Suppr超能文献

孕期药物使用风险分类系统:它们是可靠的信息来源吗?

Risk classification systems for drug use during pregnancy: are they a reliable source of information?

作者信息

Addis A, Sharabi S, Bonati M

机构信息

The Regional Drug Information (C.R.I.F), Laboratory for Mother and Child Health, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri, Milano, Italy.

出版信息

Drug Saf. 2000 Sep;23(3):245-53. doi: 10.2165/00002018-200023030-00006.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In several countries, risk classification systems have been set up to summarise the sparse data on drug safety during pregnancy. However, these have resulted in ambiguous statements that are often difficult to interpret and use with accuracy when counselling patients on drug use in pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to compare and analyse the consistency between and the criteria for risk classification for medications used during pregnancy included in 3 widely used international risk classification systems. All 3 systems use categories based on risk factors to summarise the degree to which available clinical information has ruled out the risk to unborn offspring, balanced against the drug's potential benefit to the patient.

METHODS

Drugs included in the risk classification systems from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Australian Drug Evaluation Committee (ADEC) and the Swedish Catalogue of Approved Drugs (FASS), were reviewed and compared on basis of the risk factor category to which they had been assigned. Agreement between the systems was calculated as the number of drugs common to all 3 and assigned to the same risk factor category. In addition, evidence on teratogenicity and adverse effects during pregnancy was retrieved using a MEDLINE search (from 1966 up to 1998) for common drugs classified as teratogenic.

RESULTS

Differences in the allocation of drugs to different risk factor categories were found. Risk factor category allocation for 645 drugs classified by the FDA, 446 classified by ADEC and 527 classified by FASS was compared. Only 61 (26%) of the 236 drugs common to all 3 systems were placed in the same risk factor category. Analysis of studies on the safety of common drugs during pregnancy of drugs classified as X by the FDA indicated that the variability in category allocation was not only attributable to the different definitions for the categories, but also depended on how the available scientific literature was handled.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in category allocation for the same drug can be a source of great confusion among users of the classification systems as well as for those who require information regarding risk for drug use during pregnancy, and may limit the usefulness and reliability of risk classification systems.

摘要

背景

在一些国家,已建立风险分类系统来汇总孕期药物安全性方面的稀少数据。然而,这些系统得出的表述模糊,在为患者提供孕期用药咨询时,往往难以准确解读和使用。

目的

本研究的目的是比较和分析3个广泛使用的国际风险分类系统中孕期用药风险分类的标准及一致性。所有这3个系统都使用基于风险因素的类别来汇总现有临床信息排除对未出生后代风险的程度,并权衡药物对患者的潜在益处。

方法

对美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)、澳大利亚药物评估委员会(ADEC)和瑞典批准药物目录(FASS)风险分类系统中的药物,根据其被指定的风险因素类别进行审查和比较。系统之间的一致性通过所有3个系统共有的且被指定到相同风险因素类别的药物数量来计算。此外,使用MEDLINE检索(从1966年至1998年)常见的被分类为致畸药物,获取孕期致畸性和不良反应的证据。

结果

发现不同药物被分配到不同风险因素类别的差异。比较了FDA分类的645种药物、ADEC分类的446种药物和FASS分类的527种药物的风险因素类别分配情况。在所有3个系统共有的236种药物中,只有61种(26%)被归到相同的风险因素类别。对FDA分类为X类的常见药物孕期安全性研究的分析表明,类别分配的差异不仅归因于类别的不同定义,还取决于现有科学文献的处理方式。

结论

同一药物在类别分配上的差异可能会给分类系统的使用者以及需要了解孕期用药风险信息的人带来极大困惑,并可能限制风险分类系统的实用性和可靠性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验