Advertisement

Current Status of Noninvasive Prenatal Testing and Counselling Considerations: An Indian Perspective

  • James D. MassaEmail author
  • Veronica Arora
  • Meenakshi Lallar
  • Sunita Bijarnia
  • Ratna Dua Puri
  • Ishwar C. VermaEmail author
Review Article
  • 11 Downloads

Abstract

Uptake of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) is rapidly expanding around the world. Here, we provide an overview of the current global state of NIPT, describe the expansion of the test menu, highlight alternative prenatal test service delivery, and discuss NIPT counseling considerations. We also provide a perspective on utilisation of NIPT in India, which has unique challenges for implementing NIPT given its large population, vast territory, and diverse ethnic groups. The barriers to implementation of NIPT in India are also discussed. Current recommendations regarding use of NIPT made by professional societies vary in different regions and such recommendations for NIPT in India will be helpful to provide general guidance to the health care providers, but will likely require modifications for implementation in India.

Keywords

Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) India Counselling Prenatal Diagnosis Techniques Act Limitations Guidelines 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Kristine Jinnett, Sucheta Bhatt, Christin Coffeen, and Kirsten Curnow (Illumina, Inc.) for their assistance in the preparation of the manuscript.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

JM is an employee of Illumina, Inc. VA, ML, SB, RDP and ICV are employees of Institute of Genetics and Genomics, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi.

