Cell-free DNA Screening Research Articles

Non-invasive cell-free DNA prenatal screening for trisomy 21 as part of primary screening strategy in twin pregnancy.

The performance of non-invasive prenatal screening using cell-free DNA testing of maternal blood in twin pregnancy is underevaluated, while serum marker-based strategies yield poor results. This study aimed to assess the performance of non-invasive prenatal screening for trisomy 21 in twin pregnancy as a first-tier test. Secondary objectives were to assess its failure rate and factors associated with failure. This retrospective cohort study included twin pregnancies in which non-invasive prenatal screening using cell-free DNA was performed as the primary screening strategy between May 2017 and October 2019. We used the NIPT VeriSeq® test for in-vitro diagnosis and set a fetal fraction cut-off of 4% for monochorionic pregnancies and 8% for dichorionic ones. Clinical data and pregnancy outcome were collected from physicians or midwives via a questionnaire or were retrieved directly on-site. We calculated the performance of non-invasive cell-free DNA screening for trisomy 21, analyzed its failure rate and assessed potentially associated factors. Among 1885 twin pregnancies with follow-up, there were six (0.32%) confirmed cases of trisomy 21. The sensitivity of non-invasive prenatal screening for trisomy 21 was 100% (95% CI, 54.1-100%) and the false-positive rate was 0.23% (95% CI, 0.06-0.59%). The primary failure rate was 4.6%, with 4.0% being due to insufficient fetal fraction. A successful result was obtained for 65.4% of women who underwent a new blood draw, reducing the overall failure rate to 2.8%. Maternal body mass index, gestational age at screening as well as chorionicity were significantly associated with the risk of failure. This study provides further evidence of the high performance, at an extremely low false-positive rate, of non-invasive prenatal screening in twins as part of a primary screening strategy for trisomy 21. © 2023 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Prenatal Genome-Wide Cell-Free DNA Screening: Three Years of Clinical Experience in a Hospital Prenatal Diagnostic Unit in Spain.

Genome-wide prenatal cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening can be used to screen for a wide range of fetal chromosomal anomalies in pregnant patients. In this study, we describe our clinical experience with a genome-wide cfDNA assay in screening for common trisomies, sex chromosomal aneuploidies (SCAs), rare autosomal aneuploidies (RAAs), and copy-number variations (CNVs) in about 6000 patients over a three-year period at our hospital's Prenatal Diagnostic Unit in Spain. Overall, 204 (3.3%) patients had a high-risk call, which included 76 trisomy 21, 21 trisomy 18, 7 trisomy 13, 29 SCAs, 31 RAAs, 31 CNVs, and 9 cases with multiple anomalies. The diagnostic outcomes were obtained for the high-risk cases when available, allowing for the calculation of positive predictive values (PPVs). Calculated PPVs were 95.9% for trisomy 21, 77.8% for trisomy 18, 66.7% for trisomy 13, 10.7% for RAAs, and 10.7% for CNVs. Pregnancy and birth outcomes were also collected for the majority of RAA and CNV cases. Adverse perinatal outcomes for some of these cases included preeclampsia, fetal growth restriction, preterm birth, reduced birth weight, and major congenital structural abnormalities. In conclusion, our study showed strong performance for genome-wide cfDNA screening in a large cohort of pregnancy patients in Spain.

Clinical outcomes of screen-positive genome-wide cfDNA cases for trisomy 20: results from the global expanded NIPT Consortium.

