MDedge Dermatology

To the Editor:

A 47-year-old man presented at the dermatology clinic with a growing lesion on the left medial thigh. The patient traveled frequently for work. Although asymptomatic, the lesion was interfering with the patient’s ability to get through security because it routinely was getting detected by airport full-body scanners. These scanners use high-frequency radio waves or x-rays to detect nonmetallic objects under a traveler’s clothing. The patient would be frisked by security and had to explain that he had a growth in that location. He thankfully would be released by security on those occasions, but the delay in getting through security was becoming a nuisance.

Physical examination revealed a 5-cm, pedunculated, fatty nodule on the left medial thigh that was clinically consistent with nevus lipomatosis (NL)(Figure). Although benign, trouble traveling through airport security prompted the patient to request shave removal, which subsequently was performed. Histology showed a large pedunculated nodule with prominent adipose tissue, consistent with NL. At 3-month follow-up, the patient reported getting through airport security multiple times without incident.

Nevus lipomatosis is a benign fatty lesion most commonly found on the medial thighs or trunk of adults. The lesion usually is asymptomatic but can become irritated by rubbing or catching on clothing. Our patient had symptomatic NL that caused delays getting through airport security; he experienced full resolution after simple shave removal. In rare instances, both benign and malignant skin conditions have been seen on airport scanning devices since the introduction of increased security measures following September 11, 2001. In 2016, Heymann¹ reported a man with a 1.5-cm epidermal inclusion cyst detected by airport security scanners, prompting the traveler to request and carry a medically explanatory letter used to get through security. In 2015 Mayer and Adams² described a case of nodular melanoma that was detected 20 times over a period of 2 months by airport scanners, and in 2016, Caine et al³ reported a case of desmoplastic melanoma that was detected by airport security, but after its removal was not identified by security for the next 40 flights. Noncutaneous pathology also can be detected by airport scanners. In 2013, Naraynsingh et al⁴ reported a man with a large left reducible inguinal hernia who was stopped by airport security and subjected to an invasive physical examination of the area. These instances demonstrate the breadth of conditions that can be cumbersome when individuals are traveling by airplane in our current security climate.

Our patient had to go through the trouble of having the benign NL lesion removed to avoid the hassle of repeatedly being stopped by airport security. The patient had the lesion removed and is doing well, but the procedure could have been avoided if systems existed to help patients with dermatologic and medical conditions at airport security. Our patient likely will never be stopped again for the suspicious lump on the left inner thigh, but many others will be stopped for similar reasons.

To the Editor:

A 47-year-old man presented at the dermatology clinic with a growing lesion on the left medial thigh. The patient traveled frequently for work. Although asymptomatic, the lesion was interfering with the patient’s ability to get through security because it routinely was getting detected by airport full-body scanners. These scanners use high-frequency radio waves or x-rays to detect nonmetallic objects under a traveler’s clothing. The patient would be frisked by security and had to explain that he had a growth in that location. He thankfully would be released by security on those occasions, but the delay in getting through security was becoming a nuisance.

Physical examination revealed a 5-cm, pedunculated, fatty nodule on the left medial thigh that was clinically consistent with nevus lipomatosis (NL)(Figure). Although benign, trouble traveling through airport security prompted the patient to request shave removal, which subsequently was performed. Histology showed a large pedunculated nodule with prominent adipose tissue, consistent with NL. At 3-month follow-up, the patient reported getting through airport security multiple times without incident.

Nevus lipomatosis is a benign fatty lesion most commonly found on the medial thighs or trunk of adults. The lesion usually is asymptomatic but can become irritated by rubbing or catching on clothing. Our patient had symptomatic NL that caused delays getting through airport security; he experienced full resolution after simple shave removal. In rare instances, both benign and malignant skin conditions have been seen on airport scanning devices since the introduction of increased security measures following September 11, 2001. In 2016, Heymann¹ reported a man with a 1.5-cm epidermal inclusion cyst detected by airport security scanners, prompting the traveler to request and carry a medically explanatory letter used to get through security. In 2015 Mayer and Adams² described a case of nodular melanoma that was detected 20 times over a period of 2 months by airport scanners, and in 2016, Caine et al³ reported a case of desmoplastic melanoma that was detected by airport security, but after its removal was not identified by security for the next 40 flights. Noncutaneous pathology also can be detected by airport scanners. In 2013, Naraynsingh et al⁴ reported a man with a large left reducible inguinal hernia who was stopped by airport security and subjected to an invasive physical examination of the area. These instances demonstrate the breadth of conditions that can be cumbersome when individuals are traveling by airplane in our current security climate.

Our patient had to go through the trouble of having the benign NL lesion removed to avoid the hassle of repeatedly being stopped by airport security. The patient had the lesion removed and is doing well, but the procedure could have been avoided if systems existed to help patients with dermatologic and medical conditions at airport security. Our patient likely will never be stopped again for the suspicious lump on the left inner thigh, but many others will be stopped for similar reasons.

To the Editor:

A 47-year-old man presented at the dermatology clinic with a growing lesion on the left medial thigh. The patient traveled frequently for work. Although asymptomatic, the lesion was interfering with the patient’s ability to get through security because it routinely was getting detected by airport full-body scanners. These scanners use high-frequency radio waves or x-rays to detect nonmetallic objects under a traveler’s clothing. The patient would be frisked by security and had to explain that he had a growth in that location. He thankfully would be released by security on those occasions, but the delay in getting through security was becoming a nuisance.

Physical examination revealed a 5-cm, pedunculated, fatty nodule on the left medial thigh that was clinically consistent with nevus lipomatosis (NL)(Figure). Although benign, trouble traveling through airport security prompted the patient to request shave removal, which subsequently was performed. Histology showed a large pedunculated nodule with prominent adipose tissue, consistent with NL. At 3-month follow-up, the patient reported getting through airport security multiple times without incident.

Nevus lipomatosis is a benign fatty lesion most commonly found on the medial thighs or trunk of adults. The lesion usually is asymptomatic but can become irritated by rubbing or catching on clothing. Our patient had symptomatic NL that caused delays getting through airport security; he experienced full resolution after simple shave removal. In rare instances, both benign and malignant skin conditions have been seen on airport scanning devices since the introduction of increased security measures following September 11, 2001. In 2016, Heymann¹ reported a man with a 1.5-cm epidermal inclusion cyst detected by airport security scanners, prompting the traveler to request and carry a medically explanatory letter used to get through security. In 2015 Mayer and Adams² described a case of nodular melanoma that was detected 20 times over a period of 2 months by airport scanners, and in 2016, Caine et al³ reported a case of desmoplastic melanoma that was detected by airport security, but after its removal was not identified by security for the next 40 flights. Noncutaneous pathology also can be detected by airport scanners. In 2013, Naraynsingh et al⁴ reported a man with a large left reducible inguinal hernia who was stopped by airport security and subjected to an invasive physical examination of the area. These instances demonstrate the breadth of conditions that can be cumbersome when individuals are traveling by airplane in our current security climate.

Our patient had to go through the trouble of having the benign NL lesion removed to avoid the hassle of repeatedly being stopped by airport security. The patient had the lesion removed and is doing well, but the procedure could have been avoided if systems existed to help patients with dermatologic and medical conditions at airport security. Our patient likely will never be stopped again for the suspicious lump on the left inner thigh, but many others will be stopped for similar reasons.

In an April press release, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) of the World Health Organization (WHO) reported the findings of their review concerning the efficacy of various dose schedules for human papillomavirus (HPV). “A single-dose HPV vaccine delivers solid protection against HPV, the virus that causes cervical cancer, that is comparable to 2-dose schedules,” according to SAGE.

This statement comes on the heels of an article published in the November 2021 issue of Lancet Oncology about a study in India. It found that a single dose of the vaccine provides protection against persistent infection from HPV 16 and 18 similar to that provided by two or three doses.

Will this new information lead French authorities to change their recommendations? What do French specialists think? At the 45th Congress of the French Society for Colposcopy and Cervical and Vaginal Diseases (SFCPCV), Geoffroy Canlorbe, MD, PhD, of the department of gynecologic and breast surgery and oncology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Paris, shared his thoughts.

With respect to the Indian study, Dr. Canlorbe pointed out that while its findings would need “to be confirmed by other studies,” they were, nonetheless, “excellent news for developing countries where there are challenges when it comes to access to vaccination.”
 

India and France

During the congress press conference, he went on to say that, at this stage, the findings “cannot be extrapolated” to France. This is because the country’s situation is different. HPV vaccination coverage is low; estimates put it at 23.7%, placing the country 28th out of 31 in Europe.

“This poor coverage has nothing to do with health care–related logistical or organizational issues; instead, it has to do with people’s mistrust when it comes to vaccination. Here, people who get the first dose get the subsequent ones,” said Dr. Canlorbe. “The very fact of getting two to three doses allows the person’s body to increase the production of antibodies and get a longer-lasting response to the vaccine.”

In addition, he drew attention to several limitations of the Indian study. Initially, the team had planned to enroll 20,000 participants. In the end, there were around 17,000, and these were allocated to three cohorts: single-dose, two-dose, and three-dose. Furthermore, the primary objective, which had initially been focused on precancerous and cancerous lesions, was revised. The new aim was to compare vaccine efficacy of single dose to that of three and two doses in protecting against persistent HPV 16 and 18 infection at 10 years postvaccination. In about 90% of cases, the HPV infection went away spontaneously in 2 years without inducing lesions. Finally, the participants were women in India; therefore, the results cannot necessarily be generalized to the French population.

“This information has to be confirmed. However, as far as I know, there are no new studies going on at the moment. The Indian study, on the other hand, is still in progress,” said Dr. Canlorbe.

“In France, I think that for the time being we should stick to the studies that are currently available, which have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of two or three doses,” he concluded. In support of this approach, he cited a study on the effects of the national HPV vaccination program in England; there, the vaccination coverage is 80%.

This program was associated with a 95% risk reduction for precancerous lesions and an 87% reduction in the number of cancers, confirming the good results already achieved by Sweden and Australia.

In his comments on the WHO’s stance (which differs from that of the French experts), Jean-Luc Mergui, MD, gynecologist in the department of colposcopy and hysteroscopy at Pitié-Salpêtrière, and former president of the SFCPCV, offered an eloquent comparison: “The WHO also recommends 6 months of breastfeeding as a method of contraception, but this isn’t what’s recommended in France, for the risk of getting pregnant nevertheless remains.”
 

Indian study highlights

Partha Basu, MD, PhD, of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in Lyon, France, and colleagues compared vaccine efficacy of a single dose of Gardasil (HPV 9-valent vaccine, recombinant) to that of two and three doses in protecting against persistent HPV 16 and HPV 18 infection at 10 years postvaccination.

According to the protocol, the plan was to recruit 20,000 unmarried girls, aged 10-18 years, from across India. Recruitment was initiated in September 2009. However, in response to seven unexplained deaths reported in another ongoing HPV vaccination demonstration program in the country, the Indian government issued a notification in April 2010 to stop further recruitment and HPV vaccination in all clinical trials. At this point, Dr. Basu and his team had recruited 17,729 eligible girls.

After suspension of recruitment and vaccination, their randomized trial was converted to a longitudinal, prospective, cohort study by default.

Vaccinated participants were followed up over a median duration of 9 years. In all, 4,348 participants had three doses, 4,980 had two doses (at 0 and 6 months), and 4,949 had a single dose. Cervical specimens were collected from participants 18 months after marriage or 6 months after first childbirth, whichever was earlier, to assess incident and persistent HPV infections. Participants were invited to an annual cervical cancer screening once they reached age 25 years and were married.

A single dose of HPV vaccine provides similar protection against persistent infection from HPV 16 and HPV 18, the genotypes responsible for nearly 70% of cervical cancers, compared with that provided by two or three doses. Vaccine efficacy against persistent HPV 16 and 18 infection among participants evaluable for the endpoint was 95.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 85.0-99.9) in the single-dose default cohort (2,135 women assessed), 93.1% (95% CI, 77.3-99.8) in the two-dose cohort (1,452 women assessed), and 93.3% (95% CI, 77.5-99.7) in three-dose recipients (1,460 women assessed).

Dr. Canlorbe reported no relevant financial relationships regarding the content of this article.

This article was translated from the Medscape French edition. An English version appeared on Medscape.com.

In an April press release, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) of the World Health Organization (WHO) reported the findings of their review concerning the efficacy of various dose schedules for human papillomavirus (HPV). “A single-dose HPV vaccine delivers solid protection against HPV, the virus that causes cervical cancer, that is comparable to 2-dose schedules,” according to SAGE.

This statement comes on the heels of an article published in the November 2021 issue of Lancet Oncology about a study in India. It found that a single dose of the vaccine provides protection against persistent infection from HPV 16 and 18 similar to that provided by two or three doses.

Will this new information lead French authorities to change their recommendations? What do French specialists think? At the 45th Congress of the French Society for Colposcopy and Cervical and Vaginal Diseases (SFCPCV), Geoffroy Canlorbe, MD, PhD, of the department of gynecologic and breast surgery and oncology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Paris, shared his thoughts.

With respect to the Indian study, Dr. Canlorbe pointed out that while its findings would need “to be confirmed by other studies,” they were, nonetheless, “excellent news for developing countries where there are challenges when it comes to access to vaccination.”
 

India and France

During the congress press conference, he went on to say that, at this stage, the findings “cannot be extrapolated” to France. This is because the country’s situation is different. HPV vaccination coverage is low; estimates put it at 23.7%, placing the country 28th out of 31 in Europe.

“This poor coverage has nothing to do with health care–related logistical or organizational issues; instead, it has to do with people’s mistrust when it comes to vaccination. Here, people who get the first dose get the subsequent ones,” said Dr. Canlorbe. “The very fact of getting two to three doses allows the person’s body to increase the production of antibodies and get a longer-lasting response to the vaccine.”

In addition, he drew attention to several limitations of the Indian study. Initially, the team had planned to enroll 20,000 participants. In the end, there were around 17,000, and these were allocated to three cohorts: single-dose, two-dose, and three-dose. Furthermore, the primary objective, which had initially been focused on precancerous and cancerous lesions, was revised. The new aim was to compare vaccine efficacy of single dose to that of three and two doses in protecting against persistent HPV 16 and 18 infection at 10 years postvaccination. In about 90% of cases, the HPV infection went away spontaneously in 2 years without inducing lesions. Finally, the participants were women in India; therefore, the results cannot necessarily be generalized to the French population.

“This information has to be confirmed. However, as far as I know, there are no new studies going on at the moment. The Indian study, on the other hand, is still in progress,” said Dr. Canlorbe.

“In France, I think that for the time being we should stick to the studies that are currently available, which have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of two or three doses,” he concluded. In support of this approach, he cited a study on the effects of the national HPV vaccination program in England; there, the vaccination coverage is 80%.

This program was associated with a 95% risk reduction for precancerous lesions and an 87% reduction in the number of cancers, confirming the good results already achieved by Sweden and Australia.

In his comments on the WHO’s stance (which differs from that of the French experts), Jean-Luc Mergui, MD, gynecologist in the department of colposcopy and hysteroscopy at Pitié-Salpêtrière, and former president of the SFCPCV, offered an eloquent comparison: “The WHO also recommends 6 months of breastfeeding as a method of contraception, but this isn’t what’s recommended in France, for the risk of getting pregnant nevertheless remains.”
 

Indian study highlights

Partha Basu, MD, PhD, of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in Lyon, France, and colleagues compared vaccine efficacy of a single dose of Gardasil (HPV 9-valent vaccine, recombinant) to that of two and three doses in protecting against persistent HPV 16 and HPV 18 infection at 10 years postvaccination.

According to the protocol, the plan was to recruit 20,000 unmarried girls, aged 10-18 years, from across India. Recruitment was initiated in September 2009. However, in response to seven unexplained deaths reported in another ongoing HPV vaccination demonstration program in the country, the Indian government issued a notification in April 2010 to stop further recruitment and HPV vaccination in all clinical trials. At this point, Dr. Basu and his team had recruited 17,729 eligible girls.

After suspension of recruitment and vaccination, their randomized trial was converted to a longitudinal, prospective, cohort study by default.

Vaccinated participants were followed up over a median duration of 9 years. In all, 4,348 participants had three doses, 4,980 had two doses (at 0 and 6 months), and 4,949 had a single dose. Cervical specimens were collected from participants 18 months after marriage or 6 months after first childbirth, whichever was earlier, to assess incident and persistent HPV infections. Participants were invited to an annual cervical cancer screening once they reached age 25 years and were married.

A single dose of HPV vaccine provides similar protection against persistent infection from HPV 16 and HPV 18, the genotypes responsible for nearly 70% of cervical cancers, compared with that provided by two or three doses. Vaccine efficacy against persistent HPV 16 and 18 infection among participants evaluable for the endpoint was 95.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 85.0-99.9) in the single-dose default cohort (2,135 women assessed), 93.1% (95% CI, 77.3-99.8) in the two-dose cohort (1,452 women assessed), and 93.3% (95% CI, 77.5-99.7) in three-dose recipients (1,460 women assessed).

Dr. Canlorbe reported no relevant financial relationships regarding the content of this article.

This article was translated from the Medscape French edition. An English version appeared on Medscape.com.

In an April press release, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE) of the World Health Organization (WHO) reported the findings of their review concerning the efficacy of various dose schedules for human papillomavirus (HPV). “A single-dose HPV vaccine delivers solid protection against HPV, the virus that causes cervical cancer, that is comparable to 2-dose schedules,” according to SAGE.

This statement comes on the heels of an article published in the November 2021 issue of Lancet Oncology about a study in India. It found that a single dose of the vaccine provides protection against persistent infection from HPV 16 and 18 similar to that provided by two or three doses.

Will this new information lead French authorities to change their recommendations? What do French specialists think? At the 45th Congress of the French Society for Colposcopy and Cervical and Vaginal Diseases (SFCPCV), Geoffroy Canlorbe, MD, PhD, of the department of gynecologic and breast surgery and oncology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Paris, shared his thoughts.

With respect to the Indian study, Dr. Canlorbe pointed out that while its findings would need “to be confirmed by other studies,” they were, nonetheless, “excellent news for developing countries where there are challenges when it comes to access to vaccination.”
 

India and France

During the congress press conference, he went on to say that, at this stage, the findings “cannot be extrapolated” to France. This is because the country’s situation is different. HPV vaccination coverage is low; estimates put it at 23.7%, placing the country 28th out of 31 in Europe.

“This poor coverage has nothing to do with health care–related logistical or organizational issues; instead, it has to do with people’s mistrust when it comes to vaccination. Here, people who get the first dose get the subsequent ones,” said Dr. Canlorbe. “The very fact of getting two to three doses allows the person’s body to increase the production of antibodies and get a longer-lasting response to the vaccine.”

In addition, he drew attention to several limitations of the Indian study. Initially, the team had planned to enroll 20,000 participants. In the end, there were around 17,000, and these were allocated to three cohorts: single-dose, two-dose, and three-dose. Furthermore, the primary objective, which had initially been focused on precancerous and cancerous lesions, was revised. The new aim was to compare vaccine efficacy of single dose to that of three and two doses in protecting against persistent HPV 16 and 18 infection at 10 years postvaccination. In about 90% of cases, the HPV infection went away spontaneously in 2 years without inducing lesions. Finally, the participants were women in India; therefore, the results cannot necessarily be generalized to the French population.

“This information has to be confirmed. However, as far as I know, there are no new studies going on at the moment. The Indian study, on the other hand, is still in progress,” said Dr. Canlorbe.

“In France, I think that for the time being we should stick to the studies that are currently available, which have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of two or three doses,” he concluded. In support of this approach, he cited a study on the effects of the national HPV vaccination program in England; there, the vaccination coverage is 80%.

This program was associated with a 95% risk reduction for precancerous lesions and an 87% reduction in the number of cancers, confirming the good results already achieved by Sweden and Australia.

In his comments on the WHO’s stance (which differs from that of the French experts), Jean-Luc Mergui, MD, gynecologist in the department of colposcopy and hysteroscopy at Pitié-Salpêtrière, and former president of the SFCPCV, offered an eloquent comparison: “The WHO also recommends 6 months of breastfeeding as a method of contraception, but this isn’t what’s recommended in France, for the risk of getting pregnant nevertheless remains.”
 

Indian study highlights

Partha Basu, MD, PhD, of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in Lyon, France, and colleagues compared vaccine efficacy of a single dose of Gardasil (HPV 9-valent vaccine, recombinant) to that of two and three doses in protecting against persistent HPV 16 and HPV 18 infection at 10 years postvaccination.

