Performance of a Multianalyte 'Rule-Out' Assay in Pregnant Individuals With Suspected Preeclampsia

Maged M Costantine, Baha Sibai, Allan T Bombard, Mark Sarno, Holly West, David M Haas, Alan T Tita, Michael J Paidas, Erin A S Clark, Kim Boggess, Chad Grotegut, William Grobman, Emily J Su, Irina Burd, George Saade, Martin R Chavez, Michael J Paglia, Audrey Merriam, Carlos Torres, Mounira Habli, Georges Macones, Tony Wen, James Bofill, Anna Palatnik, Rodney K Edwards, Sina Haeri, Pankaj Oberoi, Amin Mazloom, Matthew Cooper, Steven Lockton, Gary D Hankins, Maged M Costantine, Baha Sibai, Allan T Bombard, Mark Sarno, Holly West, David M Haas, Alan T Tita, Michael J Paidas, Erin A S Clark, Kim Boggess, Chad Grotegut, William Grobman, Emily J Su, Irina Burd, George Saade, Martin R Chavez, Michael J Paglia, Audrey Merriam, Carlos Torres, Mounira Habli, Georges Macones, Tony Wen, James Bofill, Anna Palatnik, Rodney K Edwards, Sina Haeri, Pankaj Oberoi, Amin Mazloom, Matthew Cooper, Steven Lockton, Gary D Hankins

Abstract

Background: The ability to diagnose preeclampsia clinically is suboptimal. Our objective was to validate a novel multianalyte assay and characterize its performance, when intended for use as an aid to rule-out preeclampsia.

Methods: Prospective, multicenter cohort study of pregnant individuals presenting between 280/7 and 366/7 weeks' with preeclampsia-associated signs and symptoms. Individuals not diagnosed with preeclampsia after baseline evaluation were enrolled in the study cohort, with those who later developed preeclampsia, classified as cases and compared with a negative control group who did not develop preeclampsia. Individuals with assay values at time of enrollment ≥0.0325, determined using a previously developed algorithm, considered at risk. The primary analysis was the time to develop preeclampsia assessed using a multivariate Cox regression model.

Results: One thousand thirty-six pregnant individuals were enrolled in the study cohort with an incidence of preeclampsia of 30.3% (27.6%-33.2%). The time to develop preeclampsia was shorter for those with an at-risk compared with negative assay result (log-rank P<0.0001; adjusted hazard ratio of 4.81 [3.69-6.27, P<0.0001]). The performance metrics for the assay to rule-out preeclampsia within 7 days of enrollment showed a sensitivity 76.4% (67.5%-83.5%), negative predictive value 95.0% (92.8%-96.6%), and negative likelihood ratio 0.46 (0.32-0.65). Assay performance improved if delivery occurred <37 weeks and for individuals enrolled between 28 and 35 weeks.

Conclusions: We confirmed that a novel multianalyte assay was associated with the time to develop preeclampsia and has a moderate sensitivity and negative likelihood ratio but high negative predictive value when assessed as an aid to rule out preeclampsia within 7 days of enrollment.

Registration: The study was registered on Clinicaltrials.gov (Identifier NCT02780414).

Keywords: biomarkers; hypertension; preeclampsia.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Study flow chart.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Survival curves (with 95% confidence margin) plotting the proportion of individuals without preeclampsia diagnosis vs the time to develop preeclampsia (in days), by assay status (at risk red or negative blue). Those who did not develop preeclampsia were censored at delivery or if lost to follow-up.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Receiver-operating characteristic curves (with 95% confidence margin) of the predictive probabilities of the models with only clinical covariates and the model including clinical covariates and the assay. AUC indicates area under the curve.