Trisomy 20 has been shown to be one of the most frequent rare autosomal trisomies in patients that undergo genome-wide noninvasive prenatal testing. Here, we describe the clinical outcomes of cases that screened positive for trisomy 20 following prenatal genome-wide cell-free (cf.) DNA screening. These cases are part of a larger cohort of previously published cases. Members of the Global Expanded NIPT Consortium were invited to submit details on their cases with a single rare autosomal aneuploidy following genome-wide cfDNA screening for retrospective analysis. Clinical details including patient demographics, test indications, diagnostic testing, and obstetric pregnancy outcomes were collected. Genome-wide cfDNA screening was conducted following site-specific laboratory procedures. Cases which screened positive for trisomy 20 (n = 10) were reviewed. Clinical outcome information was available for 90% (9/10) of our screen-positive trisomy 20 cases; the case without diagnostic testing ended in a fetal demise. Of the nine cases with outcome information, one was found to have a mosaic partial duplication (duplication at 20p13), rather than a full trisomy 20. Only one case in the study cohort had placental testing; therefore, confined placental mosaicism could not be ruled out in most cases. Adverse pregnancy outcomes were seen in half of the cases, which could suggest the presence of underlying confined placental mosaicism or mosaic/full fetal trisomy 20. Based on our limited series, the likelihood of true fetal aneuploidy is low but pregnancies may be at increased risk for adverse obstetric outcomes and may benefit from additional surveillance.

Parental questions about sex chromosome aneuploidies regarding sex, gender, and sexual orientation as reported by genetic counselors in a prenatal setting.

The introduction of cell-free DNA screening has resulted in increased prenatal identification of sex chromosome aneuploidies (SCAs). This study aimed to evaluate genetic counselor experiences disclosing SCAs positive prenatal screening or testing results and genetic counselor-reported parental questions regarding sex, gender, and sexual orientation. Forty-eight prenatal genetic counselors completed the survey. When asked to quantify their experiences, 97.9% of counselors reported disclosing a SCAs positive screen result within the previous year, and 81.3% disclosed a diagnostic result. Of those counselors, 53.8% reported always or often receiving parental questions about sex, 33% always or often about gender, and 25% always or often regarding sexual orientation. Counselors were asked to share examples of parental questions following a positive screen or diagnostic testing for SCAs. Parental questions were stratified by karyotype and content analysis revealed questions about the fetus' sex, anatomy, reproduction, being cisgender, gender expression, behavior, being transgender, and sexual orientation. The examples of parental questions provided by genetic counselors suggested some parents may have misconceptions about the intersection of SCAs with sex, gender, and sexual orientation following prenatal screening or diagnostic testing. The majority of counselors (83.3%) agreed to some extent that they desired further education on responding to parental questions about SCAs. Findings from this research suggest a need for genetic counseling strategies that accurately and respectfully discuss SCAs in the context of sex, gender, and sexual orientation with prenatal patients.

Trends in Reporting of Nuchal Translucency Measurements After the Clinical Introduction of Cell-Free DNA Screening.

Nuchal translucency (NT) measurement in conjunction with serum analytes has been used for first-trimester aneuploidy screening in the United States since 2005. We sought to analyze the trends in reporting of NT measurements to the Nuchal Translucency Quality Review program in all pregnancies beginning after the clinical introduction of cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening for fetal aneuploidy in 2011. Overall, reported NT measurements decreased 74.3% from 2012 to 2022. A similar decline was noted among individuals with pregnancies at increased risk for aneuploidy based on patient age and twin gestations. The decrease in reporting aligns temporally with the availability of cfDNA screening and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

Cell-Free DNA Screening for Trisomy 21 in Twin Pregnancy: A Large Multicenter Cohort Study

(Abstracted from Am J Obstet Gynecol 2023;229:435.e1–435.e7 Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening is an effective way to identify trisomy 21 in singleton pregnancies and has been shown to have both a high detection rate and a low false-positive rate. For twin pregnancies, however, there are challenges relating to fetal fraction and the ability to obtain and distinguish fetal DNA.

