Pregnancy outcomes in the clinical development program of fingolimod in multiple sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To report outcomes of pregnancies that occurred during the fingolimod clinical development program. METHODS: Pregnancy outcomes from phase II, phase III, and phase IV clinical studies (with optional extensions) were reported by clinical trial investigators. Fingolimod exposure in utero was defined as fingolimod treatment at the time of conception or in the 6 weeks before conception. RESULTS: As of October 31, 2011, 89 pregnancies were reported in completed or ongoing clinical studies, with 74 in fingolimod treatment arms. Of 66 pregnancies with in utero exposure to fingolimod, there were 28 live births, 9 spontaneous abortions, 24 elective abortions, 4 ongoing pregnancies, and 1 pregnancy with an unknown outcome (patient lost to follow-up). Two infants were born with malformations: 1 with congenital unilateral posteromedial bowing of the tibia and 1 with acrania. Elective abortions were performed for 1 case each of tetralogy of Fallot, spontaneous intrauterine death, and failure of fetal development. There were 5 cases (7.6%; 95% confidence interval 3%-17%) of abnormal fetal development in the 66 pregnancies that had in utero exposure to fingolimod. In all 5 cases, fetal exposure to the drug took place in the first trimester of pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: The number of patients becoming pregnant during fingolimod therapy remains small and does not permit firm conclusions to be drawn about fetal safety of fingolimod in humans. Given the known risks of teratogenicity in animals and the present data, women of childbearing potential should use effective contraception during fingolimod therapy and for 2 months after discontinuation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".