References

  1. 1.
    Lo YM, Corbetta N, Chamberlain PF, Rai V, Sargent IL, Redman CW, et al. Presence of fetal DNA in maternal plasma and serum. Lancet. 1997;350(9076):485–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Agarwal A, Sayres LC, Cho MK, Cook-Deegan R, Chandrasekharan S. Commercial landscape of noninvasive prenatal testing in the United States. Prenat Diagn. 2013;33(6):521–31.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chandrasekharan S, Minear MA, Hung A, Allyse M. Noninvasive prenatal testing goes global. Sci Transl Med. 2014;6(231):231fs15.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Allyse M, Minear MA, Berson E, Sridhar S, Rote M, Hung A, et al. Non-invasive prenatal testing: a review of international implementation and challenges. Int J Womens Health. 2015;7:113–26.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Verma IC, Lall M, Dua Puri R. Down syndrome in India–diagnosis, screening, and prenatal diagnosis. Clin Lab Med. 2012;32(2):231–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bianchi DW, Rava RP, Sehnert AJ. DNA sequencing versus standard prenatal aneuploidy screening. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(6):578.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Van Opstal D, van Maarle MC, Lichtenbelt K, Weiss MM, Schuring-Blom H, Bhola SL, et al. Origin and clinical relevance of chromosomal aberrations other than the common trisomies detected by genome-wide NIPS: results of the TRIDENT study. Genet Med. 2018;20(5):480–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pertile MD, Halks-Miller M, Flowers N, Barbacioru C, Kinnings SL, Vavrek D, et al. Rare autosomal trisomies revealed by maternal plasma DNA sequencing suggest increased risk of feto-placental disease. Sci Transl Med. 2017;9(405):1240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Akolekar R, Beta J, Picciarelli G, Ogilvie C, D’Antonio F. Procedure-related risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;45(1):16–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Norton ME, Jacobsson B, Swamy GK, Laurent LC, Ranzini AC, Brar H, et al. Cell-free DNA analysis for noninvasive examination of trisomy. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(17):1589–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gil MM, Accurti V, Santacruz B, Plana MN, Nicolaides KH. Analysis of cell-free DNA in maternal blood in screening for aneuploidies: updated meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;50(3):302–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine. Practice Bulletin No. 163 Summary: Screening for Fetal Aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;127(5):979–81.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hui L, Barclay J, Poulton A, Hutchinson B, Halliday JL. Prenatal diagnosis and socioeconomic status in the non-invasive prenatal testing era: a population-based study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;58(4):404–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Human Genetics Society of Australasia/Royal Australian New Zealand College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Prenatal screening and diagnosis of chromosomal and genetics conditions in the fetus in pregnancy, 2016 [23 Aug 2019]. https://www.ranzcog.edu.au/RANZCOG_SITE/media/RANZCOG-MEDIA/Women%27s%20Health/Statement%20and%20guidelines/Clinical-Obstetrics/Prenatal-screening_1.pdf?ext=.pdf.
  15. 15.
    van Schendel RV, van El CG, Pajkrt E, Henneman L, Cornel MC. Implementing non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy in a national healthcare system: global challenges and national solutions. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17(1):670.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chitty LS, Wright D, Hill M, Verhoef TI, Daley R, Lewis C, et al. Uptake, outcomes, and costs of implementing non-invasive prenatal testing for Down’s syndrome into NHS maternity care: prospective cohort study in eight diverse maternity units. BMJ. 2016;354:i3426.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Engels MA, Heijboer AC, Blankenstein MA, van Vugt JM. Performance of first-trimester combined test for Down syndrome in different maternal age groups: reason for adjustments in screening policy? Prenat Diagn. 2011;31(13):1241–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Norton ME, Brar H, Weiss J, Karimi A, Laurent LC, Caughey AB, et al. Non-Invasive Chromosomal Evaluation (NICE) Study: results of a multicenter prospective cohort study for detection of fetal trisomy 21 and trisomy 18. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207(2):137.e1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mazloom AR, Dzakula Z, Oeth P, Wang H, Jensen T, Tynan J, et al. Noninvasive prenatal detection of sex chromosomal aneuploidies by sequencing circulating cell-free DNA from maternal plasma. Prenat Diagn. 2013;33(6):591–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Samango-Sprouse C, Banjevic M, Ryan A, Sigurjonsson S, Zimmermann B, Hill M, et al. SNP-based non-invasive prenatal testing detects sex chromosome aneuploidies with high accuracy. Prenat Diagn. 2013;33(7):643–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wellesley D, Dolk H, Boyd PA, Greenlees R, Haeusler M, Nelen V, et al. Rare chromosome abnormalities, prevalence and prenatal diagnosis rates from population-based congenital anomaly registers in Europe. Eur J Hum Genet. 2012;20(5):521–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ehrich M, Tynan J, Mazloom A, Almasri E, McCullough R, Boomer T, et al. Genome-wide cfDNA screening: clinical laboratory experience with the first 10,000 cases. Genet Med. 2017;19(12):1332–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lau TK, Cheung SW, Lo PS, Pursley AN, Chan MK, Jiang F, et al. Non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal chromosomal abnormalities by low-coverage whole-genome sequencing of maternal plasma DNA: review of 1982 consecutive cases in a single center. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2014;43(3):254–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bayindir B, Dehaspe L, Brison N, Brady P, Ardui S, Kammoun M, et al. Noninvasive prenatal testing using a novel analysis pipeline to screen for all autosomal fetal aneuploidies improves pregnancy management. Eur J Hum Genet. 2015;23(10):1286–93.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fiorentino F, Bono S, Pizzuti F, Duca S, Polverari A, Faieta M, et al. The clinical utility of genome-wide non invasive prenatal screening. Prenat Diagn. 2017;37(6):593–601.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Scott F, Bonifacio M, Sandow R, Ellis K, Smet ME, McLennan A. Rare autosomal trisomies: Important and not so rare. Prenat Diagn. 2018;38(10):765–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Huang X, Zheng J, Chen M, Zhao Y, Zhang C, Liu L, et al. Noninvasive prenatal testing of trisomies 21 and 18 by massively parallel sequencing of maternal plasma DNA in twin pregnancies. Prenat Diagn. 2014;34(4):335–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fosler L, Winters P, Jones KW, Curnow KJ, Sehnert AJ, Bhatt S, et al. Aneuploidy screening by non-invasive prenatal testing in twin pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;49(4):470–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gil MM, Galeva S, Jani J, Konstantinidou L, Akolekar R, Plana MN, et al. Screening for trisomies by cfDNA testing of maternal blood in twin pregnancy: update of The Fetal Medicine Foundation results and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2019;53(6):734–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Liang D, Lin Y, Qiao F, Li H, Wang Y, Zhang J, et al. Perinatal outcomes following cell-free DNA screening in > 32 000 women: Clinical follow-up data from a single tertiary center. Prenat Diagn. 2018;38(10):755–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Liang D, Cram DS, Tan H, Linpeng S, Liu Y, Sun H, et al. Clinical utility of noninvasive prenatal screening for expanded chromosome disease syndromes. Genet Med. 2019.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-019-0467-4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Helgeson J, Wardrop J, Boomer T, Almasri E, Paxton WB, Saldivar JS, et al. Clinical outcome of subchromosomal events detected by whole-genome noninvasive prenatal testing. Prenat Diagn. 