sFlt-1/PlGF ratio for prediction of preeclampsia in clinical routine: A pragmatic real-world analysis of healthcare resource utilisation.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
26
04
2021
accepted:
19
01
2022
entrez:
24
2
2022
pubmed:
25
2
2022
medline:
11
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
We investigated the impact of the soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase 1 (sFlt-1)/placental growth factor (PlGF) ratio to predict short-term risk of preeclampsia on clinical utility and healthcare resource utilisation using real-world data (RWD), and compared findings with health economic modelling from previous studies. This retrospective analysis compared data from the German population of a multicentre clinical study (PROGNOSIS, n = 203; sFlt-1/PlGF ratio blinded and unavailable for decision-making) with RWD from University Hospital Leipzig, Germany (n = 281; sFlt-1/PlGF ratio used to guide clinical decision-making). A subgroup of the RWD cohort with the same inclusion criteria as the PROGNOSIS trial (RWD prediction only, n = 99) was also included. sFlt-1/PlGF ratio was measured using fully automated Elecsys® sFlt-1 and PlGF immunoassays (cobas e analyser; Roche Diagnostics). A similar proportion of women in the RWD and PROGNOSIS cohorts experienced preeclampsia (14.95% vs. 13.79%; p = 0.7938); a smaller proportion of women in the RWD prediction only cohort experienced preeclampsia versus PROGNOSIS (6.06%; p = 0.0526). In women with preeclampsia, median gestational age at delivery (weeks) was comparable in the RWD and PROGNOSIS cohorts (34.0 vs. 34.3, p = 0.5895), but significantly reduced in the RWD prediction only cohort versus PROGNOSIS (27.1, p = 0.0038). sFlt-1/PlGF ratio at baseline visit was not statistically significantly different for the RWD and PROGNOSIS cohorts, irrespective of preeclampsia outcome. Hospitalisations for confirmed preeclampsia were significantly shorter in the RWD cohort versus PROGNOSIS (median 1 vs. 4 days, p = 0.0093); there was no significant difference between RWD prediction only and PROGNOSIS (3 days, p = 0.9638). All-cause hospitalisations were significantly shorter in the RWD (median 1 day; p<0.0001) and RWD prediction only (1 day; p<0.0001) cohorts versus PROGNOSIS (3 days). This study supports the findings of previous studies, showing that routine clinical use of the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio may result in shorter duration of hospitalisations, with potential economic benefits.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
We investigated the impact of the soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase 1 (sFlt-1)/placental growth factor (PlGF) ratio to predict short-term risk of preeclampsia on clinical utility and healthcare resource utilisation using real-world data (RWD), and compared findings with health economic modelling from previous studies.
METHODS AND FINDINGS
This retrospective analysis compared data from the German population of a multicentre clinical study (PROGNOSIS, n = 203; sFlt-1/PlGF ratio blinded and unavailable for decision-making) with RWD from University Hospital Leipzig, Germany (n = 281; sFlt-1/PlGF ratio used to guide clinical decision-making). A subgroup of the RWD cohort with the same inclusion criteria as the PROGNOSIS trial (RWD prediction only, n = 99) was also included. sFlt-1/PlGF ratio was measured using fully automated Elecsys® sFlt-1 and PlGF immunoassays (cobas e analyser; Roche Diagnostics). A similar proportion of women in the RWD and PROGNOSIS cohorts experienced preeclampsia (14.95% vs. 13.79%; p = 0.7938); a smaller proportion of women in the RWD prediction only cohort experienced preeclampsia versus PROGNOSIS (6.06%; p = 0.0526). In women with preeclampsia, median gestational age at delivery (weeks) was comparable in the RWD and PROGNOSIS cohorts (34.0 vs. 34.3, p = 0.5895), but significantly reduced in the RWD prediction only cohort versus PROGNOSIS (27.1, p = 0.0038). sFlt-1/PlGF ratio at baseline visit was not statistically significantly different for the RWD and PROGNOSIS cohorts, irrespective of preeclampsia outcome. Hospitalisations for confirmed preeclampsia were significantly shorter in the RWD cohort versus PROGNOSIS (median 1 vs. 4 days, p = 0.0093); there was no significant difference between RWD prediction only and PROGNOSIS (3 days, p = 0.9638). All-cause hospitalisations were significantly shorter in the RWD (median 1 day; p<0.0001) and RWD prediction only (1 day; p<0.0001) cohorts versus PROGNOSIS (3 days).
CONCLUSIONS
This study supports the findings of previous studies, showing that routine clinical use of the sFlt-1/PlGF ratio may result in shorter duration of hospitalisations, with potential economic benefits.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35202416
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263443
pii: PONE-D-21-13571
pmc: PMC8870556
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers
0
PGF protein, human
0
Placenta Growth Factor
144589-93-5
FLT1 protein, human
EC 2.7.10.1
Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor-1
EC 2.7.10.1
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0263443Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
AD-S has nothing to disclose; AR is an employee of Roche Diagnostics GmbH; SV declares consulting fees, lecture fees and grant support from Roche Diagnostics and Thermo Fisher; CW is an employee of Roche Diagnostics International Ltd and is shareholder in F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd; HS declares speaker and consulting fees from Roche Diagnostics. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.
Références
Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Aug;128(2):261-269
pubmed: 27399996
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Mar;45(3):241-6
pubmed: 25736847
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013 Sep;170(1):1-7
pubmed: 23746796
Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Feb;97(2):261-7
pubmed: 11165592
Clin Chem. 2004 Sep;50(9):1702-3
pubmed: 15331514
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Dec;48(6):765-771
pubmed: 27300726
Hypertension. 2021 Feb;77(2):461-471
pubmed: 33280406
BMJ. 2007 Nov 10;335(7627):974
pubmed: 17975258
Hypertension. 2013 May;61(5):932-42
pubmed: 23460278
N Engl J Med. 2004 Feb 12;350(7):672-83
pubmed: 14764923
BMJ. 2006 Feb 25;332(7539):463-8
pubmed: 16497761
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014 Aug;179:240-5
pubmed: 24835859
J Clin Med. 2019 Oct 04;8(10):
pubmed: 31590294
Hypertens Pregnancy. 2001;20(1):IX-XIV
pubmed: 12044323
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2003 May;88(5):2348-51
pubmed: 12727995
BJOG. 2021 Jan;128(2):158-165
pubmed: 32593222
Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Jan;133(1):215-219
pubmed: 30575669
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Jun;190(6):1541-7; discussion 1547-50
pubmed: 15284729
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Feb;226(2S):S1037-S1047.e2
pubmed: 33892922
N Engl J Med. 2016 Jan 7;374(1):13-22
pubmed: 26735990
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1993 Nov 15;90(22):10705-9
pubmed: 8248162
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Aug 6;18(1):603
pubmed: 30081904
Hypertension. 2019 Jul;74(1):164-172
pubmed: 31188674
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014 Sep 18;14:324
pubmed: 25230734
Hypertension. 2018 Jul;72(1):24-43
pubmed: 29899139
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2005 Jan;17(1):3-18
pubmed: 15804781
Semin Nephrol. 2011 Jan;31(1):33-46
pubmed: 21266263