1
|
Allotey J, Snell KI, Smuk M, Hooper R, Chan CL, Ahmed A, Chappell LC, von Dadelszen P, Dodds J, Green M, Kenny L, Khalil A, Khan KS, Mol BW, Myers J, Poston L, Thilaganathan B, Staff AC, Smith GC, Ganzevoort W, Laivuori H, Odibo AO, Ramírez JA, Kingdom J, Daskalakis G, Farrar D, Baschat AA, Seed PT, Prefumo F, da Silva Costa F, Groen H, Audibert F, Masse J, Skråstad RB, Salvesen KÅ, Haavaldsen C, Nagata C, Rumbold AR, Heinonen S, Askie LM, Smits LJ, Vinter CA, Magnus PM, Eero K, Villa PM, Jenum AK, Andersen LB, Norman JE, Ohkuchi A, Eskild A, Bhattacharya S, McAuliffe FM, Galindo A, Herraiz I, Carbillon L, Klipstein-Grobusch K, Yeo S, Teede HJ, Browne JL, Moons KG, Riley RD, Thangaratinam S. Validation and development of models using clinical, biochemical and ultrasound markers for predicting pre-eclampsia: an individual participant data meta-analysis. Health Technol Assess 2021; 24:1-252. [PMID: 33336645 DOI: 10.3310/hta24720] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pre-eclampsia is a leading cause of maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity. Early identification of women at risk is needed to plan management. OBJECTIVES To assess the performance of existing pre-eclampsia prediction models and to develop and validate models for pre-eclampsia using individual participant data meta-analysis. We also estimated the prognostic value of individual markers. DESIGN This was an individual participant data meta-analysis of cohort studies. SETTING Source data from secondary and tertiary care. PREDICTORS We identified predictors from systematic reviews, and prioritised for importance in an international survey. PRIMARY OUTCOMES Early-onset (delivery at < 34 weeks' gestation), late-onset (delivery at ≥ 34 weeks' gestation) and any-onset pre-eclampsia. ANALYSIS We externally validated existing prediction models in UK cohorts and reported their performance in terms of discrimination and calibration. We developed and validated 12 new models based on clinical characteristics, clinical characteristics and biochemical markers, and clinical characteristics and ultrasound markers in the first and second trimesters. We summarised the data set-specific performance of each model using a random-effects meta-analysis. Discrimination was considered promising for C-statistics of ≥ 0.7, and calibration was considered good if the slope was near 1 and calibration-in-the-large was near 0. Heterogeneity was quantified using I 2 and τ2. A decision curve analysis was undertaken to determine the clinical utility (net benefit) of the models. We reported the unadjusted prognostic value of individual predictors for pre-eclampsia as odds ratios with 95% confidence and prediction intervals. RESULTS The International Prediction of Pregnancy Complications network comprised 78 studies (3,570,993 singleton pregnancies) identified from systematic reviews of tests to predict pre-eclampsia. Twenty-four of the 131 published prediction models could be validated in 11 UK cohorts. Summary C-statistics were between 0.6 and 0.7 for most models, and calibration was generally poor owing to large between-study heterogeneity, suggesting model overfitting. The clinical utility of the models varied between showing net harm to showing minimal or no net benefit. The average discrimination for IPPIC models ranged between 0.68 and 0.83. This was highest for the second-trimester clinical characteristics and biochemical markers model to predict early-onset pre-eclampsia, and lowest for the first-trimester clinical characteristics models to predict any pre-eclampsia. Calibration performance was heterogeneous across studies. Net benefit was observed for International Prediction of Pregnancy Complications first and second-trimester clinical characteristics and clinical characteristics and biochemical markers models predicting any pre-eclampsia, when validated in singleton nulliparous women managed in the UK NHS. History of hypertension, parity, smoking, mode of conception, placental growth factor and uterine artery pulsatility index had the strongest unadjusted associations with pre-eclampsia. LIMITATIONS Variations in study population characteristics, type of predictors reported, too few events in some validation cohorts and the type of measurements contributed to heterogeneity in performance of the International Prediction of Pregnancy Complications models. Some published models were not validated because model predictors were unavailable in the individual participant data. CONCLUSION For models that could be validated, predictive