Cell-free DNA analysis for the determination of fetal red blood cell antigen genotype in alloimmunized pregnancies

Participant Recruitment

Participants were recruited into an IRB-approved fetal antigen patient registry. Prospective participants were identified via the clinical laboratory’s quality assurance program or by their provider at collaborating clinical sites. Patients and their neonates were eligible for inclusion in the study if: 1) the patient was clinically confirmed to be alloimmunized to at least one of the following antigens: K (kell), Fy^a (also known as Fy(a+)), C, c, E, or D (RhD); 2) the patient underwent fetal antigen cfDNA analysis in the US between September 15, 2022 and December 15, 2023 and spoke English or Spanish. Patients were ineligible if their testing was ordered outside of the US. Prospective participants were contacted by a member of the study team or their local clinical team and invited to learn more about the study. Those who agreed to participate provided written informed consent for themselves and their neonate under WCG IRB protocol number 20225380. The participants were compensated for their participation.

Fetal Antigen cfDNA Assay

Details of the fetal antigen cfDNA analysis have been previously published.¹⁰ Briefly, we developed and validated an approach to noninvasive prenatal testing that utilizes NGS and QCTs to determine fetal antigen genotypes by analyzing cfDNA in plasma samples from pregnant individuals. The addition of QCTs enables the absolute quantification of detected fetal antigen molecules, which then is compared with the expected number of fetal molecules based on fetal fraction to determine the fetal genotype. The fetal genotype can then be used to predict the fetal antigen phenotype. When the predicted fetal phenotype is antigen positive for an antigen to which the pregnant person is alloimmunized, the pregnancy is at risk for HDFN. This test can be performed as early as ten weeks gestation to determine fetal antigen status in pregnant people who are alloimmunized to the following antigens: K, Fy^a, C, c, E, and/or D(RhD). Results are only reported for the antigens to which the patient is alloimmunized. All samples were run on the same version of the fetal antigen cfDNA analysis; the assay did not change during the duration of the study.

Neonatal genotyping

After consenting to participation, a buccal swab from the neonate that delivered in the alloimmunized pregnancy was obtained using ORAcollectDNA buccal swabs (DNA Genotek Inc., Ottawa, Canada). The samples were sent to Grifols Laboratory Solutions Inc (San Marcos, TX), which performed antigen genotyping utilizing BGG Navigator, a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and genomic hybridization-based genotyping test utilizing ID CORE XTTM™ technology (Progenika Biopharma, S.A., Bizkaia, Spain). Grifols Laboratory was blinded to the fetal cfDNA results. Neonatal genotype and predicted phenotype were reported for the following antigens included in fetal antigen cfDNA analysis: K, Fy^a, C, c, and E. For pregnancies alloimmunized to the D(RhD) antigen, neonatal genomic DNA extracted from the swabs was used to amplify exons 1-10 and their flanking regions of the RHD gene along with amplification of a hybrid RHD-CE exon 3-intron 3 region, and sequenced using BigDye® Terminator v3.1 Cycle Sequencing kit (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA) to determine the RHD genotype and predicted RhD phenotype.

Concordance determination

Concordance was determined separately for 1) only those antigens to which the pregnant person was alloimmunized and 2) all antigens for which the pregnant person was genotype negative. A pregnant person must be genotype negative for an antigen (not express the antigen) to be alloimmunized to it. Alloimmunization status does not impact the assay performance as the assay is genotype and not protein (antigen or antibody) based. Therefore, by examining all antigens for which a pregnant person was genotype negative we were able to demonstrate the assay performance with a larger sample size of antigen calls. The researchers and Grifols laboratory were blinded to neonatal and fetal analysis results, respectively; until both assays had been completed. Antigen genotypes were considered concordant where fetal antigen cfDNA analysis predicted fetal phenotype (reported as antigen detected or antigen not detected) and Grifols Laboratory’s neonatal predicted phenotype (reported as antigen positive or antigen negative) were respectively detected and positive OR not detected and negative. If a pregnancy was a twin gestation, the cfDNA analysis results were considered concordant if both neonates were antigen genotype negative and the cfDNA analysis predicted antigen not detected or at least one neonate was antigen genotype positive and the cfDNA analysis result predicted antigen detected.

Statistics

A sample size of 200 alloimmunized cfDNA assays was selected based on conservative predicted sensitivity of 97% and published antigen allele frequencies to allow for the calculation of the assay analytics with a type I error of up to 5% and a marginal error of 5% (span of 95% confidence intervals). Demographic statistics including maternal age, gestational age, maternal race and ethnicity, and fetal fraction were calculated.

Fetal Antigen Patient Registry Demographics

There were 899 eligible patients identified and invited to the study, 238 patients responded to the invitation and 166 (70%) completed enrollment prior to the end of the study (Figure 1). The final study sample included 166 participants from 128 different US practices who provided consent and submitted neonatal buccal swab samples. The sample included four twin pregnancies. These 166 cases include 30 on whom antigen concordance was previously reported in Alford & Landry et al.¹⁰ The median gestational age (GA) at the time of testing was 18.4 weeks with a median fetal fraction of 11.3% (Table 1). The pregnancy characteristics and patient demographics were similar to that of a complete patient sample (both enrolled and not enrolled; data not shown). The median turnaround time for complete patient samples was 7 days (range 5-21 days) and an informative fetal antigen result was returned for 99.6% of cases. Assay call rates were consistent when stratified by patient race and ethnicity (data not shown).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1.

Flow diagram of patient enrollment. There were 1,412 alloimmunized patients who met eligibility criteria and were invited to the study via text or email. 369 responded to the invitation, 7 declined to participate, 48 agreed to participate but did not complete enrollment and 166 completed enrollment prior to the study completion

Fetal Antigen Patient Registry Cohort cfDNA analysis Results and Concordance

The 166 patients were alloimmunnized to 206 antigens. The most common alloimmunized antigen was E (n=59, 35.5%). Forty-four patients (26.5%) were alloimmunized to K, 43 (25.9%) to D(RhD), 31 (18.7%) to C, 21 (12.7%) to c, and 9 (5.4%) to Fy^a. Forty-one patients were alloimmunized to more than one antigen (Table 2).

Overall, 104 (50.5%) fetal antigen results were reported clinically as “antigen detected”, meaning the fetal antigen genotype predicted an antigen-positive phenotype, and 102 (49.5%) were “antigen negative”, meaning the fetal antigen genotype predicted an antigen-negative phenotype (Table S1).

A concordance call was possible for 206/207 alloimmunized antigens. One case had fetal cfDNA results but inconclusive results on the neonatal sample from the outside laboratory, so a concordance call was not possible. Concordance for the 206 fetal antigen cfDNA analysis calls for antigens to which the patients were alloimmunized was 206/206 (100%) (Table 3).

Additionally, concordance was 100% for 503 fetal antigen calls (Table 4). These 503 calls includes the 206 antigens for which the pregnant person was alloimmunized against and additional 297 antigens for which the pregnant person was not alloimmunized against but was genotype negative (therefore able to be alloimmunized against; Table 4). There was one fetus for which cfDNA analysis correctly called D(RhD) negative due to an RHDΨ variant, which on postnatal RHD sequencing confirmed the fetus to be compound heterozygous for the RHD-gene deletion and RHDΨ variant. There was one case where the cfDNA analysis reported “not detected” for the C antigen and the neonatal genotyping revealed a hybrid RHD-CE-D allele RHD*DIIIa-ceVS.03(4-7)-RHCE*ce, associated with an extremely weak C phenotype.¹¹ The weak C phenotype has been reported to produce anti-C antibodies when exposed to the C antigen. ¹¹ Therefore the cfDNA “not detected” call for this genotype is likely an appropriate determination that the fetus is not at risk for HDFN when the pregnant person is alloimmunized to C. However, there is no literature to confirm this so this case was excluded from the final calculation of concordance (Table 4.) In the current case, the pregnant person was not alloimmunized to C so no further clinical investigation was warranted. This is a relatively uncommon allele present in approximately 0.3% of the US population.¹²

Principal findings

This study demonstrates that NGS-based cfDNA analysis using QCT technology is a highly accurate approach for determining fetal antigen genotypes and predicted phenotypes for alloimmunized pregnancies, improving upon the current ACOG-recommended care. The addition of QCTs enables the absolute quantification of detected fetal antigen molecules. By comparing the detected number of fetal antigen cfDNA molecules with the expected number of molecules based on the fetal fraction, the assay ensures high sensitivity and specificity for the determination of fetal genotype regardless of gestational age and fetal fraction.¹⁰

In this study, concordance between fetal antigen genotype as determined by cfDNA analysis and neonatal antigen genotypes as determined by an outside laboratory blinded to fetal cfDNA results, was 100% for all 206 calls on antigens to which the pregnant person was alloimmunized. Concordance was also 100% when the antigen calls were expanded to include all 503 antigens for which the pregnant person was genotype negative resulting in an assay sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 100%. In this expanded set of antigen calls there was a single case where the cfDNA analysis assay reported not detected for C antigen and neonatal genotyping identified a hybrid RHD-CE-D allele RHD*DIIIa-ceVS.03(4-7)-RHCE*ce, associated with an extremely weak C phenotype. This genotype is not designed to be detected by the current assay and there is no evidence that it is associated with a risk for HDFN in the setting of a pregnant person alloimmunized to C antigen. Literature demonstrates that individuals with this genotype generate anti-C antibodies when exposed to the C antigen.¹¹

This accuracy of fetal antigen cfDNA analysis is on par or better than the performance of cfDNA analysis for determining fetal antigen status reported in several countries outside the US where it has long been part of clinical practice.^9,13.,4 The multi-exon sequencing used here differs from other fetal antigen assays including those used in Europe, which typically utilize a qualitative PCR approach and cannot identify RhD-negative fetuses due to variants other than the RHD-gene deletion. These include genotypes more common in individuals of non-European ancestry.¹⁵ NGS-based cfDNA analysis for fetal antigen genotyping, evaluated in this study,¹⁰ uses quantitative counting template (QCT) technology to detect RhD-negative genotypes including the common RHD-gene deletion as well as variants such as RHDΨ, which is present in approximately 20% of RhD-negative Black Americans.¹⁵ As a result, this assay has higher call rates than European-based assays. An informative result was returned for 99.6% of cases in this study; and call rates were the same across races and ethnicities. In addition, the other RhD or fetal antigen assays are known to have higher uninformative results at lower gestational ages or fetal fractions.^9,16 An ongoing Phase III trial for the prevention of HDNF requires enrollment at 13-17 weeks gestation, highlighting the importance of a fetal-antigen cfDNA assay with high performance at early gestational ages (e.g., <15 weeks).¹⁷ This assay’s unique approach of using absolute quantification enabled by QCTs results in high sensitivity and specificity independent of fetal fraction or gestational age.¹⁰ Finally, the cfDNA assay simultaneously detects multiple fetal antigens, which is significant as alloimmunization for multiple antigens has implications for worsening fetal anemia.¹⁸

