The Role of cfDNA Biomarkers and Patient Data in the Early Prediction of Preeclampsia: Artificial Intelligence Model.

OBJECTIVE: Accurate individualized assessment of preeclampsia risk enables the identification of patients most likely to benefit from initiation of low-dose aspirin at 12-16 weeks' gestation when there is evidence for its effectiveness, as well as guiding appropriate pregnancy care pathways and surveillance. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of artificial neural network models for the prediction of preterm preeclampsia (<37 weeks' gestation) using patient characteristics available at the first antenatal visit and data from prenatal cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening. Secondary outcomes were prediction of early onset preeclampsia (<34 weeks' gestation) and term preeclampsia (≥37 weeks' gestation). METHODS: This secondary analysis of a prospective, multicenter, observational prenatal cfDNA screening study (SMART) included singleton pregnancies with known pregnancy outcomes. Thirteen patient characteristics that are routinely collected at the first prenatal visit and two characteristics of cfDNA, total cfDNA and fetal fraction (FF), were used to develop predictive models for early-onset (<34 weeks), preterm (<37 weeks), and term (≥37 weeks) preeclampsia. For the models, the 'reference' classifier was a shallow logistic regression (LR) model. We also explored several feedforward (non-linear) neural network (NN) architectures with one or more hidden layers and compared their performance with the LR model. We selected a simple NN model built with one hidden layer and made up of 15 units. RESULTS: Of 17,520 participants included in the final analysis, 72 (0.4%) developed early onset, 251 (1.4%) preterm, and 420 (2.4%) term preeclampsia. Median gestational age at cfDNA measurement was 12.6 weeks and 2,155 (12.3%) had their cfDNA measurement at 16 weeks' gestation or greater. Preeclampsia was associated with higher total cfDNA (median 362.3 versus 339.0 copies/ml cfDNA; p<0.001) and lower FF (median 7.5% versus 9.4%; p<0.001). The expected, cross-validated area under the curve (AUC) scores for early onset, preterm, and term preeclampsia were 0.782, 0.801, and 0.712, respectively for the LR model, and 0.797, 0.800, and 0.713, respectively for the NN model. At a screen-positive rate of 15%, sensitivity for preterm preeclampsia was 58.4% (95% CI 0.569, 0.599) for the LR model and 59.3% (95% CI 0.578, 0.608) for the NN model.The contribution of both total cfDNA and FF to the prediction of term and preterm preeclampsia was negligible. For early-onset preeclampsia, removal of the total cfDNA and FF features from the NN model was associated with a 6.9% decrease in sensitivity at a 15% screen positive rate, from 54.9% (95% CI 52.9-56.9) to 48.0% (95% CI 45.0-51.0). CONCLUSION: Routinely available patient characteristics and cfDNA markers can be used to predict preeclampsia with performance comparable to other patient characteristic models for the prediction of preterm preeclampsia. Both LR and NN models showed similar performance.

Impact of high-risk prenatal screening results for 22q11.2 deletion syndrome on obstetric and neonatal management: Secondary analysis from the SMART study.

OBJECTIVE: One goal of prenatal genetic screening is to optimize perinatal care and improve infant outcomes. We sought to determine whether high-risk cfDNA screening for 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (22q11.2DS) affected prenatal or neonatal management. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis from the SMART study. Patients with high-risk cfDNA results for 22q11.2DS were compared with the low-risk cohort for pregnancy characteristics and obstetrical management. To assess differences in neonatal care, we compared high-risk neonates without prenatal genetic confirmation with a 1:1 matched low-risk cohort. RESULTS: Of 18,020 eligible participants enrolled between 2015 and 2019, 38 (0.21%) were high-risk and 17,982 (99.79%) were low-risk for 22q11.2DS by cfDNA screening. High-risk participants had more prenatal diagnostic testing (55.3%; 21/38 vs. 2.0%; 352/17,982, p < 0.001) and fetal echocardiography (76.9%; 10/13 vs. 19.6%; 10/51, p < 0.001). High-risk newborns without prenatal diagnostic testing had higher rates of neonatal genetic testing (46.2%; 6/13 vs. 0%; 0/51, P < 0.001), echocardiography (30.8%; 4/13 vs. 4.0%; 2/50, p = 0.013), evaluation of calcium levels (46.2%; 6/13 vs. 4.1%; 2/49, P < 0.001) and lymphocyte count (53.8%; 7/13 vs. 15.7%; 8/51, p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: High-risk screening results for 22q11.2DS were associated with higher rates of prenatal and neonatal diagnostic genetic testing and other 22q11.2DS-specific evaluations. However, these interventions were not universally performed, and >50% of high-risk infants were discharged without genetic testing, representing possible missed opportunities to improve outcomes for affected individuals.

Biometric magnetic resonance imaging analysis of fetal brain development in Down syndrome.

OBJECTIVES: To assess brain development in living fetuses with Down syndrome (DS) by biometric measurements on fetal brain magnetic resonance images (MRI). METHODS: We scanned 10 MRIs of fetuses with confirmed trisomy 21 at birth and 12 control fetal MRIs without any detected anomalies. Fetal brain MRIs were analyzed using 14 fetal brain and skull biometric parameters. We compared measures between DS and controls in both raw MRIs and motion-corrected and anterior-posterior commissure-aligned images. RESULTS: In the reconstructed images, the measured values of the height of the cerebellar vermis (HV) and anteroposterior diameter of the cerebellar vermis (APDV) were significantly smaller, and the anteroposterior diameter of the fourth ventricle (APDF) was significantly larger in fetuses with DS than controls. In the raw MRIs, the measured values of the right lateral ventricle were significantly larger in fetuses with DS than in controls. Logistic regression analyses revealed that a new parameter, the cerebellar-to-fourth-ventricle ratio (i.e., (APDV * Height of the vermis)/APDF), was significantly smaller in fetuses with DS than controls and was the most predictive to distinguish between fetuses with DS and controls. CONCLUSIONS: The study revealed that fetuses with DS have smaller cerebellums and larger fourth ventricles compared to the controls.

Performance of prenatal cfDNA screening for sex chromosomes.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess the performance of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening to detect sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCAs) in an unselected obstetrical population with genetic confirmation. METHODS: This was a planned secondary analysis of the multicenter, prospective SNP-based Microdeletion and Aneuploidy RegisTry (SMART) study. Patients receiving cfDNA results for autosomal aneuploidies and who had confirmatory genetic results for the relevant sex chromosomal aneuploidies were included. Screening performance for SCAs, including monosomy X (MX) and the sex chromosome trisomies (SCT: 47,XXX; 47,XXY; 47,XYY) was determined. Fetal sex concordance between cfDNA and genetic screening was also evaluated in euploid pregnancies. RESULTS: A total of 17,538 cases met inclusion criteria. Performance of cfDNA for MX, SCTs, and fetal sex was determined in 17,297, 10,333, and 14,486 pregnancies, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of cfDNA were 83.3%, 99.9%, and 22.7% for MX and 70.4%, 99.9%, and 82.6%, respectively, for the combined SCTs. The accuracy of fetal sex prediction by cfDNA was 100%. CONCLUSION: Screening performance of cfDNA for SCAs is comparable to that reported in other studies. The PPV for the SCTs was similar to the autosomal trisomies, whereas the PPV for MX was substantially lower. No discordance in fetal sex was observed between cfDNA and postnatal genetic screening in euploid pregnancies. These data will assist interpretation and counseling for cfDNA results for sex chromosomes.

Obstetrical, perinatal, and genetic outcomes associated with nonreportable prenatal cell-free DNA screening results.

