cell free fetal dna: the next fetal cells in maternal ... free fetal dna: the next best test? mary e...
TRANSCRIPT
6/8/2012
1
Cell Free Fetal DNA: The Next Best Test?
Mary E Norton, MDProfessor of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Stanford University
Disclosures
• Principal Investigator of ongoing clinical trial on cfDNA supported by commercial entity (Ariosa Diagnostics)
• No personal financial involvement in any of the cfDNA companies
Fetal Cells in Maternal Circulation
• Georg Schmorl• German pathologist• Identified fetal trophoblasts in maternal lungs of women who died from eclampsia
Schmorl G, 1893
.
History of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing� 1893: Schmorl� Long hiatus (nearly 100 yrs)� 1980’s: Development of cell sorting
◦ Allowed separation of single cellsDevelopment of PCR and FISH
◦ Allowed analysis of single cells� 1990’s: Great enthusiasm for NIPDx� 1997: Lo and others report on cell free fetal DNA� 2002: NIFTY trial� 2011: Introduction of noninvasive prenatal
diagnostic tests
6/8/2012
2
Noninvasive prenatal testing using intact fetal cells
• Intact (nucleated) cells carry entire genome with potential to provide DNA results or entire karyotype
• Different cell types have been studied, each have pros/cons
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Fetal Cell Isolation Study (NIFTY)
Evaluated 2744 patients, 1292 w/male fetuses• 41% of cases with males were detected• 11% false positives• 74% detection rate for aneuploidy• 0.6-4% estimated FP rate
Bianchi et al, 2002
Intact Fetal Cells: Is There a Future?• Still appeal to this strategy• Entire fetal genome within each cell
Isolate intact fetal cell
Whole genome amplification
Microarray CGH
Cell free fetal DNA� In 1997, Lo et al reported on presence of fetal DNA in serum of pregnant women
� Y sequences found in DNA of 24/30 women carrying male fetuses and 0/13 women carrying female fetuses
� This was possible using a very small serum sample
� Subsequently confirmed by other investigators
Lo et al, Lancet, 1997
6/8/2012
3
Cell free fetal DNA
• Cell free fetal DNA (cffDNA) is made up of short segments of fetal nucleic acids that circulate in maternal plasma
• Origin of these fragments is thought to be primarily placenta
Cell free DNA results from apoptosis
Fetal DNA in Maternal Plasma: Characteristics• cffDNA represents ~10% of total DNA in maternal plasma (Lo 1998, Chiu 2011)
• Much higher percentage than intact fetal cells• cffDNAmade up of short (<200 bp) DNA fragments (Chan 2004)
• Reliably detected after 7 wks gestation (Birch 2005)• Higher concentrations late in gestation• Short half life (16 min), undetectable by 2 hrs postpartum (Lo 1999)
cffDNA: Clinical Applications• Gender determination
• Single gene disorders: ▫ Detect paternally inherited allele
• Isoimmunization: noninvasively determine fetal Rh type
�Aneuploidy: detect abnormal ratio of a particular chromosome
6/8/2012
4
Aneuploidy Testing• Largest area of commercial interest• 4+ million births/year x NEW TEST = $$$
Companies currently offering cfDNAtesting:
Noninvasive Prenatal Testing
• Detection requires accurate quantification of DNA from a specific chromosome
• Several different methods are being utilized
cffDNA: Clinical ChallengesDistinguishing fetal DNA still challenging:• Concentration of all cell free DNA is low• Total amount varies between individuals• Fetal DNA molecules are outnumbered 20:1 by maternal cell free DNA molecules�Requires strategy to overcome preponderance of maternal DNA
6/8/2012
5
Importance of Fetal DNA Fraction• Trisomy detection via cfDNA depends on fraction of
DNA that is fetal• The higher the fetal fraction, the easier it is to detect
trisomy
Trisomy 21Disomic Chr
Total: 100(Maternal: 90)
10% fetal DNA in circulation
Total: 105(Maternal: 90)
20% fetal DNA in circulation
Total: 100(Maternal: 80)
Trisomy 21
Total: 110(Maternal: 80)
Disomic Chr
cffDNA: Clinical ChallengesFalse negatives: • Failure to extract adequate material• Individual variation in amount of cffDNAFalse positives:• Contamination• Unrecognized or vanishing twin• Placental mosaicism• Low level maternal mosaicism
Next generation sequencingBig advance allowing cfDNA testing has been development of next generation sequencing
• Initial DNA sequencing entailed radiation-based methods; manually loading electrophoresis gels and reading bases from the resulting images
• Next generation sequencing is automated, and therefore easier, faster and cheaper
• There are many platforms and methods but overall theme is rapidly improving methods and decrease in costs
6/8/2012
6
Next Generation Sequencing
http://gcat.davidson.edu/
Massively Parallel Sequencing
• Many cffDNA tests use this approach
• “Massive”: tons of DNA sequencing data
• “Parallel”: many pieces of DNA sequenced at the same time
Analysis of fetal DNA
Zhong, X, Holzgreve, W, Glob. libr. women's med 2009
Massively Parallel Shotgun Sequencing • MPSS is a random sampling of cfDNA fragments from all chromosomes• A z-score value is used as a cut-off for non-trisomy (Sequenom
Materni21)
Palomaki GE et al. (2011), Genet. Med
N=1696
6/8/2012
7
MPSS using cffDNA (Materni21)• n= 4664 high risk women (CVS/amnio)• 212 with trisomy 21; 1484 controls▫ 1% uninterpretable: QNS, poor fetal fraction; higher with high BMI
• DR: 98.6% (209/212)• FP rate: 0.2% (3/1471)• Excluded twins, IVF; 89% Caucasian�Clearly far better than current screening, “near diagnostic” but very expensive
Palomaki et al. Genet Med, October 2011
Massively Parallel Shotgun Sequencing
• “No call” zone for values between 2.5-4
• Disproportionate number of positives in this zone
N=532Bianchi DW et al. (2012) Obstet Gynecol
MPSS using cffDNA (Verifi)
• N=2882 high risk women (CVS/amnio)• N=532 analyzed▫ N=221 abnormal karyotypes
• DR 100% for T21 (89/89)• FPR 0% (none in 404 normal cases)• However, cases with a midrange risk were considered “unclassified” ▫ several had aneuploidy
Bianchi DW et al. (2012) Obstet Gynecol
Selective Sequencing and Risk Calculation (Harmony)Another approach involves selective sequencing of chromosomes 18 and 21, and risk calculation based on:
• cfDNA counts• Fraction of fetal DNA• Maternal and gestational age
More like serum screening results
6/8/2012
8
T21 Detection
Selective sequencing approach
� Multicenter cohort study of 3228 patients� Trisomy 21� 81/81 cases detected (100%)� 1/2888 false positive for T21 (0.03%)
� No result obtained (test failure) in 4.6%� Low fraction of fetal DNA� Failed sequencing
Norton et al, AJOG, 2012
MPSS for Trisomy 21 -- Detection Rate and False Positive Rate
Author DR FPR
Palomaki ’11 99% 0.1%Bianchi ’12 100% 1.5%Norton ’12 100% 0.03%
CA State Screen 90% 5%
cffDNA for Aneuploidy – T13 and T18
Author T13 T18 T21DR FPR DR FPR DR FPR
Palomaki ’11 92% 0.5% 100% 0.7% 99% 0.1%Bianchi ’12 81% 0 97% 0.6% 100% 1.5%Norton ’12 n/a n/a 97.4% 0.07% 100% 0.03%
CA State n/a n/a 81% 0.31% 90% 5%
6/8/2012
9
Fetal fraction of DNA and test failure
• 2-5% of samples do not provide a result
▫ Low fraction fetal DNA, failed sequencing, high variability in counts
▫ Some association with gestational age (<10 wks) and maternal BMI
Only validated in high risk patients• Positive results need to be taken in the context of disease prevalence• The less prevalent a disease, the more likely a positive test is a false positive
Test accuracy:
99% detection
0.2% false positive
T21 prevalence:
1 in 1,000
1,000 women
1 T21 999 non-T21
1 2 9970
Test + Test +Test - Test -
Positive test result is truly right only 1/3 of the time at extreme test performance
Why Low False Positive Rate Matters
# of true trisomies
# of false positives at different FPR5% 1% 0.5% 0.1%
T21(1 in 740) 7 250 50 25 5
T18(1 in
5,000)1 250 50 25 5
T13(1 in
16,000)0 250 50 25 5
Example: Ob/Gyn practice with 5,000 births/yr
The less common a genetic condition, the more important it is to have a low false
positive rate
Aneuploidy Screening
• Clinical tests have been introduced• However, at present they are not 100% accurate▫ Twin demise, mosaicism
• Patients should not terminate based on a maternal blood test▫ Invasive confirmation will still be necessary�Better screening test (vs truly diagnostic)
6/8/2012
10
cffDNA: Where Does it Fit?
