Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40256995›Full record

ArticleArthritis care & research2025

Recommendations for the Use of Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs in Pregnancy and Reproductive Health for Patients With Rheumatic Disease: A Scoping Review.

Athena Chin, Alice Terrett, Mihye Kwon, Samuel Whittle, Catherine Hill

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Arthritis care & research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Athena ChinRoyal Adelaide Hospital and University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia, and Flinders Medical Centre, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia.ORCID 0009-0000-2423-7836
Alice TerrettRoyal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia, Flinders Medical Centre, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia, and The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville South, South Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4097-3133
Mihye KwonKonyang University Hospital, Daejeon, South Korea.
Samuel WhittleThe Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville South, South Australia, Australia, and University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Catherine HillRoyal Adelaide Hospital and University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia, and The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville South, South Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8289-4922

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAutoimmune rheumatic diseases commonly affect individuals of childbearing age, with historically increased adverse pregnancy outcomes in this group. The advent of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) has fostered more suitable conditions for pregnancy; however, this is accompanied by challenges in ensuring safe use in reproductive health. The aim of this review is to compare existing guideline recommendations for the use of DMARDs in pregnancy and reproductive health for patients with rheumatic disease.

methodsA scoping review was performed with Medline and Embase, in addition to a hand search, to identify guidelines published since 2014 by academic societies in rheumatology that addressed the management of DMARDs in pregnancy in any of rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis, and systemic lupus erythematosus. Conventional synthetic DMARDs (csDMARDs) (methotrexate, sulfasalazine, leflunomide, and hydroxychloroquine), biologic DMARDs (bDMARDs) (adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab, golimumab, certolizumab, abatacept, tocilizumab, rituximab, and anakinra), and targeted synthetic DMARDs (tsDMARDs) (tofacitinib, baricitinib, and upadacitinib) were targeted. Two authors performed data extraction in duplicate (AC, AT).

resultsA total of 18 guidelines were included. Recommendations for DMARD use in preconception were present in 10 guidelines (56%), lactation in 12 guidelines (67%), and male fertility in 6 guidelines (33%). A total of 13 guidelines (72%) included recommendations for csDMARDs, 13 guidelines (72%) included recommendations for bDMARDs, and 5 guidelines (28%) included recommendations for tsDMARDs. There was moderate evidence supporting relatively uniform csDMARD recommendations, compared to minimal evidence for bDMARD and tsDMARD use with variable recommendations.

conclusionThere is heterogeneity in the formulation of guidelines on the use of DMARDs in pregnancy. Recommendations for csDMARDs were similar between guidelines. There was significant variability in recommendations for bDMARD and tsDMARD use, reflecting current minimal literature in this area.

Indexed as

Antirheumatic AgentsPregnancy ComplicationsReproductive HealthRheumatic DiseasesFemaleHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicPregnancyAntirheumatic Agents

Identifiers

PMID40256995
PMCPMC12500500

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.