Maternal serum inhibin-A in pregnancies with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: implications for screening for Down's syndrome

Second trimester prediction of gestational diabetes: maternal analytes as an additional screening tool

OBJECTIVES

Early diagnosis of gestational diabetes can lead to greater optimization of glucose control. We evaluated associations between maternal serum analytes (alpha-fetoprotein [AFP], free beta-human chorionic gonadotropin [beta-hCG], inhibin, and estriol) and the development of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study identified single-ton pregnancies with available second trimester serum analytes between 2009 and 2017. GDM was identified by ICD-9 and -10 codes. We examined the associations between analyte levels and GDM and to adjust for potential confounders routinely collected during genetic serum screening (maternal age, BMI, and race) using logistic regression. Optimal logistic regression predictive modeling for GDM was then performed using the analyte levels and the above mentioned potential confounders. The performance of the model was assessed by receiver operator curves.

RESULTS

Out of 5,709 patients, 660 (11.6%) were diagnosed with GDM. Increasing AFP and estriol were associated with decreasing risk of GDM, aOR 0.76 [95% CI 0.60-0.95] and aOR 0.67 [95% CI 0.50-0.89] respectively. Increasing beta-hCG was associated with a decreasing risk for GDM(aOR 0.84 [95% CI 0.73-0.97]). There was no association with inhibin. The most predictive GDM predictive model included beta-hCG and estriol in addition to the clinical variables of age, BMI, and race (area under the curve (AUC 0.75), buy this was not statistically different than using clinical variables alone (AUC 0.74) (p=0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing second trimester AFP, beta-hCG, and estriol are associated with decreasing risks of GDM, though do not improve the predictive ability for GDM when added to clinical risk factors of age, BMI, and race.

Fetal overgrowth in pregnancies complicated by diabetes: development of a clinical prediction index

PURPOSE

To develop an index to predict fetal overgrowth in pregnancies complicated by diabetes.

METHODS

Data were derived from a cohort of 275 women with singleton gestations in a collaborative diabetes in pregnancy program. Regression analysis incorporated clinical factors available in the first 20-30 weeks of pregnancy that were assigned beta-coefficient-based weights, the sum of which yielded a fetal overgrowth index (composite score).

RESULTS

Fifty-one (18.5%) pregnancies were complicated by fetal overgrowth. The derived index included five clinical factors: age ≤ 30, history of macrosomia, excessive gestational weight gain, enlarged fetal abdominal circumference, and fasting hyperglycemia. Area under the curve (AUC) for the index is 0.88 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82-0.92]. Cut-points were selected to identify "high-risk" and "low-risk" ranges (≥ 8 and ≤ 3) that have positive and negative predictive values of 84% (95% CI 70-98%) and 95% (95% CI 92-98%), respectively. The majority of women in our cohort (n = 182, 66%) had a "low-risk" index while 9% (n = 25) had a "high-risk" index. Sub-analyses of nulliparous women and women with gestational and pre-gestational diabetes revealed that the overgrowth index was equally or more predictive when applied separately to each of these groups.

CONCLUSION

This fetal overgrowth index that incorporates five clinical factors provides a means of predicting fetal overgrowth and thereby serves as a tool for targeting the allocation of healthcare resources and treatment individualization.

First trimester ultrasound tests alone or in combination with first trimester serum tests for Down's syndrome screening

