Login to MyKarger

New to MyKarger? Click here to sign up.



Login with Facebook

Forgot your password?

Authors, Editors, Reviewers

For Manuscript Submission, Check or Review Login please go to Submission Websites List.

Submission Websites List

Institutional Login
(Shibboleth or Open Athens)

For the academic login, please select your country in the dropdown list. You will be redirected to verify your credentials.

Review

Open Access Gateway

Noninvasive Prenatal Testing - When Is It Advantageous to Apply

Liehr T.a · Lauten A.b · Schneider U.b · Schleussner E.b · Weise A.a

Author affiliations

aInstitute of Human Genetics and bClinic for Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jena University Hospital, Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany

Corresponding Author

Dr. Thomas Liehr

Institut für Humangenetik

Postfach

DE-07740 Jena (Germany)

E-Mail Thomas.Liehr@med.uni-jena.de

Related Articles for ""

Biomed Hub 2017;2:458432

Do you have an account?

Login Information





Contact Information











I have read the Karger Terms and Conditions and agree.



Abstract

Nowadays it is common sense in obstetrics that an increased risk for pregnancy loss due to invasive testing does not exist. Nonetheless, noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) is a hot topic, even though this approach does not provide a reduction of unintentionally induced abortions. NIPT has a number of shortcuts which are highlighted in this review, including: (1) in NIPT placental rather than fetal DNA is studied, (2) NIPT fails in 2-6% of cases, and (3) trisomy 21 accounts for only ∼50% of existing chromosomal aberrations. Thus, we agree with the literature that NIPT is a fascinating possibility to gain information on unborn life from minimal amounts of DNA. However, it remains a pure risk estimation test directed towards the detection of specific chromosomal abnormalities from peripheral blood of the pregnant woman. It is important to highlight that families buying this test, and getting a normal result, may be provided with a false sense of security. Thus, careful and comprehensive genetic counselling should be performed before the test is offered, and should include a clear explanation of the advantages and disadvantages, as well as limitations, compared to other methods.

