Cargando…

Prospective head-to-head comparison of accuracy of two sequencing platforms for screening for fetal aneuploidy by cell-free DNA: the PEGASUS study

We compared clinical validity of two non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) methods for fetal trisomies 13, 18, 21, and monosomy X. We recruited prospectively 2203 women at high risk of fetal aneuploidy and 1807 at baseline risk. Three-hundred and twenty-nine euploid samples were randomly removed. T...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rousseau, François, Langlois, Sylvie, Johnson, Jo-Ann, Gekas, Jean, Bujold, Emmanuel, Audibert, François, Walker, Mark, Giroux, Sylvie, Caron, André, Clément, Valérie, Blais, Jonatan, MacLeod, Tina, Moore, Richard, Gauthier, Julie, Jouan, Loubna, Laporte, Alexandre, Diallo, Ousmane, Parker, Jeremy, Swanson, Lucas, Zhao, Yongjun, Labelle, Yves, Giguère, Yves, Forest, Jean-Claude, Little, Julian, Karsan, Aly, Rouleau, Guy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6871532/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31231136
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41431-019-0443-0
_version_ 1783472423412170752
author Rousseau, François
Langlois, Sylvie
Johnson, Jo-Ann
Gekas, Jean
Bujold, Emmanuel
Audibert, François
Walker, Mark
Giroux, Sylvie
Caron, André
Clément, Valérie
Blais, Jonatan
MacLeod, Tina
Moore, Richard
Gauthier, Julie
Jouan, Loubna
Laporte, Alexandre
Diallo, Ousmane
Parker, Jeremy
Swanson, Lucas
Zhao, Yongjun
Labelle, Yves
Giguère, Yves
Forest, Jean-Claude
Little, Julian
Karsan, Aly
Rouleau, Guy
author_facet Rousseau, François
Langlois, Sylvie
Johnson, Jo-Ann
Gekas, Jean
Bujold, Emmanuel
Audibert, François
Walker, Mark
Giroux, Sylvie
Caron, André
Clément, Valérie
Blais, Jonatan
MacLeod, Tina
Moore, Richard
Gauthier, Julie
Jouan, Loubna
Laporte, Alexandre
Diallo, Ousmane
Parker, Jeremy
Swanson, Lucas
Zhao, Yongjun
Labelle, Yves
Giguère, Yves
Forest, Jean-Claude
Little, Julian
Karsan, Aly
Rouleau, Guy
author_sort Rousseau, François
collection PubMed
description We compared clinical validity of two non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) methods for fetal trisomies 13, 18, 21, and monosomy X. We recruited prospectively 2203 women at high risk of fetal aneuploidy and 1807 at baseline risk. Three-hundred and twenty-nine euploid samples were randomly removed. The remaining 1933 high risk and 1660 baseline-risk plasma aliquots were assigned randomly between four laboratories and tested with two index NIPS tests, blind to maternal variables and pregnancy outcomes. The two index tests used massively parallel shotgun sequencing (semiconductor-based and optical-based). The reference standard for all fetuses was invasive cytogenetic analysis or clinical examination at birth and postnatal follow-up. For each chromosome of interest, chromosomal ratios were calculated (number of reads for chromosome/total number of reads). Euploid samples’ mean chromosomal ratio coefficients of variation were 0.48 (T21), 0.34 (T18), and 0.31 (T13). According to the reference standard, there were 155 cases of T21, 49 T18, 8 T13 and 22 45,X. Using a fetal fraction ≥4% to call results and a chromosomal ratio z-score of ≥3 to report a positive result, detection rates (DR), and false positive rates (FPR) were not statistically different between platforms: mean DR 99% (T21), 100%(T18, T13); 79%(45,X); FPR < 0.3% for T21, T18, T13, and <0.6% for 45,X. Both methods’ negative predictive values in high-risk pregnancies were >99.8%, except for 45,X(>99.6%). Threshold analysis in high-risk pregnancies with different fetal fractions and z-score cut-offs suggested that a z-score cutoff to 3.5 for positive results improved test accuracy. Both sequencing platforms showed equivalent and excellent clinical validity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6871532
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68715322019-11-25 Prospective head-to-head comparison of accuracy of two sequencing platforms for screening for fetal aneuploidy by cell-free DNA: the PEGASUS study Rousseau, François Langlois, Sylvie Johnson, Jo-Ann Gekas, Jean Bujold, Emmanuel Audibert, François Walker, Mark Giroux, Sylvie Caron, André Clément, Valérie Blais, Jonatan MacLeod, Tina Moore, Richard Gauthier, Julie Jouan, Loubna Laporte, Alexandre Diallo, Ousmane Parker, Jeremy Swanson, Lucas Zhao, Yongjun Labelle, Yves Giguère, Yves Forest, Jean-Claude Little, Julian Karsan, Aly Rouleau, Guy Eur J Hum Genet Article We compared clinical validity of two non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) methods for fetal trisomies 13, 18, 21, and monosomy X. We recruited prospectively 2203 women at high risk of fetal aneuploidy and 1807 at baseline risk. Three-hundred and twenty-nine euploid samples were randomly removed. The remaining 1933 high risk and 1660 baseline-risk plasma aliquots were assigned randomly between four laboratories and tested with two index NIPS tests, blind to maternal variables and pregnancy outcomes. The two index tests used massively