Urinary multiple marker screening for down's syndrome

We have examined the possibility of using multiple markers in maternal urine rather than serum in order to screen for Down's syndrome. Urine samples were available from 36 cases (24 Down's syndrome, five Edwards' syndrome, three Turner's syndrome, one Klinefelter's syndrome, one triploidy, one triple-X, one twin discordant for Down's syndrome) and 294 controls, including three twins. Three markers were tested: the β-core fragment of human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), total oestrogen (tE) and the free a subunit of hCG. Levels were corrected for creatinine excretion and expressed as multiples of the gestation-specific median (MOM) level from the singleton controls. The median value for the singleton Down's syndrome cases was 6.02, 0.74, and 1.08 MOM for β-core-hCG, tE, and a-hCG, respectively. The increases in β-core-hCG and the reduction in tE levels were highly significant (P<0.0001 and 0.005, respectively; Wilcoxon rank sum test) but the increase in free a-hCG was not (P=0.40). On the basis of a mathematical model, the expected detection rate for a 5 per cent false-positive rate was 79.6 per cent for β-core-hCG alone, which increased to 82.3 per cent when combined with tE. Aneuploidies other than Down's syndrome were characterized by low levels of tE and either low or high β-core-hCG.     

An increase in cost-effectiveness of first trimester maternal screening programmes for fetal chromosome anomalies is obtained by contingent testing

We assessed the discriminatory efficiency and cost-effectiveness of a novel way of organising first trimester screening for Down syndrome (DS), contingent testing, where a serological test (PAPP-A and β-hCG: the double test) is made in early first trimester and followed by nuchal translucency testing (NT) only in women with an intermediate risk, e.g. <1:65 and >1:1000, and not in all women as in normal first trimester screening (NFTS). Using Monte Carlo simulation contingent testing had a detection rate (DR) of 78.9% and a false-positive rate (FPR) of 4.0% for DS with 19.4% of women offered NT testing. The DR of NFTS was 85.5% and the FPR 4.4%. The decrease in NT screening was associated with an increase from 23% to 29% in the proportion of DS cases born. The cost of the contingent testing programme was £53 000 per DS case not born and £91 000 in NFTS. The number of aborted fetuses per DS case were 0.35 and 0.36, respectively. Thus, contingent testing is an organisation of first trimester screening where costs can be reduced with a marginal decrease in performance. Contingent testing is attractive in areas where NT screening is the bottleneck preventing the introduction of first trimester screening. 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.