© 2017 The Author(s) Published by S. Karger AG, Basel


References

  1. Darouich AA, Liehr T, Weise A, Schlembach D, Schleussner E, Kiehntopf M, Schreyer I: Alpha-fetoprotein and its value for predicting pregnancy outcomes - a re-evaluation. J Prenat Med 2015;9:18-23.
  2. Donald I, MacVicar J, Brown TG: Investigation of abdominal masses by pulsed ultrasound. Lancet 1958;1:1188-1195.
  3. Steele MW, Breg WR Jr: Chromosome analysis of human amniotic-fluid cells. Lancet 1966;1:383-385.
  4. Alamillo CM, Fiddler M, Pergament E: Increased nuchal translucency in the presence of normal chromosomes: what's next? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2012;24:102-108.
  5. Fuchs F, Riis P: Antenatal sex determination. Nature 1956;177:330.
  6. Milunsky A: Genetic Disorders and the Fetus; Diagnosis, Prevention, and Treatment. Berlin, Springer, 1979, pp 19-46.
  7. Ward RH, Modell B, Petrou M, Karagözlu F, Douratsos E: Method of sampling chorionic villi in first trimester of pregnancy under guidance of real time ultrasound. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1983;286:1542-1544.
    External Resources
  8. Mohr J: Foetal genetic diagnosis: development of techniques for early sampling of foetal cells. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand 1968;73:73-77.
  9. Kullander S, Sandahl B: Fetal chromosome analysis after transcervical placental biopsies during early pregnancy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1973;52:355-359.
  10. Hahnemann N: Early prenatal diagnosis; a study of biopsy techniques and cell culturing from extraembryonic membranes. Clin Genet 1974;6:294-306.
  11. Fetal sex pridiction by sex chromatin of chorionic villi cells during early pregnancy. Chin Med J (Engl) 1975;1:117-126.
    External Resources
  12. Gosden C, Nicolaides KH, Rodeck CH: Fetal blood sampling in investigation of chromosome mosaicism in amniotic fluid cell culture. Lancet 1988;1:613-617.
  13. Valenti C: Antenatal detection of hemoglobinopathies. A preliminary report. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1973;115:851-853.
  14. Patrick JE, Perry TB, Kinch RA: Fetoscopy and fetal blood sampling: a percutaneous approach. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1974;119:539-542.
  15. Rodeck CH, Campbell S: Umbilical-cord insertion as source of pure fetal blood for prenatal diagnosis. Lancet 1979;1:1244-1245.
  16. Hixson L, Goel S, Schuber P, Faltas V, Lee J, Narayakkadan A, Leung H, Osborne J: An overview on prenatal screening for chromosomal aberrations. J Lab Autom 2015;20:562-573.
  17. Liehr T, Ziegler M: Rapid prenatal diagnostics in the interphase nucleus: procedure and cut-off rates. J Histochem Cytochem 2005;53:289-291.
  18. Weise A, Liehr T: Fluorescence in situ hybridization for prenatal screening of chromosomal aneuploidies. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2008;8:355-357.
  19. Weise A, Liehr T: Rapid prenatal aneuploidy screening by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Methods Mol Biol 2008;444:39-47.
  20. Sheth F, Rahman M, Liehr T, Desai M, Patel B, Modi C, Trivedi S, Sheth J: Prenatal screening of cytogenetic anomalies - a Western Indian experience. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2015;15:90.
  21. Tantravahi U, Wheeler P: Molecular genetic testing for prenatal diagnosis. Clin Lab Med 2003;23:481-502.
  22. Kang JU, Koo SH: Clinical implementation of chromosomal microarray technology in prenatal diagnosis. (Review). Mol Med Rep 2012;6:1219-1222.
  23. Brock DJ, Sutcliffe RG: Alpha-fetoprotein in the antenatal diagnosis of anencephaly and spina bifida. Lancet 1972;2:197-199.
  24. Gekas J, Langlois S, Ravitsky V, Audibert F, van den Berg DG, Haidar H, Rousseau F: Non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal chromosome abnormalities: review of clinical and ethical issues. Appl Clin Genet 2016;9:15-26.
  25. Pubmed. 2016. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed (accessed October 20, 2016).
  26. Wulff CB, Gerds TA, Rode L, Ekelund CK, Petersen OB, Tabor A; Danish Fetal Medicine Study Group: Risk of fetal loss associated with invasive testing following combined first-trimester screening for Down syndrome: a national cohort of 147,987 singleton pregnancies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016;47:38-44.
  27. Akolekar R, Beta J, Picciarelli G, Ogilvie C, D'Antonio F: Procedure-related risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015;45:16-26.
