Steven T Bird1, Kate Gelperin2, Lockwood Taylor2, Leyla Sahin3, Hoda Hammad4, Susan E Andrade5, Mohamed A Mohamoud2, Sengwee Toh6, Christian Hampp2. 1. Division of Epidemiology, Office of Surveillance and Epidemiology, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave, Silver Spring, MD, 20993, USA. steven.bird@fda.hhs.gov. 2. Division of Epidemiology, Office of Surveillance and Epidemiology, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave, Silver Spring, MD, 20993, USA. 3. Division of Pediatric and Maternal Health, Office of New Drugs, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD, USA. 4. Weill Cornell Medicine, Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, New York, NY, USA. 5. Meyers Primary Care Institute (Fallon Health, Reliant Medical Group), University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA. 6. Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Pregnancy registries and spontaneous reports are essential pharmacovigilance tools to evaluate drug safety during pregnancy. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate postmarket capture of exposed pregnancies. METHODS: Pregnancy registries for drugs and biologics were identified in a systematic review. Through a standardized questionnaire, manufacturers provided information on (1) pregnancy registry enrollment and retention, and (2) worldwide receipt of spontaneous reports for exposed pregnancies. A validated algorithm for live-birth pregnancies allowed calculation of exposure rates per 100,000 live births using claims data. RESULTS: Among 34 products with a pregnancy registry, median (interquartile range) registry enrollment was 36 pregnancies (5-258) and median spontaneous report capture was 450 pregnancies (89-1192). Products used in >20/100,000 live births had a median registry enrollment of 490 pregnancies and median capture of 1061 spontaneously reported exposed pregnancies. Lower median registry enrollment and spontaneous report capture was observed for products used in 0.5-20/100,000 live births (36 from registries, 541 spontaneous reports) and <0.5/100,000 live births (3 from registries, 41 spontaneous reports). Among 24 registries enrolling ≥10 pregnancies, median capture of pregnancy outcomes (e.g. live birth, spontaneous abortion) was 83.9%. For 19 registries enrolling ≥10 infants, the median proportion of infants achieving protocol-specified follow-up was 89.9% for up to 4 weeks post-birth, 75.0% for 1-5 months, and 57.1% for ≥6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Relatively higher product utilization among pregnant women predicted greater pregnancy registry enrollment. For products rarely used during pregnancy, registry enrollment was low and differences in registry enrollment compared with worldwide spontaneous report receipt were most pronounced. Products with very low utilization levels during pregnancy may require a combination of worldwide pharmacovigilance, pregnancy registries, and additional study methods to achieve adequate surveillance.
INTRODUCTION: Pregnancy registries and spontaneous reports are essential pharmacovigilance tools to evaluate drug safety during pregnancy. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate postmarket capture of exposed pregnancies. METHODS: Pregnancy registries for drugs and biologics were identified in a systematic review. Through a standardized questionnaire, manufacturers provided information on (1) pregnancy registry enrollment and retention, and (2) worldwide receipt of spontaneous reports for exposed pregnancies. A validated algorithm for live-birth pregnancies allowed calculation of exposure rates per 100,000 live births using claims data. RESULTS: Among 34 products with a pregnancy registry, median (interquartile range) registry enrollment was 36 pregnancies (5-258) and median spontaneous report capture was 450 pregnancies (89-1192). Products used in >20/100,000 live births had a median registry enrollment of 490 pregnancies and median capture of 1061 spontaneously reported exposed pregnancies. Lower median registry enrollment and spontaneous report capture was observed for products used in 0.5-20/100,000 live births (36 from registries, 541 spontaneous reports) and <0.5/100,000 live births (3 from registries, 41 spontaneous reports). Among 24 registries enrolling ≥10 pregnancies, median capture of pregnancy outcomes (e.g. live birth, spontaneous abortion) was 83.9%. For 19 registries enrolling ≥10 infants, the median proportion of infants achieving protocol-specified follow-up was 89.9% for up to 4 weeks post-birth, 75.0% for 1-5 months, and 57.1% for ≥6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Relatively higher product utilization among pregnant women predicted greater pregnancy registry enrollment. For products rarely used during pregnancy, registry enrollment was low and differences in registry enrollment compared with worldwide spontaneous report receipt were most pronounced. Products with very low utilization levels during pregnancy may require a combination of worldwide pharmacovigilance, pregnancy registries, and additional study methods to achieve adequate surveillance.
Authors: Rachel E Behrman; Joshua S Benner; Jeffrey S Brown; Mark McClellan; Janet Woodcock; Richard Platt Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-01-12 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kate Gelperin; Hoda Hammad; Kira Leishear; Steven T Bird; Lockwood Taylor; Christian Hampp; Leyla Sahin Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2016-12-27 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Flora Zagouri; Theodoros N Sergentanis; Dimosthenis Chrysikos; Christos A Papadimitriou; Meletios-Athanassios Dimopoulos; Rupert Bartsch Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2012-12-15 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Qian Li; Susan E Andrade; William O Cooper; Robert L Davis; Sascha Dublin; Tarek A Hammad; Pamala A Pawloski; Simone P Pinheiro; Marsha A Raebel; Pamela E Scott; David H Smith; Inna Dashevsky; Katherine Haffenreffer; Karin E Johnson; Sengwee Toh Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2013-01-21 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Akeem Yusuf; Victoria Chia; Fei Xue; Daniel D Mikol; Lisa Bollinger; Charles Cangialose Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2018-09-21 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Su Golder; Stephanie Chiuve; Davy Weissenbacher; Ari Klein; Karen O'Connor; Martin Bland; Murray Malin; Mondira Bhattacharya; Linda J Scarazzini; Graciela Gonzalez-Hernandez Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2019-03 Impact factor: 5.606