Pregnancies with 'double-positive' multiple marker screening results: a population-based study in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Multiple marker screening is offered to pregnant individuals in many jurisdictions to screen for trisomies 21 and 18. On occasion, the result is 'double-positive'-a screening result that is unexpectedly positive for both aneuploidies. Although this occurs rarely, the paucity of available evidence about the outcomes of these pregnancies hinders patient counselling. This study aimed to investigate the association of double-positive results with preterm birth and other adverse perinatal outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of pregnancies with an estimated date of delivery from September 1, 2016, to March 31, 2021, using province-wide perinatal registry data in Ontario, Canada. Pregnancies with double-positive screening results where trisomies 21 and 18 were ruled-out were compared to pregnancies with screen negative results for both aneuploidies. We used modified Poisson regression models with robust variance estimation to examine the association of double positive results with preterm birth and secondary outcomes. RESULTS: From 429 540 pregnancies with multiple marker screening, 863 (0.2%) had a double-positive result; trisomies 21 and 18 were ruled out in 374 pregnancies, 203 of which resulted in a live birth. Among the pregnancies in the double-positive group resulting in a live birth, the risk of preterm birth was increased compared to pregnancies with a screen negative result: adjusted risk ratio (aRR) 2.6 (95%CI 2.0-3.6), adjusted risk difference (aRD) 10.5% (95%CI 5.4-15.7). In a sensitivity analysis excluding all diagnosed chromosomal abnormalities, the risk of preterm birth remained elevated to a similar degree: aRR 2.6 (95%CI 1.9-3.7), aRD 10.0% (95%CI 4.8-15.3). The risk of other adverse perinatal outcomes was also higher, including the risk of chromosomal abnormalities other than trisomies 21 and 18: aRR 81.1 (95%CI 69.4-94.8), aRD 34.0% (95%CI 29.2-38.8). Pregnancies with double-positive results were also less likely to result in a live birth, even when excluding all diagnosed chromosomal abnormalities; and at increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes for those resulting in a live birth. CONCLUSION: Although rare, double-positive multiple marker screening results are associated with an increased risk of preterm birth and other adverse perinatal outcomes, even when excluding all identified chromosomal abnormalities.

Outcomes of pregnancies with varying levels of nuchal translucency measurements: A population-based retrospective study in Ontario, Canada.

INTRODUCTION: Nuchal translucency prenatal ultrasound is widely used to screen for chromosomal abnormalities. An elevated nuchal translucency has been associated with adverse outcomes such as pregnancy loss; however, extant studies investigating these associations have had important limitations, including selection bias. This study aimed to investigate the association between nuchal translucency measurements and pregnancy outcome, specifically, a composite of pregnancy loss, termination, stillbirth, or neonatal death. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a population-based retrospective cohort study conducted with data from the prescribed perinatal registry in Ontario, Canada, Better Outcomes Registry & Network. All singleton pregnancies with an estimated date of delivery from September 1, 2016, to March 31, 2021, and multiple marker screening including a nuchal translucency were included. Pregnancies with measurements 2.0- < 2.5 mm, 2.5- < 3.0 mm, 3.0- < 3.5 mm, 3.5- < 5.0 mm, 5.0- < 6.5 mm, and ≥6.5 mm were compared to a reference group with measurements <2.0 mm. We used multivariable modified Poisson regression models with robust variance estimation to estimate associations between nuchal translucency measurement and pregnancy outcome, with adjustment for age at estimated date of delivery and gestational age at screening. RESULTS: There were 414 268 singleton pregnancies included in the study. The risk of pregnancy loss, termination, stillbirth, or neonatal death increased with increasing levels of nuchal translucency measurements, with an adjusted risk ratio (aRR) of 11.9 (95% confidence interval (CI) 9.9, 14.3) in the group with measurements 3.5- < 5.0 mm. When pregnancies with diagnosed chromosomal abnormalities were excluded, this association remained strong, with an aRR of 6.4 (95% CI 4.8, 8.5). Among pregnancies with a live birth, those with a higher nuchal translucency measurement (>5.0 mm vs. <2.0 mm) were also at increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes such as admission to the neonatal intensive care unit and APGAR score <7. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based study using robust methods to reduce the risk of selection bias, we found that pregnancies with increased nuchal translucency measurements are less likely to result in a live birth, even with the exclusion of chromosomal abnormalities. Pregnancies with increased nuchal translucency measurements that resulted in a live birth may also be at increased risk of adverse perinatal outcomes.

Cytogenetic outcomes following a failed cell-free DNA screen: a population-based retrospective cohort study of 35,146 singleton pregnancies.

BACKGROUND: Cell-free fetal DNA screening is routinely offered to pregnant individuals to screen for aneuploidies. Although cell-free DNA screening is consistently more accurate than multiple-marker screening, it sometimes fails to yield a result. These test failures and their clinical implications are poorly described in the literature. Some studies suggest that a failed cell-free DNA screening result is associated with increased likelihood of cytogenetic abnormalities. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the association between a failed cell-free DNA test and common aneuploidies. The objectives were to determine: (1) the proportion of test failures on first and subsequent attempts, and (2) whether a failed cell-free DNA screen on first attempt is associated with increased likelihood of common aneuploidies (trisomies 21, 18, and 13, and sex chromosome aneuploidies). STUDY DESIGN: This was a population-based retrospective cohort study using data from Ontario's prescribed maternal and child registry, Better Outcomes Registry and Network Ontario. The study included all singleton pregnancies in Ontario with an estimated date of delivery from September 1, 2016 to March 31, 2019 that had a cell-free DNA screening record in the registry. Specific outcomes (trisomies 21, 18, and 13, and sex chromosome aneuploidies) of pregnancies with a failed cell-free DNA screen on first attempt were compared with those of pregnancies with low-risk cell-free DNA-screening results using modified Poisson regression adjusted for funding status (publicly funded vs self-paid), gestational age at screening, method of conception, and maternal age for autosomal aneuploidies. RESULTS: Our cohort included 35,146 pregnancies that had cell-free DNA screening during the study period. The overall cell-free DNA screening failure rate was 4.8% on first attempt and 2.2% after multiple attempts. An abnormal cytogenetic result for trisomies 21, 18, and 13, or sex chromosome aneuploidies was identified in 19.4% of pregnancies with a failed cell-free DNA screening for which cytogenetic testing was performed. Pregnancies with a failed cell-free DNA screen on first attempt had a relative risk of 130.3 (95% confidence interval, 64.7-262.6) for trisomy 21, trisomy 18, or trisomy 13, and a risk difference of 5.4% (95% confidence interval, 2.6-8.3), compared with pregnancies with a low-risk result. The risk of sex chromosome aneuploidies was not significantly greater in pregnancies with a failed result compared with pregnancies with a low-risk result (relative risk, 2.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.9-7.9; relative difference, 1.2%; 95% confidence interval, -0.9 to 3.2). CONCLUSION: Cell-free DNA screening test failures are relatively common. Although repeated testing improves the likelihood of an informative result, pregnancies with a failed cell-free DNA screen upon first attempt remain at increased risk for common autosomal aneuploidies, but not sex chromosome aneuploidies.

The impact of maternal and geographical factors on the uptake of non-invasive prenatal testing: A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to investigate recent trends in non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) utilisation, including factors associated with geographical variation, and to determine whether maternal or regional characteristics are associated with uptake the of NIPT. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included pregnant individuals in Ontario with an expected date of delivery from August 1st, 2016 to March 31st, 2020. Modified Poisson regression was used to estimate rate ratios for NIPT use adjusted for maternal and healthcare covariates. RESULTS: We found substantial variation in NIPT uptake between regions within the province. The highest uptake was found in urban areas, highest quintile of neighbourhood income and education, for those who were ≥40 years of age and had a history of previous aneuploidy, for those with a prenatal care visit in the first trimester, multiple pregnancy, multigravidity and body mass index within the normal range (18.5-24.9 kg/m2 ). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated significant regional and maternal differences in NIPT uptake across Ontario. Given the large sample size and diverse population, our study may have implications for other jurisdictions with large, socio-demographically and geographically diverse populations.

Association of COVID-19 Vaccination in Pregnancy With Adverse Peripartum Outcomes.

