Noninvasive Prenatal Testing
Abstract
Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) refers to recently developed genetic tests of the maternal serum that allow higher detection rates of trisomy 21 and other chromosomal aneuploidies in high-risk pregnancies. Noninvasive prenatal test analyzes cell-free DNA (cfDNA) in the maternal serum. Approximately 3% to 15% of cfDNA in the maternal blood is of fetal origin. Analysis of cfDNA can help identify fetuses affected with trisomy 21 and several other fetal aneuploidies. Testing can be performed after 9 to 10 weeks' gestation and has a higher sensitivity and specificity for trisomy 21 than other aneuploidy screening test. Noninvasive prenatal test has been studied and validated in singleton pregnancies at risk for trisomy 21 secondary to advanced maternal age, an abnormal serum screen, personal or family history of aneuploidy, or abnormal ultrasound findings, if these are suggestive of trisomy 13, 18, or 21. The utilization of NIPT for genetic screening has increased rapidly since introduction of the first clinical test in October 2011. Currently, there are limitations to NIPT including the possibility of test failure (2.6%-5.4%) and the focus on only the common trisomies. Noninvasive prenatal test is a screening test, and both false-positive (0.2%-1%) and false-negative results can occur. As the technology for NIPT is further evaluated, this test is likely to be increasingly used for prenatal screening. This review provides the obstetric clinician with an update of the current issues concerning NIPT.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Noninvasive prenatal testing had exceeded ten million tests by 2018 across multiple countries.
“Other examples of the rapid adoption of new genomic technologies include noninvasive prenatal testing (more than ten million tests by 2018 across multiple countries139–141) and the use of recessive carrier panels for couples planning pregnancies.”
From A brief history of human disease genetics (2020) · cites this paper as [141]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 37 · Cited by 42
- Authors
- Lo, J. O., Feist, C. D., Norton, M. E., & Caughey, A. B.
- Affiliations
- Oregon Health & Science University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Lo, Jamie O.
- Venue
- Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey
- Published
- 2014-02
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 89-99
- ISSN
- 0029-7828 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2061198441
- Cited by
- 42
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 10
- FWCI
- 6.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Assisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
- Keywords
- non-invasive prenatal testing, cell-free fetal DNA, maternal serum, Down syndrome, aneuploidy, prenatal screening, high-risk pregnancy, advanced maternal age, test failure, false positives and false negatives, trisomy 13, trisomy 18
- MeSH terms
- Trisomy 13 Syndrome, Trisomy 18 Syndrome, Aneuploidy, Chromosome Aberrations, Chromosomes, Human, Pair 13, Chromosomes, Human, Pair 18, Counseling, Down Syndrome, Female, Genetic Testing, Humans, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Trimester, First, Trisomy, Chromosome Disorders, Maternal Serum Screening Tests
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