Effect of IgG therapy on lymphocyte subpopulations in the peripheral blood of Kuwaiti women experiencing recurrent pregnancy loss

Efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin in the treatment of recurrent spontaneous abortion: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of IVIG in the treatment with patients with recurrent spontaneous abortion (RSA).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of science, Cochrane library were searched for randomized controlled (RCTs) about effect of IVIG on RSA from inception to August 20, 2021. Values of standardized mean differences (SMD) were determined for continuous outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 15 articles involving 902 patients were included in meta-analysis. Compared with the control group, IVIG can increase the live birth rate of recurrent spontaneous abortion patients [OR = 3.06, 95%CI (1.23, 7.64, P = .02]. However, recurrent abortion was divided into primary and secondary abortion for subgroup analysis, and there was no statistical difference. Besides, IVIG can also increase the expression in peripheral blood CD3+[OR = .4, 95%CI(-2.47, 3.15, P = .81],CD4+[OR = 1.16, 95%CI(-4.60, 6.93, P = .69], and a decrease in the expression of CD8+[OR = -1.78, 95%CI(-5.30, 1.75, P = .32], but there is no statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

IVIG can significantly increase the live birth rate of recurrent spontaneous abortion. However, the evidence needs further verification and the curative effect is uncertain. It is necessary to further explore the pathogenesis of recurrent abortion and the mechanism of IVIG in the treatment of recurrent spontaneous abortion. Besides, more high-quality randomized controlled trials suitable for population, race, dosage and timing of IVIG in the treatment of recurrent abortion are needed to confirm its effectiveness, and effective systematic evaluation is also needed to evaluate its use benefit.

Intravenous immunoglobulins improve live birth rate among women with underlying immune conditions and recurrent pregnancy loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) is increasingly used as a treatment for recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) despite lack of clear evidence on efficacy. Recent data suggest IVIG might be more effective in a subgroup of women with an aberrant immunological profile. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the effectiveness of IVIG treatment on pregnancy outcome among women with RPL and underlying immunological conditions (e.g., elevated NK cell percentage, elevated Th1/Th2 ratio, diagnosis with autoimmune disorders) was conducted. Eight non-randomized controlled trials, including 478 women (intervention: 284; control: 194), met eligibility criteria. Meta-analysis showed that treatment with IVIG was associated with a two-fold increase in live birth rate (RR 1.98, 95% CI 1.44–2.73, P < 0.0001). The effect of IVIG was particularly marked in the subgroup of studies including patients based on presence of elevated (> 12%) NK-cell percentage (RR 2.32, 95% CI 1.77–3.02, P < 0.0001) and when starting intervention prior to or during cycle of conception (RR 4.47, 95% CI 1.53–13.05, P = 0.006). In conclusion, treatment with IVIG may improve live birth rate in women with RPL and underlying immune conditions. However, these results should be interpreted with caution as studies are limited by low number of participants and the non-randomized design, which represent seriously biases. Future randomized controlled trials in women with RPL and underlying immune conditions are needed before using IVIG in a clinical setting.

Pathogenesis, Diagnosis and Management of Obstetric Antiphospholipid Syndrome: A Comprehensive Review

Antiphospholipid syndrome is an autoimmune disorder characterized by vascular thrombosis and/or pregnancy morbidity associated with persistent antiphospholipid antibody positivity. Cases fulfilling the Sydney criteria for obstetric morbidity with no previous thrombosis are known as obstetric antiphospholipid syndrome (OAPS). OAPS is the most identified cause of recurrent pregnancy loss and late-pregnancy morbidity related to placental injury. Cases with incomplete clinical or laboratory data are classified as obstetric morbidity APS (OMAPS) and non-criteria OAPS (NC-OAPS), respectively. Inflammatory and thrombotic mechanisms are involved in the pathophysiology of OAPS. Trophoblasts, endothelium, platelets and innate immune cells are key cellular players. Complement activation plays a crucial pathogenic role. Secondary placental thrombosis appears by clot formation in response to tissue factor activation. New risk assessment tools could improve the prediction of obstetric complication recurrences or thromboses. The standard-of-care treatment consists of low-dose aspirin and prophylactic low molecular weight heparin. In refractory cases, the addition of hydroxychloroquine, low-dose prednisone or IVIG improve pregnancy outcomes. Statins and eculizumab are currently being tested for treating selected OAPS women. Finally, we revisited recent insights and concerns about the pathophysiology, diagnosis and management of OAPS.

