PregnancyNRAMPNCT00686946
The National Register of Antipsychotic Medication in Pregnancy (NRAMP)
An observational study of Pregnancy and Mental Disorders, run by The Alfred at 1 site in Australia.
Trial summary
The National Register of Antipsychotic Medication in Pregnancy (NRAMP)is an observational, nationwide study involving women of child-bearing age who take antipsychotic medication during pregnancy. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 50 years, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Pregnancy, Mental Disorders
- How many people
- 500 participants
- Where
- 1 siteAustralia
- Study dates
- Jan 2005to Dec 2025
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 50 years
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult
Study population: Women from across Australia who are taking, or have taken, antipsychotic medication during pregnancy
Who may be able to join
- Women who take antipsychotic medication during pregnancy
- Women who are pregnant or have had a baby in the last 12 months
- Women who are living in Australia
- Women who are able to provide informed consent
Who cannot join
- Women who do not take antipsychotic medication during pregnancy
- Women who are not pregnant, or have not had a baby in the last 12 months
- Women who are unable to provide informed consent
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Australia1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Monash Alfred Pyschiatry Research Centre, Alfred Hospital
Melbourne, Victoria, 3004
Prof Jayashri Kulkarni, MBBS,FRANZCP, 61-3-9076-6564, jayashri.kulkarni@med.monash.edu.au
Ms Alisa Turbic, BSc, 61-3-9076-6591, maprc-nramp@monash.edu
About this study
The National Register of Antipsychotic Medication in Pregnancy (NRAMP)is an observational, nationwide study involving women of child-bearing age who take antipsychotic medication during pregnancy. It follows the pathway of mother and baby during pregnancy and for the first 12 months of the baby's life, in order to develop evidence-based guidelines for the best use and effect of antipsychotic medication during pregnancy, thereby informing clinical treating teams with regard to the management of their patients in this vulnerable population group.
The investigators hypothesize that the provision of such evidence-based guidelines will improve the management and outcomes for mother and baby during pregnancy, birth and the postnatal phase, providing a positive impact on maternal and child health and wellbeing for present and future generations.
Read the detailed description
The desire to reproduce is both a powerful urge and a basic human right for women regardless of mental health status. Deinstitutionalised treatment for mental illness, better pharmacotherapies, and generally higher expectations for a normal quality of life have the potential to raise the incidence of pregnancy in women with psychosis (Miller, Bloom \& Resnick, 1992). The right of women with mental illness to become parents places responsibility upon health care professionals to ensure sound antenatal and ongoing care is available.
Ethical duty of care aside, good antenatal treatment appears prudent given the greater risk of obstetric complications in women with schizophrenia (Sacker et al, 1996). In a meta analysis of studies examining outcomes for pregnant women with and without schizophrenia, evidence exists of a small but statistically significant increase in the risk of low birth weight and inferior neonatal condition in infants of the schizophrenia cohort (Sacker et al, 1996). A recent meta analysis (Webb, et al, 2005) summarized that exposure to maternal psychotic illness is associated with a "higher than expected" risk of perinatal and infant mortality, including an almost twofold chance of fetal death or stillbirth (p.1052). Jablensky and colleagues (2005) further discovered that women whose psychiatric illness commenced before the birth of their child were significantly more likely to experience obstetric complications than women whose first admission for mental illness was after the delivery. Moreover, the offspring of women with schizophrenia carry with them an increased risk for developing psychosis (Mednick, Parnas \& Schulsinger, 1987). This observation has driven the neurodevelopmental hypothesis about the aetiology of schizophrenia, which posits that alterations to early fetal brain development in utero might lead to a predisposition to the formation of schizophrenia later in life (Lewis \& Murray, 1987). Such perinatal contributions to adult mental health outcomes points to the necessity to provide pregnant women who have psychosis, with proper and specialized treatment.
Despite these clear arguments for a thorough understanding of the needs of pregnant women with schizophrenia, current research is limited. In particular, there is currently very little evidence regarding the use of antipsychotic medication in pregnancy upon fetal development and maternal health. Over the last four decades, intermittent studies have sought to investigate the teratogenicity of the older or typical antipsychotics upon fetal development. Earlier reports were generated from pregnancy outcomes of women treated with these medications for hyperemesis gravidarum, not from women with schizophrenia (Kerns, 1989); as such, it is difficult to extrapolate initial findings across these two cohorts with confidence. Limb defects in children born to women who were given large doses of haloperidol in early pregnancy are outlined in case reports (Goldberg \& Nissam, 1994). Patton and colleagues (2002) also reviewed three other larger studies and concluded that a significant increased chance exists for babies exposed to phenothiazines to develop congenital malformations, compared with the incidence within the general population.