BACKGROUND

Down's syndrome occurs when a person has three, rather than two copies of chromosome 21; or the specific area of chromosome 21 implicated in causing Down's syndrome. It is the commonest congenital cause of mental disability and also leads to numerous metabolic and structural problems. It can be life-threatening, or lead to considerable ill health, although some individuals have only mild problems and can lead relatively normal lives. Having a baby with Down's syndrome is likely to have a significant impact on family life.Non-invasive screening based on biochemical analysis of maternal serum or urine, or fetal ultrasound measurements, allows estimates of the risk of a pregnancy being affected and provides information to guide decisions about definitive testing.Before agreeing to screening tests, parents need to be fully informed about the risks, benefits and possible consequences of such a test. This includes subsequent choices for further tests they may face, and the implications of both false positive and false negative screening tests (i.e. invasive diagnostic testing, and the possibility that a miscarried fetus may be chromosomally normal). The decisions that may be faced by expectant parents inevitably engender a high level of anxiety at all stages of the screening process, and the outcomes of screening can be associated with considerable physical and psychological morbidity. No screening test can predict the severity of problems a person with Down's syndrome will have.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate and compare the accuracy of first trimester ultrasound markers alone, and in combination with first trimester serum tests for the detection of Down's syndrome.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out extensive literature searches including MEDLINE (1980 to 25 August 2011), Embase (1980 to 25 August 2011), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 25 August 2011), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 25 August 2011), and The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (the Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 7). We checked reference lists and published review articles for additional potentially relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies evaluating tests of first trimester ultrasound screening, alone or in combination with first trimester serum tests (up to 14 weeks' gestation) for Down's syndrome, compared with a reference standard, either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted as test positive/test negative results for Down's and non-Down's pregnancies allowing estimation of detection rates (sensitivity) and false positive rates (1-specificity). We performed quality assessment according to QUADAS criteria. We used hierarchical summary ROC meta-analytical methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy. Analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests was undertaken. We investigated the impact of maternal age on test performance in subgroup analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 126 studies (152 publications) involving 1,604,040 fetuses (including 8454 Down's syndrome cases). Studies were generally good quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high-risk pregnancies. Sixty test combinations were evaluated formed from combinations of 11 different ultrasound markers (nuchal translucency (NT), nasal bone, ductus venosus Doppler, maxillary bone length, fetal heart rate, aberrant right subclavian artery, frontomaxillary facial angle, presence of mitral gap, tricuspid regurgitation, tricuspid blood flow and iliac angle 90 degrees); 12 serum tests (inhibin A, alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), free beta human chorionic gonadotrophin (ßhCG), total hCG, pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A), unconjugated oestriol (uE3), disintegrin and metalloprotease 12 (ADAM 12), placental growth factor (PlGF), placental growth hormone (PGH), invasive trophoblast antigen (ITA) (synonymous with hyperglycosylated hCG), growth hormone binding protein (GHBP) and placental protein 13 (PP13)); and maternal age. The most frequently evaluated serum markers in combination with ultrasound markers were PAPP-A and free ßhCG.Comparisons of the 10 most frequently evaluated test strategies showed that a combined NT, PAPP-A, free ßhCG and maternal age test strategy significantly outperformed ultrasound markers alone (with or without maternal age) except nasal bone, detecting about nine out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies at a 5% false positive rate (FPR). In both direct and indirect comparisons, the combined NT, PAPP-A, free ßhCG and maternal age test strategy showed superior diagnostic accuracy to an NT and maternal age test strategy (P < 0.0001). Based on the indirect comparison of all available studies for the two tests, the sensitivity (95% confidence interval) estimated at a 5% FPR for the combined NT, PAPP-A, free ßhCG and maternal age test strategy (69 studies; 1,173,853 fetuses including 6010 with Down's syndrome) was 87% (86 to 89) and for the NT and maternal age test strategy (50 studies; 530,874 fetuses including 2701 Down's syndrome pregnancies) was 71% (66 to 75). Combinations of NT with other ultrasound markers, PAPP-A and free ßhCG were evaluated in one or two studies and showed sensitivities of more than 90% and specificities of more than 95%.High-risk populations (defined before screening was done, mainly due to advanced maternal age of 35 years or more, or previous pregnancies affected with Down's syndrome) showed lower detection rates compared to routine screening populations at a 5% FPR. Women who miscarried in the over 35 group were more likely to have been offered an invasive test to verify a negative screening results, whereas those under 35 were usually not offered invasive testing for a negative screening result. Pregnancy loss in women under 35 therefore leads to under-ascertainment of screening results, potentially missing a proportion of affected pregnancies and affecting test sensitivity. Conversely, for the NT, PAPP-A, free ßhCG and maternal age test strategy, detection rates and false positive rates increased with maternal age in the five studies that provided data separately for the subset of women aged 35 years or more.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Test strategies that combine ultrasound markers with serum markers, especially PAPP-A and free ßhCG, and maternal age were significantly better than those involving only ultrasound markers (with or without maternal age) except nasal bone. They detect about nine out of 10 Down's affected pregnancies for a fixed 5% FPR. Although the absence of nasal bone appeared to have a high diagnostic accuracy, only five out of 10 affected Down's pregnancies were detected at a 1% FPR.

First and second trimester serum tests with and without first trimester ultrasound tests for Down's syndrome screening

