DO FINDINGS DIFFER ACROSS RESEARCH DESIGN? THE CASE OF ANTIDEPRESSANT USE IN PREGNANCY AND MALFORMATIONS

Main Article Content

Thomas R Einarson
Deborah Kennedy
Adrienne Einarson

Keywords

Antidepressants, pregnancy, malformations, research design

Abstract

Background


Many studies examining the teratogenic potential of antidepressants have been published. A variety of observational designs have been used with apparent conflicting results, although odds ratios were rarely >2.


 


Objectives


To examine whether these apparent differences were associated with research methods such as model, comparison groups, data source, data collection procedures, definition of malformations, outcome ascertainment or management of confounders.


 


Methods


Medline and Embase were searched using terms: pregnancy, antidepressants, serotonin uptake inhibitors OR SSRI, AND embryonic structures OR congenital malformations OR fetal development for observational studies with original data. Data were analyzed using a structured approach and narrative review. Designs that were compared, included prospective cohort, retrospective cohort, and case-control studies. Rates of major malformations and cardiac malformations were combined by study type using random effects meta-analytic models.


 


Results


We identified 150 papers; 127 were rejected, 23 were analyzed: 9 prospective cohort, 8 retrospective cohort, and 6 case-control studies. Sample sizes were large (1,818 exposed in case-control and 16,824 in cohort studies), providing relatively robust findings. Overall Odds Ratio’s for major malformations ranged from 1.03-1.24 and 0.81-1.32 for cardiac malformations. No discrepancies among research designs were identified.


 


Conclusions


Diverse observational models with differing strengths and weaknesses produced remarkably similar nonsignificant results. Perceived conflicting results may be due to subsequent dissemination of results with attention given to small statistically differences with negligible clinical importance. Improved methods of knowledge transfer and translation are required to provide sound evidence-based information to assist in decision-making surrounding the use of antidepressants in pregnancy.

