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.     

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.     

Centre-specific ultrasound nuchal translucency medians needed for Down syndrome screening

Nuchal translucency (NT) measurements were compared between 13 centres participating in a multi-marker Down syndrome screening program. Results from 4765 women were analysed, and there were highly statistically significant between-centre differences after allowing for gestation (P < 0.0001). Examination of maternal serum marker levels, expressed in multiples of the median (MoM) for gestation, showed that this was not due to gestational errors. Regression analysis was carried out to derive an equation with a centre-specific component that could be used to express NT in MoMs. Use of this equation reduced the variance of logNT by 15% compared to a published equation. The equation can be readily modified for use in other centres. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.