Abbonarsi

Predictive performance of the competing risk model in screening for preeclampsia - 28/01/19

Doi : 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.11.1087 
David Wright, PhD a, Min Yi Tan, MD b, Neil O’Gorman, MD b, Liona C. Poon, MD b, Argyro Syngelaki, PhD b, Alan Wright, PhD a, Kypros H. Nicolaides, MD b,
a Institute of Health Research, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom 
b Harris Birthright Research Centre for Fetal Medicine, King's College, London, United Kingdom 

Corresponding author: Kypros H. Nicolaides, MD.

Abstract

Background

The established method of screening for preeclampsia is to identify risk factors from maternal demographic characteristics and medical history; in the presence of such factors the patient is classified as high risk and in their absence as low risk. However, the performance of such an approach is poor. We developed a competing risks model, which allows combination of maternal factors (age, weight, height, race, parity, personal and family history of preeclampsia, chronic hypertension, diabetes mellitus, systemic lupus erythematosus or antiphospholipid syndrome, method of conception and interpregnancy interval), with biomarkers to estimate the individual patient-specific risks of preeclampsia requiring delivery before any specified gestation. The performance of this approach is by far superior to that of the risk scoring systems.

Objective

The objective of the study was to examine the predictive performance of the competing risks model in screening for preeclampsia by a combination of maternal factors, mean arterial pressure, uterine artery pulsatility index, and serum placental growth factor, referred to as the triple test, in a training data set for the development of the model and 2 validation studies.

Study Design

The data for this study were derived from 3 previously reported prospective, nonintervention, multicenter screening studies for preeclampsia in singleton pregnancies at 11+0 to 13+6 weeks’ gestation. In all 3 studies, there was recording of maternal factors and biomarkers and ascertainment of outcome by appropriately trained personnel. The first study of 35,948 women, which was carried out between February 2010 and July 2014, was used to develop the competing risks model for prediction of preeclampsia and is therefore considered to be the training set. The 2 validation studies were comprised of 8775 and 16,451 women, respectively, and they were carried out between February and September 2015 and between April and December 2016, respectively. Patient-specific risks of delivery with preeclampsia at <34, <37, and <41+3 weeks’ gestation were calculated using the competing risks model and the performance of screening for preeclampsia by maternal factors alone and the triple test in each of the 3 data sets was assessed. We examined the predictive performance of the model by first, the ability of the model to discriminate between the preeclampsia and no-preeclampsia groups using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and the detection rate at fixed screen-positive rate of 10%, and second, calibration by measurements of calibration slope and calibration in the large.

Results

The detection rate at the screen-positive rate of 10% of early-preeclampsia, preterm-preeclampsia, and all-preeclampsia was about 90%, 75%, and 50%, respectively, and the results were consistent between the training and 2 validation data sets. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was >0.95, >0.90, and >0.80, respectively, demonstrating a very high discrimination between affected and unaffected pregnancies. Similarly, the calibration slopes were very close to 1.0, demonstrating a good agreement between the predicted risks and observed incidence of preeclampsia. In the prediction of early-preeclampsia and preterm-preeclampsia, the observed incidence in the training set and 1 of the validation data sets was consistent with the predicted one. In the other validation data set, which was specifically designed for evaluation of the model, the incidence was higher than predicted, presumably because of better ascertainment of outcome. The incidence of all-preeclampsia was lower than predicted in all 3 data sets because at term many pregnancies deliver for reasons other than preeclampsia, and therefore, pregnancies considered to be at high risk for preeclampsia that deliver for other reasons before they develop preeclampsia can be wrongly considered to be false positives.

Conclusion

The competing risks model provides an effective and reproducible method for first-trimester prediction of early preeclampsia and preterm preeclampsia as long as the various components of screening are carried out by appropriately trained and audited practitioners. Early prediction of preterm preeclampsia is beneficial because treatment of the high-risk group with aspirin is highly effective in the prevention of the disease.

Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.

Key words : aspirin, calibration, Combined Multimarker Screening and Randomized Patient Treatment with Aspirin for Evidence-Based Preeclampsia Prevention trial, competing risks model, discrimination, first-trimester screening, mean arterial blood pressure, performance of screening, placental growth factor, preeclampsia, survival model, uterine artery Doppler


Mappa


 The supporters of this work had no involvement in the study design; the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data; the writing of the report; and the decision to submit the article for publication.
 This study was supported by a grant from the Fetal Medicine Foundation (UK Charity number 1037116).
 The authors report no conflict of interest.
 Cite this article as: Wright D, Tan MY, O’Gorman N, et al. Predictive performance of the competing risk model in screening for preeclampsia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2019;220:199.e1-13.


© 2018  Elsevier Inc. Tutti i diritti riservati.
Aggiungere alla mia biblioteca Togliere dalla mia biblioteca Stampare
Esportazione

    Citazioni Export

  • File

  • Contenuto

Vol 220 - N° 2

P. 199.e1-199.e13 - febbraio 2019 Ritorno al numero
Articolo precedente Articolo precedente
  • Two-stage screening for preterm preeclampsia at 11–13 weeks’ gestation
  • Alan Wright, David Wright, Argyro Syngelaki, Apostolos Georgantis, Kypros H. Nicolaides
| Articolo seguente Articolo seguente
  • Childbirth-specific patient-reported outcomes as predictors of hospital satisfaction
  • Kimberly D. Gregory, Lisa M. Korst, Samia Saeb, Jeanette McCulloch, Naomi Greene, Arlene Fink, Moshe Fridman

Benvenuto su EM|consulte, il riferimento dei professionisti della salute.
L'accesso al testo integrale di questo articolo richiede un abbonamento.

Già abbonato a @@106933@@ rivista ?

@@150455@@ Voir plus

Il mio account


Dichiarazione CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM è registrato presso la CNIL, dichiarazione n. 1286925.

Ai sensi della legge n. 78-17 del 6 gennaio 1978 sull'informatica, sui file e sulle libertà, Lei puo' esercitare i diritti di opposizione (art.26 della legge), di accesso (art.34 a 38 Legge), e di rettifica (art.36 della legge) per i dati che La riguardano. Lei puo' cosi chiedere che siano rettificati, compeltati, chiariti, aggiornati o cancellati i suoi dati personali inesati, incompleti, equivoci, obsoleti o la cui raccolta o di uso o di conservazione sono vietati.
Le informazioni relative ai visitatori del nostro sito, compresa la loro identità, sono confidenziali.
Il responsabile del sito si impegna sull'onore a rispettare le condizioni legali di confidenzialità applicabili in Francia e a non divulgare tali informazioni a terzi.


Tutto il contenuto di questo sito: Copyright © 2026 Elsevier, i suoi licenziatari e contributori. Tutti i diritti sono riservati. Inclusi diritti per estrazione di testo e di dati, addestramento dell’intelligenza artificiale, e tecnologie simili. Per tutto il contenuto ‘open access’ sono applicati i termini della licenza Creative Commons.