Une nouvelle étude démontre que le dépistage prénatal non invasif pour les femmes présentant une grossesse à haut risque et pour un prix s'élevant à 795 USD, constitue un avantage clinique ainsi qu'une économie pour le système de santé

Télécharger le fichier PDF

San Jose, Calif., January 29, 2013 – A study in the Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal
Medicine highlights the cost-effectiveness of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) with cell-free
DNA (cfDNA) in high-risk women. NIPT was shown to have clinical benefit over conventional
prenatal screening tests, and at a price point of $795, NIPT demonstrated cost savings to the
healthcare system.

In the study, a decision analytic model was used to compare NIPT for trisomy 21, which causes
Down syndrome, against conventional prenatal screening with first trimester combined or
integrated screening for the U.S. population. While NIPT is not as comprehensive as a
karyotype, it does not carry a risk of pregnancy loss. This is the first study to evaluate the
economic impact of NIPT in a high-risk pregnancy population as recommended by the American
Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the Society for Maternal Fetal
Medicine (SMFM). As compared to conventional prenatal screening, NIPT detected 65-85%
more cases of trisomy 21, reduced invasive procedures by over 95%, and in turn, reduced over
99% of unnecessary fetal loss. Details of the study can be found at

“The clinical advantages of implementing non-invasive prenatal testing into clinical practice are
becoming increasingly clear and this model quantifies the benefit,” said Dr. Aaron Caughey,
senior author of the study and chair of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Oregon Health and
Sciences University. “One of the most striking findings is that NIPT can be cost saving to the
U.S. healthcare system at the appropriate price. Few, if any, new technologies can
demonstrate both clinical and cost benefit. NIPT represents a healthcare advance to achieve
the Triple Aim of improved quality, better access, and lower costs.”