MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093299070 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2020.544434

Pregnancy and Neuromyelitis Optica Spectrum Disorder – Reciprocal Effects and Practical Recommendations: A Systematic Review

2020· review· en· W3093299070 on OpenAlexaff
Rohan D’Souza, Danielle Wuebbolt, Katarina Andrejevic, Rizwana Ashraf, Vanessa Nguyen, Nusrat Zaffar, Dalia Rotstein, Ahraaz Wyne

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive System and Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of OttawaSt. Michael's HospitalWestern UniversityMount Sinai HospitalHamilton Health SciencesSickKids FoundationUniversity of Toronto
FundersAlexion Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsNeuromyelitis opticaMedicinePregnancySpectrum disorderPediatricsPreeclampsiaAdverse effectPostpartum periodDiseaseIntrauterine growth restrictionObstetricsFetusMultiple sclerosisPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) is an inflammatory disorder of the central nervous system characterized by severe, antibody-mediated astrocyte loss with secondary demyelination and axonal damage, predominantly targeting optic nerves and the spinal cord. Recent publications have alluded to increased disease activity during pregnancy, and adverse maternal and fetal outcomes in patients with NMOSD. Our objective was to systematically review published literature to help counsel and manage women with NMOSD contemplating pregnancy. Methods: We searched five databases includein MEDLINE and EMBASE, for English-language publications describing pregnancies in women with NMOSD. Article selection, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment using Joanna Briggs’ critical appraisal tool for case reports and series, were performed in duplicate. Pooled incidences were calculated where possible, and a narrative summary was provided. Results: Of 2118 identified titles, 22 case reports and seven case series, representing 595 pregnancies in 389 women, were included. The mean maternal age was 28.12 + 5.19 years. At least 20% of cases were first diagnosed during pregnancy. There were no maternal deaths. Point estimates for clinical outcomes could not be obtained due to inadequate reporting. NMOSD-related disability and relapses increased considerably during pregnancy and especially in the immediate postpartum period. Although a high proportion of early pregnancy losses were reported, an association with disease activity or therapeutic interventions could not be established. Apart from one publication which reported an increased risk of preeclampsia, there was no increase in adverse obstetric outcomes including preterm birth, fetal growth restriction or congenital malformations. Initial attacks and relapses were successfully managed with oral or intravenous corticosteroids and immunosuppressants, and refractory cases with immunoglobulin, plasma exchange and immunoadsorption. Conclusion: Increased NMOSD-related disability and relapses during pregnancy the postpartum period may respond to aggressive management with corticosteroids and immunosuppressants such as azathioprine, which are safely administered during pregnancy and lactation. Emerging safety data on monoclonal antibodies during pregnancy, make these attractive options, while intravenous immunoglobulin, plasma exchange and immunoadsorption can be safely used to treat severe relapses. The complex interplay between NMOSD and pregnancy outcomes would be best understood through prospective analysis of data collected through an international registry.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.092
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.092
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0100.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicReproductive System and PregnancyFrench-language works237,207