Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
JCO Oncol Pract ; 20(8): 1027-1034, 2024 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38608208

RESUMEN

In this article, we defined comprehensive recommendations for the clinical follow-up of pregnant women with a malignancy-suspicious NIPT result, on the basis of the vast experience with population-based NIPT screening programs in two European countries complemented with published large data sets. These recommendations provide a tool for classifying NIPT results as malignancy-suspicious, and guide health care professionals in structured clinical decision making for the diagnostic process of pregnant women who receive such a malignancy-suspicious NIPT result.


Asunto(s)
Pruebas Prenatales no Invasivas , Humanos , Femenino , Embarazo , Pruebas Prenatales no Invasivas/métodos , Pruebas Prenatales no Invasivas/normas , Complicaciones Neoplásicas del Embarazo/terapia , Complicaciones Neoplásicas del Embarazo/diagnóstico , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto/normas , Neoplasias de la Mama/terapia , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico
2.
Lancet Reg Health Eur ; 45: 101024, 2024 Oct.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39220433

RESUMEN

Background: Incidentally, the non-invasive prenatal test (NIPT) shows chromosomal aberrations suspicious of a maternal malignancy, especially after genome-wide testing. The aim of this study is to determine how many cases of cancer in pregnancy are diagnosed or missed with NIPT and whether in retrospect subtle changes in NIPT results could have detected cancer. Methods: We identified Dutch patients diagnosed in 2017-2021 with pregnancy-associated cancer from the International Network on Cancer, Infertility and Pregnancy (INCIP) Registry, who underwent NIPT in the Dutch NIPT implementation study (TRIDENT-2). We retrospectively assessed how many of these women showed a malignancy suspicious-NIPT, their tumour types and -stages, and the time interval between NIPT and cancer diagnosis. Findings: Of 143 women with pregnancy-associated cancer, we included 65 patients that underwent an NIPT. Fifty-four women had a solid tumour and 11 a haematological malignancy. Sixteen (24.6%) NIPTs were malignancy suspicious (15 genome-wide, one targeted). All 10 haematological cancer patients with genome-wide NIPT had a malignancy suspicious-NIPT, irrespective of the disease stage. Only five patients with a solid tumour had a genome-wide malignancy suspicious-NIPT (4/5 advanced cancer stage III or IV). The mean time between date of NIPT and cancer diagnosis was significantly shorter after a malignancy suspicious-NIPT compared to a non-suspicious-NIPT, respectively 49.9 days (± SD 31.8) and 100.7 days (± SD 74.9), p = 0.001. Interpretation: All genome-wide NIPT in women with pregnancy-associated haematological malignancies were malignancy suspicious. Women with a solid tumour showed a malignancy suspicious-NIPT in only a minority of cases, mainly the advanced stages. Funding: None.

3.
J Clin Oncol ; 40(22): 2426-2435, 2022 08 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35394817

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for fetal aneuploidy screening using cell-free DNA derived from maternal plasma can incidentally raise suspicion for cancer. Diagnostic routing after malignancy suspicious-NIPT faces many challenges. Here, we detail malignancy suspicious-NIPT cases, and describe the clinical characteristics, chromosomal aberrations, and diagnostic routing of the patients with a confirmed malignancy. Clinical lessons can be learned from our experience. METHODS: Patients with NIPT results indicative of a malignancy referred for tumor screening between April 2017 and April 2020 were retrospectively included from a Dutch nationwide NIPT implementation study, TRIDENT-2. NIPT profiles from patients with confirmed malignancies were reviewed, and the pattern of chromosomal aberrations related to tumor type was analyzed. We evaluated the diagnostic contribution of clinical and genetic examinations. RESULTS: Malignancy suspicious-NIPT results were reported in 0.03% after genome-wide NIPT, and malignancies confirmed in 16 patients (16/48, 33.3%). Multiple chromosomal aberrations were seen in 23 of 48 patients with genome-wide NIPT, and a malignancy was confirmed in 16 patients (16/23, 69.6%). After targeted NIPT, 0.005% malignancy suspicious-NIPT results were reported, in 2/3 patients a malignancy was confirmed. Different tumor types and stages were diagnosed, predominantly hematologic malignancies (12/18). NIPT data showed recurrent gains and losses in primary mediastinal B-cell lymphomas and classic Hodgkin lymphomas. Magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography were most informative in diagnosing the malignancy. CONCLUSION: In 231,896 pregnant women, a low percentage (0.02%) of NIPT results were assessed as indicative of a maternal malignancy. However, when multiple chromosomal aberrations were found, the risk of a confirmed malignancy was considerably high. Referral for extensive oncologic examination is recommended, and may be guided by tumor-specific hallmarks in the NIPT profile.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias , Diagnóstico Prenatal , Aneuploidia , Aberraciones Cromosómicas , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Embarazo , Diagnóstico Prenatal/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA