Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Jan;19(1):3-9.
doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2010.138. Epub 2010 Sep 15.

Rapid testing versus karyotyping in Down's syndrome screening: cost-effectiveness and detection of clinically significant chromosome abnormalities

Affiliations

Rapid testing versus karyotyping in Down's syndrome screening: cost-effectiveness and detection of clinically significant chromosome abnormalities

Jean Gekas et al. Eur J Hum Genet. 2011 Jan.

Abstract

In all, 80% of antenatal karyotypes are generated by Down's syndrome screening programmes (DSSP). After a positive screening, women are offered prenatal foetus karyotyping, the gold standard. Reliable molecular methods for rapid aneuploidy diagnosis (RAD: fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and quantitative fluorescence PCR (QF-PCR)) can detect common aneuploidies, and are faster and less expensive than karyotyping.In the UK, RAD is recommended as a standalone approach in DSSP, whereas the US guidelines recommend that RAD be followed up by karyotyping. A cost-effectiveness (CE) analysis of RAD in various DSSP is lacking. There is a debate over the significance of chromosome abnormalities (CA) detected with karyotyping but not using RAD. Our objectives were to compare the CE of RAD versus karyotyping, to evaluate the clinically significant missed CA and to determine the impact of detecting the missed CA. We performed computer simulations to compare six screening options followed by FISH, PCR or karyotyping using a population of 110948 pregnancies. Among the safer screening strategies, the most cost-effective strategy was contingent screening with QF-PCR (CE ratio of $24084 per Down's syndrome (DS) detected). Using karyotyping, the CE ratio increased to $27898. QF-PCR missed only six clinically significant CA of which only one was expected to confer a high risk of an abnormal outcome. The incremental CE ratio (ICER) to find the CA missed by RAD was $66608 per CA. These costs are much higher than those involved for detecting DS cases. As the DSSP are mainly designed for DS detection, it may be relevant to question the additional costs of karyotyping.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Simplified version of the decision trees: (a) algorithms for screening options; (b) algorithms for the diagnosis procedure. Not shown in this simplified depiction, but included in our model, is the possibility that miscarriage occurs before testing or after releasing results.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Caine A, Maltby AE, Parkin CA, Waters JJ, Crolla JA. Prenatal detection of Down's syndrome by rapid aneuploidy testing for chromosomes 13, 18, and 21 by FISH or PCR without a full karyotype: a cytogenetic risk assessment. Lancet. 2005;366:123–128. - PubMed
    1. Wald NJ, Hackshaw AK, Watt H. Nuchal translucency and trisomy 18. Prenat Diagn. 1999;19:995–996. - PubMed
    1. Wapner R, Thom E, Simpson JL, et al. First-trimester screening for trisomies 21 and 18. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:1405–1413. - PubMed
    1. NEQAS National External Quality Assessment Scheme in clinical cytogenetics. Annu Rep. 2000.
    1. Boyd PA, Devigan C, Khoshnood B, Loane M, Garne E, Dolk H. Survey of prenatal screening policies in Europe for structural malformations and chromosome anomalies, and their impact on detection and termination rates for neural tube defects and Down's syndrome. BJOG. 2008;115:689–696. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types