BACKGROUND

Down's syndrome occurs when a person has three copies of chromosome 21 (or the specific area of chromosome 21 implicated in causing Down's syndrome) rather than two. It is the commonest congenital cause of mental disability. Non-invasive screening based on biochemical analysis of maternal serum or urine, or fetal ultrasound measurements, allows estimates of the risk of a pregnancy being affected and provides information to guide decisions about definitive testing.  Before agreeing to screening tests, parents need to be fully informed about the risks, benefits and possible consequences of such a test. This includes subsequent choices for further tests they may face, and the implications of both false positive (i.e. invasive diagnostic testing, and the possibility that a miscarried fetus may be chromosomally normal) and false negative screening tests (i.e. a fetus with Down's syndrome will be missed). The decisions that may be faced by expectant parents inevitably engender a high level of anxiety at all stages of the screening process, and the outcomes of screening can be associated with considerable physical and psychological morbidity. No screening test can predict the severity of problems a person with Down's syndrome will have.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate and compare the accuracy of first and second trimester serum markers with and without first trimester ultrasound markers for the detection of Down's syndrome in the antenatal period, as combinations of markers.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a sensitive and comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE (1980 to 25 August 2011), Embase (1980 to 25 August 2011), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 25 August 2011), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 25 August 2011), the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (the Cochrane Library 25 August 2011), MEDION (25 August 2011), the Database of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Laboratory Medicine (25 August 2011), the National Research Register (Archived 2007), and Health Services Research Projects in Progress database (25 August 2011). We did not apply a diagnostic test search filter. We did forward citation searching in ISI citation indices, Google Scholar and PubMed 'related articles'. We also searched reference lists of retrieved articles SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies evaluating tests of combining first and second trimester maternal serum markers in women up to 24 weeks of gestation for Down's syndrome, with or without first trimester ultrasound markers, compared with a reference standard, either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted as test positive/test negative results for Down's and non-Down's pregnancies allowing estimation of detection rates (sensitivity) and false positive rates (1-specificity). We performed quality assessment according to QUADAS criteria. We used hierarchical summary ROC meta-analytical methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy. Analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests was undertaken. We investigated the impact of maternal age on test performance in subgroup analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-two studies (reported in 25 publications) involving 228,615 pregnancies (including 1067 with Down's syndrome) were included. Studies were generally high quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high risk pregnancies. Ten studies made direct comparisons between tests. Thirty-two different test combinations were evaluated formed from combinations of eight different tests and maternal age; first trimester nuchal translucency (NT) and the serum markers AFP, uE3, total hCG, free βhCG, Inhibin A, PAPP-A and ADAM 12. We looked at tests combining first and second trimester markers with or without ultrasound as complete tests, and we also examined stepwise and contingent strategies.Meta-analysis of the six most frequently evaluated test combinations showed that a test strategy involving maternal age and a combination of first trimester NT and PAPP-A, and second trimester total hCG, uE3, AFP and Inhibin A significantly outperformed other test combinations that involved only one serum marker or NT in the first trimester, detecting about nine out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies at a 5% false positive rate. However, the evidence was limited in terms of the number of studies evaluating this strategy, and we therefore cannot recommend one single screening strategy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tests involving first trimester ultrasound with first and second trimester serum markers in combination with maternal age are significantly better than those without ultrasound, or those evaluating first trimester ultrasound in combination with second trimester serum markers, without first trimester serum markers. We cannot make recommendations about a specific strategy on the basis of the small number of studies available.

Urine tests for Down's syndrome screening

BACKGROUND

Down's syndrome occurs when a person has three copies of chromosome 21, or the specific area of chromosome 21 implicated in causing Down's syndrome, rather than two. It is the commonest congenital cause of mental disability and also leads to numerous metabolic and structural problems. It can be life-threatening, or lead to considerable ill health, although some individuals have only mild problems and can lead relatively normal lives. Having a baby with Down's syndrome is likely to have a significant impact on family life. The risk of a Down's syndrome affected pregnancy increases with advancing maternal age.Noninvasive screening based on biochemical analysis of maternal serum or urine, or fetal ultrasound measurements, allows estimates of the risk of a pregnancy being affected and provides information to guide decisions about definitive testing. Before agreeing to screening tests, parents need to be fully informed about the risks, benefits and possible consequences of such a test. This includes subsequent choices for further tests they may face, and the implications of both false positive and false negative screening tests (i.e. invasive diagnostic testing, and the possibility that a miscarried fetus may be chromosomally normal). The decisions that may be faced by expectant parents inevitably engender a high level of anxiety at all stages of the screening process, and the outcomes of screening can be associated with considerable physical and psychological morbidity. No screening test can predict the severity of problems a person with Down's syndrome will have.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate and compare the accuracy of first and second trimester urine markers for the detection of Down's syndrome.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out a sensitive and comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE (1980 to 25 August 2011), EMBASE (1980 to 25 August 2011), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 25 August 2011), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 25 August 2011), The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 7), MEDION (25 August 2011), The Database of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Laboratory Medicine (25 August 2011), The National Research Register (archived 2007), Health Services Research Projects in Progress database (25 August 2011). We studied reference lists and published review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies evaluating tests of maternal urine in women up to 24 weeks of gestation for Down's syndrome, compared with a reference standard, either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data as test positive or test negative results for Down's and non-Down's pregnancies allowing estimation of detection rates (sensitivity) and false positive rates (1-specificity). We performed quality assessment according to QUADAS (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) criteria. We used hierarchical summary ROC (receiver operating characteristic) meta-analytical methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy. We performed analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests. We investigated the impact of maternal age on test performance in subgroup analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 studies involving 18,013 pregnancies (including 527 with Down's syndrome). Studies were generally of high quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high-risk pregnancies. Twenty-four test combinations were evaluated formed from combinations of the following seven different markers with and without maternal age: AFP (alpha-fetoprotein), ITA (invasive trophoblast antigen), ß-core fragment, free ßhCG (beta human chorionic gonadotrophin), total hCG, oestriol, gonadotropin peptide and various marker ratios. The strategies evaluated included three double tests and seven single tests in combination with maternal age, and one triple test, two double tests and 11 single tests without maternal age. Twelve of the 19 studies only evaluated the performance of a single test strategy while the remaining seven evaluated at least two test strategies. Two marker combinations were evaluated in more than four studies; second trimester ß-core fragment (six studies), and second trimester ß-core fragment with maternal age (five studies).In direct test comparisons, for a 5% false positive rate (FPR), the diagnostic accuracy of the double marker second trimester ß-core fragment and oestriol with maternal age test combination was significantly better (ratio of diagnostic odds ratio (RDOR): 2.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1 to 4.5), P = 0.02) (summary sensitivity of 73% (CI 57 to 85) at a cut-point of 5% FPR) than that of the single marker test strategy of second trimester ß-core fragment and maternal age (summary sensitivity of 56% (CI 45 to 66) at a cut-point of 5% FPR), but was not significantly better (RDOR: 1.5 (0.8 to 2.8), P = 0.21) than that of the second trimester ß-core fragment to oestriol ratio and maternal age test strategy (summary sensitivity of 71% (CI 51 to 86) at a cut-point of 5% FPR).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tests involving second trimester ß-core fragment and oestriol with maternal age are significantly more sensitive than the single marker second trimester ß-core fragment and maternal age, however, there were few studies. There is a paucity of evidence available to support the use of urine testing for Down's syndrome screening in clinical practice where alternatives are available.