performance was generally poor across data sets. Although the International Prediction of Pregnancy Complications models show good predictive performance on average, and in the singleton nulliparous population, heterogeneity in calibration performance is likely across settings. FUTURE WORK Recalibration of model parameters within populations may improve calibration performance. Additional strong predictors need to be identified to improve model performance and consistency. Validation, including examination of calibration heterogeneity, is required for the models we could not validate. STUDY REGISTRATION This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015029349. FUNDING This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 72. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
Collapse
|
3
|
Snell KIE, Allotey J, Smuk M, Hooper R, Chan C, Ahmed A, Chappell LC, Von Dadelszen P, Green M, Kenny L, Khalil A, Khan KS, Mol BW, Myers J, Poston L, Thilaganathan B, Staff AC, Smith GCS, Ganzevoort W, Laivuori H, Odibo AO, Arenas Ramírez J, Kingdom J, Daskalakis G, Farrar D, Baschat AA, Seed PT, Prefumo F, da Silva Costa F, Groen H, Audibert F, Masse J, Skråstad RB, Salvesen KÅ, Haavaldsen C, Nagata C, Rumbold AR, Heinonen S, Askie LM, Smits LJM, Vinter CA, Magnus P, Eero K, Villa PM, Jenum AK, Andersen LB, Norman JE, Ohkuchi A, Eskild A, Bhattacharya S, McAuliffe FM, Galindo A, Herraiz I, Carbillon L, Klipstein-Grobusch K, Yeo SA, Browne JL, Moons KGM, Riley RD, Thangaratinam S. External validation of prognostic models predicting pre-eclampsia: individual participant data meta-analysis. BMC Med 2020; 18:302. [PMID: 33131506 PMCID: PMC7604970 DOI: 10.1186/s12916-020-01766-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2020] [Accepted: 08/26/2020] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Pre-eclampsia is a leading cause of maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity. Early identification of women at risk during pregnancy is required to plan management. Although there are many published prediction models for pre-eclampsia, few have been validated in external data. Our objective was to externally validate published prediction models for pre-eclampsia using individual participant data (IPD) from UK studies, to evaluate whether any of the models can accurately predict the condition when used within the UK healthcare setting. METHODS IPD from 11 UK cohort studies (217,415 pregnant women) within the International Prediction of Pregnancy Complications (IPPIC) pre-eclampsia network contributed to external validation of published prediction models, identified by systematic review. Cohorts that measured all predictor variables in at least one of the identified models and reported pre-eclampsia as an outcome were included for validation. We reported the model predictive performance as discrimination (C-statistic), calibration (calibration plots, calibration slope, calibration-in-the-large), and net benefit. Performance measures were estimated separately in each available study and then, where possible, combined across studies in a random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS Of 131 published models, 67 provided the full model equation and 24 could be validated in 11 UK cohorts. Most of the models showed modest discrimination with summary C-statistics between 0.6 and 0.7. The calibration of the predicted compared to observed risk was generally poor for most models with observed calibration slopes less than 1, indicating that predictions were generally too extreme, although confidence intervals were wide. There was large between-study heterogeneity in each model's calibration-in-the-large, suggesting poor calibration of the predicted overall risk across populations. In a subset of models, the net benefit of using the models to inform clinical decisions appeared small and limited to probability thresholds between 5 and 7%. CONCLUSIONS The evaluated models had modest predictive performance, with key limitations such as poor calibration (likely due to overfitting in the original development datasets), substantial heterogeneity, and small net benefit across settings. The evidence to support the use of these prediction models for pre-eclampsia in clinical decision-making is limited. Any models that we could not validate should be examined in terms of their predictive performance, net benefit, and heterogeneity across multiple UK settings before consideration for use in practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION PROSPERO ID: CRD42015029349 .
