7. Cost-benefit Fairbrother G, Burigo J, Sharon T, et US cost-benefit study modelled on a cohort of 4 to journal article 22 May 2015 study al: Prenatal screening for fetal million pregnant women comparing NIPT to first aneuploidies with cell-free DNA in trimester combined screening (FTS). The study the general pregnancy population: a demonstrated that compared to FTS NIPT identified cost-effectiveness analysis. J 15% more trisomy cases, reduced Matern Fetal Neonatal Med procedures by 88%, reduced iatrogenic fetal loss by 29:1160-4, 2016 94% and is more economical at a NIPT unit cost of U$550 with 85% screening adherence. 8. Cost-benefit Benn P, Curnow KJ, Chapman S, et US cost-benefit study modelled on the general to journal article 9 Jul 2015 study al: An Economic Analysis of pregnancy population comparing conventional DNA Non-Invasive Prenatal screening with NIPT. The results indicated that NIPT Testing in the US General Pregnancy would reduce invasive procedures by 60.0% and Population. PLoS One 10:e0132313, the number of procedure-related euploid fetal 2015 losses by 73.5%. The study concluded that universal application of NIPT can be economically justified if provided for <$744 and that offering NIPT to all pregnant women is associated with substantial prenatal healthcare benefits. 9 Study of Cuckle H, Benn P, Pergament E: US review of cell free DNA (cfDNA) screening for to journal article 4 Mar 2015 diagnostic DNA screening for fetal fetal aneuploidy. The study reported that the accuracy aneuploidy as a clinical service. Clin efficacy of cfDNA for common autosomal trisomies Biochem 48:932-41, 2015 far exceeds conventional screening. The study concluded that a Primary cfDNA test has the highest performance but is expensive, while a Contingent test can achieve high performance at a relatively low cost.
7. Cost-benefit study Fairbrother G, Burigo J, Sharon T, et al: Prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidies with cell-free DNA in the general pregnancy population: a cost-effectiveness analysis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 29:1160-4, 2016 US cost-benefit study modelled on a cohort of 4 million pregnant women comparing NIPT to first trimester combined screening (FTS). The study demonstrated that compared to FTS NIPT identified 15% more trisomy cases, reduced procedures by 88%, reduced iatrogenic fetal loss by 94% and is more economical at a NIPT unit cost of U$550 with 85% screening adherence. to journal article 22 May 2015 8. Cost-benefit study Benn P, Curnow KJ, Chapman S, et al: An Economic Analysis of DNA Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing in the US General Pregnancy Population. PLoS One 10:e0132313, 2015 US cost-benefit study modelled on the general pregnancy population comparing conventional screening with NIPT. The results indicated that NIPT would reduce invasive procedures by 60.0% and the number of procedure-related euploid fetal losses by 73.5%. The study concluded that universal application of NIPT can be economically justified if provided for <$744 and that offering NIPT to all pregnant women is associated with substantial prenatal healthcare benefits. to journal article 9 Jul 2015 9 Study of diagnostic accuracy Cuckle H, Benn P, Pergament E: DNA screening for fetal aneuploidy as a clinical service. Clin Biochem 48:932-41, 2015 US review of cell free DNA (cfDNA) screening for fetal aneuploidy. The study reported that the efficacy of cfDNA for common autosomal trisomies far exceeds conventional screening. The study concluded that a Primary cfDNA test has the highest performance but is expensive, while a Contingent test can achieve high performance at a relatively low cost. to journal article 4 Mar 2015