Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Trials 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Research

Fair inclusion of pregnant women in clinical trials: an integrated scientific and ethical approach

Authors: Rieke van der Graaf, Indira S. E. van der Zande, Hester M. den Ruijter, Martijn A. Oudijk, Johannes J. M. van Delden, Katrien Oude Rengerink, Rolf H. H. Groenwold

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Since pregnant women are severely underrepresented in clinical research, many take the position that the exclusion of pregnant women from research must be justified unless there are compelling “scientific reasons” for their exclusion. However, it is questionable whether this approach renders research with pregnant women fair. This paper analyzes and evaluates when research with pregnant women can be considered as fair and what constitutes scientific reasons for exclusion.

Methods

Conceptual ethical and methodological analysis and evaluation of fair inclusion.

Results

Fair inclusion of pregnant women means (1) that pregnant women who are eligible are not excluded solely for being pregnant and (2) that the research interests of pregnant women are prioritized, meaning that they ought to receive substantially more attention. Fairness does not imply that pregnant women should be included in virtually every research project, as including only a few pregnant women in a population consisting only of women will not help to determine the effectiveness and safety of a treatment in pregnant women. Separate trials in pregnant women may be preferable once we assume, or know, that effects of interventions in pregnant women differ from the effects in other subpopulations, or when we assume, or know, that there are no differences. In the latter case, it may be preferable to conduct post-marketing studies or establish registries. If there is no conclusive evidence indicating either differences or equivalence of effects between pregnant and non-pregnant women, yet it seems unlikely that major differences or exact equivalence exist, the inclusion of pregnant women should be sufficient. Depending on the research question, this boils down to representativeness in terms of the proportion of pregnant and non-pregnant women, or to oversampling pregnant women.

