Cargando…

Clinical performance of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) using targeted cell‐free DNA analysis in maternal plasma with microarrays or next generation sequencing (NGS) is consistent across multiple controlled clinical studies

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical performance of non‐invasive prenatal testing for trisomy 21, 18, and 13 using targeted cell‐free DNA (cfDNA) analysis. METHODS: Targeted cfDNA analysis using DANSR™ and FORTE™ with microarray quantitation was used to evaluate the risk of trisomy 21, 18, and 13 in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stokowski, Renee, Wang, Eric, White, Karen, Batey, Annette, Jacobsson, Bo., Brar, Herb, Balanarasimha, Madhumitha, Hollemon, Desiree, Sparks, Andrew, Nicolaides, Kypros, Musci, Thomas J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5057317/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26332378
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pd.4686
_version_ 1782459044032675840
author Stokowski, Renee
Wang, Eric
White, Karen
Batey, Annette
Jacobsson, Bo.
Brar, Herb
Balanarasimha, Madhumitha
Hollemon, Desiree
Sparks, Andrew
Nicolaides, Kypros
Musci, Thomas J.
author_facet Stokowski, Renee
Wang, Eric
White, Karen
Batey, Annette
Jacobsson, Bo.
Brar, Herb
Balanarasimha, Madhumitha
Hollemon, Desiree
Sparks, Andrew
Nicolaides, Kypros
Musci, Thomas J.
author_sort Stokowski, Renee
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical performance of non‐invasive prenatal testing for trisomy 21, 18, and 13 using targeted cell‐free DNA (cfDNA) analysis. METHODS: Targeted cfDNA analysis using DANSR™ and FORTE™ with microarray quantitation was used to evaluate the risk of trisomy 21, 18, and 13 in blinded samples from 799 singleton, twin, natural, and IVF pregnancies. Subjects either had fetal chromosome evaluation by karyotype, FISH, QF‐PCR, or karyotype for newborns with suspected aneuploidy at birth. The results of targeted cfDNA analysis were compared to clinical genetic testing outcomes to assess clinical performance. RESULTS: Targeted cfDNA analysis with microarray quantification identified 107/108 trisomy 21 cases (99.1%), 29/30 trisomy 18 cases (96.7%), and 12/12 trisomy 13 cases (100%). The specificity was 100% for all three trisomies. Combining this data with all published clinical performance studies using DANSR/FORTE methodology for greater than 23 000 pregnancies, the sensitivity of targeted cfDNA analysis was calculated to be greater than 99% for trisomy 21, 97% for trisomy 18, and 94% for trisomy 13. Specificity for each trisomy was greater than 99.9%. CONCLUSION: Targeted cfDNA analysis demonstrates consistently high sensitivity and extremely low false positive rates for common autosomal trisomies in pregnancy across quantitation platforms. © 2015 Ariosa Diagnostics Inc. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5057317
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50573172016-10-19 Clinical performance of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) using targeted cell‐free DNA analysis in maternal plasma with microarrays or next generation sequencing (NGS) is consistent across multiple controlled clinical studies Stokowski, Renee Wang, Eric White, Karen Batey, Annette Jacobsson, Bo. Brar, Herb Balanarasimha, Madhumitha Hollemon, Desiree Sparks, Andrew Nicolaides, Kypros Musci, Thomas J. Prenat Diagn Original Articles OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical performance of non‐invasive prenatal testing for trisomy 21, 18, and 13 using targeted cell‐free DNA (cfDNA) analysis. METHODS: Targeted cfDNA analysis using DANSR™ and FORTE™ with microarray quantitation was used to evaluate the risk of trisomy 21, 18, and 13 in blinded samples from 799 singleton, twin, natural, and IVF pregnancies. Subjects either had fetal chromosome evaluation by karyotype, FISH, QF‐PCR, or karyotype for newborns with suspected aneuploidy at birth. The results of targeted cfDNA analysis were compared to clinical genetic testing outcomes to assess clinical performance. RESULTS: Targeted cfDNA analysis with microarray quantification identified 107/108 trisomy 21 cases (99.1%), 29/30 trisomy 18 cases (96.7%), and 12/12 trisomy 13 cases (100%). The specificity was 100% for all three trisomies. Combining this data with all published clinical performance studies using DANSR/FORTE methodology for greater than 23 000 pregnancies, the sensitivity of targeted cfDNA analysis was calculated to be greater than 99% for trisomy 21, 97% for trisomy 18, and 94% for trisomy 13. Specificity for each trisomy was greater than 99.9%. CONCLUSION: Targeted cfDNA analysis demonstrates consistently high sensitivity and extremely low false positive rates for common autosomal trisomies in pregnancy across quantitation platforms. © 2015 Ariosa Diagnostics Inc. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015-10-25 2015-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5057317/ /pubmed/26332378 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pd.4686 Text en © 2015 Ariosa Diagnostics Inc. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Stokowski, Renee
Wang, Eric
White, Karen
Batey, Annette
Jacobsson, Bo.