Importance: There is limited comparative epidemiological evidence on outcomes associated with COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy; monitoring pregnancy outcomes in large populations is required. Objective: To evaluate peripartum outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy. Design, Setting, and Participants: Population-based retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada, using a birth registry linked with the provincial COVID-19 immunization database. All births between December 14, 2020, and September 30, 2021, were included. Exposures: COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, COVID-19 vaccination after pregnancy, and no vaccination. Main Outcomes and Measures: Postpartum hemorrhage, chorioamnionitis, cesarean delivery (overall and emergency cesarean delivery), admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), and low newborn 5-minute Apgar score (<7). Linear and robust Poisson regression was used to generate adjusted risk differences (aRDs) and risk ratios (aRRs), respectively, comparing cumulative incidence of outcomes in those who received COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy with those vaccinated after pregnancy and those with no record of COVID-19 vaccination at any point. Inverse probability of treatment weights were used to adjust for confounding. Results: Among 97 590 individuals (mean [SD] age, 31.9 [4.9] years), 22 660 (23%) received at least 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy (63.6% received dose 1 in the third trimester; 99.8% received an mRNA vaccine). Comparing those vaccinated during vs after pregnancy (n = 44 815), there were no significantly increased risks of postpartum hemorrhage (incidence: 3.0% vs 3.0%; aRD, -0.28 per 100 individuals [95% CI, -0.59 to 0.03]; aRR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.82-1.02]), chorioamnionitis (0.5% vs 0.5%; aRD, -0.04 per 100 individuals [95% CI, -0.17 to 0.09]; aRR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.70-1.21]), cesarean delivery (30.8% vs 32.2%; aRD, -2.73 per 100 individuals [95% CI, -3.59 to -1.88]; aRR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.89-0.95]), NICU admission (11.0% vs 13.3%; aRD, -1.89 per 100 newborns [95% CI, -2.49 to -1.30]; aRR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.80-0.90]), or low Apgar score (1.8% vs 2.0%; aRD, -0.31 per 100 newborns [95% CI, -0.56 to -0.06]; aRR, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.73-0.97]). Findings were qualitatively similar when compared with individuals who did not receive COVID-19 vaccination at any point (n = 30 115). Conclusions and Relevance: In this population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada, COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy, compared with vaccination after pregnancy and with no vaccination, was not significantly associated with increased risk of adverse peripartum outcomes. Study interpretation should consider that the vaccinations received during pregnancy were primarily mRNA vaccines administered in the second and third trimester.

Performance of a universal prenatal screening program incorporating cell-free fetal DNA analysis in Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of cell-free fetal DNA (cfDNA) testing technology has disrupted the landscape of prenatal screening for trisomies 21 (T21) and 18 (T18). Publicly funded systems around the world are grappling with how to best integrate this more accurate but costly technology, as there is limited evidence about its incremental value in real-world conditions. The objectives of this study were to describe the population-based performance of Ontario's prenatal screening program, which incorporates publicly funded cfDNA screening for specific indications, and the effect of cfDNA testing on the screening and diagnostic choices made by pregnant people. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, descriptive cohort study using routinely collected data from Better Outcomes & Registry Network (BORN) Ontario, which captures linked population data for prenatal and neonatal health encounters across Ontario. We included all singleton pregnancies with an estimated due date between Sept. 1, 2016, and Mar. 31, 2019, that underwent publicly funded prenatal screening in Ontario, and a comparison cohort from Apr. 1, 2012, and Mar. 31, 2013. We assessed performance of the screening program for the detection of T21 or T18 by calculating sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value against diagnostic cytogenetic results or birth outcomes. We assessed the impact of the program by calculating the proportion of T21 screen-positive pregnancies undergoing subsequent cfDNA screening and invasive prenatal diagnostic testing. RESULTS: The study cohort included 373 682 pregnancies. The prenatal screening program had an uptake of 69.9%, a screen-positive rate and sensitivity of 1.6% and 89.9% for T21, and 0.2% and 80.5% for T18, respectively. The test failure rate for cfDNA screening was 2.2%. Invasive prenatal diagnostic testing decreased from 4.4% in 2012-2013 to 2.4% over the study period; 65.2% of pregnant people who received a screen-positive result from cfDNA testing went on to have invasive prenatal diagnostic testing. INTERPRETATION: This publicly funded screening program, incorporating cfDNA analysis for common aneuploidies, showed robust performance, a substantial reduction in invasive prenatal diagnostic testing and that pregnant people exercise autonomy in their choices about prenatal screening and diagnosis.

Application of exome sequencing for prenatal diagnosis: a rapid scoping review.

Genetic diagnosis provides important information for prenatal decision-making and management. Promising results from exome sequencing (ES) for genetic diagnosis in fetuses with structural anomalies are emerging. The objective of this scoping review was to identify what is known about the use of ES for genetic testing in prenatal cases with known or suspected genetic disease. A rapid scoping review was conducted over a six-week timeframe of English-language peer-reviewed studies. Search strategies for major databases (e.g., Medline) and gray literature were developed, and peer reviewed by information specialists. Identified studies were categorized and charted using tables and diagrams. Twenty-four publications were included from seven countries published between 2014 and 2019. Most commonly reported outcomes were diagnostic yields, which varied widely from 5% to 57%, and prenatal phenotype. Few studies reported clinical outcomes related to impact, decision-making, and clinical utility. Qualitative studies (n = 6) provided useful insights into patient and health-care provider experiences with ES. Findings suggest prenatal ES is beneficial, but more research is needed to better understand the clinical utility, circumstances for ideal use, feasibility, and costs of offering rapid ES as a routine option for prenatal genetic testing.

