Background: The use of antidepressants during pregnancy has increased in recent years. In the Netherlands, almost 2% of all pregnant women are exposed to antidepressants. Although guidelines have been developed on considerations that should be taken into account, prescribing antidepressants during pregnancy is still a subject of debate. Physicians and pharmacists may have opposing views on using medication during pregnancy and may give contradictory advice on whether or not to take medication for depression and anxiety disorders during pregnancy. In this study, we investigated information sources used by general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists and their common practices. Methods: A questionnaire on the use of information sources and the general approach when managing depression during pregnancy was sent out to 1400 health care professionals to assess information sources on drug safety during pregnancy and also the factors that influence decision-making. The questionnaires consisted predominantly of closed multiple-choice questions. Results: A total of 130 GPs (19%) and 144 pharmacists (21%) responded. The most popular source of information on the safety of drug use during pregnancy is the Dutch National Health Insurance System Formulary, while a minority of respondents contacts the Dutch national Teratology Information Service (TIS). The majority of GPs contact the pharmacy with questions concerning drug use during pregnancy. There is no clear line with regard to treatment or consensus between GPs on the best therapeutic strategy, nor do practitioners agree upon the drug of first choice. GPs have different views on stopping or continuing antidepressants during pregnancy or applying alternative treatment options. The debate appears to be ongoing as to whether or not specialised care for mother and child is indicated in cases of gestational antidepressant use. Conclusion: Primary health care workers are not univocal concerning therapy for pregnant women with depression. Although more research is needed to account for all safety issues, local or national policies are indispensable in order to avoid undesirable practices, such as giving contradictory advice. GPs and pharmacists should address the subject during their regular pharmacotherapeutic consensus meetings, preferably in collaboration with the TIS or other professionals in the field.

The prevalence of obesity has increased dramatically in the Western population. Obesity is known to influence not only the proportion of adipose tissue but also physiological processes that could alter drug pharmacokinetics. Yet, there are no specific dosing recommendations for radiopharmaceuticals in this patient population. This could potentially lead to underdosing and thus suboptimal treatment in obese patients, while it could also lead to drug toxicity due to high levels of radioactivity. In this review, relevant literature is summarized on radiopharmaceutical dosing and pharmacokinetic properties, and we aimed to translate these data into practical guidelines for dosing of radiopharmaceuticals in obese patients. For radium-223, dosing in obese patients is well established. Furthermore, for samarium-153-ethylenediaminetetramethylene (EDTMP), dose-escalation studies show that the maximum tolerated dose will probably not be reached in obese patients when dosing on MBq/kg. On the other hand, there is insufficient evidence to support dose recommendations in obese patients for rhenium-168-hydroxyethylidene diphosphonate (HEDP), sodium iodide-131, iodide 131-metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG), lutetium-177-dotatate, and lutetium-177-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA). From a pharmacokinetic perspective, fixed dosing may be appropriate for these drugs. More research into obese patient populations is needed, especially in the light of increasing prevalence of obesity worldwide.