Planned delivery for pre-eclampsia between 34 and 37 weeks of gestation: the PHOENIX RCT.

BACKGROUND: In women with late preterm pre-eclampsia (i.e. at 34+0 to 36+6 weeks' gestation), the optimal delivery time is unclear because limitation of maternal-fetal disease progression needs to be balanced against infant complications. The aim of this trial was to determine whether or not planned earlier initiation of delivery reduces maternal adverse outcomes without substantial worsening of perinatal or infant outcomes, compared with expectant management, in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia. METHODS: We undertook an individually randomised, triple non-masked controlled trial in 46 maternity units across England and Wales, with an embedded health economic evaluation, comparing planned delivery and expectant management (usual care) in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia. The co-primary maternal outcome was a maternal morbidity composite or recorded systolic blood pressure of ≥ 160 mmHg (superiority hypothesis). The co-primary short-term perinatal outcome was a composite of perinatal deaths or neonatal unit admission (non-inferiority hypothesis). Analyses were by intention to treat, with an additional per-protocol analysis for the perinatal outcome. The primary 2-year infant neurodevelopmental outcome was measured using the PARCA-R (Parent Report of Children's Abilities-Revised) composite score. The planned sample size of the trial was 900 women; the trial is now completed. We undertook two linked substudies. RESULTS: Between 29 September 2014 and 10 December 2018, 901 women were recruited; 450 women [448 women (two withdrew consent) and 471 infants] were allocated to planned delivery and 451 women (451 women and 475 infants) were allocated to expectant management. The incidence of the co-primary maternal outcome was significantly lower in the planned delivery group [289 (65%) women] than in the expectant management group [338 (75%) women] (adjusted relative risk 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.79 to 0.94; p = 0.0005). The incidence of the co-primary perinatal outcome was significantly higher in the planned delivery group [196 (42%) infants] than in the expectant management group [159 (34%) infants] (adjusted relative risk 1.26, 95% confidence interval 1.08 to 1.47; p = 0.0034), but indicators of neonatal morbidity were similar in both groups. At 2-year follow-up, the mean PARCA-R scores were 89.5 points (standard deviation 18.2 points) for the planned delivery group (290 infants) and 91.9 points (standard deviation 18.4 points) for the expectant management group (256 infants), both within the normal developmental range (adjusted mean difference -2.4 points, 95% confidence interval -5.4 to 0.5 points; non-inferiority p = 0.147). Planned delivery was significantly cost-saving (-£2711, 95% confidence interval -£4840 to -£637) compared with expectant management. There were nine serious adverse events in the planned delivery group and 12 in the expectant management group. CONCLUSION: In women with late preterm pre-eclampsia, planned delivery reduces short-term maternal morbidity compared with expectant management, with more neonatal unit admissions related to prematurity but no indicators of greater short-term neonatal morbidity (such as need for respiratory support). At 2-year follow-up, around 60% of parents reported follow-up scores. Average infant development was within the normal range for both groups; the small between-group mean difference in PARCA-R scores is unlikely to be clinically important. Planned delivery was significantly cost-saving to the health service. These findings should be discussed with women with late preterm pre-eclampsia to allow shared decision-making on timing of delivery. LIMITATIONS: Limitations of the trial include the challenges of finding a perinatal outcome that adequately represented the potential risks of both groups and a maternal outcome that reflects the multiorgan manifestations of pre-eclampsia. The incidences of maternal and perinatal primary outcomes were higher than anticipated on the basis of previous studies, but this did not limit interpretation of the analysis. The trial was limited by a higher loss to follow-up rate than expected, meaning that the extent and direction of bias in outcomes (between responders and non-responders) is uncertain. A longer follow-up period (e.g. up to 5 years) would have enabled us to provide further evidence on long-term infant outcomes, but this runs the risk of greater attrition and increased expense. FUTURE WORK: We identified a number of further questions that could be prioritised through a formal scoping process, including uncertainties around disease-modifying interventions, prognostic factors, longer-term follow-up, the perspectives of women and their families, meta-analysis with other studies, effect of a similar intervention in other health-care settings, and clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of other related policies around neonatal unit admission in late preterm birth. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was prospectively registered as ISRCTN01879376. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research ( NIHR ) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in Health Technology Assessment. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Minimising Young Children's Anxiety through Schools (MY-CATS): statistical analysis plan for a cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an online parent-led intervention compared with usual school practice for young children identified as at risk for anxiety disorders.

BACKGROUND: The Minimising Young Children's Anxiety through Schools (MY-CATS) trial is being conducted to determine whether an online evidence-based parent-guided cognitive behavioural therapy intervention in addition to usual school practice is effective and cost-effective compared with usual school practice in reducing anxiety disorders in children aged 4-7 deemed 'at risk' of anxiety disorders. This update article describes the detailed statistical analysis plan for the MY-CATS trial and reports a review of the underpinning sample size assumptions. METHODS AND DESIGN: The MY-CATS study is a two-arm, definitive superiority pragmatic parallel group cluster randomised controlled trial in which schools will be randomised 1:1 to receive either the intervention (in addition to usual school practice) or the usual school practice only. This update to the (published) protocol provides a detailed description of the study methods, the statistical principles, the trial population and the planned statistical analyses, including additional analyses comprising instrumental variable regression and mediation analysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN82398107 . Prospectively registered on 14 January 2021.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Planned Early Delivery or Expectant Management for Late Preterm Pre-eclampsia (PHOENIX).

AIM: There is currently limited evidence on the costs associated with late preterm pre-eclampsia beyond antenatal care and post-natal discharge from hospital. The aim of this analysis is to evaluate the 24-month cost-utility of planned delivery for women with late preterm pre-eclampsia at 34+0-36+6 weeks' gestation compared to expectant management from an English National Health Service perspective using participant-level data from the PHOENIX trial. METHODS: Women between 34+0 and 36+6 weeks' gestation in 46 maternity units in England and Wales were individually randomised to planned delivery or expectant management. Resource use was collected from hospital records between randomisation and primary hospital discharge following birth. Women were followed up at 6 months and 24 months following birth and self-reported resource use for themselves and their infant(s) covering the previous 6 months. Women completed the EQ-5D 5L at randomisation and follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 450 women were randomised to planned delivery, 451 to expectant management: 187 and 170 women, respectively, had complete data at 24 months. Planned delivery resulted in a significantly lower mean cost per woman and infant(s) over 24 months (- £2711, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 4840 to - 637), with a mean incremental difference in QALYs of 0.019 (95% CI - 0.039 to 0.063). Short-term and 24-month infant costs were not significantly different between the intervention arms. There is a 99% probability that planned delivery is cost-effective at all thresholds below £37,000 per QALY gained. CONCLUSION: There is a high probability that planned delivery is cost-effective compared to expectant management. These results need to be considered alongside clinical outcomes and in the wider context of maternity care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registry ISRCTN01879376. Registered 25 November 2013.

Minimising young children's anxiety through schools (MY-CATS): protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an online parent-led intervention compared with usual school practice for young children identified as at risk for anxiety disorders.

BACKGROUND: Identifying and supporting young children who are at risk of developing anxiety disorders would benefit children, families, and wider society. Elevated anxiety symptoms, inhibited temperament, and high parental anxiety are established risk factors for later anxiety disorders, but it remains unclear who is most likely to benefit from prevention and early intervention programmes. Delivering an online intervention through schools to parents of young children who have one or more of these risks could maximise reach. The primary aim of this trial is to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of delivering an online parent-led intervention, compared with usual school provision only, for children (aged 4-7) identified as at risk for anxiety disorders on the basis of at least one risk factor. We also aim to identify the characteristics of children who do and do not benefit from intervention and mechanisms of change from the intervention. METHODS: The design will be a parallel group, superiority cluster randomised controlled trial, with schools (clusters) randomised to intervention or usual school practice arms in a 1:1 ratio stratified according to level of deprivation within the school. The study will recruit and randomise at least 60 primary/infant schools in England, and on the basis of recruiting 60 schools, we will recruit 1080 trial participants (540 per arm). Parents of all children (aged 4-7) in sampled Reception, Year 1, and Year 2 classes will be invited to complete screening questionnaires. Children who screen positive on the basis of anxiety symptoms, and/or behavioural inhibition, and/or parent anxiety symptoms will be eligible for the trial. Parents/carers of children in schools allocated to the intervention arm will be offered a brief online intervention; schools in both arms will continue to provide any usual support for children and parents throughout the trial. Assessments will be completed at screening, baseline (before randomisation), 6 weeks, 12 weeks, and 12 months post-randomisation. The primary outcome will be the absence/presence of an anxiety disorder diagnosis at 12 months. DISCUSSION: The trial will determine if delivering an online intervention for parents of young children at risk of anxiety disorders identified through screening in schools is effective and cost-effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 82398107 . Prospectively registered on Jan. 14, 2021.

A prognostic model to guide decision-making on timing of delivery in late preterm pre-eclampsia: the PEACOCK prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Pre-eclampsia affects around 2-3% of all pregnancies, and is associated with potential serious complications for the woman and the baby. Once diagnosed, progression of the syndrome can be unpredictable, and decisions around timing of delivery need to take into account evolving maternal complications and perinatal morbidity. Novel prognostic models and blood biomarkers for determination of need for delivery in pregnancies with pre-eclampsia are now emerging. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to establish a prognostic model to inform optimal timing of delivery in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia (34+ 0 to 36+ 6 weeks' gestation), comparing novel candidate biomarkers (e.g. placental growth factor) with clinical and routinely collected blood/urinary parameters [incorporated into the PREP-S (Prediction models for Risk of Early-onset Pre-eclampsia - Survival) model] to determine clinically indicated need for delivery for pre-eclampsia (or related complications) within 7 days of assessment. METHODS: Prospective recruitment of women in whom blood samples for placental growth factor and soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 testing was obtained, alongside clinical data, for use within the PREP-S model. Candidate variables were compared using standard methods (sensitivity, specificity, receiver operator curve areas). Estimated probability of early delivery from PREP-S was compared with actual event rates by calibration. SETTING: The PEACOCK (Prognostic indicators of severe disEAse in women with late preterm pre-eClampsia tO guide deCision maKing on timing of delivery) study was a prospective cohort study, nested within the PHOENIX (Pre-eclampsia in HOspital: Early iNductIon or eXpectant management) trial. PARTICIPANTS: Women between 34+ 0 and 36+ 6 weeks' gestation, with a diagnosis of pre-eclampsia, in whom a plasma (ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid) blood sample for placental growth factor testing was obtained, alongside clinical data for the assessment of variables in a prognostic model. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinically indicated need for delivery for pre-eclampsia within 7 days of assessment. Statistical analysis: both PREP-S and placental growth factor were assessed and compared using standard methods (sensitivity and specificity for placental growth factor thresholds of 100 pg/ml and < 12 pg/ml, and receiver operating characteristic areas for continuous measurements). The estimated probability of early delivery from PREP-S was compared with actual event rates for women with similar probabilities by calibration. Calibration using logistic regression was also used. RESULTS: Between 27 April 2016 and 24 December 2018, 501 women were recruited to the study. Although placental growth factor testing had high sensitivity (97.9%) for delivery within 7 days, the negative predictive value was only 71.4% and the specificity was low (8.4%). The area under the curve for the clinical prediction model (PREP-S) and placental growth factor in this cohort in determining need for delivery within 7 days was 0.64 (standard error 0.03) and 0.60 (standard error 0.03), respectively, and 0.65 (standard error 0.03) in combination. LIMITATIONS: A high proportion of women in this cohort already had low placental growth factor concentrations at the time of confirmed diagnosis, which reduced the ability of the biomarker to further predict adverse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In this group of women with late preterm pre-eclampsia, placental growth factor measurement is not likely to add to the current clinical assessment to help plan care for late preterm pre-eclampsia regarding timing of delivery. Existing models developed in women with early-onset pre-eclampsia to predict complications cannot be used to predict clinically indicated need for delivery in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia. FUTURE WORK: Further statistical modelling and subgroup analysis is being considered to assess if improved model performance in the whole cohort or a subgroup can be achieved. Addition of other biomarkers to the model may also be of use and will be explored. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN01879376. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 30. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

