MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4411410256 · doi:10.1016/j.ard.2025.06.1043

ABS0418 LOW INCIDENCE OF NEONATAL INFECTION WITH TNF AND NON-TNF BIOLOGIC DMARD USE IN THE SECOND AND THIRD TRIMESTERS OF PREGNANCY

2025· article· en· W4411410256 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Sara Alcántara Carmona, Вера Ивановна Павлова

Notice bibliographique

RevueAnnals of the Rheumatic Diseases · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueParvovirus B19 Infection Studies
Établissements canadiensMcMaster University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicinePregnancyTumor necrosis factor alphaIncidence (geometry)TNF inhibitorObstetricsImmunologyInternal medicineInfliximab

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

<h2>Abstract</h2><h3>Background:</h3> Biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) are often required and commonly prescribed in the treatment of rheumatologic diseases. Most biological DMARDs are monoclonal IgG1 antibodies containing an Fc region that allows transfer across the placenta during pregnancy in the second and third trimesters. This has raised concerns over the years regarding newborn immunosuppression and increased risk of infection in the first months of life as there have been reports of neonatal infection with biologic use in late pregnancy. Clinical practice has therefore been governed by a conservative approach to continuing biologics in pregnancy, with safety concerns that often lead to a withdrawal of these drugs. The EULAR pregnancy recommendations from 2016 suggest that infliximab and adalimumab be stopped at 20 weeks and etanercept at 30-32 weeks of pregnancy. Further, the ACR 2020 guidelines for management of reproductive health in rheumatic disease suggest discontinuation of infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab and golimumab in the third trimester of pregnancy and complete discontinuation of anakinra and secukinumab, among other drugs, during pregnancy. Early discontinuation of biologics during pregnancy may cause a disease flare-up in high-risk patients and subsequent worsening of materno-fetal and obstetrical outcomes. Additionally, discontinuation of a biologic and restarting it at a later date may result in antibody formation to the drug, preventing the ability to recapture clinical efficacy. Recently, there has been growing evidence supporting the continuation of biologic DMARDs in pregnancy, with the 2024 Update To The EULAR Points To Consider For Use of Antirheumatic Drugs In Reproduction, Pregnancy And Lactation leaning towards a permissive approach due to a more favourable risk-benefit profile. However, biologic use in late pregnancy remains an understudied area, with limited data available in human subjects. <h3>Objectives:</h3> This study aims to add to the body of research surrounding the use of biologic DMARDs in late pregnancy. Here, we investigate the incidence of infection from birth to 6 months in mothers exposed to biologics in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy. <h3>Methods:</h3> This was a single-center prospective observational study conducted at the Ancaster Rheumatology Clinic, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. The inclusion criteria included all women with known maternal and neonatal outcomes who were treated with biologics in the second and third trimesters. The incidence of infection was recorded based on hospital records and family reports up to 6 months after birth. <h3>Results:</h3> A total of 75 pregnancies in 59 mothers with biologic exposure in the second and third trimesters were reviewed between 2011 and 2024. Most patients had their last biologic injection in the third trimester of pregnancy, i.e. between 29-40 weeks gestation. 33 patients had rheumatoid arthritis, including 2 with JIA. 19 patients had ankylosing spondylitis, one of which also had IBD and psoriasis. 13 patients had psoriatic arthritis (4 of which also had spondylitis), 3 patients had Behcet's, 5 patients had Crohn's disease (2 of which also had PsA), and 4 had other diagnoses. Patients were treated with the following biologics in pregnancy: 27 were on certolizumab, 17 were on adalimumab, 13 were on etanercept (including one in combination with risankizumab), 9 were on infliximab, 3 were on secukinumab, 3 were on golimumab, 2 were on rituximab and 1 was on anakinra. The mean maternal age at delivery was 32 years (SD 4.3). The mean birth weight was 3140g (SD 651), including 2 twin pregnancies and one fetal demise. In the 75 patients with reported infant outcomes, only 3 infants developed infections between birth and 6 months after birth. This included 3 pneumonia infections, 2 of which were RSV. The mothers of these newborns were on certolizumab and adalimumab. <h3>Conclusion:</h3> In this single center study, the late exposure to biologics in pregnancy yielded a very low incidence of infection in newborns to mothers with autoimmune conditions. The results of this study support the most recent 2024 EULAR Update in taking a more permissive approach to the continuation of biologics in pregnancy for the treatment of autoimmune diseases. <h3>REFERENCES:</h3> <b>Available upon request</b>. <h3>Acknowledgements:</h3> <b>NIL</b>. <h3>Disclosure of Interests:</h3> <b>None declared</b>. © The Authors 2025. This abstract is an open access article published in Annals of Rheumatic Diseases under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Neither EULAR nor the publisher make any representation as to the accuracy of the content. The authors are solely responsible for the content in their abstract including accuracy of the facts, statements, results, conclusion, citing resources etc.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,011
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,237

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,033
Tête enseignante GPT0,313
Écart entre enseignants0,280 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAnnals of the Rheumatic DiseasesMême sujetParvovirus B19 Infection StudiesTravaux en français237 207