Dataset Information

Oral hormone pregnancy tests and the risks of congenital malformations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Background: Oral hormone pregnancy tests (HPTs), such as Primodos, containing ethinylestradiol and high doses of norethisterone, were given to over a million women from 1958 to 1978, when Primodos was withdrawn from the market because of concerns about possible teratogenicity. We aimed to study the association between maternal exposure to oral HPTs and congenital malformations. Methods: We have performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies that included data from pregnant women and were exposed to oral HPTs within the estimated first three months of pregnancy, if compared with a relevant control group. We used random-effects meta-analysis and assessed the quality of each study using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for non-randomized studies. Results: We found 16 case control studies and 10 prospective cohort studies, together including 71 330 women, of whom 4,209 were exposed to HPTs. Exposure to oral HPTs was associated with a 40% increased risk of all congenital malformations: pooled odds ratio (OR) = 1.40 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.66; P<0.0001; I ² = 0%). Exposure to HPTs was associated with an increased risk of congenital heart malformations: pooled OR = 1.89 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.72; P = 0.0006; I ²=0%); nervous system malformations OR = 2.98 (95% CI 1.32 to 6.76; P = 0.0109 I ² = 78%); gastrointestinal malformations, OR = 4.50 (95% CI 0.63 to 32.20; P = 0.13; I ² = 54%); musculoskeletal malformations, OR = 2.24 (95% CI 1.23 to 4.08; P= 0.009; I ² = 0%); the VACTERL syndrome (Vertebral defects, Anal atresia, Cardiovascular anomalies, Tracheoesophageal fistula, Esophageal atresia, Renal anomalies, and Limb defects), OR = 7.47 (95% CI 2.92 to 19.07; P < 0.0001; I ² = 0%). Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis shows that use of oral HPTs in pregnancy is associated with increased risks of congenital malformations.

SUBMITTER: Heneghan C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6281024 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPregnant women with epilepsy frequently experience seizures related to pregnancy complications and are often prescribed anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) to manage their symptoms. However, less is known about the comparative safety of AED exposure in utero. We aimed to compare the risk of congenital malformations (CMs) and prenatal outcomes of AEDs in infants/children who were exposed to AEDs in utero through a systematic review and Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis.MethodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception to December 15, 2015. Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts and full-text papers for experimental and observational studies comparing mono- or poly-therapy AEDs versus control (no AED exposure) or other AEDs, then abstracted data and appraised the risk of bias. The primary outcome was incidence of major CMs, overall and by specific type (cardiac malformations, hypospadias, cleft lip and/or palate, club foot, inguinal hernia, and undescended testes).ResultsAfter screening 5305 titles and abstracts, 642 potentially relevant full-text articles, and 17 studies from scanning reference lists, 96 studies were eligible (n = 58,461 patients). Across all major CMs, many AEDs were associated with higher risk compared to control. For major CMs, ethosuximide (OR, 3.04; 95% CrI, 1.23-7.07), valproate (OR, 2.93; 95% CrI, 2.36-3.69), topiramate (OR, 1.90; 95% CrI, 1.17-2.97), phenobarbital (OR, 1.83; 95% CrI, 1.35-2.47), phenytoin (OR, 1.67; 95% CrI, 1.30-2.17), carbamazepine (OR, 1.37; 95% CrI, 1.10-1.71), and 11 polytherapies were significantly more harmful than control, but lamotrigine (OR, 0.96; 95% CrI, 0.72-1.25) and levetiracetam (OR, 0.72; 95% CrI, 0.43-1.16) were not.ConclusionThe newer generation AEDs, lamotrigine and levetiracetam, were not associated with significant increased risks of CMs compared to control, and were significantly less likely to be associated with children experiencing cardiac malformations than control. However, this does not mean that these agents are not harmful to infants/children exposed in utero. Counselling is advised concerning teratogenic risks when the prescription is written for a woman of childbearing age and before women continue with these agents when considering pregnancy, such as switching from polytherapy to monotherapy with evidence of lower risk and avoiding AEDs, such as valproate, that are consistently associated with CMs. These decisions must be balanced against the need for seizure control.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42014008925.