First trimester serum tests for Down's syndrome screening

BACKGROUND

Down's syndrome occurs when a person has three, rather than two copies of chromosome 21; or the specific area of chromosome 21 implicated in causing Down's syndrome. It is the commonest congenital cause of mental disability and also leads to numerous metabolic and structural problems. It can be life-threatening, or lead to considerable ill health, although some individuals have only mild problems and can lead relatively normal lives. Having a baby with Down's syndrome is likely to have a significant impact on family life.Noninvasive screening based on biochemical analysis of maternal serum or urine, or fetal ultrasound measurements, allows estimates of the risk of a pregnancy being affected and provides information to guide decisions about definitive testing. However, no test can predict the severity of problems a person with Down's syndrome will have.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to estimate and compare the accuracy of first trimester serum markers for the detection of Down's syndrome in the antenatal period, both as individual markers and as combinations of markers. Accuracy is described by the proportion of fetuses with Down's syndrome detected by screening before birth (sensitivity or detection rate) and the proportion of women with a low risk (normal) screening test result who subsequently had a baby unaffected by Down's syndrome (specificity).

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a sensitive and comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE (1980 to 25 August 2011), Embase (1980 to 25 August 2011), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 25 August 2011), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 25 August 2011), The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (The Cochrane Library 25 August 2011), MEDION (25 August 2011), The Database of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Laboratory Medicine (25 August 2011), The National Research Register (Archived 2007), Health Services Research Projects in Progress database (25 August 2011). We did forward citation searching ISI citation indices, Google Scholar and PubMed 'related articles'. We did not apply a diagnostic test search filter. We also searched reference lists and published review articles.  

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies in which all women from a given population had one or more index test(s) compared to a reference standard (either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection). Both consecutive series and diagnostic case-control study designs were included. Randomised trials where individuals were randomised to different screening strategies and all verified using a reference standard were also eligible for inclusion. Studies in which test strategies were compared head-to-head either in the same women, or between randomised groups were identified for inclusion in separate comparisons of test strategies. We excluded studies if they included less than five Down's syndrome cases, or more than 20% of participants were not followed up.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data as test positive or test negative results for Down's and non-Down's pregnancies allowing estimation of detection rates (sensitivity) and false positive rates (1-specificity). We performed quality assessment according to QUADAS (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) criteria. We used hierarchical summary ROC meta-analytical methods or random-effects logistic regression methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy as appropriate. Analyses of studies allowing direct and indirect comparisons between tests were undertaken.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 56 studies (reported in 68 publications) involving 204,759 pregnancies (including 2113 with Down's syndrome). Studies were generally of good quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high-risk pregnancies. We evaluated 78 test combinations formed from combinations of 18 different tests, with or without maternal age; ADAM12 (a disintegrin and metalloprotease), AFP (alpha-fetoprotein), inhibin, PAPP-A (pregnancy-associated plasma protein A, ITA (invasive trophoblast antigen), free βhCG (beta human chorionic gonadotrophin), PlGF (placental growth factor), SP1 (Schwangerschafts protein 1), total hCG, progesterone, uE3 (unconjugated oestriol), GHBP (growth hormone binding protein), PGH (placental growth hormone), hyperglycosylated hCG, ProMBP (proform of eosinophil major basic protein), hPL (human placental lactogen), (free αhCG, and free ßhCG to AFP ratio. Direct comparisons between two or more tests were made in 27 studies.Meta-analysis of the nine best performing or frequently evaluated test combinations showed that a test strategy involving maternal age and a double marker combination of PAPP-A and free ßhCG significantly outperformed the individual markers (with or without maternal age) detecting about seven out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies at a 5% false positive rate (FPR). Limited evidence suggested that marker combinations involving PAPP-A may be more sensitive than those without PAPP-A.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tests involving two markers in combination with maternal age, specifically PAPP-A, free βhCG and maternal age are significantly better than those involving single markers with and without age. They detect seven out of 10 Down's affected pregnancies for a fixed 5% FPR. The addition of further markers (triple tests) has not been shown to be statistically superior; the studies included are small with limited power to detect a difference.The screening blood tests themselves have no adverse effects for the woman, over and above the risks of a routine blood test. However some women who have a 'high risk' screening test result, and are given amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling (CVS) have a risk of miscarrying a baby unaffected by Down's. Parents will need to weigh up this risk when deciding whether or not to have an amniocentesis or CVS following a 'high risk' screening test result.

