MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318588379 · doi:10.1089/jwh.2022.0310

Reproductive Safety of Lurasidone and Quetiapine: Update from the National Pregnancy Registry for Psychiatric Medications

2023· article· en· W4318588379 on OpenAlexaff
Lee S. Cohen, Taylor R. Church, Marlene P. Freeman, Peter Gaccione, Phoebe S. Caplin, Lauren A Kobylski, Miranda Arakelian, Ella T. Rossa, David Chitayat, Sonia Hernández–Dı́az, Adele C. Viguera

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Women s Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuetiapineLurasidoneMedicinePregnancyOdds ratioPsychiatryProspective cohort studyObstetricsPediatricsAntipsychoticSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs), also called atypical antipsychotics, are common therapies for women with a spectrum of psychiatric disorders. No systematically ascertained human reproductive safety data are available for lurasidone, and prospective data for quetiapine are limited, making decisions regarding use of these medications during pregnancy complicated. Materials and Methods: The National Pregnancy Registry for Psychiatric Medications is a prospective cohort study designed to collect reproductive safety data relative to SGAs. Pregnant women aged 18–45 years, with psychiatric illness and prenatal psychotropic medication exposure completed three phone interviews during pregnancy and the postpartum period. Cases of presumed malformations are abstracted from medical records for adjudication by a teratologist blinded to medication exposure. Results: Of 2,293 women enrolled at the time of analysis, 134 in the lurasidone group, 264 in the quetiapine group, and 886 controls completed the postpartum interview and were therefore eligible for inclusion. Dropped or lost-to-follow-up participants (13%) and those currently pregnant were excluded. Participants were predominantly White, college-educated, and married (lurasidone = 88.1%, 76.9%, 77.6%; quetiapine = 89.8%, 71.2%, 75.0%; controls = 92.7%, 86.7%, 89.1%). Absolute risks of major malformations were 2.19% (lurasidone), 1.85% (quetiapine), and 1.77% (controls). Odds ratios comparing lurasidone and quetiapine with controls were 1.24 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.36–4.32) and 1.04 (95% CI = 0.38–2.85), respectively. Conclusions: No specific patterns of malformations were observed in infants exposed to the medications of interest. Lurasidone and quetiapine did not appear to be major teratogens, but further information is needed to refine risk estimates. Food and Drug Administration guidance underscores the importance of pregnancy registries. Clinical trial number: NCT01246765.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations18
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Women s HealthSame topicMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumFrench-language works237,207