Routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis in women who are Rh(D) negative: meta-analyses adjusted for differences in study design and quality

Antenatal RHD screening to guide antenatal anti-D immunoprophylaxis in non-immunized D- pregnant women

In pregnancy, D- pregnant women may be at risk of becoming immunized against D when carrying a D+ fetus, which may eventually lead to hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn. Administrating antenatal and postnatal anti-D immunoglobulin prophylaxis decreases the risk of immunization substantially. Noninvasive fetal RHD genotyping, based on testing cell-free DNA extracted from maternal plasma, offers a reliable tool to predict the fetal RhD phenotype during pregnancy. Used as a screening program, antenatal RHD screening can guide the administration of antenatal prophylaxis in non-immunized D- pregnant women so that unnecessary prophylaxis is avoided in those women who carry a D- fetus. In Europe, antenatal RHD screening programs have been running since 2009, demonstrating high test accuracies and program feasibility. In this review, an overview is provided of current state-of-the-art antenatal RHD screening, which includes discussions on the rationale for its implementation, methodology, detection strategies, and test performance. The performance of antenatal RHD screening in a routine setting is characterized by high accuracy, with a high diagnostic sensitivity of ≥99.9 percent. The result of using antenatal RHD screening is that 97-99 percent of the women who carry a D- fetus avoid unnecessary prophylaxis. As such, this activity contributes to avoiding unnecessary treatment and saves valuable anti-D immunoglobulin, which has a shortage worldwide. The main challenges for a reliable noninvasive fetal RHD genotyping assay are low cell-free DNA levels, the genetics of the Rh blood group system, and choosing an appropriate detection strategy for an admixed population. In many parts of the world, however, the main challenge is to improve the basic care for D- pregnant women.

Guideline No. 448: Prevention of Rh D Alloimmunization

OBJECTIVE

This guideline provides recommendations for the prevention of Rh D alloimmunization (isoimmunization) in pregnancy, including parental testing, routine postpartum and antepartum prophylaxis, and other clinical indications for prophylaxis. Prevention of red cell alloimmunization in pregnancy with atypical antigens (other than the D antigen), for which immunoprophylaxis is not currently available, is not addressed in this guideline.

TARGET POPULATION

All Rh D-negative pregnant individuals at risk for Rh D alloimmunization due to potential exposure to a paternally derived fetal Rh D antigen.

OUTCOMES

Routine postpartum and antepartum Rh D immunoprophylaxis reduces the risk of Rh D alloimmunization at 6 months postpartum and in a subsequent pregnancy.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

This guideline details the population of pregnant individuals who may benefit from Rho(D) immune globulin (RhIG) immunoprophylaxis. Thus, those for whom the intervention is not required may avoid adverse effects, while those who are at risk of alloimmunization may mitigate this risk for themselves and/or their fetus.

EVIDENCE

For recommendations regarding use of RhIG, Medline and Medline in Process via Ovid and Embase Classic + Embase via Ovid were searched using both the trials and observational studies search strategies with study design filters. For trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects via Ovid were also searched. All databases were searched from January 2000 to November 26, 2019. Studies published before 2000 were captured from the grey literature of national obstetrics and gynaecology specialty societies, luminary specialty journals, and bibliographic searching. A formal process for the systematic review was undertaken for this update, as described in the systematic review manuscript published separately.

VALIDATION METHODS

The authors rated the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations using the SOGC's modified GRADE approach. See Appendix A (Tables A1 for definitions and A2 for interpretations of strong and conditional [weak] recommendations).

INTENDED AUDIENCE

The intended users of this guideline include prenatal care providers such as obstetricians, midwives, family physicians, emergency room physicians, and residents, as well as registered nurses and nurse practitioners.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

An updated Canadian guideline for prevention of Rh D alloimmunization addresses D variants, cffDNA for fetal Rh type, and updates recommendations on timing of RhIG administration.

SUMMARY STATEMENTS

RECOMMENDATIONS.

Single-exon approach to non-invasive fetal RHD screening in early pregnancy: An update after 10 years' experience

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Anti-D prophylaxis, administered to RhD-negative women, has significantly reduced the incidence of RhD immunization. Non-invasive fetal RHD screening has been used in Stockholm for more than 10 years to identify women who will benefit from prophylaxis. The method is based on a single-exon approach and is used in early pregnancy. The aim of this study was to update the performance of the method.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The single exon assay from Devyser AB is a multiplex kit detecting both exon 4 of the RHD gene and the housekeeping gene GAPDH. Cell-free DNA was extracted from 1 ml of plasma from EDTA blood taken during early pregnancy, weeks 10-12. The genetic RHD results were compared with serological typing of newborns for a determination of sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS

In total, 4337 pregnancies were included in the study; 44 samples (1%) were inconclusive either due to maternal RHD gene variants (n = 34) or technical reasons (n = 10). Of the remaining 4293 pregnancies, a total number of nine discrepant results were found. False positive results (n = 7) were mainly (n = 4) due to RHD gene variants in the child. False-negative results were found in two cases, of which one was caused by a technical error. None of the false-negative cases was due to RHD gene variants. Overall, the sensitivity of the method was 99.93% and specificity 99.56%.

CONCLUSION

The single-exon assay used in this study is correlated with high sensitivity and specificity.

