs to be reassessed in the context of the use of cfDNA.

First trimester contingent testing with either nuchal translucency or cell-free DNA. Cost efficiency and the role of ultrasound dating.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance and cost efficacy of different first-trimester contingent screening strategies based on an initial analysis of biochemical markers. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Swedish National Quality Register for prenatal diagnosis. POPULATION: 35,780 women with singleton pregnancies. METHODS: Serum values from first trimester biochemistry were re-analyzed in a contingent approach. For risks between 1:40 and 1:1000, risk estimates from nuchal translucency measurements were added and outcomes were compared using either a final cut-off risk of 1:200 to proceed with invasive testing or offering non-invasive prenatal testing. In a subgroup of 12,836 women with regular menstrual cycles the same analyses were performed using data on the last menstrual period for determining gestational age. The costs of detecting one case of aneuploidy were compared. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparison of screening strategies. RESULTS: The detection rate was the same (87%) in the contingent group as in complete combined screening, with only 41% requiring a nuchal translucency scan. As an alternative, offering non-invasive prenatal testing to the intermediate risk group would result in a detection rate of 98%, but the cost to detect one case of trisomy 21 would be 83% higher than the cost associated with traditional combined screening. CONCLUSIONS: First trimester examination using a contingent approach will achieve similar results compared with full combined screening. Non-invasive prenatal testing will not be cost-effective when a high proportion of pregnancies need further testing.

The clinical effectiveness of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy in all 24 chromosomes (PGD-A): systematic review.

STUDY QUESTION: Is preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy (PGD-A) with analysis of all chromosomes during assisted reproductive technology (ART) clinically and cost effective? SUMMARY ANSWER: The majority of published studies comparing a strategy of PGD-A with morphologically assessed embryos have reported a higher implantation rate per embryo using PGD-A, but insufficient data has been presented to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of PGD-A in the clinical setting. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Aneuploidy is a leading cause of implantation failure, miscarriage and congenital abnormalities in humans, and a significant cause of ART failure. Preclinical evidence of PGD-A indicates that the selection and transfer of euploid embryos during ART should improve clinical outcomes. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE AND DURATION: A systematic review of the literature was performed for full text English language articles using MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library databases, NHS Economic Evaluation Database and EconLit. The Downs and Black scoring checklist was used to assess the quality of studies. Clinical effectiveness was measured in terms of pregnancy, live birth and miscarriage rates. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTINGS, METHODS: Nineteen articles meeting the inclusion criteria, comprising three RCTs in young and good prognosis patients and 16 observation studies were identified. Five of the observational studies included a control group of patients where embryos were selected based on morphological criteria (matched cohort studies). MAIN RESULTS AND ROLE OF CHANCE: Of the five studies that included a control group and reported implantation rates, four studies (including two RCTs) demonstrated improved implantation rates in the PGD-A group. Of the eight studies that included a control group, six studies (including two RCTs) reported significantly higher pregnancy rates in the PGD-A group, and in the remaining two studies, equivalent pregnancies rates were reported despite fewer embryos being transferred in the PGD-A group. The three RCTs demonstrated benefit in young and good prognosis patients in terms of clinical pregnancy rates and the use of single embryo transfer. However, studies relating to patients of advanced maternal age, recurrent miscarriage and implantation failure were restricted to matched cohort studies, limiting the ability to draw meaningful conclusions. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Relevant studies may have been missed and findings from RCTs currently being undertaken could not be included. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Given the uncertain role of PGD-A techniques, high-quality experimental studies using intention-to-treat analysis and cumulative live birth rates including the comparative outcomes from remaining cryopreserved embryos are needed to evaluate the overall role of PGD-A in the clinical setting. It is only in this way that the true contribution of PGD-A to ART can be understood.

BAC chromosomal microarray for prenatal detection of chromosome anomalies in fetal ultrasound anomalies: an economic evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: To determine the cost-effectiveness of prenatal chromosomal microarray (CMA) when performed for structural anomalies on fetal ultrasound scan over conventional techniques. METHOD: A decision tree was populated using data from a prospective cohort of women undergoing testing when a fetal ultrasound scan showed a structural abnormality. Nine strategies of testing were modeled including combinations of the tests: QFPCR, G-band karyotyping, CMA and FISH for DiGeorge (22q) microdeletion. RESULTS: When CMA costs GBP 405 and using a 1-Mb BAC array it would cost GBP 24,600 for every additional case detected by CMA over a combination of QFPCR, followed by G-band karyotype, followed lastly by FISH (for DiGeorge syndrome). If CMA is performed instead of conventional karyotyping alone it costs GBP 33,000 for every additional case detected. However, if the cost of CMA is reduced to GBP 360 than when CMA is performed instead of conventional karyotyping alone it would cost GBP 9,768 for every additional case detected. DISCUSSION: The use of a prenatal BAC CMA is not currently cost-effective when compared to other testing strategies. However, as CMA costs decrease and resolution (and detection rates) increase it is likely to become the cost-effective option of the future.