Immunotherapy for recurrent miscarriage
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Because immunological aberrations might be the cause of miscarriage in some women, several immunotherapies have been used to treat women with otherwise unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to assess the effects of any immunotherapy, including paternal leukocyte immunization and intravenous immunoglobulin on the live birth rate in women with previous unexplained recurrent miscarriages. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (11 February 2014) and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized trials of immunotherapies used to treat women with three or more prior miscarriages and no more than one live birth after, in whom all recognized non-immunologic causes of recurrent miscarriage had been ruled out and no simultaneous treatment was given. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The review author and the two co-authors independently extracted data and assessed study quality for all studies considered for this review. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty trials of high quality were included. The various forms of immunotherapy did not show significant differences between treatment and control groups in terms of subsequent live births: paternal cell immunization (12 trials, 641 women), Peto odds ratio (Peto OR) 1.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.70; third-party donor cell immunization (three trials, 156 women), Peto OR 1.39, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.82; trophoblast membrane infusion (one trial, 37 women), Peto OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.11 to 1.45; or intravenous immunoglobulin, (eight trials, 303 women), Peto OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.58. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Paternal cell immunization, third-party donor leukocytes, trophoblast membranes, and intravenous immunoglobulin provide no significant beneficial effect over placebo in improving the live birth rate.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Meta-analyses have shown no significant benefit of immunotherapy (e.g., paternal cell immunisation, third-party donor leucocytes, trophoblast membranes, IVIg) over placebo in preventing further miscarriage in women with unexplained recurrent miscarriage.
“A Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis has shown that the use of various forms of immunotherapy, including paternal cell immunisation, third-party donor leucocytes, trophoblast membranes and IVIg, in women with unexplained recurrent miscarriage provides no significant beneficial effect over placebo in preventing further miscarriage.203”
From Recurrent MiscarriageGreen‐top Guideline No. 17 (2023) · cites this paper as [203]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- Coulam CB, Clark DA, Collins J, Scott JR. Worldwide collaborative observational study and meta-analysis on allogenic leukocyte immunotherapy for recurrent spontaneous abortion. American Journal of Reproductive Immunology 1994;32:55-72.
- Daya S, Gunby J, Clark DA. Intravenous immunoglobulin therapy for recurrent spontaneous abortion: a meta-analysis. American Journal of Reproductive Immunology 1998;39:69-76.
- Daya S, Gunby J, Porter F, Scott J, Clark DA. Critical analysis of intravenous immunoglobulin therapy for recurrent miscarriage. Human Reproduction Update 1999;5(5):475-82.
- Duhem C, Dicato MA, Ries F. Side-effects of intravenous immunoglobulins. Clinical and Experimental Immunology 1994;97:79-83.
- Fraser EJ, Grimes DA, Schultz KF. Immunization as therapy for recurrent spontaneous abortion: a review and meta-analysis. Obstetrics & Gynecology 1993;82:854-9.
- Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 4.2.5 [updated May 2005]. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2005. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
- Hill JA. Immunological mechanisms of pregnancy maintenance and failure: a critique of theories and therapy. American Journal of Reproductive Immunology 1990;22:33-42.
- Johnson PM. Pregnancy immunology. Fetal Maternal Medicine Review 1992;4:1-14.
- Kwak JY, Kwak FMY, Ainbinder SW, Ruiz AM, Beer AG. Elevated peripheral blood natural killer cells are effectively suppressed by immunoglobulin G infusions in women with recurrent spontaneous abortion. American Journal of Reproductive Immunology 1996;35(4):363-9.
- Mellor AL, Sivakumar J, Chandler P, Smith K, Molina H, Mao D, et al. Prevention of T cell-driven complement activation and inflammation by tryptophan catabolism during pregnancy. Nature Immunology 2001;2:64-8.
- Morikawa 2001a Morikawa M, Yamada H, Kato EH, Shimada S, Ebina Y, Yamada T, et al. NK cell activity and subsets in women with a history of spontaneous abortion. Cause, number of abortions, and subsequent pregnancy outcome. Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation 2001;52:163-7.
- Morikawa 2001b Morikawa M, Yamada H, Kato EH, Shimada S, Kishi T, Yamada T, et al. Massive intravenous immunoglobulin treatment in women with four or more recurrent spontaneous abortions of unexplained etiology: down-regulation of NK cell activity and subsets. American Journal of Reproductive Immunology 2001;46:399-404.
- Pegoraro E, Whitaker J, Mowery-Ruston, Surti U, Lanasa M, Hoffman EP. Familial skewed X inactivation: a molecular trait associated with high spontaneous-abortion rate maps to Xq28. American Journal of Human Genetics 1997;61:160-70.
- Quenby S, Vince G, Farquharson R, Aplin J. Recurrent miscarriage: a defect in nature's quality control?. Human Reproduction 2002;17(8):1959-63.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Recurrent MiscarriageGreen‐top Guideline No. 17
Regan, L., Rai, R., Saravelos, S., Li, T., & the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (2023) · BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/1471-0528.17515 · Cited by 158 · see citing works
Progestogen for preventing miscarriage in women with recurrent miscarriage of unclear etiology
Haas, D. M., Hathaway, T. J., & Ramsey, P. S. (2018) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd003511.pub4 · Cited by 130 · see citing works
Toth, B., Würfel, W., Bohlmann, M., Zschocke, J., Rudnik-Schöneborn, S., Nawroth, F., Schleußner, E., Rogenhofer, N., Wischmann, T., von Wolff, M., et al. (2018) · Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · doi:10.1055/a-0586-4568 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Immunological Risk Factors in Recurrent Pregnancy Loss: Guidelines Versus Current State of the Art
Vomstein, K., Feil, K., Strobel, L., Aulitzky, A., Hofer-Tollinger, S., Kuon, R.-J., & Toth, B. (2021) · Journal of Clinical Medicine · doi:10.3390/jcm10040869 · Cited by 113 · see citing works
Bradley, L. A., Palomaki, G. E., Bienstock, J., Varga, E., & Scott, J. A. (2012) · Genetics in Medicine · doi:10.1038/gim.0b013e31822e575b · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Self-citationCare prior to and during subsequent pregnancies following stillbirth for improving outcomes
Wojcieszek, A. M., Shepherd, E., Middleton, P., Lassi, Z. S., Wilson, T., Murphy, M. M., Heazell, A. E., Ellwood, D. A., Silver, R. M., & Flenady, V. (2018) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd012203.pub2 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Immunologic Abnormalities, Treatments, and Recurrent Pregnancy Loss: What Is Real and What Is Not?
WANG, N. F., KOLTE, A. M., LARSEN, E. C., NIELSEN, H. S., & CHRISTIANSEN, O. B. (2016) · Clinical Obstetrics & Gynecology · doi:10.1097/grf.0000000000000215 · Cited by 43 · see citing works
Fertility after recurrent miscarriages: results of an observational cohort study
Kling, C., Hedderich, J., & Kabelitz, D. (2018) · Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics · doi:10.1007/s00404-017-4532-4 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
- Authors
- Wong, L. F., Porter, T. F., & Scott, J. R.
- Affiliations
- Intermountain Healthcare (US)
- University of Utah (US)
- ORCID
- Scott, James R
- Venue
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-10-21
- Volume
- 2014
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- CD000112-CD000112
- ISSN
- 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-1858
- PMC
- PMC7051032
- OpenAlex
- W2106808598
- Cited by
- 348
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 2.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Reproductive System and Pregnancy
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
- Keywords
- recurrent pregnancy loss, immunotherapy, intravenous immunoglobulin, live birth rate, unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss
- MeSH terms
- Abortion, Habitual, Female, Humans, Immunotherapy, Pregnancy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review