ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2026
Pregnancy safety of biologics in inflammatory bowel disease: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Biologic safety during pregnancy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) remains a clinical concern, particularly with the increasing use of novel agents such as ustekinumab (UST) and vedolizumab (VDZ). Objectives: A network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to compare pregnancy-related outcomes among various biological agents and nonbiologic-exposed patients. Design: Systematic review and frequentist random-effects NMA of comparative observational studies. Data Sources and Methods: This study systematically searched from inception to 23 March 2025 for comparative studies reporting pregnancy outcomes in biologics or conventional therapies (CT)-exposed patients with IBD. Outcomes included preterm birth, congenital malformation (CM), low birth weight (LBW), and spontaneous abortion. An NMA model was applied. Subgroup analysis was conducted for studies with comparable baseline disease activity between the treatment groups. Results: This NMA included 12 studies. Anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) agents were not associated with an increased risk of any adverse pregnancy outcomes. UST and VDZ were associated with increased CM risks (UST: odds ratio [OR]: 2.32 [1.31-4.10]; VDZ: OR: 1.98 [1.11-3.52]), and VDZ was associated with LBW (OR: 2.17 [1.15-4.11]). These associations were not significant in the subgroup analyses limited to studies with similar disease activity. Sensitivity analysis revealed that a single important study influenced the CM risk of UST/VDZ, whereas the LBW risk with VDZ remained consistent. Conclusions: This is the first NMA to comprehensively assess the pregnancy-related safety of biologic therapies, including the novel biologics VDZ and UST, in patients with IBD. Anti-TNF agents have the most robust pregnancy safety evidence and were not associated with an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in this analysis. The findings for UST and VDZ should be framed as exploratory and potentially affected by residual confounding, as the observed risk signals were not consistently maintained in the additional analyses. Registration: INPLASY202540012.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.