Does the use of fetal fibronectin in an algorithm for preterm labor reduce triage evaluation times?

Three biomarker tests to help diagnose preterm labour: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Preterm birth may result in short- and long-term health problems for the child. Accurate diagnoses of preterm births could prevent unnecessary (or ensure appropriate) admissions into hospitals or transfers to specialist units.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this report is to assess the test accuracy, clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the diagnostic tests PartoSure™ (Parsagen Diagnostics Inc., Boston, MA, USA), Actim^® Partus (Medix Biochemica, Espoo, Finland) and the Rapid Fetal Fibronectin (fFN)^® 10Q Cassette Kit (Hologic, Inc., Marlborough, MA, USA) at thresholds ≠50 ng/ml [quantitative fFN (qfFN)] for women presenting with signs and symptoms of preterm labour relative to fFN at 50 ng/ml.

METHODS

Systematic reviews of the published literature were conducted for diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) studies of PartoSure, Actim Partus and qfFN for predicting preterm birth, the clinical effectiveness following treatment decisions informed by test results and economic evaluations of the tests. A model-based economic evaluation was also conducted to extrapolate long-term outcomes from the results of the diagnostic tests. The model followed the structure of the model that informed the 2015 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines on preterm labour diagnosis and treatment, but with antenatal steroids use, as opposed to tocolysis, driving health outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty studies were identified evaluating DTA against the reference standard of delivery within 7 days and seven studies were identified evaluating DTA against the reference standard of delivery within 48 hours. Two studies assessed two of the index tests within the same population. One study demonstrated that depending on the threshold used, qfFN was more or less accurate than Actim Partus, whereas the other indicated little difference between PartoSure and Actim Partus. No study assessing qfFN and PartoSure in the same population was identified. The test accuracy results from the other included studies revealed a high level of uncertainty, primarily attributable to substantial methodological, clinical and statistical heterogeneity between studies. No study compared all three tests simultaneously. No clinical effectiveness studies evaluating any of the three biomarker tests were identified. One partial economic evaluation was identified for predicting preterm birth. It assessed the number needed to treat to prevent a respiratory distress syndrome case with a 'treat-all' strategy, relative to testing with qualitative fFN. Because of the lack of data, our de novo model involved the assumption that management of pregnant women fully adhered to the results of the tests. In the base-case analysis for a woman at 30 weeks' gestation, Actim Partus had lower health-care costs and fewer quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) than qfFN at 50 ng/ml, reducing costs at a rate of £56,030 per QALY lost compared with qfFN at 50 ng/ml. PartoSure is less costly than Actim Partus while being equally effective, but this is based on diagnostic accuracy data from a small study. Treatment with qfFN at 200 ng/ml and 500 ng/ml resulted in lower cost savings per QALY lost relative to fFN at 50 ng/ml than treatment with Actim Partus. In contrast, qfFN at 10 ng/ml increased QALYs, by 0.002, and had a cost per QALY gained of £140,267 relative to fFN at 50 ng/ml. Similar qualitative results were obtained for women presenting at different gestational ages.

CONCLUSION

There is a high degree of uncertainty surrounding the test accuracy and cost-effectiveness results. We are aware of four ongoing UK trials, two of which plan to enrol > 1000 participants. The results of these trials may significantly alter the findings presented here.

STUDY REGISTRATION

The study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017072696.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

The utility of fetal fibronectin in asymptomatic singleton and twin pregnancies with a cervical length ≤ 10 mm

Objective: To examine the utility of fetal fibronectin (fFN) for predicting spontaneous preterm birth (PTB) in asymptomatic women with a cervical length (CL) ≤10 mm compared to those with a CL 11-25 mm.Methods: Data was collected on all women with nonanomalous singleton and twin gestations who underwent transvaginal CL at a single institution between 2009 and 2012. Women with an incidental short cervix (CL ≤ 25 mm) between 22 and 32 weeks who had an fFN result within 7 days thereafter were included. Indicated preterm deliveries at <14 days of fFN, women who underwent cerclage placement, and terminations of pregnancy were excluded. The primary outcome was spontaneous PTB within 7 and 14 days of the fFN. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of fFN for a CL ≤ 10 mm was calculated for singletons and twins and compared to those with a CL 11-25 mm.Results: Of the 213 women included, 117 (54.9%) were singletons and 96 (45%) were twins. Baseline characteristics were similar between those with a CL ≤ 10 mm and with a CL 11-25 mm in both singletons and twins. The NPV of fFN for delivery within 7 days in singletons and twins with a CL ≤ 10 mm was 100%, similar to those with a CL 11-25 mm (93-100%). The NPV of fFN for delivery within 14 days in singletons and twins with a CL ≤ 10 mm remained high (87.5-100%) when compared to those with a CL 11-25 mm (93-100%). The PPV of fFN for delivery within 7 and 14 days in both singletons and twins with a CL ≤ 10 mm was low (10-25%) and similar to those with a CL 11-25 mm (7.1-24.4%).Conclusions: The NPV of fFN in asymptomatic singleton and twin pregnancies with a CL ≤ 10 mm is high and comparable to the NPV of fFN in women with a longer CL. Routine fFN collection in this select population should be considered as it may avoid unnecessary and costly admissions, as well as assist with timing of antenatal corticosteroids.