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kym I E Snell
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK.
| | - John Allotey
- Barts Research Centre for Women's Health (BARC), Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Pragmatic Clinical Trials Unit, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Melanie Smuk
- Pragmatic Clinical Trials Unit, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Richard Hooper
- Pragmatic Clinical Trials Unit, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Claire Chan
- Pragmatic Clinical Trials Unit, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Asif Ahmed
- MirZyme Therapeutics, Innovation Birmingham Campus, Birmingham, UK
| | - Lucy C Chappell
- Department of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Peter Von Dadelszen
- Department of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Marcus Green
- Action on Pre-eclampsia (APEC) Charity, Worcestershire, UK
| | - Louise Kenny
- Faculty Health & Life Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Asma Khalil
- Fetal Medicine Unit, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and Molecular and Clinical Sciences Research Institute, St George's University of London, London, UK
| | - Khalid S Khan
- Barts Research Centre for Women's Health (BARC), Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Pragmatic Clinical Trials Unit, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Ben W Mol
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton, Victoria, Australia
| | - Jenny Myers
- Maternal and Fetal Health Research Centre, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Central Manchester NHS Trust, Manchester, UK
| | - Lucilla Poston
- Department of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Basky Thilaganathan
- Fetal Medicine Unit, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and Molecular and Clinical Sciences Research Institute, St George's University of London, London, UK
| | - Anne C Staff
- Division of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Oslo University Hospital, and Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Gordon C S Smith
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Cambridge University, Cambridge, UK
| | - Wessel Ganzevoort
- Department of Obstetrics, Amsterdam UMC University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Hannele Laivuori
- Department of Medical and Clinical Genetics, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
- Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland, Helsinki Institute of Life Science, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University Hospital and Tampere University, Tampere, Finland
| | | | - Javier Arenas Ramírez
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Hospital de Cabueñes, Gijón, Spain
| | - John Kingdom
- Maternal-Fetal Medicine Division, Department OBGYN, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
| | - George Daskalakis
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Alexandra Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | - Diane Farrar
- Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals, Bradford, UK
| | - Ahmet A Baschat
- Johns Hopkins Center for Fetal Therapy, Department of Gynecology & Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Paul T Seed
- Department of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Federico Prefumo
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - Fabricio da Silva Costa
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil
| | - Henk Groen
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Francois Audibert
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, CHU Ste Justine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada
| | - Jacques Masse
- Department of Molecular Biology, Medical Biochemistry and Pathology, Laval University, Quebec City, Canada
| | - Ragnhild B Skråstad
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology - NTNU, Trondheim, Norway
- Department of Clinical Pharmacology, St. Olav University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
| | - Kjell Å Salvesen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Trondheim University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, Children's and Women's Health, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
| | - Camilla Haavaldsen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway
| | - Chie Nagata
- Department of Education for Clinical Research, National Center for Child Health and Development, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Alice R Rumbold
- South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute and Robinson Research Institute, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
| | - Seppo Heinonen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Lisa M Askie
- NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Luc J M Smits
- Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Christina A Vinter
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Odense University Hospital, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Per Magnus
- Centre for Fertility and Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway
| | - Kajantie Eero
- National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland
- Children's Hospital, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Pia M Villa
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Anne K Jenum
