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
. 2025 Jun;45(6):705-712.
doi: 10.1002/pd.6812. Epub 2025 May 8.

Clinical Laboratory Experience With Prenatal cfDNA Screening in Triplet Pregnancies

Affiliations

Clinical Laboratory Experience With Prenatal cfDNA Screening in Triplet Pregnancies

Erica Soster et al. Prenat Diagn. 2025 Jun.

Abstract

Objective: Prenatal cfDNA screening is the most sensitive and specific screen for common aneuploidies in singleton and twin pregnancies and has been endorsed by several professional societies as a first-tier screen or contingent screen. However, data for triplet pregnancies is lacking, as these pregnancies are relatively uncommon and obtaining sufficient data for a robust analysis of test performance is challenging.

Method: This study presents a retrospective review of over 1500 samples from triplet pregnancies screened via cfDNA for common aneuploidies.

Results: Mean patient age was 34 years, while mean gestational age was 13 weeks. The most common indication for testing was patient age, representing > 60% of the cohort. There were 13 screen-positive cases (1.01%), 270 NR cases (17.32%), and the remainder were screen-negative. Complete or partial genetic and/or obstetric outcome information (including birth and neonatal outcomes) was available for 147 samples, including all 13 positive cfDNA samples. No false positive or false negative cases were identified.

Conclusion: The data from this study support the notion that cfDNA screening in triplet pregnancies is a reasonable approach given the lack of alternative screening options for these patients and that the performance likely approaches that of twin pregnancies, albeit with a higher no-call rate.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors are current or former (SM) employees of Labcorp with the option to hold stock.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Indications for testing in the study cohort.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Flowchart of the samples in the study cohort. * Screen positive and screen negative rates are calculated based on reportable samples.

References

    1. Canick J. A., Kloza E. M., Lambert‐Messerlian G. M., et al., “DNA Sequencing of Maternal Plasma to Identify Down Syndrome and Other Trisomies in Multiple Gestations,” Prenatal Diagnosis 32, no. 8 (August 2012): 730–734, 10.1002/pd.3892. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Mhatre M. and Craigo S., “General Principles for Counseling and Management of Triplet Pregnancies,” Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology 66, no. 4 (December 2023): 854–863, 10.1097/GRF.0000000000000814. - DOI - PubMed
    1. American College of O, Medicine GCoPB‐OSfM‐F , “Multifetal Gestations: Twin, Triplet, and Higher‐Order Multifetal Pregnancies: ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 231,” Obstetrics & Gynecology 137, no. 6 (June 2021): e145–e162, 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004397. - DOI - PubMed
    1. American College of O, Gynecologists’ Committee on Practice B‐O, Committee on G, Society for Maternal‐Fetal MCommittee on GeneticsSociety for Maternal‐Fetal Medicine , “Screening for Fetal Chromosomal Abnormalities: ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 226,” Obstetrics & Gynecology 136, no. 4 (October 2020): e48–e69, 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004084. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Litwinska E., Litwinska M., Czuba B., et al., “Amniocentesis in Twin Pregnancies: Risk Factors of Fetal Loss,” Journal of Clinical Medicine 11, no. 7 (March 2022): 1937, 10.3390/jcm11071937. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Substances