Ultrasonographic Fetal Nuchal Translucency Measurements and Cytogenetic Outcomes

Ultrasonographic measurement of fetal nuchal translucency is used in prenatal screening for trisomies 21 and 18 and other conditions. A cutoff of 3.5 mm or greater is commonly used to offer follow-up investigations, such as prenatal cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening or cytogenetic testing. Recent studies showed a possible association with chromosomal anomalies for levels less than 3.5 mm, but extant evidence has limitations. To evaluate the association between different nuchal translucency measurements and cytogenetic outcomes on a population level. This population-based retrospective cohort study used data from the Better Outcomes Registry & Network, the perinatal registry for Ontario, Canada. All singleton pregnancies with an estimated date of delivery from September 1, 2016, to March 31, 2021, were included. Data were analyzed from March 17 to August 14, 2023. Nuchal translucency measurements were identified through multiple-marker screening results. Chromosomal anomalies were identified through all Ontario laboratory-generated prenatal and postnatal cytogenetic tests. Cytogenetic testing results, supplemented with information from cfDNA screening and clinical examination at birth, were used to identify pregnancies without chromosomal anomalies. Multivariable modified Poisson regression with robust variance estimation and adjustment for gestational age was used to compare cytogenetic outcomes for pregnancies with varying nuchal translucency measurement categories and a reference group with nuchal translucency less than 2.0 mm. Of 414 268 pregnancies included in the study (mean [SD] maternal age at estimated delivery date, 31.5 [4.7] years), 359 807 (86.9%) had a nuchal translucency less than 2.0 mm; the prevalence of chromosomal anomalies in this group was 0.5%. An increased risk of chromosomal anomalies was associated with increasing nuchal translucency measurements, with an adjusted risk ratio (ARR) of 20.33 (95% CI, 17.58-23.52) and adjusted risk difference (ARD) of 9.94% (95% CI, 8.49%-11.39%) for pregnancies with measurements of 3.0 to less than 3.5 mm. The ARR was 4.97 (95% CI, 3.45-7.17) and the ARD was 1.40% (95% CI, 0.77%-2.04%) when restricted to chromosomal anomalies beyond the commonly screened aneuploidies (excluding trisomies 21, 18, and 13 and sex chromosome aneuploidies). In this cohort study of 414 268 singleton pregnancies, those with nuchal translucency measurements less than 2.0 mm were at the lowest risk of chromosomal anomalies. Risk increased with increasing measurements, including measurements less than 3.5 mm and anomalies not routinely screened by many prenatal genetic screening programs.

A capture-based method of prenatal cell-free DNA screening for autosomal recessive non-syndromic hearing loss.

This study aimed to develop and validate a prenatal cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening method that uses capture-based enrichment to genotype fetal autosomal recessive disorders. This method was applied in pregnancies at high risk of autosomal recessive non-syndromic hearing loss (ARNSHL) to assess its accuracy and effectiveness. This assay measured the allele counts in both white blood cell DNA and cfDNA from the blood samples of pregnant women using a capture-based next-generation sequencing method. It then applied a binomial model to infer the fetal genotypes with the maximum likelihood. Ninety-four pregnant couples that were carriers of variants of ARNSHL in GJB2 or SLC26A4 were enrolled. The fetal genotypes deduced using this screening method were compared with the results of genetic diagnosis using amniocentesis. Of the 94 couples, 65 carried more than one variant, resulting in 170 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) loci to be inferred in the fetuses. Of the 170 fetal SNP genotypes, 150 (88.2%) had high confidence calls and 139 (92.7%) of these matched the genotypes obtained by amniocentesis result. Out of the remaining 20 (11.8%) cases with low-confidence calls, only 14 (70.0%) were concordant with genetic diagnosis using amniocentesis. The concordance rate was 100% for sites where the maternal genotype was wild-type homozygous. The discordance was site-biased, with each locus showing a consistent direction of discordance. Genetic diagnosis identified a total of 19 wild-type homozygotes, 46 heterozygotes, 19 compound heterozygotes, and 10 pathogenic homozygotes. This screening method correctly genotyped 81.9% (77/94) of fetuses and demonstrated a sensitivity of 89.7% and a specificity of 89.2% for correctly identifying ARNSHL. This capture-based method of prenatal screening by cfDNA demonstrated strong potential for fetal genotyping of autosomal recessive disorders.

