Am J Reprod Immunol. 1994 Sep;32(2):55-72.
Recurrent spontaneous abortion (RSA) is a common complication of pregnancy for which there is no known cure. Therefore, effective treatment is needed. Published results from controlled clinical trials of allogeneic leukocyte immunization of women suffering from RSA have given conflicting results. To address this controversy, the international raw data of all patients who had been entered into clinical trials that included a control group were collected and analyzed. The primary question to be answered was whether alloimmune stimulation of the female partner improves the subsequent live birth rate.
Fifteen clinical centers were identified worldwide because they controlled appropriate raw data. Consequently, nine randomized trials (seven double-blinded) were evaluated independently by two separate data analysis teams to assure conclusions were robust. One team also compared randomized trials to the results of six nonrandomized cohort-controlled studies to test for bias in nonrandomized trials. Factors predicting successful live births among couples with RSA were evaluated by logistic regression.
Although the two independent analyses made use of different definitions and utilized different statistical methods, the results of both were similar. The live births ratios (ratio of live births in treatment and control groups) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were 1.16 (CI, 1.01-1.34, P = 0.031) and 1.21 (CI, 1.04-1.37, P = 0.024), respectively. The absolute differences in live birth rates between treatment and control groups were 8% and 10% in respective analyses. Results in randomized and nonrandomized trials were surprisingly similar despite significant differences in composition of control and treatment groups. Live birth rates were lower with older female partners, more than five abortions, with a positive ANA or with positive anticardiolipin antibodies. Live birth rates were higher if the female partner had prior to treatment serum antibodies to paternal leukocytes or converted from negative to positive with immunization. Approximately 0.5% of controls and 2.1% of treated patients experience side effects for a 1.6% treatment related effect. There was no evidence of an increased risk of adverse effects on the fetus.
Two independent analyses of worldwide data on allogeneic leukocyte immunization for treatment of RSA suggest that alloimmunization may be an effective treatment The treatment effect appears, however, to be small, and the data indicate that immunotherapy helps only 8% to 10% of affected couples. A current lack of diagnostic tests defining patients who most likely would benefit from immunotherapy, precludes the identification of a patient population that would benefit most from such treatment. The efficacy of treatment in such a subgroup could be expected to increase and could be of sufficient magnitude to allow the determination of more effective immunization protocols. This study does not exclude the possibility of a partial correction of a widely prevalent immunology defect by immunotherapy. The presence of such a defect would indicate a need for more effective therapy. The unexplained variation in pregnancy success rates of control groups among centers continues to present a statistical problem, limiting the statistical evaluation of retroactively obtained data.
复发性自然流产(RSA)是一种常见的妊娠并发症,目前尚无已知的治愈方法。因此,需要有效的治疗方法。已发表的关于对患有RSA的女性进行同种异体白细胞免疫的对照临床试验结果相互矛盾。为了解决这一争议,收集并分析了所有纳入包含对照组的临床试验的患者的国际原始数据。需要回答的主要问题是,对女性伴侣进行同种免疫刺激是否能提高随后的活产率。
在全球范围内确定了15个临床中心,因为它们掌握了合适的原始数据。因此,由两个独立的数据分析团队对9项随机试验(7项双盲试验)进行了独立评估,以确保结论的可靠性。一个团队还将随机试验与6项非随机队列对照研究的结果进行了比较,以检验非随机试验中的偏差。通过逻辑回归评估预测RSA夫妇成功活产的因素。
尽管两项独立分析使用了不同的定义并采用了不同的统计方法,但两者结果相似。治疗组与对照组的活产率之比(治疗组与对照组活产数之比)及其95%置信区间(CI)分别为1.16(CI,1.01 - 1.34,P = 0.031)和1.21(CI,1.04 - 1.37,P = 0.024)。在各自的分析中,治疗组与对照组活产率的绝对差异分别为8%和10%。尽管对照组和治疗组的组成存在显著差异,但随机试验和非随机试验的结果惊人地相似。女性伴侣年龄较大、流产超过5次、抗核抗体(ANA)阳性或抗心磷脂抗体阳性时,活产率较低。如果女性伴侣在治疗前有针对父系白细胞的血清抗体或免疫后从阴性转为阳性,则活产率较高。对照组约0.5%的患者和治疗组2.1%的患者出现副作用,治疗相关效应为1.6%。没有证据表明对胎儿有不良影响的风险增加。
对全球范围内用于治疗RSA的同种异体白细胞免疫数据进行的两项独立分析表明,同种免疫可能是一种有效的治疗方法。然而,治疗效果似乎较小,数据表明免疫疗法仅对8%至10%的受影响夫妇有帮助。目前缺乏能够确定最有可能从免疫疗法中受益的患者的诊断测试,这使得无法确定最能从这种治疗中受益的患者群体。预计在这样一个亚组中治疗效果会增加,并且可能达到足以确定更有效免疫方案的程度。本研究不排除通过免疫疗法部分纠正广泛存在的免疫缺陷的可能性。这种缺陷的存在将表明需要更有效的治疗方法。各中心对照组妊娠成功率的 unexplained variation 继续带来一个统计问题,限制了对追溯获得的数据的统计评估。 (注:“unexplained variation”直译为“无法解释的变异”,此处结合语境推测可能是指“不明原因的差异”之类的意思,但因原文未明确,所以保留英文。)