Clinical implications

The current recommended approach for determining fetal antigen genotype in alloimmunized pregnancies in the US relies on reproductive partner antigen testing. Amniocentesis is indicated to determine fetal genotype when it cannot be assumed from reproductive partner antigen status. There are many limitations to this approach in terms of accuracy, feasibility, and utility. Rates of partner testing completion are variable but in one study less than a third (12/39) of partners completed the testing.⁵ If reproductive partner testing is not completed, ACOG recommends amniocentesis as a next step. However, amniocentesis carries the risk of fetal loss, worsening alloimmunization due to fetomaternal hemorrhage, and low uptake due to anxiety over the procedure and the risk to the fetus.^19–22 Subsequently, the fetal antigen status remains unknown for many of these pregnancies and the pregnancy is then monitored with serial antibody titers and MCA-PSV Doppler ultrasound by specialty providers, a process that is time intensive and burdensome both for the pregnant person and the healthcare system. These approaches to monitoring also have significant limitations. For example, maternal antibody titers are not useful for monitoring patients who have had prior pregnancies affected with HDFN or who are sensitized to the K antigen because of a lack of correlation between maternal titers and fetal anemia.² In addition, maternal antibody titers can rise even when the fetus is antigen negative.²³ MCA-PSV Doppler ultrasound, has been reported to have a sensitivity of 86% and specificity of 71% for pregnancies that have not yet undergone intrauterine transfusions (IUTs) according to a recent meta-analysis by Martinez-Portilla et al,²⁴ and Mari et al. report a false positive rate of 12%.²⁵ When MCA-PSV Doppler ultrasound suggests fetal anemia it can lead to unnecessary and potentially risky invasive procedures such as percutaneous umbilical cord sampling (PUBS) and IUTs.²⁶ Finally, while not assessed in the current study, evidence from countries that have already adopted cfDNA analysis for fetal antigen genotyping suggests improved cost-effectiveness and clinical utility; these studies demonstrated cost improvement with cfDNA assays despite lower sensitivities and higher rates of inconclusive results than reported in this study.^29,30

There was a recent announcement of a US shortage of RhoGAM (a commercially produced Rho(D) immune globulin).²⁷ In the US non-alloimmunized pregnant people who are RhD-negative receive prophylactic Rho(D) immune globulin during pregnancy, however, Rho(D) immune globulin is unnecessary for the approximately 40% of pregnancies because the fetus is RhD-negative. Multiple European countries currently use cfDNA analysis to determine management for RhD-negative pregnant individuals. However, ACOG does not currently recommend the routine use of cfDNA for this purpose but recognizes it may be an effective and attractive strategy if the inclusivity, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness of cfDNA tests are addressed for the US population.²⁸ The cfDNA analysis in this paper is also available for non-alloimmunized RhD-negative pregnant individuals. This study demonstrates the inclusivity and feasibility of the assay to determine fetal antigen genotype for a diverse US population and supports the use of cfDNA analysis to determine need for Rho(D) immune globulin to prevent unnecessary administration; conserving a valuable resource for those for whom it is medically necessary.

Strengths and limitations

This was a well-powered prospective study demonstrating the excellent performance of cfDNA analysis for fetal antigen genotyping with a high rate of informative results in a diverse US sample of alloimmunized pregnant individuals; including twin pregnancies. The pregnant person’s alloimmunization status was determined through medical records provided by the ordering provider and further confirmed as part of the fetal antigen assay. Importantly, the fetal cfDNA results were reported prospectively as part of the clinical care of the pregnancy without knowledge of the neonatal genotype. The laboratory providing the fetal cfDNA genotyping and the different laboratory performing neonatal genotyping were blinded to eachothers results.

The study enrolled participants 128 clinical practices across the US including representation from individuals who identified as Asian, Black, Latina, White, non-Latina, and more than one race. Importantly, in contrast to other assays and the publications that study their characteristics, the no-call rate for assay was not different for different race and ethnicities.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated the accuracy of an NGS-based cfDNA analysis assay with QCT technology for the detection of fetal antigen status in a large, diverse US-based cohort. The performance of this assay is superior to real-life application of the current recommended care in the US. Clinical implementation of fetal antigen cfDNA analysis for the management of alloimmunized pregnancies will remove the barriers of the current recommended care– incomplete partner testing and risk of amniocentesis–resulting in an accurate assessment of fetal risk for more alloimmunized pregnancies, streamlining clinical management, and improving equitable access to care. Given the body of evidence, it is time for this approach to be routinely implemented into the management of alloimmunized pregnancies in the US.