Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Joshua Davis's avatar

In 2020, ACOG put “universal screening for thyroid disease in pregnancy is not recommended” in its highest evidence tier, Level A, meaning “good and consistent scientific evidence.” The stated reason was that identifying and treating maternal subclinical hypothyroidism had not been shown to improve pregnancy outcomes or child neurocognitive outcomes. But that reason does not reach the conclusion. Universal thyroid screening does not only detect subclinical hypothyroidism; it also detects overt hypothyroidism and overt hyperthyroidism, which ACOG itself says should be treated to minimize adverse outcomes. Even stranger, ACOG graded its broad negative recommendation against universal screening as Level A, while its own alternative—targeted testing in women with risk factors or clinical suspicion—was only Level C, meaning consensus/expert opinion [1].

The RCT problem is worse. The major null neurocognitive trials, CATS and Casey/MFMU, are often used to argue against universal screening, but they mostly tested treatment that began too late to answer the early-screening question [2–4]. The lead author of CATS later coauthored a review stating that treatment in the major RCTs began at 13–18 weeks, “after the critical neurodevelopmental period,” and therefore may have been too late to affect fetal brain development [4]. A 2019 Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology cohort made the timing issue biologically concrete: the association between maternal TSH and child brain morphology was strongest early and was no longer detectable after about 14 weeks [5]. Meanwhile, positive but imperfect evidence, such as Ma 2015, reported lower miscarriage after screening/intervention for subclinical hypothyroidism [6]. So the honest guideline sentence would have been: “Evidence is limited, timing-sensitive, and conflicting.” Instead, the message became a confident recommendation against universal screening. That is not good science communication.

* Guideline-body problem: uncertainty about subclinical hypothyroidism was used to reject universal screening for all thyroid disease, including overt disease that guideline bodies agree should be treated [1,7].

* RCT problem: late-treatment trials do not answer whether preconception or very early first-trimester screening and treatment would improve outcomes [2–5].

* Science-communication problem: “has not been shown” or “no evidence” made a contested, timing-sensitive literature sound settled, despite positive but limited pregnancy-outcome evidence and cost-effectiveness evidence [6,8].

* Accountability problem: nobody has to prove bad faith first. The narrow question is whether a Level A recommendation against universal screening is actually supported by “good and consistent scientific evidence.” On this record, that level of certainty looks unearned.

References / source guide

[1] American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Practice Bulletin No. 223: Thyroid Disease in Pregnancy. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2020;135(6)–e274. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003893. See also Practice Bulletin Summary No. 223, Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2020;135(6):1496–1499. Key point: ACOG places “Universal screening for thyroid disease in pregnancy is not recommended because identification and treatment of maternal subclinical hypothyroidism has not been shown to result in improved pregnancy outcomes and neurocognitive function in offspring” under Level A recommendations, while “indicated testing” for women with personal/family history, type 1 diabetes, or clinical suspicion appears under Level C recommendations.

[2] Lazarus JH, Bestwick JP, Channon S, Paradice R, Maina A, Rees R, Chiusano E, John R, Guaraldo V, George LM, Perona M, Dall’Amico D, Parkes AB, Jooman M, Wald NJ. Antenatal Thyroid Screening and Childhood Cognitive Function. New England Journal of Medicine. 2012;366(6):493–501. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1106104. Commonly referred to as the CATS trial. Key point: a major RCT finding no significant child-IQ benefit from screening/treatment as implemented; important for later guideline discussions, but treatment timing is central to interpreting what it actually tested.

[3] Casey BM, Thom EA, Peaceman AM, Varner MW, Sorokin Y, Hirtz DG, Reddy UM, Wapner RJ, Thorp JM Jr, Saade G, Tita ATN, Rouse DJ, Sibai B, Iams JD, Mercer BM, Tolosa J, Caritis SN, VanDorsten JP, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal–Fetal Medicine Units Network. Treatment of Subclinical Hypothyroidism or Hypothyroxinemia in Pregnancy. New England Journal of Medicine. 2017;376(9):815–825. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1606205. Key point: another major null neurocognitive RCT; mean randomization/treatment timing was in the second trimester range, so it is not a clean test of very early first-trimester screening/treatment.

[4] Taylor PN, Zouras S, Min T, Nagarahaj K, Lazarus JH, Okosieme OE. Thyroid Screening in Early Pregnancy: Pros and Cons. Frontiers in Endocrinology. 2018;9:626. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2018.00626. PMCID: PMC6209822. Key point: this review, coauthored by John H. Lazarus, states that levothyroxine in major RCTs was initiated at a median gestational age of approximately 13–18 weeks, after the critical neurodevelopmental period, and therefore possibly too late to affect fetal brain development.

[5] Jansen TA, Korevaar TIM, Mulder TA, White T, Muetzel RL, Peeters RP, Tiemeier H. Maternal Thyroid Function During Pregnancy and Child Brain Morphology: A Time Window-Specific Analysis of a Prospective Cohort. The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology. 2019;7(8):629–637. DOI: 10.1016/S2213-8587(19)30153-6. Key point: maternal TSH was associated with child total gray matter and cortical gray matter volume most strongly in early pregnancy; after about 14 weeks’ gestation, TSH was no longer associated with child brain morphology.

[6] Ma L, Qi H, Chai X, Jiang F, Mao S, Liu J, Zhang S, Lian X, Sun X, Wang D, Ren J, Yan Q. The Effects of Screening and Intervention of Subclinical Hypothyroidism on Pregnancy Outcomes: A Prospective Multicenter Single-Blind, Randomized, Controlled Study of Thyroid Function Screening Test During Pregnancy. Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine. Published online 2015. DOI: 10.3109/14767058.2015.1049150. Key point: reported that screening/intervention for subclinical hypothyroidism significantly reduced miscarriage. Important limitation: cluster/randomization-by-center and unequal baseline characteristics mean this is not definitive proof that screening works, but it is enough to show the evidence record was not empty.

[7] Stagnaro-Green A, Dong A, Stephenson MD. Universal Screening for Thyroid Disease During Pregnancy Should Be Performed. Best Practice & Research Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. 2020;34(4):101320. DOI: 10.1016/j.beem.2019.101320. Key point: argues that evidence for universal screening for overt thyroid disease stands independently from the unresolved debate over subclinical hypothyroidism and thyroid autoimmunity.

[8] Dosiou C, Barnes J, Schwartz A, Negro R, Crapo L, Stagnaro-Green A. Cost-Effectiveness of Universal and Risk-Based Screening for Autoimmune Thyroid Disease in Pregnant Women. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. 2012;97(5):1536–1546. DOI: 10.1210/jc.2011-2884. Key point: universal first-trimester screening was cost-effective compared with risk-based screening and no screening; importantly, the analysis remained favorable even under scenarios where subclinical hypothyroidism treatment benefit was minimized or excluded.

No posts

Ready for more?