The role of cell-free DNA biomarkers and patient data in the early prediction of preeclampsia: an artificial intelligence model

ObjectiveAccurate 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). MethodsThis 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. ResultsOf 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). ConclusionRoutinely 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.

Obstetrical, Perinatal, and Genetic Outcomes Associated With Nonreportable Prenatal Cell-Free DNA Screening Results

ABSTRACT Although cell-free DNA (cfDNA) prenatal screening is widely used and has high sensitivity and specificity, there are circumstances in which the screening does not provide an interpretable result. Although this is relatively uncommon, it happens enough that clinical implications and potential reasons for follow-up should be studied and assessed. This study was designed to evaluate outcomes for pregnancies with nonreportable results on cfDNA screening tests. This study was a secondary analysis of the data from a multicenter prospective observational study of cfDNA screening for aneuploidy and 22q11.2 deletion syndrome. All patients were tested for trisomies 13, 18, and 21, as well as the 22q11.2 deletion syndrome, and all patients had confirmatory testing on the newborns in addition to collecting obstetric and perinatal outcomes. Inclusion criteria were women older than 18 years and at greater than 9 weeks of gestation with a singleton pregnancy. Exclusion criteria were having received cfDNA screening results before enrollment, organ transplant, ovum donation, vanishing twin, or being unwilling to provide a newborn sample. The primary outcome was the rate of adverse obstetrical and perinatal outcomes, including aneuploidy; preterm birth at less than 28, 34, or 37 weeks' gestation; preeclampsia; small for gestational age birth; and a composite outcome that included preterm birth before 37 weeks, preeclampsia, stillbirth at greater than 20 weeks, and small for gestational age. Final analyses included 17,851 individuals who had cfDNA screening, confirmatory genetic testing on the newborn, and obstetrical and perinatal outcomes recorded. Nonreportable results were found in 602 individuals (3.4%) after the first draw, with 32.2% of these due to low fetal fraction. Another third of the cohort had patterns where the risk of aneuploidy was uninterpretable but with an adequate fetal fraction, and in the final third, the fetal fraction could not be measured. Of the original 602 cases of nonreportable findings, 427 had a second draw, with 112 of these (26.2%) again having nonreportable results. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics of age and parity for those with successful versus nonreportable test results; gestational age was significantly higher in individuals with nonreportable results (14.4 vs 13.4 weeks, P &lt; 0.001), as was body mass index (26.2 vs 31.3), and the rate of chronic hypertension (4.0% vs 9.7%). In this cohort, there were 133 genetically confirmed trisomies, with 100 fetuses with trisomy 21, 18 individuals with trisomy 18, and 15 individuals with trisomy 13. Overall, the rate of aneuploidy was 1.7% in individuals with nonreportable results, versus 0.7% in those with reported results (P = 0.013; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1–4.0). Rates of preterm birth were also higher in those with nonreportable test results, with delivery at less than 34 weeks at 1.5% in those with a test result, 4.6% in those with one nonreportable test result and 6.9% in those with a second nonreportable test result (aOR, 2.2 and 2.7; 95% CI, 1.4–3.4 and 1.2–6.0, respectively). Preeclampsia showed a similar trend, with rates climbing from 3.9% in those with a reported result to 9.4% with 1 nonreportable result and 16.8% with 2 (aOR, 1.4 and 2.0; 95% CI, 1.0–1.9 and 1.1–3.7, respectively). Chances of live birth were significantly reduced in pregnancies with a nonreportable results (aOR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.13–0.30), with the chances decreasing more after a second nonreportable test result (aOR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.06–0.23). The study found that nonreportable cfDNA screening results are associated with an increased risk for aneuploidy, preterm birth, and preeclampsia, with a gradient of increased risk with a second failed test. This adds to literature with conflicting findings surrounding obstetrical complications in those with altered cfDNA levels and with most studies largely focused on characteristics that may be predictive of a nonreportable result rather than outcomes associated with nonreportable results. These results can inform clinicians who have patients with nonreportable test results in a way that may help them provide better care; future research should focus on more fully understanding the adverse outcomes associated with nonreportable tests to maximize this ability for clinicians in the future. Further research should also focus on specific populations or diagnoses to understand if there are fundamental differences in different groups of individuals.

Cell-Free DNA Screening for Single-Gene Disorders.

In pregnancy, cell-free DNA (cfDNA) represents short fragments of placental DNA released into the maternal blood stream through natural cell death. Noninvasive prenatal screening with cfDNA is commonly used in pregnancy to screen for common aneuploidies. This technology continues to evolve, and laboratories now offer cfDNA screening for single-gene disorders. This article aims to review cfDNA screening for single-gene disorders including the technology, current syndromes for which screening may be offered, limitations, and current recommendations. Original research articles, review articles, laboratory white papers, and society guidelines were reviewed. Cell-free DNA screening for single-gene disorders is not currently recommended by medical societies. There may be a role in specific circumstances and only after comprehensive pretest counseling. It can be considered in the setting of some fetal ultrasound anomalies, and usually only after diagnostic testing is offered and declined. Given the limitations of using cfDNA screening for single-gene disorders, caution is recommended when considering these tests. It should only be offered with involvement of a reproductive genetic counselor, medical geneticist, or maternal fetal medicine specialist to ensure comprehensive counseling and appropriate utilization.

Patient experiences with prenatal cell-free DNA screening in a safety net setting.

Thirty-five states, including Florida, now cover cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening of fetuses for all pregnant patients enrolled in state public insurance programs. We interviewed Black and Hispanic obstetric patients at a safety net clinic in Florida shortly after the state rolled out cfDNA as a first-tier screening method for publicly insured patients. Black and Hispanic patients receiving prenatal care from a prenatal or maternal fetal medicine clinic at a federally qualified health center in Jacksonville, FL were invited to participate in a qualitative interview in English or Spanish to explore experiences and perceptions of prenatal cfDNA screening. Participants were recruited following their first prenatal visit when cfDNA is typically introduced. Interview transcripts were qualitatively analyzed for iterative themes based on principles of grounded theory. One hundred Black and Hispanic patients (n=51 non-Hispanic Black, n=43 Hispanic, n=3 Hispanic Black, n=3 Not Reported/Other) completed an interview. Participants described minimal opportunity for pre-screening counseling and limited health literacy about cfDNA or its uses. Some believed that cfDNA could positively impact pregnancy health. Many were unsure if they had received cfDNA even though they were aware of the information provided by it. Most participants expressed an interest in cfDNA as a means for early detection of fetal sex and as an additional indication of general fetal health. Patient experiences indicate limited informed consent and decision-making for cfDNA, discordant with professional guidelines on pre-screen counseling. Our findings suggest that there should be additional investment in implementing cfDNA in safety net settings to ensure that patients and providers receive the support necessary for effective patient counseling and follow-on care for the ethical implementation of cfDNA.

Cytogenetic Outcomes Following a Failed Cell-Free DNA Screen: A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study of 35,146 Singleton Pregnancies

(Abstracted from Am J Obstet Gynecol 2023;229:168.e1–e8) Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening is a form of prenatal genetic screening for aneuploidies. This method boasts lower false-positive rates than multiple-marker screening methods and is now commonly recommended.

Cell-free DNA screening in twin pregnancies.

Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening for fetal aneuploidies is clinically available and exhibits better performance than conventional serum screening tests. However, data on the clinical performance of cfDNA screening in twin pregnancies are limited. In this review, we summarized the clinical performance and evaluated the feasibility of cfDNA screening in twin pregnancies based on recent studies and recommendations. The performance of cfDNA screening for trisomy 21 in twin pregnancies is similar to that in singleton pregnancies. Specifically, cfDNA screening has a higher detection rate and lower false-positive rate compared with conventional serum screening. Consequently, recent international guidelines from several academic communities have recommended that cfDNA screening for aneuploidy in twin pregnancies could be considered. Moreover, twin pregnancies can present with specific conditions, such as different zygosities and vanishing twins; therefore, individualized counseling and management are required. Further clinical studies with more twin pregnancies are required for a more accurate analysis.

