Table 4.
The efficiency of putative biomarkers compared with fetal fibronectin to predict preterm labor.
| Cervicovaginal fluid biomarker(s) | Time to labor (days) | Sensitivity | Specificity | Positive Likelihood Ratio (LR+) | Negative Likelihood Ratio (LR−) | Positive predictive value | Negative predictive value | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SPONTANEOUS PRETERM LABOR (ASYMPTOMATIC) | ||||||||
| fFN (meta-analysis) | 7 | 22 (3–60) | 97 (96–97) | 7.3 | 0.80 | NR | NR | Leitich et al., 1999b |
| fFN (meta-analysis) | 14 | 43 (0–95) | 95 (92–99) | 8.6 | 0.60 | NR | NR | Leitich et al., 1999b |
| fFN (meta-analysis) | 28 | 26 (3–50) | 97 (96–98) | 8.7 | 0.76 | NR | NR | Leitich et al., 1999b |
| GC | 7 | 57.7 | 96.6 | 17.0 | 0.44 | 78.8 | 91.2 | Liong et al., 2013c |
| GC | 14 | 71.2 | 87.9 | 5.9 | 0.33 | 69.9 | 88.5 | Liong et al., 2013c |
| IL1RN | 28 | 57.1 | 97.8 | 26.0 | 0.44 | 72.7 | 95.7 | Liong et al., 2013a |
| TRX | 28 | 64.3 | 97.8 | 29.2 | 0.37 | 75.0 | 96.4 | Liong et al., 2013a |
| IL1RN + TRX | 28 | 64.3 | 97.8 | 29.2 | 0.37 | 75.0 | 96.4 | Liong et al., 2013a |
| THREATENED PRETERM LABOR (SYMPTOMATIC) | ||||||||
| fFN (meta-analysis) | 7 | 76 (69–82) | 82 (79–84) | 4.2 (3.5–5.0) | 0.29 (0.22–0.38) | NR | NR | Sanchez-Ramos et al., 2009 |
| fFN (meta-analysis) | 7 | 75 (69–80) | 79 (76–83) | 3.6 (3.1–4.3) | 0.31 (0.25–0.39) | NR | NR | Boots et al., 2014 |
| fFN | 7 | 66.7 | 87.9 | 5.5 | 0.38 | 36.4 | 96.2 | Liong et al., 2015 |
| IL1RN | 7 | 88.9 | 50.9 | 1.8 | 0.22 | 13.1 | 98.2 | Liong et al., 2015 |
| TRX | 7 | 55.6 | 79.1 | 2.7 | 0.56 | 20.8 | 94.7 | Liong et al., 2015 |
| ALB | 7 | 83.3 | 73.3 | 3.1 | 0.23 | 26.3 | 97.5 | Liong et al., 2015 |
| GC | 7 | 77.8 | 98.1 | 40.9 | 0.23 | 77.8 | 98.1 | Liong et al., 2015 |
| ALB + GC | 7 | 77.8 | 100 | >100 | 0.22 | 100 | 98.0 | Liong et al., 2015 |
NR, not reported; Range shown represents 95% confidence interval.