WHY DID WE DO THIS STUDY?: Pre-eclampsia is a condition occurring in pregnancy. The condition can affect the health of the woman and the baby, often affecting the woman's kidneys and liver and the baby's growth. In severe cases, babies can be stillborn. Once pre-eclampsia is diagnosed, the only cure is to deliver the baby. It is often not possible to identify women and babies at high risk of the severe complications of pre-eclampsia who would benefit from early delivery. We wanted to see if we could improve the way that women with pre-eclampsia are assessed to work out who needs to be delivered early to prevent complications. WHAT DID WE DO?: A total of 501 women affected by pre-eclampsia took part in our study and we measured substances in their blood. We used these results, along with other clinical measures, to see if we could improve the way that we try and tell which women need delivery soon. WHAT DID WE FIND?: The blood markers were not able to tell us which women needed delivery within 7 days, and they were not able to improve our detection rate of women who need delivery to prevent complications. WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR WOMEN WITH PRE-ECLAMPSIA?: These methods cannot be recommended to plan care for women and babies affected by pre-eclampsia between 34 and 37 weeks' gestation to help tell us when the baby should be born. We need to find better tests to help find out which women and babies are most at risk of the complications of pre-eclampsia.

Planned early delivery or expectant management for late preterm pre-eclampsia (PHOENIX): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In women with late preterm pre-eclampsia, the optimal time to initiate delivery is unclear because limitation of maternal disease progression needs to be balanced against infant complications. The aim of this trial was to determine whether planned earlier initiation of delivery reduces maternal adverse outcomes without substantial worsening of neonatal or infant outcomes, compared with expectant management (usual care) in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia. METHODS: In this parallel-group, non-masked, multicentre, randomised controlled trial done in 46 maternity units across England and Wales, we compared planned delivery versus expectant management (usual care) with individual randomisation in women with late preterm pre-eclampsia from 34 to less than 37 weeks' gestation and a singleton or dichorionic diamniotic twin pregnancy. The co-primary maternal outcome was a composite of maternal morbidity or recorded systolic blood pressure of at least 160 mm Hg with a superiority hypothesis. The co-primary perinatal outcome was a composite of perinatal deaths or neonatal unit admission up to infant hospital discharge with a non-inferiority hypothesis (non-inferiority margin of 10% difference in incidence). Analyses were by intention to treat, together with a per-protocol analysis for the perinatal outcome. The trial was prospectively registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN01879376. The trial is closed to recruitment but follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Sept 29, 2014, and Dec 10, 2018, 901 women were recruited. 450 women (448 women and 471 infants analysed) were allocated to planned delivery and 451 women (451 women and 475 infants analysed) to expectant management. The incidence of the co-primary maternal outcome was significantly lower in the planned delivery group (289 [65%] women) compared with the expectant management group (338 [75%] women; adjusted relative risk 0·86, 95% CI 0·79-0·94; p=0·0005). The incidence of the co-primary perinatal outcome by intention to treat was significantly higher in the planned delivery group (196 [42%] infants) compared with the expectant management group (159 [34%] infants; 1·26, 1·08-1·47; p=0·0034). The results from the per-protocol analysis were similar. There were nine serious adverse events in the planned delivery group and 12 in the expectant management group. INTERPRETATION: There is strong evidence to suggest that planned delivery reduces maternal morbidity and severe hypertension compared with expectant management, with more neonatal unit admissions related to prematurity but no indicators of greater neonatal morbidity. This trade-off should be discussed with women with late preterm pre-eclampsia to allow shared decision making on timing of delivery. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.