Pregnancy Exposure Registries

Scientifically valid data on the safety of drug use during pregnancy are a significant public health need. Data are rarely available on the fetal effects of in utero exposure in human pregnancies, particularly when a drug is first marketed. Data from animal reproductive toxicology studies, which function as a screen for potential human teratogenicity, are usually all that is available in a product’s labelling. For practising clinicians, translating known animal risks into an accurate assessment of teratogenic risks in their patients is very difficult, if not impossible. Without human data on the effects of in utero drug exposure, it is difficult for physicians and other healthcare providers (e.g. genetic counsellors) to adequately counsel patients about fetal risks. Therefore, a pregnant woman may decide to unnecessarily terminate a wanted pregnancy or forego needed drug therapy. In spite of the lack of data on the safety of drug use during human pregnancies, pregnant women are exposed to drugs either as prescribed therapy or inadvertently before pregnancy is known (over one-half of pregnancies are unplanned). Because little is known about the teratogenic potential of a drug in humans before marketing, post-marketing surveillance of drug use in pregnancy is critical to the detection of drug-induced fetal effects. The existing passive mechanism of spontaneous reporting of adverse drug effects is inadequate to routinely detect drug-induced fetal risks or lack of such risks. Therefore, post-marketing pregnancy exposure registries are being increasingly used to proactively monitor for major fetal effects and to describe margins of safety associated with drug exposure during pregnancy. However, differing methodological rigour has been applied to the development of pregnancy exposure registries. It is important that all pregnancy registries develop epidemiologically sound written study protocols a priori. It is only through the use of rigourous methodology and procedures that data from pregnancy exposure registries will withstand scientific scrutiny. Successful recruitment of an adequate number of exposed pregnancies, aggressive follow-up, and complete and accurate ascertainment of pregnancy outcome are critical attributes of a well-designed registry.

[1]  L. Edmonds,et al.  Congenital malformations surveillance: two American systems. , 1981, International journal of epidemiology.

[2]  A. Mitchell,et al.  Systematic identification of drugs that cause birth defects--a new opportunity. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[3]  James L. Schardein,et al.  Chemically Induced Birth Defects , 1985 .

[4]  M. Khoury,et al.  The interaction between dysmorphology and epidemiology: methodologic issues of lumping and splitting. , 1992, Teratology.

[5]  E. Andrews,et al.  Data privacy, medical record confidentiality, and research in the interest of public health , 1999, Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety.

[6]  R. Knill-Jones,et al.  Therapeutic drug use during pregnancy: a comparison in four European countries. OECM Working Group. Occupational Exposures and Congenital Anomalies. , 1999, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[7]  J. Cordero,et al.  Varicella Vaccine Exposure During Pregnancy: Data from the First 5 Years of the Pregnancy Registry , 2001, Obstetrics and gynecology.

[8]  A. Mitchell,et al.  Recent patterns of medication use in the ambulatory adult population of the United States: the Slone survey. , 2002, JAMA.

[9]  E. Andrews,et al.  Birth outcomes following zidovudine exposure in pregnant women: the Antiretroviral Pregnancy Registry , 1997, Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992). Supplement.

[10]  R. K. Miller,et al.  Postmarketing surveillance for human teratogenicity: a model approach. , 2001, Teratology.

[11]  H. Tilson,et al.  Birth defect classification by organ system: a novel approach to heighten teratogenic signalling in a pregnancy registry , 2002, Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety.

[12]  L. Paulozzi,et al.  Evaluation of selected characteristics of pregnancy drug registries. , 1999, Teratology.

[13]  A. Mitchell Special Considerations in Studies of Drug‐induced Birth Defects , 2002 .

[14]  R. Ward,et al.  Difficulties in the study of adverse fetal and neonatal effects of drug therapy during pregnancy. , 2001, Seminars in perinatology.

[15]  C. D. Klaasen Casarett & Doull's Toxicology: The Basic Science of Poisons , 1980 .

[16]  W. Offen,et al.  Determination of pregnancy outcome risk rates after exposure to an intervention , 2001, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[17]  E. Andrews,et al.  Monitoring pregnancy outcomes after prenatal drug exposure through prospective pregnancy registries: a pharmaceutical company commitment. , 2000, American journal of obstetrics and gynecology.

[18]  D. Kennedy,et al.  Spontaneous Reporting in the United States , 2002 .

[19]  P. Nasca,et al.  A prospective study of early pregnancy loss. , 1996, Human reproduction.

[20]  Guidelines for Good Epidemiology Practices for Drug, Device, and Vaccine Research in the United States , 1996, Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety.

[21]  M. Werler,et al.  Predictive value of minor anomalies. I. Association with major malformations. , 1987, The Journal of pediatrics.

[22]  M. Lapeyre-Mestre,et al.  Prescription of drugs during pregnancy in France , 2000, The Lancet.

[23]  L. Holmes Need for inclusion and exclusion criteria for the structural abnormalities recorded in children born from exposed pregnancies. , 1999, Teratology.

[24]  A. Scialli,et al.  The Organization of Teratology Information Services (OTIS) Registry Study. , 1999, The Journal of allergy and clinical immunology.

[25]  A. Hartzema,et al.  Pharmacoepidemiology: An Introduction , 1991 .

[26]  Mitchell H. Gail,et al.  Power Computations for Designing Comparative Poisson Trials , 1974 .