References

    1. Gestational hypertension and preeclampsia: ACOG practice bulletin, number 222. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;135:e237–e260. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003891
    1. Firoz T, Sanghvi H, Merialdi M, von Dadelszen P. Pre-eclampsia in low and middle income countries. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;25:537–548. doi: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2011.04.002
    1. Say L, Chou D, Gemmill A, Tunçalp Ö, Moller AB, Daniels J, Gülmezoglu AM, Temmerman M, Alkema L. Global causes of maternal death: a WHO systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2014;2:e323–e333. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(14)70227-X
    1. MacKay AP, Berg CJ, Atrash HK. Pregnancy-related mortality from preeclampsia and eclampsia. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;97:533–538. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(00)01223-0
    1. Hoyert DL, Miniño AM. Maternal mortality in the united states: changes in coding, publication, and data release, 2018. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2020;69:1–18.
    1. Rossen LM, Womack LS, Hoyert DL, Anderson RN, Uddin SFG. The impact of the pregnancy checkbox and misclassification on maternal mortality trends in the united states, 1999-2017. Vital Health Stat 3. 2020:1–61.
    1. Hurrell A, Webster L, Chappell LC, Shennan AH. The assessment of blood pressure in pregnant women: pitfalls and novel approaches. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;226(2S):S804–S818. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.10.026
    1. Fishel Bartal M, Lindheimer MD, Sibai BM. Proteinuria during pregnancy: definition, pathophysiology, methodology, and clinical significance. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;226(2S):S819–S834. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.08.108
    1. Sperling JD, Dahlke JD, Huber WJ, Sibai BM. The role of headache in the classification and management of hypertensive disorders in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126:297–302. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000966
    1. Ives CW, Sinkey R, Rajapreyar I, Tita ATN, Oparil S. Preeclampsia-pathophysiology and clinical presentations: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76:1690–1702. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.08.014
    1. Smith DD, Costantine MM. The role of statins in the prevention of preeclampsia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;226(2S):S1171–S1181. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.08.040
    1. Redman CW, Sargent IL. Latest advances in understanding preeclampsia. Science. 2005;308:1592–1594. doi: 10.1126/science.1111726
    1. Staff AC, Fjeldstad HE, Fosheim IK, Moe K, Turowski G, Johnsen GM, Alnaes-Katjavivi P, Sugulle M. Failure of physiological transformation and spiral artery atherosis: their roles in preeclampsia. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;226(2S):S895–S906. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.09.026
    1. Rana S, Burke SD, Karumanchi SA. Imbalances in circulating angiogenic factors in the pathophysiology of preeclampsia and related disorders. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022;226(2S):S1019–S1034. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.10.022
    1. Branch DW, Mitchell MD, Miller E, Palinski W, Witztum JL. Pre-eclampsia and serum antibodies to oxidised low-density lipoprotein. Lancet. 1994;343:645–646. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(94)92639-5
    1. Rana S, Lemoine E, Granger JP, Karumanchi SA. Preeclampsia: pathophysiology, challenges, and perspectives. Circ Res. 2019;124:1094–1112. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.118.313276
    1. Sargent IL, Germain SJ, Sacks GP, Kumar S, Redman CW. Trophoblast deportation and the maternal inflammatory response in pre-eclampsia. J Reprod Immunol. 2003;59:153–160. doi: 10.1016/s0165-0378(03)00044-5
    1. Cooper M, Mazloom A, Obrochta C, Wapner R, Rosen T, Bombard A. Performance of a novel multi-biomarker rule out preeclampsia test: a prospective verification study. Am Coll Obstet Gynecol Annual Virtual Meeting, April 30-May 2, 2021; Poster number 999251.
    1. Hendershot JM, Abbasi M, Fortier L, Benn M, Giacobone C, Del Mastro R, Bahrami-Samani E, Mazloom AR, Oberoi P. Analytical validation of a novel panel of biomarkers for a test for preeclampsia. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2022;214:114729. doi: 10.1016/j.jpba.2022.114729
    1. Hypertension in pregnancy. Report of the american college of obstetricians and gynecologists’ task force on hypertension in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122:1122–1131.
    1. Moons KG, de Groot JA, Linnet K, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PM. Quantifying the added value of a diagnostic test or marker. Clin Chem. 2012;58:1408–1417. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2012.182550
    1. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics. 1988;44:837–845.
    1. Chappell LC, Duckworth S, Seed PT, Griffin M, Myers J, Mackillop L, Simpson N, Waugh J, Anumba D, Kenny LC, et al. . Diagnostic accuracy of placental growth factor in women with suspected preeclampsia: a prospective multicenter study. Circulation. 2013;128:2121–2131. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.003215
    1. Barton JR, Woelkers DA, Newman RB, Combs CA, How HY, Boggess KA, Martin JN, Jr, Kupfer K, Sibai BM; PETRA (Preeclampsia Triage by Rapid Assay) Trial. Placental growth factor predicts time to delivery in women with signs or symptoms of early preterm preeclampsia: a prospective multicenter study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;222:259.e1–259.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.09.003
    1. Zeisler H, Llurba E, Chantraine F, Vatish M, Staff AC, Sennström M, Olovsson M, Brennecke SP, Stepan H, Allegranza D, Dilba P, Schoedl M, Hund M, Verlohren S. Predictive value of the sFlt-1:PlGF ratio in women with suspected preeclampsia. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:13–22. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1414838
    1. Duhig KE, Myers J, Seed PT, Sparkes J, Lowe J, Hunter RM, Shennan AH, Chappell LC; PARROT trial group. Placental growth factor testing to assess women with suspected pre-eclampsia: a multicentre, pragmatic, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2019;393:1807–1818. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33212-4
    1. Koopmans CM, Bijlenga D, Groen H, Vijgen SM, Aarnoudse JG, Bekedam DJ, van den Berg PP, de Boer K, Burggraaff JM, Bloemenkamp KW, et al. ; HYPITAT study group. Induction of labour versus expectant monitoring for gestational hypertension or mild pre-eclampsia after 36 weeks’ gestation (HYPITAT): a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2009;374:979–988. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60736-4

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbeidspartnere

Medisinsk tilstand

Legemiddelintervensjoner

3
Abonnere