The newer or second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) have not been studied in any great detail; to date, to our knowledge, there have been no blinded or randomized studies examining birth outcomes in women taking SGAs, and these are unlikely given ethical considerations. Prescribing guidelines laid out in MIMS (2003) for all current SGAs include pregnancy as a "special precaution" and despite the gravity of associated risks of teratogenesis, there are few publications examining atypical antipsychotic medication use in pregnant women. In their review, Patton and colleagues (2002) cite four studies on the outcome of clozapine use, noting that for a total five cases no congenital abnormalities were reported, although one infant experienced low grade fever and seizure, with gastroesophageal reflux. Grigoriadis and Seeman (2002) suggest that the increased risk of agranulocytosis and seizures in babies, coupled with the identification of both pregnancy and clozapine as potentially increasing the likelihood of thromboembolisms, render this a medication to be avoided during pregnancy. Twenty-three Olanzapine-exposed pregnancies were observed by Goldstein and colleagues (2000), who found there was no increased risk of spontaneous abortion, stillbirth, prematurity or major malformation. The authors were, however, swift to assert that studies of greater sample sizes and over a protracted time period are necessary before olanzapine can be declared "safe" with confidence.
Thus, clinicians remain in a conundrum; although in general today's antipsychotic drugs produce fewer side effects, are better tolerated by the patient, and more effectively target the symptoms of psychosis, little evidence has been presented to reassure prescribers that their impact upon fetal development is minimal. A proven, evidence based method for achieving a balance between maternal mental health with minimal risk to the fetus must be researched and evidenced. Therefore, we have established The National Register of Antipsychotic Medication in Pregnancy (NRAMP) as a non-interventional means of providing information about pregnancies and outcomes for women with psychosis, and their babies. Not only is NRAMP seeking to record large scale obstetric information in a prospective fashion, including pharmacotherapy during pregnancy and beyond, it is also capitalizing on the opportunity to track alterations to mental health symptoms of women during pregnancy and in the post partum period, and to gather valuable insights into the attitudes of this cohort as they make the transition into parenthood.
The combination of poor psychosocial history, existing involvement with child protection agencies, psychiatric diagnoses and admissions, medications and substance abuse, present many issues affecting outcomes for both mother and child during the perinatal period. Our study involves extensive collaboration between many different clinical groups, and will culminate in an important best-practice resource to improve the quality of life for both present and future generations. The identification of a history of serious mental illness and a planned management strategy are therefore essential if we are to improve outcomes for mother and baby.
This then, is the driving force behind the establishment of The National Register of Antipsychotic Medication in Pregnancy (NRAMP), and is a much-needed strategy to improve the management of serious mental illness for women who become pregnant.
This investigator initiated study has been funded by Janssen-Cilag, AstraZeneca, Hospira, Lilly and the Australian Rotary Health Research Fund. NB: AstraZeneca provided funding up to and including 250 consented participants. The study continues to recruit.
- Conditions
- Pregnancy, Mental Disorders
- Keywords
- Severe mental illness, Antipsychotic medications, Pregnancy, Evidence-based guidelines, Maternal and infant health and wellbeing
- Medical subject headings
- Mental Disorders
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| NRAMP | Participants take their antipsychotic medication as prescribed by their clinical treating teams. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Participant interviews
Interviews to gather demographic, social, medical, psychiatric, medication and obstetric history
Measured: Antenatal - once per trimester; Postnatal - quarterly for 12 months
Secondary outcomes (2)
Psychopathology measures for the mother
PANSS (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale) Questionnaire EPDS (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale)Questionnaire
Measured: Antenatal and up to 12 months postnatally
Developmental Milestone measures for the baby
ASQ-3 (Ages and Stages Questionnaire, Third Edition)
Measured: Birth to 12 months of age
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted30 May 2008 (estimated)
- Study startJan 2005
- Primary completionDec 2025 (estimated)
- Study completionDec 2025 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for PregnancyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 500 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- The Alfred
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Janssen-Cilag Ltd., AstraZeneca, Hospira, now a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Jayashri Kulkarni, Professor, The Alfred
- Investigators
- Prof Jayashri Kulkarni, MBBS,FRANZCP, Principal investigator, Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre (MAPrc)
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00686946
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 114/04
- Acronym
- NRAMP
- Status last verified
- Nov 2023
- First submitted
- 28 May 2008
- Last updated
- 28 Nov 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: Individual participant data will be shared, for example, in Case Studies, where personal identification is not compromised, which also allows for an aggregate view of data.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 28 Nov 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The National Register of Antipsychotic Medication in Pregnancy (NRAMP)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00686946
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- NRAMP / 114/04
- Conditions
- Pregnancy, Mental Disorders
- Keywords
- Severe mental illness, Antipsychotic medications, Pregnancy, Evidence-based guidelines, Maternal and infant health and wellbeing
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 500 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- The AlfredUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Janssen-Cilag Ltd., AstraZeneca, Hospira, now a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer
- Study start
- Jan 2005 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Dec 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Dec 2025 (estimated)
- First posted
- 30 May 2008 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The National Register of Antipsychotic Medication in Pregnancy (NRAMP)is an observational, nationwide study involving women of child-bearing age who take antipsychotic medication during pregnancy. It follows the pathway of mother and baby during pregnancy and for the first 12 months of the baby's life, in order to develop evidence-based guidelines for the best use and effect of antipsychotic medication during pregnancy, thereby informing clinical treating teams with regard to the management of their patients in this vulnerable population group.
