The page below is a sample from the LabCE course Detection and Management of Preeclampsia: Current Laboratory Testing and Emerging Biomarkers. Access the complete course and earn ASCLS P.A.C.E.-approved continuing education credits by subscribing online.

Learn more about Detection and Management of Preeclampsia: Current Laboratory Testing and Emerging Biomarkers (online CE course) »
How to Subscribe
MLS & MLT Comprehensive CE Package
Includes 97 CE courses, most popular
$95 Add to cart
Pick Your Courses
Up to 8 CE hours
$50 Add to cart
Individual course$20 Add to cart

Summary and Conclusions on the Clinical Use of Biomarkers for Diagnosing and Predicting Risk for Developing PE

National organizations including the ACOG typically do not include the use of biomarkers in their practice guidelines for the diagnosis and identification of women with preeclampsia (PE). Other organizations, such as the Preeclampsia Foundation (PF), are investigating the usage of biomarkers for more advanced diagnosis of PE. Recently, the PF gathered together nine diagnostic companies and several leading clinicians and researchers in the field of preeclampsia to discuss future biomarkers for diagnosing and screening for risk of PE. At present, most if not all insurers consider testing for biomarkers to diagnose PE as experimental and investigational.
The following conclusions can be made regarding the clinical use of biomarkers to identify and diagnose PE:
  • Although the identification of certain biomarkers may hold promise in the early detection of patients with a greater risk of PE, none of the aforementioned biomarkers appear to have sufficiently high positive predictive value when used alone.
  • A combination of biomarkers is more useful than a specific individual biomarker. For example, a combination of PlGF, sFlt-1, sEng, VEGF and sFlt-1/PlGF ratio tend to have stronger predictive value for PE. Although the use of a combination of biomarkers may improve upon the clinical utility for predicting PE, more studies are needed to confirm their clinical use to specifically predict PE.
  • The addition of Doppler Ultrasonography of the uterine arteries with the biomarker combinations may improve upon the predictability of PE. However, more studies to confirm the clinical utility of Doppler ultrasonography need to be performed.
  • There are a lack of validation studies for these biomarkers and a lack of agreement on the cut-off points or standardization points to determine abnormal levels.
  • There is a lack of the understanding of the precise cause(s) of PE and the progression of PE does not give us a clear indication on definitive treatment interventions.
  • Most national professional organizations do not yet recommend biomarker testing for the diagnosis of PE.
  • There is no consensus at this point among clinicians and obstetricians on the clinical acceptance for the use of biomarkers in the risk assessment and diagnosis of PE.
  • Most major insurers consider biomarker testing to assess PE experimental and investigational.