Cited by 7Prenatal Screening and DiagnosticsGenetic and Clinical Aspects of Sex Determination and Chromosomal AbnormalitiesSexual Differentiation and Disorders

Multicenter clinical experience with non-invasive cell-free DNA screening for monosomy X and related X-chromosome variants

Open access
Bedei, Ivonne, Gehrke, Tascha, Gloning, Karl‐Philipp, Meyer‐Wittkopf, Matthias, Willner, Daria, Krapp, Martin, Scharf, Alexander, Degenhardt, Jan +15 more·2023·Prenatal Diagnosis

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate how the presence of fetal anomalies and different X chromosome variants influences Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening results for monosomy X. METHODS: From a multicenter retrospective survey on 673 pregnancies with prenatally suspected or confirmed Turner syndrome, we analyzed the subgroup for which prenatal cfDNA screening and karyotype results were available. A cfDNA screening result was defined as true positive (TP) when confirmatory testing showed 45,X or an X-chromosome variant. RESULTS: We had cfDNA results, karyotype, and phenotype data for 55 pregnancies. cfDNA results were high risk for monosomy X in 48/55, of which 23 were TP and 25 were false positive (FP). 32/48 high-risk cfDNA cases did not show fetal anomalies. Of these, 7 were TP. All were X-chromosome variants. All 16 fetuses with high-risk cfDNA result and ultrasound anomalies were TP. Of fetuses with abnormalities, those with 45,X more often had fetal hydrops/cystic hygroma, whereas those with "variant" karyotypes had different anomalies. CONCLUSION: Both, 45,X or X-chromosome variants can be detected after a high-risk cfDNA result for monosomy X. When there are fetal anomalies, the result is more likely a TP. In the absence of fetal anomalies, it is most often an FP or X-chromosome variant.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/pd.6320

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Johnston M, Warton C, Pertile MD, et al. Ethical issues associated with prenatal screening using non-invasive prenatal testing for sex chromosome aneuploidy. Prenat Diagn. 2022;pd.6217. https://doi. org/10.1002/pd6217 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bedei, I., Gehrke, T., Gloning, K., Meyer‐Wittkopf, M., Willner, D., Krapp, M., Scharf, A., Degenhardt, J., Heling, K., Kozlowski, P., Trautmann, K., Jahns, K. M., Geipel, A., Baumüller, J., Wilhelm, L., Gottschalk, I., Schröer, A., Graf, A., Wolter, A., Schenk, J., Weber, A., Van den Veyver, I. B., & Axt‐Fliedner, R.
Affiliations
  • Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen (DE)
  • Prenatal Medicine and Genetics München Duesseldorf Germany
  • Klinikum Rheine (DE)
  • Center for Prenatal Medicine and Human Genetics Hamburg Germany
  • Center for Prenatal Medicine on Elbe Hamburg Hamburg Germany
  • Center for Prenatal Medicine Mainz Germany
  • Praenatal Plus Köln Germany
  • Zentrum für Pränataldiagnostik (DE)
  • Prenatal Medicine and Genetics Düsseldorf Praenatal.de Duesseldorf Germany
  • Center for Prenatal Medicine “am Salzhaus” Frankfurt Germany
  • Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (DE)
  • University Hospital Bonn (DE)
  • Gynaekologikum Frankfurt Frankfurt Germany
  • Westend Ultrasound Frankfurt Germany
  • University of Cologne (DE)
  • Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Molecular and Human Genetics Baylor College of Medicine Houston Texas USA
  • Department of Prenatal Medicine and Fetal Therapy Justus‐Liebig University Giessen Germany
Corresponding author
Bedei, Ivonne
Venue
Prenatal Diagnosis
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2023-02
Volume
43
Issue
2
Pages
192-206
ISSN
  • 0197-3851 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0223
OpenAlex
W4318919555
Cited by
7
References
73
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2
FWCI
2.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Prenatal Diagnosis (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Universitätsbibliothek Gießen
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic and Clinical Aspects of Sex Determination and Chromosomal Abnormalities
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Sexual Differentiation and Disorders
Keywords
Turner syndrome, monosomy X, non-invasive prenatal testing, fetal malformations, cystic lymphangioma, hydrops fetalis, false positives
MeSH terms
Cell-Free Nucleic Acids, Down Syndrome, Female, Humans, Pregnancy, Prenatal Diagnosis, Retrospective Studies, Turner Syndrome, X Chromosome, Hydrops Fetalis, Lymphangioma, Cystic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review