Conclusions

Fair inclusion of pregnant women in research implies that separate trials in pregnant women should be promoted. Inclusion of pregnant women has to be realized at the earliest phases of the research process. In addition to researchers and research ethics committees, scientific advisory councils, funders, drug regulatory agencies, pharmaceutical companies, journal editors and others have a joint responsibility to further develop the evidence base for drug use in pregnant women.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Chambers CD, Polifka JE, Friedman JM. Drug safety in pregnant women and their babies: ignorance not bliss. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2008;83:181–3.CrossRefPubMed Chambers CD, Polifka JE, Friedman JM. Drug safety in pregnant women and their babies: ignorance not bliss. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2008;83:181–3.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Andrade SE, Gurwitz JH, Davis RL, Chan KA, Finkelstein JA, Fortman K, et al. Prescription drug use in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:398–407.CrossRefPubMed Andrade SE, Gurwitz JH, Davis RL, Chan KA, Finkelstein JA, Fortman K, et al. Prescription drug use in pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:398–407.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Mitchell AA, Gilboa SM, Werler MM, Kelley KE, Louik C, Hernández-Díaz S. Medication use during pregnancy, with particular focus on prescription drugs: 1976–2008. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205:51. e1-51.e8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Mitchell AA, Gilboa SM, Werler MM, Kelley KE, Louik C, Hernández-Díaz S. Medication use during pregnancy, with particular focus on prescription drugs: 1976–2008. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;205:51. e1-51.e8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Lupattelli A, Spigset O, Twigg MJ, Zagorodnikova K, Mårdby AC, Moretti ME, et al. Medication use in pregnancy: a cross-sectional, multinational web-based study. BMJ Open. 2014;4:e004365.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lupattelli A, Spigset O, Twigg MJ, Zagorodnikova K, Mårdby AC, Moretti ME, et al. Medication use in pregnancy: a cross-sectional, multinational web-based study. BMJ Open. 2014;4:e004365.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
go back to reference Noah BA. The inclusion of pregnant women in clinical research. 2014. Noah BA. The inclusion of pregnant women in clinical research. 2014.
6.
go back to reference Parisi MA, Spong CY, Zajicek A, Guttmacher AE. We don’t know what we don’t study: the case for research on medication effects in pregnancy. Am J Med Genet Part C Semin Med Genet. 2011;157C(3):247–50.CrossRefPubMed Parisi MA, Spong CY, Zajicek A, Guttmacher AE. We don’t know what we don’t study: the case for research on medication effects in pregnancy. Am J Med Genet Part C Semin Med Genet. 2011;157C(3):247–50.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Blehar MC, Spong C, Grady C, Goldkind SF, Sahin L, Clayton JA. Enrolling pregnant women: issues in clinical research. Women’s Heal Issues. 2013;23:e39–45.CrossRef Blehar MC, Spong C, Grady C, Goldkind SF, Sahin L, Clayton JA. Enrolling pregnant women: issues in clinical research. Women’s Heal Issues. 2013;23:e39–45.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Lyerly AD, Little MO, Faden R. The second wave: toward responsible inclusion of pregnant women in research. Int J Fem Approaches Bioeth. 2008;1:5–22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lyerly AD, Little MO, Faden R. The second wave: toward responsible inclusion of pregnant women in research. Int J Fem Approaches Bioeth. 2008;1:5–22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Kennedy Institute of Ethics. Institute news: The Second Wave Workshop: toward the responsible inclusion of pregnant women in medical research. 2009. Kennedy Institute of Ethics. Institute news: The Second Wave Workshop: toward the responsible inclusion of pregnant women in medical research. 2009.
11.
go back to reference Little BB. Pharmacokinetics during pregnancy: evidence-based maternal dose formulation. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;93(5 Pt 2):858–68.PubMed Little BB. Pharmacokinetics during pregnancy: evidence-based maternal dose formulation. Obstet Gynecol. 1999;93(5 Pt 2):858–68.PubMed
12.
go back to reference CIOMS. International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects, Geneva, 1993 and 2002; and International ethical guidelines for health-related research involving humans, Geneva. 2016. CIOMS. International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects, Geneva, 1993 and 2002; and International ethical guidelines for health-related research involving humans, Geneva. 2016.
13.
go back to reference Sheffield JS, Siegel D, Mirochnick M, Heine RP, Nguyen C, Bergman KL, et al. Designing drug trials: considerations for pregnant women. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;59:S437–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Sheffield JS, Siegel D, Mirochnick M, Heine RP, Nguyen C, Bergman KL, et al. Designing drug trials: considerations for pregnant women. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;59:S437–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Haas DM, Gallauresi B, Shields K, Zeitlin D, Clark SM, Hebert MF, et al. Pharmacotherapy and pregnancy: highlights from the third international conference for individualized pharmacotherapy in pregnancy. Clin Transl Sci. 2011;4:204–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Haas DM, Gallauresi B, Shields K, Zeitlin D, Clark SM, Hebert MF, et al. Pharmacotherapy and pregnancy: highlights from the third international conference for individualized pharmacotherapy in pregnancy. Clin Transl Sci. 2011;4:204–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Saint-Raymond A, de Vries C. Medicine safety in pregnancy and ambitions for the EU medicine regulatory framework. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2016;100:21–3.CrossRefPubMed Saint-Raymond A, de Vries C. Medicine safety in pregnancy and ambitions for the EU medicine regulatory framework. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2016;100:21–3.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Mastroianni AC, Faden R, Federman D, editors. Women and health research. Washington: National Academies Press; 1994. Mastroianni AC, Faden R, Federman D, editors. Women and health research. Washington: National Academies Press; 1994.