According to the protocol, the plan was to recruit 20,000 unmarried girls, aged 10-18 years, from across India. Recruitment was initiated in September 2009. However, in response to seven unexplained deaths reported in another ongoing HPV vaccination demonstration program in the country, the Indian government issued a notification in April 2010 to stop further recruitment and HPV vaccination in all clinical trials. At this point, Dr. Basu and his team had recruited 17,729 eligible girls.

After suspension of recruitment and vaccination, their randomized trial was converted to a longitudinal, prospective, cohort study by default.

Vaccinated participants were followed up over a median duration of 9 years. In all, 4,348 participants had three doses, 4,980 had two doses (at 0 and 6 months), and 4,949 had a single dose. Cervical specimens were collected from participants 18 months after marriage or 6 months after first childbirth, whichever was earlier, to assess incident and persistent HPV infections. Participants were invited to an annual cervical cancer screening once they reached age 25 years and were married.

A single dose of HPV vaccine provides similar protection against persistent infection from HPV 16 and HPV 18, the genotypes responsible for nearly 70% of cervical cancers, compared with that provided by two or three doses. Vaccine efficacy against persistent HPV 16 and 18 infection among participants evaluable for the endpoint was 95.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 85.0-99.9) in the single-dose default cohort (2,135 women assessed), 93.1% (95% CI, 77.3-99.8) in the two-dose cohort (1,452 women assessed), and 93.3% (95% CI, 77.5-99.7) in three-dose recipients (1,460 women assessed).

Dr. Canlorbe reported no relevant financial relationships regarding the content of this article.

This article was translated from the Medscape French edition. An English version appeared on Medscape.com.

To the Editor:

In response to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, iPLEDGE announced that they would accept results from home pregnancy tests and explicitly permit telemedicine.¹ Given the financial and logistical burdens associated with iPLEDGE, these changes have the potential to increase access.² However, it is unclear whether these modifications will be allowed to continue. We sought to evaluate clinician perspectives on the role of telemedicine and home pregnancy testing for iPLEDGE.

After piloting among several clinicians, a 13-question survey was distributed using the Qualtrics platform to members of the American Acne & Rosacea Society between April 14, 2021, and June 14, 2021. This survey consisted of items addressing provider practices and perspectives on telemedicine and home pregnancy testing for patients taking isotretinoin (eTable). Respondents were asked whether they think telemedicine and home pregnancy testing have improved access to care and whether they would like to continue these practices going forward. In addition, participants were asked about their concerns with home pregnancy testing and how comfortable they feel with home pregnancy testing for various contraceptive strategies (abstinence, condoms, combined oral contraceptives, and long-acting reversible contraception). This study was deemed exempt (category 2) by the University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) institutional review board (Protocol #844549).

Among 70 clinicians who completed the survey (response rate, 6.4%), 33 (47.1%) practiced in an academic setting. At the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, clinicians reported using telemedicine for a median of 90% (IQR=50%–100%) of their patients on isotretinoin, and 57 respondents (81.4%) reported having patients use a home pregnancy test for iPLEDGE (Table 1). More than 75% (55/70) agreed that they would like to continue to use telemedicine for patients on isotretinoin, and more than 75% (54/70) agreed that they would like to continue using home pregnancy testing for patients outside the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. More than 75% (54/70) agreed that telemedicine has increased access for their patients, and more than 70% (52/70) agreed that home pregnancy testing has increased access (Table 2). Clinicians agreed that they would be comfortable using home pregnancy testing for patients choosing long-acting reversible contraception (63/70 [90.0%]), combined oral contraceptives (61/69 [88.4%]), condoms (47/70 [67.1%]), or abstinence (48/70 [68.6%])(Table 3).

The most common concerns about home pregnancy testing were patient deception (39/70 [55.7%]), logistical challenges with reviewing results (19/70 [27.1%]), accuracy of the tests (19/70 [27.1%]), and patient ability to interpret tests appropriately (18/70 [25.7%]). To document testing results, 50 respondents (73.5%) would require a picture of results, 4 (5.9%) would accept a written report from the patient, and 14 (20.6%) would accept a verbal report from the patient (Table 2).

In this survey, clinicians expressed interest in continuing to use telemedicine and home pregnancy testing to care for patients with acne treated with isotretinoin. More than 75% agreed that these changes have increased access, which is notable, as several studies have identified that female and minority patients may face iPLEDGE-associated access barriers.^3,4 Continuing to allow home pregnancy testing and explicitly permitting telemedicine can enable clinicians to provide patient-centered care.²

Although clinicians felt comfortable with a variety of contraceptive strategies, particularly those with high reported effectiveness,⁵ there were concerns about deception and interpretation of test results. Future studies are needed to identify optimal workflows for home pregnancy testing and whether patients should be required to provide a photograph of the results.

This survey study is limited by the possibility of sampling and response bias due to the low response rate. Although the use of national listservs was employed to maximize the generalizability of the results, given the response rate, future studies are needed to evaluate whether these findings generalize to other settings. In addition, given iPLEDGE-associated access barriers, further research is needed to examine how changes such as telemedicine and home pregnancy testing influence both access to isotretinoin and pregnancy prevention.

Acknowledgments—We would like to thank Stacey Moore (Montclair, New Jersey) and the American Acne & Rosacea Society for their help distributing the survey.

To the Editor:

In response to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, iPLEDGE announced that they would accept results from home pregnancy tests and explicitly permit telemedicine.¹ Given the financial and logistical burdens associated with iPLEDGE, these changes have the potential to increase access.² However, it is unclear whether these modifications will be allowed to continue. We sought to evaluate clinician perspectives on the role of telemedicine and home pregnancy testing for iPLEDGE.

After piloting among several clinicians, a 13-question survey was distributed using the Qualtrics platform to members of the American Acne & Rosacea Society between April 14, 2021, and June 14, 2021. This survey consisted of items addressing provider practices and perspectives on telemedicine and home pregnancy testing for patients taking isotretinoin (eTable). Respondents were asked whether they think telemedicine and home pregnancy testing have improved access to care and whether they would like to continue these practices going forward. In addition, participants were asked about their concerns with home pregnancy testing and how comfortable they feel with home pregnancy testing for various contraceptive strategies (abstinence, condoms, combined oral contraceptives, and long-acting reversible contraception). This study was deemed exempt (category 2) by the University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) institutional review board (Protocol #844549).

Among 70 clinicians who completed the survey (response rate, 6.4%), 33 (47.1%) practiced in an academic setting. At the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, clinicians reported using telemedicine for a median of 90% (IQR=50%–100%) of their patients on isotretinoin, and 57 respondents (81.4%) reported having patients use a home pregnancy test for iPLEDGE (Table 1). More than 75% (55/70) agreed that they would like to continue to use telemedicine for patients on isotretinoin, and more than 75% (54/70) agreed that they would like to continue using home pregnancy testing for patients outside the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. More than 75% (54/70) agreed that telemedicine has increased access for their patients, and more than 70% (52/70) agreed that home pregnancy testing has increased access (Table 2). Clinicians agreed that they would be comfortable using home pregnancy testing for patients choosing long-acting reversible contraception (63/70 [90.0%]), combined oral contraceptives (61/69 [88.4%]), condoms (47/70 [67.1%]), or abstinence (48/70 [68.6%])(Table 3).

The most common concerns about home pregnancy testing were patient deception (39/70 [55.7%]), logistical challenges with reviewing results (19/70 [27.1%]), accuracy of the tests (19/70 [27.1%]), and patient ability to interpret tests appropriately (18/70 [25.7%]). To document testing results, 50 respondents (73.5%) would require a picture of results, 4 (5.9%) would accept a written report from the patient, and 14 (20.6%) would accept a verbal report from the patient (Table 2).

In this survey, clinicians expressed interest in continuing to use telemedicine and home pregnancy testing to care for patients with acne treated with isotretinoin. More than 75% agreed that these changes have increased access, which is notable, as several studies have identified that female and minority patients may face iPLEDGE-associated access barriers.^3,4 Continuing to allow home pregnancy testing and explicitly permitting telemedicine can enable clinicians to provide patient-centered care.²

Although clinicians felt comfortable with a variety of contraceptive strategies, particularly those with high reported effectiveness,⁵ there were concerns about deception and interpretation of test results. Future studies are needed to identify optimal workflows for home pregnancy testing and whether patients should be required to provide a photograph of the results.

This survey study is limited by the possibility of sampling and response bias due to the low response rate. Although the use of national listservs was employed to maximize the generalizability of the results, given the response rate, future studies are needed to evaluate whether these findings generalize to other settings. In addition, given iPLEDGE-associated access barriers, further research is needed to examine how changes such as telemedicine and home pregnancy testing influence both access to isotretinoin and pregnancy prevention.

Acknowledgments—We would like to thank Stacey Moore (Montclair, New Jersey) and the American Acne & Rosacea Society for their help distributing the survey.

To the Editor:

In response to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, iPLEDGE announced that they would accept results from home pregnancy tests and explicitly permit telemedicine.¹ Given the financial and logistical burdens associated with iPLEDGE, these changes have the potential to increase access.² However, it is unclear whether these modifications will be allowed to continue. We sought to evaluate clinician perspectives on the role of telemedicine and home pregnancy testing for iPLEDGE.

After piloting among several clinicians, a 13-question survey was distributed using the Qualtrics platform to members of the American Acne & Rosacea Society between April 14, 2021, and June 14, 2021. This survey consisted of items addressing provider practices and perspectives on telemedicine and home pregnancy testing for patients taking isotretinoin (eTable). Respondents were asked whether they think telemedicine and home pregnancy testing have improved access to care and whether they would like to continue these practices going forward. In addition, participants were asked about their concerns with home pregnancy testing and how comfortable they feel with home pregnancy testing for various contraceptive strategies (abstinence, condoms, combined oral contraceptives, and long-acting reversible contraception). This study was deemed exempt (category 2) by the University of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) institutional review board (Protocol #844549).

Among 70 clinicians who completed the survey (response rate, 6.4%), 33 (47.1%) practiced in an academic setting. At the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, clinicians reported using telemedicine for a median of 90% (IQR=50%–100%) of their patients on isotretinoin, and 57 respondents (81.4%) reported having patients use a home pregnancy test for iPLEDGE (Table 1). More than 75% (55/70) agreed that they would like to continue to use telemedicine for patients on isotretinoin, and more than 75% (54/70) agreed that they would like to continue using home pregnancy testing for patients outside the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. More than 75% (54/70) agreed that telemedicine has increased access for their patients, and more than 70% (52/70) agreed that home pregnancy testing has increased access (Table 2). Clinicians agreed that they would be comfortable using home pregnancy testing for patients choosing long-acting reversible contraception (63/70 [90.0%]), combined oral contraceptives (61/69 [88.4%]), condoms (47/70 [67.1%]), or abstinence (48/70 [68.6%])(Table 3).

The most common concerns about home pregnancy testing were patient deception (39/70 [55.7%]), logistical challenges with reviewing results (19/70 [27.1%]), accuracy of the tests (19/70 [27.1%]), and patient ability to interpret tests appropriately (18/70 [25.7%]). To document testing results, 50 respondents (73.5%) would require a picture of results, 4 (5.9%) would accept a written report from the patient, and 14 (20.6%) would accept a verbal report from the patient (Table 2).

In this survey, clinicians expressed interest in continuing to use telemedicine and home pregnancy testing to care for patients with acne treated with isotretinoin. More than 75% agreed that these changes have increased access, which is notable, as several studies have identified that female and minority patients may face iPLEDGE-associated access barriers.^3,4 Continuing to allow home pregnancy testing and explicitly permitting telemedicine can enable clinicians to provide patient-centered care.²

Although clinicians felt comfortable with a variety of contraceptive strategies, particularly those with high reported effectiveness,⁵ there were concerns about deception and interpretation of test results. Future studies are needed to identify optimal workflows for home pregnancy testing and whether patients should be required to provide a photograph of the results.

This survey study is limited by the possibility of sampling and response bias due to the low response rate. Although the use of national listservs was employed to maximize the generalizability of the results, given the response rate, future studies are needed to evaluate whether these findings generalize to other settings. In addition, given iPLEDGE-associated access barriers, further research is needed to examine how changes such as telemedicine and home pregnancy testing influence both access to isotretinoin and pregnancy prevention.

Acknowledgments—We would like to thank Stacey Moore (Montclair, New Jersey) and the American Acne & Rosacea Society for their help distributing the survey.

The current understanding of the pathogenesis of acne includes altered keratinization, follicular obstruction, overproduction of sebum, and microbial colonization ( Cutibacterium acnes ) of the pilosebaceous unit resulting in perifollicular inflammation. ¹ A deeper dive into the hormonal and molecular drivers of acne have implicated insulin, insulinlike growth factor 1 (IGF-1), corticotropin-releasing hormone, the phosphoinositide 3 -kinase/Akt pathway, mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway, and the nuclear factor κ B pathway. ^2-4 A Western diet comprised of high glycemic index foods, carbohydrates, and dairy enhances the production of insulin and IGF-1. A downstream effect of excess insulin and IGF-1 is overactivity of the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1), a major promoter of cellular growth and proliferation that primarily is regulated through nutrient availability. ⁵ This article will review our understanding of the impact of the Western diet on acne pathogenesis and highlight the existing evidence behind the contributions of the mTORC1 pathway in this process. Although quality randomized controlled trials analyzing these effects are limited, dermatologists should understand the existing evidence supporting the potential impacts of diet on acne.

The Western Diet

Glycemic Index—To assess the impact of a high glycemic index diet on acne, Kwon et al⁶ evaluated 32 patients with mild to moderate acne and placed them on a low or high glycemic index diet for 10 weeks. The low glycemic index diet group was found to have a 70% reduction in the mean number of inflammatory acne lesions from baseline (P<.05), while the high glycemic index diet group had no significant reduction. Noninflammatory lesion counts remained statistically unchanged.⁶ Smith et al⁷ studied 43 male patients with acne on either a low glycemic index diet or a self-directed high glycemic diet that was carbohydrate dense. The low glycemic index group showed greater improvement in lesion count as well as improved insulin sensitivity at 12 weeks. Specifically, the mean lesion count (SEM) decreased by 23.5 (3.9) in the low glycemic index group and by only 12.0 (3.5) in the control group (P=.03).⁷ Observational studies also have supported this hypothesis. After adjustment, an analysis of 24,452 participants in the NutriNet-Santé cohort found significant associations between current acne and the consumption of sugary beverages (adjusted OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.01-1.38) and the consumption of fatty and sugary products (adjusted OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.09-2.16).⁸ A Cochrane review that included only 2 studies (Kwon et al⁶ and Smith et al⁷) did not find evidence to suggest a low glycemic index diet for noninflammatory lesion count reduction but did note possible benefit for a reduction in inflammatory and total lesion counts; however, Kwon et al⁶ had incomplete data.⁹

Dairy—A large retrospective study including 47,355 nurses noted the frequency of milk intake was significantly associated with increased prevalence of acne in adolescence (prevalence ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.03-1.44; P=.002).¹⁰ A 2019 meta-analysis further suggested a significant relationship between acne and milk in highest vs lowest intake groups (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.31-1.66) with no significant heterogeneity between the studies (I²=23.6%, P=.24 for heterogeneity), as well as a positive relationship between the highest vs lowest intake of low-fat milk (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.10-1.43) and skim milk (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.34-2.47). In this meta-analysis, yogurt and cheese consumption were not significantly associated with acne (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.73-1.11).¹¹ One non–evidence-based explanation for this may be that fermented dairy products have different biological actions. Pasteurized milk allows microRNAs that directly activate mTORC1 to persist, whereas the bacteria present in the fermentation process may augment this.¹² A separate meta-analysis from 2018 did find that yogurt consumption was positively associated with acne (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.05-1.77; P=.022), highlighting the need for larger, more rigorous studies on this topic.¹³

Insulin and IGF-1—As reviewed above, acne has been considered a disease of Western society, with the Western diet at the center of this association.¹⁴ A typical Western diet consists of high glycemic index foods, carbohydrates, and dairy, all of which enhance the production of insulin and IGF-1. Insulin levels increase secondary to high blood glucose and to a lesser degree by protein intake.¹⁵ Insulinlike growth factor 1 production is most influenced by age and peaks during puberty; however, high protein diets also increase liver IGF-1 production and release.¹⁶ When present in excess, insulin can function as a growth factor. Insulin exerts its anabolic effects through the IGF-1 pathway; however, insulin and IGF-1 are produced in response to different signals.¹⁷ Endocrine production of IGF-1 represents 70% of blood levels, peaks at puberty, and rapidly declines in the third decade of life.¹⁸ Insulin is produced by the pancreas, and levels correspond to lifestyle and genetically induced insulin resistance.¹⁹

Adolescents have elevated levels of IGF-1 as a major driver of puberty-associated growth.²⁰ Despite the natural decrease in IGF-1 following puberty, acne persists in many patients and can even develop for the first time in adulthood in a subset of patients. A study of 40 acne patients and 20 controls found that patients with acne who consumed a high glycemic–load diet was significantly higher than the number of controls consuming a similar diet (P=.008). Additionally, significantly higher levels of mean (SD) serum IGF-1 on quantitative sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in acne patients vs controls (543.2 [174.7] ng/mL vs 316.9 [95.7] ng/mL; P<.001) was identified, and these levels correlated significantly with high glycemic–load diet consumption.²¹ In another study, Kartal et al²² found that basal and fasting insulin levels and homeostasis model assessment scores evaluating for insulin resistance were significantly higher in 36 women compared with 24 age/sex-matched controls (P<.05). This finding remained significant even after excluding women with hyperandrogenemia (P<.05).²²

Highlighting the importance of IGF-1 in the pathogenesis of acne, patients with genetic disorders characterized by IGF-1 deficiency, such as Laron syndrome, do not develop acne despite having a functional androgen receptor. Treatment with IGF-1 in these patients induces acne, further supporting the role of IGF-1 in the pathogenesis of this condition.²³

The mTORC1 Pathway

Comprised of mTOR in addition to other proteins, mTORC1 is a nutrient-sensitive regulator of cellular growth, proliferation, lipid synthesis, and protein translation.⁵ Increased activity of mTORC1 has been described in diabetes, neurodegenerative disease, and cancer,^14,24 while decreased activity may promote longevity.²⁵ Regulation of mTORC1 occurs through several mechanisms. Growth factors such as insulin and IGF-1 promote mTORC1 activation through the PI3K/Akt pathway. Several amino acids—specifically branched chain amino acids such as alanine, arginine, asparagine, glutamine, histidine, leucine, methionine, serine, threonine, and valine—also can activate mTORC1 independently.²⁶ Excess glucose leads to decreased adenosine monophosphate–activated protein kinase and increased activity of mTORC1, which occurs separately from insulin or IGF-1.²⁷ Starvation blocks mTORC1 via increased adenosine monophosphate–activated protein kinase and starvation-induced hypoxia.^26,28 To activate mTORC1, both the IGF-1 or insulin signal and amino acid excess must be present.²⁹ Although not studied in acne, altering the dietary protein content in obese mice has been shown to perturb the mTORC1 pathway, leading to pathologic changes in the mTORC1-autophagy signaling axis, increased amino acid release into the blood, and an acute elevation in mTORC1 signaling.³⁰

Another major regulator of mTORC1 is Forkhead box protein O1 (FOXO1), which is a transcription factor that regulates mTORC1 through sestrin 3.^31,32 Sestrin 3 is a stress-induced protein that helps regulate blood glucose and promote insulin sensitivity.³³ When FOXO1 is translocated to the cell nucleus, it upregulates the expression of sestrin 3, resulting in mTORC1 inhibition.^31,32 Insulin, IGF-1, and nutrient excess lead to FOXO1 translocation to the cell cytoplasm where it can no longer mitigate mTORC1 activity, while the fasted state leads to translocation to the nucleus.³⁴ A single study evaluated the association between FOXO1, mTORC1, a high glycemic–load diet, and acne development. Immunohistochemical detection of mTORC1 assessed by digital image analysis revealed significantly greater expression in inflamed pilosebaceous units found in acne patients (P<.001). Immunohistochemical cytoplasmic expression of FOXO1 and mTOR (used as a proxy for mTORC1) was significantly higher in patients on a high glycemic–load diet (P=.021 and P=.009, respectively) as well as in patients with more severe forms of acne (P=.005 and P=.015, respectively) and elevated IGF-1 levels (P=.004 and P=.003, respectively).²¹

mTORC1 contributes to the proliferation of keratinocytes and excess sebum production, both independently and through androgen-mediated processes.^35-40 Insulinlike growth factor 1 binding the IGF-1 receptor leads to proliferation of keratinocytes lining the sebaceous gland and hair follicle in vivo.³⁵ In mice with epidermis-specific deletion of mTOR, keratinocyte proliferation was decreased and hair follicles were diminished both in number and development. Genetic loss of mTOR in the epidermis led to attenuated signaling pathways of mTORC1 and mTORC2.³⁶

Androgen function is augmented by mTORC1, FOXO1, and IGF-1 through several mechanisms, which may partially explain the hormonal relationship to acne. Androgens increase IGF-1 within the hair follicle.³⁷ In prostate cancer cells, IGF-1 then facilitates movement of FOXO1 to the cytoplasm, preventing it from blocking mTORC1. This effective inactivation of FOXO1 thus further augments the impact of androgens by both allowing unchecked mTORC1 pathway activity and increasing translocation of the androgen receptor (AR) to the nucleus where it exerts its effects.³⁸ Interestingly, genetic polymorphisms of the AR have been shown to cause variable affinity of FOXO1 for the AR; specifically, shorter CAG (cytosine, adenine, guanine) repeat length may lead to decreased FOXO1 binding and is associated with an increased risk for acne.^41-43 In addition to its effects on the hair follicle, IGF-1 stimulates production of testosterone and dehydroepiandrosterone as well as activates 5α-reductase, leading to higher dihydrotestosterone levels, which activate the AR with higher affinity than testosterone.⁴⁴ In some tissues, androgens help regulate the mTORC1 pathway through positive feedback loops.^45,46 At this time, we do not know if this occurs in the pathogenesis of acne.