Fetal fibronectin testing for reducing the risk of preterm birth

BACKGROUND

Fetal fibronectin (FFN) is an extracellular matrix glycoprotein localized at the maternal-fetal interface of the amniotic membranes, between chorion and decidua, where it is concentrated in this area between decidua and trophoblast. In normal conditions, FFN is found at very low levels in cervicovaginal secretions. Levels greater than or equal to 50 ng/mL at or after 22 weeks have been associated with an increased risk of spontaneous preterm birth. In fact, FFN is one of the best predictors of preterm birth in all populations studied so far, and can help in selecting which women are at significant risk for preterm birth. This is an update of a review first published in 2008.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of management based on knowledge of FFN testing results for preventing preterm birth.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (7 September 2018), ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (7 September 2018), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials of pregnant women screened with FFN for risk of preterm birth. Studies included are based exclusively on knowledge of FFN results versus no such knowledge, and we have excluded studies including women with only positive or only negative FFN results.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data, and checked them for accuracy. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 16 trials, of which six were eligible for inclusion. The six included studies randomized 546 women with singleton gestations and threatened preterm labor (PTL) at 23 0/7 to 34 6/7 weeks. A total of 277 women were randomized to knowledge and 269 to no knowledge of FFN. No trials were identified on asymptomatic women or multiple gestations.The risk of bias of included studies was mixed. For selected important outcomes, preterm birth before 37, 34, and 32 weeks, and maternal hospitalization, we graded the quality of the evidence and created a 'Summary of findings' table. For these outcomes, the evidence was graded as mainly low quality due to the imprecision of effect estimates.Management based on knowledge of FFN results may reduce preterm birth before 37 weeks (21.6%) versus controls without such knowledge (29.2%) (risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52 to 1.01; 4 trials; 357 women; low-quality evidence). However, management based on knowledge of FFN results may make little or no difference to preterm birth before 34 (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.18; 4 trials; 357 women; low-quality evidence) or maternal hospitalization (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.43; 5 trials; 441 women; low-quality evidence). The evidence for preterm birth before 32 weeks is uncertain because the quality was found to be very low (average RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.16 to 3.96; 4 trials; 357 women; very low-quality evidence).For all other outcomes, for which there were available data (preterm birth less than 28 weeks; gestational age at delivery (weeks); birthweight less than 2500 g; perinatal death; tocolysis; steroids for fetal lung maturity; time to evaluate; respiratory distress syndrome; neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission; and NICU days), knowledge of FFN results may make little or no difference to the outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence from this review suggests that management based on knowledge of FFN results may reduce preterm birth before 37 weeks. However, our confidence in this result is limited as the evidence was found to be of low quality. Effects on other substantive outcomes are uncertain due to serious concerns in study design, inconsistency, and imprecision of effect estimates. No trials were identified on asymptomatic women, or multiple gestations.Future studies are needed that include specific populations (e.g. singleton gestations with symptoms of preterm labor), a study group managed with a protocol based on the FFN results, and that report not only maternal but also important perinatal outcomes. Cost-effectiveness analyses are also needed.

The fetal fibronectin test: 25 years after its development, what is the evidence regarding its clinical utility? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: The identification of women at risk for preterm birth should allow interventions which could improve neonatal outcome. Fetal fibronectin, a glycoprotein which acts normally as glue between decidua and amniotic membranes could be a good marker of impending labour when its concentration in cervicovaginal secretions between 22 and 36 weeks of gestation is ≥50 ng/mL. Many authors worldwide have tested this marker with many different methodologies and clinical settings, but conclusions about its clinical use are mixed. It is time for a comprehensive update through a systematic review and meta-analysis.Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase, supplemented by manual search of bibliographies of known primary and review articles, international conference papers, and contact with experts from 1-1990 to 2-2018. We have selected all type of studies involving fetal fibronectin test accuracy for preterm delivery. Two authors independently extracted data about study characteristics and quality from identified publications. Contingency tables were constructed. Reference standards were preterm delivery before 37, 36, 35, 34, and 32 weeks, within 28, 21, 14, or 7 d and within 48 h. Data were pooled to produce summary likelihood ratios for positive and negative tests results.Results: One hundred and ninety-three primary studies were identified allowing analysis of 53 subgroups. In all settings, none of the summary likelihood ratios were >10 or <0.1, thus indicating moderate prediction, particularly in asymptomatic women and in multiple gestations.Conclusions: The fetal fibronectin test should not be used as a screening test for asymptomatic women. For high-risk asymptomatic women, and especially for women with multiple pregnancies, the performance of the fetal fibronectin test was also too low to be clinically relevant. Consensual use as a diagnostic tool for women with suspected preterm labor, the best use policy probably still depends on local contingencies, future cost-effectiveness analysis, and comparison with other more recent available biochemical markers.