The investigators hypothesize that the provision of such evidence-based guidelines will improve the management and outcomes for mother and baby during pregnancy, birth and the postnatal phase, providing a positive impact on maternal and child health and wellbeing for present and future generations.
Detailed description
The desire to reproduce is both a powerful urge and a basic human right for women regardless of mental health status. Deinstitutionalised treatment for mental illness, better pharmacotherapies, and generally higher expectations for a normal quality of life have the potential to raise the incidence of pregnancy in women with psychosis (Miller, Bloom \& Resnick, 1992). The right of women with mental illness to become parents places responsibility upon health care professionals to ensure sound antenatal and ongoing care is available.
Ethical duty of care aside, good antenatal treatment appears prudent given the greater risk of obstetric complications in women with schizophrenia (Sacker et al, 1996). In a meta analysis of studies examining outcomes for pregnant women with and without schizophrenia, evidence exists of a small but statistically significant increase in the risk of low birth weight and inferior neonatal condition in infants of the schizophrenia cohort (Sacker et al, 1996). A recent meta analysis (Webb, et al, 2005) summarized that exposure to maternal psychotic illness is associated with a "higher than expected" risk of perinatal and infant mortality, including an almost twofold chance of fetal death or stillbirth (p.1052). Jablensky and colleagues (2005) further discovered that women whose psychiatric illness commenced before the birth of their child were significantly more likely to experience obstetric complications than women whose first admission for mental illness was after the delivery. Moreover, the offspring of women with schizophrenia carry with them an increased risk for developing psychosis (Mednick, Parnas \& Schulsinger, 1987). This observation has driven the neurodevelopmental hypothesis about the aetiology of schizophrenia, which posits that alterations to early fetal brain development in utero might lead to a predisposition to the formation of schizophrenia later in life (Lewis \& Murray, 1987). Such perinatal contributions to adult mental health outcomes points to the necessity to provide pregnant women who have psychosis, with proper and specialized treatment.
Despite these clear arguments for a thorough understanding of the needs of pregnant women with schizophrenia, current research is limited. In particular, there is currently very little evidence regarding the use of antipsychotic medication in pregnancy upon fetal development and maternal health. Over the last four decades, intermittent studies have sought to investigate the teratogenicity of the older or typical antipsychotics upon fetal development. Earlier reports were generated from pregnancy outcomes of women treated with these medications for hyperemesis gravidarum, not from women with schizophrenia (Kerns, 1989); as such, it is difficult to extrapolate initial findings across these two cohorts with confidence. Limb defects in children born to women who were given large doses of haloperidol in early pregnancy are outlined in case reports (Goldberg \& Nissam, 1994). Patton and colleagues (2002) also reviewed three other larger studies and concluded that a significant increased chance exists for babies exposed to phenothiazines to develop congenital malformations, compared with the incidence within the general population.
The newer or second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) have not been studied in any great detail; to date, to our knowledge, there have been no blinded or randomized studies examining birth outcomes in women taking SGAs, and these are unlikely given ethical considerations. Prescribing guidelines laid out in MIMS (2003) for all current SGAs include pregnancy as a "special precaution" and despite the gravity of associated risks of teratogenesis, there are few publications examining atypical antipsychotic medication use in pregnant women. In their review, Patton and colleagues (2002) cite four studies on the outcome of clozapine use, noting that for a total five cases no congenital abnormalities were reported, although one infant experienced low grade fever and seizure, with gastroesophageal reflux. Grigoriadis and Seeman (2002) suggest that the increased risk of agranulocytosis and seizures in babies, coupled with the identification of both pregnancy and clozapine as potentially increasing the likelihood of thromboembolisms, render this a medication to be avoided during pregnancy. Twenty-three Olanzapine-exposed pregnancies were observed by Goldstein and colleagues (2000), who found there was no increased risk of spontaneous abortion, stillbirth, prematurity or major malformation. The authors were, however, swift to assert that studies of greater sample sizes and over a protracted time period are necessary before olanzapine can be declared "safe" with confidence.
