ArticlePregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.)2025
High frequency of critical and rising titers in alloimmunized pregnancies with antigen-negative fetuses.
Article in Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In this study we performed a retrospective chart review of alloimmunized pregnancies undergoing monitoring for hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) in a cohort with known fetal antigen (FA) status. The objective was to compare fetal monitoring with titers and middle cerebral artery peak systolic velocity Doppler (MCA-PSV Doppler) in FA-negative and FA-positive pregnancies and to understand downstream impacts of screening with titers in FA-negative pregnancies. Methods: Retrospective chart review of alloimmunized pregnant patients who underwent FA cell-free DNA (cfDNA) analysis and participated in a registry in which neonatal genotyping was performed to confirm FA cfDNA results. Patients were divided into FA-positive or FA-negative cohorts based on the FA genotypes. Medical records were reviewed to characterize monitoring for anemia, titer results, MCA-PSV Doppler results, and whether interventions were performed. Fischer's exact or chi-square tests were performed as appropriate to ascertain differences between the cohorts. Results: Sixty-nine alloimmunized pregnant individuals were included. Forty pregnancies (58%) were FA positive. Of 29 FA-positive pregnancies who had titers more than once, 20 (69%) had titers that rose over two or more time points. There were 29 FA-negative pregnancies (42%). Of 20 FA-negative pregnancies that underwent titers more than once, 10 (50%) had titers that rose over two or more time points. The FA-positive and FA-negative cohorts had similar proportions of pregnancies that reached critical titers-70% (28/40) and 69% (20/29), respectively. In the FA-positive cohort 14 of 34 participants who underwent MCA-PSV Doppler reached greater than 1.5 multiples of the median (MoM), suggestive of fetal anemia. One patient in the FA-negative cohort reached 1.5 MoM. Conclusions: Titers frequently yield elevations that, while reflective of maternal alloimmunization, are not indicative of positive FA status or risk for HDFN in antigen-negative pregnancies. Such results lead to unnecessary monitoring, including MCA-PSV Doppler as well as invasive interventions. These outcomes can be avoided using methods including FA cfDNA, which has been shown to be highly accurate. These results suggest that monitoring for fetal anemia should be discontinued if FA cfDNA has determined the FA status is negative, as this will reduce downstream burdens and risks to alloimmunized patients who are not at risk for HDFN.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.