Low-Dose Aspirin after ASPRE-More Questions Than Answers? Current International Approach after PE Screening in the First Trimester

Preeclampsia (PE) is a multi-factorial disorder of pregnancy, and it continues to be one of the leading causes of fetal and maternal morbidity and mortality worldwide. Aspirin is universally recommended for high-risk women to reduce preeclampsia risk. The purpose of this review is to summarize the recommendations of various scientific societies on predicting preeclampsia and their indications for the inclusion of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) prophylaxis. Fourteen guidelines were compared. The recommended dose, screening method, and gestational age at the start of the test vary depending on the recommendation. The societies are inclined to recommend using increasingly higher doses (>75 mg) of ASA, with many encouraging doses from 100 mg upward. Most societies indicate that the optimal time for implementing aspirin is prior to 16 weeks' gestation. Following the publication of the Aspirin for Evidence-Based Preeclampsia Prevention (ASPRE) trial results and other papers evaluating the Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) screening model, a large number of societies have changed their recommendations from those based on risk factors alone to the ones based on the risk assessment proposed by the FMF. This allows for the detection of a high-risk pregnancy population in whom aspirin will be remarkably effective in preventing preterm PE, thereby decreasing maternal and fetal morbidity.

Psychological Impact and Women's Evaluation of the First-Trimester Pre-Eclampsia Screening and Prevention: ASPRE Trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to extend the understanding of the psychological impact of the first-trimester pre-eclampsia (PE) screening on women identified as high risk for preterm PE. We examined the differences between low- vs. high-risk women throughout pregnancy in: symptoms of distress (anxiety, depression, physical and mental health, and worry), health behaviour changes, the experience of pregnancy, and attitudes towards PE screening.

METHODS

This study was nested within the ASPRE trial. Pregnant women were screened for preterm-PE risk status in the first trimester; the assessments were carried out before the screening, in the second and in the third trimester (n = 155 low-risk women and N = 82 high-risk women in the second trimester).

RESULTS

The high-risk-for-PE women exhibited more depressive symptoms compared to the low-risk women in the second but not in the third trimester. No differences were observed between the two groups in other distress symptoms or in the women's evaluation of their experience of pregnancy. The high-risk group reported greater health behaviour changes compared to the low-risk group, but this was moderated by depression levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, pregnant women reported positive attitudes towards first-trimester PE screening, despite transient depressive symptoms. This study offers supportive evidence concerning the appropriateness of PE screening in ethical terms.

Serum PlGF compared with PAPP-A in first trimester screening for preterm pre-eclampsia: Adjusting for the effect of aspirin treatment

OBJECTIVE

To compare the predictive performance for preterm-pre-eclampsia (PE) in first-trimester screening by serum placental growth factor (PlGF) versus pregnancy associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A), in combination with maternal risk factors, mean arterial pressure (MAP) and uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI), after adjustment for the effect of aspirin in women receiving this treatment.

DESIGN

Non-intervention multicentre screening studies for PE in singleton pregnancies.

SETTING

Maternity hospitals.

POPULATION

Two independent prospective studies of 8775 and 16 451 women with singleton pregnancies attending for routine assessment at 11⁺⁰ -13⁺⁶ weeks' gestation.

METHODS

The competing risks model was used to estimate patient-specific risks of delivery with PE at <37 weeks' gestation based on maternal risk factors and combinations with MAP, UtA-PI and either PlGF or PAPP-A. McNemar's test was used to compare the detection rate (DR) of preterm-PE of screening utilising PlGF versus PAPP-A, after adjustments for the effects of aspirin.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Predictive performance for preterm-PE.

RESULTS

In the combined data of 25 226 women, including 678 (2.7%) who developed PE, there were 194(0.8%) with preterm-PE. Addition of PlGF improved the DR of preterm-PE, at 10% screen positive rate, by 18.4% (95% CI 12.2-24.6) in screening by maternal risk factors, by 19.9% (95% CI 13.6-26.2) in screening by maternal factors and MAP, and by 7.0% (95% CI 2.3-11.6) in screening by maternal factors, MAP and UtA-PI. PAPP-A did not significantly improve the DR provided by any combination of biomarkers.

CONCLUSION

The predictive performance of first trimester PlGF for preterm-PE is superior to that of PAPP-A.

First trimester preeclampsia screening and prediction

Preeclampsia is a major cause of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. Early-onset disease requiring preterm delivery is associated with a higher risk of complications in both mothers and babies. Evidence suggests that the administration of low-dose aspirin initiated before 16 weeks' gestation significantly reduces the rate of preterm preeclampsia. Therefore, it is important to identify pregnant women at risk of developing preeclampsia during the first trimester of pregnancy, thus allowing timely therapeutic intervention. Several professional organizations such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) have proposed screening for preeclampsia based on maternal risk factors. The approach recommended by ACOG and NICE essentially treats each risk factor as a separate screening test with additive detection rate and screen-positive rate. Evidence has shown that preeclampsia screening based on the NICE and ACOG approach has suboptimal performance, as the NICE recommendation only achieves detection rates of 41% and 34%, with a 10% false-positive rate, for preterm and term preeclampsia, respectively. Screening based on the 2013 ACOG recommendation can only achieve detection rates of 5% and 2% for preterm and term preeclampsia, respectively, with a 0.2% false-positive rate. Various first trimester prediction models have been developed. Most of them have not undergone or failed external validation. However, it is worthy of note that the Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) first trimester prediction model (namely the triple test), which consists of a combination of maternal factors and measurements of mean arterial pressure, uterine artery pulsatility index, and serum placental growth factor, has undergone successful internal and external validation. The FMF triple test has detection rates of 90% and 75% for the prediction of early and preterm preeclampsia, respectively, with a 10% false-positive rate. Such performance of screening is superior to that of the traditional method by maternal risk factors alone. The use of the FMF prediction model, followed by the administration of low-dose aspirin, has been shown to reduce the rate of preterm preeclampsia by 62%. The number needed to screen to prevent 1 case of preterm preeclampsia by the FMF triple test is 250. The key to maintaining optimal screening performance is to establish standardized protocols for biomarker measurements and regular biomarker quality assessment, as inaccurate measurement can affect screening performance. Tools frequently used to assess quality control include the cumulative sum and target plot. Cumulative sum is a sensitive method to detect small shifts over time, and point of shift can be easily identified. Target plot is a tool to evaluate deviation from the expected multiple of median and the expected median of standard deviation. Target plot is easy to interpret and visualize. However, it is insensitive to detecting small deviations. Adherence to well-defined protocols for the measurements of mean arterial pressure, uterine artery pulsatility index, and placental growth factor is required. This article summarizes the existing literature on the different methods, recommendations by professional organizations, quality assessment of different components of risk assessment, and clinical implementation of the first trimester screening for preeclampsia.

Screening for pre-eclampsia at 11-13 weeks' gestation: use of pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A, placental growth factor or both

OBJECTIVE

First-trimester screening for pre-eclampsia (PE) is useful because treatment of the high-risk group with aspirin reduces the rate of early PE with delivery at < 34 weeks' gestation by about 80% and that of preterm PE with delivery at < 37 weeks by 60%. In previous studies, we reported that the best way of identifying the high-risk group is by a combination of maternal factors, mean arterial pressure (MAP), uterine artery pulsatility index (UtA-PI) and serum placental growth factor (PlGF). An alternative biochemical marker is pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A), which is used widely as part of early screening for trisomy. The objective of this study was to examine the additive value of PlGF and PAPP-A in first-trimester screening for preterm PE by maternal factors, MAP and UtA-PI and define the risk cut-off and screen-positive rate to achieve a desired detection rate of PE if PAPP-A rather than PlGF was to be used for first-trimester screening.

METHODS

This was a non-intervention screening study. The data were derived from prospective screening for adverse obstetric outcomes in women with singleton pregnancy attending for a routine first-trimester hospital visit. Patient-specific risks of delivery with PE at < 37 weeks' gestation were calculated using the competing-risks model to combine the prior distribution of gestational age at delivery with PE, obtained from maternal characteristics and medical history, with multiples of the median (MoM) values of MAP, UtA-PI, PlGF and PAPP-A. The performance of screening in the total population and in subgroups of women of white and black racial origin was estimated. McNemar's test was used to compare the detection rate, for a fixed screen-positive rate, of screening with and without PlGF and PAPP-A. Risk cut-offs and screen-positive rates to achieve desired detection rates of preterm PE were determined in screening with and without PlGF and PAPP-A.

RESULTS

The study population was composed of 60 875 singleton pregnancies, including 1736 (2.9%) that developed PE. There are three main findings of this study. First, the performance of first-trimester screening for PE by a combination of maternal factors, MAP, UtA-PI and PlGF is superior to that of screening by maternal factors, MAP, UtA-PI and PAPP-A; for example, in screening by maternal factors, MAP, UtA-PI and PlGF, at a screen-positive rate of 10%, the detection rate of PE with delivery at < 37 weeks' gestation was 74.1%, which was 7.1% (95% CI, 3.8-10.6%) higher than in screening by maternal factors, MAP, UtA-PI and PAPP-A. Second, addition of serum PAPP-A does not improve the prediction of PE provided by maternal factors, MAP, UtA-PI and PlGF. Third, the risk cut-off and screen-positive rate to achieve a given fixed detection rate of preterm PE vary according to the racial composition of the study population and whether the biomarkers used for screening are MAP, UtA-PI and PlGF or MAP, UtA-PI and PAPP-A. For example, in screening by a combination of maternal factors, MAP, UtA-PI and PlGF in white women, if the desired detection rate of preterm PE was 75%, the risk cut-off should be 1 in 136 and the screen-positive rate would be 14.1%; in black women, to achieve a detection rate of 75%, the risk cut-off should be 1 in 29 and the screen-positive rate would be 12.5%. In screening by a combination of maternal factors, MAP, UtA-PI and PAPP-A in white women, if the desired detection rate of preterm PE was 75%, the risk cut-off should be 1 in 140 and the screen-positive rate would be 16.9%; in black women, to achieve a detection rate of 75%, the risk cut-off should be 1 in 44 and the screen-positive rate would be 19.3%.

CONCLUSION

In first-trimester screening for PE, the preferred biochemical marker is PlGF rather than PAPP-A. However, if PAPP-A was to be used rather than PlGF, the same detection rate can be achieved but at a higher screen-positive rate. © 2020 Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Screening for pre-eclampsia by maternal factors and biomarkers at 11-13 weeks' gestation

OBJECTIVE

To examine the performance of screening for early, preterm and term pre-eclampsia (PE) at 11-13 weeks' gestation by maternal factors and combinations of mean arterial pressure (MAP), uterine artery (UtA) pulsatility index (PI), serum placental growth factor (PlGF) and serum pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A).

METHODS

The data for this study were derived from three previously reported prospective non-intervention screening studies at 11 + 0 to 13 + 6 weeks' gestation in a combined total of 61 174 singleton pregnancies, including 1770 (2.9%) that developed PE. Bayes' theorem was used to combine the prior distribution of gestational age at delivery with PE, obtained from maternal characteristics, with various combinations of biomarker multiples of the median (MoM) values to derive patient-specific risks of delivery with PE at < 37 weeks' gestation. The performance of such screening was estimated.

RESULTS

In pregnancies that developed PE, compared to those without PE, the MoM values of UtA-PI and MAP were increased and those of PAPP-A and PlGF were decreased, and the deviation from normal was greater for early than late PE for all four biomarkers. Combined screening by maternal factors, UtA-PI, MAP and PlGF predicted 90% of early PE, 75% of preterm PE and 41% of term PE, at a screen-positive rate of 10%; inclusion of PAPP-A did not improve the performance of screening. The performance of screening depended on the racial origin of the women; on screening by a combination of maternal factors, MAP, UtA-PI and PlGF and using a risk cut-off of 1 in 100 for PE at < 37 weeks in Caucasian women, the screen-positive rate was 10% and detection rates for early, preterm and term PE were 88%, 69% and 40%, respectively. With the same method of screening and risk cut-off in women of Afro-Caribbean racial origin, the screen-positive rate was 34% and detection rates for early, preterm and term PE were 100%, 92% and 75%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Screening by maternal factors and biomarkers at 11-13 weeks' gestation can identify a high proportion of pregnancies that develop early and preterm PE. © 2018 Crown copyright. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology © 2018 ISUOG.

Prediction and prevention of small-for-gestational-age neonates: evidence from SPREE and ASPRE

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effect of first-trimester screening for pre-eclampsia (PE) on the prediction of delivering a small-for-gestational-age (SGA) neonate and the effect of prophylactic use of aspirin on the prevention of SGA.

METHODS

The data for this study were derived from two multicenter studies. In SPREE, we investigated the performance of screening for PE by a combination of maternal characteristics and biomarkers at 11-13 weeks' gestation. In ASPRE, women with a singleton pregnancy identified by combined screening as being at high risk for preterm PE (> 1 in 100) participated in a trial of aspirin (150 mg/day from 11-14 until 36 weeks' gestation) compared to placebo. In this study, we used the data from the ASPRE trial to estimate the effect of aspirin on the incidence of SGA with birth weight < 10^th , < 5^th and < 3^rd percentile for gestational age. We also used the data from SPREE to estimate the proportion of SGA in the pregnancies with a risk for preterm PE of > 1 in 100.

RESULTS

In SPREE, screening for preterm PE by a combination of maternal factors, mean arterial pressure, uterine artery pulsatility index and serum placental growth factor identified a high-risk group that contained about 46% of SGA neonates < 10^th percentile born at < 37 weeks' gestation (preterm) and 56% of those born at < 32 weeks (early); the overall screen-positive rate was 12.2% (2014 of 16 451 pregnancies). In the ASPRE trial, use of aspirin reduced the overall incidence of SGA < 10^th percentile by about 40% in babies born at < 37 weeks' gestation and by about 70% in babies born at < 32 weeks; in babies born at ≥ 37 weeks, aspirin did not have a significant effect on incidence of SGA. The aspirin-related decrease in incidence of SGA was mainly due to its incidence decreasing in pregnancies with PE, for which the decrease was about 70% in babies born at < 37 weeks' gestation and about 90% in babies born at < 32 weeks. On the basis of these results, it was estimated that first-trimester screening for preterm PE and use of aspirin in the high-risk group would potentially reduce the incidence of preterm and early SGA by about 20% and 40%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

First-trimester screening for PE by the combined test identifies a high proportion of cases of preterm SGA that can be prevented by the prophylactic use of aspirin. © 2018 Crown copyright. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology © 2018 ISUOG.