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Weeks of Gestation
First Trimester Serum Second Trimester Serum
NT Ultrasound
CVS Amnio
cffDNA: Where Does it Fit?
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Weeks of Gestation
First Trimester Serum Second Trimester Serum
NT Ultrasound
CVS Amnio
cffDNA: Where Does it Fit?
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Weeks of Gestation
NT Ultrasound?
CVS Amnio
cffDNA: Where Does it Fit?
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Weeks of Gestation
First Trimester Serum Second Trimester Serum
NT Ultrasound
CVS Amnio
6/8/2012
11
cffDNA: Where Does it Fit?
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Weeks of Gestation
First Trimester Serum Second Trimester Serum
NT Ultrasound
Amnio
Amnio
Aneuploidy Testing Timeline
Screening
Results
Diagnostic testing
Results
Decisions
Current Screening Timeline
Aneuploidy Testing Timeline
Screening
Results
Diagnostic testing
Results
Decisions
Screening
Results
cffDNA
Results
Diagnostic testing
Results
Decisions
Current Screening Timeline cfDNA as secondary screen
Where does cffDNA fit?
�Is this an outstanding screening test or an imperfect diagnostic test?
6/8/2012
12
Excellent first line screening test
Will simplify the process
• Now: 2 blood tests and an US▫ DS risks given twice▫ Narrow GA window
• cffDNA: Single blood test at any GA
Aneuploidy Testing vs Current Screening Algorithms
Pros� Simpler protocol◦ Results more straightforward
◦ Not as gestational age dependent
� More accurate◦ Fewer invasive tests
� Potentially earlier results
Cons� Need for more complete
consent◦ Advantages of a two-step process
� Fewer invasive tests = less expertise
� 2-4% test failure� Expensive
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Opinion:
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Opinion:
6/8/2012
13
Other Professional Societies• International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis• National Society of Genetic CounselorsThere are recognized benefits, but…▫ Not diagnostic� Needs confirmation� “Advanced screening test”
▫ T18 and T21 are not only aneuploidies detected by invasive testing
▫ Requires comprehensive genetic counseling▫ Need a low risk study before introducing into general population screening
What is the Future of:• Serum screening?▫ 1st trimester▫ 2nd trimester
• Amniocentesis?• CVS?• Cell free fetal DNA?• Microarray based Comparative Genomic Hybridization (aCGH)?
• Nuchal Translucency Screening?
Keep Ditch Add☐ ☐ ☐
☐ ☐ ☐
☐ ☐ ☐
☐ ☐ ☐
☐ ☐ ☐
☐ ☐ ☐
☐ ☐ ☐
Summary• cfDNA is here to stay for aneuploidy testing• Exact role is still being clarified• This talk was completed 5/10/12 at 4:45 pm (PST) was out of date yesterday▫ New papers published and tests available this week
• Sequencing of the fetal genome is likely to be a reality in the not-too-distant future▫ Reported yesterday (6/5/12) in Science
• Tremendous clinical and ethical issues and considerations