Isotretinoin is the treatment of choice for refractory acne. It has been hypothesized that isotretinoin induces sebocyte apoptosis via the upregulation of FOXO transcription factors and p53.⁴⁷ Elevated levels of nuclear FOXO1 have been found in the sebaceous glands of patients following initiation of treatment with isotretinoin and are hypothesized to play a major role in the drug’s effectiveness. Specifically, biopsies from 14 acne patients before and after 6 weeks of isotretinoin therapy were analyzed with immunohistochemical staining and found to have a significantly improved nuclear to cytoplasmic ratio of nonphosphorylated FOXO1 (P<.001).⁴⁷

Practical Recommendations

Given the available evidence, it is important for dermatologists to address dietary recommendations in acne patients. Although large randomized controlled trials on diet and acne severity are challenging to conduct in this population, the existing literature suggests that patients should avoid high glycemic index simple sugars and processed grains, and patients should focus on eating more complex carbohydrates in the form of legumes, vegetables, fruits, and tubers.^6-8 With regard to dairy, milk (especially skim) has been associated with increased risks for acne.^11,13 Fermented dairy products may have less impact on acne severity and include cheese, yogurt (unsweetened to keep glycemic index low), and sour cream.¹² Additionally, dermatologists can consider evaluating acne patients for insulin resistance with a hemoglobin A_1c or oral glucose tolerance test; however, these are not perfect markers of insulin sensitivity. This should be considered in patients with clinical features suggesting metabolic derangement such as acanthosis nigricans; elevated nonfasting triglycerides; or symptoms of polycystic ovarian syndrome, which include irregular menstruation, hirsutism, and early-onset androgenetic alopecia (also an independent sign of insulin resistance in men).^48-51

The current understanding of the pathogenesis of acne includes altered keratinization, follicular obstruction, overproduction of sebum, and microbial colonization ( Cutibacterium acnes ) of the pilosebaceous unit resulting in perifollicular inflammation. ¹ A deeper dive into the hormonal and molecular drivers of acne have implicated insulin, insulinlike growth factor 1 (IGF-1), corticotropin-releasing hormone, the phosphoinositide 3 -kinase/Akt pathway, mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway, and the nuclear factor κ B pathway. ^2-4 A Western diet comprised of high glycemic index foods, carbohydrates, and dairy enhances the production of insulin and IGF-1. A downstream effect of excess insulin and IGF-1 is overactivity of the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1), a major promoter of cellular growth and proliferation that primarily is regulated through nutrient availability. ⁵ This article will review our understanding of the impact of the Western diet on acne pathogenesis and highlight the existing evidence behind the contributions of the mTORC1 pathway in this process. Although quality randomized controlled trials analyzing these effects are limited, dermatologists should understand the existing evidence supporting the potential impacts of diet on acne.

The Western Diet

Glycemic Index—To assess the impact of a high glycemic index diet on acne, Kwon et al⁶ evaluated 32 patients with mild to moderate acne and placed them on a low or high glycemic index diet for 10 weeks. The low glycemic index diet group was found to have a 70% reduction in the mean number of inflammatory acne lesions from baseline (P<.05), while the high glycemic index diet group had no significant reduction. Noninflammatory lesion counts remained statistically unchanged.⁶ Smith et al⁷ studied 43 male patients with acne on either a low glycemic index diet or a self-directed high glycemic diet that was carbohydrate dense. The low glycemic index group showed greater improvement in lesion count as well as improved insulin sensitivity at 12 weeks. Specifically, the mean lesion count (SEM) decreased by 23.5 (3.9) in the low glycemic index group and by only 12.0 (3.5) in the control group (P=.03).⁷ Observational studies also have supported this hypothesis. After adjustment, an analysis of 24,452 participants in the NutriNet-Santé cohort found significant associations between current acne and the consumption of sugary beverages (adjusted OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.01-1.38) and the consumption of fatty and sugary products (adjusted OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.09-2.16).⁸ A Cochrane review that included only 2 studies (Kwon et al⁶ and Smith et al⁷) did not find evidence to suggest a low glycemic index diet for noninflammatory lesion count reduction but did note possible benefit for a reduction in inflammatory and total lesion counts; however, Kwon et al⁶ had incomplete data.⁹

Dairy—A large retrospective study including 47,355 nurses noted the frequency of milk intake was significantly associated with increased prevalence of acne in adolescence (prevalence ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.03-1.44; P=.002).¹⁰ A 2019 meta-analysis further suggested a significant relationship between acne and milk in highest vs lowest intake groups (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.31-1.66) with no significant heterogeneity between the studies (I²=23.6%, P=.24 for heterogeneity), as well as a positive relationship between the highest vs lowest intake of low-fat milk (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.10-1.43) and skim milk (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.34-2.47). In this meta-analysis, yogurt and cheese consumption were not significantly associated with acne (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.73-1.11).¹¹ One non–evidence-based explanation for this may be that fermented dairy products have different biological actions. Pasteurized milk allows microRNAs that directly activate mTORC1 to persist, whereas the bacteria present in the fermentation process may augment this.¹² A separate meta-analysis from 2018 did find that yogurt consumption was positively associated with acne (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.05-1.77; P=.022), highlighting the need for larger, more rigorous studies on this topic.¹³

Insulin and IGF-1—As reviewed above, acne has been considered a disease of Western society, with the Western diet at the center of this association.¹⁴ A typical Western diet consists of high glycemic index foods, carbohydrates, and dairy, all of which enhance the production of insulin and IGF-1. Insulin levels increase secondary to high blood glucose and to a lesser degree by protein intake.¹⁵ Insulinlike growth factor 1 production is most influenced by age and peaks during puberty; however, high protein diets also increase liver IGF-1 production and release.¹⁶ When present in excess, insulin can function as a growth factor. Insulin exerts its anabolic effects through the IGF-1 pathway; however, insulin and IGF-1 are produced in response to different signals.¹⁷ Endocrine production of IGF-1 represents 70% of blood levels, peaks at puberty, and rapidly declines in the third decade of life.¹⁸ Insulin is produced by the pancreas, and levels correspond to lifestyle and genetically induced insulin resistance.¹⁹

Adolescents have elevated levels of IGF-1 as a major driver of puberty-associated growth.²⁰ Despite the natural decrease in IGF-1 following puberty, acne persists in many patients and can even develop for the first time in adulthood in a subset of patients. A study of 40 acne patients and 20 controls found that patients with acne who consumed a high glycemic–load diet was significantly higher than the number of controls consuming a similar diet (P=.008). Additionally, significantly higher levels of mean (SD) serum IGF-1 on quantitative sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in acne patients vs controls (543.2 [174.7] ng/mL vs 316.9 [95.7] ng/mL; P<.001) was identified, and these levels correlated significantly with high glycemic–load diet consumption.²¹ In another study, Kartal et al²² found that basal and fasting insulin levels and homeostasis model assessment scores evaluating for insulin resistance were significantly higher in 36 women compared with 24 age/sex-matched controls (P<.05). This finding remained significant even after excluding women with hyperandrogenemia (P<.05).²²

Highlighting the importance of IGF-1 in the pathogenesis of acne, patients with genetic disorders characterized by IGF-1 deficiency, such as Laron syndrome, do not develop acne despite having a functional androgen receptor. Treatment with IGF-1 in these patients induces acne, further supporting the role of IGF-1 in the pathogenesis of this condition.²³

The mTORC1 Pathway

Comprised of mTOR in addition to other proteins, mTORC1 is a nutrient-sensitive regulator of cellular growth, proliferation, lipid synthesis, and protein translation.⁵ Increased activity of mTORC1 has been described in diabetes, neurodegenerative disease, and cancer,^14,24 while decreased activity may promote longevity.²⁵ Regulation of mTORC1 occurs through several mechanisms. Growth factors such as insulin and IGF-1 promote mTORC1 activation through the PI3K/Akt pathway. Several amino acids—specifically branched chain amino acids such as alanine, arginine, asparagine, glutamine, histidine, leucine, methionine, serine, threonine, and valine—also can activate mTORC1 independently.²⁶ Excess glucose leads to decreased adenosine monophosphate–activated protein kinase and increased activity of mTORC1, which occurs separately from insulin or IGF-1.²⁷ Starvation blocks mTORC1 via increased adenosine monophosphate–activated protein kinase and starvation-induced hypoxia.^26,28 To activate mTORC1, both the IGF-1 or insulin signal and amino acid excess must be present.²⁹ Although not studied in acne, altering the dietary protein content in obese mice has been shown to perturb the mTORC1 pathway, leading to pathologic changes in the mTORC1-autophagy signaling axis, increased amino acid release into the blood, and an acute elevation in mTORC1 signaling.³⁰

Another major regulator of mTORC1 is Forkhead box protein O1 (FOXO1), which is a transcription factor that regulates mTORC1 through sestrin 3.^31,32 Sestrin 3 is a stress-induced protein that helps regulate blood glucose and promote insulin sensitivity.³³ When FOXO1 is translocated to the cell nucleus, it upregulates the expression of sestrin 3, resulting in mTORC1 inhibition.^31,32 Insulin, IGF-1, and nutrient excess lead to FOXO1 translocation to the cell cytoplasm where it can no longer mitigate mTORC1 activity, while the fasted state leads to translocation to the nucleus.³⁴ A single study evaluated the association between FOXO1, mTORC1, a high glycemic–load diet, and acne development. Immunohistochemical detection of mTORC1 assessed by digital image analysis revealed significantly greater expression in inflamed pilosebaceous units found in acne patients (P<.001). Immunohistochemical cytoplasmic expression of FOXO1 and mTOR (used as a proxy for mTORC1) was significantly higher in patients on a high glycemic–load diet (P=.021 and P=.009, respectively) as well as in patients with more severe forms of acne (P=.005 and P=.015, respectively) and elevated IGF-1 levels (P=.004 and P=.003, respectively).²¹

mTORC1 contributes to the proliferation of keratinocytes and excess sebum production, both independently and through androgen-mediated processes.^35-40 Insulinlike growth factor 1 binding the IGF-1 receptor leads to proliferation of keratinocytes lining the sebaceous gland and hair follicle in vivo.³⁵ In mice with epidermis-specific deletion of mTOR, keratinocyte proliferation was decreased and hair follicles were diminished both in number and development. Genetic loss of mTOR in the epidermis led to attenuated signaling pathways of mTORC1 and mTORC2.³⁶

Androgen function is augmented by mTORC1, FOXO1, and IGF-1 through several mechanisms, which may partially explain the hormonal relationship to acne. Androgens increase IGF-1 within the hair follicle.³⁷ In prostate cancer cells, IGF-1 then facilitates movement of FOXO1 to the cytoplasm, preventing it from blocking mTORC1. This effective inactivation of FOXO1 thus further augments the impact of androgens by both allowing unchecked mTORC1 pathway activity and increasing translocation of the androgen receptor (AR) to the nucleus where it exerts its effects.³⁸ Interestingly, genetic polymorphisms of the AR have been shown to cause variable affinity of FOXO1 for the AR; specifically, shorter CAG (cytosine, adenine, guanine) repeat length may lead to decreased FOXO1 binding and is associated with an increased risk for acne.^41-43 In addition to its effects on the hair follicle, IGF-1 stimulates production of testosterone and dehydroepiandrosterone as well as activates 5α-reductase, leading to higher dihydrotestosterone levels, which activate the AR with higher affinity than testosterone.⁴⁴ In some tissues, androgens help regulate the mTORC1 pathway through positive feedback loops.^45,46 At this time, we do not know if this occurs in the pathogenesis of acne.

Isotretinoin is the treatment of choice for refractory acne. It has been hypothesized that isotretinoin induces sebocyte apoptosis via the upregulation of FOXO transcription factors and p53.⁴⁷ Elevated levels of nuclear FOXO1 have been found in the sebaceous glands of patients following initiation of treatment with isotretinoin and are hypothesized to play a major role in the drug’s effectiveness. Specifically, biopsies from 14 acne patients before and after 6 weeks of isotretinoin therapy were analyzed with immunohistochemical staining and found to have a significantly improved nuclear to cytoplasmic ratio of nonphosphorylated FOXO1 (P<.001).⁴⁷

Practical Recommendations

Given the available evidence, it is important for dermatologists to address dietary recommendations in acne patients. Although large randomized controlled trials on diet and acne severity are challenging to conduct in this population, the existing literature suggests that patients should avoid high glycemic index simple sugars and processed grains, and patients should focus on eating more complex carbohydrates in the form of legumes, vegetables, fruits, and tubers.^6-8 With regard to dairy, milk (especially skim) has been associated with increased risks for acne.^11,13 Fermented dairy products may have less impact on acne severity and include cheese, yogurt (unsweetened to keep glycemic index low), and sour cream.¹² Additionally, dermatologists can consider evaluating acne patients for insulin resistance with a hemoglobin A_1c or oral glucose tolerance test; however, these are not perfect markers of insulin sensitivity. This should be considered in patients with clinical features suggesting metabolic derangement such as acanthosis nigricans; elevated nonfasting triglycerides; or symptoms of polycystic ovarian syndrome, which include irregular menstruation, hirsutism, and early-onset androgenetic alopecia (also an independent sign of insulin resistance in men).^48-51

The current understanding of the pathogenesis of acne includes altered keratinization, follicular obstruction, overproduction of sebum, and microbial colonization ( Cutibacterium acnes ) of the pilosebaceous unit resulting in perifollicular inflammation. ¹ A deeper dive into the hormonal and molecular drivers of acne have implicated insulin, insulinlike growth factor 1 (IGF-1), corticotropin-releasing hormone, the phosphoinositide 3 -kinase/Akt pathway, mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway, and the nuclear factor κ B pathway. ^2-4 A Western diet comprised of high glycemic index foods, carbohydrates, and dairy enhances the production of insulin and IGF-1. A downstream effect of excess insulin and IGF-1 is overactivity of the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1), a major promoter of cellular growth and proliferation that primarily is regulated through nutrient availability. ⁵ This article will review our understanding of the impact of the Western diet on acne pathogenesis and highlight the existing evidence behind the contributions of the mTORC1 pathway in this process. Although quality randomized controlled trials analyzing these effects are limited, dermatologists should understand the existing evidence supporting the potential impacts of diet on acne.

The Western Diet

Glycemic Index—To assess the impact of a high glycemic index diet on acne, Kwon et al⁶ evaluated 32 patients with mild to moderate acne and placed them on a low or high glycemic index diet for 10 weeks. The low glycemic index diet group was found to have a 70% reduction in the mean number of inflammatory acne lesions from baseline (P<.05), while the high glycemic index diet group had no significant reduction. Noninflammatory lesion counts remained statistically unchanged.⁶ Smith et al⁷ studied 43 male patients with acne on either a low glycemic index diet or a self-directed high glycemic diet that was carbohydrate dense. The low glycemic index group showed greater improvement in lesion count as well as improved insulin sensitivity at 12 weeks. Specifically, the mean lesion count (SEM) decreased by 23.5 (3.9) in the low glycemic index group and by only 12.0 (3.5) in the control group (P=.03).⁷ Observational studies also have supported this hypothesis. After adjustment, an analysis of 24,452 participants in the NutriNet-Santé cohort found significant associations between current acne and the consumption of sugary beverages (adjusted OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.01-1.38) and the consumption of fatty and sugary products (adjusted OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.09-2.16).⁸ A Cochrane review that included only 2 studies (Kwon et al⁶ and Smith et al⁷) did not find evidence to suggest a low glycemic index diet for noninflammatory lesion count reduction but did note possible benefit for a reduction in inflammatory and total lesion counts; however, Kwon et al⁶ had incomplete data.⁹

Dairy—A large retrospective study including 47,355 nurses noted the frequency of milk intake was significantly associated with increased prevalence of acne in adolescence (prevalence ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.03-1.44; P=.002).¹⁰ A 2019 meta-analysis further suggested a significant relationship between acne and milk in highest vs lowest intake groups (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.31-1.66) with no significant heterogeneity between the studies (I²=23.6%, P=.24 for heterogeneity), as well as a positive relationship between the highest vs lowest intake of low-fat milk (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.10-1.43) and skim milk (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.34-2.47). In this meta-analysis, yogurt and cheese consumption were not significantly associated with acne (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.73-1.11).¹¹ One non–evidence-based explanation for this may be that fermented dairy products have different biological actions. Pasteurized milk allows microRNAs that directly activate mTORC1 to persist, whereas the bacteria present in the fermentation process may augment this.¹² A separate meta-analysis from 2018 did find that yogurt consumption was positively associated with acne (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.05-1.77; P=.022), highlighting the need for larger, more rigorous studies on this topic.¹³

Insulin and IGF-1—As reviewed above, acne has been considered a disease of Western society, with the Western diet at the center of this association.¹⁴ A typical Western diet consists of high glycemic index foods, carbohydrates, and dairy, all of which enhance the production of insulin and IGF-1. Insulin levels increase secondary to high blood glucose and to a lesser degree by protein intake.¹⁵ Insulinlike growth factor 1 production is most influenced by age and peaks during puberty; however, high protein diets also increase liver IGF-1 production and release.¹⁶ When present in excess, insulin can function as a growth factor. Insulin exerts its anabolic effects through the IGF-1 pathway; however, insulin and IGF-1 are produced in response to different signals.¹⁷ Endocrine production of IGF-1 represents 70% of blood levels, peaks at puberty, and rapidly declines in the third decade of life.¹⁸ Insulin is produced by the pancreas, and levels correspond to lifestyle and genetically induced insulin resistance.¹⁹

Adolescents have elevated levels of IGF-1 as a major driver of puberty-associated growth.²⁰ Despite the natural decrease in IGF-1 following puberty, acne persists in many patients and can even develop for the first time in adulthood in a subset of patients. A study of 40 acne patients and 20 controls found that patients with acne who consumed a high glycemic–load diet was significantly higher than the number of controls consuming a similar diet (P=.008). Additionally, significantly higher levels of mean (SD) serum IGF-1 on quantitative sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in acne patients vs controls (543.2 [174.7] ng/mL vs 316.9 [95.7] ng/mL; P<.001) was identified, and these levels correlated significantly with high glycemic–load diet consumption.²¹ In another study, Kartal et al²² found that basal and fasting insulin levels and homeostasis model assessment scores evaluating for insulin resistance were significantly higher in 36 women compared with 24 age/sex-matched controls (P<.05). This finding remained significant even after excluding women with hyperandrogenemia (P<.05).²²

Highlighting the importance of IGF-1 in the pathogenesis of acne, patients with genetic disorders characterized by IGF-1 deficiency, such as Laron syndrome, do not develop acne despite having a functional androgen receptor. Treatment with IGF-1 in these patients induces acne, further supporting the role of IGF-1 in the pathogenesis of this condition.²³

The mTORC1 Pathway

Comprised of mTOR in addition to other proteins, mTORC1 is a nutrient-sensitive regulator of cellular growth, proliferation, lipid synthesis, and protein translation.⁵ Increased activity of mTORC1 has been described in diabetes, neurodegenerative disease, and cancer,^14,24 while decreased activity may promote longevity.²⁵ Regulation of mTORC1 occurs through several mechanisms. Growth factors such as insulin and IGF-1 promote mTORC1 activation through the PI3K/Akt pathway. Several amino acids—specifically branched chain amino acids such as alanine, arginine, asparagine, glutamine, histidine, leucine, methionine, serine, threonine, and valine—also can activate mTORC1 independently.²⁶ Excess glucose leads to decreased adenosine monophosphate–activated protein kinase and increased activity of mTORC1, which occurs separately from insulin or IGF-1.²⁷ Starvation blocks mTORC1 via increased adenosine monophosphate–activated protein kinase and starvation-induced hypoxia.^26,28 To activate mTORC1, both the IGF-1 or insulin signal and amino acid excess must be present.²⁹ Although not studied in acne, altering the dietary protein content in obese mice has been shown to perturb the mTORC1 pathway, leading to pathologic changes in the mTORC1-autophagy signaling axis, increased amino acid release into the blood, and an acute elevation in mTORC1 signaling.³⁰