Abstract 56 | PDF Downloads 31

References

1. Einarson TR, Einarson A. Newer antidepressants in pregnancy and rates of major malformations: a meta-analysis of prospective comparative studies.
2. GlaxoSmithKline. Epidemiology study EPIP083: Preliminary report on bupropion in pregnancy and the occurrence of cardiovascular and major congenital malformation. 2007. Available at :
http://www.gskclinicalstudyregister.com/result_detail.jsp;jsessionid=F5A41786A9BC0ABB022F641A24F6E21D?protocolId=EPIP083&studyId=2887&compound=Depressive+Disorder%2c+Major&type=Medical+Condition&letterrange=A-F. [Accessed 2012 Feb 07].
3. FDA News Release: FDA Advising of risk of birth defects with Paxil. Agency requiring updated product labeling. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/P ressAnnouncements/2005/ucm108527.htm [Accessed 2012 Feb 07].
4. Williams M, Wooltorton E. Paroxetine (Paxil) and congenital malformations. CMAJ 2005; 173:1320-1.
5. Einarson A. Studying the safety of drugs in pregnancy: and the gold standard is...? J Clin Pharmacol Pharmacoepidemiol 2010;1:3-8.
6. Briggs GG, Polifka J, and the Research Committee, Organization of Teratology Information Specialists. Better data needed from pregnancy registries. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 2009; 85: 109-11.
7. Chambers CD, Johnson KA, Dick LM, et al. Birth outcomes in pregnant women taking fluoxetine. N Engl J Med 1996;335:1010-5.
8. Diav-Citrin O, Shechtman S, Weinbaum D, et al. Paroxetine and fluoxetine in pregnancy: a prospective, multicentre, controlled, observational study. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2008;66:695-705.
9. Einarson A, Choi J, Einarson TR, Koren G. Incidence of major malformations in infants following antidepressant exposure in pregnancy: Results of a large prospective cohort study. Can J Psychiatry 2009;54:242-6.
10. Klieger-Grossmann C, Weitzner B, Panchaud A, Pistelli A, Einarson T, Koren G, Einarson A. Pregnancy outcomes following use of escitalopram: a prospective comparative cohort study. J Clin Pharmacol 2011 Nov 11. [Epub ahead of print].
11. Kulin NA, Pastuszak A, Sage SR, et al. Pregnancy outcome following maternal use of the new selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: a prospective controlled multicenter study. JAMA 1998;279: 609-10.
12. Nordeng H, van Gelder MMHJ, Spigset O, et al. Pregnancy outcome after exposure to antidepressants and the role of maternal depression - results from the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2012 Apr;32(2):186-94.
13. Pastuszak A, Schick-Boschetto B, Zuber C, et al. Pregnancy outcome following firsttrimester exposure to fluoxetine (Prozac). JAMA 1993;269:2246-8.
14. Cole JA, Modell JG, Haight BR, Cosmatos IS, Stoler JM, Walker AM. Bupropion in pregnancy and the prevalence of congenital malformations. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2007;16:474-84.
15. Davis RL, Rubanowice D, McPhillips H, et al. Risks of congenital malformations and perinatal events among infants exposed to antidepressant medications during pregnancy. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Safe 2007;16:1086- 94.
16. Malm H, Klaukka T, Neuvonen PJ. Risks associated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2005;106:1289-96.
17. Oberlander TF, Warburton W, Misri S, Riggs W, Aghajanian J, Hertzman C. Major congenital malformations following prenatal exposure to serotonin reuptake inhibitors and benzodiazepines using population-based health data. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 2008;83:68-76.
18. Pedersen LH, Henriksen TB, Vestergaard M, Olsen J, Bech BH. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in pregnancy and congenital malformations: Population based cohort study. BMJ 2009 Sep 26;339:b3569. doi:10.1136/bmj.b3569.
19. Simon GE,Cunningham ML, Davis RL. Outcomes of prenatal antidepressant exposure. Am J Psychiatry 2002;159:2055-61.
20. Wen SW, Yang Q, Garner P, et al. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Am Obstet Gynecol 2006;94:961-6.
21. Alwan S, Reefhuis J, Rasmussen SA, et al. Use of selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors in pregnancy and the risk of birth defects. N Engl J Med 2007;356:2684-92.
22. Louik C, Lin AE, Werler MM, et al. Firsttrimester use of selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors and the risk of birth defects. N Engl J Med 2007;356:2675-83.
23. Ramos E, St-Andre M, Rey E, Oraichi D, Bérard A. Duration of antidepressant use during pregnancy and risk of major congenital malformations. Br J Psychiatry 2008;92:344- 50.
24. Einarson A, Pistelli A, DeSantis M, et al. Evaluation of the risk of congenital cardiovascular defects associated with use of paroxetine during pregnancy. Am J Psychiatry 2008;165:749-52.
25. Merlob P, Birk E, Sirota L, et al. Are selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors cardiac teratogens? echocardiographic screening of newborns with persistent heart murmur. Birth Defects Res (Part A) 2009;85:837-41.
26. Wichman CL, Moore KM, Lang TR, et al. Congenital heart disease associated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor use during pregnancy. Mayo Clin Proc 2009;84:23-7.
27. Alwan S, Reefhuis J, Botto LD, et al. Maternal use of bupropion and risk for congenital heart defects. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;203:52.e1-6.
28. Bakker MK, Kerstjens-Frederikse WS, Buys CHCM, et al. First-trimester use of paroxetine and congenital heart defects: a populationbased case-control study. Birth Defects Res (Part A) 2010;8: 941-100.
29. Bérard A, Ramos E, Rey E, Blais L, St.-Andre M, Oraichi D. First trimester exposure to paroxetine and risk of cardiac malformations in infants: The importance of dosage. Birth Defects Res B Dev Reprod Toxicol 2007;80:18-27.
30. Wurst KE, Poole C, Ephross SA, Olshan AF. First trimester paroxetine use and the prevalence of congenital, specifically cardiac, defects: a meta-analysis of epidemiological studies. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 2010;88:159-70.
31. Andrews EB, Tennis P. Promise and pitfalls of administrative data in evaluating pregnancy outcomes. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2007;16:1181-3.
32. Källén B, Nilsson E, Olausson PO. Antidepressant use during pregnancy: comparison of data obtained from a prescription register and from antenatal care records. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2011;67: 839- 45.
33. Einarson A. Proceedings from Motherisk Update 2008. Introduction: reproductive mental health. Can J Clin Pharmacol 2009 Winter;16(1):e1-5.
34. Scialli AR. Paroxetine exposure during pregnancy and cardiac malformations. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 2010;88:171- 4.
35. Bérard A. Paroxetine exposure during pregnancy and the risk of cardiac malformations: what is the evidence? Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol 2010;88:175- 7.
36. Stewart DE. Clinical practice. Depression during pregnancy. N Engl J Med 2011;365:1605-11.
37. Tanne JH. GlaxoSmithKline told to pay family $2.5m after jury finds paroxetine caused son's heart defects. BMJ 2009 Oct 15;339:b4266.
38. Einarson A. Influence of the media on women taking antidepressants during pregnancy. J Clin Psychiatry 2009;70:1313-4.
39. Markus EM, Miller LJ. The other side of the risk equation: exploring risks of untreated depression and anxiety in pregnancy. J Clin Psychiatry 2009;70:1314-5.
40. Bonari L, Pinto N, Ahn E, Einarson A, Steiner M, Koren G. Perinatal risks of untreated depression during pregnancy. Can J Psychiatry 2004;49:726-35.

Most read articles by the same author(s)