A 2-year review of publicly funded cell-free DNA screening in Ontario: utilization and adherence to funding criteria.

OBJECTIVE: Ontario offers a publicly funded modified contingent model of prenatal screening for aneuploidy in which cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening is covered for pregnancies at higher risk of fetal aneuploidy. The objective of this study was to review utilization of provincially funded cfDNA screening and adherence to the criteria laid out in Ontario prenatal screening guidelines. METHODS: This was a descriptive cohort study using data collected by Ontario's prescribed maternal and child registry. The study population included all pregnant individuals who received cfDNA screening from January 2016 to December 2017. RESULTS: The most common criteria for provincially funded cfDNA screening were advanced maternal age ≥40 years (37.7%), positive multiple marker screen (34.1%), modifying risk factors such as ultrasound soft markers (7.1%), and previous aneuploidy (5.5%). The audit demonstrated that 2.9% of funded cfDNA screens tests did not meet funding criteria, and that 11.4% of self-paid cfDNA screens could have been publicly funded. CONCLUSION: Reviewing and auditing the application of criteria for funded cfDNA screening using prescribed registry data allows an opportunity to identify areas where targeted education may improve adherence to standardized screening protocols, and provides a basis for reassessment of the funding model.

Noninvasive Prenatal Testing for Trisomies 21, 18, and 13, Sex Chromosome Aneuploidies, and Microdeletions in Average-Risk Pregnancies: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The cost effectiveness of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has been established for high-risk pregnancies but remains unclear for pregnancies at other risk levels. The aim was to assess the cost effectiveness of NIPT in average-risk pregnancies from the perspective of a provincial public payer in Canada. METHODS: A model was developed to compare traditional prenatal screening (TPS), NIPT as a second-tier test (performed only after a positive TPS result), and NIPT as a first-tier test (performed instead of TPS) for trisomies 21, 18, and 13; sex chromosome aneuploidies; and microdeletions in a hypothetical annual population cohort of average-risk pregnancies (142 000 to 148,000) in Ontario, Canada. A probabilistic analysis was conducted with 5000 repetitions. RESULTS: Compared with TPS, NIPT as a second-tier test detected more affected fetuses with trisomies 21, 18, and 13 (188 vs. 158), substantially reduced the number of diagnostic tests (i.e., chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis) performed (660 vs. 3107), and reduced the cost of prenatal screening ($26.7 million vs. $27.6 million) annually. Compared with second-tier NIPT, first-tier NIPT detected an additional 80 cases of trisomies 21, 18, and 13 at an additional cost of $33 million. The incremental cost per additional affected fetus detected was $412 411. Extending first-tier NIPT to include testing for sex chromosome aneuploidies and 22q11.2 deletion would increase the total screening cost. CONCLUSIONS: NIPT as a second-tier test is cost-saving compared with TPS alone. Compared with second-tier NIPT, first-tier NIPT detects more cases of chromosomal anomalies but at a substantially higher cost.

Practice guideline: joint CCMG-SOGC recommendations for the use of chromosomal microarray analysis for prenatal diagnosis and assessment of fetal loss in Canada.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this guideline is to provide updated recommendations for Canadian genetic counsellors, medical geneticists, maternal fetal medicine specialists, clinical laboratory geneticists and other practitioners regarding the use of chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) for prenatal diagnosis. This guideline replaces the 2011 Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOGC)-Canadian College of Medical Geneticists (CCMG) Joint Technical Update. METHODS: A multidisciplinary group consisting of medical geneticists, genetic counsellors, maternal fetal medicine specialists and clinical laboratory geneticists was assembled to review existing literature and guidelines for use of CMA in prenatal care and to make recommendations relevant to the Canadian context. The statement was circulated for comment to the CCMG membership-at-large for feedback and, following incorporation of feedback, was approved by the CCMG Board of Directors on 5 June 2017 and the SOGC Board of Directors on 19 June 2017. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations include but are not limited to: (1) CMA should be offered following a normal rapid aneuploidy screen when multiple fetal malformations are detected (II-1A) or for nuchal translucency (NT) ≥3.5 mm (II-2B) (recommendation 1); (2) a professional with expertise in prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis should provide genetic counselling to obtain informed consent, discuss the limitations of the methodology, obtain the parental decisions for return of incidental findings (II-2A) (recommendation 4) and provide post-test counselling for reporting of test results (III-A) (recommendation 9); (3) the resolution of chromosomal microarray analysis should be similar to postnatal microarray platforms to ensure small pathogenic variants are detected. To minimise the reporting of uncertain findings, it is recommended that variants of unknown significance (VOUS) smaller than 500 Kb deletion or 1 Mb duplication not be routinely reported in the prenatal context. Additionally, VOUS above these cut-offs should only be reported if there is significant supporting evidence that deletion or duplication of the region may be pathogenic (III-B) (recommendation 5); (4) secondary findings associated with a medically actionable disorder with childhood onset should be reported, whereas variants associated with adult-onset conditions should not be reported unless requested by the parents or disclosure can prevent serious harm to family members (III-A) (recommendation 8).The working group recognises that there is variability across Canada in delivery of prenatal testing, and these recommendations were developed to promote consistency and provide a minimum standard for all provinces and territories across the country (recommendation 9).

Comparing Maternal Serum Screening Markers Among IVF and Spontaneous Conceptions in Ontario Through Registry Data.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were as follows: (1) to investigate the accuracy of IVF identification on the prenatal screening record from prenatal screening laboratories; (2) to compare the screening markers in IVF and non-IVF pregnancies in the population of Ontario; and (3) to propose more appropriate IVF adjustment factors for the Ontario population. METHODS: Two years of IVF treatment, data from all fertility clinics in Ontario were merged with the corresponding prenatal screening data from all five prenatal screening labs. New adjustment factors for IVF were developed for each maternal serum screening marker and nuchal translucency measurement. Means and SDs and linear regression models were reported for all prenatal screening records, as well as for records that had IVF identified through the prenatal screening requisition and records that were identified through the Canadian Assisted Reproductive Technologies Register (CARTR) Plus database. RESULTS: Significant differences between IVF and non-IVF groups on the basis of the prenatal screening requisition information and CARTR Plus information were found among the ethnicity-adjusted mean multiple of the medians for alpha fetoprotein, first trimester pregnancy-associated plasma protein A, second trimester unconjugated estradiol, first trimester human chorionic gonadotropin, total human chorionic gonadotropin, and dimeric inhibin A. CONCLUSION: This study proposed alternate IVF adjustment factors that will produce more accurate screening results within the population of Ontario.

Enhanced First Trimester Screening for Trisomy 21 with Contingent Cell-Free Fetal DNA: A Comparative Performance and Cost Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Prenatal screening for trisomy 21 is a standard of care. Emerging cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) technologies can improve screening performance, but they are expensive. This study was conducted to propose a contingent screening model that would incorporate cffDNA technology, would remain affordable, and could be applied equitably in a publically funded system. METHODS: Using performance and cost parameters from published literature, four prenatal screening strategies were compared. Scenario 1 modelled integrated prenatal screening (first trimester nuchal translucency and biochemical markers from both the first and second trimesters) with no cffDNA. Scenarios 2 and 3 modelled first trimester combined screening (FTS) and "enhanced FTS" (adding serum placental growth factor and alpha fetoprotein to FTS), respectively, with contingent cffDNA following a positive result. Scenario 4 modelled cffDNA as the primary screening test. RESULTS: Scenario 1 provides a known detection rate (DR) of 88%, with a false positive rate (FPR) of 3.3%. Scenarios 2 and 3 result in a DR of 94% and overall FPR of 0.59% and 0.33%, respectively, comparable to the DR of 96% and FPR of 0.1% with primary cffDNA (assuming the published test failure rate of 3%). The total cost, cost per woman screened, and cost per case of trisomy 21 detected were lower with scenario 3 (enhanced FTS with contingent cffDNA) compared with primary cffDNA or scenario 2 (FTS with contingent cffDNA). CONCLUSION: Enhanced FTS with contingent cffDNA following a positive result provides a similar performance to that of primary cffDNA at a substantially lower cost.

Ultrasonographic Fetal Nuchal Translucency Measurements and Cytogenetic Outcomes.

