Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37194254›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical screening2023

Cell-free DNA-based prenatal screening via rolling circle amplification: Identifying and resolving analytic issues.

Glenn E Palomaki, Geralyn M Lambert-Messerlian, Donna Fullerton, Madhuri Hegde, Stéphanie Conotte, Matthew L Saidel, Jacques C Jani

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical screening, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Glenn E PalomakiDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Women & Infants Hospital and Alpert Medical School at Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6154-8449
Geralyn M Lambert-MesserlianDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Women & Infants Hospital and Alpert Medical School at Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9440-3411
Donna FullertonDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK.
Madhuri HegdeGlobal Laboratory Services, PerkinElmer, Inc, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Stéphanie ConotteDepartment of Blood Transfusion, University Hospital Brugmann, Brussels, Belgium.
Matthew L SaidelWomen's Health USA, Hartford, CT, USA.
Jacques C JaniDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Brugmann, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveA rolling circle amplification (RCA) based commercial methodology using cell-free (cf)DNA to screen for common trisomies became available in 2018. Relevant publications documented high detection but with a higher than expected 1% false positive rate. Preliminary evidence suggested assay variability was an issue. A multi-center collaboration was created to explore this further and examine whether subsequent manufacturer changes were effective.

methodsThree academic (four devices) and two commercial (two devices) laboratories provided run date, chromosome 21, 18, and 13 run-specific standard deviations, number of samples run, and reagent lot identifications. Temporal trends and between-site/device consistency were explored. Proportions of run standard deviations exceeding pre-specified caps of 0.4%, 0.4% and 0.6% were computed.

resultsOverall, 661 RCA runs between April 2019 and July 30, 2022 tested 39,756 samples. In the first 24, subsequent 9, and final 7 months, proportions of capped chromosome 21 runs dropped from 39% to 22% to 6.0%; for chromosome 18, rates were 76%, 36%, and 4.0%. Few chromosome 13 runs were capped using the original 0.60%, but capping at 0.50%, rates were 28%, 16%, and 7.6%. Final rates occurred after reformulated reagents and imaging software modifications were fully implemented across all devices. Revised detection and false positive rates are estimated at 98.4% and 0.3%, respectively. After repeat testing, failure rates may be as low as 0.3%.

conclusionCurrent RCA-based screening performance estimates are equivalent to those reported for other methods, but with a lower test failure rate after repeat testing.

Indexed as

Cell-Free Nucleic AcidsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansPregnancyPrenatal DiagnosisTrisomyCell-Free Nucleic Acidscell-free DNAcommon trisomiesDown syndromePrenatal screeningquality controlrolling circle amplification

Identifiers

PMID37194254
PMCPMC10629251

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.