Transgender and gender diverse individuals' perspectives on discussions of fetal sex chromosomes in obstetrics care.

In the past decade, prenatal cell-free DNA screening (cfDNA) has become ubiquitous as a screening tool for fetal aneuploidy and sex chromosomes. Healthcare provider (HCP) discussions and public perceptions of sex and gender uniquely impact transgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals, and existing cfDNA guidelines lack recommendations regarding how to discuss sex and gender prenatally. The aim of this exploratory qualitative study was to examine TGD individuals' opinions regarding fetal sex chromosome disclosure sessions. Twelve semi-structured virtual interviews were conducted with TGD individuals regarding their perspectives on the discussion of fetal sex chromosomes by HCPs within the prenatal setting. Interviews were coded and analyzed using a reflexive thematic approach, generating four major themes: (1) Current practices in prenatal care exclude gender diverse people; (2) HCPs' responsibility to de-gender discussions of sex chromosomes in prenatal care; (3) HCPs' responsibility to acknowledge gender diversity; and (4) HCPs' influence on societal perceptions of sex and gender. More guidance is needed from professional societies regarding best practices for HCP discussions of sex chromosomes, sex, and gender. Participants recommended HCPseducate patients about sex chromosomes and their relevance to health while avoiding the conflation of sex and gender terms. Additionally, there is an acute need for trans-inclusive prenatal healthcare. Ultimately, HCPs' and organizations are in a prime position to deconstruct rigid gender binaries and promote societal inclusion of TGD people.

Prenatal Diagnosis for Congenital Malformations and Genetic Disorders

Advancements in molecular genetic testing methods have significantly enhanced our ability to detect genetic abnormalities during pregnancy. This review delves into the landscape of prenatal diagnostic tests for congenital malformations and genetic disorders, considering the evolving field of molecular genetics. Exhaustive searches on PubMed, Web of Science, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were conducted, employing the Rayyan QRCI throughout the meticulous process.Prenatal genetic testing is instrumental for various reasons, and its applications extend to the evaluation of fetal genital abnormalities. State-of-the-art tests, such as noninvasive prenatal testing, genome sequencing, and cell-free DNA screening, have emerged as key players in prenatal diagnostics. These techniques offer a comprehensive approach to identifying congenital abnormalities during the prenatal period. By utilizing noninvasive prenatal testing, genome sequencing, and cell-free DNA screening, healthcare professionals can effectively screen for malformations before birth.This proactive approach not only enhances early detection but also significantly reduces the unnecessary financial and psychological burdens on families. The ability to diagnose congenital abnormalities during pregnancy allows for informed decision-making and better preparation for potential challenges that may arise after birth. As molecular genetic testing continues to advance and gain prominence in clinical settings, the landscape of prenatal diagnostics is poised for further improvement and refinement, promising a brighter and more informed future for expectant families.

523 Fetal and Neonatal Outcomes after “Atypical Finding for Sex Chromosomes” on Cell-Free Fetal DNA Screening

523 Fetal and Neonatal Outcomes after “Atypical Finding for Sex Chromosomes” on Cell-Free Fetal DNA Screening

511 Comparing the yield of meaningful findings in targeted versus genome-wide cell free DNA screening

511 Comparing the yield of meaningful findings in targeted versus genome-wide cell free DNA screening

109 Prenatal diagnostic testing trends in the era of cell-free DNA screening

109 Prenatal diagnostic testing trends in the era of cell-free DNA screening

194 Fetal fraction amplification dramatically increases PPV for 22q11.2 deletion syndrome in prenatal cell-free DNA screening

194 Fetal fraction amplification dramatically increases PPV for 22q11.2 deletion syndrome in prenatal cell-free DNA screening