Immunological Risk Factors in Recurrent Pregnancy Loss: Guidelines Versus Current State of the Art

Around 1-5% of all couples experience recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL). Established risk factors include anatomical, genetic, endocrine, and hemostatic alterations. With around 50% of idiopathic cases, immunological risk factors are getting into the scientific focus, however international guidelines hardly take them into account. Within this review, the current state of immunological risk factors in RPL in international guidelines of the European Society of Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), German/Austrian/Swiss Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology (DGGG/OEGGG/SGGG) and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (RCOG) are evaluated. Special attention was drawn to recommendations in the guidelines regarding diagnostic factors such as autoantibodies, natural killer cells, regulatory T cells, dendritic cells, plasma cells, and human leukocyte antigen system (HLA)-sharing as well as treatment options such as corticosteroids, intralipids, intravenous immunoglobulins, aspirin and heparin in RPL. Finally, the current state of the art focusing on both diagnostic and therapeutic options was summarized.

A systemic review of intravenous immunoglobulin G treatment in women with recurrent implantation failures and recurrent pregnancy losses

Over the last few decades, the advancement in reproductive technologies and protocols to improve embryo quality through culture techniques and genetic testing to eliminate chromosomally abnormal embryos resulted in better pregnancy rates and outcomes after fertility treatments. Unfortunately, some patients still struggle with recurrent implantation failures (RIFs) and recurrent pregnancy losses (RPLs). Immune etiologies have been attributed to play an important role in some of those patients. Maintaining a pre-conceptional anti-inflammatory environment for implantation and pregnancy continuation yields superior results. Intravenous immunoglobulin G (IVIG) treatment has been reported to enhance reproductive outcome in patients with RIF and RPL with immune dysregulations. In this systemic review, we analyzed outcomes of IVIG trials for RIF and RPL, its mechanism of action, dosing, administration, side-effects, and evidence for its use in women with RIF and RPL.

Is there a Role of Intravenous Immunoglobulin in Immunologic Recurrent Pregnancy Loss?

Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) commonly refers to three or more miscarriages that occur before 20 weeks of pregnancy. The immunological cause of RPL could be either an auto- or alloimmune-related event or both. Because of the discovery of immunological abnormalities in RPL patients in clinical practice, several immunomodulatory therapies were introduced to maintain the immune balance at the maternal-fetal interface. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) is one of the immunomodulators. In recent years, several studies have analyzed the therapeutic effect of IVIg on RPL patients with antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) or unexplained RPL. However, their results are controversial. IVIg can be used in RPL patients with APS who have previously failed in other treatments. It is recommended that IVIg infusion could be considered used before conception in RPL patients who have cellular immune abnormalities such as increased natural killer (NK) cell counts, NK cell cytotoxicity, or increased T helper (Th)1/Th2 ratio, depending on the cut-off values of each hospital. The aim of this review was to summarize the mechanisms, efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and side effects associated with passive immunization using IVIg in immunologic RPL, according to the literature published in recent years. We hope that more obstetricians will be able to understand the timing and indication of IVIg properly in immunologic RPL patients and effectively enhance pregnancy outcomes for mothers and neonates.

Aspirin or heparin or both for improving pregnancy outcomes in women with persistent antiphospholipid antibodies and recurrent pregnancy loss

BACKGROUND

Aspirin and heparin are widely used as preventive strategy to reduce the high risk of recurrent pregnancy loss in women with antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL). This review supersedes a previous, out-of-date review that evaluated all potential therapies for preventing recurrent pregnancy loss in women with aPL. The current review focusses on a narrower scope because current clinical practice is restricted to using aspirin or heparins, or both for women with aPL in an attempt to reduce pregnancy complications.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of aspirin or heparin, or both for improving pregnancy outcomes in women with persistent (on two separate occasions) aPL, either lupus anticoagulant (LAC), anticardiolipin (aCL) or aβ₂-glycoprotein-I antibodies (aβ₂GPI) or a combination, and recurrent pregnancy loss (two or more, which do not have to be consecutive).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (3 June 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies. Where necessary, we attempted to contact trial authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised, cluster-randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials that assess the effects of aspirin, heparin (either low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) or unfractionated heparin (UFH]), or a combination of aspirin and heparin compared with no treatment, placebo or another, on pregnancy outcomes in women with persistent aPL and recurrent pregnancy loss were eligible. All treatment regimens were considered.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion criteria and risk of bias. Two review authors independently extracted data and checked them for accuracy and the certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven studies (1672 women) met the inclusion criteria; nine randomised controlled trials and two quasi-RCTs. The studies were conducted in the USA, Canada, UK, China, New Zealand, Iraq and Egypt. One included trial involved 1015 women, all other included trials had considerably lower numbers of participants (i.e. 141 women or fewer). Some studies had high risk of selection and attrition bias, and many did not include sufficient information to judge the risk of reporting bias. Overall, the certainty of evidence is low to very low due to the small numbers of women in the studies and to the risk of bias. The dose and type of heparin and aspirin varied among studies. One study compared aspirin alone with placebo; no studies compared heparin alone with placebo and there were no trials that had a no treatment comparator arm during pregnancy; five studies explored the efficacy of heparin (either UFH or LMWH) combined with aspirin compared with aspirin alone; one trial compared LMWH with aspirin; two trials compared the combination of LMWH plus aspirin with the combination of UFH plus aspirin; two studies evaluated the combination of different doses of heparin combined with aspirin. All trials used aspirin at a low dose. Aspirin versus placebo We are very uncertain if aspirin has any effect on live birth compared to placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 1.25, 1 trial, 40 women, very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain if aspirin has any effect on the risk of pre-eclampsia, pregnancy loss, preterm delivery of a live infant, intrauterine growth restriction or adverse events in the child, compared to placebo. We are very uncertain if aspirin has any effect on adverse events (bleeding) in the mother compared with placebo (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.77, 1 study, 40 women). The certainty of evidence for these outcomes is very low because of imprecision, due to the low numbers of women involved and the wide 95% CIs, and also because of risk of bias. Venous thromboembolism and arterial thromboembolism were not reported in the included studies. Heparin plus aspirin versus aspirin alone Heparin plus aspirin may increase the number of live births (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.49, 5 studies, 1295 women, low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if heparin plus aspirin has any effect on the risk of pre-eclampsia, preterm delivery of a live infant, or intrauterine growth restriction, compared with aspirin alone because of risk of bias and imprecision due to the low numbers of women involved and the wide 95% CIs. We are very uncertain if heparin plus aspirin has any effect on adverse events (bleeding) in the mother compared with aspirin alone (RR 1.65, 95% CI 0.19 to 14.03, 1 study, 31 women). No women in either the heparin plus aspirin group or the aspirin alone group had heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, allergic reactions, or venous or arterial thromboembolism. Similarly, no infants had congenital malformations. Heparin plus aspirin may reduce the risk of pregnancy loss (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.71, 5 studies, 1295 women, low-certainty evidence). When comparing LMWH plus aspirin versus aspirin alone the pooled RR for live birth was 1.20 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.38, 3 trials, 1155 women). In the comparison of UFH plus aspirin versus aspirin alone, the RR for live birth was 1.74 (95% CI 1.28 to 2.35, 2 trials, 140 women).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The combination of heparin (UFH or LMWH) plus aspirin during the course of pregnancy may increase live birth rate in women with persistent aPL when compared with aspirin treatment alone. The observed beneficial effect of heparin was driven by one large study in which LMWH plus aspirin was compared with aspirin alone. Adverse events were frequently not, or not uniformly, reported in the included studies. More research is needed in this area in order to further evaluate potential risks and benefits of this treatment strategy, especially among women with aPL and recurrent pregnancy loss, to gain consensus on the ideal prevention for recurrent pregnancy loss, based on a risk profile.

Treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin in patients with recurrent pregnancy loss: An update

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) has a documented clinical effect in many autoimmune diseases and has so far been tested in >10 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in women with recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL). The results of the RCTs have, however, been very divergent. In meta-analyses of all trials, no significant impact on live birth rate has been reported. In contrast, in sensitivity analyses, IVIg significantly increased live birth rates when initiated prior to conception and it had a borderline significant therapeutic effect in women with secondary RPL. Higher dosages of IVIg and serological signs of autoimmunity in the treated patients tended to increase the success rate after treatment. A follow-up study of patients from our recent RCT also supports a significant therapeutic effect in patients who had received IVIg before conception. The lessons learned from the published trials and meta-analyses should be incorporated in the design of future RCTs of IVIg in the treatment of RPL.

Care prior to and during subsequent pregnancies following stillbirth for improving outcomes

BACKGROUND

Stillbirth affects at least 2.6 million families worldwide every year and has enduring consequences for parents and health services. Parents entering a subsequent pregnancy following stillbirth face a risk of stillbirth recurrence, alongside increased risks of other adverse pregnancy outcomes and psychosocial challenges. These parents may benefit from a range of interventions to optimise their short- and longer-term medical health and psychosocial well-being.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of different interventions or models of care prior to and during subsequent pregnancies following stillbirth on maternal, fetal, neonatal and family health outcomes, and health service utilisation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (6 June 2018), along with ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (18 June 2018).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised controlled trials (qRCTs). Trials using a cluster-randomised design were eligible for inclusion, but we found no such reports. We included trials published as abstract only, provided sufficient information was available to allow assessment of trial eligibility and risk of bias. We excluded cross-over trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and undertook data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessments. We extracted data from published reports, or sourced data directly from trialists. We checked the data for accuracy and resolved discrepancies by discussion or correspondence with trialists, or both. We conducted an assessment of the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs and one qRCT, and judged them to be at low to moderate risk of bias. Trials were carried out between the years 1964 and 2015 and took place predominantly in high-income countries in Europe. All trials assessed medical interventions; no trials assessed psychosocial interventions or incorporated psychosocial aspects of care. Trials evaluated the use of antiplatelet agents (low-dose aspirin (LDA) or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), or both), third-party leukocyte immunisation, intravenous immunoglobulin, and progestogen. Trial participants were women who were either pregnant or attempting to conceive following a pregnancy loss, fetal death, or adverse outcome in a previous pregnancy.We extracted data for 222 women who had experienced a previous stillbirth of 20 weeks' gestation or more from the broader trial data sets, and included them in this review. Our GRADE assessments of the quality of evidence ranged from very low to low, due largely to serious imprecision in effect estimates as a result of small sample sizes, low numbers of events, and wide confidence intervals (CIs) crossing the line of no effect. Most of the analyses in this review were not sufficiently powered to detect differences in the outcomes assessed. The results presented are therefore largely uncertain.Main comparisonsLMWH versus no treatment/standard care (three RCTs, 123 women, depending on the outcome)It was uncertain whether LMWH reduced the risk of stillbirth (risk ratio (RR) 2.58, 95% CI 0.40 to 16.62; 3 trials; 122 participants; low-quality evidence), adverse perinatal outcome (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.20 to 3.32; 2 trials; 77 participants; low-quality evidence), adverse maternal psychological effects (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.07 to 14.90; 1 trial; 40 participants; very low-quality evidence), perinatal mortality (RR 2.58, 95% CI 0.40 to 16.62; 3 trials; 122 participants; low-quality evidence), or any preterm birth (< 37 weeks) (RR 1.01, 0.58 to 1.74; 3 trials; 114 participants; low-quality evidence). No neonatal deaths were reported in the trials assessed and no data were available for maternal-infant attachment. There was no clear evidence of a difference between the groups among the remaining secondary outcomes.LDA versus placebo (one RCT, 24 women)It was uncertain whether LDA reduced the risk of stillbirth (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.06 to 12.01), neonatal death (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.01 to 6.38), adverse perinatal outcome (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.34), perinatal mortality, or any preterm birth (< 37 weeks) (both of the latter RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.06; all very low-quality evidence). No data were available for adverse maternal psychological effects or maternal-infant attachment. LDA appeared to be associated with an increase in birthweight (mean difference (MD) 790.00 g, 95% CI 295.03 to 1284.97 g) when compared to placebo, but this result was very unstable due to the extremely small sample size. Whether LDA has any effect on the remaining secondary outcomes was also uncertain.Other comparisonsLDA appeared to be associated with an increase in birthweight when compared to LDA + LMWH (MD -650.00 g, 95% CI -1210.33 to -89.67 g; 1 trial; 29 infants), as did third-party leukocyte immunisation when compared to placebo (MD 1195.00 g, 95% CI 273.35 to 2116.65 g; 1 trial, 4 infants), but these results were again very unstable due to extremely small sample sizes. The effects of the interventions on the remaining outcomes were also uncertain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence in this review to inform clinical practice about the effectiveness of interventions to improve care prior to and during subsequent pregnancies following a stillbirth. There is a clear and urgent need for well-designed trials addressing this research question. The evaluation of medical interventions such as LDA, in the specific context of stillbirth prevention (and recurrent stillbirth prevention), is warranted. However, appropriate methodologies to evaluate such therapies need to be determined, particularly where clinical equipoise may be lacking. Careful trial design and multicentre collaboration is necessary to carry out trials that would be sufficiently large to detect differences in statistically rare outcomes such as stillbirth and neonatal death. The evaluation of psychosocial interventions addressing maternal-fetal attachment and parental anxiety and depression is also an urgent priority. In a randomised-trial context, such trials may allocate parents to different forms of support, to determine which have the greatest benefit with the least financial cost. Importantly, consistency in nomenclature and in data collection across all future trials (randomised and non-randomised) may be facilitated by a core outcomes data set for stillbirth research. All future trials should assess short- and longer-term psychosocial outcomes for parents and families, alongside economic costs of interventions.

The Effects of Intravenous Immunoglobulins in Women with Recurrent Miscarriages: A Systematic Review of Randomised Trials with Meta-Analyses and Trial Sequential Analyses Including Individual Patient Data

BACKGROUND

Immunological disturbances are hypothesised to play a role in recurrent miscarriage (RM) and therefore intravenous immunoglubulins (IVIg) have been tested in RM patients.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to investigate the benefits and harms of IVIg versus placebo, no intervention, or treatment as usual in women with RM.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the published literature in all relevant databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials investigating IVIg versus placebo, no intervention, or treatment as usual in women with RM.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We undertook meta-analyses of aggregated data and individual patient data using a two-step approach, and we conducted bias domain assessments and trial sequential analyses to assess the risks of systematic and random errors.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 11 randomised clinical trials. No significant difference in the frequency of no live birth was found when IVIg was compared with placebo or treatment as usual (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.75-1.12, p = 0.42). Trial sequential analysis showed that the required information size of 1,008 participants was not obtained. IVIg compared with placebo seems to increase the risk of adverse events. Subgroup analysis suggests that women with RM after a birth (secondary RM) seemed most likely to obtain a potential beneficial effect of IVIg (RR for no live birth 0.77, 95%CI 0.58-1.02, p = 0.06), however, trial sequential analysis showed that insufficient information is presently accrued.

CONCLUSION

We cannot recommend or refute IVIg in women with RM. IVIg should therefore be assessed in further randomised clinical trials with positive outcomes before any clinical use is considered.

Immunotherapy for recurrent miscarriage

BACKGROUND

Because immunological aberrations might be the cause of miscarriage in some women, several immunotherapies have been used to treat women with otherwise unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effects of any immunotherapy, including paternal leukocyte immunization and intravenous immunoglobulin on the live birth rate in women with previous unexplained recurrent miscarriages.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (11 February 2014) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials of immunotherapies used to treat women with three or more prior miscarriages and no more than one live birth after, in whom all recognized non-immunologic causes of recurrent miscarriage had been ruled out and no simultaneous treatment was given.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The review author and the two co-authors independently extracted data and assessed study quality for all studies considered for this review.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty trials of high quality were included. The various forms of immunotherapy did not show significant differences between treatment and control groups in terms of subsequent live births: paternal cell immunization (12 trials, 641 women), Peto odds ratio (Peto OR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.70; third-party donor cell immunization (three trials, 156 women), Peto OR 1.39, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.82; trophoblast membrane infusion (one trial, 37 women), Peto OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.45; or intravenous immunoglobulin, (eight trials, 303 women), Peto OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.58.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Paternal cell immunization, third-party donor leukocytes, trophoblast membranes, and intravenous immunoglobulin provide no significant beneficial effect over placebo in improving the live birth rate.

Butyrylcholinesterase activity and lymphocyte subpopulations in peripheral blood of Kuwaiti women experiencing recurrent spontaneous abortion

This study has evaluated the hypothesis that activity of the detoxifying enzyme butyrylcholinesterase (BuChE) correlates with levels of serum anti-cardiolipin antibodies (ACA) and T lymphocytes in peripheral blood of women experiencing recurrent spontaneous abortion (RSA). Peripheral venous blood from 16 non-pregnant, RSA-afflicted women and 8 healthy non-pregnant women was analyzed for frequency of T lymphocyte subpopulations by two-color flow cytometry and for serum BuChE using butyrylthiocholine iodide/spectrophotometry. RSA-afflicted women with high serum ACA, but not those with normal ACA levels, exhibited significantly increased percentages of CD4+CD25+ cells (p<0.01) and CD4+HLA-DR+ cells (p<0.05) relative to healthy women. CD4+CD25+(high) cells were significantly lower (p<0.05), while CD4+CD25+(low) cells were significantly higher (p<0.01), in women with elevated ACA compared to healthy women and to RSA women with normal ACA. Relative to healthy, non-pregnant subjects, serum BuChE activity in RSA patients was elevated, both for those with normal ACA (p<0.001) and elevated ACA levels (p<0.01). Among healthy controls, a significant positive correlation was observed between frequency of CD3+NK cells and BuChE activity (p<0.01), but not for RSA-afflicted subjects. A positive correlation between BuChE activity and frequency of CD4+CD25+ cells, as well as CD4+CD25+(high) cells, was observed in the RSA-afflicted subject group with elevated ACA (p<0.05), which may be related to induction of BuChE by toxic metabolites resulting from pathogenic T cell activity. It is concluded that, among RSA patients, high serum ACA correlates with elevated levels of activated T cells and reduced CD4+CD25+(high)/CD4+CD25+(low) cells in comparison to healthy women or those afflicted with RSA but with normal ACA. BuChE activity is observed to be elevated in RSA patients irrespective of serum ACA status.

Immunotherapy for recurrent miscarriage

BACKGROUND

Because immunological aberrations might be the cause of miscarriage in some women, several immunotherapies have been used to treat women with otherwise unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to assess the effects of any immunotherapy, including paternal leukocyte immunization and intravenous immune globulin on the live birth rate in women with previous unexplained recurrent miscarriages.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (December 2005), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2004, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1966 to September 2004) and EMBASE (1980 to September 2004).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized trials of immunotherapies used to treat women with three or more prior miscarriages and no more than one live birth after, in whom all recognised non-immunologic causes of recurrent miscarriage had been ruled out and no simultaneous treatment was given.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The review author and the two co-authors independently extracted data and assessed study quality for all studies considered for this review.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty trials of high quality were included. The various forms of immunotherapy did not show significant differences between treatment and control groups in terms of subsequent live births: paternal cell immunization (12 trials, 641 women), Peto odds ratio (Peto OR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.70; third party donor cell immunization (three trials, 156 women), Peto OR 1.39, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.82; trophoblast membrane infusion (one trial, 37 women), Peto OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.45; intravenous immune globulin, Peto OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.58.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Paternal cell immunization, third party donor leukocytes, trophoblast membranes, and intravenous immune globulin provide no significant beneficial effect over placebo in improving the live birth rate.

Association of selected phenotypic markers of lymphocyte activation and differentiation with perinatal human immunodeficiency virus transmission and infant infection

This study of a subset of women and infants participating in National Institutes of Health Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group protocol 185 evaluated lymphocyte phenotypic markers of immune activation and differentiation to determine their association with the likelihood of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission from the women to their infants and the potential for early identification and/or prognosis of infection in the infants. Lymphocytes from 215 human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV)-infected women and 192 of their infants were analyzed by flow cytometry with an extended three-color panel of monoclonal antibodies. Women who did not transmit to their infants tended to have higher CD4+ T cells. Most notably, levels of total CD8+ T cells and CD8+ CD38+ cells made significant independent contributions to predicting the risk of mother-to-child transmission. Adjusting for HIV-1 RNA level at entry, a one percentage-point increase in these marker combinations was associated with a nine percent increase in the likelihood of maternal transmission. Total as well as naive CD4+ T cells were significantly higher in uninfected than infected infants. Total CD8+ cells, as well as CD8+ cells positive for HLA-DR+, CD45 RA+ HLA-DR+, and CD28+ HLA-DR+ were elevated in infected infants. Detailed immunophenotyping may be helpful in predicting which pregnant HIV-infected women are at increased risk of transmitting HIV to their infants. Increasing differences in lymphocyte subsets between infected and uninfected infants became apparent as early as six weeks of age. Detailed immunophenotyping may be useful in supporting the diagnosis of HIV infection in infants with perinatal HIV exposure.

Prevention of recurrent miscarriage for women with antiphospholipid antibody or lupus anticoagulant

BACKGROUND

A range of treatments have been proposed to improve pregnancy outcome in recurrent pregnancy loss associated with antiphospholipid antibody (APL). Small studies have not resolved uncertainty about benefits and risks.

OBJECTIVES

To examine outcomes of all treatments given to maintain pregnancy in women with prior miscarriage and APL.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 May 2004), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2003), MEDLINE (1966 to June 2003), EMBASE (1988 to June 2003), Lupus (volume one to eight, 1991 to 1999) and conference proceedings from the International Symposium on APL up to 1999.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised, controlled trials of interventions in pregnant women with a history of pregnancy loss and APL.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed quality and extracted data for studies up to December 1999. One review author performed this for studies after 1999.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen studies were found (849 participants). The quality was not high; 50% had clear evidence of allocation concealment. Participant characteristics varied between trials. Unfractionated heparin combined with aspirin (two trials; n = 140) significantly reduced pregnancy loss compared to aspirin alone (relative risk (RR) 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 0.71). Low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) combined with aspirin compared to aspirin (one trial; n = 98) did not significantly reduce pregnancy loss (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.57). There was no advantage in high-dose, over low-dose, unfractionated heparin (one trial; n = 50). Three trials of aspirin alone (n = 135) showed no significant reduction in pregnancy loss (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.68). Prednisone and aspirin (three trials; n = 286) resulted in a significant increase in prematurity when compared to placebo, aspirin, and heparin combined with aspirin, and an increase in gestational diabetes, but no significant benefit. Intravenous immunoglobulin +/- unfractionated heparin and aspirin (two trials; n = 58) was associated with an increased risk of pregnancy loss or premature birth when compared to unfractionated heparin or LMWH combined with aspirin (RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.27 to 4.95). When compared to prednisone and aspirin, intravenous immunoglobulin (one trial; n = 82) was not significantly different in outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Combined unfractionated heparin and aspirin may reduce pregnancy loss by 54%. Large, randomised controlled trials with adequate allocation concealment are needed to explore potential differences between unfractionated heparin and LMWH.