I missed the call yesterday regarding my lab results and it was only like 5 days so it makes me a little nervous. Now am having an anxiety attack waiting for them to return my call. uuughhhhhh I hate waiting.
I won't be doing any genetic testing including the blood marker test or Materni21. Last time my blood markers showed a few things that were confirmed incorrect at our anatomy scan. I'll just wait for the scan at 20 weeks to see if anything needs to be tested further.
@Laumb11 early doesn’t mean anything bad! Sometimes lab people are just speedy! I got my results for the genetic testing in half the time they said it would take with my last pregnancy.
@Laumb11 You have more strength than me! I would have definitely been calling multiple times by now
I finally did. I kept calling the nurses line and getting the machine so finally I went Through to the operator at 4:20 and was like I need To know! Everything is good
@Laumb11 early doesn’t mean anything bad! Sometimes lab people are just speedy! I got my results for the genetic testing in half the time they said it would take with my last pregnancy.
You’re right, I just had a bad dream the night before so all I could Think about was something was wrong. But it’s all ok, negative results
I am going to call my insurance company and ask but I thought I would ask here too- I'm currently in a high deductible plan and I know that my insurance won't cover the genetic testing, but I'm wondering if it will still be applied to my deductible. I opted to do the genetic testing, but now I'm not sure if it's worth it. Neither of us have any risk factors and I never did it with DD. Buuutttt.. If it will be applied to my deductible that we will reach this year anyway then I wouldn't mind just doing it.
BFP #1: due 6/17/2013, DD born 6/25/13 BFP #2: due 6/30/2017, MMC found 12/7/2016 BFP #3: due 10/21/2018
If your insurance doesn't cover it, it typically doesn't count toward your deductible. Ask your Dr if there's any companies they recommend that help with the cost. I'm going through Sequenom and it's no cost to me and I have a high deductible plan (CDHP) plan.
@knottieamusements Do you mind sharing which company you got the NIPT from? I did Sequenom and am curious how long it takes to get the results, since some people have said they have gotten them sooner than originally projected.
@stithof I was told the Sequenom should only take a week. Im getting it done on the 21st and was told I should have the results for my appt on the 28th.
We did Counsyl last Wednesday week and got the results today. Baby is happy and healthy! We are finding out the sex, but I had the nurse leave a separate voicemail with that info so my H and I can find out together tonight!
My ob told me to call the providers to confirm coverage. Harmony told me it would be $645 out of pocket and Sequenom (MaternIT21) said it would be zero. So I guess I’ll go with the latter?
During my first pregnancy we did harmony and they told me it would be covered and then I got a bill for 2k and I had to yell at people until it went away.
Im AMA this pregnancy so I’m definitely doing it. Plus I want to know sex so I know if I can toss or keep all the clothes from Dd!
For those that are not AMA, I'm curious what providers are saying to you regarding NIPT vs. NT-scan and blood work. I'm very close to the cut off for AMA and my provider said that NIPT wasn't accurate for me because I wasn't 35 yet....based on my research I don't believe that. Anyone not AMA and having NIPT?
@ruthiep5555 I don’t think accuracy has anything to do with age. I’m 26 and was offered the test but just told I was already pretty low risk so it’s no big deal if I don’t want it.
Something else my OB reminded me was that you always have to option to take the test later. She said if anything concerning shows up down the road, we can always opt for testing then.
I have the NT scan and blood work scheduled for Wednesday. NIPT was only covered through my insurance with prior authorization, and I wouldn't meet any of the criteria for that. Going through the agent person, it would be $200. Since the NT is covered, we decided to go that route again.
Actually these tests are more accurate based on your age simply because the way that these tests were formed means that the tests were done within a specific population (i.e. An older and therefore higher risk population) so the positive predictive value is higher if you are within that risk group and is lower if you aren't outside of that risk group. WHat all that means is that your individual test is equally as accurate for you as another person, but in a population a younger population group is more likely to have false positives than the at risk group is to have false positives.
Sorry, I took epidemiology and so I looked into all that for these tests.
@kiwi2628 thanks for educating me! Maybe when I was 31 I was old enough for it to be relevant. Or my doctor is getting kickbacks lol. Wouldn’t be surprised.
Do you mean the analysis itself, or the acceptance testing of the analysis? I can understand that the population that was examined is smaller, resulting in less data about the accuracy of the test for that population, but that is different from the test actually being less accurate for that population.
Also - regardless of the answer to the previous question, does this mean that NIPT is a worse option for younger women than the older method of screening?
@knottieamusements My OB did say that the old test (99% sure she was referring to the quad screen) has a much higher false positive rate than the NIPT tests. That it was created before ultrasounds were commonly used. Any true positive that the quad screen would pick up would also be evident on an ultrasound nowadays. And I would imagine that’s irrelevant of age.
@knottieamusements I found this doctor that explained it in an article a while ago and I cannot find it and its driving me crazy because it was explained so beautifully. Positive predictive value is kind of hard to explain unless you truly understand specificity and sensitivity- what those mean and the differences. But I am gonna try (and probably screw up and confuse people and myself more, lol)
Basically, these tests are not 100% yes or no. They are screening tests, not definitive tests, so they look for markers/evidence of genetic abnormalities, but they dont give a definitive yes or no. These tests (and I am gonna make up easy numbers just for the test sake) have a specificity of 99% but a sensitivity of only about 85%. Specificity rules things in- meaning IF your baby has a trisomy, it has a very high likelihood of testing abnormal on these tests and a very low chance of falsely being negative, but sensitivity rules things out, meaning you have a higher chance of having a false positive. This all means you believe a negative result more than you believe a positive result to be accurate.
For two populations of women- 25 years old and 40 years old, the prevalence of trisomies (in this case lets use Trisomy 21) significantly increases. That means that for a population of 25 year olds, a positive test has a higher chance of being a false positive since the prevalence in that population is lower than a positive test in a 40 year old since the prevalence of that in that population is higher. The combination of specificity/sensitivity and prevalence is what makes up a positive predictive value (PPV). That is why the PPV for an older population is higher- it is more accurate, but that is for the population, so you need to take your results along with the PPV value for your individual test.
What that means is that you have to remember these tests are a screening tool and not a definitive diagnostic tool, but if you are older and get a positive, it is less likely to be a false positive than someone who is younger.
Phew. I thought after vet school I would never use epidemiology again. This damn kid....lol
The takeaway for me is that, regardless of age, if you get a positive result from NIPT, then, if you may consider terminating the pregnancy, you should have a diagnostic test, such as an amniocentesis, done first - which was also true under the old testing regime.
I read online a month or two ago that Anthem now does the testing regardless of risk status. That they consider it routine for everyone? Anybody know or have experience?
Me: 31 I DH: 31
Met: 9/8/08; Engaged: 9/8/11; Married 6/30/12
TTC#1: 8/2013; BFP: 9/30/13; born June 2014 (boy) TTC#2: 2/2018; BFP: 2/26/18; MC 4/4/18. TTC#2: 4/2018; BFP: 5/12/18; EDD: 1/19/19 (boy) 2 fur babies: Oakley Marley (11.5) & Ava Lynn (2)
FYI to those of you who used Counsyl (I did too), the cash price is SIGNIFICANTLY lower than the rate when it goes through insurance, and they also have a great financial aid program where you type in your income and expected medical expenses for the year and if it’s over a certain ratio you get it for free (even with a decent income)! I did a ton of research weighing my options whether it was worth t for the cost and realized it was way more affordable than I originally thought. I’m patiently waiting for my results.
I just spoke to the genetics counselor: everything came back normal- less than 1 / 10,000 risk of Downs, Trisomy 13, or Trisomy 18 with a normal pattern for the sex chromosomes.
Awesome news @knottieamusements. I took mine yesterday, they told me up to 2 weeks for the results. Hoping they will come before Easter so we can share the sex with family.
Re: Genetic Testing
Me 32 and DH 40
Fur-baby named Bella
1 MC Nov. 2013
DD born Nov. 2, 2014
Little 2 EDD Oct. 1
BFP #2: due 6/30/2017, MMC found 12/7/2016
BFP #3: due 10/21/2018
Wish us luck!
During my first pregnancy we did harmony and they told me it would be covered and then I got a bill for 2k and I had to yell at people until it went away.
Im AMA this pregnancy so I’m definitely doing it. Plus I want to know sex so I know if I can toss or keep all the clothes from Dd!
Something else my OB reminded me was that you always have to option to take the test later. She said if anything concerning shows up down the road, we can always opt for testing then.
Sorry, I took epidemiology and so I looked into all that for these tests.
Do you mean the analysis itself, or the acceptance testing of the analysis? I can understand that the population that was examined is smaller, resulting in less data about the accuracy of the test for that population, but that is different from the test actually being less accurate for that population.
Also - regardless of the answer to the previous question, does this mean that NIPT is a worse option for younger women than the older method of screening?
Basically, these tests are not 100% yes or no. They are screening tests, not definitive tests, so they look for markers/evidence of genetic abnormalities, but they dont give a definitive yes or no. These tests (and I am gonna make up easy numbers just for the test sake) have a specificity of 99% but a sensitivity of only about 85%. Specificity rules things in- meaning IF your baby has a trisomy, it has a very high likelihood of testing abnormal on these tests and a very low chance of falsely being negative, but sensitivity rules things out, meaning you have a higher chance of having a false positive. This all means you believe a negative result more than you believe a positive result to be accurate.
For two populations of women- 25 years old and 40 years old, the prevalence of trisomies (in this case lets use Trisomy 21) significantly increases. That means that for a population of 25 year olds, a positive test has a higher chance of being a false positive since the prevalence in that population is lower than a positive test in a 40 year old since the prevalence of that in that population is higher. The combination of specificity/sensitivity and prevalence is what makes up a positive predictive value (PPV). That is why the PPV for an older population is higher- it is more accurate, but that is for the population, so you need to take your results along with the PPV value for your individual test.
What that means is that you have to remember these tests are a screening tool and not a definitive diagnostic tool, but if you are older and get a positive, it is less likely to be a false positive than someone who is younger.
Phew. I thought after vet school I would never use epidemiology again. This damn kid....lol
The takeaway for me is that, regardless of age, if you get a positive result from NIPT, then, if you may consider terminating the pregnancy, you should have a diagnostic test, such as an amniocentesis, done first - which was also true under the old testing regime.
TTC#2: 2/2018; BFP: 2/26/18; MC 4/4/18.
TTC#2: 4/2018; BFP: 5/12/18; EDD: 1/19/19 (boy)
2 fur babies: Oakley Marley (11.5) & Ava Lynn (2)
I just spoke to the genetics counselor: everything came back normal- less than 1 / 10,000 risk of Downs, Trisomy 13, or Trisomy 18 with a normal pattern for the sex chromosomes.