The global preclinical research and development landscape for pre-eclampsia and eclampsia therapies
4 affiliations
- 1Women’s, Children’s and Adolescent’s Health Program, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, VIC Australia
- 2School of Public Health and Preventative Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC Australia
- 3Impact Global Health, Sydney, NSW Australia
- 4Concept Foundation, Geneva, Switzerland
Abstract
Background: Surprisingly few medicines are available to prevent or manage pre-eclampsia, all of which are repurposed from non-pregnant populations and conditions. Analyses of clinical research and development pipelines for pre-eclampsia medicines have identified high-potential candidates; however, the preclinical pipeline has not been interrogated. To address this gap, we developed an approach to analyse and rank preclinical candidates and applied it to the preclinical pipeline for pre‑eclampsia and eclampsia.
Methods: We analysed and ranked the potential of 83 preclinical candidates for pre-eclampsia and eclampsia identified in the Maternal Health Pipeline spanning 2000 to 2025. Candidates were assessed across three domains – quality of preclinical evidence, product development stage and implementability. Each question in the prioritisation matrix was assigned a numerical value based on importance. The sum of these values was used to rank the potential of each candidate for future research.
Results: There is a total of 106 candidates in the preclinical pipeline. Twenty-three candidates are excluded from our analysis. Among the 83 candidates analysed, 11 high-potential candidates are identified, and the remaining candidates are ranked as medium (63 candidates) and low potential (nine candidates). Of the candidates analysed, 49.4% are new chemical or biological entities, 37 different binding targets are identified and the proposed mechanism of action for 32 candidates is a reduction in angiogenic factor sFlt-1.
Conclusions: High potential candidates should be prioritised for further development, but progress is restricted by current mechanisms of action and animal models. Increased investment is essential to advance pre-eclampsia therapies into clinical trials.
Related
- Clinical development landscape of CAR/TCR-engineered cellular therapies in musculoskeletal sarcomas: a TrialTrove-based registry analysis
- 618 A novel preclinical mouse model to investigate IL-18-targeting therapies
- 257 Preclinical evaluation of in vivo CAR-T therapies using human PBMC and HSC reconstituted mouse models in Biocytogen
- Comprehensive regulatory and developmental landscape of cell–scaffold combination therapies for osteoarthritis
- The current landscape of bladder-sparing therapies in BCG-refractory high-risk nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer.
BibTeX
@article{postregna2026global,
title = {{The global preclinical research and development landscape for pre-eclampsia and eclampsia therapies}},
author = {Jessica Postregna and Kate Mills and Fiona Bruinsma and Maya Goldstein and Andrew Tuttle and Lindsay Keir and Cecile Ventola and A. Metin Gülmezoglu and Anne Ammerdorffer and Joshua P. Vogel and Annie R. A. McDougall},
journal = {Communications Medicine},
year = {2026},
month = jul,
doi = {10.1038/s43856-026-01784-3},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1038/s43856-026-01784-3},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - The global preclinical research and development landscape for pre-eclampsia and eclampsia therapies
AU - Jessica Postregna
AU - Kate Mills
AU - Fiona Bruinsma
AU - Maya Goldstein
AU - Andrew Tuttle
AU - Lindsay Keir
AU - Cecile Ventola
AU - A. Metin Gülmezoglu
AU - Anne Ammerdorffer
AU - Joshua P. Vogel
AU - Annie R. A. McDougall
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/07/14
JO - Communications Medicine
DO - 10.1038/s43856-026-01784-3
UR - https://doi.org/10.1038/s43856-026-01784-3
AB - Background: Surprisingly few medicines are available to prevent or manage pre-eclampsia, all of which are repurposed from non-pregnant populations and conditions. Analyses of clinical research and development pipelines for pre-eclampsia medicines have identified high-potential candidates; however, the preclinical pipeline has not been interrogated. To address this gap, we developed an approach to analyse and rank preclinical candidates and applied it to the preclinical pipeline for pre‑eclampsia and eclampsia. Methods: We analysed and ranked the potential of 83 preclinical candidates for pre-eclampsia and eclampsia identified in the Maternal Health Pipeline spanning 2000 to 2025. Candidates were assessed across three domains – quality of preclinical evidence, product development stage and implementability. Each question in the prioritisation matrix was assigned a numerical value based on importance. The sum of these values was used to rank the potential of each candidate for future research. Results: There is a total of 106 candidates in the preclinical pipeline. Twenty-three candidates are excluded from our analysis. Among the 83 candidates analysed, 11 high-potential candidates are identified, and the remaining candidates are ranked as medium (63 candidates) and low potential (nine candidates). Of the candidates analysed, 49.4% are new chemical or biological entities, 37 different binding targets are identified and the proposed mechanism of action for 32 candidates is a reduction in angiogenic factor sFlt-1. Conclusions: High potential candidates should be prioritised for further development, but progress is restricted by current mechanisms of action and animal models. Increased investment is essential to advance pre-eclampsia therapies into clinical trials.
SN - 2730-664X
ER -