Down syndrome maternal serum marker screening after 18 weeks' gestation

Women having access to prenatal care late in pregnancy may still wish to benefit from maternal serum screening for Down syndrome. Therefore, we established reference values for α-feto protein (AFP) and free β-human chorionic gonadotrophin (β-hCG), and assessed the diagnostic value of maternal serum marker screening at 18–35 weeks' gestation based upon a series of 4072 sera from unaffected pregnancies and 118 sera from pregnant women with fetuses affected by Down syndrome. Using a 1/250 risk cut-off, a detection rate of 72.9% (95% CI = 71.5–74.3%) was achieved with a false-positive rate of 7.51% (95% CI = 6.71–8.3%). This was not significantly different from the percentages observed in our 14–17 weeks routine screening (50 596 patients): 71.9% (95% CI = 71.5–72.3%) and 6.48% (95% CI = 6.28–6.68%), respectively. Detection and screen-positive rates were, respectively, 51.3% (95% CI = 35.6–67.0%) and 5.95% (95% CI = 5.12–6.68%) in women aunder 35 years of age, and 84.8% (95% CI = 76.9–92.7%) and 24% (95% CI = 20.7–27.3%) in women aged 35 years and over. In conclusion, maternal serum marker screening is feasible at 18 weeks' gestation and later, which may be of interest in selected cases. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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.     

Accuracy of Down syndrome risks produced in a first-trimester screening programme incorporating fetal nuchal translucency thickness and maternal serum biochemistry

Over the past three years approximately 12 000 women have been screened in the first trimester through our OSCAR programme, which utilizes fetal NT and maternal serum free β-hCG and PAPP-A. During this time 30 cases of Down syndrome were identified either prenatally or postnatally. Using an established procedure the accuracy of predicted risk for Down syndrome was assessed in a population of 30 cases of Down syndrome and 11 758 unaffected pregnancies. The correlation between predicted risk and prevalence of Down syndrome was very high (r=0.9995). It is concluded that risks produced by the Fetal Medicine Foundation combined risk algorithm agree very closely with Down syndrome prevalence and can be used with confidence when counselling women of their risk. 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.     

Value of maternal serum unconjugated oestriol measurement in prenatal screening for Down's syndrome

We compared the medical and financial cost-effectiveness of prenatal serum screening for Down's syndrome using maternal age, serum alpha-fetoprotein and human chorionic gonadotrophin with and without the use of unconjugated oestriol. The use of unconjugated oestriol is medically more cost-effective than screening without it at all levels of detection. The actual performance depends on whether gestational age is estimated using ‘dates’ or an ultrasound scan. At a detection rate of 60 per cent, the proportion of unaffected fetal losses per case diagnosed at amniocentesis is about 22 per cent less if gestational age is estimated using dates (time since the first day of the last menstrual period) and about 47 per cent less if it is based on an ultrasound scan examination. At this detection rate, the inclusion of unconjugated oestriol increases costs by about £2k per case diagnosed (£36k instead of £34k) if gestational age is estimated using dates, but it is no more expensive if gestational age is measured from an ultrasound scan examination (indeed, it is more cost-effective at detection rates above 60 per cent). Since there is little change in the financial cost with the inclusion of unconjugated oestriol, for the improved medical performance of screening, it is worthwhile including it in the screening test.