Infant exposure to Fluvoxamine through placenta and human milk: a case series - A contribution from the ConcePTION project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Fluvoxamine is widely used to treat depression during pregnancy and lactation. However, limited data are available on its transfer to the fetus or in human milk. This case series provides additional information on the infant exposure to fluvoxamine during pregnancy and lactation. Case presentation: Two women, aged 38 and 34 years, diagnosed with depression were treated with 50 mg fluvoxamine during pregnancy and lactation. At delivery a paired maternal and cord blood sample was collected for each woman. The first mother exclusively breastfed her child for 4 months and gave one foremilk and one hindmilk sample at 2 days and 4 weeks post-partum, whereas the second mother did not breastfeed. Results: The cord to plasma concentration ratios were 0.62 and 0.48, respectively. At 2 weeks post-partum, relative infant doses (RID) were 0.47 and 0.57% based on fluvoxamine concentrations in foremilk and hindmilk, respectively. At 4 weeks post-partum, the RIDs were 0.35 and 0.90%, respectively. The child from the first mother was born healthy and showed a normal development at the 6th, 18th and 36th month follow-ups. One of the twins from the second woman was hospitalized for hypoglycemia that was attributed to gestational diabetes and low birth weight. The second one was born healthy. Conclusion: These results suggest a minimal exposure to fluvoxamine during lactation which is in accordance with previously published data. Larger clinical and pharmacokinetic studies assessing the long-term safety of this drug during lactation and the variability of its exposure through breastmilk are warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".