Samuel Parry1, Benjamin A Carper2, William A Grobman3, Ronald J Wapner4, Judith H Chung5, David M Haas6, Brian Mercer7, Robert M Silver8, Hyagriv N Simhan9, George R Saade10, Uma M Reddy11, Corette B Parker2. 1. Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Electronic address: parry@pennmedicine.upenn.edu. 2. RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Columbia University, New York, NY. 5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California, Irvine, Orange, CA. 6. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN. 7. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, MetroHealth System, Cleveland, OH. 8. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Utah Health Sciences Center, Salt Lake City, UT. 9. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. 10. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston, TX. 11. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-to-Be was established to investigate the underlying causes and pathophysiological pathways associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes in nulliparous gravidas. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to study placental physiology and identify novel biomarkers concerning adverse pregnancy outcomes, including preterm birth (medically indicated and spontaneous), preeclampsia, small-for-gestational-age neonates, and stillbirth. We measured levels of placental proteins in the maternal circulation in the first 2 trimesters of pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: Maternal serum samples were collected at 2 study visits (6-13 weeks and 16-21 weeks), and levels of 9 analytes were measured. The analytes we measured were vascular endothelial growth factor, placental growth factor, endoglin, soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1, A disintegrin and metalloproteinase domain-containing protein 12, pregnancy-associated plasma protein A, free beta-human chorionic gonadotropin, inhibin A, and alpha-fetoprotein. The primary outcome was preterm birth between 20 0/7 and 36 6/7 weeks of gestation. The secondary outcomes were spontaneous preterm births, medically indicated preterm births, preeclampsia, small-for-gestational-age neonates, and stillbirth. RESULTS: A total of 10,038 eligible gravidas were enrolled in the Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-to-Be cohort, from which a nested case-control study was performed comparing 800 cases with preterm birth (466 spontaneous preterm births, 330 medically indicated preterm births, and 4 unclassified preterm births), 568 with preeclampsia, 406 with small-for-gestational-age birth, and 49 with stillbirth with 911 controls who delivered at term without complications. Although levels of each analyte generally differed between cases and controls at 1 or 2 visits, the odds ratios revealed a <2-fold difference between cases and controls in all comparisons. Receiver operating characteristic curves, generated to determine the relationship between analyte levels and preterm birth and the other adverse pregnancy outcomes, resulted in areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves that were relatively low (range, 0.50-0.64) for each analyte. Logistic regression modeling demonstrated that areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for predicting adverse pregnancy outcomes were greater using baseline clinical characteristics and combinations of analytes than baseline characteristics alone, but areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves remained relatively low for each outcome (range, 0.65-0.78). CONCLUSION: We have found significant associations between maternal serum levels of analytes evaluated early in pregnancy and subsequent adverse pregnancy outcomes in nulliparous gravidas. However, the test characteristics for these analytes do not support their use as clinical biomarkers to predict adverse pregnancy outcomes, either alone or in combination with maternal clinical characteristics.
BACKGROUND: The Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-to-Be was established to investigate the underlying causes and pathophysiological pathways associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes in nulliparous gravidas. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to study placental physiology and identify novel biomarkers concerning adverse pregnancy outcomes, including preterm birth (medically indicated and spontaneous), preeclampsia, small-for-gestational-age neonates, and stillbirth. We measured levels of placental proteins in the maternal circulation in the first 2 trimesters of pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: Maternal serum samples were collected at 2 study visits (6-13 weeks and 16-21 weeks), and levels of 9 analytes were measured. The analytes we measured were vascular endothelial growth factor, placental growth factor, endoglin, soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1, A disintegrin and metalloproteinase domain-containing protein 12, pregnancy-associated plasma protein A, free beta-human chorionic gonadotropin, inhibin A, and alpha-fetoprotein. The primary outcome was preterm birth between 20 0/7 and 36 6/7 weeks of gestation. The secondary outcomes were spontaneous preterm births, medically indicated preterm births, preeclampsia, small-for-gestational-age neonates, and stillbirth. RESULTS: A total of 10,038 eligible gravidas were enrolled in the Nulliparous Pregnancy Outcomes Study: Monitoring Mothers-to-Be cohort, from which a nested case-control study was performed comparing 800 cases with preterm birth (466 spontaneous preterm births, 330 medically indicated preterm births, and 4 unclassified preterm births), 568 with preeclampsia, 406 with small-for-gestational-age birth, and 49 with stillbirth with 911 controls who delivered at term without complications. Although levels of each analyte generally differed between cases and controls at 1 or 2 visits, the odds ratios revealed a <2-fold difference between cases and controls in all comparisons. Receiver operating characteristic curves, generated to determine the relationship between analyte levels and preterm birth and the other adverse pregnancy outcomes, resulted in areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves that were relatively low (range, 0.50-0.64) for each analyte. Logistic regression modeling demonstrated that areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for predicting adverse pregnancy outcomes were greater using baseline clinical characteristics and combinations of analytes than baseline characteristics alone, but areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves remained relatively low for each outcome (range, 0.65-0.78). CONCLUSION: We have found significant associations between maternal serum levels of analytes evaluated early in pregnancy and subsequent adverse pregnancy outcomes in nulliparous gravidas. However, the test characteristics for these analytes do not support their use as clinical biomarkers to predict adverse pregnancy outcomes, either alone or in combination with maternal clinical characteristics.
Authors: Samuel Parry; Anthony Sciscione; David M Haas; William A Grobman; Jay D Iams; Brian M Mercer; Robert M Silver; Hyagriv N Simhan; Ronald J Wapner; Deborah A Wing; Michal A Elovitz; Frank P Schubert; Alan Peaceman; M Sean Esplin; Steve Caritis; Michael P Nageotte; Benjamin A Carper; George R Saade; Uma M Reddy; Corette B Parker Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2017-07-13 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Lorraine Dugoff; John C Hobbins; Fergal D Malone; T Flint Porter; David Luthy; Christine H Comstock; Gary Hankins; Richard L Berkowitz; Irwin Merkatz; Sabrina D Craigo; Ilan E Timor-Tritsch; Steven R Carr; Honor M Wolfe; John Vidaver; Mary E D'Alton Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Harald Zeisler; Elisa Llurba; Frederic Chantraine; Manu Vatish; Anne Cathrine Staff; Maria Sennström; Matts Olovsson; Shaun P Brennecke; Holger Stepan; Deirdre Allegranza; Peter Dilba; Maria Schoedl; Martin Hund; Stefan Verlohren Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-01-07 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Richard J Levine; Sharon E Maynard; Cong Qian; Kee-Hak Lim; Lucinda J England; Kai F Yu; Enrique F Schisterman; Ravi Thadhani; Benjamin P Sachs; Franklin H Epstein; Baha M Sibai; Vikas P Sukhatme; S Ananth Karumanchi Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-02-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kate E Duhig; Jenny Myers; Paul T Seed; Jenie Sparkes; Jessica Lowe; Rachael M Hunter; Andrew H Shennan; Lucy C Chappell Journal: Lancet Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: I Papastefanou; D Wright; M Lolos; K Anampousi; M Mamalis; K H Nicolaides Journal: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol Date: 2021-02-15 Impact factor: 7.299