Abstract
Fetal growth restriction (FGR) subjects exhibit altered metabolism, with higher metabolic rate due to their small body mass, and by adopting strategies to minimise energy expenditure. We investigated how these metabolic differences develop, or manifest in growth trajectories, after FGR, small for gestational age (SGA) (constitutionally small), and normal pregnancies. We curated a unique composite dataset of 1934 subjects between 14 weeks of gestation and 5 years of age. First, we assessed fetal and infant heart rate to assess whether higher metabolic rate persisted postnatally after FGR. Next, as the largest energy expenditure is brain synaptic maintenance, we tested whether FGR infants had lower white matter volume (proxy for synapse number). Finally, we modelled longitudinal body weight into childhood in FGR, SGA, and control groups, and tested for associations with neurodevelopmental scores at 1-2 years. Heart rate at rest was higher in FGR fetuses and infants (688 subjects), and FGR infants exhibited a blunted capacity to increase heart rate to a nociceptive procedure (i.e. a physiological challenge). FGR infants had smaller white matter volume (270 subjects). Finally, the more individual weight gain deviated below average curves (1714 subjects), the lower were their motor and cognitive scores at 1-2 years.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This work was primarily supported by Brain Research UK (awardee: KW). The internship of BC with KW, during which BC worked on these data, was supported by a Wellcome Biomedical Vacation Scholarship. LF is supported by the Medical Research Council (MR/X010716/1). We acknowledge the support of the National Institute for Health Research UCLH Biomedical Research Centre. The EVERREST study received funding from the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement no. 305823, the Rosetrees Trust and the Mitchell Charitable Trust in memory of Shoshana Mitchell Glynn.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
A composite dataset was created. We merged data collected at University College London Hospitals (UCLH) within a neurophysiological research programme, with the Europe-wide (including UCLH) EVERREST cohort, the Evaluation of Preterm Imaging Study (ePrime; EudraCT 2009-011602-42) 36, and open-access data from FEMINA2, the IEEE dataport, and the Norway-Alabama Fetal Growth Study. Of the three open-access datasets, the first two are freely available, while the Norway-Alabama dataset is obtainable upon written application to the Biospecimen Repository Access and Data Sharing (BRADS) committee, Division of Intramural Population Health Research (DIPHR), and permissions were granted to KW in 2023 (https://dash.nichd.nih.gov/resource/LinksToOtherArchives). For all studies, ethical approval to conduct the work was secured from the relevant body (e.g. the National Health Service (NHS) Health Research Authority in England) and informed written parental consent was provided. University College London Hospitals (UCLH) neurophysiological research programme: ethical approval provided by the London-Surrey borders Research Ethics Committee (reference: 11/LO/0350). Europe-wide (including UCLH) EVERREST cohort: ethical approval provided by the London-Stanmore Research Ethics Committee in the UK (13/LO/1254); the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona's Clinical Research Ethics Committee in Spain (Reg: HCB/2014/0091); the Regional Ethical Review Board in Lund in Sweden (DNr 2014/147); and the Ethics Committee of the Hamburg Board of Physicians in Germany (PV4809). Evaluation of Preterm Imaging Study (ePrime): ethical approval provided by the Hammersmith and Queen Charlotte's Research Ethics Committee (09/H0707/98).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The EEG data described will be made accessible on Open Science Framework at publication. For the three open-access datasets, we will provide the reference numbers of the participants analysed in a supplementary spreadsheet, for replication purposes. Please direct enquiries about any other data to the corresponding author.
