Second and first trimester estimation of risk for Down syndrome: implementation and performance in the SAFER study

被引:7
|
作者
MacRae, Andrew R. [1 ]
Chodirker, Bernie N. [1 ]
Davies, Gregory A. [2 ]
Palomaki, Glenn E. [3 ]
Knight, George J. [3 ]
Minett, Jane
Kavsak, Peter A. [4 ]
Toi, Ants [5 ]
Chitayat, David [6 ]
Van Caeseele, Paul G. [7 ]
机构
[1] Univ Manitoba, Biochem & Med Genet, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
[2] Queens Univ, Obstet & Gynecol, Kingston, ON, Canada
[3] Brown Univ, Women & Infants Hosp, Lab Med, Providence, RI USA
[4] McMaster Univ, Pathol & Mol Med, Hamilton, ON, Canada
[5] Univ Toronto, Mt Sinai Hosp, Diagnost Imaging, Toronto, ON M5S 1A1, Canada
[6] Univ Toronto, Mt Sinai Hosp, Prenatal Diag & Med Genet Program, Toronto, ON M5S 1A1, Canada
[7] Univ Manitoba, Med Microbiol, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
关键词
Down syndrome; prenatal screening; serum markers; nuchal translucency; risk algorithms; SERUM ALPHA-FETOPROTEIN; MATERNAL SERUM; ULTRASOUND; 1ST-TRIMESTER; AGE; PREGNANCIES; TRISOMY-21; INHIBIN; SURUSS; TESTS;
D O I
10.1002/pd.2502
中图分类号
Q3 [遗传学];
学科分类号
071007 ; 090102 ;
摘要
Objectives Document patient choices and screening performance (false positive and detection rates) when three improved Down syndrome screening protocols were introduced coincidentally. Method Second-trimester 'triple marker' screening was expanded by adding second-trimester dimeric inhibin-A (four-marker), with or without first-trimester pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (five-marker). Nuchal translucency (NT) measurements were included when available from accredited sonographers (six-marker). For assigning risk, two sets of marker distribution parameters were evaluated. Results Over 3.5 years, 8571 women enrolled (median age 30.6 years). Uptake of the four-, five- and six-marker protocols was 18%, 46% and 36%, respectively. Of those selecting an integrated test (five or six markers), 9.7% did not provide the second trimester serum sample. False positive rates decreased with added markers (5.2%, 5.1% and 2.5%, respectively) and varied between the two parameter sets, while detection remained high. Overall, 21 of 23 cases were detected (91%, 95% CI 73-98%) at a 4.2% false positive rate (95% CI 3.3-5.1%). Conclusions Integrated screening protocols were chosen 4.6 times more often than four-marker screening (82% vs. 18% uptake). Overall detection was higher and false positives lower, consistent with recent guidelines. Important performance factors include gestational dating method, risk cut-off, and the parameter set used to assign risk. Copyright (C) 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:459 / 466
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Technical standards and guidelines: Prenatal screening for Down syndrome that includes first-trimester biochemistry and/or ultrasound measurements
    Palomaki, Glenn E.
    Lee, Jo Ellen S.
    Canick, Jacob A.
    McDowell, Geraldine A.
    Donnenfeld, Alan E.
    GENETICS IN MEDICINE, 2009, 11 (09) : 669 - 681
  • [42] First-trimester contingent screening for Down syndrome can reduce the number of nuchal translucency measurements required
    Vadiveloo, Thenmalar
    Crossley, Jennifer A.
    Aitken, David A.
    PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS, 2009, 29 (01) : 79 - 82
  • [43] First-trimester screening for Down syndrome using quadruple maternal biochemical markers
    Caron, Laurence
    Fillion, Alexandre
    Giguere, Yves
    Audibert, Francois
    Forest, Jean-Claude
    Gasse, Cedric
    Girard, Mario
    Laforest, Genevieve
    Guerby, Paul
    Bujold, Emmanuel
    CLINICAL CHEMISTRY AND LABORATORY MEDICINE, 2023, 61 (09) : 1630 - 1635
  • [44] Use of sonographic markers to determine the risk of down syndrome in second-trimester fetuses
    Benacerraf, BR
    RADIOLOGY, 1996, 201 (03) : 619 - 620
  • [45] The analysis of second-trimester triple screening for Down syndrome in Chinese normal singleton pregnancies
    Wan, Xiaohua
    Wen, Jiangping
    Song, Xin
    Guo, Yongjun
    Liu, Xiangyi
    Yang, Benshan
    Lu, Xinxin
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL & LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2012, 72 (08) : 642 - 647
  • [46] Evaluation of population parameters and mathematical strategies for the calculation of prenatal risk of Down syndrome in the first trimester of pregnancy
    Martinez-Morillo, Eduardo
    Prieto Garcia, Belen
    Moreno Calvo, Francisco
    Alvarez, Francisco V.
    PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS, 2012, 32 (03) : 234 - 239
  • [47] Combined first- and second-trimester screening for Down syndrome: an evaluation of proMBP as a marker
    Rode, L
    Wojdemann, KR
    Shalmi, AC
    Larsen, SO
    Sundberg, K
    Norgaard-Pedersen, B
    Christiansen, M
    Tabor, A
    PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS, 2003, 23 (07) : 593 - 598
  • [48] Contingent triple-screening for Down syndrome in the second trimester: a feasibility study in Mainland Chinese population
    Xie, Zhenwei
    Lu, Shiming
    Li, Hui
    PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS, 2010, 30 (01) : 74 - 76
  • [49] First trimester screening for Down syndrome in a French perinatal healthcare network
    Letourneau, A.
    Benachi, A.
    Egoroff, C.
    JOURNAL DE GYNECOLOGIE OBSTETRIQUE ET BIOLOGIE DE LA REPRODUCTION, 2013, 42 (07): : 647 - 654
  • [50] First trimester screening for Down syndrome: Five years prospective experience
    Weingertner, A. -S.
    Trieu, N. -T.
    Kohler, M.
    Viville, B.
    Levy, G.
    Montaya, Y.
    Kutnahorsky, R.
    Tissier, I.
    Kohler, A.
    Tanghe, M.
    Mager, C.
    Benassi, E.
    Cancelier, M.
    Neuman, M.
    Bouffet, N.
    Hunsinger, M. C.
    Hornecker, F.
    Langer, B.
    Nisand, I.
    Favre, R.
    JOURNAL DE GYNECOLOGIE OBSTETRIQUE ET BIOLOGIE DE LA REPRODUCTION, 2010, 39 (05): : 353 - 361