parallel shotgun sequencing (semiconductor-based and optical-based). The reference standard for all fetuses was invasive cytogenetic analysis or clinical examination at birth and postnatal follow-up. For each chromosome of interest, chromosomal ratios were calculated (number of reads for chromosome/total number of reads). Euploid samples’ mean chromosomal ratio coefficients of variation were 0.48 (T21), 0.34 (T18), and 0.31 (T13). According to the reference standard, there were 155 cases of T21, 49 T18, 8 T13 and 22 45,X. Using a fetal fraction ≥4% to call results and a chromosomal ratio z-score of ≥3 to report a positive result, detection rates (DR), and false positive rates (FPR) were not statistically different between platforms: mean DR 99% (T21), 100%(T18, T13); 79%(45,X); FPR < 0.3% for T21, T18, T13, and <0.6% for 45,X. Both methods’ negative predictive values in high-risk pregnancies were >99.8%, except for 45,X(>99.6%). Threshold analysis in high-risk pregnancies with different fetal fractions and z-score cut-offs suggested that a z-score cutoff to 3.5 for positive results improved test accuracy. Both sequencing platforms showed equivalent and excellent clinical validity. Springer International Publishing 2019-06-23 2019-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6871532/ /pubmed/31231136 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41431-019-0443-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Article
Rousseau, François
Langlois, Sylvie
Johnson, Jo-Ann
Gekas, Jean
Bujold, Emmanuel
Audibert, François
Walker, Mark
Giroux, Sylvie
Caron, André
Clément, Valérie
Blais, Jonatan
MacLeod, Tina
Moore, Richard
Gauthier, Julie
Jouan, Loubna
Laporte, Alexandre
Diallo, Ousmane
Parker, Jeremy
Swanson, Lucas
Zhao, Yongjun
Labelle, Yves
Giguère, Yves
Forest, Jean-Claude
Little, Julian
Karsan, Aly
Rouleau, Guy
Prospective head-to-head comparison of accuracy of two sequencing platforms for screening for fetal aneuploidy by cell-free DNA: the PEGASUS study
title Prospective head-to-head comparison of accuracy of two sequencing platforms for screening for fetal aneuploidy by cell-free DNA: the PEGASUS study
title_full Prospective head-to-head comparison of accuracy of two sequencing platforms for screening for fetal aneuploidy by cell-free DNA: the PEGASUS study
title_fullStr Prospective head-to-head comparison of accuracy of two sequencing platforms for screening for fetal aneuploidy by cell-free DNA: the PEGASUS study
title_full_unstemmed Prospective head-to-head comparison of accuracy of two sequencing platforms for screening for fetal aneuploidy by cell-free DNA: the PEGASUS study
title_short Prospective head-to-head comparison of accuracy of two sequencing platforms for screening for fetal aneuploidy by cell-free DNA: the PEGASUS study
title_sort prospective head-to-head comparison of accuracy of two sequencing platforms for screening for fetal aneuploidy by cell-free dna: the pegasus study
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6871532/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31231136
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41431-019-0443-0
work_keys_str_mv AT rousseaufrancois prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT langloissylvie prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT johnsonjoann prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT gekasjean prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT bujoldemmanuel prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT audibertfrancois prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT walkermark prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT girouxsylvie prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT caronandre prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT clementvalerie prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT blaisjonatan prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT macleodtina prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT moorerichard prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT gauthierjulie prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT jouanloubna prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT laportealexandre prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT dialloousmane prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT parkerjeremy prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT swansonlucas prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT zhaoyongjun prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT labelleyves prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT giguereyves prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT forestjeanclaude prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT littlejulian prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT karsanaly prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy
AT rouleauguy prospectiveheadtoheadcomparisonofaccuracyoftwosequencingplatformsforscreeningforfetalaneuploidybycellfreednathepegasusstudy