Brar, Herb
Balanarasimha, Madhumitha
Hollemon, Desiree
Sparks, Andrew
Nicolaides, Kypros
Musci, Thomas J.
Clinical performance of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) using targeted cell‐free DNA analysis in maternal plasma with microarrays or next generation sequencing (NGS) is consistent across multiple controlled clinical studies
title Clinical performance of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) using targeted cell‐free DNA analysis in maternal plasma with microarrays or next generation sequencing (NGS) is consistent across multiple controlled clinical studies
title_full Clinical performance of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) using targeted cell‐free DNA analysis in maternal plasma with microarrays or next generation sequencing (NGS) is consistent across multiple controlled clinical studies
title_fullStr Clinical performance of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) using targeted cell‐free DNA analysis in maternal plasma with microarrays or next generation sequencing (NGS) is consistent across multiple controlled clinical studies
title_full_unstemmed Clinical performance of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) using targeted cell‐free DNA analysis in maternal plasma with microarrays or next generation sequencing (NGS) is consistent across multiple controlled clinical studies
title_short Clinical performance of non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) using targeted cell‐free DNA analysis in maternal plasma with microarrays or next generation sequencing (NGS) is consistent across multiple controlled clinical studies
title_sort clinical performance of non‐invasive prenatal testing (nipt) using targeted cell‐free dna analysis in maternal plasma with microarrays or next generation sequencing (ngs) is consistent across multiple controlled clinical studies
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5057317/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26332378
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pd.4686
work_keys_str_mv AT stokowskirenee clinicalperformanceofnoninvasiveprenataltestingniptusingtargetedcellfreednaanalysisinmaternalplasmawithmicroarraysornextgenerationsequencingngsisconsistentacrossmultiplecontrolledclinicalstudies
AT wangeric clinicalperformanceofnoninvasiveprenataltestingniptusingtargetedcellfreednaanalysisinmaternalplasmawithmicroarraysornextgenerationsequencingngsisconsistentacrossmultiplecontrolledclinicalstudies
AT whitekaren clinicalperformanceofnoninvasiveprenataltestingniptusingtargetedcellfreednaanalysisinmaternalplasmawithmicroarraysornextgenerationsequencingngsisconsistentacrossmultiplecontrolledclinicalstudies
AT bateyannette clinicalperformanceofnoninvasiveprenataltestingniptusingtargetedcellfreednaanalysisinmaternalplasmawithmicroarraysornextgenerationsequencingngsisconsistentacrossmultiplecontrolledclinicalstudies
AT jacobssonbo clinicalperformanceofnoninvasiveprenataltestingniptusingtargetedcellfreednaanalysisinmaternalplasmawithmicroarraysornextgenerationsequencingngsisconsistentacrossmultiplecontrolledclinicalstudies
AT brarherb clinicalperformanceofnoninvasiveprenataltestingniptusingtargetedcellfreednaanalysisinmaternalplasmawithmicroarraysornextgenerationsequencingngsisconsistentacrossmultiplecontrolledclinicalstudies
AT balanarasimhamadhumitha clinicalperformanceofnoninvasiveprenataltestingniptusingtargetedcellfreednaanalysisinmaternalplasmawithmicroarraysornextgenerationsequencingngsisconsistentacrossmultiplecontrolledclinicalstudies
AT hollemondesiree clinicalperformanceofnoninvasiveprenataltestingniptusingtargetedcellfreednaanalysisinmaternalplasmawithmicroarraysornextgenerationsequencingngsisconsistentacrossmultiplecontrolledclinicalstudies
AT sparksandrew clinicalperformanceofnoninvasiveprenataltestingniptusingtargetedcellfreednaanalysisinmaternalplasmawithmicroarraysornextgenerationsequencingngsisconsistentacrossmultiplecontrolledclinicalstudies
AT nicolaideskypros clinicalperformanceofnoninvasiveprenataltestingniptusingtargetedcellfreednaanalysisinmaternalplasmawithmicroarraysornextgenerationsequencingngsisconsistentacrossmultiplecontrolledclinicalstudies
AT muscithomasj clinicalperformanceofnoninvasiveprenataltestingniptusingtargetedcellfreednaanalysisinmaternalplasmawithmicroarraysornextgenerationsequencingngsisconsistentacrossmultiplecontrolledclinicalstudies