Heidi Splete

The recent rise in pertussis rates may have peaked, but the experts are responding by reinstating a working group.

The new working group for pertussis was announced at a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. The ACIP’s new group, led by Fiona Havers, MD, of the CDC, heard data on the currently available pertussis vaccines and solicited ideas from ACIP members about what other data they would like before the February meeting.

One question on the agenda is whether the current recommendation that nonpregnant adults receive a single lifetime dose of Tdap and then tetanus-diphtheria (Td) boosters every 10 years be expanded to allow either Tdap or Td as the booster. Reasons for considering the change include possible changes in the circulating pertussis strain, improved diagnosis and reporting, and the waning of protection under the current guidelines, as well as the potential economic impact, Dr. Havers said.

This change could make booster administration easier for many physicians who do not routinely stock Td, some committee members noted. In addition, the Food and Drug Administration has approved a label change for one Tdap manufacturer to remove “single use” language.

In a study presented by David P. Greenberg, MD, associate vice president of Sanofi Pasteur, seroprotection rates to tetanus and diphtheria were similar in a comparison between groups of adults aged 18 years and older, receiving either Tdap (Adacel) or Td as a booster. “Seroprotection was greater than 99% in both groups,” he said.

Pain was the most common injection site reaction in both groups, rates of serious adverse events were similarly low (0.8% and 0.3%, respectively), and no deaths occurred in patients given either vaccine.

The postvaccination antipertussis geometric mean concentrations were noninferior in the Tdap group, compared with the Td group, Dr. Greenberg said.

A phase III open label study presented by Leonard Silverstein, MD, of GlaxoSmithKline also showed similar seroprotection rates for adults revaccinated with Tdap after an initial vaccination with either of two different Tdap vaccines.

Also at the February meeting, the committee will address whether any vaccine that contained Td should be allowed for use as tetanus prophylaxis in the setting of wound management, said Dr. Havers.

The committee members expressed interest in more information on several topics including pregnancy and pertussis, whether manufacturers could discuss vaccines in the pipeline, data on responses to multiple doses and if there is a point of diminishing returns, and whether some states are covering Tdap for adults.

The committee members had no financial conflicts to disclose.

The recent rise in pertussis rates may have peaked, but the experts are responding by reinstating a working group.

The new working group for pertussis was announced at a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. The ACIP’s new group, led by Fiona Havers, MD, of the CDC, heard data on the currently available pertussis vaccines and solicited ideas from ACIP members about what other data they would like before the February meeting.

One question on the agenda is whether the current recommendation that nonpregnant adults receive a single lifetime dose of Tdap and then tetanus-diphtheria (Td) boosters every 10 years be expanded to allow either Tdap or Td as the booster. Reasons for considering the change include possible changes in the circulating pertussis strain, improved diagnosis and reporting, and the waning of protection under the current guidelines, as well as the potential economic impact, Dr. Havers said.

This change could make booster administration easier for many physicians who do not routinely stock Td, some committee members noted. In addition, the Food and Drug Administration has approved a label change for one Tdap manufacturer to remove “single use” language.

In a study presented by David P. Greenberg, MD, associate vice president of Sanofi Pasteur, seroprotection rates to tetanus and diphtheria were similar in a comparison between groups of adults aged 18 years and older, receiving either Tdap (Adacel) or Td as a booster. “Seroprotection was greater than 99% in both groups,” he said.

Pain was the most common injection site reaction in both groups, rates of serious adverse events were similarly low (0.8% and 0.3%, respectively), and no deaths occurred in patients given either vaccine.

The postvaccination antipertussis geometric mean concentrations were noninferior in the Tdap group, compared with the Td group, Dr. Greenberg said.

A phase III open label study presented by Leonard Silverstein, MD, of GlaxoSmithKline also showed similar seroprotection rates for adults revaccinated with Tdap after an initial vaccination with either of two different Tdap vaccines.

Also at the February meeting, the committee will address whether any vaccine that contained Td should be allowed for use as tetanus prophylaxis in the setting of wound management, said Dr. Havers.

The committee members expressed interest in more information on several topics including pregnancy and pertussis, whether manufacturers could discuss vaccines in the pipeline, data on responses to multiple doses and if there is a point of diminishing returns, and whether some states are covering Tdap for adults.

The committee members had no financial conflicts to disclose.

The recent rise in pertussis rates may have peaked, but the experts are responding by reinstating a working group.

The new working group for pertussis was announced at a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. The ACIP’s new group, led by Fiona Havers, MD, of the CDC, heard data on the currently available pertussis vaccines and solicited ideas from ACIP members about what other data they would like before the February meeting.

One question on the agenda is whether the current recommendation that nonpregnant adults receive a single lifetime dose of Tdap and then tetanus-diphtheria (Td) boosters every 10 years be expanded to allow either Tdap or Td as the booster. Reasons for considering the change include possible changes in the circulating pertussis strain, improved diagnosis and reporting, and the waning of protection under the current guidelines, as well as the potential economic impact, Dr. Havers said.

This change could make booster administration easier for many physicians who do not routinely stock Td, some committee members noted. In addition, the Food and Drug Administration has approved a label change for one Tdap manufacturer to remove “single use” language.

In a study presented by David P. Greenberg, MD, associate vice president of Sanofi Pasteur, seroprotection rates to tetanus and diphtheria were similar in a comparison between groups of adults aged 18 years and older, receiving either Tdap (Adacel) or Td as a booster. “Seroprotection was greater than 99% in both groups,” he said.

Pain was the most common injection site reaction in both groups, rates of serious adverse events were similarly low (0.8% and 0.3%, respectively), and no deaths occurred in patients given either vaccine.

The postvaccination antipertussis geometric mean concentrations were noninferior in the Tdap group, compared with the Td group, Dr. Greenberg said.

A phase III open label study presented by Leonard Silverstein, MD, of GlaxoSmithKline also showed similar seroprotection rates for adults revaccinated with Tdap after an initial vaccination with either of two different Tdap vaccines.

Also at the February meeting, the committee will address whether any vaccine that contained Td should be allowed for use as tetanus prophylaxis in the setting of wound management, said Dr. Havers.

The committee members expressed interest in more information on several topics including pregnancy and pertussis, whether manufacturers could discuss vaccines in the pipeline, data on responses to multiple doses and if there is a point of diminishing returns, and whether some states are covering Tdap for adults.

The committee members had no financial conflicts to disclose.

WASHINGTON – Genetic developments may create a new medical model for patients with rare diseases and the doctors who treat them, according to Marshall Summar, MD, chief of genetics and metabolism at Children’s National Medical Center in Washington, D.C.

In an interview at the NORD Rare Summit, held by the National Organization for Rare Disorders, Dr. Summar and Peter L. Saltonstall, president and CEO of NORD, discussed hot topics in the rare disease field. Those include new knowledge of the natural history of rare diseases, made possible by the creation of patient databases and the expansion of genetic technology. In addition, some DNA therapies “are finally crossing the finish line,” said Dr. Summar. That means clinicians will be looking at some rare diseases as acute conditions rather than chronic.

However, patients with rare diseases continue to face challenges in terms of the need for prior authorization and for drug access. One of NORD’s missions is to help patients access treatment. “We are seeing these prior authorizations take weeks or even longer,” Mr. Saltonstall said – and meanwhile, patients aren’t receiving therapy.

Visit rarediseases.org for more information about NORD’s ongoing research and advocacy efforts.

Dr. Summar and Mr. Saltonstall had no financial conflicts to disclose.

WASHINGTON – Genetic developments may create a new medical model for patients with rare diseases and the doctors who treat them, according to Marshall Summar, MD, chief of genetics and metabolism at Children’s National Medical Center in Washington, D.C.

In an interview at the NORD Rare Summit, held by the National Organization for Rare Disorders, Dr. Summar and Peter L. Saltonstall, president and CEO of NORD, discussed hot topics in the rare disease field. Those include new knowledge of the natural history of rare diseases, made possible by the creation of patient databases and the expansion of genetic technology. In addition, some DNA therapies “are finally crossing the finish line,” said Dr. Summar. That means clinicians will be looking at some rare diseases as acute conditions rather than chronic.

However, patients with rare diseases continue to face challenges in terms of the need for prior authorization and for drug access. One of NORD’s missions is to help patients access treatment. “We are seeing these prior authorizations take weeks or even longer,” Mr. Saltonstall said – and meanwhile, patients aren’t receiving therapy.

Visit rarediseases.org for more information about NORD’s ongoing research and advocacy efforts.

Dr. Summar and Mr. Saltonstall had no financial conflicts to disclose.

WASHINGTON – Genetic developments may create a new medical model for patients with rare diseases and the doctors who treat them, according to Marshall Summar, MD, chief of genetics and metabolism at Children’s National Medical Center in Washington, D.C.

In an interview at the NORD Rare Summit, held by the National Organization for Rare Disorders, Dr. Summar and Peter L. Saltonstall, president and CEO of NORD, discussed hot topics in the rare disease field. Those include new knowledge of the natural history of rare diseases, made possible by the creation of patient databases and the expansion of genetic technology. In addition, some DNA therapies “are finally crossing the finish line,” said Dr. Summar. That means clinicians will be looking at some rare diseases as acute conditions rather than chronic.

However, patients with rare diseases continue to face challenges in terms of the need for prior authorization and for drug access. One of NORD’s missions is to help patients access treatment. “We are seeing these prior authorizations take weeks or even longer,” Mr. Saltonstall said – and meanwhile, patients aren’t receiving therapy.

Visit rarediseases.org for more information about NORD’s ongoing research and advocacy efforts.

Dr. Summar and Mr. Saltonstall had no financial conflicts to disclose.

WASHINGTON – Physicians in primary and specialty care can provide guidance and support to patients with rare diseases by educating themselves about the resources available, according to Tim Boyd, director of state policy for the National Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD).

In an interview at the NORD Rare Summit, held by the National Organization for Rare Disorders, Mr. Boyd and Melinda Burnworth, PharmD, a pharmacist and NORD state volunteer from Arizona, discussed challenges faced by patients with rare diseases, including securing a correct diagnosis, accessing medication, and managing treatment going forward.

Physicians who understand some of the barriers to medication access can help advocate for their patients, explained Mr. Boyd, and those who know about resources for rare disorders can help make a diagnosis.

“All health care providers have an opportunity to enhance care for patients with rare disorders,” said Dr. Burnworth, author of the Rare Disease eResource Guide, available through the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists. Visit rarediseases.org for more information about NORD’s ongoing research and advocacy efforts.

Mr. Boyd and Dr. Burnworth had no financial conflicts to disclose.

WASHINGTON – Physicians in primary and specialty care can provide guidance and support to patients with rare diseases by educating themselves about the resources available, according to Tim Boyd, director of state policy for the National Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD).

In an interview at the NORD Rare Summit, held by the National Organization for Rare Disorders, Mr. Boyd and Melinda Burnworth, PharmD, a pharmacist and NORD state volunteer from Arizona, discussed challenges faced by patients with rare diseases, including securing a correct diagnosis, accessing medication, and managing treatment going forward.

Physicians who understand some of the barriers to medication access can help advocate for their patients, explained Mr. Boyd, and those who know about resources for rare disorders can help make a diagnosis.

“All health care providers have an opportunity to enhance care for patients with rare disorders,” said Dr. Burnworth, author of the Rare Disease eResource Guide, available through the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists. Visit rarediseases.org for more information about NORD’s ongoing research and advocacy efforts.

Mr. Boyd and Dr. Burnworth had no financial conflicts to disclose.

WASHINGTON – Physicians in primary and specialty care can provide guidance and support to patients with rare diseases by educating themselves about the resources available, according to Tim Boyd, director of state policy for the National Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD).

In an interview at the NORD Rare Summit, held by the National Organization for Rare Disorders, Mr. Boyd and Melinda Burnworth, PharmD, a pharmacist and NORD state volunteer from Arizona, discussed challenges faced by patients with rare diseases, including securing a correct diagnosis, accessing medication, and managing treatment going forward.

Physicians who understand some of the barriers to medication access can help advocate for their patients, explained Mr. Boyd, and those who know about resources for rare disorders can help make a diagnosis.

“All health care providers have an opportunity to enhance care for patients with rare disorders,” said Dr. Burnworth, author of the Rare Disease eResource Guide, available through the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists. Visit rarediseases.org for more information about NORD’s ongoing research and advocacy efforts.

Mr. Boyd and Dr. Burnworth had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Clinicians consulting the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices vaccination schedules for children, adolescents, and adults in 2019 will find a simpler design and more useful product, according to David Kim, MD, of the Immunization Services Division of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta.

