Anshul Jadli1, Kanjaksha Ghosh2, Purnima Satoskar3, Kaizad Damania3, Vandana Bansal3, Shrimati Shetty4. 1. National Institute of Immunohaematology (ICMR), 13th Floor, KEM Hospital, Parel, Mumbai 400 012, India. 2. Surat Raktadan Kendra & Research Centre, Regional Blood Transfusion Centre, Surat 395 002, Gujarat, India. 3. Nowrosjee Wadia Maternity Hospital, Acharya Donde Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 400012, India. 4. National Institute of Immunohaematology (ICMR), 13th Floor, KEM Hospital, Parel, Mumbai 400 012, India. Electronic address: shrimatishetty@yahoo.com.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Preeclampsia (PE) remains to be an enigmatic puzzle for clinicians and researchers perplexing them for decades. As delivery remains only choice of treatment, early prediction of PE will offer timely therapeutic invention and hence extensive research efforts have been put in identification of biomarkers which will facilitate early prediction of PE. METHODS: Serum levels of CPP, PlGF and plasma total annexin V MPs were assessed in women who subsequently developed PE (n = 33), IUGR (n = 81) and normal pregnancy outcome (n = 112) at 10-14 weeks of gestation. Comparison of biomarker levels between patients and control group was done using Mann Whitney test. Receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis and binary logistic regression analysis were used to evaluate predictive utility of combination of CPP, PlGF and total annexin V MPs for prediction of PE. RESULTS: Women who subsequently developed PE showed significantly elevated levels of total annexin V MPs [2766.04 (2086.88-3794) versus 1090.74 (631.91-2197.16)] and CPP [440.98 (365.12-488.92) versus 217.8 (171.13-308.98)] compared to controls. Serum PlGF levels were significantly reduced in women with PE 17.68 (12.66-22.32) compared to controls 105.22 (35.02-255.1). Using logistic regression analysis, the combination of CPP, PlGF and total annexin V MPs gave high predictive value with AUC of 0.970, 93.1% sensitivity, 90.7% specificity, 77.50% Positive predictive value, 98.10% Negative predictive value, 11.69 Positive likelihood ratio and 0.07 Negative likelihood ratio for PE prediction at 10-14 weeks. CONCLUSION: The combination of serum markers and plasma microparticles can be used for 10-14 weeks prediction and discrimination of PE from other pregnancy complications.
INTRODUCTION: Preeclampsia (PE) remains to be an enigmatic puzzle for clinicians and researchers perplexing them for decades. As delivery remains only choice of treatment, early prediction of PE will offer timely therapeutic invention and hence extensive research efforts have been put in identification of biomarkers which will facilitate early prediction of PE. METHODS: Serum levels of CPP, PlGF and plasma total annexin V MPs were assessed in women who subsequently developed PE (n = 33), IUGR (n = 81) and normal pregnancy outcome (n = 112) at 10-14 weeks of gestation. Comparison of biomarker levels between patients and control group was done using Mann Whitney test. Receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis and binary logistic regression analysis were used to evaluate predictive utility of combination of CPP, PlGF and total annexin V MPs for prediction of PE. RESULTS:Women who subsequently developed PE showed significantly elevated levels of total annexin V MPs [2766.04 (2086.88-3794) versus 1090.74 (631.91-2197.16)] and CPP [440.98 (365.12-488.92) versus 217.8 (171.13-308.98)] compared to controls. Serum PlGF levels were significantly reduced in women with PE 17.68 (12.66-22.32) compared to controls 105.22 (35.02-255.1). Using logistic regression analysis, the combination of CPP, PlGF and total annexin V MPs gave high predictive value with AUC of 0.970, 93.1% sensitivity, 90.7% specificity, 77.50% Positive predictive value, 98.10% Negative predictive value, 11.69 Positive likelihood ratio and 0.07 Negative likelihood ratio for PE prediction at 10-14 weeks. CONCLUSION: The combination of serum markers and plasma microparticles can be used for 10-14 weeks prediction and discrimination of PE from other pregnancy complications.
Authors: Vanessa R Kay; Matthew T Rätsep; Lindsay S Cahill; Andrew F Hickman; Bruno Zavan; Margaret E Newport; Jacob Ellegood; Christine L Laliberte; James N Reynolds; Peter Carmeliet; Chandrakant Tayade; John G Sled; B Anne Croy Journal: Physiol Genomics Date: 2018-08-17 Impact factor: 3.107
Authors: Carlos Palma; Jessica Jellins; Andrew Lai; Alexis Salas; America Campos; Shayna Sharma; Gregory Duncombe; Jon Hyett; Carlos Salomon Journal: Subcell Biochem Date: 2021
Authors: Julie A Vignato; S Banu Gumusoglu; Heather A Davis; Sabrina M Scroggins; Wendy S Hamilton; Debra S Brandt; Gary L Pierce; Boyd A Knosp; Donna A Santillan; Mark K Santillan Journal: Reprod Sci Date: 2022-08-19 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Anand R Nair; Sebastiao D Silva; Larry N Agbor; Jing Wu; Pablo Nakagawa; Masashi Mukohda; Ko-Ting Lu; Jeremy A Sandgren; Gary L Pierce; Mark K Santillan; Justin L Grobe; Curt D Sigmund Journal: Hypertension Date: 2019-05-20 Impact factor: 9.897