Importance: Ultrasonographic measurement of fetal nuchal translucency is used in prenatal screening for trisomies 21 and 18 and other conditions. A cutoff of 3.5 mm or greater is commonly used to offer follow-up investigations, such as prenatal cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening or cytogenetic testing. Recent studies showed a possible association with chromosomal anomalies for levels less than 3.5 mm, but extant evidence has limitations. Objective: To evaluate the association between different nuchal translucency measurements and cytogenetic outcomes on a population level. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based retrospective cohort study used data from the Better Outcomes Registry & Network, the perinatal registry for Ontario, Canada. All singleton pregnancies with an estimated date of delivery from September 1, 2016, to March 31, 2021, were included. Data were analyzed from March 17 to August 14, 2023. Exposures: Nuchal translucency measurements were identified through multiple-marker screening results. Main Outcomes and Measures: Chromosomal anomalies were identified through all Ontario laboratory-generated prenatal and postnatal cytogenetic tests. Cytogenetic testing results, supplemented with information from cfDNA screening and clinical examination at birth, were used to identify pregnancies without chromosomal anomalies. Multivariable modified Poisson regression with robust variance estimation and adjustment for gestational age was used to compare cytogenetic outcomes for pregnancies with varying nuchal translucency measurement categories and a reference group with nuchal translucency less than 2.0 mm. Results: Of 414 268 pregnancies included in the study (mean [SD] maternal age at estimated delivery date, 31.5 [4.7] years), 359 807 (86.9%) had a nuchal translucency less than 2.0 mm; the prevalence of chromosomal anomalies in this group was 0.5%. An increased risk of chromosomal anomalies was associated with increasing nuchal translucency measurements, with an adjusted risk ratio (ARR) of 20.33 (95% CI, 17.58-23.52) and adjusted risk difference (ARD) of 9.94% (95% CI, 8.49%-11.39%) for pregnancies with measurements of 3.0 to less than 3.5 mm. The ARR was 4.97 (95% CI, 3.45-7.17) and the ARD was 1.40% (95% CI, 0.77%-2.04%) when restricted to chromosomal anomalies beyond the commonly screened aneuploidies (excluding trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and sex chromosome aneuploidies). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of 414 268 singleton pregnancies, those with nuchal translucency measurements less than 2.0 mm were at the lowest risk of chromosomal anomalies. Risk increased with increasing measurements, including measurements less than 3.5 mm and anomalies not routinely screened by many prenatal genetic screening programs.

First and second trimester maternal serum markers for prenatal aneuploidy screening: An update on the adjustment factors for race, smoking, and insulin dependent diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVES: The concentrations of maternal serum markers for aneuploidy screening are influenced by maternal characteristics such as race, smoking, insulin dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM), and in vitro fertilization (IVF). Accurate risk estimation requires adjustment of initial values for these characteristics. This study aims to update and validate adjustment factors for race, smoking, and IDDM. METHODS: The study included singleton pregnancies that received multiple marker screening in Ontario, Canada between January 2012, and December 2018, and had their information collected in the Better Outcomes Registry & Network (BORN) Ontario. Serum markers assessed included first trimester pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A), free ß and total human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), placental growth factor (PlGF) and αlpha-fetoprotein (AFP); second trimester AFP, unconjugated estriol (uE3), total hCG and inhibin A. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to assess the differences in the median multiple of the median (MoM) of serum markers between study and reference groups. New adjustment factors were generated by dividing the median MoM of a particular race, individuals who smoke tobacco, or have IDDM by those of the reference groups. RESULTS: The study included 624,789 pregnancies. There were statistically significant differences in serum marker concentrations among pregnant individuals who were Black, Asian, or First Nations compared to a White group, those who smoked compared to Non-smoking individuals, and those with IDDM compared to Non-IDDM group. New adjustment factors for race, smoking, and IDDM were validated by comparing median MoM of serum markers corrected using the current adjustment factors and new adjustment factors generated in this study. CONCLUSION: The adjustment factors generated in this study can adjust the effects of race, smoking, and IDDM on serum markers more accurately.

Temporal trends and determinants of COVID-19 vaccine coverage and series initiation during pregnancy in Ontario, Canada, December 2020 to December 2021: A population-based retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Population-based COVID-19 vaccine coverage estimates among pregnant individuals are limited. We assessed temporal patterns in vaccine coverage (≥1 dose before or during pregnancy) and evaluated factors associated with vaccine series initiation (receiving dose 1 during pregnancy) in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: We linked the provincial birth registry with COVID-19 vaccination records from December 14, 2020 to December 31, 2021 and assessed coverage rates among all pregnant individuals by month, age, and neighborhood sociodemographic characteristics. Among individuals who gave birth since April 2021-when pregnant people were prioritized for vaccination-we assessed associations between sociodemographic, behavioral, and pregnancy-related factors with vaccine series initiation using multivariable regression to estimate adjusted risk ratios (aRR) and risk differences (aRD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Among 221,190 pregnant individuals, vaccine coverage increased to 71.2% by December 2021. Gaps in coverage across categories of age and sociodemographic characteristics decreased over time, but did not disappear. Lower vaccine series initiation was associated with lower age (<25 vs. 30-34 years: aRR 0.53, 95%CI 0.51-0.56), smoking (vs. non-smoking: 0.64, 0.61-0.67), no first trimester prenatal care visit (vs. visit: 0.80, 0.77-0.84), and residing in neighborhoods with the lowest income (vs. highest: 0.69, 0.67-0.71). Vaccine series initiation was marginally higher among individuals with pre-existing medical conditions (vs. no conditions: 1.07, 1.04-1.10). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccine coverage among pregnant individuals remained lower than in the general population, and there was lower vaccine initiation by multiple characteristics.

Canadian SARS-CoV-2 serological survey using antenatal serum samples: a retrospective seroprevalence study.

BACKGROUND: Insufficient data on the rate and distribution of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Canada has presented a substantial challenge to the public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our objective was to assess SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in a representative sample of pregnant people throughout Canada, across multiple time points over 2 years of the pandemic, to describe the seroprevalence and show the ability of this process to provide prevalence estimates. METHODS: This Canadian retrospective serological surveillance study used existing serological prenatal samples across 10 provinces over multiple time periods: Feb. 3-21, 2020; Aug. 24-Sept. 11, 2020; Nov. 16-Dec. 4, 2020; Nov. 15-Dec. 3, 2021; and results from the province of British Columbia during a period in which the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant was predominant, from Nov. 15, 2021, to June 11, 2022. Age and postal code administrative data allowed for comparison with concurrent polymerase chain reactivity (PCR)-positive results collected by Statistics Canada and the Canadian Surveillance of COVID-19 in Pregnancy (CANCOVID-Preg) project. RESULTS: Seropositivity in antenatal serum as early as February 2020 indicates SARS-CoV-2 transmission before the World Health Organization's declaration of the pandemic. Seroprevalence in our sample of pregnant people was 1.84 to 8.90 times higher than the recorded concurrent PCR-positive prevalence recorded among females aged 20-49 years in November-December 2020. Overall seropositivity in our sample of pregnant people was low at the end of 2020, increasing to 15% in 1 province by the end of 2021. Seroprevalence among pregnant people in BC during the Omicron period increased from 5.8% to 43% from November 2021 to June 2022. INTERPRETATION: These results indicate widespread vulnerability to SARS-CoV-2 infection before vaccine availability in Canada. During the time periods sampled, public health tracking systems were under-reporting infections, and seroprevalence results during the Omicron period indicate extensive community spread of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Risk of preterm birth, small for gestational age at birth, and stillbirth after covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy: population based retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the risk of preterm birth, small for gestational age at birth, and stillbirth after covid-19 vaccination during pregnancy. DESIGN: Population based retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Ontario, Canada, 1 May to 31 December 2021. PARTICIPANTS: All liveborn and stillborn infants from pregnancies conceived at least 42 weeks before the end of the study period and with gestational age ≥20 weeks or birth weight ≥500 g. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Using Cox regression, hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for preterm birth before 37 weeks (overall and spontaneous preterm birth), very preterm birth (<32 weeks), small for gestational age at birth (<10th centile), and stillbirth. Vaccination against covid-19 was treated as a time varying exposure in the outcome specific risk window, and propensity score weighting was used to adjust hazard ratios for potential confounding. RESULTS: Among 85 162 births, 43 099 (50.6%) occurred in individuals who received one dose or more of a covid-19 vaccine during pregnancy-42 979 (99.7%) received an mRNA vaccine. Vaccination during pregnancy was not associated with any increased risk of overall preterm birth (6.5% among vaccinated v 6.9% among unvaccinated; adjusted hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.08), spontaneous preterm birth (3.7% v 4.4%; 0.96, 0.90 to 1.03), or very preterm birth (0.59% v 0.89%; 0.80, 0.67 to 0.95). No increase was found in risk of small for gestational age at birth (9.1% v 9.2%; 0.98, 0.93 to 1.03) or stillbirth (0.25% v 0.44%; 0.65, 0.51 to 0.84). Findings were similar by trimester of vaccination, mRNA vaccine product, and number of doses received during pregnancy. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that vaccination against covid-19 during pregnancy is not associated with a higher risk of preterm birth, small for gestational age at birth, or stillbirth.

Gastroschisis in Ontario, Canada: 2012-2018.

BACKGROUND: Gastroschisis is a congenital anomaly of the abdomen in which the intestines are found outside of the body at birth. While no clear causative factors have been identified, it is strongly associated with young maternal age. Other reported associations include low maternal socioeconomic status, low maternal body mass index (BMI), and smoking. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of epidemiologic data relating to cases of gastroschisis in Ontario from 2012-2018 in the Better Outcomes Registry & Network (BORN) Ontario database, which is the province's prescribed maternal-newborn registry. We describe the epidemiology of gastroschisis in Ontario with respect to birth prevalence, maternal age, health, exposures, and geography. RESULTS: The birth prevalence of gastroschisis is 2.31 cases/10,000 births. There was no apparent change in birth prevalence over the study period and there was no difference between male and female infants. Gastroschisis was associated with younger maternal ages and was inversely correlated with maternal BMI. Gastroschisis was associated with first completed pregnancy. Maternal diabetes was associated with a lower birth prevalence of gastroschisis than average. Mothers of babies with gastroschsis were more likely to report use of tobacco, alcohol, and drugs during pregnancy than those without gastroschisis, with marijuana use showing the largest increase in birth prevalence of gastroschisis. Mothers living in rural areas were more likely to have a baby with gastroschisis than those in urban centers, even after controlling for maternal age. CONCLUSIONS: This Ontario registry study reveals that mothers with babies with gastroschisis are more likely to be young and thin, live in rural areas, and report prenatal smoking, alcohol use, and drug use than women whose pregnancies do not have gastroschsis.