  28. Kähler C, Gembruch U, Heling KS, Henrich W, Schramm T; DEGUM: DEGUM guidelines for amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling (in German). Ultraschall Med 2013;34:435-440.
  29. Eddleman KA, Malone FD, Sullivan L, Dukes K, Berkowitz RL, Kharbutli Y, Porter TF, Luthy DA, Comstock CH, Saade GR, Klugman S, Dugoff L, Craigo SD, Timor-Tritsch IE, Carr SR, Wolfe HM, D'Alton ME: Pregnancy loss rates after midtrimester amniocentesis. Obstet Gynecol 2006;108:1067-1072.
  30. Tabor A, Vestergaard CH, Lidegaard Ø: Fetal loss rate after chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis: an 11-year national registry study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009;34:19-24.
  31. Belloin C, Jacquemard F, Bernabé-Dupont C, Viot G, Lohmann L, Grangé G: The noninvasive prenatal testing for Down's Syndrome. Retrospective study of 8821 patients (in French). J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2016;45:1127-1132.
  32. Levi S: Ultrasound in prenatal diagnosis: polemics around routine ultrasound screening for second trimester fetal malformations. Prenat Diagn 2002;22:285-295.
  33. Rink BD, Norton ME: Screening for fetal aneuploidy. Semin Perinatol 2016;40:35-43.
  34. Lau TK, Jiang FM, Stevenson RJ, Lo TK, Chan LW, Chan MK, Lo PS, Wang W, Zhang HY, Chen F, Choy KW: Secondary findings from non-invasive prenatal testing for common fetal aneuploidies by whole genome sequencing as a clinical service. Prenat Diagn 2013;33:602-608.
  35. Gross SJ, Stosic M, McDonald-McGinn DM, Bassett AS, Norvez A, Dhamankar R, Kobara K, Kirkizlar E, Zimmermann B, Wayham N, Babiarz JE, Ryan A, Jinnett KN, Demko Z, Benn P: Clinical experience with single-nucleotide polymorphism-based non-invasive prenatal screening for 22q11.2 deletion syndrome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016;47:177-183.
  36. Taylor-Phillips S, Freeman K, Geppert J, Agbebiyi A, Uthman OA, Madan J, Clarke A, Quenby S, Clarke A: Accuracy of non-invasive prenatal testing using cell-free DNA for detection of Down, Edwards and Patau syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 2016;6:e010002.
  37. Lau TK, Cheung SW, Lo PS, Pursley AN, Chan MK, Jiang F, Zhang H, Wang W, Jong LF, Yuen OK, Chan HY, Chan WS, Choy KW: Non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal chromosomal abnormalities by low-coverage whole-genome sequencing of maternal plasma DNA: review of 1982 consecutive cases in a single center. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014;43:254-264.
  38. Mennuti MT, Cherry AM, Morrissette JJ, Dugoff L: Is it time to sound an alarm about false-positive cell-free DNA testing for fetal aneuploidy? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013;209:415-419.
  39. Verweij EJ, de Boer MA, Oepkes D: Non-invasive prenatal testing for trisomy 13: more harm than good? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014;44:112-114.
  40. Srebniak MI, Diderich KE, Noomen P, Dijkman A, de Vries FA, van Opstal D: Abnormal non-invasive prenatal test results concordant with karyotype of cytotrophoblast but not reflecting abnormal fetal karyotype. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2014;44:109-111.
  41. Chen X, Dai M, Shi W, Pan Y, Zhang W, Zhang Y, Wu Z: Analysis of two false positive cases from noninvasive prenatal testing (in Chinese). Zhonghua Yi Xue Yi Chuan Xue Za Zhi 2014;31:778-781.
  42. Pan Q, Sun B, Huang X, Jing X, Liu H, Jiang F, Zhou J, Lin M, Yue H, Hu P, Ning Y: A prenatal case with discrepant findings between non-invasive prenatal testing and fetal genetic testings. Mol Cytogenet 2014;7:48
  43. Grati FR, Malvestiti F, Ferreira JC, Bajaj K, Gaetani E, Agrati C, Grimi B, Dulcetti F, Ruggeri AM, De Toffol S, Maggi F, Wapner R, Gross S, Simoni G: Fetoplacental mosaicism: potential implications for false-positive and false-negative noninvasive prenatal screening results. Genet Med 2014;16:620-624.
  44. Beulen L, Faas BH, Feenstra I, van Vugt JM, Bekker MN: The clinical utility of non-invasive prenatal testing in pregnancies with ultrasound anomalies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol DOI: 10.1002/uog.17228.
  45. Zhang H, Gao Y, Jiang F, Fu M, Yuan Y, Guo Y, Zhu Z, Lin M, Liu Q, Tian Z, Zhang H, Chen F, Lau TK, Zhao L, Yi X, Yin Y, Wang W: Non-invasive prenatal testing for trisomies 21, 18 and 13: clinical experience from 146,958 pregnancies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015;45:530-538.
