All samples were processed and analyzed at Natera Inc’s Clinical

All samples were processed and analyzed at Natera Inc’s Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act (CLIA)-certified and College of American Pathologists (CAP)-accredited laboratory (San Carlos, CA). Laboratory testing

was performed as previously described using validated methodologies for cfDNA isolation, polymerase chain click here reaction amplification targeting 19,488 SNPs, high-throughput sequencing, and analysis with the next-generation aneuploidy test using SNPs (NATUS) algorithm.2, 3, 4 and 5 Samples were subject to a stringent set of quality-control metrics. A second blood draw (redraw) was requested if total input cfDNA, fetal cfDNA fraction, or signal-to-noise ratio did not meet quality metrics, or for poor fit of the data to the model. In cases of large regions (>25%) of loss of heterozygosity or suspected maternal or fetal mosaicism, redraw was not requested. Reports included a risk score for the 4 aneuploidies; when requested, reports included fetal sex. Risk scores were calculated by combining the maximum likelihood estimate generated by the NATUS algorithm with maternal and gestational age prior risks. All samples with a risk score ≥1/100 were reported as high risk for fetal

Capmatinib cell line aneuploidy and samples with risk scores <1/100 were considered low risk. For the purposes of this study, the high-risk results were further divided into a maximum-risk score of 99/100 or an intermediate-risk score of ≥1/100 and <99/100. The presence of >2 fetal haplotypes (indicative of either triploidy or multiple gestation) was reported only when the confidence was >99.9%. Additional sex chromosome aneuploidies (XXX, XXY, and XYY) were reported from June 2013. The following patient characteristics were requested for each sample: maternal date of birth, maternal weight, gestational age, and whether a paternal sample was included. Patients with available International Classification of Diseases, Ninth

Revision (ICD-9) codes ( Appendix; Supplementary Table 1) were categorized into 3 subcohorts: (1) “low risk” if aged <35 years and no aneuploidy-related high-risk codes; (2) “at risk” for fetal aneuploidy based solely on maternal age ≥35 years; or (3) “high risk” for fetal aneuploidy by ICD-9 code, regardless either of maternal age. High-risk indications included positive screening tests, ultrasound anomalies, and relevant family history. Patients without reported ICD-9 codes were categorized by maternal age as low risk (<35 years) or high risk (≥35 years). Follow-up information on high-risk results was obtained by telephone and recorded in an internal database. Clinical follow-up was completed on June 14, 2014, at which time all pregnancies were completed. Two partner laboratories accounting for 38.1% of the total 31,030 cases were responsible for their own follow-up efforts and were excluded from outcome calculations. Providers were encouraged to share information about false-negative (FN) results.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>