Another major regulator of mTORC1 is Forkhead box protein O1 (FOXO1), which is a transcription factor that regulates mTORC1 through sestrin 3.^31,32 Sestrin 3 is a stress-induced protein that helps regulate blood glucose and promote insulin sensitivity.³³ When FOXO1 is translocated to the cell nucleus, it upregulates the expression of sestrin 3, resulting in mTORC1 inhibition.^31,32 Insulin, IGF-1, and nutrient excess lead to FOXO1 translocation to the cell cytoplasm where it can no longer mitigate mTORC1 activity, while the fasted state leads to translocation to the nucleus.³⁴ A single study evaluated the association between FOXO1, mTORC1, a high glycemic–load diet, and acne development. Immunohistochemical detection of mTORC1 assessed by digital image analysis revealed significantly greater expression in inflamed pilosebaceous units found in acne patients (P<.001). Immunohistochemical cytoplasmic expression of FOXO1 and mTOR (used as a proxy for mTORC1) was significantly higher in patients on a high glycemic–load diet (P=.021 and P=.009, respectively) as well as in patients with more severe forms of acne (P=.005 and P=.015, respectively) and elevated IGF-1 levels (P=.004 and P=.003, respectively).²¹

mTORC1 contributes to the proliferation of keratinocytes and excess sebum production, both independently and through androgen-mediated processes.^35-40 Insulinlike growth factor 1 binding the IGF-1 receptor leads to proliferation of keratinocytes lining the sebaceous gland and hair follicle in vivo.³⁵ In mice with epidermis-specific deletion of mTOR, keratinocyte proliferation was decreased and hair follicles were diminished both in number and development. Genetic loss of mTOR in the epidermis led to attenuated signaling pathways of mTORC1 and mTORC2.³⁶

Androgen function is augmented by mTORC1, FOXO1, and IGF-1 through several mechanisms, which may partially explain the hormonal relationship to acne. Androgens increase IGF-1 within the hair follicle.³⁷ In prostate cancer cells, IGF-1 then facilitates movement of FOXO1 to the cytoplasm, preventing it from blocking mTORC1. This effective inactivation of FOXO1 thus further augments the impact of androgens by both allowing unchecked mTORC1 pathway activity and increasing translocation of the androgen receptor (AR) to the nucleus where it exerts its effects.³⁸ Interestingly, genetic polymorphisms of the AR have been shown to cause variable affinity of FOXO1 for the AR; specifically, shorter CAG (cytosine, adenine, guanine) repeat length may lead to decreased FOXO1 binding and is associated with an increased risk for acne.^41-43 In addition to its effects on the hair follicle, IGF-1 stimulates production of testosterone and dehydroepiandrosterone as well as activates 5α-reductase, leading to higher dihydrotestosterone levels, which activate the AR with higher affinity than testosterone.⁴⁴ In some tissues, androgens help regulate the mTORC1 pathway through positive feedback loops.^45,46 At this time, we do not know if this occurs in the pathogenesis of acne.

Isotretinoin is the treatment of choice for refractory acne. It has been hypothesized that isotretinoin induces sebocyte apoptosis via the upregulation of FOXO transcription factors and p53.⁴⁷ Elevated levels of nuclear FOXO1 have been found in the sebaceous glands of patients following initiation of treatment with isotretinoin and are hypothesized to play a major role in the drug’s effectiveness. Specifically, biopsies from 14 acne patients before and after 6 weeks of isotretinoin therapy were analyzed with immunohistochemical staining and found to have a significantly improved nuclear to cytoplasmic ratio of nonphosphorylated FOXO1 (P<.001).⁴⁷

Practical Recommendations

Given the available evidence, it is important for dermatologists to address dietary recommendations in acne patients. Although large randomized controlled trials on diet and acne severity are challenging to conduct in this population, the existing literature suggests that patients should avoid high glycemic index simple sugars and processed grains, and patients should focus on eating more complex carbohydrates in the form of legumes, vegetables, fruits, and tubers.^6-8 With regard to dairy, milk (especially skim) has been associated with increased risks for acne.^11,13 Fermented dairy products may have less impact on acne severity and include cheese, yogurt (unsweetened to keep glycemic index low), and sour cream.¹² Additionally, dermatologists can consider evaluating acne patients for insulin resistance with a hemoglobin A_1c or oral glucose tolerance test; however, these are not perfect markers of insulin sensitivity. This should be considered in patients with clinical features suggesting metabolic derangement such as acanthosis nigricans; elevated nonfasting triglycerides; or symptoms of polycystic ovarian syndrome, which include irregular menstruation, hirsutism, and early-onset androgenetic alopecia (also an independent sign of insulin resistance in men).^48-51

After most dermatology residents graduate from their programs, they go out into practice and will often carry with them what they learned from their teachers, especially clinicians. Everyone else in their dermatology residency programs approaches disease management and the use of different therapies in the same way, right?

It does not take very long before these same dermatology residents realize that things are different in real-world clinical practice in many ways. Most clinicians develop a range of fairly predictable patterns in how they approach and treat common skin disorders such as acne, rosacea, psoriasis, atopic dermatitis/eczema, and seborrheic dermatitis. These patterns often include what testing is performed at baseline and at follow-up.

Recently, I have been giving thought to how clinicians—myself included—change their approaches to management of specific skin diseases over time, especially as new information and therapies emerge. Are we fast adopters, or are we slow adopters? How much evidence do we need to see before we consider adjusting our approach? Is the needle moving too fast or not fast enough?

I would like to use an example that relates to acne treatment, especially as this is one of the most common skin disorders encountered in outpatient dermatologic practice. Despite lack of US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for use in acne, oral spironolactone commonly is used in females, especially adults, with acne vulgaris and has a long history as an acceptable approach in dermatology.¹ Because spironolactone is a potassium-sparing diuretic, one question that commonly arises is: Do we monitor serum potassium levels at baseline and periodically during treatment with spironolactone? There has never been a definitive consensus on which approach to take. However, there has been evidence to suggest that such monitoring is not necessary in young healthy women due to a negligible risk for clinically relevant hyperkalemia.^2,3

In fact, the suggestion that there is a very low risk for clinically significant hyperkalemia in healthy young women treated with spironolactone is accurate based on population-based studies. Nevertheless, the clinician is faced with confirming the patient is in fact healthy rather than assuming this is the case due to her “young” age. In addition, it is important to exclude potential drug-drug interactions that can increase the risk for hyperkalemia when coadministered with spironolactone and also to exclude an unknown underlying decrease in renal function.¹ At the end of the day, I support the continued research that is being done to evaluate questions that can challenge the recycled dogma on how we manage patients, and I do not fault those who follow what they believe to be new cogent evidence. However, in the case of oral spironolactone use, I also could never fault a clinician for monitoring renal function and electrolytes including serum potassium levels in a female patient treated for acne, especially with a drug that has the known potential to cause hyperkalemia in certain clinical situations and is not FDA approved for the indication of acne (ie, the guidance that accompanies the level of investigation needed for such FDA approval is missing). The clinical judgment of the clinician who is responsible for the individual patient trumps the results from population-based studies completed thus far. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of that clinician to assure the safety of their patient in a manner that they are comfortable with.

It takes time to make changes in our approaches to patient management, and in the majority of cases, that is rightfully so. There are several potential limitations to how certain data are collected, and a reasonable verification of results over time is what tends to change behavior patterns. Ultimately, the common goal is to do what is in the best interest of our patients. No one can argue successfully against that.

After most dermatology residents graduate from their programs, they go out into practice and will often carry with them what they learned from their teachers, especially clinicians. Everyone else in their dermatology residency programs approaches disease management and the use of different therapies in the same way, right?

It does not take very long before these same dermatology residents realize that things are different in real-world clinical practice in many ways. Most clinicians develop a range of fairly predictable patterns in how they approach and treat common skin disorders such as acne, rosacea, psoriasis, atopic dermatitis/eczema, and seborrheic dermatitis. These patterns often include what testing is performed at baseline and at follow-up.

Recently, I have been giving thought to how clinicians—myself included—change their approaches to management of specific skin diseases over time, especially as new information and therapies emerge. Are we fast adopters, or are we slow adopters? How much evidence do we need to see before we consider adjusting our approach? Is the needle moving too fast or not fast enough?

I would like to use an example that relates to acne treatment, especially as this is one of the most common skin disorders encountered in outpatient dermatologic practice. Despite lack of US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for use in acne, oral spironolactone commonly is used in females, especially adults, with acne vulgaris and has a long history as an acceptable approach in dermatology.¹ Because spironolactone is a potassium-sparing diuretic, one question that commonly arises is: Do we monitor serum potassium levels at baseline and periodically during treatment with spironolactone? There has never been a definitive consensus on which approach to take. However, there has been evidence to suggest that such monitoring is not necessary in young healthy women due to a negligible risk for clinically relevant hyperkalemia.^2,3

In fact, the suggestion that there is a very low risk for clinically significant hyperkalemia in healthy young women treated with spironolactone is accurate based on population-based studies. Nevertheless, the clinician is faced with confirming the patient is in fact healthy rather than assuming this is the case due to her “young” age. In addition, it is important to exclude potential drug-drug interactions that can increase the risk for hyperkalemia when coadministered with spironolactone and also to exclude an unknown underlying decrease in renal function.¹ At the end of the day, I support the continued research that is being done to evaluate questions that can challenge the recycled dogma on how we manage patients, and I do not fault those who follow what they believe to be new cogent evidence. However, in the case of oral spironolactone use, I also could never fault a clinician for monitoring renal function and electrolytes including serum potassium levels in a female patient treated for acne, especially with a drug that has the known potential to cause hyperkalemia in certain clinical situations and is not FDA approved for the indication of acne (ie, the guidance that accompanies the level of investigation needed for such FDA approval is missing). The clinical judgment of the clinician who is responsible for the individual patient trumps the results from population-based studies completed thus far. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of that clinician to assure the safety of their patient in a manner that they are comfortable with.

It takes time to make changes in our approaches to patient management, and in the majority of cases, that is rightfully so. There are several potential limitations to how certain data are collected, and a reasonable verification of results over time is what tends to change behavior patterns. Ultimately, the common goal is to do what is in the best interest of our patients. No one can argue successfully against that.

After most dermatology residents graduate from their programs, they go out into practice and will often carry with them what they learned from their teachers, especially clinicians. Everyone else in their dermatology residency programs approaches disease management and the use of different therapies in the same way, right?

It does not take very long before these same dermatology residents realize that things are different in real-world clinical practice in many ways. Most clinicians develop a range of fairly predictable patterns in how they approach and treat common skin disorders such as acne, rosacea, psoriasis, atopic dermatitis/eczema, and seborrheic dermatitis. These patterns often include what testing is performed at baseline and at follow-up.

Recently, I have been giving thought to how clinicians—myself included—change their approaches to management of specific skin diseases over time, especially as new information and therapies emerge. Are we fast adopters, or are we slow adopters? How much evidence do we need to see before we consider adjusting our approach? Is the needle moving too fast or not fast enough?

I would like to use an example that relates to acne treatment, especially as this is one of the most common skin disorders encountered in outpatient dermatologic practice. Despite lack of US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for use in acne, oral spironolactone commonly is used in females, especially adults, with acne vulgaris and has a long history as an acceptable approach in dermatology.¹ Because spironolactone is a potassium-sparing diuretic, one question that commonly arises is: Do we monitor serum potassium levels at baseline and periodically during treatment with spironolactone? There has never been a definitive consensus on which approach to take. However, there has been evidence to suggest that such monitoring is not necessary in young healthy women due to a negligible risk for clinically relevant hyperkalemia.^2,3

In fact, the suggestion that there is a very low risk for clinically significant hyperkalemia in healthy young women treated with spironolactone is accurate based on population-based studies. Nevertheless, the clinician is faced with confirming the patient is in fact healthy rather than assuming this is the case due to her “young” age. In addition, it is important to exclude potential drug-drug interactions that can increase the risk for hyperkalemia when coadministered with spironolactone and also to exclude an unknown underlying decrease in renal function.¹ At the end of the day, I support the continued research that is being done to evaluate questions that can challenge the recycled dogma on how we manage patients, and I do not fault those who follow what they believe to be new cogent evidence. However, in the case of oral spironolactone use, I also could never fault a clinician for monitoring renal function and electrolytes including serum potassium levels in a female patient treated for acne, especially with a drug that has the known potential to cause hyperkalemia in certain clinical situations and is not FDA approved for the indication of acne (ie, the guidance that accompanies the level of investigation needed for such FDA approval is missing). The clinical judgment of the clinician who is responsible for the individual patient trumps the results from population-based studies completed thus far. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of that clinician to assure the safety of their patient in a manner that they are comfortable with.

It takes time to make changes in our approaches to patient management, and in the majority of cases, that is rightfully so. There are several potential limitations to how certain data are collected, and a reasonable verification of results over time is what tends to change behavior patterns. Ultimately, the common goal is to do what is in the best interest of our patients. No one can argue successfully against that.

Isotretinoin is the most effective treatment of recalcitrant acne, but because of its teratogenicity and potential association with psychiatric adverse effects, it has been heavily regulated by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) through the iPLEDGE program since 2006.^1,2 To manage the risk of teratogenicity associated with isotretinoin, various pregnancy prevention programs have been developed, but none of these programs have demonstrated a zero fetal exposure rate. The FDA reported 122 isotretinoin-exposed pregnancies during the first year iPLEDGE was implemented, which was a slight increase from the 120 pregnancies reported the year after the implementation of the System to Manage Accutane-Related Teratogenicity program, iPLEDGE’s predecessor.³ The iPLEDGE program requires registration of all wholesalers distributing isotretinoin, all health care providers prescribing isotretinoin, all pharmacies dispensing isotretinoin, and all female and male patients prescribed isotretinoin to create a verifiable link that only enables patients who have met all criteria to pick up their prescriptions. For patients of reproductive potential, there are additional qualification criteria and monthly requirements; before receiving their prescription every month, patients of reproductive potential must undergo a urine or serum pregnancy test with negative results, and patients must be counseled by prescribers regarding the risks of the drug and verify they are using 2 methods of contraception (or practicing abstinence) each month before completing online questions that test their understanding of the drug’s side effects and their chosen methods of contraception.⁴ These requirements place burdens on both patients and prescribers. Studies have shown that in the 2 years after the implementation of iPLEDGE, there was a 29% decrease in isotretinoin prescriptions.^1-3

We conducted a survey study to see if clinicians chose not to prescribe isotretinoin to appropriate candidates specifically because of the administrative burden of iPLEDGE. Secondarily, we investigated the medications these clinicians would prescribe instead of isotretinoin.

Methods

In March 2020, we administered an anonymous online survey consisting of 12 multiple-choice questions to verified board-certified dermatologists in the United States using a social media group. The University of Rochester’s (Rochester, New York) institutional review board determined that our protocol met criteria for exemption (IRB STUDY00004693).

Statistical Analysis—Primary analyses used Pearson χ² tests to identify significant differences among respondent groups, practice settings, age of respondents, and time spent registering patients for iPLEDGE.

Results

Survey results from 510 respondents are summarized in the Table.

Burden of iPLEDGE—Of the respondents, 336 (65.9%) were frequent prescribers of isotretinoin, 166 (32.5%) were infrequent prescribers, and 8 (1.6%) were never prescribers. Significantly more isotretinoin prescribers estimated that their offices spend 16 to 30 minutes registering a new isotretinoin patient with the iPLEDGE program (289 [57.6%]) compared with 0 to 15 minutes (140 [27.9%]), 31 to 45 minutes (57 [11.3%]), and morethan 45 minutes (16 [3.2%])(χ²₃=22.09, P<.0001). Furthermore, 150 dermatologists reported sometimes not prescribing, and 2 reported never prescribing isotretinoin because of the burden of iPLEDGE.

Systemic Agents Prescribed Instead of Isotretinoin—Of the respondents, 73.0% (n=111) prescribed spironolactone to female patients and 88.8% (n=135) prescribed oral antibiotics to male patients instead of isotretinoin. Spironolactone typically is not prescribed to male patients with acne because of its feminizing side effects, such as gynecomastia.⁵ According to the American Academy of Dermatology guidelines on acne, systemic antibiotic usage should be limited to the shortest possible duration (ie, less than 3–4 months) because of potential bacterial resistance and reported associations with inflammatory bowel disease, Clostridium difficile infection, and candidiasis.^6,7

Prescriber Demographics—The frequency of not prescribing isotretinoin did not vary by practice setting (χ ²₄=6.44, P=.1689) but did vary by age of the dermatologist (χ²₃=15.57, P=.0014). Dermatologists younger than 46 years were more likely (Figure) to report not prescribing isotretinoin because of the administrative burden of iPLEDGE. We speculate that this is because younger dermatologists are less established in their practices and therefore may have less support to complete registration without interruption of clinic workflow.

Comment

The results of our survey suggest that the administrative burden of iPLEDGE may be compelling prescribers to refrain from prescribing isotretinoin therapy to appropriate candidates when it would otherwise be the drug of choice.

Recent Changes to iPLEDGE—The FDA recently approved a modification to the iPLEDGE Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) program based on the advocacy efforts from the American Academy of Dermatology. Starting December 13, 2021, the 3 patient risk categories were consolidated into 2 gender-neutral categories: patients who can get pregnant and patients who cannot get pregnant.⁸ The iPLEDGE website was transitioned to a new system, and all iPLEDGE REMS users had to update their iPLEDGE accounts. After the implementation of the modified program, user access issues arose, leading to delayed treatment when patients, providers, and pharmacists were all locked out of the online system; users also experienced long hold times with the call center.⁸ This change highlights the ongoing critical need for a streamlined program that increases patient access to isotretinoin while maintaining safety.

Study Limitations—The main limitation of this study was the inability to calculate a true response rate to our survey. We distributed the survey via social media to maintain anonymity of the respondents. We could not track how many saw the link to compare with the number of respondents. Therefore, the only way we could calculate a response rate was with the total number of members in the group, which fluctuated around 4000 at the time we administered the survey. We calculated that we would need at least 351 responses to have a 5% margin of error at 95% confidence for our results to be generalizable and significant. We ultimately received 510 responses, which gave us a 4.05% margin of error at 95% confidence and an estimated 12.7% response rate. Since some members of the group are not active and did not see the survey link, our true response rate was likely higher. Therefore, we concluded that the survey was successful, and our significant responses were representative of US dermatologists.

Suggestions to Improve iPLEDGE Process—Our survey study should facilitate further discussions on the importance of simplifying iPLEDGE. One suggestion for improving iPLEDGE is to remove the initial registration month so care is not delayed. Currently, a patient who can get pregnant must be on 2 forms of contraception for 30 days after they register as a patient before they are eligible to fill their prescription.⁴ This process is unnecessarily long and arduous and could be eliminated as long as the patient has already been on an effective form of contraception and has a negative pregnancy test on the day of registration. The need to repeat contraception comprehension questions monthly is redundant and also could be removed. Another suggestion is to remove the category of patients who cannot become pregnant from the system entirely. Isotretinoin does not appear to be associated with adverse psychiatric effects as shown through the systematic review and meta-analysis of numerous studies.⁹ If anything, the treatment of acne with isotretinoin appears to mitigate depressive symptoms. The iPLEDGE program does not manage this largely debunked idea. Because the program’s sole goal is to manage the risk of isotretinoin’s teratogenicity, the category of those who cannot become pregnant should not be included.

Conclusion

This survey highlights the burdens of iPLEDGE for dermatologists and the need for a more streamlined risk management program. The burden was felt equally among all practice types but especially by younger dermatologists (<46 years). This time-consuming program is deterring some dermatologists from prescribing isotretinoin and ultimately limiting patient access to an effective medication.

Acknowledgment—The authors thank all of the responding clinicians who provided insight into the impact of iPLEDGE on their isotretinoin prescribing patterns.

Isotretinoin is the most effective treatment of recalcitrant acne, but because of its teratogenicity and potential association with psychiatric adverse effects, it has been heavily regulated by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) through the iPLEDGE program since 2006.^1,2 To manage the risk of teratogenicity associated with isotretinoin, various pregnancy prevention programs have been developed, but none of these programs have demonstrated a zero fetal exposure rate. The FDA reported 122 isotretinoin-exposed pregnancies during the first year iPLEDGE was implemented, which was a slight increase from the 120 pregnancies reported the year after the implementation of the System to Manage Accutane-Related Teratogenicity program, iPLEDGE’s predecessor.³ The iPLEDGE program requires registration of all wholesalers distributing isotretinoin, all health care providers prescribing isotretinoin, all pharmacies dispensing isotretinoin, and all female and male patients prescribed isotretinoin to create a verifiable link that only enables patients who have met all criteria to pick up their prescriptions. For patients of reproductive potential, there are additional qualification criteria and monthly requirements; before receiving their prescription every month, patients of reproductive potential must undergo a urine or serum pregnancy test with negative results, and patients must be counseled by prescribers regarding the risks of the drug and verify they are using 2 methods of contraception (or practicing abstinence) each month before completing online questions that test their understanding of the drug’s side effects and their chosen methods of contraception.⁴ These requirements place burdens on both patients and prescribers. Studies have shown that in the 2 years after the implementation of iPLEDGE, there was a 29% decrease in isotretinoin prescriptions.^1-3

We conducted a survey study to see if clinicians chose not to prescribe isotretinoin to appropriate candidates specifically because of the administrative burden of iPLEDGE. Secondarily, we investigated the medications these clinicians would prescribe instead of isotretinoin.

Methods

In March 2020, we administered an anonymous online survey consisting of 12 multiple-choice questions to verified board-certified dermatologists in the United States using a social media group. The University of Rochester’s (Rochester, New York) institutional review board determined that our protocol met criteria for exemption (IRB STUDY00004693).

Statistical Analysis—Primary analyses used Pearson χ² tests to identify significant differences among respondent groups, practice settings, age of respondents, and time spent registering patients for iPLEDGE.

Results

Survey results from 510 respondents are summarized in the Table.

Burden of iPLEDGE—Of the respondents, 336 (65.9%) were frequent prescribers of isotretinoin, 166 (32.5%) were infrequent prescribers, and 8 (1.6%) were never prescribers. Significantly more isotretinoin prescribers estimated that their offices spend 16 to 30 minutes registering a new isotretinoin patient with the iPLEDGE program (289 [57.6%]) compared with 0 to 15 minutes (140 [27.9%]), 31 to 45 minutes (57 [11.3%]), and morethan 45 minutes (16 [3.2%])(χ²₃=22.09, P<.0001). Furthermore, 150 dermatologists reported sometimes not prescribing, and 2 reported never prescribing isotretinoin because of the burden of iPLEDGE.

Systemic Agents Prescribed Instead of Isotretinoin—Of the respondents, 73.0% (n=111) prescribed spironolactone to female patients and 88.8% (n=135) prescribed oral antibiotics to male patients instead of isotretinoin. Spironolactone typically is not prescribed to male patients with acne because of its feminizing side effects, such as gynecomastia.⁵ According to the American Academy of Dermatology guidelines on acne, systemic antibiotic usage should be limited to the shortest possible duration (ie, less than 3–4 months) because of potential bacterial resistance and reported associations with inflammatory bowel disease, Clostridium difficile infection, and candidiasis.^6,7

Prescriber Demographics—The frequency of not prescribing isotretinoin did not vary by practice setting (χ ²₄=6.44, P=.1689) but did vary by age of the dermatologist (χ²₃=15.57, P=.0014). Dermatologists younger than 46 years were more likely (Figure) to report not prescribing isotretinoin because of the administrative burden of iPLEDGE. We speculate that this is because younger dermatologists are less established in their practices and therefore may have less support to complete registration without interruption of clinic workflow.

Comment

The results of our survey suggest that the administrative burden of iPLEDGE may be compelling prescribers to refrain from prescribing isotretinoin therapy to appropriate candidates when it would otherwise be the drug of choice.

Recent Changes to iPLEDGE—The FDA recently approved a modification to the iPLEDGE Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) program based on the advocacy efforts from the American Academy of Dermatology. Starting December 13, 2021, the 3 patient risk categories were consolidated into 2 gender-neutral categories: patients who can get pregnant and patients who cannot get pregnant.⁸ The iPLEDGE website was transitioned to a new system, and all iPLEDGE REMS users had to update their iPLEDGE accounts. After the implementation of the modified program, user access issues arose, leading to delayed treatment when patients, providers, and pharmacists were all locked out of the online system; users also experienced long hold times with the call center.⁸ This change highlights the ongoing critical need for a streamlined program that increases patient access to isotretinoin while maintaining safety.

Study Limitations—The main limitation of this study was the inability to calculate a true response rate to our survey. We distributed the survey via social media to maintain anonymity of the respondents. We could not track how many saw the link to compare with the number of respondents. Therefore, the only way we could calculate a response rate was with the total number of members in the group, which fluctuated around 4000 at the time we administered the survey. We calculated that we would need at least 351 responses to have a 5% margin of error at 95% confidence for our results to be generalizable and significant. We ultimately received 510 responses, which gave us a 4.05% margin of error at 95% confidence and an estimated 12.7% response rate. Since some members of the group are not active and did not see the survey link, our true response rate was likely higher. Therefore, we concluded that the survey was successful, and our significant responses were representative of US dermatologists.

Suggestions to Improve iPLEDGE Process—Our survey study should facilitate further discussions on the importance of simplifying iPLEDGE. One suggestion for improving iPLEDGE is to remove the initial registration month so care is not delayed. Currently, a patient who can get pregnant must be on 2 forms of contraception for 30 days after they register as a patient before they are eligible to fill their prescription.⁴ This process is unnecessarily long and arduous and could be eliminated as long as the patient has already been on an effective form of contraception and has a negative pregnancy test on the day of registration. The need to repeat contraception comprehension questions monthly is redundant and also could be removed. Another suggestion is to remove the category of patients who cannot become pregnant from the system entirely. Isotretinoin does not appear to be associated with adverse psychiatric effects as shown through the systematic review and meta-analysis of numerous studies.⁹ If anything, the treatment of acne with isotretinoin appears to mitigate depressive symptoms. The iPLEDGE program does not manage this largely debunked idea. Because the program’s sole goal is to manage the risk of isotretinoin’s teratogenicity, the category of those who cannot become pregnant should not be included.

Conclusion

This survey highlights the burdens of iPLEDGE for dermatologists and the need for a more streamlined risk management program. The burden was felt equally among all practice types but especially by younger dermatologists (<46 years). This time-consuming program is deterring some dermatologists from prescribing isotretinoin and ultimately limiting patient access to an effective medication.

Acknowledgment—The authors thank all of the responding clinicians who provided insight into the impact of iPLEDGE on their isotretinoin prescribing patterns.

Isotretinoin is the most effective treatment of recalcitrant acne, but because of its teratogenicity and potential association with psychiatric adverse effects, it has been heavily regulated by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) through the iPLEDGE program since 2006.^1,2 To manage the risk of teratogenicity associated with isotretinoin, various pregnancy prevention programs have been developed, but none of these programs have demonstrated a zero fetal exposure rate. The FDA reported 122 isotretinoin-exposed pregnancies during the first year iPLEDGE was implemented, which was a slight increase from the 120 pregnancies reported the year after the implementation of the System to Manage Accutane-Related Teratogenicity program, iPLEDGE’s predecessor.³ The iPLEDGE program requires registration of all wholesalers distributing isotretinoin, all health care providers prescribing isotretinoin, all pharmacies dispensing isotretinoin, and all female and male patients prescribed isotretinoin to create a verifiable link that only enables patients who have met all criteria to pick up their prescriptions. For patients of reproductive potential, there are additional qualification criteria and monthly requirements; before receiving their prescription every month, patients of reproductive potential must undergo a urine or serum pregnancy test with negative results, and patients must be counseled by prescribers regarding the risks of the drug and verify they are using 2 methods of contraception (or practicing abstinence) each month before completing online questions that test their understanding of the drug’s side effects and their chosen methods of contraception.⁴ These requirements place burdens on both patients and prescribers. Studies have shown that in the 2 years after the implementation of iPLEDGE, there was a 29% decrease in isotretinoin prescriptions.^1-3

We conducted a survey study to see if clinicians chose not to prescribe isotretinoin to appropriate candidates specifically because of the administrative burden of iPLEDGE. Secondarily, we investigated the medications these clinicians would prescribe instead of isotretinoin.

Methods

In March 2020, we administered an anonymous online survey consisting of 12 multiple-choice questions to verified board-certified dermatologists in the United States using a social media group. The University of Rochester’s (Rochester, New York) institutional review board determined that our protocol met criteria for exemption (IRB STUDY00004693).

Statistical Analysis—Primary analyses used Pearson χ² tests to identify significant differences among respondent groups, practice settings, age of respondents, and time spent registering patients for iPLEDGE.

Results

Survey results from 510 respondents are summarized in the Table.

Burden of iPLEDGE—Of the respondents, 336 (65.9%) were frequent prescribers of isotretinoin, 166 (32.5%) were infrequent prescribers, and 8 (1.6%) were never prescribers. Significantly more isotretinoin prescribers estimated that their offices spend 16 to 30 minutes registering a new isotretinoin patient with the iPLEDGE program (289 [57.6%]) compared with 0 to 15 minutes (140 [27.9%]), 31 to 45 minutes (57 [11.3%]), and morethan 45 minutes (16 [3.2%])(χ²₃=22.09, P<.0001). Furthermore, 150 dermatologists reported sometimes not prescribing, and 2 reported never prescribing isotretinoin because of the burden of iPLEDGE.

Systemic Agents Prescribed Instead of Isotretinoin—Of the respondents, 73.0% (n=111) prescribed spironolactone to female patients and 88.8% (n=135) prescribed oral antibiotics to male patients instead of isotretinoin. Spironolactone typically is not prescribed to male patients with acne because of its feminizing side effects, such as gynecomastia.⁵ According to the American Academy of Dermatology guidelines on acne, systemic antibiotic usage should be limited to the shortest possible duration (ie, less than 3–4 months) because of potential bacterial resistance and reported associations with inflammatory bowel disease, Clostridium difficile infection, and candidiasis.^6,7

Prescriber Demographics—The frequency of not prescribing isotretinoin did not vary by practice setting (χ ²₄=6.44, P=.1689) but did vary by age of the dermatologist (χ²₃=15.57, P=.0014). Dermatologists younger than 46 years were more likely (Figure) to report not prescribing isotretinoin because of the administrative burden of iPLEDGE. We speculate that this is because younger dermatologists are less established in their practices and therefore may have less support to complete registration without interruption of clinic workflow.

Comment

The results of our survey suggest that the administrative burden of iPLEDGE may be compelling prescribers to refrain from prescribing isotretinoin therapy to appropriate candidates when it would otherwise be the drug of choice.

Recent Changes to iPLEDGE—The FDA recently approved a modification to the iPLEDGE Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) program based on the advocacy efforts from the American Academy of Dermatology. Starting December 13, 2021, the 3 patient risk categories were consolidated into 2 gender-neutral categories: patients who can get pregnant and patients who cannot get pregnant.⁸ The iPLEDGE website was transitioned to a new system, and all iPLEDGE REMS users had to update their iPLEDGE accounts. After the implementation of the modified program, user access issues arose, leading to delayed treatment when patients, providers, and pharmacists were all locked out of the online system; users also experienced long hold times with the call center.⁸ This change highlights the ongoing critical need for a streamlined program that increases patient access to isotretinoin while maintaining safety.

Study Limitations—The main limitation of this study was the inability to calculate a true response rate to our survey. We distributed the survey via social media to maintain anonymity of the respondents. We could not track how many saw the link to compare with the number of respondents. Therefore, the only way we could calculate a response rate was with the total number of members in the group, which fluctuated around 4000 at the time we administered the survey. We calculated that we would need at least 351 responses to have a 5% margin of error at 95% confidence for our results to be generalizable and significant. We ultimately received 510 responses, which gave us a 4.05% margin of error at 95% confidence and an estimated 12.7% response rate. Since some members of the group are not active and did not see the survey link, our true response rate was likely higher. Therefore, we concluded that the survey was successful, and our significant responses were representative of US dermatologists.

Suggestions to Improve iPLEDGE Process—Our survey study should facilitate further discussions on the importance of simplifying iPLEDGE. One suggestion for improving iPLEDGE is to remove the initial registration month so care is not delayed. Currently, a patient who can get pregnant must be on 2 forms of contraception for 30 days after they register as a patient before they are eligible to fill their prescription.⁴ This process is unnecessarily long and arduous and could be eliminated as long as the patient has already been on an effective form of contraception and has a negative pregnancy test on the day of registration. The need to repeat contraception comprehension questions monthly is redundant and also could be removed. Another suggestion is to remove the category of patients who cannot become pregnant from the system entirely. Isotretinoin does not appear to be associated with adverse psychiatric effects as shown through the systematic review and meta-analysis of numerous studies.⁹ If anything, the treatment of acne with isotretinoin appears to mitigate depressive symptoms. The iPLEDGE program does not manage this largely debunked idea. Because the program’s sole goal is to manage the risk of isotretinoin’s teratogenicity, the category of those who cannot become pregnant should not be included.

Conclusion

This survey highlights the burdens of iPLEDGE for dermatologists and the need for a more streamlined risk management program. The burden was felt equally among all practice types but especially by younger dermatologists (<46 years). This time-consuming program is deterring some dermatologists from prescribing isotretinoin and ultimately limiting patient access to an effective medication.

Acknowledgment—The authors thank all of the responding clinicians who provided insight into the impact of iPLEDGE on their isotretinoin prescribing patterns.

Practice Gap

Dermatology residents can struggle with surgical closure early in their training years. Although experienced dermatologic surgeons may intuitively be able to align edges for maximal cosmesis, doing so can prove challenging in the context of learning basic surgical techniques for early residents.

Furthermore, local anesthesia can distort cutaneous anatomy and surgical landmarks, requiring the surgeon to reexamine their closure technique. Patients may require position changes or may make involuntary movements, both of which require dynamic thinking and planning on the part of the dermatologic surgeon to achieve optimal outcomes.

The Technique

We propose the use of sutures to intraoperatively guide placement of the dermal needle. This technique can be used for various closure types; here, we demonstrate its use in a standard elliptical excision.

To begin, a standard length to width ellipse ratio of 3:1 is drawn with appropriate margins around a neoplasm.¹ After excision and appropriate undermining of the ellipse, we typically use deep sutures to close the deep space. The first pass of the needle through tissue can be performed in a place of the surgeon’s preference but typically abides by the rule of halves or the zipper method (Figure 1A). To determine optimal placement of the second needle pass through tissue, we recommend applying gentle opposing traction forces to the wound apices to approximate the linear outcome of the wound edges. The surgeon can use a skin hook to guide placement of the needle to the contralateral wound edge in an unassisted method of this technique (Figure 1B). The surgeon’s assistant also can aid in applying cutaneous traction along the length of the excision if the surgeon wishes to free their hands (Figure 1C). Because the risk of needlestick injury at this step is small, it is prudent for the surgeon to advise the assistant to avoid needlestick injury by keeping their hands away from the needle path in the surgical site.

Although traction is being applied to the wound apices, the deep suture should extend across the wound with just enough pressure to leave a serosanguineous notched mark in the contralateral tissue edge (Figure 1D). After releasing traction on the wound edges, the surgeon can effortlessly visualize the target for needle placement and make a throw through the tissue accordingly.

This process can be continued until wound closure is complete (Figure 2). Top sutures or adhesive strips can be placed afterward for completing approximation of the wound edges superficially.

Practice Implications

By using this technique to align wound edges intraoperatively, the surgeon can have a functional guide for needle placement. The technique allows improvement of function and cosmesis of surgical wounds, while also accounting for topographical variations in the patient’s surgical site. Approximation of the wound edges is particularly important at the beginning of closure, as the wound edges align and approximate more with each subsequent stitch, with decreasing tension.²

In addition, when operating on a curvilinear or challenging topographical surface of the body, this technique can provide a clear template for guiding suture placement for approximating wound edges. Furthermore, local biodynamic anatomy might become distorted after excision of the tissue specimen due to release of centripetal tangential forces that were present in the pre-excised skin.¹ Local change in biodynamic forces may be difficult to plan for preoperatively using other techniques.³

Although this technique can be utilized for all suture placements in closure, it is of greatest value when placing the first few sutures and when operating on nonplanar surfaces that might become distorted after excision. To ensure the best outcome, it is important to be certain that the area has been properly cleaned prior to surgery and a sterile technique is used.

Practice Gap

Dermatology residents can struggle with surgical closure early in their training years. Although experienced dermatologic surgeons may intuitively be able to align edges for maximal cosmesis, doing so can prove challenging in the context of learning basic surgical techniques for early residents.

Furthermore, local anesthesia can distort cutaneous anatomy and surgical landmarks, requiring the surgeon to reexamine their closure technique. Patients may require position changes or may make involuntary movements, both of which require dynamic thinking and planning on the part of the dermatologic surgeon to achieve optimal outcomes.

The Technique

We propose the use of sutures to intraoperatively guide placement of the dermal needle. This technique can be used for various closure types; here, we demonstrate its use in a standard elliptical excision.

To begin, a standard length to width ellipse ratio of 3:1 is drawn with appropriate margins around a neoplasm.¹ After excision and appropriate undermining of the ellipse, we typically use deep sutures to close the deep space. The first pass of the needle through tissue can be performed in a place of the surgeon’s preference but typically abides by the rule of halves or the zipper method (Figure 1A). To determine optimal placement of the second needle pass through tissue, we recommend applying gentle opposing traction forces to the wound apices to approximate the linear outcome of the wound edges. The surgeon can use a skin hook to guide placement of the needle to the contralateral wound edge in an unassisted method of this technique (Figure 1B). The surgeon’s assistant also can aid in applying cutaneous traction along the length of the excision if the surgeon wishes to free their hands (Figure 1C). Because the risk of needlestick injury at this step is small, it is prudent for the surgeon to advise the assistant to avoid needlestick injury by keeping their hands away from the needle path in the surgical site.

Although traction is being applied to the wound apices, the deep suture should extend across the wound with just enough pressure to leave a serosanguineous notched mark in the contralateral tissue edge (Figure 1D). After releasing traction on the wound edges, the surgeon can effortlessly visualize the target for needle placement and make a throw through the tissue accordingly.

This process can be continued until wound closure is complete (Figure 2). Top sutures or adhesive strips can be placed afterward for completing approximation of the wound edges superficially.

Practice Implications

By using this technique to align wound edges intraoperatively, the surgeon can have a functional guide for needle placement. The technique allows improvement of function and cosmesis of surgical wounds, while also accounting for topographical variations in the patient’s surgical site. Approximation of the wound edges is particularly important at the beginning of closure, as the wound edges align and approximate more with each subsequent stitch, with decreasing tension.²

In addition, when operating on a curvilinear or challenging topographical surface of the body, this technique can provide a clear template for guiding suture placement for approximating wound edges. Furthermore, local biodynamic anatomy might become distorted after excision of the tissue specimen due to release of centripetal tangential forces that were present in the pre-excised skin.¹ Local change in biodynamic forces may be difficult to plan for preoperatively using other techniques.³

Although this technique can be utilized for all suture placements in closure, it is of greatest value when placing the first few sutures and when operating on nonplanar surfaces that might become distorted after excision. To ensure the best outcome, it is important to be certain that the area has been properly cleaned prior to surgery and a sterile technique is used.

Practice Gap

Dermatology residents can struggle with surgical closure early in their training years. Although experienced dermatologic surgeons may intuitively be able to align edges for maximal cosmesis, doing so can prove challenging in the context of learning basic surgical techniques for early residents.

Furthermore, local anesthesia can distort cutaneous anatomy and surgical landmarks, requiring the surgeon to reexamine their closure technique. Patients may require position changes or may make involuntary movements, both of which require dynamic thinking and planning on the part of the dermatologic surgeon to achieve optimal outcomes.

The Technique

We propose the use of sutures to intraoperatively guide placement of the dermal needle. This technique can be used for various closure types; here, we demonstrate its use in a standard elliptical excision.

To begin, a standard length to width ellipse ratio of 3:1 is drawn with appropriate margins around a neoplasm.¹ After excision and appropriate undermining of the ellipse, we typically use deep sutures to close the deep space. The first pass of the needle through tissue can be performed in a place of the surgeon’s preference but typically abides by the rule of halves or the zipper method (Figure 1A). To determine optimal placement of the second needle pass through tissue, we recommend applying gentle opposing traction forces to the wound apices to approximate the linear outcome of the wound edges. The surgeon can use a skin hook to guide placement of the needle to the contralateral wound edge in an unassisted method of this technique (Figure 1B). The surgeon’s assistant also can aid in applying cutaneous traction along the length of the excision if the surgeon wishes to free their hands (Figure 1C). Because the risk of needlestick injury at this step is small, it is prudent for the surgeon to advise the assistant to avoid needlestick injury by keeping their hands away from the needle path in the surgical site.