Fetal fibronectin testing for prevention of preterm birth in singleton pregnancies with threatened preterm labor: a systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE DATA

Fetal fibronectin is an extracellular matrix glycoprotein that is produced by amniocytes and cytotrophoblasts and has been shown to predict spontaneous preterm birth.

STUDY

The aim of this systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized clinical trials was to evaluate the effect of the use of fetal fibronectin in the prevention of preterm birth in singleton pregnancies with threatened preterm labor.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

The research was conducted with the use of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Sciences, Scopus, ClinicalTrial.gov, OVID, and Cochrane Library as electronic databases from the inception of each database to February 2016. Selection criteria included randomized clinical trials of singleton gestations with threatened preterm labor that were assigned randomly to management based on fetal fibronectin results (ie, intervention group) or not (ie, comparison group). Types of participants included women with singleton gestations at 23 0/7 to 34 6/7 weeks with threatened preterm labor. Studies that included management that was also based on the use of sonographic cervical length were excluded. The primary outcome was preterm birth at <37 weeks of gestation. The summary measures were reported as relative risk or as mean differences with 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

Six trials that included 546 singleton gestations with symptoms of preterm labor were included in the metaanalysis. The overall risk of bias of the included trials was low. Women were eligible for the random assignment in case of symptoms that suggested preterm labor at 23-34 weeks of gestation. During admission, before digital examination, a Dacron swab was rotated in the posterior fornix for 10 seconds to absorb cervicovaginal secretions that were then analyzed for the fetal fibronectin qualitative method, with results reported as either positive or negative. Women who were assigned randomly to the fetal fibronectin group had a similar incidence of preterm birth at <37 weeks of gestation (20.7% vs 29.2%; relative risk, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-1.01), at <34 weeks of gestation (8.3% vs 7.9%; relative risk, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-2.18), at <32 weeks of gestation (3.3% vs 5.6%; relative risk, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-1.74), and at <28 weeks of gestation (1.1% vs 1.7%; relative risk, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-3.67) compared with the control group. No differences were found in the number of women who delivered within 7 days (12.8% vs 14.5%; relative risk, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.47-1.21), in the mean of gestational age at delivery (mean difference, 0.20 week; 95% confidence interval, -0.26 to 0.67), in the rate of maternal hospitalization (27.4% vs 26.9%; relative risk, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.44), in the use of tocolysis (25.3% vs 28.2%; relative risk, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-1.24), antenatal steroids (29.2% vs 29.2%; relative risk, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-1.39), in the mean time in the triage unit (mean difference, 0.60 hour; 95% confidence interval, -0.03 to 1.23) and in neonatal outcomes that included respiratory distress syndrome (1.3% vs 1.5%; relative risk, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-14.06), and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (19.4% vs 8.1%; relative risk, 2.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-6.46). Management based on the fetal fibronectin test required higher hospitalization charges (mean difference, $153; 95% confidence interval, 24.01-281.99).

CONCLUSION

Fetal fibronectin testing in singleton gestations with threatened preterm labor is not associated with the prevention of preterm birth or improvement in perinatal outcome but is associated with higher costs.

Diagnostic Potential of Evaluation of SDF-1α and sRAGE Levels in Threatened Premature Labor

Preterm birth remains the most prevalent cause of neonatal morbidity. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of SDF-1α, resistin, secretory RAGE (sRAGE), and endogenous secretory RAGE (esRAGE) in preterm labor. A total of 211 pregnant women participated in the study. Group A contained 72 women between 22 and 36 weeks of gestation, with premature labor, who finally had preterm birth. Group B contained 66 women in labor between 37 and 41 weeks of gestation. Women in group A had lower SDF-1α and sRAGE levels than those in group B. Moreover, in group A, SDF-1α and sRAGE levels were correlated with the latency period from the occurrence of premature labor symptoms until delivery. Sensitivity and specificity of studied parameters for prediction of preterm birth were 95% and 40% for SDF-1α and 51.3% and 93.5% for sRAGE, respectively. The prognostic value of plasma SDF-1α and sRAGE levels was comparable with that of cervical length ultrasound measurement and serum C-reactive protein levels. We conclude that SDF-1α and sRAGE appear to play a major role in the diagnosis of preterm birth and its evaluation could be convenient and useful for predicting preterm birth.