- General Practice Research Unit (AFE), Department of General Practice, Institute of Health and Society, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Louise B Andersen
- Institute for Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Jane E Norman
- MRC Centre for Reproductive Health, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| | - Akihide Ohkuchi
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Jichi Medical University School of Medicine, Shimotsuke-shi, Tochigi, Japan
| | - Anne Eskild
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway
- Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Sohinee Bhattacharya
- Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Medical Sciences and Nutrition, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - Fionnuala M McAuliffe
- UCD Perinatal Research Centre, School of Medicine, University College Dublin, National Maternity Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Alberto Galindo
- Fetal Medicine Unit, Maternal and Child Health and Development Network (SAMID), Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Universitario, Instituto de Investigación Hospital, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - Ignacio Herraiz
- Fetal Medicine Unit, Maternal and Child Health and Development Network (SAMID), Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hospital Universitario, Instituto de Investigación Hospital, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
| | - Lionel Carbillon
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris Université Paris, Paris, France
| | - Kerstin Klipstein-Grobusch
- Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Seon Ae Yeo
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Joyce L Browne
- Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Karel G M Moons
- Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Cochrane Netherlands, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Richard D Riley
- Centre for Prognosis Research, School of Primary, Community and Social Care, Keele University, Keele, UK
| | - Shakila Thangaratinam
- Institute of Metabolism and Systems Research, WHO Collaborating Centre for Women's Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Li W, Gakwaya S, Masse J, Series F. 0566 Assessment of Soft Palate Muscle Fatigue and its Effect on Velopharyngeal Upper Airway (UA) Mechanical Properties. Sleep 2020. [DOI: 10.1093/sleep/zsaa056.563] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Introduction
Soft palate muscles are crucial in the maintenance of UA patency. This study aimed to investigate the fatigability of soft palate muscles and to quantify its effects on velopharyngeal UA dynamic properties in OSA patients and control subjects.
Methods
8 control (AHI ≤ 10 /h), 21 OSA patients (13 with mild/moderate disease: 10 /h < AHI ≤ 20 /h and 8 with moderate/severe: AHI > 20/h) were included in the study. Subjects were asked to develop repetitive intra-oral positive pressure during cheek-bulging maneuvers while wearing a mouth piece to keep the jaw opened. Subjects were asked to develop sustained maximal bulging pressure for 5 sec every 10 sec until the peak pressure could not reach 85% of baseline maximal pressure for 2 consecutive times. UA dynamic properties were assessed by measuring instantaneous airflow and velopharyngeal pressure in response to phrenic nerve magnetic stimulation (PNMS) performed before, immediately and every 3 minutes after the fatiguing protocol for a maximum of 30 minutes’ recovery time. UA closing pressure (Pcrit) was estimated by modeling the flow/pressure relationship in response to PNMS.
Results
The sex, age, BMI and the soft palate mechanical properties (including the baseline strength, endurance time, total muscle work) did not significantly differ between the 3 groups. Maximal peak bulging pressure measured using cheek-bulging maneuver significantly changed following the fatigue task (p < 0.05). Baseline velopharyngeal Pcrit were less negative in moderate/severe OSA group compared to mild/moderate OSA (-6.5±2.6 vs. -11.9±3.2, p < 0.05). In mild/moderate OSA patients, PNMS-induced drop in maximal instantaneous airflow tend to increase 3 mins after the fatiguing trial compared to baseline (22.7±21.1 l.s-1vs. 9.6±5.8 l.s-1, p < 0.1), and their Velopharyngeal linear resistance 3 mins after the fatiguing trial tend to be higher than the moderate/severe OSA group (3.9 ± 5.0 cmH2O·l−1·s−1 vs. 1.8 ± 1.1 cmH2O·l−1·s−1, p< 0.1).
Conclusion
The cheek-bulging maneuver could induce soft palate muscle fatigue, with no difference observed in soft palate mechanical performances among patients with different OSA severity. The fatiguing maneuver could further alter velopharyngeal UA mechanical properties in patients with mild/moderate OSA.
Support
SBD from IUCPQ Foundation
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W Li
- Unité de recherche en pneumologie, Centre de recherche, Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Québec, Université Laval., Québec, QC, Canada, QC, CANADA
| | - S Gakwaya
- Unité de recherche en pneumologie, Centre de recherche, Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Québec, Université Laval., Québec, QC, Canada, QC, CANADA
| | - J Masse
- Université Laval., Québec, QC, Canada, QC, CANADA
| | - F Series
- Unité de recherche en pneumologie, Centre de recherche, Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Québec, Université Laval., Québec, QC, Canada, QC, CANADA
| |
Collapse
|