患有免疫介导的炎症性疾病的孕妇使用生物免疫抑制剂的安全性。

IF 7.9 1区 医学 Q1 IMMUNOLOGY Journal of autoimmunity Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-16 DOI:10.1016/j.jaut.2024.103301
Martínez-Sánchez N, J Álvarez-Troncoso, Á Robles-Marhuenda, M De la Calle Fernández-Miranda, M L Muner Hernando, J L Bartha
{"title":"患有免疫介导的炎症性疾病的孕妇使用生物免疫抑制剂的安全性。","authors":"Martínez-Sánchez N, J Álvarez-Troncoso, Á Robles-Marhuenda, M De la Calle Fernández-Miranda, M L Muner Hernando, J L Bartha","doi":"10.1016/j.jaut.2024.103301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) typically affect women of childbearing age. One of the challenges in treating these women during pregnancy is to manage the disease while minimizing or avoiding the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) that may increase the risk to the mother or fetus. Biologic therapy has transformed the management of these patients. This study aimed to evaluate the maternal-fetal safety and perinatal outcomes in pregnant women with IMID exposed to biologic DMARDs either preconceptionally or during pregnancy and compare them with women using conventional DMARDs and a group of healthy pregnant women.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective study with prospective follow-up of pregnant women with IMID at a single center. We analyzed baseline maternal demographic characteristics, diseases, DMARDs, and maternal-fetal outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A cohort of 244 pregnancies was studied. One hundred twenty-eight patients met classificatory criteria for rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMD) or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and 116 pregnancies of healthy women were evaluated from the same study period. One hundred and one pregnancies in IMID patients (89.84 %) occurred under immunosuppressive treatment, 78.91 % of IMID pregnancies were under cDMARD (33.59 % exclusive cDMARD), 56.25 % under bDMARD, and 27.34 % under oral glucocorticoids. Anti-TNF was the most frequent (88.88 %) bDMARD and was used in 50.78 % of the IMIDs. There was at least one flare in 37.10 % of the IMID pregnancies, and 9.38 % experienced more than one. Among flares, 43.48 % happened in the first trimester, 34.78 % in the second trimester, and 19.57 % in the third. Flares were more frequent in the RMD patients compared with IBD (p = 0.041; OR 2.15, 95%CI: 1.03-4.52). Flare was associated with discontinuation of bDMARD before the eighth week of gestation (p = 0.016), but especially in the second (p = 0.042) and third trimester (p = 0.012). Maternal infections were an infrequent complication overall (7.66 %), although more frequent in patients with IMIDs (p = 0.004) but were not associated with cDMARD or bDMARD. IMID patients needed assisted reproductive techniques (ART) more often (p = 0.001, OR 2.83, 95%CI: 1.02-7.90). More cesarean sections were performed in gestations under treatment with bDMARD (p = 0.020) and especially in those under treatment with anti-TNF. Aneuploidies calculation risk and fetal malformations were not correlated with DMARDs (cDMARDs, bDMARDs, or its combination) nor with any of the DMARDs individually preconcepcionally or during gestation. Small for gestational age (SGA) newborns were higher in patients with IMIDs however, it was not associated with DMARD use.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>In general, patients with IMIDs who require treatment with bDMARDs have a more severe or refractory disease prior to gestation. In our cohort, we found a higher risk of flare among patients with bDMARDs, especially when those were suspended early. Among maternal outcomes, we found that IMID patients needed ART more often. This is probably, first of all, because of maternal age. Among fetal outcomes, there are no differences in congenital malformations in the IMIDs and healthy patients and were not correlated with DMARDs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of bDMARDs was effective in disease control and safe from a maternal-fetal point of view, with no increase in prematurity, SGA, malformations, or infections.</p>","PeriodicalId":15245,"journal":{"name":"Journal of autoimmunity","volume":"148 ","pages":"103301"},"PeriodicalIF":7.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Safety of biologic immunosuppressants in pregnant women with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases.\",\"authors\":\"Martínez-Sánchez N, J Álvarez-Troncoso, Á Robles-Marhuenda, M De la Calle Fernández-Miranda, M L Muner Hernando, J L Bartha\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jaut.2024.103301\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) typically affect women of childbearing age. One of the challenges in treating these women during pregnancy is to manage the disease while minimizing or avoiding the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) that may increase the risk to the mother or fetus. Biologic therapy has transformed the management of these patients. This study aimed to evaluate the maternal-fetal safety and perinatal outcomes in pregnant women with IMID exposed to biologic DMARDs either preconceptionally or during pregnancy and compare them with women using conventional DMARDs and a group of healthy pregnant women.