BACKGROUND: The clinical implications of nonreportable cell-free DNA screening results are uncertain, but such results may indicate poor placental implantation in some cases and be associated with adverse obstetrical and perinatal outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the outcomes of pregnancies with nonreportable cell-free DNA screening in a cohort of patients with complete genetic and obstetrical outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: This was a prespecified secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective observational study of prenatal cell-free DNA screening for fetal aneuploidy and 22q11.2 deletion syndrome. Participants who underwent cell-free DNA screening from April 2015 through January 2019 were offered participation. Obstetrical outcomes and neonatal genetic testing results were collected from 21 primary-care and referral centers in the United States, Europe, and Australia. The primary outcome was risk for adverse obstetrical and perinatal outcomes (aneuploidy, preterm birth at <28, <34, and <37 weeks' gestation, preeclampsia, small for gestational age or birthweight <10th percentile for gestational week, and a composite outcome that included preterm birth at <37 weeks, preeclampsia, small for gestational age, and stillbirth at >20 weeks) after nonreportable cell-free DNA screening because of low fetal fraction or other causes. Multivariable analyses were performed, adjusting for variables known to be associated with obstetrical and perinatal outcomes, nonreportable results, or fetal fraction. RESULTS: In total, 25,199 pregnant individuals were screened, and 20,194 were enrolled. Genetic confirmation was missing in 1165 (5.8%), 1085 (5.4%) were lost to follow-up, and 93 (0.5%) withdrew; the final study cohort included 17,851 (88.4%) participants who had cell-free DNA, fetal or newborn genetic confirmatory testing, and obstetrical and perinatal outcomes collected. Results were nonreportable in 602 (3.4%) participants. A sample was redrawn and testing attempted again in 427; in 112 (26.2%) participants, results were again nonreportable. Nonreportable results were associated with higher body mass index, chronic hypertension, later gestational age, lower fetal fraction, and Black race. Trisomy 13, 18, or 21 was confirmed in 1.6% with nonreportable tests vs 0.7% with reported results (P=.013). Rates of preterm birth at <28, 34, and 37 weeks, preeclampsia, and the composite outcome were higher among participants with nonreportable results, and further increased among those with a second nonreportable test, whereas the rate of small for gestational age infants was not increased. After adjustment for confounders, the adjusted odds ratios were 2.2 (95% confidence interval, 1.1-4.4) and 2.6 (95% confidence interval, 0.6-10.8) for aneuploidy, and 1.5 (95% confidence interval, 1.2-1.8) and 2.1 (95% confidence interval, 1.4-3.2) for the composite outcome after a first and second nonreportable test, respectively. Of the patients with nonreportable tests, 94.9% had a live birth, as opposed to 98.8% of those with reported test results (adjusted odds ratio for livebirth, 0.20 [95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.30]). CONCLUSION: Patients with nonreportable cell-free DNA results are at increased risk for a number of adverse outcomes, including aneuploidy, preeclampsia, and preterm birth. They should be offered diagnostic genetic testing, and clinicians should be aware of the increased risk of pregnancy complications.

Cell-free DNA screening for prenatal detection of 22q11.2 deletion syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Historically, prenatal screening has focused primarily on the detection of fetal aneuploidies. Cell-free DNA now enables noninvasive screening for subchromosomal copy number variants, including 22q11.2 deletion syndrome (or DiGeorge syndrome), which is the most common microdeletion and a leading cause of congenital heart defects and neurodevelopmental delay. Although smaller studies have demonstrated the feasibility of screening for 22q11.2 deletion syndrome, large cohort studies with confirmatory postnatal testing to assess test performance have not been reported. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the performance of single-nucleotide polymorphism-based, prenatal cell-free DNA screening for detection of 22q11.2 deletion syndrome. STUDY DESIGN: Patients who underwent single-nucleotide polymorphism-based prenatal cell-free DNA screening for 22q11.2 deletion syndrome were prospectively enrolled at 21 centers in 6 countries. Prenatal or newborn DNA samples were requested in all cases for genetic confirmation using chromosomal microarrays. The primary outcome was sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of cell-free DNA screening for the detection of all deletions, including the classical deletion and nested deletions that are ≥500 kb, in the 22q11.2 low-copy repeat A-D region. Secondary outcomes included the prevalence of 22q11.2 deletion syndrome and performance of an updated cell-free DNA algorithm that was evaluated with blinding to the pregnancy outcome. RESULTS: Of the 20,887 women enrolled, a genetic outcome was available for 18,289 (87.6%). A total of 12 22q11.2 deletion syndrome cases were confirmed in the cohort, including 5 (41.7%) nested deletions, yielding a prevalence of 1 in 1524. In the total cohort, cell-free DNA screening identified 17,976 (98.3%) cases as low risk for 22q11.2 deletion syndrome and 38 (0.2%) cases as high risk; 275 (1.5%) cases were nonreportable. Overall, 9 of 12 cases of 22q11.2 were detected, yielding a sensitivity of 75.0% (95% confidence interval, 42.8-94.5); specificity of 99.84% (95% confidence interval, 99.77-99.89); positive predictive value of 23.7% (95% confidence interval, 11.44-40.24), and negative predictive value of 99.98% (95% confidence interval, 99.95-100). None of the cases with a nonreportable result was diagnosed with 22q11.2 deletion syndrome. The updated algorithm detected 10 of 12 cases (83.3%; 95% confidence interval, 51.6-97.9) with a lower false positive rate (0.05% vs 0.16%; P<.001) and a positive predictive value of 52.6% (10/19; 95% confidence interval, 28.9-75.6). CONCLUSION: Noninvasive cell-free DNA prenatal screening for 22q11.2 deletion syndrome can detect most affected cases, including smaller nested deletions, with a low false positive rate.

Cell-free DNA screening for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 in pregnancies at low and high risk for aneuploidy with genetic confirmation.

