Drug safety studies in pregnancy based on data from regulatory information sources: a systematic review

   Relevance. Prenatal exposure to medicines with a teratogenic risk and the prevention of such exposure is an important clinical and public health issue. The first priority for the safe use of medicines, both during pregnancy and by women of reproductive age, is to know the teratogenic risk and to include it in the primary source of information.

   Objective. To conduct a systematic literature review to identify and compare the results of drug safety studies in pregnancy based on data from officially recognised information documents.

   Material and methods. Literature searches were conducted in the electronic databases MEDLINE/PubMed from 1 January 2000 to 30 June 2024, using specific keywords and MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms in combination with the logical operators "AND" and "OR". The Google Scholar search engine has also been used for the manual selection of publications.

   Results. The search identified 24 publications that were relevant to the topic under study and were included in the analysis. Studies in regulatory documents assessing the completeness, applicability and safety of information on the use of the drug in pregnancy (n = 3; 12.5 %) revealed a lack of sufficient data on people. Comparative studies of inconsistencies between different sources of information (n = 10; 41.7 %) showed inconsistencies between countries in the content of information on medicines produced by the same pharmaceutical companies, as well as differences between different sources of approved information. A number of studies (n = 5; 20.8 %) focus on current systems of risk classification in pregnancy, the effectiveness of prescribing information to warn of the teratogenicity of medicines and the adaptation of its content to the level of risk perception. In the United States, prescription information is divided into specific subsections, the content of which is regulated by the recently published Pregnancy and Lactation Labeling Rule, which was the focus of several studies (n = 6; 25.0 %).

   Conclusion. The increasing use of medicines in pregnancy worldwide and the annual registration of new medicines, most of which contain limited or no safety information in pregnancy, support the relevance of this systematic review.

1. Mayall SJ, Banerjee AK. Therapeutic risk management of medicines, 1^st ed. Woodhead Publishing; 2014. EBook ISBN: 9781908818270.

2. Yuan HT, Raynor DK, Aslani P. Comparison of International Regulations for Written Medicine Information (WMI) on Prescription Medicines. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2019 Mar;53(2):215-226. doi: 10.1177/2168479018776949.

3. Nualdaisri P, Corlett SA, Krska J. Provision and need for medicine information in Asia and Africa : a scoping review of the literature. Drug Saf. 2021;44(4):421-37. doi: 10.1007/s40264-020-01038-8.

4. Davis TC, Wolf MS, Bass PF 3^rd , et al. Literacy and misunderstanding prescription drug labels. Ann Intern Med. 2006;145(12):887-94. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-145-12-200612190-00144.

5. Kesselheim AS, Franklin JM, Avorn J, Duke JD. Speaking the same language? International variations in the safety information accompanying top-selling prescription drugs. BMJ Qual Saf. 2013;22(9):727-34. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001704.

6. Eichler HG, Abadie E, Baker M, Rasi G. Fifty years after thalidomide; what role for drug regulators? Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2012;74(5):731-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2012.04255.x.

7. Alyautdin RN, Romanov BK. The development of system of professional information about pharmaceuticals: Quo vadis? Rossiiskii meditsinskii zhournal = Medical Journal of the Russian Federation, Russian journal. 2016;22(3):162-165. (In Russ.) doi: 10.18821/0869-2106-2016-22-3-162-165.

8. Koren G, Sakaguchi S, Klieger C, et al. Toward improved pregnancy labeling. J Popul Ther Clin Pharmacol. 2010;17(3):e349-e357.

9. Lutsevich KA, Reshetko OV. Pharmacological safety in pregnancy: modern knowledge, practice and pharmacoepidemiological approaches to the studying and recognizing of drugs with teratogenic risk. Pediatricheskaya farmakologiya = Pediatric Pharmacology. 2019;16(1):19-29. (In Russ.) doi: 10.15690/pf.v16i1.2000.

10. Wesley BD, Sewell CA, Chang CY, et al. Prescription medications for use in pregnancy - perspective from the US Food and Drug Administration. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021;225(1):21-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2021.02.032.

11. Wilmer E, Chai S, Kroumpouzos G. Drug safety: pregnancy rating classifications and controversies. Clin Dermatol. 2016;34(3):401-9. doi: 10.1016/j.clindermatol.2016.02.013.

12. Freeman J, Bwire R, Houn F, et al. Teratogenic drugs and risk management: an implementation assessment. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2014;48(4):420-7. doi: 10.1177/2168479013516776.

13. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7):e1000100. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100.

14. Addis A, Sharabi S, Bonati M. Risk classification systems for drug use during pregnancy: are they a reliable source of information? Drug Saf. 2000;23(3):245-53. doi: 10.2165/00002018-200023030-00006.

15. Pole M, Einarson A, Pairaudeau N, Einarson T, Koren G. Drug labeling and risk perceptions of teratogenicity: a survey of pregnant Canadian women and their health professionals. J Clin Pharmacol. 2000;40(6):573-7.

16. Boothby L, Doering P. FDA labeling system for drugs in pregnancy. Ann Pharmacother. 2001;35(11):1485-9. doi: 10.1345/aph.1A034.

17. Frost Widnes SK, Schjott J. Advice on drug safety in pregnancy: are there differences between commonly used sources of information? Drug Saf. 2008;31(9):799-806. doi: 10.2165/00002018-200831090-00008.

18. You WB, Grobman W, Davis T, et al. Improving pregnancy drug warnings to promote patient comprehension. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Apr;204(4):318.e1-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.12.040.

19. Widnes SF, Schjott J, Eide GE, Granas AG. Teratogenic risk perception and confidence in use of medicines in pairs of pregnant women and general practitioners based on patient information leaflets. Drug Saf. 2013;36(6):481-9. doi: 10.1007/s40264-013-0035-9.

20. Mazer-Amirshahi M, Samiee-Zafarghandy S, Gray G, van den Anker JN. Trends in pregnancy labeling and data quality for US-approved pharmaceuticals. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Dec;211(6):690.e1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.06.013.

21. Warrer P, Aagaard L, Hansen EH. Comparison of pregnancy and lactation labeling for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder drugs marketed in Australia, the USA, Denmark, and the UK. Drug Saf. 2014;37(10):805-13. doi: 10.1007/ s40264-014-0215-2.

22. Brown E, Hotham E, Hotham N. Views of obstetric practitioners and hospital pharmacists on Therapeutic Goods Administration approved product information for pregnancy and lactation. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014;54(2):184-8. doi: 10.1111/ajo.12197.

23. Lee SH, Shin JY, Park MJ, Park BJ. Agreement of label information of cardiovascular drugs in pregnancy among Korea, the USA, the UK, and Japan. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2014;68(3):363-9. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2014.01.013.

24. Arguello B, Salgado TM, Fernandez-Llimos F. Assessing the information in the summaries of product characteristics for the use of medicines in pregnancy and lactation. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2015;79(3):537-44. doi: 10.1111/bcp.12515.

25. Colaceci S, Giusti A, Chapin EM, et al. The difficulties in antihypertensive drug prescription during lactation: is the information consistent? Breastfeed Med. 2015;10(10):468-73. doi: 10.1089/bfm.2015.0086.

26. Tassinari MS, Sahin L, Yao LP. Assessing congenital malformation risk from medications used in pregnancy: the contribution of NBDPS in pregnancy labeling of prescription drug products. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2015;103(8):718-20. doi: 10.1002/bdra.23403.

27. Brown E, Hotham E, Hotham N. Pregnancy and lactation advice: how does Australian Product Information compare with established information resources? Obstet Med. 2016;9(3):130-4. doi: 10.1177/1753495X16637750.

28. Barrow P. Review of embryo-fetal developmental toxicity studies performed for pharmaceuticals approved by FDA in 2016 and 2017. Reprod Toxicol. 2018;80:117-125. doi: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2018.04.008.

29. Noh Y, Yoon D, Song I, et al. Discrepancies in the evidence and recommendation levels of pregnancy information in prescription drug labeling in the United States, United Kingdom, Japan, and Korea. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2018;27(9):1086-1092. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2017.6792.

30. Holmes AP, Harris JB, Ware S. Evaluation of lactation compatibility reference recommendations. Ann Pharmacother. 2019;53(9):899-904. doi: 10.1177/1060028019839389.

31. Byrne JJ, Saucedo AM, Spong CY. Evaluation of Drug Labels Following the 2015 Pregnancy and Lactation Labeling Rule. JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Aug 3;3(8):e2015094. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.15094.

32. Namazy J, Chambers C, Sahin L, et al. Clinicians' perspective of the new Pregnancy and Lactation Labeling Rule (PLLR): results from an AAAAI/FDA survey. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2020;8(6):1947-52. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2020.01.056.

