Clinical utility of expanded non-invasive prenatal screening compared with chromosomal microarray analysis in over 8000 pregnancies without major structural anomaly

I. Maya, L. Salzer Sheelo, D. Brabbing-Goldstein, R. Matar, S. Kahana, I. Agmon-Fishman, C. Klein, M. Gurevitch, L. Basel-Salmon, L. Sagi-Dain*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the theoretical added value of two types of non-invasive prenatal screening (NIPS) expansions in pregnancies without major structural anomalies over the commonly used NIPS for chromosomes 13, 18, 21, X and Y (5-NIPS) and to compare them with the added value of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA). Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study based on CMA results of all pregnancies with normal ultrasound (including pregnancies with soft markers and with abnormal maternal serum screening) that had undergone amniocentesis between January 2013 to February 2022 and were registered in the database of the Rabin Medical Center genetic laboratory. We calculated the theoretical yield of 5-NIPS and compared the added value of expanded 5-NIPS for common microdeletions (1p36.3–1p36.2, 4p16.3–4p16.2, 5p15.3–5p15.1, 15q11.2–15q13.1 and 22q11.2) and genome-wide NIPS (including variants > 5 Mb) with the added value of CMA in the overall cohort and in subgroups according to indication for invasive testing. Results: Among the 8605 examined pregnancies, 122 (1.4%) clinically significant CMA results were demonstrated. Of these, 44 (36.1%) were theoretically detectable on 5-NIPS, with the rates of 1.56% in 642 pregnancies with abnormal maternal serum screening, 0.63% in 318 pregnancies with soft markers, 0.62% in 4378 women with advanced maternal age (≥ 35 years) and 0.15% in 3267 women younger than 35 years. In addition to aneuploidies detectable on 5-NIPS, three (0.03%) cases detectable on 5-NIPS expanded for common microdeletions and nine (0.10%) cases detectable on genome-wide NIPS (excluding common microdeletions) were identified in the overall cohort. The added value of expanded NIPS tools over 5-NIPS was significantly lower compared with that of CMA, for the overall cohort and subgroups. Conclusions: 5-NIPS and even genome-wide NIPS would miss 63.9% and 54.1% of clinically significant CMA findings, respectively. The added value of 5-NIPS expanded to detect common microdeletions over 5-NIPS is about 0.035%, and the overall added value of genome-wide NIPS aimed at large CNVs is about 0.14%, both much lower compared with the added value of CMA (0.91%). These findings should assist healthcare practitioners in guiding couples towards informed decision-making regarding the choice between prenatal invasive testing and NIPS.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)698-704
Number of pages7
JournalUltrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology
Volume61
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2023

Keywords

  • CMA
  • CNV
  • NIPS
  • chromosomal microarray
  • copy-number variant
  • non-invasive prenatal screening

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Clinical utility of expanded non-invasive prenatal screening compared with chromosomal microarray analysis in over 8000 pregnancies without major structural anomaly'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this