Ursodeoxycholic acid to reduce adverse perinatal outcomes for intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy: the PITCHES RCT

Author:

Chappell Lucy C1ORCID,Bell Jennifer L2ORCID,Smith Anne2ORCID,Rounding Catherine2ORCID,Bowler Ursula2ORCID,Linsell Louise2ORCID,Juszczak Edmund2ORCID,Tohill Sue1ORCID,Redford Amanda3ORCID,Dixon Peter H1ORCID,Chambers Jenny4ORCID,Hunter Rachael5ORCID,Dorling Jon6ORCID,Williamson Catherine1ORCID,Thornton Jim G3ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Women and Children’s Health, School of Life Course Sciences, King’s College London, London, UK

2. National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

3. Division of Child Health, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

4. ICP Support, Sutton Coldfield, UK

5. Research Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK

6. Division of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, IWK Health Centre, Halifax, NS, Canada

Abstract

Background Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy, characterised by maternal pruritus and raised serum bile acid concentrations, is associated with increased rates of stillbirth, preterm birth and neonatal unit admission. Ursodeoxycholic acid is widely used as a treatment, but without an adequate evidence base. Objective We aimed to evaluate whether or not ursodeoxycholic acid reduces adverse perinatal outcomes in affected women. Design Multicentre, masked, randomised, placebo-controlled, two-arm, parallel-group trial. Setting Thirty-three UK maternity units. Participants Women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy aged ≥ 18 years, between 20+0 and 40+6 weeks’ gestation with a singleton or twin pregnancy and no known lethal fetal anomaly. Interventions Women were randomly assigned (1 : 1 allocation ratio) to take ursodeoxycholic acid tablets or matched placebo tablets, at an equivalent dose of 1000 mg daily, titrated as needed. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was a composite of perinatal death (in utero fetal death after randomisation or known neonatal death up to 7 days) or preterm delivery (< 37 weeks’ gestation) or neonatal unit admission for at least 4 hours (from birth until hospital discharge). Each infant was counted once within this composite. Analyses were by intention to treat. Results Between 23 December 2015 and 7 August 2018, 605 women were randomised, with 305 women allocated to the ursodeoxycholic acid arm and 300 women to the placebo arm. There was no evidence of a significant difference in the incidence of the primary outcome between the groups: 23.0% (74 out of 322 infants) in the ursodeoxycholic acid group compared with 26.7% (85 out of 318 infants) in the placebo group; adjusted risk ratio 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.62 to 1.15). There was no evidence of a significant difference in total costs (maternal, infant and the cost of ursodeoxycholic acid) between the two trial groups. There were two serious adverse events in the ursodeoxycholic acid group and six in the placebo group. Limitations Limitations include a primary outcome event rate in the control group that was lower than that estimated for the sample size calculation, but the lack of evidence of effect in all analyses suggests that it is unlikely that the trial had insufficient power. Conclusions In this clinical trial of ursodeoxycholic acid in women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy, there is no evidence that it is effective in reducing a composite of adverse perinatal outcomes. Future work Future research should aim to elucidate the aetiology and pathophysiology of adverse perinatal outcomes, particularly stillbirth, in women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy to assist the development of an effective preventative treatment. Further exploratory analyses may identify groups of women who might respond to ursodeoxycholic acid treatment. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN91918806. Funding This project was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) Programme, a Medical Research Council and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) partnership. This will be published in full in Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation; Vol. 7, No. 9. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Funder

Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme

Medical Research Council

Publisher

National Institute for Health Research

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3