Thus, clinicians remain in a conundrum; although in general today's antipsychotic drugs produce fewer side effects, are better tolerated by the patient, and more effectively target the symptoms of psychosis, little evidence has been presented to reassure prescribers that their impact upon fetal development is minimal. A proven, evidence based method for achieving a balance between maternal mental health with minimal risk to the fetus must be researched and evidenced. Therefore, we have established The National Register of Antipsychotic Medication in Pregnancy (NRAMP) as a non-interventional means of providing information about pregnancies and outcomes for women with psychosis, and their babies. Not only is NRAMP seeking to record large scale obstetric information in a prospective fashion, including pharmacotherapy during pregnancy and beyond, it is also capitalizing on the opportunity to track alterations to mental health symptoms of women during pregnancy and in the post partum period, and to gather valuable insights into the attitudes of this cohort as they make the transition into parenthood.
The combination of poor psychosocial history, existing involvement with child protection agencies, psychiatric diagnoses and admissions, medications and substance abuse, present many issues affecting outcomes for both mother and child during the perinatal period. Our study involves extensive collaboration between many different clinical groups, and will culminate in an important best-practice resource to improve the quality of life for both present and future generations. The identification of a history of serious mental illness and a planned management strategy are therefore essential if we are to improve outcomes for mother and baby.
This then, is the driving force behind the establishment of The National Register of Antipsychotic Medication in Pregnancy (NRAMP), and is a much-needed strategy to improve the management of serious mental illness for women who become pregnant.
This investigator initiated study has been funded by Janssen-Cilag, AstraZeneca, Hospira, Lilly and the Australian Rotary Health Research Fund. NB: AstraZeneca provided funding up to and including 250 consented participants. The study continues to recruit.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| NRAMP | – | –Participants take their antipsychotic medication as prescribed by their clinical treating teams. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 50 years
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
- Study population
- Women from across Australia who are taking, or have taken, antipsychotic medication during pregnancy
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Women who take antipsychotic medication during pregnancy
- Women who are pregnant or have had a baby in the last 12 months
- Women who are living in Australia
- Women who are able to provide informed consent
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Women who do not take antipsychotic medication during pregnancy
- Women who are not pregnant, or have not had a baby in the last 12 months
- Women who are unable to provide informed consent
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Participant interviews
Time frame: Antenatal - once per trimester; Postnatal - quarterly for 12 months
Interviews to gather demographic, social, medical, psychiatric, medication and obstetric history
2 secondary outcomes
Psychopathology measures for the mother
Time frame: Antenatal and up to 12 months postnatally
Developmental Milestone measures for the baby
Time frame: Birth to 12 months of age
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 28 Nov 2023.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. Individual participant data will be shared, for example, in Case Studies, where personal identification is not compromised, which also allows for an aggregate view of data.
Related trials for Pregnancy
Recruiting
Methylation Profiling in Self-Samples for Identification of (Epi)Genetic Biomarkers for Gynecological Cancers
Gynaecological Cancers, Ovarian Cancer
RecruitingPhase 1/2
Study of INBRX-106 and INBRX-106 in Combination With Pembrolizumab (Keytruda®) in Subjects With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Solid Tumors (Hexavalent OX40 Agonist)
Solid Tumor, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
RecruitingObservational study
Population Pharmacokinetics of Temocillin in Acute Enterobacterial Pyelonephritis in Children
Pyelonephritis
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
A Study of Belzutifan (MK-6482) in Combination With Lenvatinib Versus Cabozantinib for Treatment of Renal Cell Carcinoma (MK-6482-011)
Carcinoma, Renal Cell
Recruiting
Safety and Performance of UCon Patch Electrode
Urinary Incontinence, Urinary Incontinence, Urge
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Prof Jayashri Kulkarni, MBBS,FRANZCP principal investigator
Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre (MAPrc)
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Pregnancy and Mental Disorders, run by The Alfred at 1 site in Australia.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 28 Nov 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Australia. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Prof Jayashri Kulkarni, MBBS,FRANZCP (61-3-9076-6564, jayashri.kulkarni@med.monash.edu.au), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Participant interviews (time frame: Antenatal - once per trimester; Postnatal - quarterly for 12 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 28 Nov 2023.