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective study with prospective follow-up of pregnant women with IMID at a single center. We analyzed baseline maternal demographic characteristics, diseases, DMARDs, and maternal-fetal outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A cohort of 244 pregnancies was studied. One hundred twenty-eight patients met classificatory criteria for rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMD) or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and 116 pregnancies of healthy women were evaluated from the same study period. One hundred and one pregnancies in IMID patients (89.84 %) occurred under immunosuppressive treatment, 78.91 % of IMID pregnancies were under cDMARD (33.59 % exclusive cDMARD), 56.25 % under bDMARD, and 27.34 % under oral glucocorticoids. Anti-TNF was the most frequent (88.88 %) bDMARD and was used in 50.78 % of the IMIDs. There was at least one flare in 37.10 % of the IMID pregnancies, and 9.38 % experienced more than one. Among flares, 43.48 % happened in the first trimester, 34.78 % in the second trimester, and 19.57 % in the third. Flares were more frequent in the RMD patients compared with IBD (p = 0.041; OR 2.15, 95%CI: 1.03-4.52). Flare was associated with discontinuation of bDMARD before the eighth week of gestation (p = 0.016), but especially in the second (p = 0.042) and third trimester (p = 0.012). Maternal infections were an infrequent complication overall (7.66 %), although more frequent in patients with IMIDs (p = 0.004) but were not associated with cDMARD or bDMARD. IMID patients needed assisted reproductive techniques (ART) more often (p = 0.001, OR 2.83, 95%CI: 1.02-7.90). More cesarean sections were performed in gestations under treatment with bDMARD (p = 0.020) and especially in those under treatment with anti-TNF. Aneuploidies calculation risk and fetal malformations were not correlated with DMARDs (cDMARDs, bDMARDs, or its combination) nor with any of the DMARDs individually preconcepcionally or during gestation. Small for gestational age (SGA) newborns were higher in patients with IMIDs however, it was not associated with DMARD use.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>In general, patients with IMIDs who require treatment with bDMARDs have a more severe or refractory disease prior to gestation. In our cohort, we found a higher risk of flare among patients with bDMARDs, especially when those were suspended early. Among maternal outcomes, we found that IMID patients needed ART more often. This is probably, first of all, because of maternal age. Among fetal outcomes, there are no differences in congenital malformations in the IMIDs and healthy patients and were not correlated with DMARDs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of bDMARDs was effective in disease control and safe from a maternal-fetal point of view, with no increase in prematurity, SGA, malformations, or infections.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15245,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of autoimmunity\",\"volume\":\"148 \",\"pages\":\"103301\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of autoimmunity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaut.2024.103301\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/16 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of autoimmunity","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaut.2024.103301","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:免疫介导的炎症性疾病(IMID)通常会影响育龄妇女。妊娠期妇女在治疗这些疾病时面临的挑战之一是在控制疾病的同时尽量减少或避免使用可能会增加母亲或胎儿风险的改善病情抗风湿药(DMARDs)。生物疗法改变了这些患者的治疗方法。本研究旨在评估在孕前或孕期使用生物 DMARDs 的 IMID 孕妇的母胎安全性和围产期结局,并将其与使用传统 DMARDs 的孕妇和一组健康孕妇进行比较:我们在一个中心对患有IMID的孕妇进行了回顾性研究和前瞻性随访。我们分析了孕妇的基线人口特征、疾病、DMARDs 和母胎结局:研究对象包括 244 名孕妇。其中 128 名患者符合风湿和肌肉骨骼疾病(RMD)或炎症性肠病(IBD)的分类标准,在同一研究期间还对 116 名健康孕妇进行了评估。IMID患者中有101例(89.84%)妊娠是在免疫抑制治疗下发生的,78.91%的IMID妊娠是在cDMARD治疗下发生的(33.59%为独家cDMARD),56.25%是在bDMARD治疗下发生的,27.34%是在口服糖皮质激素治疗下发生的。抗肿瘤坏死因子(Anti-TNF)是最常用的 bDMARD(88.88%),在 50.78% 的 IMID 中使用。37.10%的IMID妊娠至少出现过一次复发,9.38%的妊娠出现过一次以上复发。其中,43.48%的复发发生在妊娠前三个月,34.78%发生在妊娠后三个月,19.57%发生在妊娠后三个月。与 IBD 相比,RMD 患者的复发率更高(P = 0.041;OR 2.15,95%CI:1.03-4.52)。复发与妊娠第 8 周前停用 bDMARD 有关(p = 0.016),尤其是在妊娠第 2 周(p = 0.042)和第 3 周(p = 0.012)。产妇感染是一种不常见的并发症(7.66%),但在IMID患者中更为常见(p = 0.004),但与cDMARD或bDMARD无关。IMID患者更经常需要辅助生殖技术(ART)(p = 0.001,OR 2.83,95%CI:1.02-7.90)。在使用 bDMARD 治疗的妊娠中,剖宫产率更高(p = 0.020),尤其是在使用抗肿瘤坏死因子治疗的妊娠中。非整倍体计算风险和胎儿畸形与DMARDs(cDMARDs、bDMARDs或其组合)无关,也与孕前或妊娠期间单独使用的任何DMARDs无关。IMIDs患者的新生儿胎龄小(SGA)率较高,但这与使用DMARD无关:讨论:一般来说,需要使用bDMARDs治疗的IMIDs患者在妊娠前病情较重或难治。在我们的队列中,我们发现使用 bDMARDs 的患者病情复发的风险较高,尤其是早期停药的患者。在孕产妇结局中,我们发现 IMID 患者需要抗逆转录病毒疗法的次数更多。这可能首先与产妇的年龄有关。在胎儿结局方面,IMID 患者和健康患者的先天性畸形没有差异,也与 DMARDs 无关:结论:使用 bDMARDs 可以有效控制疾病,从母婴角度来看也是安全的,不会增加早产、SGA、畸形或感染。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Safety of biologic immunosuppressants in pregnant women with immune-mediated inflammatory diseases.