Data Quality Assessment on Congenital Anomalies in Ontario, Canada.

Background: Congenital anomalies (CAs) are a major cause of infant morbidity and mortality in Canada. Reliably identifying CAs is essential for CA surveillance and research. The main objective of this study was to assess the agreement of eight sentinel anomalies including: neural tube defects (NTD), orofacial clefts, limb deficiency defects (LDD), Down syndrome (DS), tetralogy of Fallot (TOF), gastroschisis (GS), hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS) and transposition of great vessels (TGA) captured in the BORN Information System (BIS) database and the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) Discharge Abstract Database (DAD). Methods: Live birth and stillbirth records between the BIS and CIHI-DAD in the fiscal years of 2012-2013 to 2015-2016 were linked using 10 digit infant Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) numbers. Percent agreement and Kappa statistics were performed to assess the reliability (agreement) of CAs identified in the linked BIS and CIHI-DAD birth records. Then, further investigations were conducted on those CA cases identified in the CIHI-DAD only. Results: Kappa coefficients of the eight selected CAs between BIS ("Confirmed" or "Suspected" cases) and CIHI-DAD were 0.96 (95% CI: 0.93-0.98) for GS; 0.81 (95% CI: 0.78-0.83) for Orofacial clefts; 0.75 (95% CI: 0.72-0.77) for DS; 0.71 (95% CI: 0.65-0.77) for TOF; 0.62 (95% CI: 0.55-0.68) for TGA; 0.59 (95% CI: 0.49-0.68) for HLHS, 0.53 (95% CI: 0.46-0.60) for NTD-all; and 0.30 (95% CI: 0.23-0.37) for LDD. Conclusions: The degree of agreement varied among sentinel CAs identified between the BIS and CIHI. The potential reasons for discrepancies include incompleteness of capturing CAs using existing picklist values, especially for certain sub-types, incomplete neonatal special care data in the BIS, and differences between clinical diagnosis in the BIS and ICD-10-CA classification in the DAD. A future data abstraction study will be conducted to investigate the potential reasons for discrepancies of CA capture between two databases. This project helps quantify the quality of CA data collection in the BIS, enhances understanding of CA prevalence in Ontario and provides direction for future data quality improvement activities.

Trends in the use of prenatal testing services for fetal aneuploidy in Ontario: a descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: In 2014, Ontario augmented its publicly funded multiple-marker screening program for prenatal aneuploidy by incorporating cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) analysis for high-risk pregnancies. We assessed trends in the use of multiple-marker screening, cffDNA screening and prenatal diagnostic testing before and after implementation of public funding. METHODS: We conducted a descriptive study based on data from the Better Outcomes Registry & Network (BORN) Ontario. The study population included all pregnant women in Ontario with a singleton pregnancy and an expected date of delivery between July 1, 2012, and Mar. 31, 2016, with pregnancy data captured in BORN. Pregnancy losses and terminations before 20 weeks' gestation not captured in BORN were excluded. We generated descriptive statistics to show trends and regional variations in use. RESULTS: The study sample included 534 210 singleton pregnancies. After cffDNA screening was funded for specific indications, uptake of multiple-marker screening increased slightly, from 66.5% to 68.1% (p < 0.001). Uptake of cffDNA screening among women with a positive multiple-marker screening result increased substantially, from 3.2% to 48.8% (p < 0.001). In contrast, the rate of prenatal diagnostic testing in this group decreased from 54.8% to 30.8% (p < 0.001). Although women aged 40 years or older are eligible for primary cffDNA screening, only a small decrease in the use of multiple-marker screening was observed in this group. The greatest use of cffDNA screening and greatest decline in prenatal diagnostic testing were seen in women with a level of risk for trisomy 21 of 1:101-1:200 based on multiple-marker screening. INTERPRETATION: After public funding of cffDNA screening was implemented in Ontario, there was a significant increase in cffDNA screening and a significant decrease in prenatal diagnostic testing among women with a positive multiple-marker screening result. These changing patterns show the significant impact of public policy and funding decisions on women's choices regarding prenatal testing.