Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38630478›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2024

Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Use During Pregnancy and Outcomes in Pregnant Individuals and Newborns.

Paul Gougis, Anne-Sophie Hamy, Floriane Jochum, Kevin Bihan, Marie Carbonnel, Joe-Elie Salem, Elise Dumas, Rayan Kabirian, Beatriz Grandal, Solenn Barraud and 9 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
13.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. The Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors Journey: From Early Promise to Lasting Impact.Journal of immunotherapy and precision oncology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Management and treatment of breast cancer in pregnant women.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2026
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Paul GougisResidual Tumor and Response to Treatment Laboratory, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), U932 Immunity and Cancer, Institut Curie, Université Paris, Paris, France.
Anne-Sophie HamyResidual Tumor and Response to Treatment Laboratory, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), U932 Immunity and Cancer, Institut Curie, Université Paris, Paris, France.
Floriane JochumResidual Tumor and Response to Treatment Laboratory, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), U932 Immunity and Cancer, Institut Curie, Université Paris, Paris, France.
Kevin BihanINSERM, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Clinical Investigation Center (CIC) 1901, Department of Pharmacology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Marie CarbonnelINSERM U1135, Centre d'Immunologie et des Maladies Infectieuses-Paris, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Joe-Elie SalemINSERM, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Clinical Investigation Center (CIC) 1901, Department of Pharmacology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Elise DumasResidual Tumor and Response to Treatment Laboratory, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), U932 Immunity and Cancer, Institut Curie, Université Paris, Paris, France.
Rayan KabirianResidual Tumor and Response to Treatment Laboratory, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), U932 Immunity and Cancer, Institut Curie, Université Paris, Paris, France.
Beatriz GrandalResidual Tumor and Response to Treatment Laboratory, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), U932 Immunity and Cancer, Institut Curie, Université Paris, Paris, France.
Solenn BarraudResidual Tumor and Response to Treatment Laboratory, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), U932 Immunity and Cancer, Institut Curie, Université Paris, Paris, France.
Florence CoussyResidual Tumor and Response to Treatment Laboratory, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), U932 Immunity and Cancer, Institut Curie, Université Paris, Paris, France.
Judicael HottonDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Institut Godinot, Reims, France.
Raphaelle SavarinoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, Université Paris, Paris, France.
Aurélien MarabelleDépartement d'Innovation Thérapeutique et d'Essais Précoces, Gustave Roussy, Département de Médecine Interne et Immunologie clinique, AP-HP, Hôpital Universitaire Bicêtre, INSERM U1015 and CIC1428, Le Kremlin Bicêtre, Villejuif, France.
Jacques CadranelDepartment of Pneumology, AP-HP, Tenon Hospital, Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Jean-Philippe SpanoDepartment of Medical Oncology, AP-HP, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie, INSERM U1136, CLIP 2 Galilée, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Enora LaasResidual Tumor and Response to Treatment Laboratory, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), U932 Immunity and Cancer, Institut Curie, Université Paris, Paris, France.
Fabien ReyalResidual Tumor and Response to Treatment Laboratory, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), U932 Immunity and Cancer, Institut Curie, Université Paris, Paris, France.
Baptiste AbbarDepartment of Medical Oncology, AP-HP, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie, INSERM U1136, CLIP 2 Galilée, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Inserm · FRImmunité et Cancer · FRSorbonne Université · FRInstitut Curie · FRPitié-Salpêtrière Hospital · FRInstitut Jean Godinot · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: With the widespread use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), concerns about their pregnancy outcomes through maternal exposure have emerged, and clinical comparative data are lacking. Objective: To assess the risk of pregnancy-, fetal-, and/or newborn-related adverse outcomes associated with exposure to ICIs compared with exposure to other anticancer agents. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, all reports mentioning a pregnancy-related condition and an antineoplastic agent (Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification group L01) used for a cancer indication registered in the World Health Organization international pharmacovigilance database VigiBase up to June 26, 2022, were extracted. Exposure: Anticancer agents, including ICIs, used during pregnancy for a cancer indication. Immune checkpoint inhibitors included blockers of programmed cell death 1 (PD1) or its ligand (PD-L1) or cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA4). Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the reporting odds ratio (ROR) for maternal, fetal, or newborn complications in patients treated with ICIs vs any other anticancer drug. Adverse events, categorized into 45 individual maternofetal adverse outcomes, were directly mapped to Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities preferred terms in VigiBase. Results: A total of 3558 reports (ICI: 91 [2.6%]; other anticancer drugs: 3467 [97.4%]) were included in the analysis. In the ICI group, most reports were from the US (60 [65.9%]), and the mean (SD) patient age was 28.9 (10.2) years; in 24 of 55 reports with data on cancer type (43.6%), patients were treated for melanoma. The molecules involved in the ICI group were anti-PD1 (58 reports [63.7%]), anti-PD1 plus anti-CTLA4 (15 [16.5%]), anti-CTLA4 (13 [14.3%]), anti-PD-L1 (4 [4.4%]), and anti-PD1 plus anti-lymphocyte activation gene 3 (1 [1.1%]). An ICI was used in combination with a non-ICI anticancer agent in 10 participants (11.0%). Compared with other anticancer drugs, none of the 45 adverse outcomes identified were overreported in the group exposed to ICIs. However, preterm birth was significantly overreported for the anti-PD1 plus anti-CTLA4 combination compared with other anticancer drugs (12 of 15 [80.0%] vs 793 of 3452 [23.0%]; ROR, 13.87; 95% CI, 3.90-49.28; P < .001) but not for anti-PD-L1 or anti-CTLA4 monotherapy. Three reports of possibly immune-related maternofetal events were identified: 1 case of maternal antiphospholipid syndrome leading to spontaneous abortion, 1 case of pneumonitis leading to neonatal respiratory distress syndrome and death, and 1 case of transient congenital hypothyroidism. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of 91 individuals exposed to ICIs during pregnancy, ICI exposure was not associated with overreporting of specific adverse pregnancy, fetal, and/or newborn outcomes compared with other anticancer treatments. However, due to possible rare immune-related neonatal adverse events, ICI use in pregnant women should be avoided when possible, especially the anti-PD1 plus anti-CTLA4 combination.

Indexed as

Abortion, SpontaneousHypothyroidismNeoplasmsPremature BirthAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsInfant, NewbornPregnancyImmune Checkpoint Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID38630478
PMCPMC11024778
OpenAlexW4394873759

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.