  46. Van Opstal D, Srebniak MI, Polak J, de Vries F, Govaerts LC, Joosten M, Go AT, Knapen MF, van den Berg C, Diderich KE, Galjaard RJ: 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;11:e0146794.
  47. Mardy A, Wapner RJ: Confined placental mosaicism and its impact on confirmation of NIPT results. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 2016;172:118-122.
  48. Osborne CM, Hardisty E, Devers P, Kaiser-Rogers K, Hayden MA, Goodnight W, Vora NL: Discordant noninvasive prenatal testing results in a patient subsequently diagnosed with metastatic disease. Prenat Diagn 2013;33:609-611.
  49. Wang Y, Chen Y, Tian F, Zhang J, Song Z, Wu Y, Han X, Hu W, Ma D, Cram D, Cheng W: Maternal mosaicism is a significant contributor to discordant sex chromosomal aneuploidies associated with noninvasive prenatal testing. Clin Chem 2014;60:251-259.
  50. Snyder MW, Simmons LE, Kitzman JO, Coe BP, Henson JM, Daza RM, Eichler EE, Shendure J, Gammill HS: Copy-number variation and false positive prenatal aneuploidy screening results. N Engl J Med 2015;372:1639-1645.
  51. Dheedene A, Sante T, De Smet M, Vanbellinghen JF, Grisart B, Vergult S, Janssens S, Menten B: Implementation of non-invasive prenatal testing by semiconductor sequencing in a genetic laboratory. Prenat Diagn 2016;36:699-707.
  52. Lo KK, Karampetsou E, Boustred C, McKay F, Mason S, Hill M, Plagnol V, Chitty LS: Limited clinical utility of non-invasive prenatal testing for subchromosomal abnormalities. Am J Hum Genet 2016;98:34-44.
  53. Dugo N, Padula F, Mobili L, Brizzi C, D'Emidio L, Cignini P, Mesoraca A, Bizzoco D, Cima A, Giorlandino C: Six consecutive false positive cases from cell-free fetal DNA testing in a single referring centre. J Prenat Med 2014;8:31-35.
    External Resources
  54. Yaron Y: The implications of non-invasive prenatal testing failures: a review of an under-discussed phenomenon. Prenat Diagn 2016;36:391-396.
  55. Norton ME, Wapner RJ: Cell-free DNA analysis for noninvasive examination of trisomy. N Engl J Med 2015;373:2582.
  56. Norton ME, Jelliffe-Pawlowski LL, Currier RJ: Chromosome abnormalities detected by current prenatal screening and noninvasive prenatal testing. Obstet Gynecol 2014;124:979-986.
  57. Mackie FL, Hemming K, Allen S, Morris RK, Kilby MD: The accuracy of cell-free fetal DNA-based non-invasive prenatal testing in singleton pregnancies: a systematic review and bivariate meta-analysis. BJOG 2017;124:32-46.
  58. Committee Opinion No. 640: cell-free DNA screening for fetal aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol 2015;126:e31-e37.
  59. Bevilacqua E, Gil MM, Nicolaides KH, Ordoñez E, Cirigliano V, Dierickx H, Willems PJ, Jani JC: Performance of screening for aneuploidies by cell-free DNA analysis of maternal blood in twin pregnancies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015;45:61-66.
  60. Bevilacqua E, Guizani M, Cos Sanchez T, Jani JC: Concerns with performance of screening for aneuploidy by cell-free DNA analysis of maternal blood in twin pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2016;47:124-125.
  61. Krishna I, Badell M, Loucks TL, Lindsay M, Samuel A: Adverse perinatal outcomes are more frequent in pregnancies with a low fetal fraction result on noninvasive prenatal testing. Prenat Diagn 2016;36:210-215.
  62. Chiu RW, Akolekar R, Zheng YW, Leung TY, Sun H, Chan KC, Lun FM, Go AT, Lau ET, To WW, Leung WC, Tang RY, Au-Yeung SK, Lam H, Kung YY, Zhang X, van Vugt JM, Minekawa R, Tang MH, Wang J, Oudejans CB, Lau TK, Nicolaides KH, Lo YM: Non-invasive prenatal assessment of trisomy 21 by multiplexed maternal plasma DNA sequencing: large scale validity study. BMJ 2011;342:c7401.
  63. Eiben B, Glaubitz R, Kagan KO: Nichtinvasive Pränataldiagnostik, ETS und NGS basierte Tests. Med Gen 2014;26:382-390.
    External Resources

Article / Publication Details

First-Page Preview
Abstract of Review

Received: October 21, 2016
Accepted: January 27, 2017
Published online: March 04, 2017
Issue release date: January – April

Number of Print Pages: 11
Number of Figures: 3
Number of Tables: 4


eISSN: 2296-6870 (Online)

For additional information: https://www.karger.com/BMH


Open Access License / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer

This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND). Usage and distribution for commercial purposes as well as any distribution of modified material requires written permission. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.