Second trimester serum tests for Down's Syndrome screening

BACKGROUND

Down's syndrome occurs when a person has three copies of chromosome 21 - or the specific area of chromosome 21 implicated in causing Down's syndrome - rather than two. It is the commonest congenital cause of mental retardation. Noninvasive screening based on biochemical analysis of maternal serum or urine, or fetal ultrasound measurements, allows estimates of the risk of a pregnancy being affected and provides information to guide decisions about definitive testing.  

OBJECTIVES

To estimate and compare the accuracy of second trimester serum markers for the detection of Down's syndrome.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out a sensitive and comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE (1980 to May 2007), EMBASE (1980 to 18 May 2007), BIOSIS via EDINA (1985 to 18 May 2007), CINAHL via OVID (1982 to 18 May 2007), The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (The Cochrane Library 2007, Issue 1), MEDION (May 2007), The Database of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in Laboratory Medicine (May 2007), The National Research Register (May 2007), Health Services Research Projects in Progress database (May 2007). We studied reference lists and published review articles.  

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies evaluating tests of maternal serum in women at 14-24 weeks of gestation for Down's syndrome, compared with a reference standard, either chromosomal verification or macroscopic postnatal inspection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted as test positive/test negative results for Down's and non-Down's pregnancies allowing estimation of detection rates (sensitivity) and false positive rates (1-specificity). We performed quality assessment according to QUADAS criteria. We used hierarchical summary ROC meta-analytical methods to analyse test performance and compare test accuracy. Analysis of studies allowing direct comparison between tests was undertaken. We investigated the impact of maternal age on test performance in subgroup analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-nine studies involving 341,261 pregnancies (including 1,994 with Down's syndrome) were included. Studies were generally high quality, although differential verification was common with invasive testing of only high-risk pregnancies. Seventeen studies made direct comparisons between tests. Fifty-four test combinations were evaluated formed from combinations of 12 different tests and maternal age; alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), unconjugated oestriol (uE3), total human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), free beta human chorionic gonadotrophin (βhCG), free alpha human chorionic gonadotrophin (αhCG), Inhibin A, SP2, CA125, troponin, pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A), placental growth factor (PGF) and proform of eosinophil major basic protein (ProMBP).Meta-analysis of 12 best performing or frequently evaluated test combinations showed double and triple tests (involving AFP, uE3, total hCG, free βhCG) significantly outperform individual markers, detecting six to seven out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies at a 5% false positive rate. Tests additionally involving inhibin performed best (eight out of every 10 Down's syndrome pregnancies) but were not shown to be significantly better than standard triple tests in direct comparisons. Significantly lower sensitivity occurred in women over the age of 35 years. Women who miscarried in the over 35 group were more likely to have been offered an invasive test to verify a negative screening results, whereas those under 35 were usually not offered invasive testing for a negative screening result. Pregnancy loss in women under 35 therefore leads to under ascertainment of screening results, potentially missing a proportion of affected pregnancies and affecting the accuracy of the sensitivity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Tests involving two or more markers in combination with maternal age are significantly more sensitive than those involving one marker. The value of combining four or more tests or including inhibin have not been proven to show statistically significant improvement. Further study is required to investigate reduced test performance in women aged over 35 and the impact of differential pregnancy loss on study findings.

Korean-specific parameter models for calculating the risk of Down syndrome in the second trimester of pregnancy

The purpose of the current study was to propose a Korean-specific parameter set for calculating the risk of Down syndrome in the second trimester of pregnancy and to determine the screening performances of triple and quadruple tests in Korean women. Using the data on triple or quadruple screening from three hospitals in Korea during 7 yr, we re-converted the concentrations of four serum markers to multiple of median values according to gestational age and maternal weight. After re-calculating the risk of Down syndrome in each pregnancy by multiplying maternal age-specific risk by the likelihood ratio values for the serum markers, screening performances and optimal cut-off values of triple and quadruple tests were analyzed. Among 16,077 pregnancies, 23 cases had Down syndrome (1.4/1,000 deliveries). Compared to the previous program, the tests with new parameters had improved screening performance. The triple and quadruple tests had detection rates of 65.2% and 72.7%, respectively, at a false-positive rate of 5%. The optimal cut-off value for the quadruple and triple tests was 1:250. We have presented a Korean-specific parameter set for Down syndrome screening. The proposed screening test using this parameter set may improve the performance of Down syndrome screening for Korean women.