BACKGROUND: Cell-free DNA noninvasive prenatal screening for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 has been rapidly adopted into clinical practice. However, previous studies are limited by a lack of follow-up genetic testing to confirm the outcomes and accurately assess test performance, particularly in women at a low risk for aneuploidy. OBJECTIVE: To measure and compare the performance of cell-free DNA screening for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 between women at a low and high risk for aneuploidy in a large, prospective cohort with genetic confirmation of results STUDY DESIGN: This was a multicenter prospective observational study at 21 centers in 6 countries. Women who had single-nucleotide-polymorphism-based cell-free DNA screening for trisomies 21, 18, and 13 were enrolled. Genetic confirmation was obtained from prenatal or newborn DNA samples. The test performance and test failure (no-call) rates were assessed for the cohort, and women with low and high previous risks for aneuploidy were compared. An updated cell-free DNA algorithm blinded to the pregnancy outcome was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 20,194 women were enrolled at a median gestational age of 12.6 weeks (interquartile range, 11.6-13.9). The genetic outcomes were confirmed in 17,851 cases (88.4%): 13,043 (73.1%) low-risk and 4808 (26.9%) high-risk cases for aneuploidy. Overall, 133 trisomies were diagnosed (100 trisomy 21; 18 trisomy 18; 15 trisomy 13). The cell-free DNA screen positive rate was lower in the low-risk vs the high-risk group (0.27% vs 2.2%; P<.0001). The sensitivity and specificity were similar between the groups. The positive predictive value for the low- and high-risk groups was 85.7% vs 97.5%; P=.058 for trisomy 21; 50.0% vs 81.3%; P=.283 for trisomy 18; and 62.5% vs 83.3; P=.58 for trisomy 13, respectively. Overall, 602 (3.4%) patients had no-call result after the first draw and 287 (1.61%) after including cases with a second draw. The trisomy rate was higher in the 287 cases with no-call results than patients with a result on a first draw (2.8% vs 0.7%; P=.001). The updated algorithm showed similar sensitivity and specificity to the study algorithm with a lower no-call rate. CONCLUSION: In women at a low risk for aneuploidy, single-nucleotide-polymorphism-based cell-free DNA has high sensitivity and specificity, positive predictive value of 85.7% for trisomy 21 and 74.3% for the 3 common trisomies. Patients who receive a no-call result are at an increased risk of aneuploidy and require additional investigation.

Quantitative MRI Analyses of Regional Brain Growth in Living Fetuses with Down Syndrome.

Down syndrome (DS) is the most common liveborn autosomal chromosomal anomaly and is a major cause of developmental disability. Atypical brain development and the resulting intellectual disability originate during the fetal period. Perinatal interventions to correct such aberrant development are on the horizon in preclinical studies. However, we lack tools to sensitively measure aberrant structural brain development in living human fetuses with DS. In this study, we aimed to develop safe and precise neuroimaging measures to monitor fetal brain development in DS. We measured growth patterns of regional brain structures in 10 fetal brains with DS (29.1 ± 4.2, weeks of gestation, mean ± SD, range 21.7~35.1) and 12 control fetuses (25.2 ± 5.0, range 18.6~33.3) using regional volumetric analysis of fetal brain MRI. All cases with DS had confirmed karyotypes. We performed non-linear regression models to compare fitted regional growth curves between DS and controls. We found decreased growth trajectories of the cortical plate (P = 0.033), the subcortical parenchyma (P = 0.010), and the cerebellar hemispheres (P < 0.0001) in DS compared to controls. This study provides proof of principle that regional volumetric analysis of fetal brain MRI facilitates successful evaluation of brain development in living fetuses with DS.

Noninvasive prenatal screening by next-generation sequencing.

Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) has emerged as a highly accurate method of screening for fetal Down syndrome, with a detection rate and specificity approaching 100%. Challenging the widespread use of this technology are cost and the paradigm shift in counseling that accompanies any emerging technology. The expense of the test is expected to decrease with increased utilization, and well beyond the current NIPS technology, its components (fetal genome measurements, sequencing technology, and bioinformatics) will be utilized alone or in combinations to interrogate the fetal genome. The end goal is simple: to offer patients information early in pregnancy about fetal genomes without incurring procedural risks. This will allow patients an opportunity to make informed reproductive and pregnancy management decisions based on precise fetal genomic information.

DNA sequencing versus standard prenatal aneuploidy screening.