Calibrating Natural History of Cancer Models in the Presence of Data Incompatibility: Problems and Solutions

The calibration of cancer natural history models is often challenged by a lack of representative calibration targets, forcing modellers to rely on potentially incompatible datasets. Using a microsimulation colorectal cancer model as an example, the purposes of this paper are to (1) highlight the reasons for uncertainty in calibration targets, (2) illustrate practical and generalisable approaches for dealing with incompatibility in calibration targets, and (3) discuss the importance of future research in the area of incorporating uncertainty in calibration. The low quality of data and differences in populations, outcome definitions, and healthcare systems may result in incompatibility between the model and the data. Acknowledging reasons for data incompatibility allows assessment of the risk of incompatibility before calibrating the model. Only a few approaches are available to address data incompatibility, for instance addressing biases in calibration targets and their adjustment, relaxing the goodness-of-fit metric, and validation of the calibration targets to the data not used in the calibration. However, these approaches lack explicit comparison and validation, and so more research is needed to describe the nature and causes of indirect uncertainty (i.e. uncertainty that cannot be expressed in absolute quantitative forms) and identify methods for managing this uncertainty in healthcare modelling.

Following targeted routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis, almost half of the pregnant women had undetectable anti-D prophylaxis at delivery

INTRODUCTION

In September 2016, a nationwide targeted routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis program was implemented in Norway. The prophylaxis (anti-D immunoglobulin) aims to cover the whole third trimester and is administered in gestational week 28 to RhD-negative women who carry RhD-positive fetuses. However, in many women, antibody screening at delivery does not detect anti-D immunoglobulin. The goal of this study was to investigate the presumable role of dose and timing of antenatal anti-D immunoglobulin administration in non-detectable prophylaxis at the time of delivery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this retrospective observational study, RhD-negative pregnant women who gave birth at Oslo University Hospital and Akershus University Hospital between January 2017 and December 2019 were analyzed. Women who received antenatal anti-D immunoglobulin (1500 IU at Oslo University Hospital and 1250 IU at Akershus University Hospital) when fetal RHD genotyping at gestational week 24 predicted an RhD-positive fetus were included if an antibody screen at delivery was available. Data from the blood bank, maternity information systems, and electronic patient records were used.

RESULTS

Analysis of the 984 RhD-negative women at the two hospitals revealed that 45.4% had non-detectable anti-D at delivery. A significant difference between the two hospitals was observed: 40.5% at Oslo University Hospital (n = 509) and 50.7% at Akershus University Hospital (n = 475) (p = 0.001). The proportion with non-detectable anti-D increased to 56.0 and 75.3%, respectively (p = 0.008) in the group of women who gave birth 12 weeks after routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis. Significantly fewer women had detectable anti-D at delivery when the lower anti-D immunoglobulin dose (1250 IU) was administered antenatally. Multiple logistic regression indicated that the time interval between routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis and delivery, in addition to anti-D dose, were significantly associated with detectable anti-D at delivery (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

We do not know which RhD-negative pregnant women, despite antenatal anti-D prophylaxis, are at risk of RhD alloimmunization, when antibody screening is negative at delivery. Administration of antenatal prophylaxis should probably be moved closer to delivery, since the risk of fetomaternal hemorrhage is higher during the last weeks of the third trimester.

Practices for RhD alloimmunization prevention: a vignette-based survey of midwives

INTRODUCTION

Despite the availability guidelines to prevent RhD alloimmunization, severe hemolytic disease of fetus and newborn still occurs in high-income countries. The aim of the study was (1) To assess variations in practices for the prevention of RhD alloimmunization, and (2) to understand midwives' acceptance and appropriation of fetal RhD genotyping.

METHODS

Descriptive cross-sectional survey of French midwives from September 2017 through January 2018. Participants were asked to complete an internet-based questionnaire that included three clinical vignettes. They were questioned about their practices concerning early pregnancy visit by RhD-negative women, prevention of RhD alloimmunization in women with second-trimester metrorrhagia, and RhD fetal genotyping.

RESULTS

A total of 827 midwives completed the questionnaire. Only 21.1% reported that they practice all the preventive measures recommended in early pregnancy. In a situation at high risk of RhD alloimmunization during pregnancy, 97.2% of midwives would perform immunoprophylaxis. Nearly, all midwives reported providing information about RhD alloimmunization (92.4%) at the beginning of pregnancy, although only 11.3% offered both written and verbal information; at the time of systematic anti-D immunoprophylaxis (28 weeks), 78% provided information, but only 2.7% both verbally and in writing. Finally, only 50.8% of midwives preferred to include RhD fetal genotyping in routine prenatal prophylaxis.

DISCUSSION

This study showed significant variations in French midwives' practices to prevent RhD alloimmunization. Better dissemination of guidelines is needed to improve both consistent use of these practices and the quality of information delivered to RhD-negative pregnant women.

Time points and risk factors for RhD immunizations after the implementation of targeted routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis: A retrospective nationwide cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Targeted routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis was introduced to the national prophylaxis program in Finland in late 2013. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence, time-points, and risk factors for Rhesus D immunization after the implementation of routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis, in all women in Finland with antenatal anti-D antibodies detected in 2014-2017.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a nationwide population-based retrospective cohort study, the incidence, time-points, and risk factors of anti-D immunizations were analyzed. Information on antenatal screening was obtained from the Finnish Red Cross Blood Service database, and obstetric data from hospital records and the Finnish Medical Birth Register.

