Cargando…

A Critical Evaluation of Validation and Clinical Experience Studies in Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and Monosomy X

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for trisomies 21, 18, 13 and monosomy X is widely utilized with massively parallel shotgun sequencing (MPSS), digital analysis of selected regions (DANSR), and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) analyses being the most widely reported methods. We searched the l...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Demko, Zachary, Prigmore, Brittany, Benn, Peter
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9410356/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36012999
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11164760
_version_ 1784775073698152448
author Demko, Zachary
Prigmore, Brittany
Benn, Peter
author_facet Demko, Zachary
Prigmore, Brittany
Benn, Peter
author_sort Demko, Zachary
collection PubMed
description Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for trisomies 21, 18, 13 and monosomy X is widely utilized with massively parallel shotgun sequencing (MPSS), digital analysis of selected regions (DANSR), and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) analyses being the most widely reported methods. We searched the literature to find all NIPT clinical validation and clinical experience studies between January 2011 and January 2022. Meta-analyses were performed using bivariate random-effects and univariate regression models for estimating summary performance measures across studies. Bivariate meta-regression was performed to explore the influence of testing method and study design. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses evaluated factors that may have led to heterogeneity. Based on 55 validation studies, the detection rate (DR) was significantly higher for retrospective studies, while the false positive rate (FPR) was significantly lower for prospective studies. Comparing the performance of NIPT methods for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 combined, the SNP method had a higher DR and lower FPR than other methods, significantly so for MPSS, though not for DANSR. The performance of the different methods in the 84 clinical experience studies was consistent with validation studies. Clinical positive predictive values of all NIPT methods improved over the last decade. We conclude that all NIPT methods are highly effective for fetal aneuploidy screening, with performance differences across methodologies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9410356
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94103562022-08-26 A Critical Evaluation of Validation and Clinical Experience Studies in Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and Monosomy X Demko, Zachary Prigmore, Brittany Benn, Peter J Clin Med Article Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for trisomies 21, 18, 13 and monosomy X is widely utilized with massively parallel shotgun sequencing (MPSS), digital analysis of selected regions (DANSR), and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) analyses being the most widely reported methods. We searched the literature to find all NIPT clinical validation and clinical experience studies between January 2011 and January 2022. Meta-analyses were performed using bivariate random-effects and univariate regression models for estimating summary performance measures across studies. Bivariate meta-regression was performed to explore the influence of testing method and study design. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses evaluated factors that may have led to heterogeneity. Based on 55 validation studies, the detection rate (DR) was significantly higher for retrospective studies, while the false positive rate (FPR) was significantly lower for prospective studies. Comparing the performance of NIPT methods for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 combined, the SNP method had a higher DR and lower FPR than other methods, significantly so for MPSS, though not for DANSR. The performance of the different methods in the 84 clinical experience studies was consistent with validation studies. Clinical positive predictive values of all NIPT methods improved over the last decade. We conclude that all NIPT methods are highly effective for fetal aneuploidy screening, with performance differences across methodologies. MDPI 2022-08-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9410356/ /pubmed/36012999 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11164760 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Demko, Zachary
Prigmore, Brittany
Benn, Peter
A Critical Evaluation of Validation and Clinical Experience Studies in Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and Monosomy X
title A Critical Evaluation of Validation and Clinical Experience Studies in Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and Monosomy X
title_full A Critical Evaluation of Validation and Clinical Experience Studies in Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and Monosomy X
title_fullStr A Critical Evaluation of Validation and Clinical Experience Studies in Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and Monosomy X
title_full_unstemmed A Critical Evaluation of Validation and Clinical Experience Studies in Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and Monosomy X
title_short A Critical Evaluation of Validation and Clinical Experience Studies in Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and Monosomy X
title_sort critical evaluation of validation and clinical experience studies in non-invasive prenatal testing for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and monosomy x
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9410356/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36012999
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm11164760
work_keys_str_mv AT demkozachary acriticalevaluationofvalidationandclinicalexperiencestudiesinnoninvasiveprenataltestingfortrisomies2118and13andmonosomyx
AT prigmorebrittany acriticalevaluationofvalidationandclinicalexperiencestudiesinnoninvasiveprenataltestingfortrisomies2118and13andmonosomyx
AT bennpeter acriticalevaluationofvalidationandclinicalexperiencestudiesinnoninvasiveprenataltestingfortrisomies2118and13andmonosomyx
AT demkozachary criticalevaluationofvalidationandclinicalexperiencestudiesinnoninvasiveprenataltestingfortrisomies2118and13andmonosomyx
AT prigmorebrittany criticalevaluationofvalidationandclinicalexperiencestudiesinnoninvasiveprenataltestingfortrisomies2118and13andmonosomyx
AT bennpeter criticalevaluationofvalidationandclinicalexperiencestudiesinnoninvasiveprenataltestingfortrisomies2118and13andmonosomyx