BACKGROUND: In high-risk pregnant women, noninvasive prenatal testing with the use of massively parallel sequencing of maternal plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA testing) accurately detects fetal autosomal aneuploidy. Its performance in low-risk women is unclear. METHODS: At 21 centers in the United States, we collected blood samples from women with singleton pregnancies who were undergoing standard aneuploidy screening (serum biochemical assays with or without nuchal translucency measurement). We performed massively parallel sequencing in a blinded fashion to determine the chromosome dosage for each sample. The primary end point was a comparison of the false positive rates of detection of fetal trisomies 21 and 18 with the use of standard screening and cfDNA testing. Birth outcomes or karyotypes were the reference standard. RESULTS: The primary series included 1914 women (mean age, 29.6 years) with an eligible sample, a singleton fetus without aneuploidy, results from cfDNA testing, and a risk classification based on standard screening. For trisomies 21 and 18, the false positive rates with cfDNA testing were significantly lower than those with standard screening (0.3% vs. 3.6% for trisomy 21, P<0.001; and 0.2% vs. 0.6% for trisomy 18, P=0.03). The use of cfDNA testing detected all cases of aneuploidy (5 for trisomy 21, 2 for trisomy 18, and 1 for trisomy 13; negative predictive value, 100% [95% confidence interval, 99.8 to 100]). The positive predictive values for cfDNA testing versus standard screening were 45.5% versus 4.2% for trisomy 21 and 40.0% versus 8.3% for trisomy 18. CONCLUSIONS: In a general obstetrical population, prenatal testing with the use of cfDNA had significantly lower false positive rates and higher positive predictive values for detection of trisomies 21 and 18 than standard screening. (Funded by Illumina; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01663350.).

Skin wrinkles and rigidity in early postmenopausal women vary by race/ethnicity: baseline characteristics of the skin ancillary study of the KEEPS trial.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize skin wrinkles and rigidity in recently menopausal women. DESIGN: Baseline assessment of participants before randomization to study drug. SETTING: Multicenter trial, university medical centers. PATIENT(S): Recently menopausal participants enrolled in the Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS). INTERVENTION(S): Skin wrinkles were assessed at 11 locations on the face and neck using the Lemperle wrinkle scale. Skin rigidity was assessed at the forehead and cheek using a durometer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Skin wrinkles and rigidity were compared among race/ethnic groups. Skin wrinkles and rigidity were correlated with age, time since menopause, weight, and body mass index (BMI). RESULT(S): In early menopausal women, wrinkles, but not skin rigidity, vary significantly among races, where black women have the lowest wrinkle scores. In white women, chronological age was significantly correlated with worsening skin wrinkles, but not with rigidity. Skin rigidity correlated with increasing length of time since menopause, however, only in the white subgroup. In the combined study group, increasing weight was associated with less skin wrinkling. CONCLUSION(S): Skin characteristics of recently menopausal women are not well studied. Ethnic differences in skin characteristics are widely accepted, but poorly described. In recently menopausal women not using hormone therapy (HT), significant racial differences in skin wrinkling and rigidity exist. Continued study of the KEEPS population will provide evidence of the effects of HT on the skin aging process in early menopausal women.

Efficacy of luteinizing hormone activity in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization and treated only with low-dose recombinant choriogonadotropin alfa (Ovidrel) in the late follicular phase.

Ten good prognosis patients underwent IVF with a new ovarian stimulation protocol using only 8 microg of recombinant choriogonadotropin and a GnRH antagonist starting at a 14-mm lead follicle. Six of the 10 subjects delivered and all had supernumerary embryos for cryopreservation.

Clomiphene citrate induced ovulation and intrauterine insemination: effect of timing of human chorionic gonadotropin injection in relation to the spontaneous LH surge on pregnancy rates.

PURPOSE: To determine the optimal time for administration of human chorionic gonadotropin in clomiphene citrate induced intrauterine insemination cycles. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 171 consecutive cycles was performed. An increase in luteinizing hormone level >100% over the mean of the preceding two days was defined as luteinizing hormone surge. Human chorionic gonadotropin was given in preparation for intrauterine insemination based on the follicle size and estradiol level prior to surge in 85 cycles (Group A), with the spontaneous surge in 64 cycles (Group B) and not given in 22 cycles (Group C) due to high luteinizing hormone levels. RESULTS: The overall pregnancy rate per cycle was 18.1% (31/171), 15.2% (Group A), 20.3% (Group B) and 22.7% (Group C), (p > 0.50). CONCLUSION: Although there may be physiological reasons to propose that timing the human chorionic gonadotropin to the luteinizing hormone surge will improve the success rate, they were not demonstrated.