En 6 día(s), 19 hora(s) y 58 minuto(s): El Repositorio Institucional UNAL informa a la comunidad universitaria que, con motivo del periodo de vacaciones colectivas, el servicio de publicación estará suspendido: Periodo de cierre: Del 20 de diciembre al 18 de enero de 2026. Sobre los depósitos: Durante este tiempo, los usuarios podrán continuar realizando el depósito respectivo de sus trabajos en la plataforma. Reanudación: Una vez reiniciadas las actividades administrativas, los documentos serán revisados y publicados en orden de llegada.

Análisis de concordancia de pruebas no invasivas prenatales en sangre materna (NIPT) con pruebas invasivas para embarazos con alto riesgo de aneuploidías fetales en una muestra piloto

dc.contributor.advisorYunis Londoño, Juan Joséspa
dc.contributor.advisorYunis Hazbun, Luz Karimespa
dc.contributor.authorGrajales Ospina, Diana Carolinaspa
dc.contributor.researchgroupPatología Molecularspa
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-18T15:00:37Zspa
dc.date.available2021-02-18T15:00:37Zspa
dc.date.issued2020spa
dc.description.abstractObjective: To evaluate the concordance of a non-invasive prenatal test (NIPT) against invasive prenatal tests (karyotype) in a pilot sample of high-risk fetal aneuploidy pregnancies. Materials and methods: Pilot study in 15 patients classified as high risk of aneuploidies, each underwent confirmatory invasive test, NIPT and standard screening test. Results: Three out of 15 pregnancies had aneuploidies detected by invasive cytogenetic study, which corresponded to: a trisomy 21, a trisomy 18 and a monosomy X. There were no abnormal findings in the other pregnancies. The kappa index between NIPT and karyotype was 0.75. NIPT detected 66% of aneuploidies. Conclusion: This is the first study that compares NIPT and confirmatory tests carried out in patients at high risk for aneuploidy in Colombia. We found that NIPT has a good overall operational performance (0.75) for the detection of aneuploidies in the pilot sample. However, a larger sample is required to support these findings.spa
dc.description.abstractObjetivo: Evaluar la concordancia de una prueba prenatal no invasiva (NIPT) contra pruebas prenatales invasivas (cariotipo) en una muestra piloto de embarazos de alto riesgo de aneuploidías fetales. Materiales y métodos: Estudio piloto en 15 pacientes clasificadas con alto riesgo de aneuploidías, a cada una se le realizó prueba invasiva confirmatoria, NIPT y prueba de tamización estándar. Resultados: 3 de las 15 gestaciones presentaron aneuploidías detectadas por estudio citogenético invasivo, las cuáles correspondían a: una trisomía 21, una trisomía 18 y una monosomía X. No hubo hallazgos anormales en las gestaciones restantes. El índice kappa entre NIPT y cariotipo fue de 0,75. La prueba NIPT detectó 66% de las aneuploidías. Conclusión: Este es el primer estudio de comparación entre pruebas NIPT y pruebas confirmatorias realizado en pacientes de alto riesgo para aneuploidía en Colombia, encontrando que la prueba NIPT tiene un buen rendimiento operativo global (0,75) para la detección de las aneuploidías en la muestra piloto. Sin embargo se requiere una mayor muestra para soportar estos hallazgos.spa
dc.description.degreelevelMaestríaspa
dc.description.sponsorshipUniversidad Nacional de Colombia, Servicios Médicos Yunis Turbay y Cia SASspa
dc.format.extent1 recurso en línea (73 páginas)spa
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfspa
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.unal.edu.co/handle/unal/79270
dc.language.isospaspa
dc.publisher.branchUniversidad Nacional de Colombia - Sede Bogotáspa
dc.publisher.programBogotá - Medicina - Maestría en Genética Humanaspa
dc.relation.references1. Botero FR, Araujo YA. Supervivencia durante el primer año de recién nacidos con defectos congénitos Survival during the first year of life of children with birth defects.spa
dc.relation.references2. WHO. Birth defects. Report by the Secretariat. 1 April 2010.spa
dc.relation.references3. Zarante I, Franco L, López C, Fernández N. Frecuencia de malformaciones congénitas: evaluación y pronóstico de 52.744 nacimientos en tres ciudades colombianas. Biomédica. 2010;30(1).spa
