This is a secondary analysis of a double-blind, randomized, multicenter, placebo-controlled study of the delayed-release combination of doxylamine succinate (10 mg) and pyridoxine hydrochloride (10 mg) (Diclegis®) in the treatment of NVP [12]. The study was approved by the IRB of the University of Texas, Galveston, University of Pittsburg and Georgetown University. The subjects were pregnant, at least 18 years of age, in the gestational age range of 7–14 weeks, suffering from NVP, had a PUQE score ≥ 6) [13-15], and had not responded to conservative management consisting of dietary/lifestyle advice [16]. Women treated by other antiemetics, suffering from chronic medical conditions, or those who could not communicate in either English or Spanish, were excluded. After physical examination and laboratory tests (hemoglobin and blood count, liver function tests, electrolytes, amylase), and after confirming in utero singleton pregnancies by ultrasound, women were randomized, using a computerized program, to receive Diclegis® (doxylamine succinate 10 mg and pyridoxine hydrochloride 10 mg) or placebo of similar look. Two tablets of study drug (Diclegis® or placebo) were administered at bedtime on Day 1. If symptoms of nausea and vomiting persisted into the afternoon hours of Day 2 (i.e., PUQE Score above 3), the subject was directed to take her usual dose of 2 tablets at bedtime and an additional tablet the next morning on Day 3. Based upon assessment in the clinic on Day 4 (+/−1 day), the subject might have been directed to take an additional 4th tablet mid-afternoon to control evening symptoms. The minimum assigned study medication was 2 tablets daily at bedtime, increasing when indicated to the maximal dosage of 4 tablets per day according to the timing, duration, severity, and frequency of the symptoms experienced by the subject. The study had a 15 day period consisting of 14 dosing days. Telephone contact was made on day 2, 6, 12, and 14 in order to assess subject diary information, adverse events (AEs), concomitant medications, and compliance with the study medication. Patients returned to the clinic in the morning prior to their morning dose on Day 4 (+/− 1 day), Day 8 (+/− 1 day), and on Day 15 (+/− 1 day; end of study visit) to collect diary report and complete all study related data.

Subjects completed the Pregnancy-Unique Quantification of Emesis (PUQE) score and the study diary (once daily every morning prior to study dose at approximately the same time each day). They also completed the Global Assessment of Well Being scale of the PUQE on Days 1, 8, and 14 at the same time the PUQE score was completed.

Adverse events and concomitant medications were recorded at all visits and follow-up phone calls. An additional follow-up phone call was conducted 30 days after last dosing to capture serious adverse events for patients completing the treatment period or early termination.

The results of the effectiveness of the drug in this trial have been previously published [12].

The frequency and severity of all AEs were tabulated by treatment group, system organ class, preferred term severity, and relationship to study drug. In addition, laboratory tests were conducted on Days 1 and15 (±1 day).

Adverse events (AEs) experienced by the subjects that occurred on or after Day 1 (after the patient signed the informed consent form) through Day 15, were compared between groups using Pearson’s Chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test if more appropriate. The available sample size has 80% power to show a doubling in CNS depression with alpha of 5%.

1. Koren G, Bishai R. Nausea and Vomiting of Pregnancy: State of the art, 2000, vol. 1. Toronto: The Motherisk Program; 2000. p. 5–9.Google Scholar
2. Arsenault MY, Lane CA, MacKinnon CJ, Bartellas E, Cargill YM, Klein MC, et al. SOGC clinical practice guidelines: the management of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2002;24(10):817–31.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
3. Koren G, Pastuszak A, Ito S. Drugs in pregnancy. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:1128–37.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
4. Food and Drug administration U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Services, Talk Paper. 1983.Google Scholar
5. Federal Register /Vol. 64, No 152/August 9, 1999/Notes, Determination that Bendectin was not withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness.Google Scholar
6. Neutel CI, Johansen HL. Measuring drug effectiveness by default: the case of Bendectin. Can J Public Health. 1995;86(1):66–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
7. Kutcher JS, Engle A, Firth J, Lamm SH. Bendectin and birth defects. II: ecological analyses. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2003;67(2):79–87.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
8. McKeigue PM, Lamm SH, Linn S, Kutcher JS. Bendectin and birth defects: I. A metaanalysis of the epidemiologic studies. Teratology. 1994;50(1):27–37.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
9. Einarson TR, Leeder JS, Koren G. A method for meta-analysis of epidemiological studies. Drug Intell Clin Pharm. 1988;22(10):813–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
10. Diclectin®. Product Monograph. Blainville Quebec, Canada: Duchesnay Inc; 2008.Google Scholar
11. Nulman I, Koren G. Pharmacokinetic comparison of a delayed-release combination of doxylamine succinate and pyridoxine hydrochloride (Diclectin®) and oral solutions of these drugs in healthy women of childbearing age. Can J Clin Pharmacol. 2009;16(3):e400–6. Fall 2009.PubMedGoogle Scholar
12. Koren G, Clark S, Hankins GD, Caritis SN, Miodovnik M, Umans JG, et al. Effectiveness of delayed-release doxylamine and pyridoxine for nausea and vomiting of pregnancy: a randomized placebo controlled trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203(6):571. e1-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
13. Koren G, Boskovic R, Hard M, Maltepe C, Navioz Y, Einarson A. Motherisk-PUQE (pregnancy-unique quantification of emesis and nausea) scoring system for nausea and vomiting of pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;186(5):S228–31.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
14. Koren G, Piwko C, Ahn E, Boskovic R, Maltepe C, Einarson A, et al. Validation studies of the Pregnancy Unique-Quantification of Emesis (PUQE) scores. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2005;25(3):241–4.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
15. Ebrahimi N, Maltepe C, Garcia-Bournissen F, Koren G. Nausea and vomiting of pregnancy: using the 24-hour pregnancy-unique quantification of emesis (PUQE-24) scale. J Obstet Gynecol Can. 2009;31:803–7.Google Scholar
16. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Nausea and vomiting of pregnancy. ACOG Practice Bulletin No 52. 2004;103(4):803–15.Google Scholar
17. Ornstein M, Einarson A, Koren G. Bendectin/diclectin for morning sickness: a Canadian follow-up of an American tragedy. Reprod Toxicol. 1995;9(1):1–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
18. Boskovic R, Einarson A, Maltepe C, Wolpin J, Koren G. Diclectin therapy for nausea and vomiting of pregnancy: effects of optimal dosing. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2003;25(10):830–3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
19. Atanackovic G, Navioz Y, Moretti ME, Koren G. The safety of higher than standard dose of doxylamine succinate-pyridoxine hydrochloride (Diclectin) for nausea and vomiting of pregnancy. J Clin Pharmacol. 2001;41(8):842–5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
20. Nulman I, Rovet J, Barrera M, Knittel-Keren D, Feldman BM, Koren G. Long-term neurodevelopment of children exposed to maternal nausea and vomiting of pregnancy and diclectin. J Pediatr. 2009;155(1):45–50.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
21. Redelmeie DAR, May SC, Thiruchelvam D, Barrett JF. Pregnancy and the risk of a traffic crash. CMAJ May 12, 2014 doi:10.1503/cmaj.131650.Google Scholar