19.
go back to reference Shields KE, Lyerly AD. Exclusion of pregnant women from industry-sponsored clinical trials. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122:1077–81.CrossRefPubMed Shields KE, Lyerly AD. Exclusion of pregnant women from industry-sponsored clinical trials. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;122:1077–81.CrossRefPubMed
20.
22.
go back to reference Adam MP, Polifka JE, Friedman JM. Evolving knowledge of the teratogenicity of medications in human pregnancy. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2011;157C:175–82.CrossRefPubMed Adam MP, Polifka JE, Friedman JM. Evolving knowledge of the teratogenicity of medications in human pregnancy. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2011;157C:175–82.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference van der Zande ISE, van der Graaf R, Browne JL, van Delden JJM. Fair inclusion of pregnant women in clinical research: a systematic review of reported reasons for exclusion. In: Baylis F, Ballantyne A, editors. Clinical Research Involving Pregnant Women. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. 2016. p. 65–94. van der Zande ISE, van der Graaf R, Browne JL, van Delden JJM. Fair inclusion of pregnant women in clinical research: a systematic review of reported reasons for exclusion. In: Baylis F, Ballantyne A, editors. Clinical Research Involving Pregnant Women. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. 2016. p. 65–94.
24.
go back to reference Levine RJ. IRB perspective on inclusion of pregnant women in clinical research. ORWH Work. Enrolling pregnant women. Issues Clin Res. An ORWH 20th Anniversary Event. Bethesda: National Institutes of Health; 2011. p. 37–43. Levine RJ. IRB perspective on inclusion of pregnant women in clinical research. ORWH Work. Enrolling pregnant women. Issues Clin Res. An ORWH 20th Anniversary Event. Bethesda: National Institutes of Health; 2011. p. 37–43.
25.
26.
go back to reference Foulkes MA, Grady C, Spong CY, Bates A, Clayton JA. Clinical research enrolling pregnant women: a workshop summary. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2011;20:1429–32.CrossRef Foulkes MA, Grady C, Spong CY, Bates A, Clayton JA. Clinical research enrolling pregnant women: a workshop summary. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2011;20:1429–32.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS). International Ethical Guidelines for Health-related Research Involving Humans. Geneva, CIOMS. 2016. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS). International Ethical Guidelines for Health-related Research Involving Humans. Geneva, CIOMS. 2016.
28.
go back to reference UN Joint Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). Ethical Considerations in Biomedical HIV Prevention Trials. 2007. UN Joint Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS). Ethical Considerations in Biomedical HIV Prevention Trials. 2007.
30.
31.
go back to reference Langston L. Better safe than sorry: risk, stigma and research during pregnancy. In: Baylis F, Ballantyne A, editors. Clinical Research Involving Pregnant Women. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016. p. 1–8. Langston L. Better safe than sorry: risk, stigma and research during pregnancy. In: Baylis F, Ballantyne A, editors. Clinical Research Involving Pregnant Women. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016. p. 1–8.
32.
go back to reference van der Graaf R, Groenwold Rolf HH, Kalkman S, Grobbee Diederick E, Van Delden JJM. From justifying inclusion to justifying exclusion of study populations: strengths and limitations. World Med J. 2013;59:192. van der Graaf R, Groenwold Rolf HH, Kalkman S, Grobbee Diederick E, Van Delden JJM. From justifying inclusion to justifying exclusion of study populations: strengths and limitations. World Med J. 2013;59:192.
33.
go back to reference Kaposky C. Presumptive inclusion and legitimate exclusion criteria. In: F Baylis, A Ballantyne, editors. Clinical Research Involving Pregnant Women. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2016. 51–64. Kaposky C. Presumptive inclusion and legitimate exclusion criteria. In: F Baylis, A Ballantyne, editors. Clinical Research Involving Pregnant Women. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2016. 51–64.
34.
go back to reference Halperin SA. Research involving pregnant women: trials and tribulations. Clin Investig. 2012;2(2):139–46. Halperin SA. Research involving pregnant women: trials and tribulations. Clin Investig. 2012;2(2):139–46.
35.
go back to reference Ballantyne A, Rogers W. Pregnancy, vulnerability, and the risk of exploitation in clinical research. In: Baylis F, Ballantyne A, editors. Clinical Research Involving Pregnant Women. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016. Ballantyne A, Rogers W. Pregnancy, vulnerability, and the risk of exploitation in clinical research. In: Baylis F, Ballantyne A, editors. Clinical Research Involving Pregnant Women. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016.
38.
go back to reference van der Zande ISE, van der Graaf R, Oudijk MA, van Delden JJM. A qualitative study on acceptable levels of risk for pregnant women in clinical research. BMC Med Ethics. 2017;18:35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral van der Zande ISE, van der Graaf R, Oudijk MA, van Delden JJM. A qualitative study on acceptable levels of risk for pregnant women in clinical research. BMC Med Ethics. 2017;18:35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
39.
go back to reference Schmidt AF, Groenwold RHH, van Delden JJM, van der Does Y, Klungel OH, Roes KCB, et al. Justification of exclusion criteria was underreported in a review of cardiovascular trials. J Clin Epidemiol Elsevier Inc. 2014;67:635–44.CrossRef Schmidt AF, Groenwold RHH, van Delden JJM, van der Does Y, Klungel OH, Roes KCB, et al. Justification of exclusion criteria was underreported in a review of cardiovascular trials. J Clin Epidemiol Elsevier Inc. 2014;67:635–44.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Fair inclusion of pregnant women in clinical trials: an integrated scientific and ethical approach
Authors
Rieke van der Graaf
Indira S. E. van der Zande
Hester M. den Ruijter
Martijn A. Oudijk
Johannes J. M. van Delden
Katrien Oude Rengerink
Rolf H. H. Groenwold
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-017-2402-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Trials 1/2018 Go to the issue