Obstetrical complications associated with abnormal maternal serum markers analytes

OBJECTIVE

To review the obstetrical outcomes associated with abnormally elevated or decreased level of one or more of the most frequently measured maternal serum marker analytes used in screening for aneuploidy. To provide guidance to facilitate the management of pregnancies that have abnormal levels of one of more markers and to assess the usefulness of these markers as a screening test.

OPTIONS

Perinatal outcomes associated with abnormal levels of maternal serum markers analytes are compared with the outcomes of pregnancies with normal levels of the same analytes or the general population.

EVIDENCE

The Cochrane Library and Medline were searched for English-language articles published from 1966 to February 2007, relating to maternal serum markers and perinatal outcomes. Search terms included PAPP-A (pregnancy associated plasma protein A), AFP (alphafetoprotein), hCG (human chorionic gonadotropin), estriol, unconjugated estriol, inhibin, inhibin-A, maternal serum screen, triple marker screen, quadruple screen, integrated prenatal screen, first trimester screen, and combined prenatal screen. All study types were reviewed. Randomized controlled trials were considered evidence of the highest quality, followed by cohort studies. Key individual studies on which the recommendations are based are referenced. Supporting data for each recommendation are summarized with evaluative comments and references. The evidence was evaluated using the guidelines developed by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.

VALUES

The evidence collected was reviewed by the Genetics Committee of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

The benefit expected from this guideline is to facilitate early detection of potential adverse pregnancy outcomes when risks are identified at the time of a maternal serum screen. It will help further stratification of risk and provide options for pregnancy management to minimize the impact of pregnancy complications. The potential harms resulting from such practice are associated with the so called false positive (i.e., uncomplicated pregnancies labelled at increased risk for adverse perinatal outcomes), the potential stress associated with such a label, and the investigations performed for surveillance in this situation. No cost-benefit analysis is available to assess costs and savings associated with this guideline. SUMMARY STATEMENTS: 1. An unexplained level of a maternal serum marker analyte is defined as an abnormal level after confirmation of gestational age by ultrasound and exclusion of maternal, fetal, or placental causes for the abnormal level. (III) 2. Abnormally elevated levels of serum markers are associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes in twin pregnancies, after correction for the number of fetuses. Spontaneous or planned mutifetal reductions may result in abnormal elevations of serum markers. (II-2) RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. In the first trimester, an unexplained low PAPP-A (< 0.4 MoM) and/or a low hCG (< 0.5 MoM) are associated with an increased frequency of adverse obstetrical outcomes, and, at present, no specific protocol for treatment is available. (II-2A) In the second trimester, an unexplained elevation of maternal serum AFP (> 2.5 MoM), hCG (> 3.0 MoM), and/or inhibin-A (> or =2.0 MoM) or a decreased level of maternal serum AFP (< 0.25 MoM) and/or unconjugated estriol (< 0.5 MoM) are associated with an increased frequency of adverse obstetrical outcomes, and, at present, no specific protocol for treatment is available. (II-2A) 2. Pregnant woman with an unexplained elevated PAPP-A or hCG in the first trimester and an unexplained low hCG or inhibin-A and an unexplained elevated unconjugated estriol in the second trimester should receive normal antenatal care, as this pattern of analytes is not associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. (II-2A) 3. The combination of second or third trimester placenta previa and an unexplained elevated maternal serum AFP should increase the index of suspicion for placenta accreta, increta, or percreta. (II-2B) An assessment (ultrasound, MRI) of the placental-uterine interface should be performed. Abnormal invasion should be strongly suspected, and the planning of delivery location and technique should be done accordingly. (III-C) 4. A prenatal consultation with the medical genetics department is recommended for low unconjugated estriol levels (<0.3 MoM), as this analyte pattern can be associated with genetic conditions. (II-2B) 5. The clinical management protocol for identification of potential adverse obstetrical outcomes should be guided by one or more abnormal maternal serum marker analyte value rather than the false positive screening results for the trisomy 21 and/or the trisomy 18 screen. (II-2B) 6. Pregnant woman who are undergoing renal dialysis or who have had a renal transplant should be offered maternal serum screening, but interpretation of the result is difficult as the level of serum hCG is not reliable. (II-2A) 7. Abnormal maternal uterine artery Doppler in association with elevated maternal serum AFP, hCG, or inhibin-A or decreased PAPP-A identifies a group of women at greater risk of IUGR and gestational hypertension with proteinuria. Uterine artery Doppler measurements may be used in the evaluation of an unexplained abnormal level of either of these markers. (II-2B) 8. Further research is recommended to identify the best protocol for pregnancy management and surveillance in women identified at increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes based on an abnormality of a maternal serum screening analyte. (III-A) 9. In the absence of evidence supporting any specific surveillance protocol, an obstetrician should be consulted in order to establish a fetal surveillance plan specific to the increased obstetrical risks (maternal and fetal) identified. This plan may include enhanced patient education on signs and symptoms of the most common complications, increased frequency of antenatal visits, increased ultrasound (fetal growth, amniotic fluid levels), and fetal surveillance (biophysical profile, arterial and venous Doppler), and cervical length assessment. (III-A) 10. Limited information suggests that, in women with elevated hCG in the second trimester and/or abnormal uterine artery Doppler (at 22-24 weeks), low-dose aspirin (60-81 mg daily) is associated with higher birthweight and lower incidence of gestational hypertension with proteinuria. This therapy may be used in women who are at risk. (II-2B) 11. Further studies are recommended in order to assess the benefits of low-dose aspirin, low molecular weight heparin, or other therapeutic options in pregnancies determined to be at increased risk on the basis of an abnormal maternal serum screening analyte. (III-A) 12. Multiple maternal serum markers screening should not be used at present as a population-based screening method for adverse pregnancy outcomes (such as preeclampsia, placental abruption, and stillbirth) outside an established research protocol, as sensitivity is low, false positive rates are high, and no management protocol has been shown to clearly improve outcomes. (II-2D) When maternal serum screening is performed for the usual clinical indication (fetal aneuploidy and/or neural tube defect), abnormal analyte results can be utilized for the identification of pregnancies at risk and to direct their clinical management. (II-2B) Further studies are recommended to determine the optimal screening method for poor maternal and/or perinatal outcomes. (III-A).