In a single vote to cover both adult and child/adolescent schedules, the committee voted unanimously in favor of a redesign of the schedules and several clinical updates.

In 2016, the working group for vaccination schedules conducted an ad hoc evaluation of the adult schedule to assess its usability, Dr. Kim said at a meeting of the CDC’s ACIP.

The design of the adult schedule was fully evaluated in 2018 via a three-step process – interviews with 48 health care providers, a redesign of the schedule, and a survey after the redesign. Design changes to the child/adolescent schedule were harmonized with the adult schedule, Dr. Kim explained.

The adult vaccination schedule itself includes several updates in ACIP recommendations in addition to the aesthetic design changes.

The 2019 Adult Immunization Schedule includes the option of the live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) for influenza, the addition of homelessness as an indication for hepatitis A vaccination, and the use of CpG-adjuvanted hepatitis B vaccine, Dr. Kim said.

The additions to the 2019 Child and Adolescent Immunization Schedule are the optional use of the LAIV for influenza, the addition of homelessness as an indication for hepatitis A vaccination, the use of CpG-adjuvanted hepatitis B vaccine (a cytosine phosphoguanosine oligodeoxynucleotide adjuvant), and the addition of the Tdap vaccination of individuals who received Tdap at age 7-10 years.

Some of the key design changes include the use of bright purple on the child/adolescent schedule to more easily distinguish it from the adult version, said Dr. Kim.

Other changes to both schedules include shorter titles, lists of vaccines and trade names, and compartmentalized information for easier reference. Figures have been replaced by tables, and footnotes are simply “Notes” at the end of the schedule, compartmentalized for easier reading, he said. In addition, the schedules include resources for vaccination in outbreak situations and a section on how to report vaccine preventable disease outbreaks.

The ACIP committee members had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.

Clinicians consulting the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices vaccination schedules for children, adolescents, and adults in 2019 will find a simpler design and more useful product, according to David Kim, MD, of the Immunization Services Division of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta.

In a single vote to cover both adult and child/adolescent schedules, the committee voted unanimously in favor of a redesign of the schedules and several clinical updates.

In 2016, the working group for vaccination schedules conducted an ad hoc evaluation of the adult schedule to assess its usability, Dr. Kim said at a meeting of the CDC’s ACIP.

The design of the adult schedule was fully evaluated in 2018 via a three-step process – interviews with 48 health care providers, a redesign of the schedule, and a survey after the redesign. Design changes to the child/adolescent schedule were harmonized with the adult schedule, Dr. Kim explained.

The adult vaccination schedule itself includes several updates in ACIP recommendations in addition to the aesthetic design changes.

The 2019 Adult Immunization Schedule includes the option of the live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) for influenza, the addition of homelessness as an indication for hepatitis A vaccination, and the use of CpG-adjuvanted hepatitis B vaccine, Dr. Kim said.

The additions to the 2019 Child and Adolescent Immunization Schedule are the optional use of the LAIV for influenza, the addition of homelessness as an indication for hepatitis A vaccination, the use of CpG-adjuvanted hepatitis B vaccine (a cytosine phosphoguanosine oligodeoxynucleotide adjuvant), and the addition of the Tdap vaccination of individuals who received Tdap at age 7-10 years.

Some of the key design changes include the use of bright purple on the child/adolescent schedule to more easily distinguish it from the adult version, said Dr. Kim.

Other changes to both schedules include shorter titles, lists of vaccines and trade names, and compartmentalized information for easier reference. Figures have been replaced by tables, and footnotes are simply “Notes” at the end of the schedule, compartmentalized for easier reading, he said. In addition, the schedules include resources for vaccination in outbreak situations and a section on how to report vaccine preventable disease outbreaks.

The ACIP committee members had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.

Clinicians consulting the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices vaccination schedules for children, adolescents, and adults in 2019 will find a simpler design and more useful product, according to David Kim, MD, of the Immunization Services Division of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta.

In a single vote to cover both adult and child/adolescent schedules, the committee voted unanimously in favor of a redesign of the schedules and several clinical updates.

In 2016, the working group for vaccination schedules conducted an ad hoc evaluation of the adult schedule to assess its usability, Dr. Kim said at a meeting of the CDC’s ACIP.

The design of the adult schedule was fully evaluated in 2018 via a three-step process – interviews with 48 health care providers, a redesign of the schedule, and a survey after the redesign. Design changes to the child/adolescent schedule were harmonized with the adult schedule, Dr. Kim explained.

The adult vaccination schedule itself includes several updates in ACIP recommendations in addition to the aesthetic design changes.

The 2019 Adult Immunization Schedule includes the option of the live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) for influenza, the addition of homelessness as an indication for hepatitis A vaccination, and the use of CpG-adjuvanted hepatitis B vaccine, Dr. Kim said.

The additions to the 2019 Child and Adolescent Immunization Schedule are the optional use of the LAIV for influenza, the addition of homelessness as an indication for hepatitis A vaccination, the use of CpG-adjuvanted hepatitis B vaccine (a cytosine phosphoguanosine oligodeoxynucleotide adjuvant), and the addition of the Tdap vaccination of individuals who received Tdap at age 7-10 years.

Some of the key design changes include the use of bright purple on the child/adolescent schedule to more easily distinguish it from the adult version, said Dr. Kim.

Other changes to both schedules include shorter titles, lists of vaccines and trade names, and compartmentalized information for easier reference. Figures have been replaced by tables, and footnotes are simply “Notes” at the end of the schedule, compartmentalized for easier reading, he said. In addition, the schedules include resources for vaccination in outbreak situations and a section on how to report vaccine preventable disease outbreaks.

The ACIP committee members had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.

Homeless individuals aged 1 year and older should be vaccinated against hepatitis A, based on a unanimous vote at a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.

©vchal/Thinkstock

“It is important that we take a national approach to vaccinating homeless” people, Noele Nelson, MD, PhD, MPH, of the CDC’s Division of Viral Hepatitis, said in a presentation prior to the vote, in which all 11 committee members voted in favor of hepatitis A vaccination for the homeless population.

Even limited vaccination will increase the herd immunity of the homeless population over time, she said.

Dr. Nelson presented data on the pros and cons of routine hepatitis A vaccination for homeless individuals aged 1 year and older. The Hepatitis Vaccines Work Group convened four meetings in advance of the October ACIP meeting and reached a consensus that homelessness is an independent indication for hepatitis A vaccination, she said.

If the hepatitis A vaccine is included as an ACIP recommendation, “it is more likely to be considered by homeless service providers,” noted Dr. Nelson. She also cited a low quality of evidence for adverse events associated with hepatitis A vaccination.

The work group considerations in the wake of a nationwide hepatitis A outbreak earlier in 2018 included the challenges of controlling outbreaks, which can spread quickly among the homeless population because of poor personal hygiene, limited sanitation, and tight living quarters. These factors make the homeless population more reliant on a vaccine for protection. An outbreak in San Diego, Calif., in particular, occurred largely in the homeless population.

“Routine vaccination is a more feasible approach to reach the homeless over time through regular homeless care providers,” Dr. Nelson said. As for costs, integrating vaccination into routine care for the homeless is cheaper and much less disruptive than the cost of responding to an outbreak.

The “cons” of recommending routine hepatitis A vaccination for the homeless population included the challenges of administrative record keeping. However, during the public comment period, Mae Morgan, MD, an internist who is medical director of Mercy Care Decatur Street & City of Refuge in Atlanta, emphasized that local homeless care organizations have procedures to manage routine vaccination. “If anyone is concerned that there is not a network in place, there are health centers to do this [that] would implement the vaccine.”

The ACIP committee members had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Homeless individuals aged 1 year and older should be vaccinated against hepatitis A, based on a unanimous vote at a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.

©vchal/Thinkstock

“It is important that we take a national approach to vaccinating homeless” people, Noele Nelson, MD, PhD, MPH, of the CDC’s Division of Viral Hepatitis, said in a presentation prior to the vote, in which all 11 committee members voted in favor of hepatitis A vaccination for the homeless population.

Even limited vaccination will increase the herd immunity of the homeless population over time, she said.

Dr. Nelson presented data on the pros and cons of routine hepatitis A vaccination for homeless individuals aged 1 year and older. The Hepatitis Vaccines Work Group convened four meetings in advance of the October ACIP meeting and reached a consensus that homelessness is an independent indication for hepatitis A vaccination, she said.

If the hepatitis A vaccine is included as an ACIP recommendation, “it is more likely to be considered by homeless service providers,” noted Dr. Nelson. She also cited a low quality of evidence for adverse events associated with hepatitis A vaccination.

The work group considerations in the wake of a nationwide hepatitis A outbreak earlier in 2018 included the challenges of controlling outbreaks, which can spread quickly among the homeless population because of poor personal hygiene, limited sanitation, and tight living quarters. These factors make the homeless population more reliant on a vaccine for protection. An outbreak in San Diego, Calif., in particular, occurred largely in the homeless population.

“Routine vaccination is a more feasible approach to reach the homeless over time through regular homeless care providers,” Dr. Nelson said. As for costs, integrating vaccination into routine care for the homeless is cheaper and much less disruptive than the cost of responding to an outbreak.

The “cons” of recommending routine hepatitis A vaccination for the homeless population included the challenges of administrative record keeping. However, during the public comment period, Mae Morgan, MD, an internist who is medical director of Mercy Care Decatur Street & City of Refuge in Atlanta, emphasized that local homeless care organizations have procedures to manage routine vaccination. “If anyone is concerned that there is not a network in place, there are health centers to do this [that] would implement the vaccine.”

The ACIP committee members had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Homeless individuals aged 1 year and older should be vaccinated against hepatitis A, based on a unanimous vote at a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices.

©vchal/Thinkstock

“It is important that we take a national approach to vaccinating homeless” people, Noele Nelson, MD, PhD, MPH, of the CDC’s Division of Viral Hepatitis, said in a presentation prior to the vote, in which all 11 committee members voted in favor of hepatitis A vaccination for the homeless population.

Even limited vaccination will increase the herd immunity of the homeless population over time, she said.

Dr. Nelson presented data on the pros and cons of routine hepatitis A vaccination for homeless individuals aged 1 year and older. The Hepatitis Vaccines Work Group convened four meetings in advance of the October ACIP meeting and reached a consensus that homelessness is an independent indication for hepatitis A vaccination, she said.

If the hepatitis A vaccine is included as an ACIP recommendation, “it is more likely to be considered by homeless service providers,” noted Dr. Nelson. She also cited a low quality of evidence for adverse events associated with hepatitis A vaccination.

The work group considerations in the wake of a nationwide hepatitis A outbreak earlier in 2018 included the challenges of controlling outbreaks, which can spread quickly among the homeless population because of poor personal hygiene, limited sanitation, and tight living quarters. These factors make the homeless population more reliant on a vaccine for protection. An outbreak in San Diego, Calif., in particular, occurred largely in the homeless population.

“Routine vaccination is a more feasible approach to reach the homeless over time through regular homeless care providers,” Dr. Nelson said. As for costs, integrating vaccination into routine care for the homeless is cheaper and much less disruptive than the cost of responding to an outbreak.

The “cons” of recommending routine hepatitis A vaccination for the homeless population included the challenges of administrative record keeping. However, during the public comment period, Mae Morgan, MD, an internist who is medical director of Mercy Care Decatur Street & City of Refuge in Atlanta, emphasized that local homeless care organizations have procedures to manage routine vaccination. “If anyone is concerned that there is not a network in place, there are health centers to do this [that] would implement the vaccine.”

The ACIP committee members had no financial conflicts to disclose.

WASHINGTON – Ataxia is the most common symptom at disease onset in patients with opsoclonus-myoclonus syndrome (OMS), a rare disease affecting only 1 in 5,000,000 individuals, mostly aged 1-5 years, based on data from a new patient registry.

In partnership with the National Organization of Rare Disorders (NORD) the nonprofit OMSLife Foundation has created a patient registry to better understand the disease experience in patients, wrote Mike Michaelis, chairman of OMSLife, and his colleagues. Early data from 275 enrolled patients were presented in a poster at the NORD Rare Summit, held by the National Organization for Rare Disorders.

The registry patients were mainly born in the United States (86%) and white (74%); approximately half were female. Of 150 patients who indicated symptoms at onset, 87% reported ataxia. Additional symptoms at onset were myoclonus (61%), opsoclonus (59%), tremors (46%), sleep disturbances (45%), temper tantrums (38%), vomiting (27%), fever (13%), headache (9%) and other symptoms (13%).

The researchers reviewed associations of symptoms at onset to determine the frequency of other symptoms for each individual symptom. Ataxia was present with 89% or higher instances of the other reported symptoms. Of note, some symptoms occurred more frequently than expected, such as temper tantrums and tremors in approximately 70% of patients with sleep disturbances. Myoclonus and opsoclonus, as well as fever and vomiting, also were significantly associated with the presence of other symptoms.

Two-thirds of the registry patients (69%) were diagnosed within 3 months of symptom onset, and 83% of these were diagnosed by a neurologist. Based on the Mitchell-Pike OMS severity scale, 59% of the patients met criteria for severe disease, 34% were classified as moderate, and 7% were mild. The registry is ongoing, but the current data provide insight on the clinical picture and common symptoms of OMS, the researchers said.

OMS Life was established in 2012 to support patients, caregivers, and researchers in raising awareness of opsoclonus-myoclonus syndrome as well as funds for research.

The study was supported by the OMSLife Foundation, NORD, and Trio Health Analytics. The researchers are employed by these organizations.

WASHINGTON – Ataxia is the most common symptom at disease onset in patients with opsoclonus-myoclonus syndrome (OMS), a rare disease affecting only 1 in 5,000,000 individuals, mostly aged 1-5 years, based on data from a new patient registry.

In partnership with the National Organization of Rare Disorders (NORD) the nonprofit OMSLife Foundation has created a patient registry to better understand the disease experience in patients, wrote Mike Michaelis, chairman of OMSLife, and his colleagues. Early data from 275 enrolled patients were presented in a poster at the NORD Rare Summit, held by the National Organization for Rare Disorders.

The registry patients were mainly born in the United States (86%) and white (74%); approximately half were female. Of 150 patients who indicated symptoms at onset, 87% reported ataxia. Additional symptoms at onset were myoclonus (61%), opsoclonus (59%), tremors (46%), sleep disturbances (45%), temper tantrums (38%), vomiting (27%), fever (13%), headache (9%) and other symptoms (13%).

The researchers reviewed associations of symptoms at onset to determine the frequency of other symptoms for each individual symptom. Ataxia was present with 89% or higher instances of the other reported symptoms. Of note, some symptoms occurred more frequently than expected, such as temper tantrums and tremors in approximately 70% of patients with sleep disturbances. Myoclonus and opsoclonus, as well as fever and vomiting, also were significantly associated with the presence of other symptoms.

Two-thirds of the registry patients (69%) were diagnosed within 3 months of symptom onset, and 83% of these were diagnosed by a neurologist. Based on the Mitchell-Pike OMS severity scale, 59% of the patients met criteria for severe disease, 34% were classified as moderate, and 7% were mild. The registry is ongoing, but the current data provide insight on the clinical picture and common symptoms of OMS, the researchers said.

OMS Life was established in 2012 to support patients, caregivers, and researchers in raising awareness of opsoclonus-myoclonus syndrome as well as funds for research.

The study was supported by the OMSLife Foundation, NORD, and Trio Health Analytics. The researchers are employed by these organizations.

WASHINGTON – Ataxia is the most common symptom at disease onset in patients with opsoclonus-myoclonus syndrome (OMS), a rare disease affecting only 1 in 5,000,000 individuals, mostly aged 1-5 years, based on data from a new patient registry.

In partnership with the National Organization of Rare Disorders (NORD) the nonprofit OMSLife Foundation has created a patient registry to better understand the disease experience in patients, wrote Mike Michaelis, chairman of OMSLife, and his colleagues. Early data from 275 enrolled patients were presented in a poster at the NORD Rare Summit, held by the National Organization for Rare Disorders.

The registry patients were mainly born in the United States (86%) and white (74%); approximately half were female. Of 150 patients who indicated symptoms at onset, 87% reported ataxia. Additional symptoms at onset were myoclonus (61%), opsoclonus (59%), tremors (46%), sleep disturbances (45%), temper tantrums (38%), vomiting (27%), fever (13%), headache (9%) and other symptoms (13%).

The researchers reviewed associations of symptoms at onset to determine the frequency of other symptoms for each individual symptom. Ataxia was present with 89% or higher instances of the other reported symptoms. Of note, some symptoms occurred more frequently than expected, such as temper tantrums and tremors in approximately 70% of patients with sleep disturbances. Myoclonus and opsoclonus, as well as fever and vomiting, also were significantly associated with the presence of other symptoms.

Two-thirds of the registry patients (69%) were diagnosed within 3 months of symptom onset, and 83% of these were diagnosed by a neurologist. Based on the Mitchell-Pike OMS severity scale, 59% of the patients met criteria for severe disease, 34% were classified as moderate, and 7% were mild. The registry is ongoing, but the current data provide insight on the clinical picture and common symptoms of OMS, the researchers said.

OMS Life was established in 2012 to support patients, caregivers, and researchers in raising awareness of opsoclonus-myoclonus syndrome as well as funds for research.

The study was supported by the OMSLife Foundation, NORD, and Trio Health Analytics. The researchers are employed by these organizations.

All women of reproductive age should be screened for intimate partner violence, according to updated recommendations from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Intimate partner violence (IPV), defined to include sexual violence, physical violence, and stalking, occurs in approximately 36% of women and 33% of men in the United States, the Task Force members said.

Photodisc/Thinkstock

The screening of women of reproductive age is a B recommendation. However, evidence remains insufficient to recommend routine screening for IPV for men, and screening for abuse in elders and vulnerable adult populations received an I statement based on insufficient evidence to assess the balance of risks and benefits, wrote Susan J. Curry, PhD, of the University of Iowa, Iowa City, and her colleagues. Vulnerable adults were defined as those who are not able to protect themselves because of age, disability, or both. The recommendations were published in JAMA.

The Task Force reviewed the available evidence and determined that screening tools can help identify intimate partner violence in women of reproductive age, and that support services can reduce the risk of physical, sexual, and psychological abuse in these women.

In the evidence review accompanying the recommendations, Cynthia Feltner, MD, MPH, of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and her colleagues analyzed data from 30 studies including 14,959 individuals.

They reviewed studies of IPV for adolescents through women in their 40s and identified several screening tools that accurately detected IPV in adult women within the past year: Humiliation, Afraid, Rape, Kick (HARK); Hurt, Insulted, Threaten, Scream (HITS); Extended–Hurt, Insult, Threaten, Scream (E-HITS); Partner Violence Screen (PVS); and Woman Abuse Screening Tool (WAST). The sensitivity of these tools ranged from 65% to 87%, and specificity ranged from 80% to 95%.

Data from three randomized, controlled trials including 3,759 women found no benefit to screening them for IPV over 3-18 months, but no randomized, controlled trials found any harms associated with screening.

In addition, the data showed no evidence that screening reduced IPV or improved quality of life over a 3-18-month period, the researchers noted.

In addition, the Task Force researchers found no reliable screening tools to identify IPV in men or to identify abuse of elders or vulnerable adults in the absence of recognized signs and symptoms of abuse.

The complete recommendations are available online in JAMA, and on the USPSTF website: http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org.

The USPSTF is supported by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.

SOURCES: Curry SJ et al. JAMA. 2018;320(16):1678-87; Feltner C et al. JAMA. 2018;320(16):1688-701.

All women of reproductive age should be screened for intimate partner violence, according to updated recommendations from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Intimate partner violence (IPV), defined to include sexual violence, physical violence, and stalking, occurs in approximately 36% of women and 33% of men in the United States, the Task Force members said.

Photodisc/Thinkstock

The screening of women of reproductive age is a B recommendation. However, evidence remains insufficient to recommend routine screening for IPV for men, and screening for abuse in elders and vulnerable adult populations received an I statement based on insufficient evidence to assess the balance of risks and benefits, wrote Susan J. Curry, PhD, of the University of Iowa, Iowa City, and her colleagues. Vulnerable adults were defined as those who are not able to protect themselves because of age, disability, or both. The recommendations were published in JAMA.

The Task Force reviewed the available evidence and determined that screening tools can help identify intimate partner violence in women of reproductive age, and that support services can reduce the risk of physical, sexual, and psychological abuse in these women.

In the evidence review accompanying the recommendations, Cynthia Feltner, MD, MPH, of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and her colleagues analyzed data from 30 studies including 14,959 individuals.

They reviewed studies of IPV for adolescents through women in their 40s and identified several screening tools that accurately detected IPV in adult women within the past year: Humiliation, Afraid, Rape, Kick (HARK); Hurt, Insulted, Threaten, Scream (HITS); Extended–Hurt, Insult, Threaten, Scream (E-HITS); Partner Violence Screen (PVS); and Woman Abuse Screening Tool (WAST). The sensitivity of these tools ranged from 65% to 87%, and specificity ranged from 80% to 95%.

Data from three randomized, controlled trials including 3,759 women found no benefit to screening them for IPV over 3-18 months, but no randomized, controlled trials found any harms associated with screening.

In addition, the data showed no evidence that screening reduced IPV or improved quality of life over a 3-18-month period, the researchers noted.

In addition, the Task Force researchers found no reliable screening tools to identify IPV in men or to identify abuse of elders or vulnerable adults in the absence of recognized signs and symptoms of abuse.

The complete recommendations are available online in JAMA, and on the USPSTF website: http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org.

The USPSTF is supported by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.

SOURCES: Curry SJ et al. JAMA. 2018;320(16):1678-87; Feltner C et al. JAMA. 2018;320(16):1688-701.

All women of reproductive age should be screened for intimate partner violence, according to updated recommendations from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Intimate partner violence (IPV), defined to include sexual violence, physical violence, and stalking, occurs in approximately 36% of women and 33% of men in the United States, the Task Force members said.

Photodisc/Thinkstock

The screening of women of reproductive age is a B recommendation. However, evidence remains insufficient to recommend routine screening for IPV for men, and screening for abuse in elders and vulnerable adult populations received an I statement based on insufficient evidence to assess the balance of risks and benefits, wrote Susan J. Curry, PhD, of the University of Iowa, Iowa City, and her colleagues. Vulnerable adults were defined as those who are not able to protect themselves because of age, disability, or both. The recommendations were published in JAMA.

The Task Force reviewed the available evidence and determined that screening tools can help identify intimate partner violence in women of reproductive age, and that support services can reduce the risk of physical, sexual, and psychological abuse in these women.

In the evidence review accompanying the recommendations, Cynthia Feltner, MD, MPH, of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and her colleagues analyzed data from 30 studies including 14,959 individuals.

They reviewed studies of IPV for adolescents through women in their 40s and identified several screening tools that accurately detected IPV in adult women within the past year: Humiliation, Afraid, Rape, Kick (HARK); Hurt, Insulted, Threaten, Scream (HITS); Extended–Hurt, Insult, Threaten, Scream (E-HITS); Partner Violence Screen (PVS); and Woman Abuse Screening Tool (WAST). The sensitivity of these tools ranged from 65% to 87%, and specificity ranged from 80% to 95%.

Data from three randomized, controlled trials including 3,759 women found no benefit to screening them for IPV over 3-18 months, but no randomized, controlled trials found any harms associated with screening.

In addition, the data showed no evidence that screening reduced IPV or improved quality of life over a 3-18-month period, the researchers noted.

In addition, the Task Force researchers found no reliable screening tools to identify IPV in men or to identify abuse of elders or vulnerable adults in the absence of recognized signs and symptoms of abuse.

The complete recommendations are available online in JAMA, and on the USPSTF website: http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org.

The USPSTF is supported by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.

SOURCES: Curry SJ et al. JAMA. 2018;320(16):1678-87; Feltner C et al. JAMA. 2018;320(16):1688-701.

Opioid addiction patients given extended-release naltrexone had about twice the rate of treatment retention at 6 months as those given oral naltrexone, a study of 60 adults shows.

“These study findings have immediate clinical relevance for treatment of opioid use disorder, at a time when an opioid epidemic continues unabated in the United States,” wrote Maria A. Sullivan, MD, PhD, of Columbia University, New York, and her colleagues.

Naltrexone remains an alternative to agonist treatment for opioid use disorder, but adherence to a daily pill regimen is often poor. “Extended-release (XR) parenteral formulations of naltrexone, as monthly injection or implants, circumvent the daily pill requirement and have shown promising effectiveness,” the researchers said.

In a study published in the American Journal of Psychiatry, 60 opioid-dependent adults who had completed an inpatient detoxification program were randomized to 50 mg/day of oral naltrexone (or 100 mg on Mondays and Wednesdays and 150 mg on Fridays for those living alone) plus behavior therapy or a 380-mg intramuscular injection of XR-naltrexone monthly plus behavior therapy.

After 6 months, 57% of patients in the XR-naltrexone group were retained in treatment, compared with 28% of the oral group (hazard ratio, 2.18), reported Dr. Sullivan and her colleagues.

