PubMed HealthSearch

Biomedical subjects

Abdullah Altamimi

Publications and source records attributed to Abdullah Altamimi.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Maternal disease control and pregnancy outcomes with anti-CD20 therapy versus natalizumab in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Management of multiple sclerosis (MS) during pregnancy requires balancing maternal disease control with fetal safety. Among high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies, anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies and natalizumab are commonly used in women with active disease, yet their comparative effectiveness and safety during pregnancy remain incompletely defined. This systematic review evaluated maternal disease activity and pregnancy-related outcomes associated with anti-CD20 exposure compared with natalizumab in pregnant women with MS. METHODS: PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception through February 2026. Eligible studies included pregnant women with MS exposed to anti-CD20 before or during pregnancy and reporting maternal disease activity compared to natalizumab. RESULTS: Seven studies were included, comprising six observational cohort studies and one pharmacovigilance disproportionality analysis. Across studies, anti-CD20 exposure was consistently associated with lower relapse activity than natalizumab, particularly in the postpartum period. Anti-CD20 strategies were also associated with markedly lower postpartum MRI activity and more favorable disability-related outcomes where reported. Meta-analysis of three studies demonstrated a significant reduction in postpartum MRI activity with anti-CD20 therapy compared with natalizumab (RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02-0.24; I² = 0%). No clear increase in major congenital anomalies was identified, although some data suggested higher odds of small for gestational age and maternal antibiotic use with anti-CD20 exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Anti-CD20 therapy was associated with lower maternal disease activity than natalizumab during pregnancy, especially for relapse prevention and postpartum MRI suppression. However, evidence regarding fetal and neonatal safety remains limited, warranting cautious individualized treatment decisions and further comparative research.

Humans

Efficacy and safety of split-dose ultra-low-volume polyethylene glycol with ascorbic acid versus sodium picosulfate with magnesium citrate for bowel preparation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Colonoscopy remains the gold standard for early detection and prevention of colorectal cancer, with adequate bowel cleansing being pivotal for its success. This systematic review aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of split-dose ultra-low-volume polyethylene glycol (PEG) with ascorbic acid (Asc) versus sodium picosulfate magnesium citrate for bowel preparation. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we conducted a comprehensive literature search across Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to July 2025. Data analysis was conducted using R version 4.2.2 (31 October 2022) and RStudio version 2022.07.2 (2009-2022, RStudio, Inc.) Our literature search yielded six eligible studies involving 3285 patients. Our findings indicate no significant differences in overall and right-sided colon adequate cleansing rates between the two regimens: risk ratio: 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.99-1.12, P  = 0.1082; and risk ratio: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.99-1.08, P  = 0.1755, respectively. However, PEG + Asc demonstrated a significantly lower rate of vomiting compared to sodium picosulfate magnesium citrate (risk ratio: 2.58, 95% CI: 0.94-2.78, P  = 0.0008), suggesting better tolerability. Other secondary outcomes, including nausea, abdominal pain, and overall Boston Bowel Preparation Scale scores, did not show significant differences. The quality of the evidence varied across the outcomes. Our results support the comparable efficacy of both bowel preparation agents while highlighting PEG + Asc's potential advantages in tolerability. Our findings suggest that the choice between these two preparations can be tailored to the specific patient, considering their preferences or previous experiences, although some caution is advised in interpreting these findings.

Humans