RESULTS

The study included a total of 228 women (197 with complete data for all pregnancies). After the implementation of routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis, the prevalence of pregnancies with anti-D antibodies decreased from 1.52% in 2014 to 0.88% in 2017, and the corresponding incidence of new immunizations decreased from 0.33% to 0.10%. Time-points for detection of new anti-D antibodies before and after 2014 were the first screening sample at 8-12 weeks of gestation in 52% versus 19%, the second sample at 24-26 weeks in 20% versus 50%, and the third screening at 36 weeks in 28% versus 32%.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of new anti-D immunizations decreased as expected after the implementation of routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis. True failures are rare and they mainly occur when the prophylaxis is not given appropriately, suggesting a need for constant education of healthcare professionals on the subject.

Altered strategy of prophylactic anti-D administration in pregnancy to cover term and post-term - a pilot study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis (RAADP) to RhD-negative women is most often administered in gestational age (GA) 28-30 weeks with the next anti-D dose administered postpartum. The aim of this study was to analyse the proportion of RhD-negative women where RAADP is not detectable at term and in a pilot study to investigate whether RAADP administered in GA 28 and 38 results in detectable levels at term, post-term and post-delivery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a retrospective analysis, 4280 RhD-negative women carrying an RHD positive fetus were included and the proportion with a negative antibody screen at delivery was determined. In the second part, 39 pregnancies were included prospectively, a second dose of RAADP was administered in GA 38 weeks, and anti-D was quantified before the second dose and then weekly for 5 weeks.

RESULTS

In the retrospective analysis, 20·5% (856/4280) with RAADP administered in GA 28 were negative in routine antibody screening at delivery. In the small prospective study, 18% (7/39) had a negative antibody screen and 26% (10/39) had levels below 0·005 IU/ml, in the quantification assay, in GA 38. Anti-D prophylaxis administered in GA 38 showed detectable levels of anti-D up to 30 days post-delivery, with concentration at delivery 0·060 ± 0·034 IU/ml (mean ± SD).

CONCLUSION

Approximately 20% of the RhD-negative women show non-detectable levels of anti-D at term. A second dose of RAADP at GA 38 results in stable concentrations of anti-D at term, post-term and post-delivery, but with large interindividual variation.

Optimization of diagnostic strategy for non-invasive cell-free foetal RHD determination from maternal plasma

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to optimize routine non-invasive prenatal detection of fetal RHD gene from plasma of RhD-negative pregnant women (the median of gestational age was 25 weeks, range 10-38) to detect RhD materno-fetal incompatibility and to avoid the redundant immunoprophylaxis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Initially only one exon of RHD gene (exon 10) was investigated in 281 plasma samples (144 verified after delivery), in the second phase three RHD exons (5, 7, 10) were analyzed in 246 samples of plasma and maternal genomic DNA (204 verified) by real-time PCR method. Detection of Y-chromosomal sequence DYS-14 and five X-chromosomal insertion/deletion polymorphisms was used to confirm the fetal cfDNA detectability in plasma. Specific polymorphisms in RHD gene were detected by sequence-specific primer PCR in nine samples.

RESULTS

When only the RHD exon 10 was tested, 2·8% of verified samples were false positive and 3·5% false negative. With three RHD exons (5, 7, 10) and maternal genomic DNA testing, only one case was false negative (0·5%). Nine samples were inconclusive due to RHD-positive results in maternal genomic DNA. These samples were analyzed for specific mutations in RHD gene. Combination of both methods for fetal cfDNA verification succeeded in 75% of tested group.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of analysis of three RHD exons and maternal genomic DNA to routine practice lowers dramatically the ratio of false positive and negative results. This method enables more accurate determination of fetal RHD status with the reduction of unnecessary medical care and RhD immunoprophylaxis.

Uncertain About Uncertainty: How Qualitative Expressions of Forecaster Confidence Impact Decision-Making With Uncertainty Visualizations

When forecasting events, multiple types of uncertainty are often inherently present in the modeling process. Various uncertainty typologies exist, and each type of uncertainty has different implications a scientist might want to convey. In this work, we focus on one type of distinction between direct quantitative uncertainty and indirect qualitative uncertainty. Direct quantitative uncertainty describes uncertainty about facts, numbers, and hypotheses that can be communicated in absolute quantitative forms such as probability distributions or confidence intervals. Indirect qualitative uncertainty describes the quality of knowledge concerning how effectively facts, numbers, or hypotheses represent reality, such as evidence confidence scales proposed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. A large body of research demonstrates that both experts and novices have difficulty reasoning with quantitative uncertainty, and visualizations of uncertainty can help with such traditionally challenging concepts. However, the question of if, and how, people may reason with multiple types of uncertainty associated with a forecast remains largely unexplored. In this series of studies, we seek to understand if individuals can integrate indirect uncertainty about how "good" a model is (operationalized as a qualitative expression of forecaster confidence) with quantified uncertainty in a prediction (operationalized as a quantile dotplot visualization of a predicted distribution). Our first study results suggest that participants utilize both direct quantitative uncertainty and indirect qualitative uncertainty when conveyed as quantile dotplots and forecaster confidence. In manipulations where forecasters were less sure about their prediction, participants made more conservative judgments. In our second study, we varied the amount of quantified uncertainty (in the form of the SD of the visualized distributions) to examine how participants' decisions changed under different combinations of quantified uncertainty (variance) and qualitative uncertainty (low, medium, and high forecaster confidence). The second study results suggest that participants updated their judgments in the direction predicted by both qualitative confidence information (e.g., becoming more conservative when the forecaster confidence is low) and quantitative uncertainty (e.g., becoming more conservative when the variance is increased). Based on the findings from both experiments, we recommend that forecasters present qualitative expressions of model confidence whenever possible alongside quantified uncertainty.

FIGO/ICM guidelines for preventing Rhesus disease: A call to action

The introduction of anti‐Rh(D) immunoglobulin more than 50 years ago has resulted in only a 50% decrease in Rhesus disease globally owing to a low uptake of this prophylactic approach. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics, International Confederation of Midwives, and Worldwide Initiative for Rhesus Disease Eradication have reviewed current evidence regarding the utility of anti‐Rh(D) immunoglobulin. Taking into account the effectiveness anti‐Rh(D), the new guidelines propose adjusting the dose for different indications and prioritizing its administration by indication.

These FIGO/ICM guidelines review the evidence regarding the usefulness of anti‐Rh(D) immunoglobulin, prioritizing its administration by indication.

RhIg for the prevention Rh immunization and IVIg for the treatment of affected neonates

Rhesus D (RhD) negative pregnant women carrying an RhD positive fetus are at risk of developing anti-D during or after pregnancy. Anti-d-immunoglobulin (RhIg), which is mainly produced from special plasma donated in a few countries for the whole world, is able to prevent an anti-D alloimmunization. Through the introduction of ante- and postnatal anti-d-prophylaxis into clinical routine, the frequency of hemolytic disease of fetus and newborn decreased considerably. Postnatal prophylaxis from the beginning in the 1960s has been applied only to women who delivered an RhD positive newborn. Because the fetal RhD status can be determined with high sensitivity and accuracy from the mother's peripheral blood, targeted antenatal anti-d-prophylaxis is becoming a new standard procedure in more and more countries. Phototherapy and exchange transfusion are still the main pillars for the treatment of RhD hemolytic disease of the newborn. The efficacy of IVIg in the management of these neonates is not conclusive and cannot be recommended until a larger randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study is performed.

Clinical value of different anti-D immunoglobulin strategies for preventing Rh hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several anti-D immunoglobulin strategies exist for preventing Rh hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn. This study systematically assessed the clinical value of those therapeutic strategies.

METHODS

The Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Wanfang databases were searched for eligible studies that evaluated the value of different anti-D immunoglobulin strategies in preventing maternal anti-D antibody sensitization. Combined odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The network meta-analysis was conducted using Stata 14.2 and WinBUGS 1.4.3 software.

RESULTS

Twenty-four original studies involving 64860 patients were included. Among all therapeutic measures, injecting 300 μg anti-D immunoglobulin at 28 and 34 gestational weeks (antenatal 5/E) appeared to be the most effective measure for preventing maternal antibody sensitization (surface under the cumulative ranking curve [SUCRA] = 96.8%), while a single injection at 28 gestational weeks (SUCRA = 89.2%) was the second most effective. Administering no injection or a placebo (SUCRA = 0.0%) was the least effective intervention measure.

CONCLUSION

Among the therapeutic measures, antenatal 5/E appeared to be the best method for reducing the positive incidence of anti-D antibodies in the maternal serum; thus, it may be the most effective treatment for preventing fetal hemolytic disease.

Targeted antenatal anti-D prophylaxis for RhD-negative pregnant women: a systematic review

Background

All non-sensitized Rhesus D (RhD)-negative pregnant women in Germany receive antenatal anti-D prophylaxis without knowledge of fetal RhD status. Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) of cell-free fetal DNA in maternal plasma could avoid unnecessary anti-D administration. In this paper, we systematically reviewed the evidence on the benefit of NIPT for fetal RhD status in RhD-negative pregnant women.

Methods

We systematically searched several bibliographic databases, trial registries, and other sources (up to October 2019) for controlled intervention studies investigating NIPT for fetal RhD versus conventional anti-D prophylaxis. The focus was on the impact on fetal and maternal morbidity. We primarily considered direct evidence (from randomized controlled trials) or if unavailable, linked evidence (from diagnostic accuracy studies and from controlled intervention studies investigating the administration or withholding of anti-D prophylaxis). The results of diagnostic accuracy studies were pooled in bivariate meta-analyses.

Results

Neither direct evidence nor sufficient data for linked evidence were identified. Meta-analysis of data from about 60,000 participants showed high sensitivity (99.9%; 95% CI [99.5%; 100%] and specificity (99.2%; 95% CI [98.5%; 99.5%]).

Conclusions

NIPT for fetal RhD status is equivalent to conventional serologic testing using the newborn’s blood. Studies investigating patient-relevant outcomes are still lacking.

Rhesus D factor (RhD) negative women's experiences with pregnancy: An interpretive description

BACKGROUND

The development of rh immune globulin (RhIG) for the prevention of Rhesus D (RhD) alloimmunization has significantly decreased the incidence of RhD alloimmunization. Despite long-standing prevention, the experiences of RhD negative women with pregnancy is absent in the literature.

AIM

The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of RhD negative women with pregnancy.

METHODS

Utilizing an Interpretive Description approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted with RhD negative women about their pregnancies. This study took place within the geographic context of northern British Columbia (BC). The analysis involved a two-cycle approach to identify themes within the data.

FINDINGS

Sixteen RhD negative women that live in northern BC participated in this study. The analysis identified that RhD negative women are uninformed and want to be involved in the decision-making process regarding the prevention of RhD alloimmunization. The themes that emerged from the interview data were communication, information-seeking behaviour, out of sight out of mind, choice and trust, and patient advocacy.

DISCUSSION

The participants in this study described lacking information regarding the prevention of RhD alloimmunization. They sought information to overcome the gaps in knowledge and a desire to be involved in the decision-making process.

CONCLUSION

RhD negative women want information and to be involved in the decision-making process in the prevention of RhD alloimmunization. Working with RhD negative women to develop decision-aids and/or other educational tools to aid in the decision-making process are warranted.

Rhesus D alloimmunization in pregnancy from 1996 to 2015 in Iceland: a nation-wide population study prior to routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis

BACKGROUND

Rhesus D (RhD) incompatibility is still the most important cause of hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) worldwide. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence, causes, and consequences of anti-D alloimmunizations in pregnancy in Iceland, prior to implementation of targeted routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis (RAADP) in 2018.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a nation-wide cohort study of 130 pregnancies affected by RhD alloimmunization in Iceland in the period from 1996 through 2015. Data were collected from transfusion medicine databases, medical records, and the Icelandic Medical Birth Register.

RESULTS

Of 130 RhD alloimmunizations, 80 cases (61.5%) represented new RhD immunization in the current pregnancy. Sensitization was discovered in the third trimester in 41 (51.3%) and occurred in the first pregnancy in 14 cases (17.5%). The most likely causative immunization event was the index pregnancy for 45 (56.25%), a previous pregnancy/birth for 26 (32.5%), abortion for 3 (3.75%), and unknown for 6 women (7.5%). Higher anti-D titers were associated with shorter gestational length, cesarean sections, positive direct antiglobulin test (DAT), and severe HDFN. Intrauterine transfusion (IUT) was performed in five pregnancies (3.8%), and 35 of 132 (26.5%) live-born neonates received treatment for HDFN; 32 received phototherapy (24.2%), 13 exchange transfusion (9.8%), and seven simple blood transfusion (5.3%).

CONCLUSION

In about half of cases, RhD alloimmunization was caused by the index pregnancy and discovered in the third trimester. Thus, the newly implemented RAADP protocol should be effective in reducing the incidence of RhD immunization in Iceland in the future.

Communicating uncertainty about facts, numbers and science

Uncertainty is an inherent part of knowledge, and yet in an era of contested expertise, many shy away from openly communicating their uncertainty about what they know, fearful of their audience's reaction. But what effect does communication of such epistemic uncertainty have? Empirical research is widely scattered across many disciplines. This interdisciplinary review structures and summarizes current practice and research across domains, combining a statistical and psychological perspective. This informs a framework for uncertainty communication in which we identify three objects of uncertainty-facts, numbers and science-and two levels of uncertainty: direct and indirect. An examination of current practices provides a scale of nine expressions of direct uncertainty. We discuss attempts to codify indirect uncertainty in terms of quality of the underlying evidence. We review the limited literature about the effects of communicating epistemic uncertainty on cognition, affect, trust and decision-making. While there is some evidence that communicating epistemic uncertainty does not necessarily affect audiences negatively, impact can vary between individuals and communication formats. Case studies in economic statistics and climate change illustrate our framework in action. We conclude with advice to guide both communicators and future researchers in this important but so far rather neglected field.

High-throughput non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal rhesus D status in RhD-negative women not known to be sensitised to the RhD antigen: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

High-throughput non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for fetal rhesus (D antigen) (RhD) status could avoid unnecessary treatment with routine anti-D immunoglobulin for RhD-negative women carrying a RhD-negative fetus, although this may lead to an increased risk of RhD sensitisations.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the evidence on the diagnostic accuracy, clinical effectiveness and implementation of high-throughput NIPT and to develop a cost-effectiveness model.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and other databases, from inception to February 2016, for studies of high-throughput NIPT free-cell fetal deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) tests of maternal plasma to determine fetal RhD status in RhD-negative pregnant women who were not known to be sensitised to the RhD antigen. Study quality was assessed with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) and A Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool: for Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions (ACROBAT-NRSI). Summary estimates of false-positive rates (FPRs) and false-negative rates (FNRs) were calculated using bivariate models. Clinical effectiveness evidence was used to conduct a simulation study. We developed a de novo probabilistic decision tree-based cohort model that considered four alternative ways in which the results of NIPT could guide the use of anti-D immunoglobulin antenatally and post partum. Sensitivity analyses (SAs) were conducted to address key uncertainties and model assumptions.

RESULTS

Eight studies were included in the diagnostic accuracy review, seven studies were included in the clinical effectiveness review and 12 studies were included in the review of implementation. Meta-analyses included women mostly at or post 11 weeks' gestation. The pooled FNR (women at risk of sensitisation) was 0.34% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15% to 0.76%] and the pooled FPR (women needlessly receiving anti-D) was 3.86% (95% CI 2.54% to 5.82%). SAs did not materially alter the overall results. Data on clinical outcomes, including sensitisation rates, were limited. Our simulation suggests that NIPT could substantially reduce unnecessary use of antenatal anti-D with only a small increase in the risk of sensitisation. All large implementation studies suggested that large-scale implementation of high-throughput NIPT was feasible. Seven cost-effectiveness studies were included in the review, which found that the potential for the use of NIPT to produce cost savings was dependent on the cost of the test. Our de novo model suggested that high-throughput NIPT is likely to be cost saving compared with the current practice of providing routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis to all women who are RhD negative. The extent of the cost saving appeared to be sufficient to outweigh the small increase in sensitisations. However, the magnitude of the cost saving is highly sensitive to the cost of NIPT itself.

LIMITATIONS

There was very limited evidence relating to the clinical effectiveness of high-throughput NIPT, with no evidence on potential adverse effects. The generalisability of the findings to non-white women and multiple pregnancies is unclear.

CONCLUSIONS

High-throughput NIPT is sufficiently accurate to detect fetal RhD status in RhD-negative women from 11 weeks' gestation and would considerably reduce unnecessary treatment with routine anti-D immunoglobulin, potentially resulting in cost savings of between £485,000 and £671,000 per 100,000 pregnancies if the cost of implementing NIPT is in line with that reflected in this evaluation.

FUTURE WORK

Further research on the diagnostic accuracy of NIPT in non-white women is needed.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015029497.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Noninvasive fetal RHD genotyping to guide targeted anti-D prophylaxis-an external quality assessment workshop

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Fetal RHD genotyping of cell-free fetal DNA from RhD-negative pregnant women can be used to guide targeted antenatal and postnatal anti-D prophylaxis for the prevention of RhD immunization. To assure the quality of clinical testing, we conducted an external quality assessment workshop with the participation of 28 laboratories.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Aliquots of pooled maternal plasma were sent to each laboratory. One sample was positive, and the second sample was negative for fetal RHD, verified by pre-workshop testing using quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) analysis of RHD exons 4, 5, 7 and 10. Plasma samples were shipped at room temperature. A reporting scheme was supplied for data collection, including questions regarding the methodological setup, results and clinical recommendations. Different methodological approaches were used, all employing qPCR with a total of eight different combinations of RHD exon targets. The samples were tested blindly.

RESULTS

Fetal RHD genotyping was performed with no false-negative and no false-positive results. One inconclusive result was reported for the RHD-positive sample, and four inconclusive results were reported for the RHD-negative sample. All clinical conclusions were satisfactory.

CONCLUSION

This external quality assessment workshop demonstrates that despite the different approaches taken to perform the clinical assays, fetal RHD genotyping is a reliable laboratory assay to guide targeted use of Rh prophylaxis in a clinical setting.

Anti-D quantification in relation to anti-D titre, middle cerebral artery Doppler measurement and clinical outcome in RhD-immunized pregnancies

BACKGROUND

The optimal strategy to monitor RhD-immunized pregnancies is not evident. Whether a quantitative analysis of anti-D antibodies adds valuable information to anti-D titre is unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relevance of anti-D quantification in routine monitoring of RhD-immunized pregnancies.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a retrospective study, 64 consecutive pregnancies in 61 immunized women with anti-D titre ≥128 at any time during pregnancy were included. According to routine, at titre ≥128, anti-D quantification was performed by flow cytometry and the peak systolic velocity in the middle cerebral artery was measured by ultrasound. Decisions for treatment with intrauterine blood transfusion were based on increased peak systolic velocity in the middle cerebral artery.

RESULTS

Increasing anti-D concentrations correlated well to increasing anti-D titres, but at each titre value, there was a large interindividual variation, in the determined anti-D concentration. Intrauterine transfusions were initiated in 35 pregnancies according to algorithms based on ultrasound measurements, at anti-D concentrations of 2·4-619 IU/ml and titre 128-16 000. Sixty pregnancies resulted in a live-born child, three in miscarriage and one in termination of pregnancy. During the perinatal care in the neonatal intensive care unit, thirty-one of the neonates were treated with blood exchange transfusions and/or red cell transfusions and 47 were treated with phototherapy.

CONCLUSION

Anti-D quantification does not add further information compared to anti-D titre, in defining a critical level to start monitoring RhD-immunized pregnancies with Doppler ultrasound.

Use of a random effects meta-analysis in the design and analysis of a new clinical trial

In designing a randomized controlled trial, it has been argued that trialists should consider existing evidence about the likely intervention effect. One approach is to form a prior distribution for the intervention effect based on a meta‐analysis of previous studies and then power the trial on its ability to affect the posterior distribution in a Bayesian analysis. Alternatively, methods have been proposed to calculate the power of the trial to influence the “pooled” estimate in an updated meta‐analysis. These two approaches can give very different results if the existing evidence is heterogeneous, summarised using a random effects meta‐analysis. We argue that the random effects mean will rarely represent the trialist's target parameter, and so, it will rarely be appropriate to power a trial based on its impact upon the random effects mean. Furthermore, the random effects mean will not generally provide an appropriate prior distribution. More appropriate alternatives include the predictive distribution and shrinkage estimate for the most similar study. Consideration of the impact of the trial on the entire random effects distribution might sometimes be appropriate. We describe how beliefs about likely sources of heterogeneity have implications for how the previous evidence should be used and can have a profound impact on the expected power of the new trial. We conclude that the likely causes of heterogeneity among existing studies need careful consideration. In the absence of explanations for heterogeneity, we suggest using the predictive distribution from the meta‐analysis as the basis for a prior distribution for the intervention effect.

Rh(O)D immune globulin products for prevention of alloimmunization during pregnancy

PURPOSE

The pharmacologic properties of Rhesus (Rh) immune globulin (RhIG) and clinical data on its effectiveness in preventing Rh-antigen alloimmunization in pregnant women are reviewed.

SUMMARY

RhIG is a human plasma derivative that targets red blood cells (RBCs) positive for Rh(O) antigen (also called D antigen). In the United States and other countries, the widespread use of RhIG has markedly reduced the occurrence of hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN), a devastating condition caused by D-antigen sensitization of a pregnant woman via exposure to fetal RBCs (usually during detachment of the placenta in labor) that results in a maternal immune response leading to severe hemolysis in the fetus. Routine administration of RhIG at 26-30 weeks' gestation and again within 72 hours of delivery has been shown to be highly effective in preventing maternal Rh alloimmunization, with very low rates of D-antigen sensitization (in the range of 0-2.2%) reported in multiple studies of at-risk women. The four RhIG products currently available in the United States have common clinical indications but differ in certain attributes. Pharmacists can play an important role in guiding other clinicians on the rationale for the use of RhIG, important differences between products, and appropriate timing of RhIG therapy.

CONCLUSION

Routine administration of RhIG to women at risk for Rh alloimmunization is clinically effective and has made HDFN a rare clinical event. The available RhIG products are not the same and should be carefully reviewed to ensure that they are administered safely.

Anti-D administration in pregnancy for preventing Rhesus alloimmunisation

BACKGROUND

During pregnancy, a Rhesus negative (Rh-negative) woman may develop antibodies when her fetus is Rhesus positive (Rh-positive). These antibodies may harm Rh-positive babies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of antenatal anti-D immunoglobulin on the incidence of Rhesus D alloimmunisation when given to Rh-negative women without anti-D antibodies.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 May 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials in Rh-negative women without anti-D antibodies given anti-D after 28 weeks of pregnancy, compared with no treatment, placebo or a different regimen of anti-D.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two trials involving over 4500 women, comparing anti-D prophylaxis with no anti-D during pregnancy in this review. Overall, the trials were judged to be at moderate to high risk of bias. The quality of the evidence for pre-specified outcomes was also assessed using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach.In regards to primary review outcomes, there did not appear to be a clear difference in the risks of immunisation when women who received anti-D at 28 and 34 weeks' gestation were compared with women who were not given antenatal anti-D: risk ratio (RR) for incidence of Rhesus D alloimmunisation during pregnancy was 0.42 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 1.17, two trials, 3902 women; GRADE: low quality evidence); at birth of a Rh-positive infant the RR was 0.42 (95% CI 0.15 to 1.17, two trials, 2297 women); and within 12 months after birth of a Rh-positive infant the average RR was 0.39 (95% CI 0.10 to 1.62, two trials, 2048 women; Tau²: 0.47; I²: 39%; GRADE: low quality evidence). Neither of the trials reported on incidence of Rhesus D alloimmunisation in subsequent pregnancies.Considering secondary outcomes, in one trial, women receiving anti-D during pregnancy were shown to be less likely to register a positive Kleihauer test (which detects fetal cells in maternal blood) in pregnancy (at 32 to 25 weeks) (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.88; 1884 women; GRADE: low quality evidence) and at the birth of a Rh-positive infant (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.79; 1189 women; GRADE: low quality evidence). No clear differences were seen for neonatal jaundice (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.30; 1882 infants; GRADE: very low quality evidence). Neither of the trials reported on adverse effects associated with anti-D treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Existing studies do not provide conclusive evidence that the use of anti-D during pregnancy benefits either mother or baby in terms of incidence of Rhesus D alloimmunisation during the pregnancy or postpartum, or the incidence of neonatal morbidity (jaundice) (low to very low quality evidence). However women receiving anti-D may be less likely to register a positive Kleihauer test in pregnancy and at the birth of a Rh-positive infant (low quality evidence). Fewer women who receive anti-D during pregnancy may have Rhesus D antibodies in a subsequent pregnancy, with benefits for the baby, however this needs to be tested in studies of robust design.

Haemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn

Haemolytic Disease of the Fetus and Newborn (HDFN) is caused by maternal alloimmunization against red blood cell antigens. In severe cases, HDFN may lead to fetal anaemia with a risk for fetal death and to severe forms of neonatal hyperbilirubinaemia with a risk for kernicterus. Most severe cases are caused by anti-D, despite the introduction of antental and postnatal anti-D immunoglobulin prophylaxis. In general, red blood cell antibody screening programmes are aimed to detect maternal alloimmunization early in pregnancy to facilitate the identification of high-risk cases to timely start antenatal and postnatal treatment. In this review, an overview of the clinical relevance of red cell alloantibodies in relation to occurrence of HDFN and recent views on prevention, screening and treatment options of HDFN are provided.

Integration of noninvasive prenatal prediction of fetal blood group into clinical prenatal care

Incompatibility of red blood cell blood group antigens between a pregnant woman and her fetus can cause maternal immunization and, consequently, hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn. Noninvasive prenatal testing of cell-free fetal DNA can be used to assess the risk of hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn to fetuses of immunized women. Prediction of the fetal RhD type has been very successful and is now integrated into clinical practice to assist in the management of the pregnancies of RhD immunized women. In addition, noninvasive prediction of the fetal RhD type can be applied to guide targeted prenatal prophylaxis, thus avoiding unnecessary exposure to anti-D in pregnant women. The analytical aspect of noninvasive fetal RHD typing is very robust and accurate, and its routine utilization has demonstrated high sensitivities for fetal RHD detection. A high compliance with administering anti-D is essential for obtaining a clinical effect. Noninvasive fetal typing of RHC/c, RHE/e, and KEL may become more widely used in the future.

Targeted routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis in the prevention of RhD immunisation--outcome of a new antenatal screening and prevention program

Objective

To estimate the incidence of RhD immunisation after implementation of first trimester non-invasive fetal RHD screening to select only RhD negative women carrying RHD positive fetuses for routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis (RAADP).

