A contingent model for cell-free DNA testing to detect fetal aneuploidy after first trimester combined screening

[1]  D. Wright,et al.  Accuracy of first‐trimester combined test in screening for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 , 2017, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[2]  B. Skotko,et al.  Out‐of‐pocket medical costs and third‐party healthcare costs for children with Down syndrome , 2017, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[3]  C. Liao,et al.  Submicroscopic chromosomal abnormalities in fetuses with increased nuchal translucency and normal karyotype , 2017, The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians.

[4]  M. Knapen,et al.  Enlarged NT (≥3.5 mm) in the first trimester – not all chromosome aberrations can be detected by NIPT , 2016, Molecular Cytogenetics.

[5]  M. Watson,et al.  Noninvasive prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy, 2016 update: a position statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics , 2016, Genetics in Medicine.

[6]  P. Chambon,et al.  Pregnancy outcomes in prenatally diagnosed 47, XXX and 47, XYY syndromes: a 30‐year French, retrospective, multicentre study , 2016, Prenatal diagnosis.

[7]  Hui Jiang,et al.  Clinical experience from Thailand: noninvasive prenatal testing as screening tests for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 in 4736 pregnancies , 2016, Prenatal diagnosis.

[8]  K. Nicolaides,et al.  Clinical implementation of routine screening for fetal trisomies in the UK NHS: cell‐free DNA test contingent on results from first‐trimester combined test , 2016, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[9]  R. Schmidt,et al.  A cost‐effectiveness analysis of cell free DNA as a replacement for serum screening for Down syndrome , 2015, Prenatal diagnosis.

[10]  Y. Gao,et al.  Non‐invasive prenatal testing for trisomies 21, 18 and 13: clinical experience from 146 958 pregnancies , 2015, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[11]  F. D’Antonio,et al.  Procedure‐related risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: a systematic review and meta‐analysis , 2015, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[12]  M. Norton,et al.  Chromosome Abnormalities Detected by Current Prenatal Screening and Noninvasive Prenatal Testing , 2014, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[13]  Y. Liu,et al.  Detection of fetal sex chromosome aneuploidy by massively parallel sequencing of maternal plasma DNA: initial experience in a Chinese hospital , 2014, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[14]  I. Vogel,et al.  Potential diagnostic consequences of applying non‐invasive prenatal testing: population‐based study from a country with existing first‐trimester screening , 2014, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[15]  R. Rava,et al.  DNA sequencing versus standard prenatal aneuploidy screening. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[16]  G. Simoni,et al.  Fetoplacental mosaicism: potential implications for false-positive and false-negative noninvasive prenatal screening results , 2014, Genetics in Medicine.

[17]  K. Nicolaides,et al.  Replacing the Combined Test by Cell-Free DNA Testing in Screening for Trisomies 21, 18 and 13: Impact on the Diagnosis of Other Chromosomal Abnormalities , 2014, Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy.

[18]  D. Cram,et al.  Maternal mosaicism is a significant contributor to discordant sex chromosomal aneuploidies associated with noninvasive prenatal testing. , 2014, Clinical chemistry.

[19]  H. Cuckle,et al.  Maternal cfDNA screening for Down syndrome – a cost sensitivity analysis , 2013, Prenatal diagnosis.

[20]  M. Evans,et al.  Nearly a third of abnormalities found after first‐trimester screening are different than expected:10‐year experience from a single center , 2013, Prenatal diagnosis.

[21]  A. Caughey,et al.  Clinical utility and cost of non-invasive prenatal testing with cfDNA analysis in high-risk women based on a US population , 2013, The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians.

[22]  P. Boyd,et al.  Rare chromosome abnormalities, prevalence and prenatal diagnosis rates from population-based congenital anomaly registers in Europe , 2012, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[23]  Kypros H Nicolaides,et al.  Screening for fetal aneuploidies at 11 to 13 weeks , 2011, Prenatal diagnosis.

[24]  E. Muggli,et al.  Uptake of prenatal diagnostic testing and the effectiveness of prenatal screening for Down syndrome , 2010, Prenatal diagnosis.

[25]  Z. Alfirevic,et al.  Update on Procedure-Related Risks for Prenatal Diagnosis Techniques , 2009, Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy.

[26]  Z. Papp,et al.  Incidence of Chromosomal Abnormalities in the Presence of Fetal Subcutaneous Oedema, Such as Nuchal Oedema, Cystic Hygroma and Non-Immune Hydrops , 2009, Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy.

[27]  K. Kagan,et al.  Screening for trisomy 21 by maternal age, fetal nuchal translucency thickness, free beta‐human chorionic gonadotropin and pregnancy‐associated plasma protein‐A , 2008, Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

[28]  A. Goncé,et al.  Translucencia nucal y ductus venoso: valores de referencia en el primer trimestre de la gestación , 2006 .

[29]  K. Nicolaides,et al.  Evidence-based obstetric ethics and informed decision-making by pregnant women about invasive diagnosis after first-trimester assessment of risk for trisomy 21. , 2005, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[30]  H. Landy,et al.  The impact of first‐trimester screening on AMA patients' uptake of invasive testing , 2005, Prenatal diagnosis.

[31]  K. Nicolaides,et al.  Increased nuchal translucency with normal karyotype. , 2005, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[32]  K. Nicolaides.  Nuchal translucency and other first-trimester sonographic markers of chromosomal abnormalities. , 2004, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.