Universal Cell Free DNA or Contingent Screening for Trisomy 21: Does It Make a Difference? A Comparative Study with Real Data
Abstract
Objective: The aim of the objective was to compare the detection rate for trisomy 21 of universal cell free DNA (cfDNA) screening with contingent screening. Methods: Retrospective study was carried out at 3 German centers. The study included euploid and trisomy 21 pregnancies where cfDNA and first trimester (FT) screening assessment was carried out. The FT risk for trisomy 21 was computed based on combined screening and stratified into the following classes: high risk ≥1:10, intermediate risk 1:11–1,000, low risk ≤1,001. For universal cfDNA screening, the cfDNA test results were examined. For the contingent screening model, the result of the cfDNA test was taken into account in case of an intermediate FT risk. Different strategies combining maternal age, nuchal translucency, nasal bone, beta-hCG, and PAPP-A were evaluated. Screen positivity was defined as either a high risk after FT screening or a cfDNA test indicating a high-risk result. An inconclusive cfDNA test was also considered as screen positive. Results: The search of the database identified 2,255 euploid and 163 affected pregnancies. All affected fetuses were identified by universal cfDNA screening. 1.3% of the euploid fetuses were classified as screen positive due to final inconclusive cfDNA test result. The detection and false-positive rate of a contingent approach that is based on combined screening and cfDNA screening in the intermediate group would be 98.4% and 0.7%, respectively. With this approach, cfDNA screening would be necessary in only about 27% of all pregnancies. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that a contingent approach provides similar detection rates for trisomy 21 as universal cfDNA screening, by a reduction of 73% the number of cfDNA tests.
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?
When intermediate-risk women were screened with cfDNA, the detection rate of trisomy 21 was 98.4% with a false-positive rate of 0.7%.
“This recommendation is based on a large study which showed that, when intermediate-risk women were screened with cfDNA, the detection rate of trisomy 21 was 98.4% with a false-positive rate of 0.7% [80].”
From First-Trimester Ultrasound: A Comparative Review of Guidelines (2026) · cites this paper as [80]
Cites
Maiz, N., Valencia, C., Kagan, K. O., Wright, D., & Nicolaides, K. H. (2009) · Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1002/uog.6330 · Cited by 206 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
First-Trimester Ultrasound: A Comparative Review of Guidelines
Boureka, E., Tsakiridis, I., Michos, G., Liberis, A., Giouleka, S., Mamopoulos, A., Kalogiannidis, I., & Dagklis, T. (2026) · Diagnostics · doi:10.3390/diagnostics16111695
- Authors
- Prodan, N. C., Wiechers, C., Geipel, A., Walter, A., Siegmann, H. J., Kozlowski, P., Hoopmann, M., & Kagan, K. O.
- Affiliations
- Universitätsklinikum Tübingen (DE)
- University Hospital Bonn (DE)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy
- Publisher
- S. Karger AG
- Published
- 2022
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 85-94
- ISSN
- 1015-3837 (ISSN-L)
- 1421-9964
- OpenAlex
- W4212796868
- Cited by
- 14
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 3.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Down syndrome and intellectual disability research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
- Keywords
- Down syndrome, Down syndrome screening, non-invasive prenatal testing, first-trimester combined screening, intermediate risk, detection rate, false positive rate, nuchal translucency, nasal bone, beta-hCG, PAPP-A, maternal age
- MeSH terms
- Cell-Free Nucleic Acids, Down Syndrome, Female, Humans, Maternal Age, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Trimester, First, Pregnancy-Associated Plasma Protein-A, Prenatal Diagnosis, Retrospective Studies, Trisomy, Chorionic Gonadotropin, beta Subunit, Human, Nuchal Translucency Measurement
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