33. Harris JB, Holmes AP, Eiland LS. The Influence of the Food and Drug Administration Pregnancy and Lactation Labeling Rule on Drug Information Resources. Ann Pharmacother. 2021 Apr;55(4):459-465. doi: 10.1177/1060028020956658.

34. Nörby U, Noël-Cuppers B, Hristoskova S, et al. Online information discrepancies regarding safety of medicine use during pregnancy and lactation: an IMI ConcePTION study. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2021 Sep;20(9):1117-1124. doi: 10.1080/14740338.2021.1935865.

35. Aydın V, Bahar A, Bayram D, et al. Analysis of pregnancy and lactation-related expressions in the summary of product characteristics and patient information leaflets of the drugs used for the treatment of nausea and vomiting. J Acad Res Med. 2021;11(1):107-116. doi: 10.4274/jarem.galenos.2021.35744.

36. Alem G, Awuonda M, Haastrup D, et al. Evaluation of knowledge of the new Pregnancy and Lactation Labeling Rule among pharmacists and physicians. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2022;62(2):427-431. doi: 10.1016/j.japh.2021.10.012.

37. Robinson A, Futterman ID, Atallah F, et al. Removal of pregnancy categories and likelihood of prescribing: a randomized trial. J Perinat Med. 2022 Nov 24;51(4):546-549. doi: 10.1515/jpm-2022-0308.

38. Lo WY, Friedman JM. Teratogenicity of recently introduced medications in human pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Sep;100(3):465-73. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(02)02122-1.

39. Adam MP, Polifka JE, Friedman JM. Evolving knowledge of the teratogenicity of medications in human pregnancy. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2011 Aug 15;157C(3):175-82. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.c.30313.

40. Honein MA, Moore CA, Erickson JD. Can we ensure the safe use of known human teratogens? Introduction of generic isotretinoin in the US as an example. Drug Saf. 2004;27(14):1069-80. doi: 10.2165/00002018-200427140-00001.

41. Sedgh G, Singh S, Hussain R. Intended and unintended pregnancies worldwide in 2012 and recent trends. Stud Fam Plann. 2014 Sep;45(3):301-14. doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4465.2014.00393.x.

42. Lupattelli A, Spigset O, Twigg MJ, et al. Medication use in pregnancy: a cross-sectional, multinational web-based study. BMJ Open. 2014 Feb 17;4(2):e004365. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-004365.

43. Webster WS, Freeman JA. Prescription drugs and pregnancy. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2003 Jun;4(6):949-61. doi: 10.1517/14656566.4.6.949.

44. Koren G. Fetal risks of maternal pharmacotherapy: identifying signals. Handb Exp Pharmacol. 2011;205:285-94. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-20195-0_14.

45. Reggi V, Balocco-Mattavelli R, Bonati M, et al; International Comparative Study on Drug Information Collaborative Group. Prescribing information in 26 countries: a comparative study. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2003 Aug;59(4):263-70. doi: 10.1007/s00228-003-0607-1.

46. Arguello B, Fernandez-Llimos F. Clinical pharmacology information in summaries of product characteristics and package inserts. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2007;82(5):566-71. doi: 10.1038/sj.clpt.6100198.

47. Garbe E, Andersohn F. Contraindication labelling changes in the United States and Germany. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;63(1):87-93. doi: 10.1007/s00228-006-0229-5.

48. Shimazawa R, Ikeda M. Safety information in drug labeling: a comparison of the USA, the UK, and Japan. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2013;22(3):306-18. doi: 10.1002/pds.3408.

49. Pfistermeister B, Saß A, Criegee-Rieck M, et al. Inconsistencies and misleading information in officially approved prescribing information from three major drug markets. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2014;96(5):616-24. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2014.156.

50. Bjerrum L, Foged A. Patient information leaflets--helpful guidance or a source of confusion? Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2003 Jan-Feb;12(1):55-9. doi: 10.1002/pds.795.

51. Fusier I, Tollier C, Husson MC. Infovigilance: reporting errors in official drug information sources. Pharm World Sci. 2005;27(3):166-9. doi: 10.1007/s11096-004-1733-2.

52. Sinclair M, Lagan BM, Dolk H, McCullough JEM. An assessment of pregnant women's knowledge and use of the Internet for medication safety information and purchase. J Adv Nurs. 2018;74(1):137-147. doi: 10.1111/jan.13387.

53. Gray KJ. Providing Data to Empower Pregnant Patients to Make Evidence-Based Choices. JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Apr 1;4(4):e215359. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.5359.