A Benefit–Risk Conceptual Framework for Biologic Use During Pregnancy: A Mini‐Review

• Published in: Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics Vol. 115; no. 6; pp. 1251 - 1257
• Main Authors: Bozzi, Laura M., Jacobson, Melanie H., Yost, Emily, Sheahan, Anna, Cafone, Joseph, Komatsu, Yosuke, Schwartz, Lisa, Levitan, Bennett, Nelson, Robert M.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.06.2024
• Subjects: Biological Products - adverse effects; Biological Products - therapeutic use; Female; Humans; Immunosuppressive Agents - adverse effects; Immunosuppressive Agents - therapeutic use; Pregnancy; Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects - prevention & control; Risk Assessment; Vaccination - adverse effects
• ISSN: 0009-9236; 1532-6535
• DOI: 10.1002/cpt.3239

Recent reports related to in utero exposure of marketed immunosuppressive biologics led to clinical recommendations to delay live vaccinations for infants due to the concern of reduced vaccine effectiveness and/or increased risk of vaccine‐related disease. These delays can increase the risk of children contracting vaccine preventable diseases, yet the alternative cessation of biologics during pregnancy may result in increased autoimmune disease activity for the pregnant person, raising complex benefit–risk (B‐R) considerations and trade‐offs. Our goal is to develop a conceptual framework for B‐R assessment based on the key benefits and risks pregnant people would consider for themselves and their children when continuing (vs. discontinuing) a biologic during pregnancy. The proposed framework defines the decision contexts, key domains and attributes for potential benefits, and risks of biologic use during pregnancy, informed by a literature review of indications for biologics and refined with key clinical stakeholders. The framework includes both the pregnant person taking the biologic and the infant potentially exposed to the biologic in utero, with potential benefit and risk domains and attributes for each participant. To advance this conceptual framework, there are considerations of potential biases and uncertainty of available data that will be imperative to address when quantifying the B‐R framework. For these reasons, we recommend the formation of a consortium to ensure development of a robust, validated framework that can be adopted in the healthcare setting.