Background: Immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs) typically affect women of childbearing age. One of the challenges in treating these women during pregnancy is to manage the disease while minimizing or avoiding the use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) that may increase the risk to the mother or fetus. Biologic therapy has transformed the management of these patients. This study aimed to evaluate the maternal-fetal safety and perinatal outcomes in pregnant women with IMID exposed to biologic DMARDs either preconceptionally or during pregnancy and compare them with women using conventional DMARDs and a group of healthy pregnant women.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective study with prospective follow-up of pregnant women with IMID at a single center. We analyzed baseline maternal demographic characteristics, diseases, DMARDs, and maternal-fetal outcomes.

Results: A cohort of 244 pregnancies was studied. One hundred twenty-eight patients met classificatory criteria for rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMD) or inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), and 116 pregnancies of healthy women were evaluated from the same study period. One hundred and one pregnancies in IMID patients (89.84 %) occurred under immunosuppressive treatment, 78.91 % of IMID pregnancies were under cDMARD (33.59 % exclusive cDMARD), 56.25 % under bDMARD, and 27.34 % under oral glucocorticoids. Anti-TNF was the most frequent (88.88 %) bDMARD and was used in 50.78 % of the IMIDs. There was at least one flare in 37.10 % of the IMID pregnancies, and 9.38 % experienced more than one. Among flares, 43.48 % happened in the first trimester, 34.78 % in the second trimester, and 19.57 % in the third. Flares were more frequent in the RMD patients compared with IBD (p = 0.041; OR 2.15, 95%CI: 1.03-4.52). Flare was associated with discontinuation of bDMARD before the eighth week of gestation (p = 0.016), but especially in the second (p = 0.042) and third trimester (p = 0.012). Maternal infections were an infrequent complication overall (7.66 %), although more frequent in patients with IMIDs (p = 0.004) but were not associated with cDMARD or bDMARD. IMID patients needed assisted reproductive techniques (ART) more often (p = 0.001, OR 2.83, 95%CI: 1.02-7.90). More cesarean sections were performed in gestations under treatment with bDMARD (p = 0.020) and especially in those under treatment with anti-TNF. Aneuploidies calculation risk and fetal malformations were not correlated with DMARDs (cDMARDs, bDMARDs, or its combination) nor with any of the DMARDs individually preconcepcionally or during gestation. Small for gestational age (SGA) newborns were higher in patients with IMIDs however, it was not associated with DMARD use.

Discussion: In general, patients with IMIDs who require treatment with bDMARDs have a more severe or refractory disease prior to gestation. In our cohort, we found a higher risk of flare among patients with bDMARDs, especially when those were suspended early. Among maternal outcomes, we found that IMID patients needed ART more often. This is probably, first of all, because of maternal age. Among fetal outcomes, there are no differences in congenital malformations in the IMIDs and healthy patients and were not correlated with DMARDs.

Conclusion: The use of bDMARDs was effective in disease control and safe from a maternal-fetal point of view, with no increase in prematurity, SGA, malformations, or infections.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of autoimmunity
Journal of autoimmunity 医学-免疫学
CiteScore
27.90
自引率
1.60%
发文量
117
审稿时长
17 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Autoimmunity serves as the primary publication for research on various facets of autoimmunity. These include topics such as the mechanism of self-recognition, regulation of autoimmune responses, experimental autoimmune diseases, diagnostic tests for autoantibodies, as well as the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and treatment of autoimmune diseases. While the journal covers a wide range of subjects, it emphasizes papers exploring the genetic, molecular biology, and cellular aspects of the field. The Journal of Translational Autoimmunity, on the other hand, is a subsidiary journal of the Journal of Autoimmunity. It focuses specifically on translating scientific discoveries in autoimmunity into clinical applications and practical solutions. By highlighting research that bridges the gap between basic science and clinical practice, the Journal of Translational Autoimmunity aims to advance the understanding and treatment of autoimmune diseases.
期刊最新文献
PD-1 antibody interactions with Fc gamma receptors enable PD-1 agonism to inhibit T cell activation – therapeutic implications for autoimmunity Sunscreen use associated with elevated prevalence of anti-nuclear antibodies in U.S. adults EZH2 promotes B-cell autoimmunity in primary Sjogren's syndrome via METTL3-mediated m6A modification Bulk T cell repertoire sequencing (TCR-Seq) is a powerful technology for understanding inflammation-mediated diseases Autoantibodies against a subunit of mitochondrial respiratory chain complex I in inclusion body myositis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1