Friday August 17 1:17 PM ET
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Daughters of women who used the drug diethylstilbestrol (DES) while pregnant are at increased risk for infertility, according to the results of a new study.
DES, a synthetic form of estrogen, was introduced in 1941 as a drug that prevented miscarriage. An estimated 2.4 million US women took the drug before its use during pregnancy was banned in 1971.
The drug appears to cause structural changes in the reproductive organs of both female and male children exposed to DES before birth. Studies suggest that almost half of all DES-exposed daughters will experience complications in pregnancy, such as ectopic pregnancy or miscarriage, associated with DES-induced malformations. However, whether or not DES exposure affects fertility has not previously been determined.
``The results of the study indicate that DES-exposed women are more likely than are unexposed women to have difficulty in achieving a clinically recognized pregnancy and more likely to have tried to become pregnant for at least 12 months without success,'' write lead author Dr. Julie R. Palmer of Boston University School of Medicine in Massachusetts and colleagues.
The findings, published in the August issue of the American Journal of Epidemiology, are based on interviews with 1,753 women exposed to DES while still in the womb. The group was compared with 1,050 similarly aged women who were not exposed to DES.
``Twenty-eight percent of exposed and 16% of unexposed women reported having tried to become pregnant for at least 12 months without success,'' the report indicates.
Women exposed to DES were nearly eight times more likely than unexposed women to have infertility associated with uterine problems, the researchers found.
While the findings indicate that women exposed to DES are likely to have difficulty becoming pregnant, Palmer and colleagues note that their analysis ``relied on data from self-reports and not all participants will have remembered their infertility diagnosis accurately.''
SOURCE: American Journal of Epidemiology 2001;154:319-321.