dc.relation.references4. García MA, Imbachí L, Hurtado PM, Gracia G, Zarante I. Detección ecográfica de anomalías congénitas en 76.155 nacimientos en Bogotá y Cali, 2011-2012. Biomédica. 2014;34(3):379-86.spa
dc.relation.references5. Shaffer BL, Norton ME. Cell-Free DNA Screening for Aneuploidy and Microdeletion Syndromes. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2018;45(1):13-26.spa
dc.relation.references6. Norwitz ER, Levy B. Noninvasive prenatal testing: the future is now. Rev Obstet Gynecol. 2013;6(2):48-62.spa
dc.relation.references7. Kazemi M, Salehi M, Kheirollahi M. Down Syndrome: Current Status, Challenges and Future Perspectives. Int J Mol Cell Med. 2016;5(3):125-33.spa
dc.relation.references8. Bianchi DW, Rava RP, Sehnert AJ. DNA sequencing versus standard prenatal aneuploidy screening. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(6):578.spa
dc.relation.references9. Nussbaum RL, McInnes RR, Willard HF. Thompson & Thompson Genetics in Medicine E-Book: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2015.spa
dc.relation.references10. Nicolaides KH, Falcón O. La ecografía de las 11-13+ 6 semanas. Fetal Medicine Foundation, Londres. 2004:17-9.spa
dc.relation.references11. Audibert F, De Bie I, Johnson JA, Okun N, Wilson RD, Armour C, et al. No. 348-Joint SOGC-CCMG Guideline: Update on Prenatal Screening for Fetal Aneuploidy, Fetal Anomalies, and Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2017;39(9):805-17.spa
dc.relation.references12. Chai H, DiAdamo A, Grommisch B, Boyle J, Amato K, Wang D, et al. Integrated FISH, Karyotyping and aCGH Analyses for Effective Prenatal Diagnosis of Common Aneuploidies and Other Cytogenomic Abnormalities. Med Sci (Basel). 2019;7(2).spa
dc.relation.references13. Leon SA, Shapiro B, Sklaroff DM, Yaros MJ. Free DNA in the serum of cancer patients and the effect of therapy. Cancer Res. 1977;37(3):646-50.spa
dc.relation.references14. Lo YM, Corbetta N, Chamberlain PF, Rai V, Sargent IL, Redman CW, et al. Presence of fetal DNA in maternal plasma and serum. Lancet. 1997;350(9076):485-7.spa
dc.relation.references15. de Alba MR, Bustamante-Aragonés A, Perlado S, Trujillo-Tiebas MJ, Díaz-Recasens J, Plaza-Arranz J, et al. Diagnóstico prenatal no invasivo: presente y futuro de mano de las nuevas tecnologías. 2012;23(2):67-75.spa
dc.relation.references16. Allyse M, Minear MA, Berson E, Sridhar S, Rote M, Hung A, et al. Non-invasive prenatal testing: a review of international implementation and challenges. Int J Womens Health. 2015;7:113-26.spa
dc.relation.references17. Costa J-M, Letourneau A, Favre R, Bidat L, Belaisch-Allart J, Jouannic J-M, et al. Cell-free fetal DNA versus maternal serum screening for trisomy 21 in pregnant women with and without assisted reproduction technology: a prospective interventional study. Genetics in Medicine. 2018.spa
dc.relation.references18. Committee on Practice Bulletins—Obstetrics CmoG, and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Practice Bulletin No. 163: Screening for Fetal Aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;127(5):e123-37.spa
dc.relation.references19. Cunningham F, Leveno K, Bloom S, Spong CY, Dashe J. Williams obstetrics, 24e: Mcgraw-hill; 2014.spa
dc.relation.references20. Wellesley D, Dolk H, Boyd PA, Greenlees R, Haeusler M, Nelen V, et al. Rare chromosome abnormalities, prevalence and prenatal diagnosis rates from population-based congenital anomaly registers in Europe. Eur J Hum Genet. 2012;20(5):521-6.spa
dc.relation.references21. Nicolaides KH. Screening for fetal aneuploidies at 11 to 13 weeks. Prenat Diagn. 2011;31(1):7-15.spa
dc.relation.references22. Borrell A BV, Bennassar M. Guía de práctica clínica: Diagnóstico prenatal de los defectos congénitos. Cribado de anomalías cromosómicas. Diagnóstico Prenatal. 2013;24(2):57-72.spa
dc.relation.references23. Committee Opinion No. 640: Cell-Free DNA Screening For Fetal Aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126(3):e31-7.spa
dc.relation.references24. Gagnon A, Wilson RD, COMMITTEE SOOAGOCG. Obstetrical complications associated with abnormal maternal serum markers analytes. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2008;30(10):918-32.spa
dc.relation.references25. Skrzypek H, Hui L. Noninvasive prenatal testing for fetal aneuploidy and single gene disorders. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2017;42:26-38.spa
dc.relation.references26. Carlson LM, Vora NL. Prenatal Diagnosis: Screening and Diagnostic Tools. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2017;44(2):245-56.spa
dc.relation.references27. Park SY, Jang IA, Lee MA, Kim YJ, Chun SH, Park MH. Screening for chromosomal abnormalities using combined test in the first trimester of pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2016;59(5):357-66.spa
dc.relation.references28. Perea Cuesta R, Rodríguez Merchán DM. Texto guía en ecografia obstetrica, para el desarrollo de programas de educación médica continuada en ultrasonido obstétrico de la Unidad de Medicina Maternofetal del Departamento de Obstetricia y Ginecología de la Universidad Nacional: Universidad Nacional de Colombia.spa
dc.relation.references29. Fandiño-Losada A, Lucumí-Villegas B, Ramírez-Cheyne J, Isaza-de, Lourido C, Saldarriaga C. Valor predictivo positivo del diagnóstico prenatal invasivo para alteraciones cromosómicas Rev. Fac. Med. 2018spa
dc.relation.references30. Colciencias MdSyPnS-. Guía de Práctica Clínica para la prevención, detección temprana y tratamiento del embarazo, parto o puerperio. 2013.spa
dc.relation.references31. Gynaecologists RCoOa. Amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: RCOG; 2010.spa
dc.relation.references32. Alfirevic Z, Navaratnam K, Mujezinovic F. Amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling for prenatal diagnosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;9:CD003252.spa
dc.relation.references33. Mujezinovic F, Alfirevic Z. Procedure-related complications of amniocentesis and chorionic villous sampling: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;110(3):687-94.spa
dc.relation.references34. Ghi T, Sotiriadis A, Calda P, Da Silva Costa F, Raine‐Fenning N, Alfirevic Z, et al. ISUOG Practice Guidelines: invasive procedures for prenatal diagnosis. 2016;48(2):256-68.spa
dc.relation.references35. García-Posada R, Borobio V, Bennasar M, Illa M, Mula R, Serés A, et al. Biopsia corial transcervical: guía práctica. Diagnóstico Prenatal. 2012;23(1):2-10.spa
dc.relation.references36. Aypar U, Thorland EC, Hoppman N. Prenatal diagnosis of chromosome abnormalities: past, present, and future. Clin Chem. 2013;59(10):1432-4.spa
dc.relation.references37. Faas BH, Cirigliano V, Bui TH. Rapid methods for targeted prenatal diagnosis of common chromosome aneuploidies. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2011;16(2):81-7.spa
dc.relation.references38. Fauzdar A, Chowdhry M, Makroo RN, Mishra M, Srivastava P, Tyagi R, et al. Rapid-prenatal diagnosis through fluorescence in situ hybridization for preventing aneuploidy related birth defects. Indian J Hum Genet. 2013;19(1):32-42.spa
dc.relation.references39. Tepperberg J, Pettenati MJ, Rao PN, Lese CM, Rita D, Wyandt H, et al. Prenatal diagnosis using interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH): 2-year multi-center retrospective study and review of the literature. Prenat Diagn. 2001;21(4):293-301.spa
dc.relation.references40. Dey M, Sharma S, Aggarwal S. Prenatal screening methods for aneuploidies. N Am J Med Sci. 2013;5(3):182-90.spa
dc.relation.references41. Medicine CoGatSfM-F. Committee Opinion No.682: Microarrays and Next-Generation Sequencing Technology: The Use of Advanced Genetic Diagnostic Tools in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(6):e262-e8.spa
dc.relation.references42. Wapner RJ, Martin CL, Levy B, Ballif BC, Eng CM, Zachary JM, et al. Chromosomal microarray versus karyotyping for prenatal diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(23):2175-84.spa
dc.relation.references43. Brady PD, Delle Chiaie B, Christenhusz G, Dierickx K, Van Den Bogaert K, Menten B, et al. A prospective study of the clinical utility of prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis in fetuses with ultrasound abnormalities and an exploration of a framework for reporting unclassified variants and risk factors. Genet Med. 2014;16(6):469-76.spa
dc.relation.references44. Hillman SC, McMullan DJ, Hall G, Togneri FS, James N, Maher EJ, et al. Use of prenatal chromosomal microarray: prospective cohort study and systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013;41(6):610-20.spa
dc.relation.references45. Revello R, Sarno L, Ispas A, Akolekar R, Nicolaides KH. Screening for trisomies by cell-free DNA testing of maternal blood: consequences of a failed result. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016;47(6):698-704.spa
dc.relation.references46. Ashoor G, Syngelaki A, Poon LC, Rezende JC, Nicolaides KH. Fetal fraction in maternal plasma cell-free DNA at 11-13 weeks' gestation: relation to maternal and fetal characteristics. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2013;41(1):26-32.spa
dc.relation.references47. Bianchi DW, Parsa S, Bhatt S, Halks-Miller M, Kurtzman K, Sehnert AJ, et al. Fetal sex chromosome testing by maternal plasma DNA sequencing: clinical laboratory experience and biology. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125(2):375-82.spa
dc.relation.references48. Taylor-Phillips S, Freeman K, Geppert J, Agbebiyi A, Uthman OA, Madan J, et al. Accuracy of non-invasive prenatal testing using cell-free DNA for detection of Down, Edwards and Patau syndromes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2016;6(1):e010002.spa
dc.relation.references49. Langlois S, Brock JA, COMMITTEE G. Current status in non-invasive prenatal detection of Down syndrome, trisomy 18, and trisomy 13 using cell-free DNA in maternal plasma. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2013;35(2):177-81.spa
dc.relation.references50. Gregg AR, Skotko BG, Benkendorf JL, Monaghan KG, Bajaj K, Best RG, et al. Noninvasive prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy, 2016 update: a position statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Genet Med. 2016;18(10):1056-65.spa
dc.relation.references51. Devers PL, Cronister A, Ormond KE, Facio F, Brasington CK, Flodman P. Noninvasive prenatal testing/noninvasive prenatal diagnosis: the position of the National Society of Genetic Counselors. J Genet Couns. 2013;22(3):291-5.spa
dc.relation.references52. Wou K, Levy B, Wapner RJ. Chromosomal Microarrays for the Prenatal Detection of Microdeletions and Microduplications. Clin Lab Med. 2016;36(2):261-76.spa
dc.relation.references53. Suela J, López-Expósito I, Querejeta ME, Martorell R, Cuatrecasas E, Armengol L, et al. Recommendations for the use of microarrays in prenatal diagnosis. Med Clin (Barc). 2017;148(7):328.e1-.e8.spa
dc.relation.references54. Petersen AK, Cheung SW, Smith JL, Bi W, Ward PA, Peacock S, et al. Positive predictive value estimates for cell-free noninvasive prenatal screening from data of a large referral genetic diagnostic laboratory. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(6):691.e1-.e6.spa
dc.relation.references55. Beulen L, Faas BH, Feenstra I, van Vugt JM, Bekker MN. Clinical utility of non‐invasive prenatal testing in pregnancies with ultrasound anomalies. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2017;49(6):721-8.spa
dc.relation.references56. Nicolaides KH, Syngelaki A, Poon LC, Gil MM, Wright D. First-trimester contingent screening for trisomies 21, 18 and 13 by biomarkers and maternal blood cell-free DNA testing. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2014;35(3):185-92.spa
dc.relation.references57. Gil MM, Accurti V, Santacruz B, Plana MN, Nicolaides KH. Analysis of cell-free DNA in maternal blood in screening for aneuploidies: updated meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;50(3):302-14.spa
dc.relation.references58. Haymon L, Simi E, Moyer K, Aufox S, Ouyang DW. Clinical implementation of noninvasive prenatal testing among maternal fetal medicine specialists. Prenat Diagn. 2014;34(5):416-23.spa
dc.relation.references59. Programa para análisis epidemiológico de datos. Versión 4.2, julio 2016. Consellería de Sanidade, Xunta de Galicia, España; Organización Panamericana de la salud (OPS-OMS); Universidad CES, Colombia.spa
dc.relation.references60. Foundation FM. https://fetalmedicine.org/research/assess/trisomies 2020 [spa
dc.relation.references61. Nicolaides KH, Syngelaki A, Ashoor G, Birdir C, Touzet G. Noninvasive prenatal testing for fetal trisomies in a routinely screened first-trimester population. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207(5):374.e1-6.spa
dc.relation.references62. Guy C, Haji-Sheikhi F, Rowland CM, Anderson B, Owen R, Lacbawan FL, et al. Prenatal cell-free DNA screening for fetal aneuploidy in pregnant women at average or high risk: Results from a large US clinical laboratory. Mol Genet Genomic Med. 2019;7(3):e545.spa
dc.relation.references63. Luo Y, Hu H, Zhang R, Pan Y, Ma Y, Long Y, et al. [Factors affecting the failure of non-invasive prenatal testing and the feasibility analysis of retesting]. Zhonghua Yi Xue Yi Chuan Xue Za Zhi. 2020;37(6):603-8.spa
dc.relation.references64. Wang E, Batey A, Struble C, Musci T, Song K, Oliphant A. Gestational age and maternal weight effects on fetal cell-free DNA in maternal plasma. Prenat Diagn. 2013;33(7):662-6.spa
dc.relation.references65. Van Opstal D, Srebniak MI, Polak J, de Vries F, Govaerts LC, Joosten M, et al. False Negative NIPT Results: Risk Figures for Chromosomes 13, 18 and 21 Based on Chorionic Villi Results in 5967 Cases and Literature Review. PLoS One. 2016;11(1):e0146794.spa
dc.relation.references66. Wong D, Moturi S, Angkachatchai V, Mueller R, DeSantis G, van den Boom D, et al. Optimizing blood collection, transport and storage conditions for cell free DNA increases access to prenatal testing. Clin Biochem. 2013;46(12):1099-104.spa
dc.relation.references67. Tabor A, Alfirevic Z. Update on procedure-related risks for prenatal diagnosis techniques. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2010;27(1):1-7.spa
dc.relation.references68. Chen Y, Yu Q, Mao X, Lei W, He M, Lu W. Noninvasive prenatal testing for chromosome aneuploidies and subchromosomal microdeletions/microduplications in a cohort of 42,910 single pregnancies with different clinical features. Hum Genomics. 2019;13(1):60.spa
dc.relation.references69. Fairbrother G, Burigo J, Sharon T, Song K. Prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidies with cell-free DNA in the general pregnancy population: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2016;29(7):1160-4.spa
dc.relation.references70. Kostenko E, Chantraine F, Vandeweyer K, Schmid M, Lefevre A, Hertz D, et al. Clinical and Economic Impact of Adopting Noninvasive Prenatal Testing as a Primary Screening Method for Fetal Aneuploidies in the General Pregnancy Population. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2019;45(6):413-23.spa
dc.rightsDerechos reservados - Universidad Nacional de Colombiaspa
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessspa
dc.rights.licenseAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Internacionalspa
dc.rights.spaAcceso abiertospa
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/spa
dc.subject.ddc610 - Medicina y saludspa
dc.subject.proposalNIPTspa
dc.subject.proposalNIPTeng
dc.subject.proposalFetal aneuploidieseng
dc.subject.proposalAneuploidías fetalesspa
dc.subject.proposalHigh-risk pregnancieseng
dc.subject.proposalGestaciones de alto riesgospa
dc.subject.proposalTrisomía 21spa
dc.subject.proposalTrisomy 21eng
dc.subject.proposalTrisomy 18eng
dc.subject.proposalTrisomía 18spa
dc.subject.proposalTrisomy 13eng
dc.subject.proposalTrisomía 13spa
dc.subject.proposalSex chromosome aneuploidieseng
dc.subject.proposalAneuploidías en cromosomas sexualesspa
dc.subject.proposalCariotipospa
dc.subject.proposalKaryotypeeng
dc.titleAnálisis de concordancia de pruebas no invasivas prenatales en sangre materna (NIPT) con pruebas invasivas para embarazos con alto riesgo de aneuploidías fetales en una muestra pilotospa
dc.typeTrabajo de grado - Maestríaspa
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_bdccspa
dc.type.coarversionhttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_ab4af688f83e57aaspa
dc.type.contentTextspa
dc.type.driverinfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesisspa
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersionspa
oaire.accessrightshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2spa

Archivos

Bloque original

Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
Cargando...
Miniatura
Nombre:
1152188365.2021.pdf
Tamaño:
12.74 MB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Bloque de licencias

Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
Cargando...
Miniatura
Nombre:
license.txt
Tamaño:
3.87 KB
Formato:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Descripción: