ObjectiveTo compare the performance at 35+0 to 36+6 weeks’ gestation of screening for delivery with pre‐eclampsia (PE) at various time points, using one of three approaches: placental growth factor (PlGF) concentration, the soluble fms‐like tyrosine kinase‐1 (sFLT‐1) to PlGF concentration ratio, or the competing risks model, which combines maternal risk factors with biomarkers to estimate patient‐specific risk.MethodsThis was a prospective observational study in women attending for a routine hospital visit at 35+0 to 36+6 weeks’ gestation in two maternity hospitals in England (2016‐22). The visits included recording of maternal demographic characteristics and medical history, and measurement of serum PlGF, serum sFLT‐1, and mean arterial pressure (MAP). The detection rates (DRs) were evaluated for delivery with PE (by 2019 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists criteria), within 1 week, within 2 weeks, or at any time after screening, using either: (i) low PlGF (<10th percentile), (ii) high sFLT‐1/PlGF ratio (>90th percentile), or (iii) the competing risks model, using a combination of maternal factors and multiple of the median (MoM) values of PlGF (‘single’ test), PlGF and sFLT‐1 (‘double’ test), or PlGF, sFLT‐1 and MAP (‘triple’ test). Risk cut‐offs corresponded to a screen‐positive rate of 10%. DRs were compared between tests by McNemar's test, with p<0.05 considered statistically significant.ResultsOf 34,782 pregnancies, 831 (2.4%) developed PE. In screening for delivery with PE at any time from assessment, the DR at 10% screen‐positive rate was 47% by low PlGF alone, 54% by the ‘single test’, 55% by high sFLT‐1/PlGF, 61% by the ‘double test’, and 68% by the ‘triple test’. In screening for delivery with PE within 2 weeks, the respective values were 67%, 74%, 74%, 80%, and 87%. In screening for delivery with PE within 1 week, the respective values were 77%, 81%, 85%, 88% and 91%. For prediction of PE at any time, the DR difference [95% confidence interval] was significantly higher with the ‘triple test’, compared with PlGF alone (20.1 [16.7‐23.0]) or the sFLT‐1/PlGF ratio (12.4 [9.7‐15.3]). Similar results were seen for prediction of PE within 2 weeks (20.6 [14.9‐26.8] and 12.9 [7.7‐17.5], respectively) and prediction of PE within 1 week (13.5 [5.4‐21.6]) and (5.4 [0.0‐10.8]). The double test was superior to the sFLT‐1/PlGF ratio and the single test was superior to PlGF alone in the prediction of PE within 2 weeks and at any time from assessment, but not within 1 week of assessment.ConclusionAt 35+0 to 36+6 weeks’ gestation, the performance of screening for PE by the competing risks model ’triple test’ is superior to that of PlGF alone or the sFLT‐1/PlGF ratio for PE within 1 week, within 2 weeks and at any time from screening.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.