Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of early screening for pre-eclampsia by NICE guidelines and a method combining maternal factors and biomarkers: results of SPREE
- PMID: 29536574
- DOI: 10.1002/uog.19039
Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of early screening for pre-eclampsia by NICE guidelines and a method combining maternal factors and biomarkers: results of SPREE
Abstract
Objective: To test the hypothesis that the performance of first-trimester screening for pre-eclampsia (PE) by a method that uses Bayes' theorem to combine maternal factors with biomarkers is superior to that defined by current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines.
Methods: This was a prospective multicenter study (screening program for pre-eclampsia (SPREE)) in seven National Health Service maternity hospitals in England, of women recruited between April and December 2016. Singleton pregnancies at 11-13 weeks' gestation had recording of maternal characteristics and medical history and measurements of mean arterial pressure (MAP), uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI), serum placental growth factor (PlGF) and serum pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A). The performance of screening for PE by the Bayes' theorem-based method was compared with that of the NICE method. Primary comparison was detection rate (DR) using NICE method vs mini-combined test (maternal factors, MAP and PAPP-A) in the prediction of PE at any gestational age (all-PE) for the same screen-positive rate determined by the NICE method. Key secondary comparisons were DR of screening recommended by the NICE guidelines vs three Bayes' theorem-based methods (maternal factors, MAP and PAPP-A; maternal factors, MAP and PlGF; and maternal factors, MAP, UtA-PI and PlGF) in the prediction of preterm PE, defined as that requiring delivery < 37 weeks.
Results: All-PE developed in 473 (2.8%) of the 16 747 pregnancies and preterm PE developed in 142 (0.8%). The screen-positive rate by the NICE method was 10.3% and the DR for all-PE was 30.4% and for preterm PE it was 40.8%. Compliance with the NICE recommendation that women at high risk for PE should be treated with aspirin from the first trimester to the end of pregnancy was only 23%. The DR of the mini-combined test for all-PE was 42.5%, which was superior to that of the NICE method by 12.1% (95% CI, 7.9-16.2%). In screening for preterm PE by a combination of maternal factors, MAP and PlGF, the DR was 69.0%, which was superior to that of the NICE method by 28.2% (95% CI, 19.4-37.0%) and with the addition of UtA-PI the DR was 82.4%, which was higher than that of the NICE method by 41.6% (95% CI, 33.2-49.9%).
Conclusions: The performance of screening for PE as currently recommended by NICE guidelines is poor and compliance with these guidelines is low. The performance of screening is substantially improved by a method combining maternal factors with biomarkers. © 2018 Crown copyright. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology © 2018 ISUOG.
Keywords: Bayes' theorem; NICE guidelines; aspirin; diagnostic accuracy; first-trimester screening; pre-eclampsia.
© 2018 Crown copyright. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology © 2018 ISUOG.
Similar articles
-
Screening for pre-eclampsia at 11-13 weeks' gestation: use of pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A, placental growth factor or both.Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Sep;56(3):400-407. doi: 10.1002/uog.22093. Epub 2020 Aug 5. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020. PMID: 32441401
-
Multicenter screening for pre-eclampsia by maternal factors and biomarkers at 11-13 weeks' gestation: comparison with NICE guidelines and ACOG recommendations.Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Jun;49(6):756-760. doi: 10.1002/uog.17455. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017. PMID: 28295782
-
Protocol for the prospective validation study: 'Screening programme for pre-eclampsia' (SPREE).Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Aug;50(2):175-179. doi: 10.1002/uog.17467. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017. PMID: 28295773
-
Mini-combined test compared with NICE guidelines for early risk-assessment for pre-eclampsia: the SPREE diagnostic accuracy study.Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2020 Nov. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2020 Nov. PMID: 33226739 Free Books & Documents. Review.
-
First trimester preeclampsia screening and prediction.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Feb;226(2S):S1071-S1097.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2020.07.020. Epub 2020 Jul 16. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022. PMID: 32682859 Review.
Cited by
-
Clinical effectiveness of routine first-trimester combined screening for pre-eclampsia in Spain with the addition of placental growth factor.Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2023 Dec;102(12):1711-1718. doi: 10.1111/aogs.14687. Epub 2023 Oct 9. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2023. PMID: 37814344 Free PMC article.
-
Arterial stiffness as a novel tool for the early prediction of preeclampsia: a perspective.J Hum Hypertens. 2024 Nov;38(11):745-749. doi: 10.1038/s41371-024-00967-6. Epub 2024 Oct 16. J Hum Hypertens. 2024. PMID: 39415051 Review.
-
Comparison of first trimester preeclampsia combined screening performances with various approaches in the Indonesian population.J Perinatol. 2025 May 21. doi: 10.1038/s41372-025-02316-y. Online ahead of print. J Perinatol. 2025. PMID: 40394239
-
Evaluating mean platelet volume and platelet distribution width as predictors of early-onset pre-eclampsia: a prospective cohort study.Matern Health Neonatol Perinatol. 2024 Mar 1;10(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s40748-024-00174-8. Matern Health Neonatol Perinatol. 2024. PMID: 38424566 Free PMC article.
-
Evidence-Based Prevention of Preeclampsia: Commonly Asked Questions in Clinical Practice.J Pregnancy. 2019 Aug 1;2019:2675101. doi: 10.1155/2019/2675101. eCollection 2019. J Pregnancy. 2019. PMID: 31467716 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous