Comparison of different methods of first-trimester screening for preterm pre-eclampsia: cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the predictive performance of three different mathematical models for first-trimester screening of pre-eclampsia (PE), which combine maternal risk factors with mean arterial pressure (MAP), uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI) and serum placental growth factor (PlGF), and two risk-scoring systems. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study performed in eight fetal medicine units in five different regions of Spain between September 2017 and December 2019. All pregnant women with singleton pregnancy and a non-malformed live fetus attending their routine ultrasound examination at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks' gestation were invited to participate in the study. Maternal characteristics and medical history were recorded and measurements of MAP, UtA-PI, serum PlGF and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A) were converted into multiples of the median (MoM). Risks for term PE, preterm PE (< 37 weeks' gestation) and early PE (< 34 weeks' gestation) were calculated according to the FMF competing-risks model, the Crovetto et al. logistic regression model and the Serra et al. Gaussian model. PE classification was also performed based on the recommendations of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). We estimated detection rates (DR) with their 95% CIs at a fixed 10% screen-positive rate (SPR), as well as the area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC) for preterm PE, early PE and all PE for the three mathematical models. For the scoring systems, we calculated DR and SPR. Risk calibration was also assessed. RESULTS: The study population comprised 10 110 singleton pregnancies, including 32 (0.3%) that developed early PE, 72 (0.7%) that developed preterm PE and 230 (2.3%) with any PE. At a fixed 10% SPR, the FMF, Crovetto et al. and Serra et al. models detected 82.7% (95% CI, 69.6-95.8%), 73.8% (95% CI, 58.7-88.9%) and 79.8% (95% CI, 66.1-93.5%) of early PE; 72.7% (95% CI, 62.9-82.6%), 69.2% (95% CI, 58.8-79.6%) and 74.1% (95% CI, 64.2-83.9%) of preterm PE; and 55.1% (95% CI, 48.8-61.4%), 47.1% (95% CI, 40.6-53.5%) and 53.9% (95% CI, 47.4-60.4%) of all PE, respectively. The best correlation between predicted and observed cases was achieved by the FMF model, with an AUC of 0.911 (95% CI, 0.879-0.943), a slope of 0.983 (95% CI, 0.846-1.120) and an intercept of 0.154 (95% CI, -0.091 to 0.397). The NICE criteria identified 46.7% (95% CI, 35.3-58.0%) of preterm PE at 11% SPR and ACOG criteria identified 65.9% (95% CI, 55.4-76.4%) of preterm PE at 33.8% SPR. CONCLUSIONS: The best performance of screening for preterm PE is achieved by mathematical models that combine maternal factors with MAP, UtA-PI and PlGF, as compared to risk-scoring systems such as those of NICE and ACOG. While all three algorithms show similar results in terms of overall prediction, the FMF model showed the best performance at an individual level. © 2024 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Validation of machine-learning model for first-trimester prediction of pre-eclampsia using cohort from PREVAL study.

OBJECTIVE: Effective first-trimester screening for pre-eclampsia (PE) can be achieved using a competing-risks model that combines risk factors from the maternal history with multiples of the median (MoM) values of biomarkers. A new model using artificial intelligence through machine-learning methods has been shown to achieve similar screening performance without the need for conversion of raw data of biomarkers into MoM. This study aimed to investigate whether this model can be used across populations without specific adaptations. METHODS: Previously, a machine-learning model derived with the use of a fully connected neural network for first-trimester prediction of early (< 34 weeks), preterm (< 37 weeks) and all PE was developed and tested in a cohort of pregnant women in the UK. The model was based on maternal risk factors and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI), placental growth factor (PlGF) and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A). In this study, the model was applied to a dataset of 10 110 singleton pregnancies examined in Spain who participated in the first-trimester PE validation (PREVAL) study, in which first-trimester screening for PE was carried out using the Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) competing-risks model. The performance of screening was assessed by examining the area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC) and detection rate (DR) at a 10% screen-positive rate (SPR). These indices were compared with those derived from the application of the FMF competing-risks model. The performance of screening was poor if no adjustment was made for the analyzer used to measure PlGF, which was different in the UK and Spain. Therefore, adjustment for the analyzer used was performed using simple linear regression. RESULTS: The DRs at 10% SPR for early, preterm and all PE with the machine-learning model were 84.4% (95% CI, 67.2-94.7%), 77.8% (95% CI, 66.4-86.7%) and 55.7% (95% CI, 49.0-62.2%), respectively, with the corresponding AUCs of 0.920 (95% CI, 0.864-0.975), 0.913 (95% CI, 0.882-0.944) and 0.846 (95% CI, 0.820-0.872). This performance was achieved with the use of three of the biomarkers (MAP, UtA-PI and PlGF); inclusion of PAPP-A did not provide significant improvement in DR. The machine-learning model had similar performance to that achieved by the FMF competing-risks model (DR at 10% SPR, 82.7% (95% CI, 69.6-95.8%) for early PE, 72.7% (95% CI, 62.9-82.6%) for preterm PE and 55.1% (95% CI, 48.8-61.4%) for all PE) without requiring specific adaptations to the population. CONCLUSIONS: A machine-learning model for first-trimester prediction of PE based on a neural network provides effective screening for PE that can be applied in different populations. However, before doing so, it is essential to make adjustments for the analyzer used for biochemical testing. © 2023 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Performance of first-trimester combined screening for preterm pre-eclampsia: findings from cohort of 10 110 pregnancies in Spain.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) competing-risks model, incorporating maternal characteristics, mean arterial pressure (MAP), uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI) and placental growth factor (PlGF) (the 'triple test'), for the prediction at 11-13 weeks' gestation of preterm pre-eclampsia (PE) in a Spanish population. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study performed in eight fetal medicine units in five different regions of Spain between September 2017 and December 2019. All pregnant women with a singleton pregnancy and a non-malformed live fetus attending a routine ultrasound examination at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks' gestation were invited to participate. Maternal demographic characteristics and medical history were recorded and MAP, UtA-PI, serum PlGF and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A) were measured following standardized protocols. Treatment with aspirin during pregnancy was also recorded. Raw values of biomarkers were converted into multiples of the median (MoM), and audits were performed periodically to provide regular feedback to operators and laboratories. Patient-specific risks for term and preterm PE were calculated according to the FMF competing-risks model, blinded to pregnancy outcome. The performance of screening for PE, taking into account aspirin use, was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC) and detection rate (DR) at a 10% fixed screen-positive rate (SPR). Risk calibration of the model was assessed. RESULTS: The study population comprised 10 110 singleton pregnancies, including 72 (0.7%) that developed preterm PE. In the preterm PE group, compared to those without PE, median MAP MoM and UtA-PI MoM were significantly higher, and median serum PlGF MoM and PAPP-A MoM were significantly lower. In women with PE, the deviation from normal in all biomarkers was inversely related to gestational age at delivery. Screening for preterm PE by a combination of maternal characteristics and medical history with MAP, UtA-PI and PlGF had a DR, at 10% SPR, of 72.7% (95% CI, 62.9-82.6%). An alternative strategy of replacing PlGF with PAPP-A in the triple test was associated with poorer screening performance for preterm PE, giving a DR of 66.5% (95% CI, 55.8-77.2%). The calibration plot showed good agreement between predicted risk and observed incidence of preterm PE, with a slope of 0.983 (95% CI, 0.846-1.120) and an intercept of 0.154 (95% CI, -0.091 to 0.397). CONCLUSIONS: The FMF model is effective in predicting preterm PE in the Spanish population at 11-13 weeks' gestation. This method of screening is feasible to implement in routine clinical practice, but it should be accompanied by a robust audit and monitoring system, in order to maintain high-quality screening. © 2023 International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Prospective first-trimester screening for trisomies by cell-free DNA testing of maternal blood in twin pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES: First, to examine in twin pregnancies the performance of first-trimester screening for fetal trisomies 21, 18 and 13 by cell-free (cf) DNA testing of maternal blood and, second, to compare twin and singleton pregnancies regarding the distribution of fetal fraction of cfDNA and rate of failure to obtain a result. METHODS: This was a prospective study in 438 twin and 10 698 singleton pregnancies undergoing screening for fetal trisomies by cfDNA testing at 10 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks' gestation. Chromosome-selective sequencing of cfDNA was used and, in twin pregnancies, an algorithm was applied that relies on the lower fetal fraction contributed by the two fetuses. Multivariate regression analysis was used to determine significant predictors of fetal fraction and a failed result. RESULTS: In twin pregnancies, the median fetal fraction was lower (8.0% (interquartile range (IQR), 6.0-10.4%) vs 11.0% (IQR, 8.3-14.4%); P < 0.0001) and failure rate after first sampling was higher (9.4% vs 2.9%; P < 0.0001) compared to in singletons. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the risk of test failure increased with increasing maternal age and body mass index and decreased with fetal crown-rump length. The risk was increased in women of South Asian racial origin and in pregnancies conceived by in-vitro fertilization (IVF). The main contributor to the higher rate of failure in twins was conception by IVF which was observed in 9.5% of singletons and 56.2% of twins. In the 417 twin pregnancies with a cfDNA result after first or second sampling, the detection rate was 100% (8/8) for trisomy 21 and 60% (3/5) for trisomies 18 or 13, at a false-positive rate (FPR) of 0.25% (1/404). In the 10 530 singleton pregnancies with a cfDNA result after first or second sampling, the detection rate was 98.7% (156/158) for trisomy 21 and 80.3% (49/61) for trisomies 18 or 13, at a FPR of 0.22% (23/10 311). CONCLUSIONS: In twin pregnancies undergoing first-trimester screening for trisomies by cfDNA testing, the fetal fraction is lower and failure rate higher compared to in singletons. The number of trisomic twin pregnancies examined was too small for an accurate assessment of performance of screening, but it may be similar to that in singleton pregnancies. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Screening for trisomies by cell-free DNA testing of maternal blood: consequences of a failed result.

OBJECTIVES: First, to report the distribution of the fetal fraction of cell-free (cf) DNA and the rate of a failed cfDNA test result in trisomies 21, 18 and 13, by comparison with pregnancies unaffected by these trisomies, second, to examine the possible effects of maternal and fetal characteristics on the fetal fraction, and third, to consider the options for further management of pregnancies with a failed result. METHODS: This was a cohort study of 10 698 singleton pregnancies undergoing screening for fetal trisomies 21, 18 and 13 by cfDNA testing at 10-14 weeks' gestation. There were 160 cases of trisomy 21, 50 of trisomy 18, 16 of trisomy 13 and 10 472 were unaffected by these trisomies. Multivariate regression analysis was used to determine significant predictors of fetal fraction and a failed cfDNA test result amongst maternal and fetal characteristics. RESULTS: Fetal fraction decreased with increasing body mass index and maternal age, was lower in women of South Asian racial origin than in Caucasians and in assisted compared to natural conceptions. It increased with fetal crown-rump length and higher levels of serum pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A and free ß-human chorionic gonadotropin. The median fetal fraction was 11.0% (interquartile range (IQR), 8.3-14.4%) in the unaffected group, 10.7% (IQR, 7.8-14.3%) in trisomy 21, 8.6% (IQR, 5.0-10.2%) in trisomy 18 and 7.0% (IQR, 6.0-9.4%) in trisomy 13. There was a failed result from cfDNA testing after first sampling in 2.9% of the unaffected group, 1.9% of trisomy 21, 8.0% of trisomy 18 and 6.3% of trisomy 13. In the cases with a failed result, 7% of women had invasive testing, mainly because of high risk from the combined test and/or presence of sonographic features suggestive of trisomies 18 and 13. All cases of trisomies were detected prenatally. CONCLUSIONS: In cases of a failed cfDNA test, the rate of trisomies 18 and 13, but not trisomy 21, is higher than in those with a successful test. In the management of such cases, the decision in favor of invasive testing should depend on the risk of prior screening and the results of detailed ultrasound examination. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Clinical implementation of routine screening for fetal trisomies in the UK NHS: cell-free DNA test contingent on results from first-trimester combined test.

OBJECTIVES: Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis of maternal blood for detection of trisomies 21, 18 and 13 is superior to other methods of screening but is expensive. One strategy to maximize performance at reduced cost is to offer cfDNA testing contingent on the results of the first-trimester combined test that is used currently. The objectives of this study were to report the feasibility of implementing such screening, to examine the factors affecting patient decisions concerning their options for screening and decisions on the management of affected pregnancies and to report the prenatal diagnosis of fetal trisomies and outcome of affected pregnancies following the introduction of contingent screening. METHODS: We examined routine clinical implementation of contingent screening in 11,692 singleton pregnancies in two National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in the UK. Women with a risk ≥ 1 in 100 (high-risk group) were offered options of invasive testing, cfDNA testing or no further testing, and those with a risk between 1 in 101 and 1 in 2500 (intermediate-risk group) were offered cfDNA testing or no further testing. The trisomic status of the pregnancies was determined by prenatal or postnatal karyotyping or by examination of the neonates. RESULTS: In the study population of 11,692 pregnancies, there were 47 cases of trisomy 21 and 28 of trisomies 18 or 13. Screening with the combined test followed by invasive testing for all patients in the high-risk group potentially could have detected 87% of trisomy 21 and 93% of trisomies 18 or 13, at a false-positive rate of 3.4%; the respective values for cfDNA testing in the high- and intermediate-risk groups were 98%, 82% and 0.25%. However, in the high-risk group, 38% of women chose invasive testing and 60% chose cfDNA testing; in the intermediate-risk group 92% opted for cfDNA testing. A prenatal diagnosis was made in 43 (91.5%) pregnancies with trisomy 21 and all pregnancies with trisomies 18 or 13. In many affected pregnancies the parents chose to avoid testing or termination and 32% of pregnancies with trisomy 21 resulted in live births. CONCLUSIONS: Screening for fetal trisomies by cfDNA analysis of maternal blood, contingent on the results of the combined test, can be implemented easily in routine clinical practice. In the high-risk group from the combined test, most but not all women chose cfDNA testing rather than invasive testing. Performance of screening for trisomy 21 was superior by the cfDNA test than by the combined test. However, prenatal detection of trisomies and pregnancy outcome depend not only on performance of screening tests but also on parental choice.

Analysis of cell-free DNA in maternal blood in screening for fetal aneuploidies: updated meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To review clinical validation or implementation studies of maternal blood cell-free (cf) DNA analysis and define the performance of screening for fetal trisomies 21, 18 and 13 and sex chromosome aneuploidies. METHODS: Searches of PubMed, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library were performed to identify all peer-reviewed articles on cfDNA testing in screening for aneuploidies between January 2011, when the first such study was published, and 4 January 2015. RESULTS: In total, 37 relevant studies were identified and these were used for the meta-analysis on the performance of cfDNA testing in screening for aneuploidies. These studies reported cfDNA results in relation to fetal karyotype from invasive testing or clinical outcome. Weighted pooled detection rates (DR) and false-positive rates (FPR) in singleton pregnancies were 99.2% (95% CI, 98.5-99.6%) and 0.09% (95% CI, 0.05-0.14%), respectively, for trisomy 21, 96.3% (95% CI, 94.3-97.9%) and 0.13% (95% CI, 0.07-0.20) for trisomy 18, 91.0% (95% CI, 85.0-95.6%) and 0.13% (95% CI, 0.05-0.26%) for trisomy 13, 90.3% (95% CI, 85.7-94.2%) and 0.23% (95% CI, 0.14-0.34%) for monosomy X and 93.0% (95% CI, 85.8-97.8%) and 0.14% (95% CI, 0.06-0.24%) for sex chromosome aneuploidies other than monosomy X. For twin pregnancies, the DR for trisomy 21 was 93.7% (95% CI, 83.6-99.2%) and the FPR was 0.23% (95% CI, 0.00-0.92%). CONCLUSION: Screening for trisomy 21 by analysis of cfDNA in maternal blood is superior to that of all other traditional methods of screening, with higher DR and lower FPR. The performance of screening for trisomies 18 and 13 and sex chromosome aneuploidies is considerably worse than that for trisomy 21.