Second-trimester prenatal screening markers for Down syndrome in women with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus

Published studies have shown that some serum markers used in screening for Down syndrome tend to be lower among women with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM). On this basis, many screening programmes adjust the marker levels to take account of this difference. Recent studies suggested that the marker levels were not different, and so adjustment may no longer be needed, possibly because of better diabetic control. Data from a prenatal screening programme for Down syndrome were examined to see whether the median values of second-trimester screening markers were still reduced in pregnant women with IDDM. A total of 366 women with IDDM singleton pregnancies without Down syndrome were identified from the screening programme at Barts from 1989 to 2002. After allowing for maternal weight, the median multiples of the median (MoM) for IDDM-unaffected singleton pregnancies were as follows: 0.88 (95% confidence interval 0.84-0.93) for alphafetoprotein (AFP), 0.95 (0.91-0.99) for unconjugated oestriol (uE3), 0.90 (0.80-1.01) for total human chorionic gonadotrophin (total hCG), 0.98 (0.88-1.08) for free beta-hCG, and 0.99 (0.89-1.10) for inhibin-A. The median levels for AFP and uE3 were statistically significantly lower in pregnant women with IDDM. The other markers were not significantly different in women with and without IDDM. There remains a case for adjusting AFP and uE3 levels in women with IDDM in prenatal screening programmes for Down syndrome.

Using Down syndrome serum screening results to predict low birthweight

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the use of prenatal maternal serum screening results for Down syndrome, for the prediction of low (<2500 g) and very low (<1500 g) birthweight.

DESIGN

Record linkage of maternal serum screening results with the corresponding birth records.

PARTICIPANTS

42 259 women whose pregnancies had been screened for the risk of Down syndrome.

SETTING

Three East London maternity units, between February 1989 and August 1998.

RESULTS

Estimates were made of the effectiveness of single markers only for the prediction of low birthweight, and of multiple markers together with mother's weight and smoking habit. As reported previously, high levels of the single markers alpha-fetoprotein and total human chorionic gonadotrophin, inhibin A, and low levels of unconjugated oestriol were associated with low birthweight. However, the best prediction was obtained when multiple serum markers comprising alpha-fetoprotein, unconjugated oestriol, and inhibin A were used in combination together with mother's weight and adjustment for smoking habit. For a false-positive rate of 5%, this combination predicted 23% of low birthweight and 39% of very low birthweight babies, possibly the best method of prediction to date.

CONCLUSION

Prediction of low birthweight derived from Down syndrome screening could be used, for little extra cost, to advise on place of delivery or to select candidates for randomised clinical trials of low birthweight prevention.

Advances in prenatal screening for Down syndrome: I. general principles and second trimester testing

BACKGROUND

Down syndrome is one of the most important causes of mental retardation in the population. In the absence of prenatal screening and diagnosis, prevalence at birth in the United States would currently exceed 1:600. The purpose of prenatal screening is to identify those women at the increased risk for an affected pregnancy and to maximize the options available to these women.

