Detection and false-positive rates of maternal serum markers for Down syndrome screening according to maternal age in women over 35 years of age. A study of the agreement of eight dedicated software packages

Maternal serum markers for trisomy 21 screening (MSS) can be assayed in women ≥35 years in an attempt to reduce the need for invasive procedures and thereby avoid their side effects. Our objective was to compare, in women ≥35, eight different software packages dedicated to second trimester MSS, thus providing reliable data for patient counselling. A simulation study was carried out on 189 sera from women with Down syndrome fetuses and 11 962 sera from mothers of unaffected babies. The first step was to estimate the joint distribution of alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and free beta-human chorionic gonadotrophin (β-hCG). The second step was to calculate trisomy 21 detection and false-positive rates for each software according to maternal age (35–45 years), using the usual 1:250 risk threshold. Agreement between software packages was measured using 2×2 kappa coefficients. Detection rates and false-positive rates increased with maternal age. Depending on the software, 57–71% detection rates were achieved at 35 years with 12–18% false-positive rates. At 45 years, 61–100% detection rates were achieved with 66–95% false-positive rates. Up to 39 years, all softwares were concordant (kappa coefficients >0.75). In the range 35–45 years, false-positive and detection rates increased substantially with maternal age and differences between software packages are observed. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Compromise ultrasound dating policy in maternal serum screening for Down syndrome

Routine ultrasound biometry is the method of choice for gestational dating when screening for Down syndrome. However, it is costly and an alternative policy is to restrict ultrasound to women most likely to have menstrual dating errors. This was evaluated by statistical modelling with parameters from 14 274 women screened between January 1997 and July 2001 using free beta-human chorionic gonadotrophin (free β-hCG), α-fetoprotein (AFP) and unconjugated estriol (uE₃). A total of 12 711 (89%) women had both ultrasound and menstrual gestations, but in 4101 (29%) women either the last menstrual period (LMP) was uncertain or a pill-withdrawal period, or there were irregular or abnormal length cycles. The LMP was not entered in the test request form for a further 1404 (9.8%) women. Routine ultrasound dating yielded a predicted detection rate higher than for menstrual dating by 3.9–7.1%, depending on the marker combination and cut-off. The false-positive rate was reduced by 0.2–1.1%. Selectively scanning the 39% with unreliable dates increased detection by 2.6–4.6%, and reduced the false-positive rate by 0.04–0.6%. Some centres only use the ultrasound estimate of gestation when it differs from the menstrual estimate by more than 7 days. Such a rule reduces the gain in detection rate to 2.5–4.6% for routine ultrasound and 1.7–3.1% with the compromise policy; the false-positive rate reductions are 0.06–0.6% and 0.0–0.3%, respectively. We conclude that if routine ultrasound is not financially and practically feasible, the compromise policy yields a clinically important improvement in screening performance compared to menstrual dating. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The variation of risk estimates through pregnancy in second trimester maternal serum screening for Down syndrome

The variation of risk estimates in second trimester maternal serum screening for Down's syndrome has been shown to be considerable in quality control schemes, i.e. UKNEQAS. We studied the biological variation of risk estimates in 16 women through pregnancy. The maternal serum markers alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), unconjugated estriol (uE3) and β-hCG were determined six times during late first to late second trimester, and the associated likelihood ratios for Down syndrome were calculated. The interpersonal variation of markers, as well as that of the likelihood ratio, was much greater than the intrapersonal variation. The average intrapersonal standard deviation (SD) of the triple test log likelihood ratio was 0.2291, corresponding to a central 95-percentile interval 0.36–2.81 of the likelihood ratio. The interpersonal SD of the log likelihood ratio was 0.5482, corresponding to a central 95-percentile interval 0.08–11.87 of the likelihood ratio. The large difference between the intra- and interpersonal variation makes it unlikely that biological variation through pregnancy is a major contributor to the variation of risk estimates obtained several times in the same pregnancy. Rather, improvements in analytical quality and laboratory management must be expected to result in reduced variation and, in consequence, better performance of screening. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Risk of amniocentesis in women screened positive for Down syndrome with second trimester maternal serum markers

In routine obstetrical practice, prior to offering invasive prenatal diagnosis, it is crucial to weigh the risks attendant on amniocentesis against the individual's risk of aneuploidy. We took advantage of a policy of follow-up of patients undergoing Down syndrome maternal serum screening to compare the rates of fetal loss before 24 weeks and of early premature delivery at 24–28 weeks between women who underwent amniocentesis and women who did not. A total of 54 902 patients entered the study, of whom 4039 (7.35%) were lost to follow-up and 387 were excluded because of a severe fetal abnormality. Of the 50 476 remaining patients, 3472 had an amniocentesis whereas 47 004 had not and served as controls. In the amniocentesis group, the fetal loss rate before 24 weeks was 1.12% (95% CI=1.08–1.15) and the 24–28 weeks premature delivery rate was 0.40% (95% CI=0.39–0.41) which was significantly higher than in controls (0.42% with 95% CI 0.41–0.43 and 0.24% with 95% CI 0.23–0.25, respectively). The 0.86% difference in adverse outcome rates between the amniocentesis and control groups may be attributable to amniocentesis and compares favourably with the positive predictive value of maternal serum markers (1.70%) observed in the present study. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.