Although traction is being applied to the wound apices, the deep suture should extend across the wound with just enough pressure to leave a serosanguineous notched mark in the contralateral tissue edge (Figure 1D). After releasing traction on the wound edges, the surgeon can effortlessly visualize the target for needle placement and make a throw through the tissue accordingly.

This process can be continued until wound closure is complete (Figure 2). Top sutures or adhesive strips can be placed afterward for completing approximation of the wound edges superficially.

Practice Implications

By using this technique to align wound edges intraoperatively, the surgeon can have a functional guide for needle placement. The technique allows improvement of function and cosmesis of surgical wounds, while also accounting for topographical variations in the patient’s surgical site. Approximation of the wound edges is particularly important at the beginning of closure, as the wound edges align and approximate more with each subsequent stitch, with decreasing tension.²

In addition, when operating on a curvilinear or challenging topographical surface of the body, this technique can provide a clear template for guiding suture placement for approximating wound edges. Furthermore, local biodynamic anatomy might become distorted after excision of the tissue specimen due to release of centripetal tangential forces that were present in the pre-excised skin.¹ Local change in biodynamic forces may be difficult to plan for preoperatively using other techniques.³

Although this technique can be utilized for all suture placements in closure, it is of greatest value when placing the first few sutures and when operating on nonplanar surfaces that might become distorted after excision. To ensure the best outcome, it is important to be certain that the area has been properly cleaned prior to surgery and a sterile technique is used.

The Diagnosis: Tinea Corporis Bullosa

At the time of presentation, a potassium hydroxide (KOH) preparation, fungal culture, and punch biopsy of the right ventral wrist was performed. The KOH preparation was positive for fungal hyphae characteristic of dermatophyte infections. Histologically, the biopsy showed intraepidermal and subepidermal blisters with neutrophil- and lymphocyte-rich contents (Figure 1). Fungal hyphae and spores were present within the stratum corneum and superficial epidermis (Figure 2), and fungal cultures grew Microsporum canis. The extent of the rash (upper and lower extremities, chest, and back), positive fungal culture, and KOH preparation all supported the diagnosis of tinea corporis bullosa, which was confirmed with biopsy. Oral prednisone use was discouraged and triamcinolone ointment was discontinued given that inappropriate treatment with steroids in the setting of fungal infection suppresses an inflammatory response and alters clinical appearance, obviating the persistent underlying infection.

Tinea corporis bullosa is a rare superficial dermatophyte fungal infection that often is acquired by close personto- person contact or contact with domestic animals. The infection begins as a circular pruritic plaque, generally with raised borders, which may be erythematous or hyperpigmented. By definition, tinea corporis occurs in sites other than the face, feet, hands, or groin area. Bullae formation is thought to be secondary to a delayed hypersensitivity reaction provoked by the presence of a dermatophyte antigen.¹

Linear IgA bullous dermatosis is an immunemediated disease characterized by IgA deposition at the dermoepidermal junction. Linear IgA bullous dermatosis classically presents as widespread tense vesicles in an arciform or annular pattern. Mucosal involvement is common and typically presents with erosions, ulcerations, and scarring.² Given the absence of mucosal involvement in our patient and a positive KOH preparation, linear IgA bullous dermatosis was an unlikely diagnosis.

Benign inoculation lymphoreticulosis, more commonly known as cat scratch disease (CSD), is a Bartonella henselae infection that results from a cat scratch or bite. Cat scratch disease can present as localized cutaneous and nodal involvement (lymphadenopathy) near the site of inoculation, or it may present as disseminated disease. Cutaneous lesions generally progress through vesicular, erythematous, and papular phases. Regional lymphadenopathy proximal to the inoculation site is the hallmark of CSD.³ Given the absence of lymphadenopathy in our patient as well as the sporadic distribution of lesions, CSD was an unlikely diagnosis.

Dermatitis herpetiformis (DH) is an autoimmune disorder with cutaneous manifestations of gluten sensitivity. Dermatitis herpetiformis presents as extremely pruritic papules and vesicles arranged in groups on areas such as the elbows, dorsal aspects of the forearms, knees, scalp, back, and buttocks. Most patients with DH have celiac disease or small bowel disease related to gluten sensitivity.4 Given our patient’s acute presentation in adulthood and lack of gluten sensitivity, DH was an unlikely diagnosis.

Bullous fixed drug reaction is a cutaneous eruption that typically presents in the setting of exposure to an offending drug/agent. Drug reactions can have various cutaneous presentations, with the most common being pigmented macules that progress into plaques.⁵ Given the isolated nature of our patient’s episode and apparent lack of association with medication, bullous fixed drug reaction was an unlikely diagnosis.

Tinea corporis bullosa is a rare clinical variant of tinea corporis that has only been reported in patients with a history of contact with different animals. There are many causative organisms related to tinea corporis; Trichophyton rubrum is the most common etiology of tinea corporis, while tinea corporis due to close contact with domesticated animals often is caused by M canis.⁶ The immunoinhibitory properties of the mannans in the fungal cell wall allow the organisms to adhere to the skin prior to invasion. Cutaneous invasion into dead cornified layers of the skin is credited to the proteases, subtilisinlike proteases (subtilases), and keratinases produced by the fungus.¹ There are many different clinical presentations of tinea corporis due to the variability of causative organisms. An annular (ring-shaped) lesion with a central plaque and advancing border is the most typical presentation. Tinea corporis bullosa is characterized by the presence of bullae or vesicles in the borders of the scaly plaque. Rupture of the bullae subsequently leads to erosions and crusts over the plaque.

The diagnosis of tinea corporis bullosa often is clinical if the lesion is typical and can be confirmed using KOH preparation and fungal culture. Once the diagnosis is confirmed, topical antifungals are the standard treatment approach for localized superficial tinea corporis. Systemic antifungal treatment can be initiated if the lesion is extensive, recurrent, chronic, or unresponsive to topical treatment.¹ Given our patient’s characteristic presentation, she was managed with an over-the-counter topical antifungal (terbinafine). The patient’s lesions dramatically improved, rendering oral therapy unnecessary. At 1-month follow-up, the rash had nearly resolved.

The Diagnosis: Tinea Corporis Bullosa

At the time of presentation, a potassium hydroxide (KOH) preparation, fungal culture, and punch biopsy of the right ventral wrist was performed. The KOH preparation was positive for fungal hyphae characteristic of dermatophyte infections. Histologically, the biopsy showed intraepidermal and subepidermal blisters with neutrophil- and lymphocyte-rich contents (Figure 1). Fungal hyphae and spores were present within the stratum corneum and superficial epidermis (Figure 2), and fungal cultures grew Microsporum canis. The extent of the rash (upper and lower extremities, chest, and back), positive fungal culture, and KOH preparation all supported the diagnosis of tinea corporis bullosa, which was confirmed with biopsy. Oral prednisone use was discouraged and triamcinolone ointment was discontinued given that inappropriate treatment with steroids in the setting of fungal infection suppresses an inflammatory response and alters clinical appearance, obviating the persistent underlying infection.

Tinea corporis bullosa is a rare superficial dermatophyte fungal infection that often is acquired by close personto- person contact or contact with domestic animals. The infection begins as a circular pruritic plaque, generally with raised borders, which may be erythematous or hyperpigmented. By definition, tinea corporis occurs in sites other than the face, feet, hands, or groin area. Bullae formation is thought to be secondary to a delayed hypersensitivity reaction provoked by the presence of a dermatophyte antigen.¹

Linear IgA bullous dermatosis is an immunemediated disease characterized by IgA deposition at the dermoepidermal junction. Linear IgA bullous dermatosis classically presents as widespread tense vesicles in an arciform or annular pattern. Mucosal involvement is common and typically presents with erosions, ulcerations, and scarring.² Given the absence of mucosal involvement in our patient and a positive KOH preparation, linear IgA bullous dermatosis was an unlikely diagnosis.

Benign inoculation lymphoreticulosis, more commonly known as cat scratch disease (CSD), is a Bartonella henselae infection that results from a cat scratch or bite. Cat scratch disease can present as localized cutaneous and nodal involvement (lymphadenopathy) near the site of inoculation, or it may present as disseminated disease. Cutaneous lesions generally progress through vesicular, erythematous, and papular phases. Regional lymphadenopathy proximal to the inoculation site is the hallmark of CSD.³ Given the absence of lymphadenopathy in our patient as well as the sporadic distribution of lesions, CSD was an unlikely diagnosis.

Dermatitis herpetiformis (DH) is an autoimmune disorder with cutaneous manifestations of gluten sensitivity. Dermatitis herpetiformis presents as extremely pruritic papules and vesicles arranged in groups on areas such as the elbows, dorsal aspects of the forearms, knees, scalp, back, and buttocks. Most patients with DH have celiac disease or small bowel disease related to gluten sensitivity.4 Given our patient’s acute presentation in adulthood and lack of gluten sensitivity, DH was an unlikely diagnosis.

Bullous fixed drug reaction is a cutaneous eruption that typically presents in the setting of exposure to an offending drug/agent. Drug reactions can have various cutaneous presentations, with the most common being pigmented macules that progress into plaques.⁵ Given the isolated nature of our patient’s episode and apparent lack of association with medication, bullous fixed drug reaction was an unlikely diagnosis.

Tinea corporis bullosa is a rare clinical variant of tinea corporis that has only been reported in patients with a history of contact with different animals. There are many causative organisms related to tinea corporis; Trichophyton rubrum is the most common etiology of tinea corporis, while tinea corporis due to close contact with domesticated animals often is caused by M canis.⁶ The immunoinhibitory properties of the mannans in the fungal cell wall allow the organisms to adhere to the skin prior to invasion. Cutaneous invasion into dead cornified layers of the skin is credited to the proteases, subtilisinlike proteases (subtilases), and keratinases produced by the fungus.¹ There are many different clinical presentations of tinea corporis due to the variability of causative organisms. An annular (ring-shaped) lesion with a central plaque and advancing border is the most typical presentation. Tinea corporis bullosa is characterized by the presence of bullae or vesicles in the borders of the scaly plaque. Rupture of the bullae subsequently leads to erosions and crusts over the plaque.

The diagnosis of tinea corporis bullosa often is clinical if the lesion is typical and can be confirmed using KOH preparation and fungal culture. Once the diagnosis is confirmed, topical antifungals are the standard treatment approach for localized superficial tinea corporis. Systemic antifungal treatment can be initiated if the lesion is extensive, recurrent, chronic, or unresponsive to topical treatment.¹ Given our patient’s characteristic presentation, she was managed with an over-the-counter topical antifungal (terbinafine). The patient’s lesions dramatically improved, rendering oral therapy unnecessary. At 1-month follow-up, the rash had nearly resolved.

The Diagnosis: Tinea Corporis Bullosa

At the time of presentation, a potassium hydroxide (KOH) preparation, fungal culture, and punch biopsy of the right ventral wrist was performed. The KOH preparation was positive for fungal hyphae characteristic of dermatophyte infections. Histologically, the biopsy showed intraepidermal and subepidermal blisters with neutrophil- and lymphocyte-rich contents (Figure 1). Fungal hyphae and spores were present within the stratum corneum and superficial epidermis (Figure 2), and fungal cultures grew Microsporum canis. The extent of the rash (upper and lower extremities, chest, and back), positive fungal culture, and KOH preparation all supported the diagnosis of tinea corporis bullosa, which was confirmed with biopsy. Oral prednisone use was discouraged and triamcinolone ointment was discontinued given that inappropriate treatment with steroids in the setting of fungal infection suppresses an inflammatory response and alters clinical appearance, obviating the persistent underlying infection.

Tinea corporis bullosa is a rare superficial dermatophyte fungal infection that often is acquired by close personto- person contact or contact with domestic animals. The infection begins as a circular pruritic plaque, generally with raised borders, which may be erythematous or hyperpigmented. By definition, tinea corporis occurs in sites other than the face, feet, hands, or groin area. Bullae formation is thought to be secondary to a delayed hypersensitivity reaction provoked by the presence of a dermatophyte antigen.¹

Linear IgA bullous dermatosis is an immunemediated disease characterized by IgA deposition at the dermoepidermal junction. Linear IgA bullous dermatosis classically presents as widespread tense vesicles in an arciform or annular pattern. Mucosal involvement is common and typically presents with erosions, ulcerations, and scarring.² Given the absence of mucosal involvement in our patient and a positive KOH preparation, linear IgA bullous dermatosis was an unlikely diagnosis.

Benign inoculation lymphoreticulosis, more commonly known as cat scratch disease (CSD), is a Bartonella henselae infection that results from a cat scratch or bite. Cat scratch disease can present as localized cutaneous and nodal involvement (lymphadenopathy) near the site of inoculation, or it may present as disseminated disease. Cutaneous lesions generally progress through vesicular, erythematous, and papular phases. Regional lymphadenopathy proximal to the inoculation site is the hallmark of CSD.³ Given the absence of lymphadenopathy in our patient as well as the sporadic distribution of lesions, CSD was an unlikely diagnosis.

Dermatitis herpetiformis (DH) is an autoimmune disorder with cutaneous manifestations of gluten sensitivity. Dermatitis herpetiformis presents as extremely pruritic papules and vesicles arranged in groups on areas such as the elbows, dorsal aspects of the forearms, knees, scalp, back, and buttocks. Most patients with DH have celiac disease or small bowel disease related to gluten sensitivity.4 Given our patient’s acute presentation in adulthood and lack of gluten sensitivity, DH was an unlikely diagnosis.

Bullous fixed drug reaction is a cutaneous eruption that typically presents in the setting of exposure to an offending drug/agent. Drug reactions can have various cutaneous presentations, with the most common being pigmented macules that progress into plaques.⁵ Given the isolated nature of our patient’s episode and apparent lack of association with medication, bullous fixed drug reaction was an unlikely diagnosis.

Tinea corporis bullosa is a rare clinical variant of tinea corporis that has only been reported in patients with a history of contact with different animals. There are many causative organisms related to tinea corporis; Trichophyton rubrum is the most common etiology of tinea corporis, while tinea corporis due to close contact with domesticated animals often is caused by M canis.⁶ The immunoinhibitory properties of the mannans in the fungal cell wall allow the organisms to adhere to the skin prior to invasion. Cutaneous invasion into dead cornified layers of the skin is credited to the proteases, subtilisinlike proteases (subtilases), and keratinases produced by the fungus.¹ There are many different clinical presentations of tinea corporis due to the variability of causative organisms. An annular (ring-shaped) lesion with a central plaque and advancing border is the most typical presentation. Tinea corporis bullosa is characterized by the presence of bullae or vesicles in the borders of the scaly plaque. Rupture of the bullae subsequently leads to erosions and crusts over the plaque.

The diagnosis of tinea corporis bullosa often is clinical if the lesion is typical and can be confirmed using KOH preparation and fungal culture. Once the diagnosis is confirmed, topical antifungals are the standard treatment approach for localized superficial tinea corporis. Systemic antifungal treatment can be initiated if the lesion is extensive, recurrent, chronic, or unresponsive to topical treatment.¹ Given our patient’s characteristic presentation, she was managed with an over-the-counter topical antifungal (terbinafine). The patient’s lesions dramatically improved, rendering oral therapy unnecessary. At 1-month follow-up, the rash had nearly resolved.

When Amy Moser had a simple urinary tract infection in her late 20s, her doctor prescribed Cipro, a powerful antibiotic used to treat anthrax and some of the most fearsome bacterial infections.

Nearly 2 weeks after she finished her treatment, her left kneecap dislocated while she was trying on a swimsuit at a retail store. Shortly afterward, she had painful ligament ruptures in her wrists, then her shoulder dislocated, followed by three Achilles tendon tears.

“That’s when I fell apart,” says Ms. Moser, a Phoenix health blogger and book author. “From that moment on, for almost the next 2.5 years consistently, I had new tendon tears every few weeks.”

Ms. Moser’s doctors had no answer for what was causing her injuries, all of which required surgical fixes. A married mother of three, she was otherwise healthy and fit. So, after her third Achilles tear, she turned to the FDA’s website for answers. There, she found many warnings about side effects of Cipro, Levaquin, and other so-called fluoroquinolones, including risks for tendon and ligament injuries.

“When all the ruptures started to happen, my doctor kept asking me if I’d ever taken Levaquin, and every time I was like, ‘No.’ So I did what all doctors don’t want you to do: I Googled ‘Levaquin,’ ” she recalls.

Her search led to FDA warnings and articles about the possibility of tendon and ligament ruptures with fluroquinolones.

“That was the first time I’d ever even heard that word ‘fluroquinolones,’ and I found Cipro on that list ... and I realized that I’d just been prescribed that before everything started,” she says.

That was 12 years ago. Since then, the FDA has issued more warnings about fluoroquinolone risks. In that time, Ms. Moser, now 40, has had more than 30 surgeries to correct tendon ruptures and injuries, including a double-knee replacement this year.

“I am in chronic pain all the time,” she says. “I am chronically injured. I have a lot of tears that I’ve not fixed because they’re very complicated, and I don’t know if the rest of my body can handle the strain of recovering from those surgeries.”

Ms. Moser’s is hardly an isolated case. Since the 1980s, more than 60,000 patients have reported hundreds of thousands of serious events linked to fluoroquinolones to the FDA, including 6,575 reports of deaths.

The most common side effects were tendon rupture, as well as neurological and psychiatric symptoms. But experts estimate only 1%-10% of such events are reported to the FDA. That suggests that fluoroquinolones might have harmed hundreds of thousands of people in the United States alone, says Charles Bennett, MD, a hematologist at the University of South Carolina’s College of Pharmacy, Columbia.

Yet despite the many patient reports and FDA warnings on dangerous side effects, many doctors continue to wrongly prescribe fluoroquinolones for simple urinary tract infections, sinus infections, and respiratory issues better treated with less risky antibiotics.

“There probably is overprescription by primary care doctors for urinary tract infections and respiratory infections, when there could be alternatives that are safer to use,” says Amesh Adalja, MD, an infectious disease specialist and senior scholar with the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

“I would say that’s probably the case in the outpatient setting, not necessarily in the hospital setting or among infectious disease doctors ... but I think it’s important to say there are still some judicious uses of fluoroquinolones,” he says. “However, there probably is a lot of injudicious use of fluoroquinolones along with many other antibiotics in the primary care setting.”
 

FDA warnings on fluoroquinolones

Fluoroquinolones are a class of broad-spectrum antibiotics used for decades to treat certain bacterial infections.

FDA-approved fluoroquinolones include ciprofloxacin (Cipro), ciprofloxacin extended-release tablets, delafloxacin (Baxdela), gemifloxacin (Factive) levofloxacin (Levaquin), moxifloxacin (Avelox), and ofloxacin (Floxin). More than 60 generic versions of these brand-name medicines are also on the market, making them among the most prescribed antibiotics in the U.S.

Over the past 2 decades, a wide range of physical and mental health side effects have been tied to fluoroquinolones. As a result of these “adverse event reports” and research published in medical literature, the FDA has required an escalating series of warnings and safety labeling changes for doctors who prescribe these drugs.

• In 2008, the FDA first added a “black box” warning to fluoroquinolones, citing an increased risk of tendinitis and tendon rupture in patients prescribed these meds.
• In 2011, the agency required the warning label to include risks of worsening symptoms for those with myasthenia gravis, a chronic autoimmune disease that causes muscle weakness, vision problems, and speech problems.
• In 2013, regulators required updated labels noting the potential for irreversible peripheral neuropathy (serious nerve damage).
• In 2016, the FDA issued its strongest warning against the use of such antibiotics for simple bacterial infections – such as uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTIs), acute sinusitis, and acute bronchitis – saying the “association of fluoroquinolones with disabling and potentially permanent side effects involving tendons, muscles, joints, nerves and the central nervous system ... outweighs the benefits for patients.”
• And in 2018, regulators required safety labeling changes to include warnings about the risks of aortic aneurysm – a life-threatening enlargement of the main vessel that delivers blood to the body – as well as mental health side effects and serious blood sugar disturbances.

But FDA regulators have stopped short of barring fluoroquinolone use in the treatment of bacterial infections, citing the benefits for certain conditions.

“For some patients, the benefits of fluoroquinolones may continue to outweigh the risks for treatment of serious bacterial infections, such as pneumonia or intra-abdominal infections,” said former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, MD, “but there are other serious, known risks associated with these strong antibiotics that must be carefully weighed when considering their use.”

In December 2021, a study published in the journal JAMA Network Open found the FDA’s warnings may have helped lower prescribing of the drugs in Medicare patients. But not all doctors have been responsive to those warnings, researchers found.

“An overall decline in change over time and an immediate change in fluoroquinolone prescribing was observed after the 2016 FDA warning,” the authors concluded. “Certain physicians, such as primary care physicians, were more responsive to FDA warnings than others. ... Findings of this study suggest that identifying the association of physician and organizational characteristics with fluoroquinolone prescribing practices could help in developing mechanisms for improving de-adoption.”

Some critics say the FDA should do more to spotlight the dangers of fluoroquinolones and require doctors and patients to sign checklist consent forms to show they are aware of the potential side effects of these drugs.

Rachel Brummert, a patient advocate who sits on an FDA consumer advisory board, believes the FDA needs to improve its communication to doctors on fluoroquinolone risks and get tougher with those who continue to inappropriately prescribe the drugs.

“I think there needs to be a system in place, where if something comes down from the FDA about a drug, the physician has to sign off on it, the patient has to sign off on it and mark that they understand that there are these ‘black box’ warnings,” says Ms. Brummert, 52, a representative on the FDA’s Medical Devices Advisory Committee.

As an example, she points to Australia’s medical laws requiring doctors and patients to sign a checklist before any fluoroquinolone prescription is approved.

“When a physician prescribes a fluoroquinolone antibiotic, there’s a checklist – does the patient have an infection, is it a simple infection, do they have allergies?” she notes. “And you can’t even get the prescription out – it won’t even print out, it won’t go into the system – unless you check all of the boxes. But we don’t do that here. We don’t have that type of system right now.”

Ms. Brummert says such a system might have prevented the harm from taking Levaquin her doctor prescribed for a suspected sinus infection in 2006.

Soon after she began taking the antibiotic, she ruptured her Achilles tendon, requiring surgery. By 2009, she’d had three ruptures, each needing surgical fixes. To date, she’s had more than 30 surgeries to correct tendon ruptures. She’s also had seizures, blood pressure issues, depression, chronic pain, and memory problems she attributes to taking Levaquin.

As it turns out, her doctor misdiagnosed her condition – a misstep that would have been averted with a system like Australia’s, which requires doctors to verify the presence of a bacterial infection through a simple test before prescribing a fluoroquinolone.

“When I got the Levaquin, it was for a suspected sinus infection that it turned out I didn’t even have in the first place,” she notes. “So, I took the Levaquin basically for nothing. But what I would have asked my doctor had I known is: ‘Why should I take something so strong for so simple an infection?’

“It seems common sense to me now that you don’t prescribe something that can kill anthrax for a simple sinus infection. It’s like an atom bomb killing a mosquito. I agree that there are uses for these drugs, but they are being overprescribed. And so, here I am 16 years later – I’m still rupturing, I’m still having surgery, and I’m still in pain – all for something I didn’t even need medicine for in the first place.”
 

Should guidelines be stronger?

So, why are so many doctors continuing to prescribe fluoroquinolones for simple infections? Dr. Adalja and other experts say several things are at work.

For one thing, Dr. Adalja notes, fluoroquinolones are broad-spectrum antibiotics that are effective against dangerous germs, including “gram-negative” bacterial infections, and are “100% bioavailable.” That means they are as effective when given in pill form as they are if put directly into a vein. So they can be used in an outpatient setting or to allow a patient to be discharged from a hospital sooner because they don’t need an IV to receive treatment.

“There are still some uses for these drugs because they are so bioavailable, and I think that drives some of the use, and those are legitimate uses, knowing that there are risks when you do it,” he says. “But no drug is without risks, and you have to weigh risks and benefits – that’s what medicine is about: deciding what the best drug is for a patient.”

But Dr. Adalja says the overprescription of fluoroquinolones is part of the larger trend of antibiotic overuse. That is driving up antibiotic resistance, which in turn is another thing leading doctors to turn to Cipro and other fluoroquinolones after other drugs have proven ineffective.

“You can’t separate this from the fact that 80% of antibiotic prescriptions in the outpatient setting are probably illegitimate or not warranted,” he notes. “And because fluoroquinolones are highly effective drugs against certain pathogens, they are the go-to [drug] for many people who are prescribing antibiotics.”

That’s why patients should be wary whenever a doctor prescribes a fluoroquinolone, or any drug to treat a suspected infection, he says.

“Any time a patient is getting prescribed an antibiotic by a physician, they should ask: ‘Do I really need this antibiotic?’ That should be the first question they ask,” he advises. “And if they’re getting a fluoroquinolone, they may want to ask: ‘Is this the best antibiotic for me?’ ”
 

What you can do

Ms. Brummert and Ms. Moser say they are sharing their stories to raise awareness of the dangers of fluoroquinolones.

Ms. Moser has published a book on her experiences, “The Magnificent Story of a Lame Author,” and provides a wealth of consumer resources on her blog: Mountains and Mustard Seeds.

“As much as I hate what has happened to me, it has put me in a place where I am glad that I can inform other patients,” she says.

Ms. Brummert supplements her advocacy work as an FDA adviser with useful materials she provides on her website: Drugwatch.com.

“Pain into purpose – that’s what I call it,” she says. “I can’t change what happened to me, but I can warn others.”

The upshot for patients?

• the FDA’s Drug Safety Communication on Fluoroquinolones online to learn more about the risks and benefits of these powerful antibiotics.
• If you believe you’ve been harmed by fluoroquinolones, MedWatch website to report your experiences.

Ms. Brummert also advises patients to ask 12 critical questions of any doctor who wants to prescribe a fluoroquinolone, including the following listed on her website:

• For what condition is this medication prescribed, and is there another drug specific to my condition?
• What are the risks associated with this medication, and do the benefits outweigh them?
• Will this medication interact with my other drugs and/or other health conditions?
• What are the “boxed” warnings for this medication, and where can I report adverse events?

“I would also do my own research,” she says. “I wouldn’t just take a prescription from a physician and just say, ‘OK, doctor knows best.’ ”

Ms. Moser agrees that you have to be your own patient advocate and not simply take a doctor’s advice on any medical issue without having a deeper conversation.

“I’ve had arguments with doctors who legitimately did not believe me when I told them what happened to me,” she says. “And I actually told them, ‘Go get your Physicians’ Desk Reference [for prescription drugs]’ and they opened the book in front of me and read the warnings. Obviously, they had not been keeping up with the added warnings. So, I do think that doctors do need to be better informed.”

“So, yes, it’s the FDA’s responsibility, but it is also the doctors’ responsibility to make sure that they’re watching out for the side effects and they’re reporting them when their patients come up with them and making those connections.”

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

When Amy Moser had a simple urinary tract infection in her late 20s, her doctor prescribed Cipro, a powerful antibiotic used to treat anthrax and some of the most fearsome bacterial infections.

Nearly 2 weeks after she finished her treatment, her left kneecap dislocated while she was trying on a swimsuit at a retail store. Shortly afterward, she had painful ligament ruptures in her wrists, then her shoulder dislocated, followed by three Achilles tendon tears.

“That’s when I fell apart,” says Ms. Moser, a Phoenix health blogger and book author. “From that moment on, for almost the next 2.5 years consistently, I had new tendon tears every few weeks.”

Ms. Moser’s doctors had no answer for what was causing her injuries, all of which required surgical fixes. A married mother of three, she was otherwise healthy and fit. So, after her third Achilles tear, she turned to the FDA’s website for answers. There, she found many warnings about side effects of Cipro, Levaquin, and other so-called fluoroquinolones, including risks for tendon and ligament injuries.

“When all the ruptures started to happen, my doctor kept asking me if I’d ever taken Levaquin, and every time I was like, ‘No.’ So I did what all doctors don’t want you to do: I Googled ‘Levaquin,’ ” she recalls.

Her search led to FDA warnings and articles about the possibility of tendon and ligament ruptures with fluroquinolones.

“That was the first time I’d ever even heard that word ‘fluroquinolones,’ and I found Cipro on that list ... and I realized that I’d just been prescribed that before everything started,” she says.

That was 12 years ago. Since then, the FDA has issued more warnings about fluoroquinolone risks. In that time, Ms. Moser, now 40, has had more than 30 surgeries to correct tendon ruptures and injuries, including a double-knee replacement this year.

“I am in chronic pain all the time,” she says. “I am chronically injured. I have a lot of tears that I’ve not fixed because they’re very complicated, and I don’t know if the rest of my body can handle the strain of recovering from those surgeries.”

Ms. Moser’s is hardly an isolated case. Since the 1980s, more than 60,000 patients have reported hundreds of thousands of serious events linked to fluoroquinolones to the FDA, including 6,575 reports of deaths.

The most common side effects were tendon rupture, as well as neurological and psychiatric symptoms. But experts estimate only 1%-10% of such events are reported to the FDA. That suggests that fluoroquinolones might have harmed hundreds of thousands of people in the United States alone, says Charles Bennett, MD, a hematologist at the University of South Carolina’s College of Pharmacy, Columbia.

Yet despite the many patient reports and FDA warnings on dangerous side effects, many doctors continue to wrongly prescribe fluoroquinolones for simple urinary tract infections, sinus infections, and respiratory issues better treated with less risky antibiotics.

“There probably is overprescription by primary care doctors for urinary tract infections and respiratory infections, when there could be alternatives that are safer to use,” says Amesh Adalja, MD, an infectious disease specialist and senior scholar with the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

“I would say that’s probably the case in the outpatient setting, not necessarily in the hospital setting or among infectious disease doctors ... but I think it’s important to say there are still some judicious uses of fluoroquinolones,” he says. “However, there probably is a lot of injudicious use of fluoroquinolones along with many other antibiotics in the primary care setting.”
 

FDA warnings on fluoroquinolones

Fluoroquinolones are a class of broad-spectrum antibiotics used for decades to treat certain bacterial infections.

FDA-approved fluoroquinolones include ciprofloxacin (Cipro), ciprofloxacin extended-release tablets, delafloxacin (Baxdela), gemifloxacin (Factive) levofloxacin (Levaquin), moxifloxacin (Avelox), and ofloxacin (Floxin). More than 60 generic versions of these brand-name medicines are also on the market, making them among the most prescribed antibiotics in the U.S.

Over the past 2 decades, a wide range of physical and mental health side effects have been tied to fluoroquinolones. As a result of these “adverse event reports” and research published in medical literature, the FDA has required an escalating series of warnings and safety labeling changes for doctors who prescribe these drugs.

• In 2008, the FDA first added a “black box” warning to fluoroquinolones, citing an increased risk of tendinitis and tendon rupture in patients prescribed these meds.
• In 2011, the agency required the warning label to include risks of worsening symptoms for those with myasthenia gravis, a chronic autoimmune disease that causes muscle weakness, vision problems, and speech problems.
• In 2013, regulators required updated labels noting the potential for irreversible peripheral neuropathy (serious nerve damage).
• In 2016, the FDA issued its strongest warning against the use of such antibiotics for simple bacterial infections – such as uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTIs), acute sinusitis, and acute bronchitis – saying the “association of fluoroquinolones with disabling and potentially permanent side effects involving tendons, muscles, joints, nerves and the central nervous system ... outweighs the benefits for patients.”
• And in 2018, regulators required safety labeling changes to include warnings about the risks of aortic aneurysm – a life-threatening enlargement of the main vessel that delivers blood to the body – as well as mental health side effects and serious blood sugar disturbances.

But FDA regulators have stopped short of barring fluoroquinolone use in the treatment of bacterial infections, citing the benefits for certain conditions.

“For some patients, the benefits of fluoroquinolones may continue to outweigh the risks for treatment of serious bacterial infections, such as pneumonia or intra-abdominal infections,” said former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, MD, “but there are other serious, known risks associated with these strong antibiotics that must be carefully weighed when considering their use.”

In December 2021, a study published in the journal JAMA Network Open found the FDA’s warnings may have helped lower prescribing of the drugs in Medicare patients. But not all doctors have been responsive to those warnings, researchers found.

“An overall decline in change over time and an immediate change in fluoroquinolone prescribing was observed after the 2016 FDA warning,” the authors concluded. “Certain physicians, such as primary care physicians, were more responsive to FDA warnings than others. ... Findings of this study suggest that identifying the association of physician and organizational characteristics with fluoroquinolone prescribing practices could help in developing mechanisms for improving de-adoption.”

Some critics say the FDA should do more to spotlight the dangers of fluoroquinolones and require doctors and patients to sign checklist consent forms to show they are aware of the potential side effects of these drugs.

Rachel Brummert, a patient advocate who sits on an FDA consumer advisory board, believes the FDA needs to improve its communication to doctors on fluoroquinolone risks and get tougher with those who continue to inappropriately prescribe the drugs.

“I think there needs to be a system in place, where if something comes down from the FDA about a drug, the physician has to sign off on it, the patient has to sign off on it and mark that they understand that there are these ‘black box’ warnings,” says Ms. Brummert, 52, a representative on the FDA’s Medical Devices Advisory Committee.

As an example, she points to Australia’s medical laws requiring doctors and patients to sign a checklist before any fluoroquinolone prescription is approved.

“When a physician prescribes a fluoroquinolone antibiotic, there’s a checklist – does the patient have an infection, is it a simple infection, do they have allergies?” she notes. “And you can’t even get the prescription out – it won’t even print out, it won’t go into the system – unless you check all of the boxes. But we don’t do that here. We don’t have that type of system right now.”

Ms. Brummert says such a system might have prevented the harm from taking Levaquin her doctor prescribed for a suspected sinus infection in 2006.

Soon after she began taking the antibiotic, she ruptured her Achilles tendon, requiring surgery. By 2009, she’d had three ruptures, each needing surgical fixes. To date, she’s had more than 30 surgeries to correct tendon ruptures. She’s also had seizures, blood pressure issues, depression, chronic pain, and memory problems she attributes to taking Levaquin.

As it turns out, her doctor misdiagnosed her condition – a misstep that would have been averted with a system like Australia’s, which requires doctors to verify the presence of a bacterial infection through a simple test before prescribing a fluoroquinolone.

“When I got the Levaquin, it was for a suspected sinus infection that it turned out I didn’t even have in the first place,” she notes. “So, I took the Levaquin basically for nothing. But what I would have asked my doctor had I known is: ‘Why should I take something so strong for so simple an infection?’

“It seems common sense to me now that you don’t prescribe something that can kill anthrax for a simple sinus infection. It’s like an atom bomb killing a mosquito. I agree that there are uses for these drugs, but they are being overprescribed. And so, here I am 16 years later – I’m still rupturing, I’m still having surgery, and I’m still in pain – all for something I didn’t even need medicine for in the first place.”
 

Should guidelines be stronger?

So, why are so many doctors continuing to prescribe fluoroquinolones for simple infections? Dr. Adalja and other experts say several things are at work.

For one thing, Dr. Adalja notes, fluoroquinolones are broad-spectrum antibiotics that are effective against dangerous germs, including “gram-negative” bacterial infections, and are “100% bioavailable.” That means they are as effective when given in pill form as they are if put directly into a vein. So they can be used in an outpatient setting or to allow a patient to be discharged from a hospital sooner because they don’t need an IV to receive treatment.

“There are still some uses for these drugs because they are so bioavailable, and I think that drives some of the use, and those are legitimate uses, knowing that there are risks when you do it,” he says. “But no drug is without risks, and you have to weigh risks and benefits – that’s what medicine is about: deciding what the best drug is for a patient.”

But Dr. Adalja says the overprescription of fluoroquinolones is part of the larger trend of antibiotic overuse. That is driving up antibiotic resistance, which in turn is another thing leading doctors to turn to Cipro and other fluoroquinolones after other drugs have proven ineffective.

“You can’t separate this from the fact that 80% of antibiotic prescriptions in the outpatient setting are probably illegitimate or not warranted,” he notes. “And because fluoroquinolones are highly effective drugs against certain pathogens, they are the go-to [drug] for many people who are prescribing antibiotics.”

That’s why patients should be wary whenever a doctor prescribes a fluoroquinolone, or any drug to treat a suspected infection, he says.

“Any time a patient is getting prescribed an antibiotic by a physician, they should ask: ‘Do I really need this antibiotic?’ That should be the first question they ask,” he advises. “And if they’re getting a fluoroquinolone, they may want to ask: ‘Is this the best antibiotic for me?’ ”
 

What you can do

Ms. Brummert and Ms. Moser say they are sharing their stories to raise awareness of the dangers of fluoroquinolones.

Ms. Moser has published a book on her experiences, “The Magnificent Story of a Lame Author,” and provides a wealth of consumer resources on her blog: Mountains and Mustard Seeds.

“As much as I hate what has happened to me, it has put me in a place where I am glad that I can inform other patients,” she says.

Ms. Brummert supplements her advocacy work as an FDA adviser with useful materials she provides on her website: Drugwatch.com.

“Pain into purpose – that’s what I call it,” she says. “I can’t change what happened to me, but I can warn others.”

The upshot for patients?

• the FDA’s Drug Safety Communication on Fluoroquinolones online to learn more about the risks and benefits of these powerful antibiotics.
• If you believe you’ve been harmed by fluoroquinolones, MedWatch website to report your experiences.

Ms. Brummert also advises patients to ask 12 critical questions of any doctor who wants to prescribe a fluoroquinolone, including the following listed on her website:

• For what condition is this medication prescribed, and is there another drug specific to my condition?
• What are the risks associated with this medication, and do the benefits outweigh them?
• Will this medication interact with my other drugs and/or other health conditions?
• What are the “boxed” warnings for this medication, and where can I report adverse events?

“I would also do my own research,” she says. “I wouldn’t just take a prescription from a physician and just say, ‘OK, doctor knows best.’ ”

Ms. Moser agrees that you have to be your own patient advocate and not simply take a doctor’s advice on any medical issue without having a deeper conversation.

“I’ve had arguments with doctors who legitimately did not believe me when I told them what happened to me,” she says. “And I actually told them, ‘Go get your Physicians’ Desk Reference [for prescription drugs]’ and they opened the book in front of me and read the warnings. Obviously, they had not been keeping up with the added warnings. So, I do think that doctors do need to be better informed.”

“So, yes, it’s the FDA’s responsibility, but it is also the doctors’ responsibility to make sure that they’re watching out for the side effects and they’re reporting them when their patients come up with them and making those connections.”

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

When Amy Moser had a simple urinary tract infection in her late 20s, her doctor prescribed Cipro, a powerful antibiotic used to treat anthrax and some of the most fearsome bacterial infections.

Nearly 2 weeks after she finished her treatment, her left kneecap dislocated while she was trying on a swimsuit at a retail store. Shortly afterward, she had painful ligament ruptures in her wrists, then her shoulder dislocated, followed by three Achilles tendon tears.

“That’s when I fell apart,” says Ms. Moser, a Phoenix health blogger and book author. “From that moment on, for almost the next 2.5 years consistently, I had new tendon tears every few weeks.”

Ms. Moser’s doctors had no answer for what was causing her injuries, all of which required surgical fixes. A married mother of three, she was otherwise healthy and fit. So, after her third Achilles tear, she turned to the FDA’s website for answers. There, she found many warnings about side effects of Cipro, Levaquin, and other so-called fluoroquinolones, including risks for tendon and ligament injuries.

“When all the ruptures started to happen, my doctor kept asking me if I’d ever taken Levaquin, and every time I was like, ‘No.’ So I did what all doctors don’t want you to do: I Googled ‘Levaquin,’ ” she recalls.

Her search led to FDA warnings and articles about the possibility of tendon and ligament ruptures with fluroquinolones.

“That was the first time I’d ever even heard that word ‘fluroquinolones,’ and I found Cipro on that list ... and I realized that I’d just been prescribed that before everything started,” she says.

That was 12 years ago. Since then, the FDA has issued more warnings about fluoroquinolone risks. In that time, Ms. Moser, now 40, has had more than 30 surgeries to correct tendon ruptures and injuries, including a double-knee replacement this year.

“I am in chronic pain all the time,” she says. “I am chronically injured. I have a lot of tears that I’ve not fixed because they’re very complicated, and I don’t know if the rest of my body can handle the strain of recovering from those surgeries.”

Ms. Moser’s is hardly an isolated case. Since the 1980s, more than 60,000 patients have reported hundreds of thousands of serious events linked to fluoroquinolones to the FDA, including 6,575 reports of deaths.

The most common side effects were tendon rupture, as well as neurological and psychiatric symptoms. But experts estimate only 1%-10% of such events are reported to the FDA. That suggests that fluoroquinolones might have harmed hundreds of thousands of people in the United States alone, says Charles Bennett, MD, a hematologist at the University of South Carolina’s College of Pharmacy, Columbia.

Yet despite the many patient reports and FDA warnings on dangerous side effects, many doctors continue to wrongly prescribe fluoroquinolones for simple urinary tract infections, sinus infections, and respiratory issues better treated with less risky antibiotics.

“There probably is overprescription by primary care doctors for urinary tract infections and respiratory infections, when there could be alternatives that are safer to use,” says Amesh Adalja, MD, an infectious disease specialist and senior scholar with the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

“I would say that’s probably the case in the outpatient setting, not necessarily in the hospital setting or among infectious disease doctors ... but I think it’s important to say there are still some judicious uses of fluoroquinolones,” he says. “However, there probably is a lot of injudicious use of fluoroquinolones along with many other antibiotics in the primary care setting.”
 

FDA warnings on fluoroquinolones

Fluoroquinolones are a class of broad-spectrum antibiotics used for decades to treat certain bacterial infections.

FDA-approved fluoroquinolones include ciprofloxacin (Cipro), ciprofloxacin extended-release tablets, delafloxacin (Baxdela), gemifloxacin (Factive) levofloxacin (Levaquin), moxifloxacin (Avelox), and ofloxacin (Floxin). More than 60 generic versions of these brand-name medicines are also on the market, making them among the most prescribed antibiotics in the U.S.

Over the past 2 decades, a wide range of physical and mental health side effects have been tied to fluoroquinolones. As a result of these “adverse event reports” and research published in medical literature, the FDA has required an escalating series of warnings and safety labeling changes for doctors who prescribe these drugs.

• In 2008, the FDA first added a “black box” warning to fluoroquinolones, citing an increased risk of tendinitis and tendon rupture in patients prescribed these meds.
• In 2011, the agency required the warning label to include risks of worsening symptoms for those with myasthenia gravis, a chronic autoimmune disease that causes muscle weakness, vision problems, and speech problems.
• In 2013, regulators required updated labels noting the potential for irreversible peripheral neuropathy (serious nerve damage).
• In 2016, the FDA issued its strongest warning against the use of such antibiotics for simple bacterial infections – such as uncomplicated urinary tract infections (UTIs), acute sinusitis, and acute bronchitis – saying the “association of fluoroquinolones with disabling and potentially permanent side effects involving tendons, muscles, joints, nerves and the central nervous system ... outweighs the benefits for patients.”
• And in 2018, regulators required safety labeling changes to include warnings about the risks of aortic aneurysm – a life-threatening enlargement of the main vessel that delivers blood to the body – as well as mental health side effects and serious blood sugar disturbances.

But FDA regulators have stopped short of barring fluoroquinolone use in the treatment of bacterial infections, citing the benefits for certain conditions.

“For some patients, the benefits of fluoroquinolones may continue to outweigh the risks for treatment of serious bacterial infections, such as pneumonia or intra-abdominal infections,” said former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, MD, “but there are other serious, known risks associated with these strong antibiotics that must be carefully weighed when considering their use.”

In December 2021, a study published in the journal JAMA Network Open found the FDA’s warnings may have helped lower prescribing of the drugs in Medicare patients. But not all doctors have been responsive to those warnings, researchers found.

“An overall decline in change over time and an immediate change in fluoroquinolone prescribing was observed after the 2016 FDA warning,” the authors concluded. “Certain physicians, such as primary care physicians, were more responsive to FDA warnings than others. ... Findings of this study suggest that identifying the association of physician and organizational characteristics with fluoroquinolone prescribing practices could help in developing mechanisms for improving de-adoption.”

Some critics say the FDA should do more to spotlight the dangers of fluoroquinolones and require doctors and patients to sign checklist consent forms to show they are aware of the potential side effects of these drugs.

Rachel Brummert, a patient advocate who sits on an FDA consumer advisory board, believes the FDA needs to improve its communication to doctors on fluoroquinolone risks and get tougher with those who continue to inappropriately prescribe the drugs.

“I think there needs to be a system in place, where if something comes down from the FDA about a drug, the physician has to sign off on it, the patient has to sign off on it and mark that they understand that there are these ‘black box’ warnings,” says Ms. Brummert, 52, a representative on the FDA’s Medical Devices Advisory Committee.

As an example, she points to Australia’s medical laws requiring doctors and patients to sign a checklist before any fluoroquinolone prescription is approved.

“When a physician prescribes a fluoroquinolone antibiotic, there’s a checklist – does the patient have an infection, is it a simple infection, do they have allergies?” she notes. “And you can’t even get the prescription out – it won’t even print out, it won’t go into the system – unless you check all of the boxes. But we don’t do that here. We don’t have that type of system right now.”

Ms. Brummert says such a system might have prevented the harm from taking Levaquin her doctor prescribed for a suspected sinus infection in 2006.

Soon after she began taking the antibiotic, she ruptured her Achilles tendon, requiring surgery. By 2009, she’d had three ruptures, each needing surgical fixes. To date, she’s had more than 30 surgeries to correct tendon ruptures. She’s also had seizures, blood pressure issues, depression, chronic pain, and memory problems she attributes to taking Levaquin.

As it turns out, her doctor misdiagnosed her condition – a misstep that would have been averted with a system like Australia’s, which requires doctors to verify the presence of a bacterial infection through a simple test before prescribing a fluoroquinolone.

“When I got the Levaquin, it was for a suspected sinus infection that it turned out I didn’t even have in the first place,” she notes. “So, I took the Levaquin basically for nothing. But what I would have asked my doctor had I known is: ‘Why should I take something so strong for so simple an infection?’

“It seems common sense to me now that you don’t prescribe something that can kill anthrax for a simple sinus infection. It’s like an atom bomb killing a mosquito. I agree that there are uses for these drugs, but they are being overprescribed. And so, here I am 16 years later – I’m still rupturing, I’m still having surgery, and I’m still in pain – all for something I didn’t even need medicine for in the first place.”
 

Should guidelines be stronger?

So, why are so many doctors continuing to prescribe fluoroquinolones for simple infections? Dr. Adalja and other experts say several things are at work.

For one thing, Dr. Adalja notes, fluoroquinolones are broad-spectrum antibiotics that are effective against dangerous germs, including “gram-negative” bacterial infections, and are “100% bioavailable.” That means they are as effective when given in pill form as they are if put directly into a vein. So they can be used in an outpatient setting or to allow a patient to be discharged from a hospital sooner because they don’t need an IV to receive treatment.

“There are still some uses for these drugs because they are so bioavailable, and I think that drives some of the use, and those are legitimate uses, knowing that there are risks when you do it,” he says. “But no drug is without risks, and you have to weigh risks and benefits – that’s what medicine is about: deciding what the best drug is for a patient.”

But Dr. Adalja says the overprescription of fluoroquinolones is part of the larger trend of antibiotic overuse. That is driving up antibiotic resistance, which in turn is another thing leading doctors to turn to Cipro and other fluoroquinolones after other drugs have proven ineffective.

“You can’t separate this from the fact that 80% of antibiotic prescriptions in the outpatient setting are probably illegitimate or not warranted,” he notes. “And because fluoroquinolones are highly effective drugs against certain pathogens, they are the go-to [drug] for many people who are prescribing antibiotics.”

That’s why patients should be wary whenever a doctor prescribes a fluoroquinolone, or any drug to treat a suspected infection, he says.

“Any time a patient is getting prescribed an antibiotic by a physician, they should ask: ‘Do I really need this antibiotic?’ That should be the first question they ask,” he advises. “And if they’re getting a fluoroquinolone, they may want to ask: ‘Is this the best antibiotic for me?’ ”
 

What you can do

Ms. Brummert and Ms. Moser say they are sharing their stories to raise awareness of the dangers of fluoroquinolones.

Ms. Moser has published a book on her experiences, “The Magnificent Story of a Lame Author,” and provides a wealth of consumer resources on her blog: Mountains and Mustard Seeds.

“As much as I hate what has happened to me, it has put me in a place where I am glad that I can inform other patients,” she says.

Ms. Brummert supplements her advocacy work as an FDA adviser with useful materials she provides on her website: Drugwatch.com.

“Pain into purpose – that’s what I call it,” she says. “I can’t change what happened to me, but I can warn others.”

The upshot for patients?

• the FDA’s Drug Safety Communication on Fluoroquinolones online to learn more about the risks and benefits of these powerful antibiotics.
• If you believe you’ve been harmed by fluoroquinolones, MedWatch website to report your experiences.

Ms. Brummert also advises patients to ask 12 critical questions of any doctor who wants to prescribe a fluoroquinolone, including the following listed on her website:

• For what condition is this medication prescribed, and is there another drug specific to my condition?
• What are the risks associated with this medication, and do the benefits outweigh them?
• Will this medication interact with my other drugs and/or other health conditions?
• What are the “boxed” warnings for this medication, and where can I report adverse events?

“I would also do my own research,” she says. “I wouldn’t just take a prescription from a physician and just say, ‘OK, doctor knows best.’ ”

Ms. Moser agrees that you have to be your own patient advocate and not simply take a doctor’s advice on any medical issue without having a deeper conversation.

“I’ve had arguments with doctors who legitimately did not believe me when I told them what happened to me,” she says. “And I actually told them, ‘Go get your Physicians’ Desk Reference [for prescription drugs]’ and they opened the book in front of me and read the warnings. Obviously, they had not been keeping up with the added warnings. So, I do think that doctors do need to be better informed.”

“So, yes, it’s the FDA’s responsibility, but it is also the doctors’ responsibility to make sure that they’re watching out for the side effects and they’re reporting them when their patients come up with them and making those connections.”

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

How satisfied are physicians that they are fairly compensated for their dedication, skills, and time? That’s a subject that seems to steer many physicians to heated emotions and to a variety of issues with today’s medical field – not all of which directly affect their pay.

Medscape’s Physician Compensation Report 2022: “Incomes Gain, Pay Gaps Remain” generally shows encouraging trends. Physician income rose from a year earlier, when it stagnated as COVID-19 restrictions led patients to stay home and medical practices to cut hours or close. And for the first time in Medscape’s 11 years of reporting on physician compensation, average income rose for every medical specialty surveyed.

Heartening findings, right? Yet the tone of comments to the report was anything but peppy. Many commenters were highly distressed or even angry about their compensation. One physician even complained his plumber earns more than he does.

A family physician lamented that he has “made less in the past 3 years, with more hassles and work” and he “can’t wait to retire next year.” Meanwhile, he complained, the U.S. health system is “the costliest, yet wasteful, with worse outcomes; reactive, not preventative; and has the costliest drugs and social issues.”
 

Do NPs and PAs encroach on your income?

The conversation about fair compensation launched some commenters into a discussion about competition from nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs). Some physicians expressed wariness at best, and anger at worst, about NPs and PAs evolving beyond traditional doctor support roles into certain direct patient support.

One-fourth of respondents in the compensation report said their income was negatively affected by competition from NPs, PAs, and other nonphysician providers. For example, with states like Arkansas expanding independent practice for certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs), one commenter complained, “we are no longer needed.”

Added another physician, “primary care, especially internal medicine, is just going away for doctors. We wasted, by all accounts, 4 full years of our working lives because NPs are ‘just as good.’ ”

Greater independence for NPs and PAs strengthens the hands of health insurers and “will end up hastening the demise of primary care as we have known it,” another reader predicted. Other physicians’ takes: “For the institution, it’s much cheaper to hire NPs than to hire doctors” and “overall, physician negotiating power will decrease in the future.”
 

Medicare reimbursement rates grate

Although 7 in 10 respondents in the compensation report said they would continue to accept new Medicare or Medicaid patients, comments reveal resentment about the practical need to work with Medicare and its resentment rates.

“An open question to Medicare: Are you doing the dumbest thing possible by paying low wages and giving huge administrative burdens for internal medicine on purpose?” one physician wrote. “Or are you really that short-sighted?”

Another reader cited an analysis from the American College of Surgeons of Medicare’s 1998 surgical CPT codes. If Medicare had left those codes alone beyond annual inflation adjustments, the study found, reimbursement rates by 2019 would be half of what they became.

Another way of looking at the code reimbursement increases is a 50% pay cut over 20 years for doctors and medical practices, that reader insisted. “The rising cost of employee wages, particularly of the last two-and-a-half years of COVID-19, combined with the effective pay cuts over the last 20 years, equals time to quit!”

Another commenter concurred. “In the 1990s, most full-time docs were making almost double what you see [in the report], and everything cost almost half of what it does now. So, MD purchasing power is between half and one-quarter of what it was in the early 1990s.”
 

Are self-pay models better?

Do physicians have a better chance at consistently fair income under a self-pay practice that avoids dealing with insurance companies?

One commenter hypothesized that psychiatrists once trailed internists in income but today earn more because many “quit working for insurance and went to a cash business 15 years ago.” Many family physicians did something similar by switching to a direct primary care model, he said.

This physician said he has done the same “with great results” for patients as well: shorter office visits, faster booking of appointments, no deductibles owed. Best of all, “I love practicing medicine again, and my patients love the great health care they receive.”

Another commenter agreed. “Two words: cash practice.” But another objected, “I guess only the very rich can afford to cover your business costs.”

Regardless of the payment model, another physician argued for private practice over employed positions. “Save on the bureaucratic expenses. Go back to private practice and get rid of electronic records.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

How satisfied are physicians that they are fairly compensated for their dedication, skills, and time? That’s a subject that seems to steer many physicians to heated emotions and to a variety of issues with today’s medical field – not all of which directly affect their pay.

Medscape’s Physician Compensation Report 2022: “Incomes Gain, Pay Gaps Remain” generally shows encouraging trends. Physician income rose from a year earlier, when it stagnated as COVID-19 restrictions led patients to stay home and medical practices to cut hours or close. And for the first time in Medscape’s 11 years of reporting on physician compensation, average income rose for every medical specialty surveyed.

Heartening findings, right? Yet the tone of comments to the report was anything but peppy. Many commenters were highly distressed or even angry about their compensation. One physician even complained his plumber earns more than he does.

A family physician lamented that he has “made less in the past 3 years, with more hassles and work” and he “can’t wait to retire next year.” Meanwhile, he complained, the U.S. health system is “the costliest, yet wasteful, with worse outcomes; reactive, not preventative; and has the costliest drugs and social issues.”
 

Do NPs and PAs encroach on your income?

The conversation about fair compensation launched some commenters into a discussion about competition from nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs). Some physicians expressed wariness at best, and anger at worst, about NPs and PAs evolving beyond traditional doctor support roles into certain direct patient support.

One-fourth of respondents in the compensation report said their income was negatively affected by competition from NPs, PAs, and other nonphysician providers. For example, with states like Arkansas expanding independent practice for certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs), one commenter complained, “we are no longer needed.”

Added another physician, “primary care, especially internal medicine, is just going away for doctors. We wasted, by all accounts, 4 full years of our working lives because NPs are ‘just as good.’ ”

Greater independence for NPs and PAs strengthens the hands of health insurers and “will end up hastening the demise of primary care as we have known it,” another reader predicted. Other physicians’ takes: “For the institution, it’s much cheaper to hire NPs than to hire doctors” and “overall, physician negotiating power will decrease in the future.”
 

Medicare reimbursement rates grate

Although 7 in 10 respondents in the compensation report said they would continue to accept new Medicare or Medicaid patients, comments reveal resentment about the practical need to work with Medicare and its resentment rates.

“An open question to Medicare: Are you doing the dumbest thing possible by paying low wages and giving huge administrative burdens for internal medicine on purpose?” one physician wrote. “Or are you really that short-sighted?”

Another reader cited an analysis from the American College of Surgeons of Medicare’s 1998 surgical CPT codes. If Medicare had left those codes alone beyond annual inflation adjustments, the study found, reimbursement rates by 2019 would be half of what they became.

Another way of looking at the code reimbursement increases is a 50% pay cut over 20 years for doctors and medical practices, that reader insisted. “The rising cost of employee wages, particularly of the last two-and-a-half years of COVID-19, combined with the effective pay cuts over the last 20 years, equals time to quit!”

Another commenter concurred. “In the 1990s, most full-time docs were making almost double what you see [in the report], and everything cost almost half of what it does now. So, MD purchasing power is between half and one-quarter of what it was in the early 1990s.”
 

Are self-pay models better?

Do physicians have a better chance at consistently fair income under a self-pay practice that avoids dealing with insurance companies?

One commenter hypothesized that psychiatrists once trailed internists in income but today earn more because many “quit working for insurance and went to a cash business 15 years ago.” Many family physicians did something similar by switching to a direct primary care model, he said.

This physician said he has done the same “with great results” for patients as well: shorter office visits, faster booking of appointments, no deductibles owed. Best of all, “I love practicing medicine again, and my patients love the great health care they receive.”

Another commenter agreed. “Two words: cash practice.” But another objected, “I guess only the very rich can afford to cover your business costs.”

Regardless of the payment model, another physician argued for private practice over employed positions. “Save on the bureaucratic expenses. Go back to private practice and get rid of electronic records.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

How satisfied are physicians that they are fairly compensated for their dedication, skills, and time? That’s a subject that seems to steer many physicians to heated emotions and to a variety of issues with today’s medical field – not all of which directly affect their pay.

Medscape’s Physician Compensation Report 2022: “Incomes Gain, Pay Gaps Remain” generally shows encouraging trends. Physician income rose from a year earlier, when it stagnated as COVID-19 restrictions led patients to stay home and medical practices to cut hours or close. And for the first time in Medscape’s 11 years of reporting on physician compensation, average income rose for every medical specialty surveyed.

Heartening findings, right? Yet the tone of comments to the report was anything but peppy. Many commenters were highly distressed or even angry about their compensation. One physician even complained his plumber earns more than he does.

A family physician lamented that he has “made less in the past 3 years, with more hassles and work” and he “can’t wait to retire next year.” Meanwhile, he complained, the U.S. health system is “the costliest, yet wasteful, with worse outcomes; reactive, not preventative; and has the costliest drugs and social issues.”
 

Do NPs and PAs encroach on your income?

The conversation about fair compensation launched some commenters into a discussion about competition from nurse practitioners (NPs) and physician assistants (PAs). Some physicians expressed wariness at best, and anger at worst, about NPs and PAs evolving beyond traditional doctor support roles into certain direct patient support.

One-fourth of respondents in the compensation report said their income was negatively affected by competition from NPs, PAs, and other nonphysician providers. For example, with states like Arkansas expanding independent practice for certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs), one commenter complained, “we are no longer needed.”

Added another physician, “primary care, especially internal medicine, is just going away for doctors. We wasted, by all accounts, 4 full years of our working lives because NPs are ‘just as good.’ ”

Greater independence for NPs and PAs strengthens the hands of health insurers and “will end up hastening the demise of primary care as we have known it,” another reader predicted. Other physicians’ takes: “For the institution, it’s much cheaper to hire NPs than to hire doctors” and “overall, physician negotiating power will decrease in the future.”
 

Medicare reimbursement rates grate

Although 7 in 10 respondents in the compensation report said they would continue to accept new Medicare or Medicaid patients, comments reveal resentment about the practical need to work with Medicare and its resentment rates.

“An open question to Medicare: Are you doing the dumbest thing possible by paying low wages and giving huge administrative burdens for internal medicine on purpose?” one physician wrote. “Or are you really that short-sighted?”

Another reader cited an analysis from the American College of Surgeons of Medicare’s 1998 surgical CPT codes. If Medicare had left those codes alone beyond annual inflation adjustments, the study found, reimbursement rates by 2019 would be half of what they became.

Another way of looking at the code reimbursement increases is a 50% pay cut over 20 years for doctors and medical practices, that reader insisted. “The rising cost of employee wages, particularly of the last two-and-a-half years of COVID-19, combined with the effective pay cuts over the last 20 years, equals time to quit!”

Another commenter concurred. “In the 1990s, most full-time docs were making almost double what you see [in the report], and everything cost almost half of what it does now. So, MD purchasing power is between half and one-quarter of what it was in the early 1990s.”
 

Are self-pay models better?

Do physicians have a better chance at consistently fair income under a self-pay practice that avoids dealing with insurance companies?

One commenter hypothesized that psychiatrists once trailed internists in income but today earn more because many “quit working for insurance and went to a cash business 15 years ago.” Many family physicians did something similar by switching to a direct primary care model, he said.

This physician said he has done the same “with great results” for patients as well: shorter office visits, faster booking of appointments, no deductibles owed. Best of all, “I love practicing medicine again, and my patients love the great health care they receive.”

Another commenter agreed. “Two words: cash practice.” But another objected, “I guess only the very rich can afford to cover your business costs.”

Regardless of the payment model, another physician argued for private practice over employed positions. “Save on the bureaucratic expenses. Go back to private practice and get rid of electronic records.”

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.