Materials and Methods

We present a population-based prospective observational cohort study with historic controls including all maternity care centres and delivery hospitals in the Stockholm region, Sweden. All RhD negative pregnant women were screened for fetal RHD genotype in the first trimester of pregnancy. Anti-D immunoglobulin (250–300 µg) was administered intramuscularly in gestational week 28–30 to participants with RHD positive fetuses. Main outcome measure was the incidence of RhD immunisation developing during or after pregnancy.

Results

During the study period 9380 RhD negative women gave birth in Stockholm. Non-invasive fetal RHD genotyping using cell-free fetal DNA in maternal plasma was performed in 8374 pregnancies of which 5104 (61%) were RHD positive and 3270 (39%) RHD negative. In 4590 pregnancies with an RHD positive test the women received antenatal anti-D prophylaxis. The incidence of RhD immunisation in the study cohort was 0.26 percent (24/9380) (95% CI 0.15–0.36%) compared to 0.46 percent (86/18546) (95% CI 0.37 to 0.56%) in the reference cohort. The risk ratio (RR) for sensitisation was 0.55 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.87) and the risk reduction was statistically significant (p = 0.009). The absolute risk difference was 0.20 percent, corresponding to a number needed to treat (NNT) of 500.

Conclusions

Using first trimester non-invasive antenatal screening for fetal RHD to target routine antenatal anti-D prophylaxis selectively to RhD negative women with RHD positive fetuses significantly reduces the incidence of new RhD immunisation. The risk reduction is comparable to that reported in studies evaluating the outcome of non selective RAADP to all RhD negative women. The cost-effectiveness of this targeted approach remains to be studied.

Survey on the prevention and incidence of haemolytic disease of the newborn in Italy

BACKGROUND

In 2010, the Italian Society of Immunohaematology and Transfusion Medicine (SIMTI) carried out a survey of the incidence of haemolytic disease of the newborn (HDN) and the prevention of HDN caused by anti-Rh(D) in Italian Transfusion Structures (TS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A questionnaire divided into the following five sections was administered: (i) types of services provided and maintenance of legally required registers, (ii) immunoprophylaxis (IP), (iii) red cell typing and searches for irregular antibodies, (iv) evaluation of foetal-maternal haemorrhage (FMH), and (v) incidence of HDN in 2010. Of the 280 TS sent the questionnaire, 176 (63%) replied.

RESULTS

A HDN register was available in 55.5% of the TS (n =91). Immunoprophylaxis with a dose of anti-D IgG was given to all Rh(D) negative and Rh(D) variant puerpera with Rh(D) positive newborns: in more than 93% of cases the dose was between 1,500 IU (300 μg) and 1,250 IU (250 μg). Antenatal IP between the 25(th) and 28(th) week was proposed by 42 TS (26%). Seventy percent of the TS (n =115) did not make any evaluation of FMH. The number of births surveyed in 2010 was 203,384, the number of Rh(D) negative pregnancies was 13,569, while anti-D antibodies were present in 245 pregnancies. There were 111 cases of HDN due to anti Rh(D) incompatibility and in 40 of these, intrauterine transfusion (n =8) or exchange transfusion (n =32) was necessary. In 94 cases HDN was due to other irregular antibodies: in 4 of these cases intrauterine transfusion was needed and in 11 other recourse was made of exchange transfusion. Finally, there were 1,456 newborns with ABO HDN of whom 13 underwent exchange transfusion.

DISCUSSION

The data collected give a picture of the incidence of HDN in Italy and of the methods of managing IP and could form the basis for an update of the SIMTI recommendations on the management and prevention of this disease.

Anti-D administration in pregnancy for preventing Rhesus alloimmunisation

BACKGROUND

During pregnancy, a Rhesus negative (Rh-negative) woman may develop antibodies when her fetus is Rhesus positive (Rh-positive). These antibodies may harm Rh-positive babies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of antenatal anti-D immunoglobulin on the incidence of Rhesus D alloimmunisation when given to Rh-negative women without anti-D antibodies.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 September 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials in Rh-negative women without anti-D antibodies given anti-D after 28 weeks of pregnancy, compared with no treatment, placebo or a different regimen of anti-D.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and extracted the data.

MAIN RESULTS

Two trials with moderate to high risk of bias, involving over 4500 women, compared anti-D prophylaxis with no anti-D during pregnancy. When women received anti-D at 28 and 34 weeks' gestation, risks of immunisation were not significantly different than for women not given antenatal anti-D: risk ratio (RR) of immunisation during pregnancy was 0.42 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 1.17); after the birth of a Rh-positive infant the RR was 0.42 (95% CI 0.15 to 1.17); and within 12 months after birth of a Rh-positive infant the RR was 0.39 (95% CI 0.10 to 1.62).However, women receiving anti-D during pregnancy were significantly less likely to register a positive Kleihauer test (which detects fetal cells in maternal blood) in pregnancy (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.88) and at the birth of a Rh-positive infant (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.79). No data were available for the risk of Rhesus D alloimmunisation in a subsequent pregnancy. No significant differences were seen for neonatal jaundice, and no adverse effects were reported in either trial.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The risk of Rhesus D alloimmunisation during or immediately after a first pregnancy is about 1%. Administration of 100 µg (500 IU) anti-D to women in their first pregnancy can reduce this risk to about 0.2% without, to date, any adverse effects. Although unlikely to confer benefit in the current pregnancy, fewer women may have Rhesus D antibodies in any subsequent pregnancy, but the effects of this needs to be tested in studies of robust design.