ÌÇÐÄvlog

Object moved to here.

When Pregnancy Becomes an Inclusion Criterion in Neuroscience Research | Pregnancy | JAMA Neurology | ÌÇÐÄvlog

ÌÇÐÄvlog

[Skip to Navigation]
Sign In
Viewpoint
November 27, 2023

When Pregnancy Becomes an Inclusion Criterion in Neuroscience Research

Author Affiliations
  • 1Department of Medicine and Department of Obstetrical Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  • 2Department of Neurology, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts
  • 3Women’s Epilepsy Program, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
  • 4Neurology, Epilepsy & EEG, Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
JAMA Neurol. 2024;81(1):7-8. doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2023.4506

Just over half a century ago, not much was known about placental drug transfer and metabolism and in utero exposure risks to the fetus. This allowed for the liberal use of pharmaceuticals antenatally that eventually cumulated in the thalidomide crisis of the 1950s. Frances Kelsey, PhD, a physician-pharmacist and drug reviewer for the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), astutely withheld the approval of thalidomide in the US due to limited safety data, preventing thousands of potential fetal malformations. A unanimous FDA amendment in 1962 called for the rigorous protection of pregnant patients and their fetuses from the harmful effects of pharmaceuticals, leading to the firm exclusion of all people of child-bearing potential from early-phase clinical trials. In the ensuing decades, though created with good intentions, these safeguards have severely limited safety data for the therapeutic use of many essential medications for pregnant patients.

1 Comment for this article
EXPAND ALL
For safety in pregnancy, why not first try the drug on animals first?
John Leung, M.B.,B.S. | Hong Kong Sanatorium and Hospital
Hyunh et al. raised the very important issue of drug safety and called to attention the historical tragedy of thalidomide, suggesting that pregnant women should have been included in the preliminary trial. That would certainly have prevented thousands of fetal deformities but still a small number would have been created during the trial. So there is an ethical issue to resolve. One would naturally think of trials in animals, but species response differ widely. Thus, belatedly, thalidomide has been shown to produce deformed rabbits at 300x the human dose, and deformed monkeys at 10x the human dose. So, does that mean thalidomide animal trials would not have prevented its marketing? But wait, with rabbit it's 300x, with monkey it's 10x, what if we had tried it on chimpanzee, would the result come closer to one? In that case we might have prevented the disaster altogether.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None Reported
READ MORE
×