This nested case‑control study evaluated first‑trimester maternal plasma cell‑free RNA (cfRNA) profiling using the MaiRa test against conventional first‑trimester combined screening implemented with the Fetal Medicine Foundation (FMF) algorithm for prediction of early‑onset preeclampsia (EOPE; disease onset before 34 weeks).
The analysis was conducted as a secondary study within the prospective, multicentre PREMOM cohort (NCT04990141) and compared the two risk estimates in the same pregnancies to benchmark molecular profiling against routine clinical screening.
The dataset comprised 126 singleton pregnancies enrolled across 14 tertiary hospitals in Spain: 99 uncomplicated controls and 27 EOPE cases. EOPE was defined by onset of preeclampsia before 34 weeks of gestation.
First‑trimester MaiRa and FMF risk estimates were computed for each participant. Discriminative performance was compared using stratified paired bootstrap analysis of areas under receiver‑operating‑characteristic curves (AUC). The investigators also assessed performance at prespecified clinical risk thresholds and evaluated detection rates at fixed false‑positive rates (FPRs).
In addition to head‑to‑head discrimination, the authors performed patient‑level analyses to characterize pregnancies with discordant classifications between MaiRa and FMF, examining conventional first‑trimester profile components such as maternal risk factors, mean arterial pressure and uterine artery pulsatility index. Finally, exploratory implementation strategies were modelled, including universal MaiRa screening and a contingent pathway where FMF triaged pregnancies and reflex MaiRa testing was applied to a subset.
MaiRa demonstrated superior first‑trimester discrimination for EOPE compared with FMF combined screening. Reported AUC values were 0.974 for MaiRa and 0.900 for FMF, with a stated P value of .040 for the difference.
At fixed false‑positive rates MaiRa consistently achieved higher detection rates. Specifically, at a 5% FPR MaiRa detected 85.2% of EOPE cases compared with 44.4% detected by FMF. At a 10% FPR MaiRa detected 92.6% versus 70.4% for FMF. These findings indicate that, in this sample, MaiRa increased sensitivity for EOPE at clinically relevant FPR thresholds relative to conventional combined screening.
A detailed patient‑level analysis revealed that MaiRa identified 12 of 27 EOPE cases (44.4%) that FMF had classified as low risk. These reclassified pregnancies tended to show less abnormal conventional first‑trimester markers: they had fewer maternal risk factors recorded, lower mean arterial pressure and lower uterine artery pulsatility index compared with EOPE cases identified by FMF.
Despite milder abnormalities on conventional screening metrics, 8 of the 12 MaiRa‑identified/ FMF‑low‑risk pregnancies (66.7% of that subgroup) subsequently developed severe EOPE. This observation suggests that maternal plasma cfRNA profiling may detect underlying pathobiology of EOPE not fully captured by conventional risk factors, blood pressure or uterine artery Doppler measurements in the first trimester.
The authors modelled two implementation approaches. Universal MaiRa screening delivered the highest overall EOPE detection in their analysis. A contingent strategy—using FMF combined screening for initial triage and reflexing to MaiRa only for a subset—substantially reduced the proportion of pregnancies requiring molecular testing while retaining strong performance metrics. In the contingent scenario presented, reflex MaiRa testing was performed in 35.7% of pregnancies and the pathway achieved 77.8% sensitivity with 97.0% specificity for EOPE in this dataset.
These exploratory results indicate potential tradeoffs between testing coverage, resource use, and detection performance: universal cfRNA screening maximizes sensitivity, while a contingent model may balance resource constraints with acceptable sensitivity and high specificity.
In this nested case‑control sample drawn from a prospective multicentre cohort, first‑trimester maternal plasma cfRNA profiling with MaiRa outperformed FMF combined screening for predicting early‑onset preeclampsia, showing higher AUC and greater detection rates at fixed false‑positive rates. Importantly, MaiRa identified EOPE cases that conventional screening labeled low risk, including pregnancies that later progressed to severe EOPE, implying that cfRNA captures biological signals not reflected in standard first‑trimester measurements.
The authors conclude these findings support further prospective evaluation of MaiRa in independent, unselected obstetric populations to validate performance and assess clinical utility. They also report competing interests: some authors are employees, co‑inventors on a patent related to MaiRa, or shareholders of the company associated with the test; other authors reported no conflicts.
Limitations inherent to the report include its nested case‑control design and the sample size (27 EOPE cases) used for the present comparisons. The source text does not report cost analyses, downstream clinical outcomes from reclassification, or results from independent validation cohorts; those details were not provided in the manuscript previewed here. Data supporting the study results are available from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request and subject to ethical and data‑protection restrictions.