A total of 40 adverse events were reported. Insomnia was the most common and occurred in 52% of the patients; it was more common in the oral group, compared with the extended-release group (70% vs. 35%, respectively). A total of nine serious adverse events were reported, and five participants discontinued the study as a result. However, only one event, a case of hives determined to be an allergic reaction, was attributed to the study drug.

The findings were limited by several factors, including the small size, open-label design, and lack of urine data for patients after they discontinued the study, the researchers noted. However, the results “support the use of XR-naltrexone combined with behavioral therapy as an effective treatment for patients seeking opioid withdrawal and nonagonist treatment for preventing relapse to opioid use disorder,” they said. In addition, the findings “may call into question the current practice by some third-party payers of requiring a failed trial of oral naltrexone before approving XR-naltrexone, given the difference in effectiveness and the high risk of a failed treatment with oral naltrexone,” they said.

The study was supported in part by grants from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Dr. Sullivan had no financial conflicts to disclose.
 

SOURCE: Sullivan MA et al. Am J Psychiatry. 2018. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2018.17070732.

Opioid addiction patients given extended-release naltrexone had about twice the rate of treatment retention at 6 months as those given oral naltrexone, a study of 60 adults shows.

“These study findings have immediate clinical relevance for treatment of opioid use disorder, at a time when an opioid epidemic continues unabated in the United States,” wrote Maria A. Sullivan, MD, PhD, of Columbia University, New York, and her colleagues.

Naltrexone remains an alternative to agonist treatment for opioid use disorder, but adherence to a daily pill regimen is often poor. “Extended-release (XR) parenteral formulations of naltrexone, as monthly injection or implants, circumvent the daily pill requirement and have shown promising effectiveness,” the researchers said.

In a study published in the American Journal of Psychiatry, 60 opioid-dependent adults who had completed an inpatient detoxification program were randomized to 50 mg/day of oral naltrexone (or 100 mg on Mondays and Wednesdays and 150 mg on Fridays for those living alone) plus behavior therapy or a 380-mg intramuscular injection of XR-naltrexone monthly plus behavior therapy.

After 6 months, 57% of patients in the XR-naltrexone group were retained in treatment, compared with 28% of the oral group (hazard ratio, 2.18), reported Dr. Sullivan and her colleagues.

A total of 40 adverse events were reported. Insomnia was the most common and occurred in 52% of the patients; it was more common in the oral group, compared with the extended-release group (70% vs. 35%, respectively). A total of nine serious adverse events were reported, and five participants discontinued the study as a result. However, only one event, a case of hives determined to be an allergic reaction, was attributed to the study drug.

The findings were limited by several factors, including the small size, open-label design, and lack of urine data for patients after they discontinued the study, the researchers noted. However, the results “support the use of XR-naltrexone combined with behavioral therapy as an effective treatment for patients seeking opioid withdrawal and nonagonist treatment for preventing relapse to opioid use disorder,” they said. In addition, the findings “may call into question the current practice by some third-party payers of requiring a failed trial of oral naltrexone before approving XR-naltrexone, given the difference in effectiveness and the high risk of a failed treatment with oral naltrexone,” they said.

The study was supported in part by grants from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Dr. Sullivan had no financial conflicts to disclose.
 

SOURCE: Sullivan MA et al. Am J Psychiatry. 2018. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2018.17070732.

Opioid addiction patients given extended-release naltrexone had about twice the rate of treatment retention at 6 months as those given oral naltrexone, a study of 60 adults shows.

“These study findings have immediate clinical relevance for treatment of opioid use disorder, at a time when an opioid epidemic continues unabated in the United States,” wrote Maria A. Sullivan, MD, PhD, of Columbia University, New York, and her colleagues.

Naltrexone remains an alternative to agonist treatment for opioid use disorder, but adherence to a daily pill regimen is often poor. “Extended-release (XR) parenteral formulations of naltrexone, as monthly injection or implants, circumvent the daily pill requirement and have shown promising effectiveness,” the researchers said.

In a study published in the American Journal of Psychiatry, 60 opioid-dependent adults who had completed an inpatient detoxification program were randomized to 50 mg/day of oral naltrexone (or 100 mg on Mondays and Wednesdays and 150 mg on Fridays for those living alone) plus behavior therapy or a 380-mg intramuscular injection of XR-naltrexone monthly plus behavior therapy.

After 6 months, 57% of patients in the XR-naltrexone group were retained in treatment, compared with 28% of the oral group (hazard ratio, 2.18), reported Dr. Sullivan and her colleagues.

A total of 40 adverse events were reported. Insomnia was the most common and occurred in 52% of the patients; it was more common in the oral group, compared with the extended-release group (70% vs. 35%, respectively). A total of nine serious adverse events were reported, and five participants discontinued the study as a result. However, only one event, a case of hives determined to be an allergic reaction, was attributed to the study drug.

The findings were limited by several factors, including the small size, open-label design, and lack of urine data for patients after they discontinued the study, the researchers noted. However, the results “support the use of XR-naltrexone combined with behavioral therapy as an effective treatment for patients seeking opioid withdrawal and nonagonist treatment for preventing relapse to opioid use disorder,” they said. In addition, the findings “may call into question the current practice by some third-party payers of requiring a failed trial of oral naltrexone before approving XR-naltrexone, given the difference in effectiveness and the high risk of a failed treatment with oral naltrexone,” they said.

The study was supported in part by grants from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Dr. Sullivan had no financial conflicts to disclose.
 

SOURCE: Sullivan MA et al. Am J Psychiatry. 2018. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2018.17070732.

A new study that validates the use of the Lupus Low Disease Activity State as a treatment outcome in systemic lupus erythematosus clinical trials is one of the highly-rated abstracts that will be presented in the third Plenary Session at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology on Tuesday, Oct. 23.

The prospective, multicenter validation study, to be presented by Vera Golder, MBBS, of Monash University in Melbourne, builds on the results of previously reported studies using the Lupus Low Disease Activity State as a treatment target at EULAR this year and at last year’s International Congress on Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

Among other presentations in the session will be the results of the PEXIVAS trial. Peter A. Merkel, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, will present findings from the randomized trial assessing oral glucocorticoid use and plasma exchange in patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis. The results have been highly anticipated as being among several research efforts to support reduction of corticosteroids in these patients.

In addition, attendees will hear results of a phase 3 study of apremilast for the treatment of oral ulcers in patients with Behçet’s syndrome. In the study, presented by Gulen Hatemi, MD, of Cerrahpasa Medical School, Istanbul, benefits of the drug were sustained for 28 weeks. Findings from a phase 2 study were reported in 2015.

A new study that validates the use of the Lupus Low Disease Activity State as a treatment outcome in systemic lupus erythematosus clinical trials is one of the highly-rated abstracts that will be presented in the third Plenary Session at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology on Tuesday, Oct. 23.

The prospective, multicenter validation study, to be presented by Vera Golder, MBBS, of Monash University in Melbourne, builds on the results of previously reported studies using the Lupus Low Disease Activity State as a treatment target at EULAR this year and at last year’s International Congress on Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

Among other presentations in the session will be the results of the PEXIVAS trial. Peter A. Merkel, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, will present findings from the randomized trial assessing oral glucocorticoid use and plasma exchange in patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis. The results have been highly anticipated as being among several research efforts to support reduction of corticosteroids in these patients.

In addition, attendees will hear results of a phase 3 study of apremilast for the treatment of oral ulcers in patients with Behçet’s syndrome. In the study, presented by Gulen Hatemi, MD, of Cerrahpasa Medical School, Istanbul, benefits of the drug were sustained for 28 weeks. Findings from a phase 2 study were reported in 2015.

A new study that validates the use of the Lupus Low Disease Activity State as a treatment outcome in systemic lupus erythematosus clinical trials is one of the highly-rated abstracts that will be presented in the third Plenary Session at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology on Tuesday, Oct. 23.

The prospective, multicenter validation study, to be presented by Vera Golder, MBBS, of Monash University in Melbourne, builds on the results of previously reported studies using the Lupus Low Disease Activity State as a treatment target at EULAR this year and at last year’s International Congress on Systemic Lupus Erythematosus.

Among other presentations in the session will be the results of the PEXIVAS trial. Peter A. Merkel, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, will present findings from the randomized trial assessing oral glucocorticoid use and plasma exchange in patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis. The results have been highly anticipated as being among several research efforts to support reduction of corticosteroids in these patients.

In addition, attendees will hear results of a phase 3 study of apremilast for the treatment of oral ulcers in patients with Behçet’s syndrome. In the study, presented by Gulen Hatemi, MD, of Cerrahpasa Medical School, Istanbul, benefits of the drug were sustained for 28 weeks. Findings from a phase 2 study were reported in 2015.

A 5-year follow-up study comparing methods of meniscal tear management in patients with osteoarthritis kicks off the second Plenary Session on Monday, Oct. 22, at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology.

Jeffrey N. Katz, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, and his colleagues conducted a long-term follow-up of patients from the METEOR study, the early results of which were presented at OARSI in 2017. Dr. Katz and his colleagues randomized patients with knee pain, meniscal tears, and OA changes on x-ray or MRI to physical therapy vs. physical therapy plus arthroscopic partial meniscectomy. After 5 years, pain relief was similar across treatment groups, supporting the short-term conclusion that these patients experience relief over time, irrespective of initial treatment. Overall, 25% of the patients had total knee replacement surgery during the follow-up period.

The session also includes a new presentation by Kenneth G. Saag, MD, of the University of Alabama at Birmingham of 2-year outcomes from a phase 3 trial of denosumab versus risedronate for glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis that was first presented at EULAR this year.

At 2 years, denosumab proved superior for increasing spine and hip bone mineral density in osteoporosis patients, compared with risedronate, and demonstrated a similar safety profile.

In addition, attendees will hear updated long-term results from the SCOT trial of myeloablative autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for scleroderma patients. Keith M. Sullivan, MD, of Duke University, Durham, N.C., and his colleagues found that the benefits of the treatment endured after 6-11 years, supporting results presented at ACR 2016.

A 5-year follow-up study comparing methods of meniscal tear management in patients with osteoarthritis kicks off the second Plenary Session on Monday, Oct. 22, at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology.

Jeffrey N. Katz, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, and his colleagues conducted a long-term follow-up of patients from the METEOR study, the early results of which were presented at OARSI in 2017. Dr. Katz and his colleagues randomized patients with knee pain, meniscal tears, and OA changes on x-ray or MRI to physical therapy vs. physical therapy plus arthroscopic partial meniscectomy. After 5 years, pain relief was similar across treatment groups, supporting the short-term conclusion that these patients experience relief over time, irrespective of initial treatment. Overall, 25% of the patients had total knee replacement surgery during the follow-up period.

The session also includes a new presentation by Kenneth G. Saag, MD, of the University of Alabama at Birmingham of 2-year outcomes from a phase 3 trial of denosumab versus risedronate for glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis that was first presented at EULAR this year.

At 2 years, denosumab proved superior for increasing spine and hip bone mineral density in osteoporosis patients, compared with risedronate, and demonstrated a similar safety profile.

In addition, attendees will hear updated long-term results from the SCOT trial of myeloablative autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for scleroderma patients. Keith M. Sullivan, MD, of Duke University, Durham, N.C., and his colleagues found that the benefits of the treatment endured after 6-11 years, supporting results presented at ACR 2016.

A 5-year follow-up study comparing methods of meniscal tear management in patients with osteoarthritis kicks off the second Plenary Session on Monday, Oct. 22, at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology.

Jeffrey N. Katz, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, and his colleagues conducted a long-term follow-up of patients from the METEOR study, the early results of which were presented at OARSI in 2017. Dr. Katz and his colleagues randomized patients with knee pain, meniscal tears, and OA changes on x-ray or MRI to physical therapy vs. physical therapy plus arthroscopic partial meniscectomy. After 5 years, pain relief was similar across treatment groups, supporting the short-term conclusion that these patients experience relief over time, irrespective of initial treatment. Overall, 25% of the patients had total knee replacement surgery during the follow-up period.

The session also includes a new presentation by Kenneth G. Saag, MD, of the University of Alabama at Birmingham of 2-year outcomes from a phase 3 trial of denosumab versus risedronate for glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis that was first presented at EULAR this year.

At 2 years, denosumab proved superior for increasing spine and hip bone mineral density in osteoporosis patients, compared with risedronate, and demonstrated a similar safety profile.

In addition, attendees will hear updated long-term results from the SCOT trial of myeloablative autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for scleroderma patients. Keith M. Sullivan, MD, of Duke University, Durham, N.C., and his colleagues found that the benefits of the treatment endured after 6-11 years, supporting results presented at ACR 2016.