Cargando…
Does a High-Risk (>1/50) Result for First-Trimester Combined Screening Always Entail Invasive Testing? Which Patients from This Group Might Benefit from cfDNA Testing?
Currently, cell-free DNA (cfDNA) is offered as part of a contingent screening for patients with a first-trimester combined test (FCT) risk between 1/50 and 1/250. However, most aneuploidies are within the group of patients with a risk above 1/10. An observational, retrospective, and multi-centric st...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9599393/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36289845 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10102579 |
Sumario: | Currently, cell-free DNA (cfDNA) is offered as part of a contingent screening for patients with a first-trimester combined test (FCT) risk between 1/50 and 1/250. However, most aneuploidies are within the group of patients with a risk above 1/10. An observational, retrospective, and multi-centric study was carried out, to evaluate the theorical performance of lowering the cut-off point for the high-risk group from 1/50 to 1/10. Out of the 25,920 patients included, 25,374 (97.9%) consented to the cfDNA contingent screening for aneuploidies. With the proposed strategy, knowing that the detection rate (DR) of cfDNA testing for trisomy 21 is 99.7%, the DR for trisomy 21 would have stayed in a 93.2%, just as it was with the current strategy. In this instance, 267 (1.1%) invasive tests would have been performed, while the current strategy had a total of 307 (1.2%). The false positive rate (FPR) rate would have stayed at 5.2% in both scenarios. In conclusion, the contingent screening of aneuploidies based in the result of the FCT, offering the analysis of cfDNA to patients with an intermediate risk after lowering the cut-off point from 1/50 to 1/10, is a valid alternative that might maintain the current detection rates and avoid the complications associated with invasive testing. |
---|