• About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Login
    • ObGFirst
  • COVID-19
  • Alerts
  • OB
  • 2T US Atlas
  • The Genome
  • GYN
    • GYN
    • Sexual Health
  • Primary Care
  • Your Practice
  • GrandRounds
  • My Bookshelf
  • Now@ObG
  • Media
About Us Contact Us Login ObGFirst
  • COVID-19
  • Alerts
  • OB
  • 2T US Atlas
  • The Genome
  • GYN
    • GYN
    • Sexual Health
  • Primary Care
  • Your Practice
  • GrandRounds
  • My Bookshelf
  • Now@ObG
  • Media
Grand Rounds

SMART Study: NIPS Aneuploidy Screening Performance Among Both Low and High-Risk Pregnancies

image_pdfFavoriteLoadingFavorite

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: 

  • Dar et al. (AJOG, 2022) compared the performance of cfDNA screening for T21, T18 and T13 between women at low and high-risk for aneuploidy in a large, prospective cohort with genetic confirmation of results 

METHODS: 

  • Multicenter prospective observational study 
  • Participants 
    • Women from 6 countries who had SNP-based cfDNA screening for T21, T18, and T13 
  • Exposure 
    • Low-risk for aneuploidy 
    • High-risk for aneuploidy 
  • Study design 
    • Genetic confirmation of screening results was obtained from prenatal or newborn DNA samples 
    • High-risk for aneuploidy 
      • Prior positive serum-based screen for aneuploidy | NT>3 mm | Ultrasound anomaly | Maternal age ≥35 years at delivery and no other screening results available 
    • The primary outcome was assessed for the full cohort, and based on exposure group (risk of aneuploidy) 
    • The authors also assessed an updated cfDNA algorithm, blinded to pregnancy outcome 
  • Primary outcome 
    • Test performance 
    • Test failure (no-call) rates 

RESULTS: 

  • 17,851 women with genetic outcomes confirmed 
    • Median (IQR) gestational age: 12.6 (11.6 to 13.9) weeks 
    • Low-risk of aneuploidy: 73.1% 
    • High-risk of aneuploidy: 26.9% 
    • Trisomies diagnosed 
      • T21: 100 
      • T18: 18 
      • T13: 15 
  • cfDNA screen positive rate was lower in the low-risk group, compared to those at high-risk (P<0.0001) 
    • Low-risk: 0.27% 
    • High-risk: 2.2% 
  • Sensitivity and specificity were similar between groups 
  • Positive predictive value  
    • For T21 (P=0.058) 
      • Low-risk: 85.7% 
      • High-risk: 97.5% 
    • For T18 (P=0.283) 
      • Low-risk: 50.0% 
      • High-risk: 81.3% 
    • For T13 (P=0.58) 
      • Low-risk: 62.5% 
      • High-risk: 83.3% 
  • No-call results 
    • After the first draw: 3.4% 
    • After including cases with a second draw: 1.61% 
  • Trisomy rate was higher in those with no-call results, compared to patients with results on a first draw (P=0.001) 
    • No-call result: 2.8% 
    • Results on first draw: 0.7% 
  • Updated algorithm  
    • Similar sensitivity and specificity to the current study algorithm  
    • Lower no-call rate (p<0.001) 
      • After first draw: 1.4% vs. 3.4%  
      • After optional second draw: 0.5% vs. 1.6%   

CONCLUSION: 

  • For women with a low risk of aneuploidy, cfDNA screening for trisomies exhibits high sensitivity and specificity, with positive predictive values of 
    • 85.7% for T21  
    • 74.3% for all three common trisomies 
  • PPVs were lower among non-risk cohorts as expected, although not statistically significant for T18 and T13, likely due to small sample size  
  • Patients who receive a no-call result are at an increased risk of aneuploidy 
  • The authors state 

…the findings in this study demonstrate that SNP-based cfDNA screening for the common trisomies performs similarly well in both high- and low-risk groups 

Learn More – Primary Sources: 

Cell-free DNA screening for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 in pregnancies at low and high risk for aneuploidy with genetic confirmation 

image_pdfFavoriteLoadingFavorite
< Previous
All Grand Rounds Posts
Next >

Related ObG Topics:

What is the Best Strategy for Fetal Aneuploidy Screening?
Practical info on evidence based medicine for your women's healthcare practice
cfDNA vs. Routine Screening – How Do They Compare?
Does Noninvasive Screening Result in Fewer Miscarriages When Compared to Amniocentesis?

Sections

  • COVID-19
  • Alerts
  • OB
  • GYN
    • GYN
    • Sexual Health
  • 2T US Atlas
  • The Genome
  • Primary Care
  • Your Practice
  • Grand Rounds
  • My Bookshelf
  • Now@ObG
  • Media

Are you an
ObG Insider?

Get specially curated clinical summaries delivered to your inbox every week for free

  • Site Map/
  • © ObG Project/
  • Terms and Conditions/
  • Privacy/
  • Contact Us/
© ObG Project
SSL Certificate


  • Already an ObGFirst Member?
    Welcome back

    Log In

    Want to sign up?
    Get guideline notifications
    CME Included

    Sign Up

Get Guideline Alerts Direct to Your Phone
Try ObGFirst Free!

Sign In

Lost your password?

Sign Up for ObGFirst and Stay Ahead

  • - Professional guideline notifications
  • - Daily summary of a clinically relevant
    research paper
  • - Includes 1 hour of CME every month

ObGFirst Free Trial

Already a Member of ObGFirst®?

Please log in to ObGFirst to access the 2T US Atlas

Password Trouble?

Not an ObGFirst® Member Yet?

  • - Access 2T US Atlas
  • - Guideline notifications
  • - Daily research paper summaries
  • - And lots more!
ObGFirst Free Trial

Media - Internet

Computer System Requirements

OBG Project CME requires a modern web browser (Internet Explorer 10+, Mozilla Firefox, Apple Safari, Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge). Certain educational activities may require additional software to view multimedia, presentation, or printable versions of their content. These activities will be marked as such and will provide links to the required software. That software may be: Adobe Flash, Apple QuickTime, Adobe Acrobat, Microsoft PowerPoint, Windows Media Player, or Real Networks Real One Player.

Disclosure of Unlabeled Use

This educational activity may contain discussion of published and/or investigational uses of agents that are not indicated by the FDA. The planners of this activity do not recommend the use of any agent outside of the labeled indications.

The opinions expressed in the educational activity are those of the faculty and do not necessarily represent the views of the planners. Please refer to the official prescribing information for each product for discussion of approved indications, contraindications, and warnings.

Disclaimer

Participants have an implied responsibility to use the newly acquired information to enhance patient outcomes and their own professional development. The information
presented in this activity is not meant to serve as a guideline for patient management. Any procedures, medications, or other courses of diagnosis or treatment discussed or suggested in this activity should not be used by clinicians without evaluation of their patient’s conditions and possible contraindications and/or dangers in use, review of any applicable manufacturer’s product information, and comparison with recommendations of other authorities.

Jointly provided by

NOT ENOUGH CME HOURS

It appears you don't have enough CME Hours to take this Post-Test. Feel free to buy additional CME hours or upgrade your current CME subscription plan

Subscribe

JOIN OBGFIRST AND GET CME/CE CREDITS

One of the benefits of an ObGFirst subscription is the ability to earn CME/CE credits from the ObG entries you read. Tap the button to learn more about ObGFirst

Learn More
Leaving ObG Website

You are now leaving the ObG website and on your way to PRIORITY at UCSF, an independent website. Therefore, we are not responsible for the content or availability of this site