A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Is it time to sound an alarm about false-positive cell-free DNA testing for fetal aneuploidy? | LitMetric

Is it time to sound an alarm about false-positive cell-free DNA testing for fetal aneuploidy?

Am J Obstet Gynecol

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA; Prenatal Cytogenetic Laboratory, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA.

Published: November 2013

Testing cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in maternal blood samples has been shown to have very high sensitivity for the detection of fetal aneuploidy with very low false-positive results in high-risk patients who undergo invasive prenatal diagnosis. Recent observation in clinical practice of several cases of positive cfDNA tests for trisomy 18 and trisomy 13, which were not confirmed by cytogenetic testing of the pregnancy, may reflect a limitation of the positive predictive value of this quantitative testing, particularly when it is used to detect rare aneuploidies. Analysis of a larger number of false-positive cases is needed to evaluate whether these observations reflect the positive predictive value that should be expected. Infrequently, mechanisms (such as low percentage mosaicism or confined placental mosaicism) might also lead to positive cfDNA testing that is not concordant with standard prenatal cytogenetic diagnosis. The need to explore these and other possible causes of false-positive cfDNA testing is exemplified by 2 of these cases. Additional evaluation of cfDNA testing in clinical practice and a mechanism for the systematic reporting of false-positive and false-negative cases will be important before this test is offered widely to the general population of low-risk obstetric patients. In the meantime, incorporating information about the positive predictive value in pretest counseling and in clinical laboratory reports is recommended. These experiences reinforce the importance of offering invasive testing to confirm cfDNA results before parental decision-making.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2013.03.027DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

positive predictive
12
cfdna testing
12
cell-free dna
8
testing
8
clinical practice
8
positive cfdna
8
cfdna
6
false-positive
5
positive
5
time sound
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!