BACKGROUND Information regarding the possible influence of immunosuppressive drugs on male sexual function and reproductive outcomes is scarce. Men diagnosed with immune-mediated diseases and a wish to become a father represent an important neglected population since they lack vital information to make balanced decisions about their treatment. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE The aim of this research was to systematically review the literature for the influence of paternal immunosuppressive drug use on many aspects of male sexual health, such as sexual function, fertility, pregnancy outcomes and offspring health outcomes. SEARCH METHODS A systematic literature search was performed in the bibliographic databases: Embase (via Elsevier embase.com), MEDLINE ALL via Ovid, Cochrane Central Register of Trials (via Wiley) and Web of Science Core Collection. Additionally, Google Scholar and the Clinical trial registries of Europe and the USA were searched. The databases were searched from inception until 31 August 2019. The searches combined keywords regarding male sexual function and fertility, pregnancy outcomes and offspring health with a list of immunosuppressive drugs. Studies were included if they were published in English and if they included original data on male human exposure to immunosuppressive drugs. A meta-analysis was not possible to perform due to the heterogeneity of the data. OUTCOMES A total of 5867 references were identified, amongst which we identified 161 articles fulfilling the eligibility criteria. Amongst these articles, 50 included pregnancy and offspring outcomes and 130 included sexual health outcomes. Except for large Scandinavian cohorts, most of the identified articles included a small number of participants. While a clear negative effect on sperm quality was evident for sulfasalazine and cyclophosphamide, a dubious effect was identified for colchicine, methotrexate and sirolimus. In three articles, exposure to tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors in patients diagnosed with ankylosing spondylitis resulted in improved sperm quality. The information regarding pregnancy and offspring outcomes was scant but no large negative effect associated with paternal immunosuppressive drug exposure was reported. WIDER IMPLICATIONS Evidence regarding the safety of immunosuppressive drugs in men with a wish to become a father is inconclusive. The lack of standardisation on how to evaluate and report male sexual function, fertility and reproduction as study outcomes in men exposed to immunosuppressive drugs is an important contributor to this result. Future research on this topic is needed and should be preferably done using standardised methods.

This multicenter, observational prospective cohort study addresses the risk associated with exposure to mirtazapine during pregnancy. Pregnancy outcomes after exposure to mirtazapine were compared with 2 matched control groups: (1) exposure to any selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI, control subjects with a psychiatric condition) and (2) no exposure to medication known to be teratogenic or any antidepressant (general control subjects). Data were collected by members of the European Network of Teratology Information Services between 1995 and 2011. Observations from 357 exposed pregnancies were compared with 357 pregnancies from each control group. The rate of major birth defects between the mirtazapine and the SSRI group did not differ significantly (4.5% vs 4.2%; odds ratio [OR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.5-2.3; P = 0.9). A trend toward a higher rate of birth defects in the mirtazapine group compared with general control subjects (4.5% vs 1.9%; OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 0.9-6.3; P = 0.08) reached statistical significance after exclusion of chromosomal or genetic anomalies (4.1% vs 1.3%; OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.04-10.3; P = 0.03), but this difference became again nonsignificant if cases of exposure not comprising the first trimester were excluded from the analysis (3.4% vs 1.9%; OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 0.6-5.0; P = 0.26). The crude miscarriage rate did not differ significantly between the mirtazapine, the SSRI, and the general control groups (12.1% vs 12.0% vs 9.3%; P = 0.44). However, a higher rate of elective pregnancy termination was observed in the mirtazapine group compared with SSRI and general control subjects (7.8% vs 3.4% vs 5.6%; P = 0.03). This study did not observe a statistically significant difference in the rate of major birth defects after first-trimester exposure between mirtazapine, SSRI-exposed, and nonexposed pregnancies. A marginally higher rate of birth defects was, however, observed in the mirtazapine and SSRI groups compared with the low rate of birth defects in our general control subjects. Overall pregnancy outcome after mirtazapine exposure was similar to that of the SSRI-exposed control group.

No abstract

Medication use is often underreported in paper-based questionnaires or interviews. Web-based questionnaires may improve recall of medication use, but data on their validity are currently lacking. Participants in the Pregnancy and Infant Development (PRIDE) Study (2014-2016; n = 557) and the Pregnancy Drug Registry (pREGnant) (2015-2016; n = 169) completed a 6-week paper-based medication diary during gestational weeks 19-24 or 26-31. In week 34, they completed a Web-based questionnaire with questions on medication names, time period and frequency of use, and quantity taken. To assess the degree of underreporting, we calculated the questionnaire's sensitivity using the medication diary as the reference standard. Sensitivity was high for many medication groups, including antiepileptic medication (sensitivity (Sn) = 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89, 1.00), antacids (Sn = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.86, 0.93), and iron preparations (Sn = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.64, 0.98). However, medications for short-term use were underreported more frequently, with sensitivities of 0.54 (95% CI: 0.35, 0.72) for antihistamines, 0.63 (95% CI: 0.57, 0.69) for analgesic and antipyretic agents, and 0.57 (95% CI: 0.51, 0.64) for acetaminophen. Shortening the period of time between exposure and questionnaire administration increased sensitivity substantially. In conclusion, underreporting in Web-based questionnaires is limited for many medication groups. In prospective studies, underreporting of medications for short-term use may be reduced by decreasing the interval between consecutive questionnaires.

Information on the safety of medication use during pregnancy and breastfeeding is scarce, yet use of medication among pregnant and breastfeeding women is widespread. The pREGnant, the Dutch Pregnancy Drug Register, was set up to obtain insight into medication use among pregnant and breastfeeding women and potential effects on maternal and fetal/infant health. The systematically documented, good quality data on medication use during pregnancy and lactation in pREGnant will be used in signal detection, epidemiologic studies and counseling of healthcare providers and patients. The register has a prospective cohort design. The population is derived from pregnant women throughout the Netherlands. Data collection started in April 2014 and enrollment of women is continuous and is characterized by a relative high proportion of women born in the Netherlands with a high education compared with the general Dutch pregnant population. Data on current pregnancy, obstetric history, maternal lifestyle, health and medication use, delivery, and infant health are collected through web-based questionnaires completed by the participating women (three times during pregnancy and three times during the infant’s first year of life). If permission is given, the self-reported data can be complemented with information retrieved from Perined, the perinatal registry of the Netherlands, and from obstetric and medical records, and/or pharmacy records. Here, we provide detailed information on the design of the pREGnant, the Dutch Pregnancy Drug Register, as well as descriptive information on characteristics of the participants so far. Currently, steps are being taken to implement the register on a large scale in the Netherlands.