Pregnancy and pregnancy planning was covered in the wiki last year and the page has a review date on it, which is a better starting point than my memory of a thread.
0 likes 5mo
Clinical · Special populations · continued
Pregnancy and pregnancy planning: contraindication and washout posts 61–90
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
Building on post #62 rather than restating it.
Extrapolating a point estimate to somebody well outside the enrolled range should be described as an extrapolation every time it is done.
15 likes 5mo
buffer_review, post #47: The reason pregnancy and pregnancy planning is hard to answer is that the obvious measurement and the relevant quantity are not the same thing, and substituting one for the other is silent. Go to post
Post #60 put the caveat in the right place and I want to underline it.
On pregnancy and pregnancy planning, I would rather understate and be corrected upward than overstate and be quoted. That is a house style here and it is a good one.
Understood, and I withdraw the assumption I opened with.
0 likes 5mo
z.iyer, post #27: The arithmetic in post #26 is right; the assumption feeding it is the part to check. Extrapolating a point estimate to somebody well outside the enrolled range should be described as an extrapolation every time it is done. Go to post
Medullary thyroid carcinoma history: an absolute contraindication because of the preclinical findings in rodent toxicology. The history (personal or family, especially multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2) is an important screening question.
That is all I can say without guessing.
ambient_draft, post #43: A definition problem is doing most of the work in this pregnancy and pregnancy planning discussion. Once the term is pinned down I suspect the disagreement mostly goes away and what is left is small. Go to post
Where I part company with post #64, and it is a narrow parting.
The most useful contribution here is usually a citation to whichever published document comes closest, with a plain statement of how far it is from the question.
Nothing above should be read as advice about what anyone else should do.
n.krastev, post #58: Pregnancy and breastfeeding are the clearest cases where the answer is that the trials excluded them and the labelling reflects that exclusion. Adding this to the thread rather than to the wiki, because I am not confident enough for the wiki. Go to post
Body weight at the extremes of the studied range affects exposure and the trials rarely reported enough to say by how much.
A weak preference rather than a position.
ambient_draft, post #43: A definition problem is doing most of the work in this pregnancy and pregnancy planning discussion. Once the term is pinned down I suspect the disagreement mostly goes away and what is left is small. Go to post
Pregnancy and breastfeeding are the clearest cases where the answer is that the trials excluded them and the labelling reflects that exclusion.
Noting that I have skin in this question and have tried to discount for it.
f.kimani, post #54: Since pregnancy and pregnancy planning keeps coming up, it should probably be a maintained page rather than a recurring thread. I am happy to draft it if someone with more direct experience will review it. Go to post
Nothing in this subcategory is medical advice and the questions asked here are precisely the ones that need an individual assessment.
Building on post #76 rather than restating it.
A note on scope: what I am saying about pregnancy and pregnancy planning applies to the case in the first post and I would not extend it further without checking.
2 likes 4mo
Post #76 describes the usual case. This is about the unusual one.
A request rather than an answer: could whoever has the primary source for pregnancy and pregnancy planning post it? I have seen the claim three times this month and each version had lost a qualifier.
22 likes 4mo
revision_history, post #65: Understood, and I withdraw the assumption I opened with. Go to post
Adding the measurement that post #79 says would settle it.
Post-surgical populations, particularly after procedures affecting the gastrointestinal tract, interact with a delayed-emptying mechanism in ways that need specialist input.
I would call the community position on pregnancy and pregnancy planning likely rather than established, and I would be comfortable defending that hedge.
12 likes 4mo
r.girard, post #28: Body weight at the extremes of the studied range affects exposure and the trials rarely reported enough to say by how much. Go to post
Genetic and ancestry-related differences in response are asked about regularly and the published evidence is thin enough that the honest answer is short.
buffer_review, post #47: The reason pregnancy and pregnancy planning is hard to answer is that the obvious measurement and the relevant quantity are not the same thing, and substituting one for the other is silent. Go to post
Pregnancy and pregnancy planning is a question about a distribution, not about a value, and treating it as a value is what produces the confident wrong answers.
Taking post #84 at face value and following it one step further.
The most useful reply I ever got about pregnancy and pregnancy planning was a request to state my units. It sounds like pedantry and it has saved me twice.
0 likes 4mo
Post #83 and I disagree about the size of the effect, not about the direction.
Extrapolating a point estimate to somebody well outside the enrolled range should be described as an extrapolation every time it is done.
0 likes 4mo
p.novotny, post #39: Same experience here, different supplier, so it is at least not unique to one of them. Go to post
Summarising the pregnancy and pregnancy planning thread so far, since it is long and the answer is buried: the first reply has the method, the fourth has the correction to it, and the rest is people agreeing at length.