Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Prenatal Diagnosisarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Prenatal Diagnosis
Article . 2019 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Classification of factors involved in nonreportable results of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) and prediction of success rate of second NIPT

Authors: Nobuhiro Suzumori; Akihiko Sekizawa; Eri Takeda; Osamu Samura; Aiko Sasaki; Rina Akaishi; Seiji Wada; +49 Authors

Classification of factors involved in nonreportable results of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) and prediction of success rate of second NIPT

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveTo evaluate the reasons for nonreportable cell‐free DNA (cfDNA) results in noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT), we retrospectively studied maternal characteristics and other details associated with the results.MethodsA multicenter retrospective cohort study in pregnant women undergoing NIPT by massively parallel sequencing (MPS) with failed cfDNA tests was performed between April 2013 and March 2017. The women's data and MPS results were analyzed in terms of maternal characteristics, test performance, fetal fraction (FF), z scores, anticoagulation therapy, and other details of the nonreportable cases.ResultsOverall, 110 (0.32%) of 34 626 pregnant women had nonreportable cfDNA test results after an initial blood sampling; 22 (20.0%) cases had a low FF (<4%), and 18 (16.4%) cases including those with a maternal malignancy, were found to have altered genomic profile. Approximately half of the cases with nonreportable results had borderline z score. Among the women with nonreportable results because of altered genomic profile, the success rate of retesting using a second blood sampling was relatively low (25.0%‐33.3%). Thirteen (11.8%) of the women with nonreportable results had required hypodermic heparin injection.ConclusionsThe classification of nonreportable results using cfDNA analysis is important to provide women with precise information and to reduce anxiety during pregnancy.

Keywords

Adult, High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing, Reproducibility of Results, Trisomy, Pregnancy Trimester, First, Predictive Value of Tests, Pregnancy, Research Design, Risk Factors, Pregnancy Trimester, Second, Prenatal Diagnosis, Humans, Female, Genetic Testing, False Negative Reactions, Retrospective Studies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    38
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
38
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!