TESTS AVAILABLE

Second trimester serum screening involves combining the maternal age-specific risk for an affected pregnancy with the risks associated with the concentrations of maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein (MSAFP), unconjugated estriol (uE3), and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) (triple testing). A forth analyte, inhibin-A (INH-A), is increasingly being utilized (quadruple testing). Optimal second trimester screening requires the integration of a number of clinical variables, the most important of which is an accurate assessment of gestational age. In addition to Down syndrome, the triple and quadruple tests preferentially identify fetal trisomy 18, Turner syndrome, triploidy, trisomy 16 mosaicism, fetal death, Smith-Lemli-Opitz syndrome, and steroid sulfatase deficiency. Some programs modify the Down syndrome risks generated through maternal serum screening tests with fetal biometric data obtained by ultrasound. Other second trimester tests have shown promise, including the analysis of maternal urine and fetal cells in the maternal circulation, but none are in routine clinical use.

CONCLUSION

The second trimester triple and quadruple tests provide benchmarks for evaluating new screening protocols. The combination of fetal biometry, new test development as well as clarification of the role of co-factors that affect the concentrations of analytes in existing tests should lead to greater efficacy in second trimester screening for Down syndrome.

Antenatal screening for aneuploidy

There are several methods of antenatal screening for aneuploidy. Most are aimed at the identification of women at increased risk of Down syndrome, the most common abnormal karyotype conferring a significant risk of serious long-term morbidity. Traditional maternal-age-based screening has largely been replaced by programmes based on biochemical markers in maternal serum in the second trimester of pregnancy. However, in recent years there has been a considerable drive towards earlier screening such that there are now a range of potential programmes based on various combinations of maternal age, serum markers and ultrasound findings. There is currently much debate as to which are the most effective methods of screening for aneuploidy.

Antenatal screening for Down's syndrome

BACKGROUND

In 1968 the first antenatal diagnosis of Down's syndrome was made and screening on the basis of selecting women of advanced maternal age for amniocentesis was gradually introduced into medical practice. In 1983 it was shown that low maternal serum alpha fetoprotein (AFP) was associated with Down's syndrome. Later, raised maternal serum human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), and low unconjugated oestriol (uE3) were found to be markers of Down's syndrome. In 1988 the three biochemical markers were used together with maternal age as a method of screening, and this has been widely adopted. PRINCIPLES OF ANTENATAL SCREENING FOR DOWN'S SYNDROME: Methods of screening need to be fully evaluated before being introduced into routine clinical practice. This included choosing markers for which there is sufficient scientific evidence of efficacy, quantifying performance in terms of detection and false positive rates, and establishing methods of monitoring performance. Screening needs to be provided as an integrated service, coordinating and managing the separate aspects of the screening process. SERUM MARKERS AT 15-22 WEEKS OF PREGNANCY: A large number of serum markers have been found to be associated with Down's syndrome between 15 and 22 weeks of pregnancy. The principal markers are AFP, hCG or its individual subunits (free alpha- and free beta-hCG), uE3, and inhibin A. Screening performance varies according to the choice of markers used and whether ultrasound is used to estimate gestational age (table 1). When an ultrasound scan is used to estimate gestational age the detection rate for a 5% false positive rate is estimated to be 59% using the double test (AFP and hCG), 69% using the triple test (AFP, hCG, uE3), and 76% using the quadruple test (AFP, hCG, uE3, inhibin A), all in combination with maternal age. Other factors that can usefully be taken into account in screening are maternal weight, the presence of insulin dependent diabetes mellitus, multiple pregnancy, ethnic origin, previous Down's syndrome pregnancy, and whether the test is the first one in a pregnancy or a repeat. Factors such as parity and smoking are associated with one or more of the serum markers, but the effect is too small to justify adjusting for these factors in interpreting a screening test.

URINARY MARKERS AND FETAL CELLS IN MATERNAL BLOOD

Urinary beta-core hCG has been investigated in a number of studies and shown to be raised in pregnancies with Down's syndrome. This area is currently the subject of active research and the use of urine in future screening programmes may be a practical possibility. Other urinary markers, such as total oestriol and free beta-hCG may also be of value. Fetal cells can be identified in the maternal circulation and techniques such as fluorescent in situ hybridisation can be used to identify aneuploidies, including Down's syndrome and trisomy 18. This approach may, in the future, be of value in screening or diagnosis. Currently, the techniques available do not have the performance, simplicity, or economy needed to replace existing methods.

DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS

Demonstration projects are valuable in determining the feasibility of screening and in refining the practical application of screening. They are of less value in determining the performance of different screening methods. Several demonstration projects have been conducted using the triple and double tests. In general, the uptake of screening was about 80%. The screen positive rates were about 5-6%. About 80% of women with positive screening results had an invasive diagnostic test, and of those found to have a pregnancy with Down's syndrome, about 90% chose to have a termination of pregnancy. ULTRASOUND MARKERS AT 15-22 WEEKS OF PREGNANCY: There are a number of ultrasound markers of Down's syndrome at 15-22 weeks, including nuchal fold thickness, cardiac abnormalities, duodenal atresia, femur length, humerus length, pyelectasis, and hyperechogenic bowel. (ABSTRA