Project description:BackgroundAbout 3·7 billion doses of ivermectin have been distributed in mass drug administration (MDA) campaigns globally over the past 30 years. At 10-100 times higher than current human doses, ivermectin is a known teratogen in mammals. During these campaigns with recommended doses, pregnant women might be inadvertently exposed. We therefore aimed to evaluate the existing evidence for serious and non-serious adverse events after ivermectin exposure in pregnant women.MethodsFor this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched relevant databases and trial registry platforms on July 15, 2018, for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that reported adverse events in pregnant women. We did not use language or date restrictions. Outcomes of interest were spontaneous abortions, stillbirths, congenital anomalies, and neonatal death (serious adverse events), as well as maternal morbidity, preterm births, and low birthweight (adverse events). The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for RCTs. We did the meta-analysis of observational studies and RCTs separately. The quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. The study protocol is registered with PROSPERO, protocol CRD42016046914.FindingsWe identified 147 records, of which only five observational studies and one RCT were included for quantitative analysis; these studies were published between 1990 and 2008, and were done in six African countries. 893 women with 899 pregancy outcomes were included, of whom 496 pregnant women (500 pregnancy outcomes) received ivermectin inadvertently during MDA campaigns in the observational studies and 397 pregnant women (399 pregnancy outcomes) purposely received ivermectin as part of the open-label RCT. No study reported neonatal deaths, maternal morbidity, preterm births, or low birthweight. It is unclear whether exposure to ivermectin during pregnancy increases the risk of spontaneous abortions and stillbirths (odds ratio [OR] 1·15 [95% CI 0·75-1·78] with very low certainty of evidence for the four observational studies and 0·62 [0·18-2·14] with very low certainty of evidence for the RCT) or congenital anomalies (OR 1·69 [95% CI 0·83-3·41] with very low certainty of evidence for the five observational studies and 1·10 [0·07-17·65] with very low certainty of evidence for the RCT).InterpretationThere is insufficient evidence to conclude on the safety profile of ivermectin during pregnancy. Treatment campaigns should focus additional efforts on preventing inadvertent treatment of pregnant women.FundingUnitaid.

Project description:BackgroundIn 2005, the FDA cautioned that exposure to paroxetine, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), during the first trimester of pregnancy may increase the risk of cardiac malformations. Since then, the association between maternal use of SSRIs during pregnancy and congenital malformations in infants has been the subject of much discussion and controversy. The aim of this study is to systematically review the associations between SSRIs use during early pregnancy and the risk of congenital malformations, with particular attention to the potential confounding by indication.MethodsThe study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018088358). Cohort studies on congenital malformations in infants born to mothers with first-trimester exposure to SSRIs were identified via PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases through 17 January 2018. Random-effects models were used to calculate summary relative risks (RRs).ResultsTwenty-nine cohort studies including 9,085,954 births were identified. Overall, use of SSRIs was associated with an increased risk of overall major congenital anomalies (MCAs, RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.19) and congenital heart defects (CHD, RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.37). No significantly increased risk was observed when restricted to women with a psychiatric diagnosis (MCAs, RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.13; CHD, RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.26). Similar significant associations were observed using maternal citalopram exposure (MCAs, RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.31; CHD, RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.51), fluoxetine (MCAs, RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.28; CHD, 1.30, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.53), and paroxetine (MCAs, RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.32; CHD, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.41) and analyses restricted to using women with a psychiatric diagnosis were not statistically significant. Sertraline was associated with septal defects (RR 2.69, 95% CI 1.76 to 4.10), atrial septal defects (RR 2.07, 95% CI 1.26 to 3.39), and respiratory system defects (RR 2.65, 95% CI 1.32 to 5.32).ConclusionsThe evidence suggests a generally small risk of congenital malformations and argues against a substantial teratogenic effect of SSRIs. Caution is advisable in making decisions about whether to continue or stop treatment with SSRIs during pregnancy.

Dataset Information

Oral hormone pregnancy tests and the risks of congenital malformations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets