Ethics of studies of drugs in pregnancy

Sex, Gender, and the Regulation of Prescription Drugs: Omissions and Opportunities

The regulation of prescription drugs is an important health, safety, and equity issue. However, regulatory processes do not always consider evidence on sex, gender, and factors such as age and race, omissions that advocates have highlighted for several decades. Assessing the impact of sex-related factors is critical to ensuring drug safety and efficacy for females and males, and for informing clinical product monographs and consumer information. Gender-related factors affect prescribing, access to drugs, needs and desires for specific prescribed therapies. This article draws on a policy-research partnership project that examined the lifecycle management of prescription drugs in Canada using a sex and gender-based analysis plus (SGBA+) lens. In the same time period, Health Canada created a Scientific Advisory Committee on Health Products for Women, in part to examine drug regulation. We report on grey literature and selected regulatory documents to illustrate the extent to which sex and gender-based analysis plus (SGBA+) is utilized in regulation and policy. We identify omissions in the management of prescription drugs, and name opportunities for improvements by integrating SGBA+ into drug sponsor applications, clinical trials development, and pharmacovigilance. We report on recent efforts to incorporate sex disaggregated data and recommend ways that the management of prescription drugs can benefit from more integration of sex, gender, and equity.

Participation in a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of metformin in gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM): pregnant women's perceptions and experiences of the decision-making process

Background: Research in pregnancy and childbirth is required to advance healthcare needs for this population. Fears around potential fetal risk and the history of drug scandals renders it an area of research that is somewhat neglected. Due to the growing medical complexities facing pregnant women, efforts have been made in recent times to recognise the ethical importance of including this population in clinical research. Although clinical trials are becoming more common in pregnancy, recruitment of this population remains difficult with a common assumption that pregnant women would be reluctant to participate in clinical trials. This study set out to explore pregnant women's perspectives and experiences of the decision-making process to participate in a randomised controlled trial of metformin in gestational diabetes mellitus (the EMERGE clinical trial). Methods: This study employed a qualitative descriptive design with thematic analysis. Data were collected by conducting individual semi-structured interviews (n=11) with participants (n=9) and decliners (n=2) of the EMERGE clinical trial.  Results: The main findings reveal that a significant perception of personal benefit from participation was the biggest influence on women's decisions to participate. Concerns about the impact of gestational diabetes on their pregnancies, the option of a favourable intervention treatment, a low perception of risk associated with the trial and the opportunity to help medical research appeared to have significantly influenced their decision. Receiving detailed information, personal interactions with the study team, a perception of voluntariness in participation and accessibility of the trial positively impacted on women's decisions to participate.  Conclusions: Personal contact during recruitment, presenting clear and thorough trial information, providing previous participant testimonials, and facilitating women to participate in clinical trials are all important strategies when trying to enhance recruitment in pregnancy trials. Further research on pregnant women declining participation in clinical trials is needed.

Innovative Approaches for Pharmacology Studies in Pregnant and Lactating Women: A Viewpoint and Lessons from HIV

Medication use during pregnancy in the absence of pharmacokinetic and safety data is common, particularly for antiretrovirals, as pregnant women are not usually included in clinical trials leading to drug licensure. To date, data are typically generated through opportunistic pregnancy studies performed in the postmarketing setting, leading to a substantial time-lag between initial regulatory approval of a drug and availability of essential pregnancy-specific pharmacokinetic and safety data. During this period, health care providers lack key information on human placental transfer, fetal exposure, optimal maternal dosing in pregnancy, and maternal and fetal drug toxicity, including teratogenicity risk. We discuss new approaches that could facilitate the acquisition of these critical data earlier in the drug development process, aiding clinicians and patients in making informed decisions on drug selection and dosing during pregnancy. An integrated approach utilizing multiple novel methodologies (in vitro, ex vivo, in silico and in vivo) is needed to accelerate the availability of pharmacology data in pregnancy and lactation.

Placental transfer and safety in pregnancy of medications under investigation to treat coronavirus disease 2019

Objective

Treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 is mostly symptomatic, but a wide range of medications are under investigation against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Although pregnant women are excluded from clinical trials, they will inevitably receive therapies whenever they seem effective in nonpregnant patients and even under compassionate use.

Methods

We conducted a review of the literature on placental transfer and pregnancy safety data of drugs under current investigation for coronavirus disease 2019.

Results

Regarding remdesivir, there are no data in pregnant women. Several other candidates already have safety data in pregnant women, because they are repurposed drugs already used for their established indications. Thus, they may be used in pregnancy, although their safety in the context of coronavirus disease 2019 may differ from conventional use. These include HIV protease inhibitors such as lopinavir/ritonavir that have low placental transfer, interferon that does not cross the placental barrier, and hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine that has high placental transfer. There are also pregnancy safety and placental transfer data for colchicine, steroids, oseltamivir, azithromycin, and some monoclonal antibodies. However, some drugs are strictly prohibited in pregnancy because of known teratogenicity (thalidomide) or fetal toxicities (renin-angiotensin system blockers). Other candidates including tocilizumab, other interleukin 6 inhibitors, umifenovir, and favipiravir have insufficient data on pregnancy outcomes.

Conclusion

In life-threatening cases of coronavirus disease 2019, the potential risks of therapy to the fetus may be more than offset by the benefit of curing the mother. Although preclinical and placental transfer studies are required for a number of potential anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 drugs, several medications can already be used in pregnant women.

Research in Pregnant Subjects: Increasingly Important, but Challenging

Background: The number of pregnant women with medical comorbidities continues to increase. A large proportion of pregnant women are exposed to medications during pregnancy, but only a fraction of the medications used have been investigated during pregnancy with regard to benefits, risks, and doses.

Methods: This article includes a review of potential deterrents and barriers to pregnant women enrolling in clinical research studies and the federal regulations governing enrollment of pregnant women in research.

Results: Research in pregnant women has been hampered by concerns for liability, the complex physiology of pregnancy with changes related to stage of pregnancy, and federal regulations that deemed pregnant women a vulnerable population. While recent revisions to federal regulations have removed pregnant women from the classification of vulnerable population, regulations regarding consent requirements still limit women's ability to decide on participation in clinical trials. The Department of Health and Human Services established the Task Force on Research Specific to Pregnant Women and Lactating Women to help identify and reduce these barriers.

Conclusion: While recognition of the need for more scientific knowledge on the effects of medications and other interventions in pregnancy is widespread, a number of barriers that hinder enrollment of pregnant women in clinical trials remain.

Researchers', Regulators', and Sponsors' Views on Pediatric Clinical Trials: A Multinational Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The last decade has seen dramatic changes in the regulatory landscape to support more trials involving children, but child-specific challenges and inequitable conduct across income regions persist. The goal of this study was to describe the attitudes and opinions of stakeholders toward trials in children, to inform additional strategies to promote more high-quality, relevant pediatric trials across the globe.

METHODS

Key informant semi-structured interviews were conducted with stakeholders (researchers, regulators, and sponsors) who were purposively sampled from low- to middle-income countries and high-income countries. The transcripts were thematically analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirty-five stakeholders from 10 countries were interviewed. Five major themes were identified: addressing pervasive inequities (paucity of safety and efficacy data, knowledge disparities, volatile environment, double standards, contextual relevance, market-driven forces, industry sponsorship bias and prohibitive costs); contending with infrastructural barriers (resource constraints, dearth of pediatric trial expertise, and logistical complexities); navigating complex ethical and regulatory frameworks ("draconian" oversight, ambiguous requirements, exploitation, excessive paternalism and precariousness of coercion versus volunteerism); respecting uniqueness of children (pediatric research paradigms, child-appropriate approaches, and family-centered empowerment); and driving evidence-based child health (advocacy, opportunities, treatment access, best practices, and research prioritization).

CONCLUSIONS

Stakeholders acknowledge that changes in the regulatory environment have encouraged more trials in children, but they contend that inequities and political, regulatory, and resource barriers continue to exist. Embedding trials as part of routine clinical care, addressing the unique needs of children, and streamlining regulatory approvals were suggested. Stakeholders recommended increasing international collaboration, establishing centralized trials infrastructure, and aligning research to child health priorities to encourage trials that address global child health care needs.