2015;35(10):999–1004.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ravi H, McNeill G, Goel S, Meltzer SD, Hunkapiller N, Ryan A, et al. Validation of a SNP-based non-invasive prenatal test to detect the fetal 22q11.2 deletion in maternal plasma samples. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(2):0193476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schmid M, Wang E, Bogard PE, Bevilacqua E, Hacker C, Wang S, et al. Prenatal screening for 22q11.2 deletion using a targeted microarray-based cell-free DNA test. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2017;44:299–304.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000484317.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dash P, Puri RD, Kotecha U, Bijarnia S, Lall M, Verma IC. Using noninvasive prenatal testing for aneuploidies in a developing country: lessons learnt. J Fetal Med. 2014;1(3):131–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Verma IC, Puri R, Venkataswamy E, Tayal T, Nampoorthiri S, Andrew C, et al. Single nucleotide polymorphism-based noninvasive prenatal testing: experience in India. J Obstet Gynecol India. 2018;68:462–70.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-017-1061-9:1-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Dar P, Curnow KJ, Gross SJ, Hall MP, Stosic M, Demko Z, et al. Clinical experience and follow-up with large scale single-nucleotide polymorphism-based non-invasive prenatal aneuploidy testing. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211(5):527.e1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ashoor G, Syngelaki A, Wagner M, Birdir C, Nicolaides KH. Chromosome-selective sequencing of maternal plasma cell-free DNA for first-trimester detection of trisomy 21 and trisomy 18. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(4):322.e1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Verma IC. Noninvasive prenatal testing: the Indian perspective. J. Fetal Med. 2014;1(3):113–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Verma IC, Dua-Puri R, Bijarnia-Mahay S. ACMG 2016 update on noninvasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidy: implications for India. J. Fetal Med. 2017;4(1):1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    The Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation And Prevention of Misuse) ACT, 1994 (Act No. 57 of 1994). http://chdslsa.gov.in/right_menu/act/pdf/PNDT.pdf.
  42. 42.
    The Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and prevention of Misuse) Amendment Act, 2002 (Act No. 14 of 2003). Ministry of Health, Government of India.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    The Pre-conception and Prenatal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act 1994, with Amendments Rules (2006). Universal Law Publishing. Lexis Nexis. Gurgaon, Haryana. India.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Bhaktwani A. The PC-PNDT act in a nutshell. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2012;22(2):133–4.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Dhar M, Payal YS, Krishna V. The Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques Act and its implication on advancement of ultrasound in anaesthesiology; time to change mindsets rather than laws. Indian J Anaesth. 2018;62(12):930–3.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Onkar P, Mitra K, Dhok A. Relief from high court against restriction imposed by appropriate authority under PC-PNDT act on number of ultrasound centers visited by a Sonologist. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2012;22(2):148.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Phadke SR, Puri RD, Ranganath P. Prenatal screening for genetic disorders: suggested guidelines for the Indian Scenario. Indian J Med Res. 2017;146(6):689–99.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gregg AR, Skotko BG, Benkendorf JL, Monaghan KG, Bajaj K, Best RG, et al. Noninvasive prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy, 2016 update: a position statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Genet Med. 2016;18(10):1056–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Benn P, Borrell A, Chiu RW, Cuckle H, Dugoff L, Faas B, et al. Position statement from the Chromosome Abnormality Screening Committee on behalf of the Board of the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis. Prenat Diagn. 2015;35(8):725–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Salomon LJ, Alfirevic Z, Audibert F, Kagan KO, Paladini D, Yeo G, et al. ISUOG updated consensus statement on the impact of cfDNA aneuploidy testing on screening policies and prenatal ultrasound practice. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;49(6):815–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    van Schendel RV, Page-Christiaens GC, Beulen L, Bilardo CM, de Boer MA, Coumans AB, et al. Trial by Dutch laboratories for evaluation of non-invasive prenatal testing. Part II-women’s perspectives. Prenat Diagn. 2016;36(12):1091–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Abrams DJ, Geier MR. A comparison of patient satisfaction with telehealth and on-site consultations: a pilot study for prenatal genetic counseling. J Genet Couns. 2006;15(3):199–205.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Cloutier M, Gallagher L, Goldsmith C, Akiki S, Barrowman N, Morrison S. Group genetic counseling: an alternate service delivery model in a high risk prenatal screening population. Prenat Diagn. 2017;37(11):1112–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Cuckle H. cfDNA screening performance: accounting for and reducing test failures. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;49(6):689–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Yaron Y. The implications of non-invasive prenatal testing failures: a review of an under-discussed phenomenon. Prenat Diagn. 2016;36(5):391–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Rava RP, Srinivasan A, Sehnert AJ, Bianchi DW. Circulating fetal cell-free DNA fractions differ in autosomal aneuploidies and monosomy X. Clin Chem. 2014;60(1):243–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Hartwig TS, Ambye L, Sorensen S, Jorgensen FS. Discordant non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT)—a systematic review. Prenat Diagn. 2017;37(6):527–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Kuppermann M, Pena S, Bishop JT, Nakagawa S, Gregorich SE, Sit A, et al. Effect of enhanced information, values clarification, and removal of financial barriers on use of prenatal genetic testing: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2014;312(12):1210–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Beulen L, van den Berg M, Faas BH, Feenstra I, Hageman M, van Vugt JM, et al. The effect of a decision aid on informed decision-making in the era of non-invasive prenatal testing: a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Hum Genet. 2016;24(10):1409–16.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Hilgart JS, Hayward JA, Coles B, Iredale R. Telegenetics: a systematic review of telemedicine in genetics services. Genet Med. 2012;14(9):765–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Kaiser AS, Ferris LE, Pastuszak AL, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Johnson JA, Conacher S, et al. The effects of prenatal group genetic counselling on knowledge, anxiety and decisional conflict: issues for nuchal translucency screening. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2002;22(3):246–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Hunter AG, Cappelli M, Humphreys L, Allanson JE, Chiu TT, Peeters C, et al. A randomized trial comparing alternative approaches to prenatal diagnosis counseling in advanced maternal age patients. Clin Genet. 2005;67(4):303–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Fetal Medicine 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • James D. Massa
    • 1
    Email author
  • Veronica Arora
    • 2
  • Meenakshi Lallar
    • 2
  • Sunita Bijarnia
    • 2
  • Ratna Dua Puri
    • 2
  • Ishwar C. Verma
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Medical AffairsIllumina, Inc.San DiegoUSA
  2. 2.Institute of Medical Genetics and GenomicsSir Ganga Ram HospitalNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations