A Conde-Agudelo1, A T Papageorghiou, S H Kennedy, J Villar. 1. Perinatology Research Branch, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development/National Institutes of Health/Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Being able to predict preterm birth is important, as it may allow a high-risk population to be selected for future interventional studies and help in understanding the pathways that lead to preterm birth. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the accuracy of novel biomarkers to predict spontaneous preterm birth in women with singleton pregnancies and no symptoms of preterm labour. SEARCH STRATEGY: Electronic searches in PubMed, Embase, Cinahl, Lilacs, and Medion, references of retrieved articles, and conference proceedings. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: Observational studies that evaluated the accuracy of biomarkers proposed in the last decade to predict spontaneous preterm birth in asymptomatic women. We excluded studies in which biomarkers were evaluated in women with preterm labour. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data on study characteristics, quality, and accuracy. Data were arranged in 2 × 2 contingency tables and synthesised separately for spontaneous preterm birth before 32, 34, and 37 weeks of gestation. We used bivariate meta-analysis to estimate pooled sensitivities and specificities, and calculated likelihood ratios (LRs). MAIN RESULTS: A total of 72 studies, including 89,786 women and evaluating 30 novel biomarkers, met the inclusion criteria. Only three biomarkers (proteome profile and prolactin in cervicovaginal fluid, and matrix metalloproteinase-8 in amniotic fluid) had positive LRs > 10. However, each of these biomarkers was evaluated in only one small study. Four biomarkers had a moderate predictive accuracy (interleukin-6 and angiogenin, in amniotic fluid; human chorionic gonadotrophin and phosphorylated insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1, in cervicovaginal fluid). The remaining biomarkers had low predictive accuracies. CONCLUSIONS: None of the biomarkers evaluated in this review meet the criteria to be considered a clinically useful test to predict spontaneous preterm birth. Further large, prospective cohort studies are needed to evaluate promising biomarkers such as a proteome profile in cervicovaginal fluid.
BACKGROUND: Being able to predict preterm birth is important, as it may allow a high-risk population to be selected for future interventional studies and help in understanding the pathways that lead to preterm birth. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the accuracy of novel biomarkers to predict spontaneous preterm birth in women with singleton pregnancies and no symptoms of preterm labour. SEARCH STRATEGY: Electronic searches in PubMed, Embase, Cinahl, Lilacs, and Medion, references of retrieved articles, and conference proceedings. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: Observational studies that evaluated the accuracy of biomarkers proposed in the last decade to predict spontaneous preterm birth in asymptomatic women. We excluded studies in which biomarkers were evaluated in women with preterm labour. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data on study characteristics, quality, and accuracy. Data were arranged in 2 × 2 contingency tables and synthesised separately for spontaneous preterm birth before 32, 34, and 37 weeks of gestation. We used bivariate meta-analysis to estimate pooled sensitivities and specificities, and calculated likelihood ratios (LRs). MAIN RESULTS: A total of 72 studies, including 89,786 women and evaluating 30 novel biomarkers, met the inclusion criteria. Only three biomarkers (proteome profile and prolactin in cervicovaginal fluid, and matrix metalloproteinase-8 in amniotic fluid) had positive LRs > 10. However, each of these biomarkers was evaluated in only one small study. Four biomarkers had a moderate predictive accuracy (interleukin-6 and angiogenin, in amniotic fluid; human chorionic gonadotrophin and phosphorylated insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1, in cervicovaginal fluid). The remaining biomarkers had low predictive accuracies. CONCLUSIONS: None of the biomarkers evaluated in this review meet the criteria to be considered a clinically useful test to predict spontaneous preterm birth. Further large, prospective cohort studies are needed to evaluate promising biomarkers such as a proteome profile in cervicovaginal fluid.
Authors: Seung Mi Lee; Roberto Romero; Jeong Woo Park; Sun Min Kim; Chan-Wook Park; Steven J Korzeniewski; Tinnakorn Chaiworapongsa; Bo Hyun Yoon Journal: J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med Date: 2012-04-25
Authors: David M Haas; Corette B Parker; Deborah A Wing; Samuel Parry; William A Grobman; Brian M Mercer; Hyagriv N Simhan; Matthew K Hoffman; Robert M Silver; Pathik Wadhwa; Jay D Iams; Matthew A Koch; Steve N Caritis; Ronald J Wapner; M Sean Esplin; Michal A Elovitz; Tatiana Foroud; Alan M Peaceman; George R Saade; Marian Willinger; Uma M Reddy Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2015-01-31 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Pascale Stadelmann; Regina Alessandri; Sigrun Eick; Giovanni E Salvi; Daniel Surbek; Anton Sculean Journal: Clin Oral Investig Date: 2013-03-07 Impact factor: 3.573