Dermatology News

Mobile health technologies currently available for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), particularly mobile health (mHealth) apps, are poor quality and have limited “The use of mobile technologies to support health (mHealth technologies), specifically mHealth applications (apps), has the potential to improve outcomes in SLE by empowering patients through education, symptom tracking, and peer support,” first author Lucas Ogura Dantas, of Tufts Medical Center, Boston, and coauthors wrote in Lupus. “These may be particularly powerful tools in SLE which commonly affects young adults, who are typically avid smartphone users familiar with the use of mobile apps.”

[email protected]

SOURCE: Dantas LO et al. Lupus. 2020;29:144-56.

Mobile health technologies currently available for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), particularly mobile health (mHealth) apps, are poor quality and have limited “The use of mobile technologies to support health (mHealth technologies), specifically mHealth applications (apps), has the potential to improve outcomes in SLE by empowering patients through education, symptom tracking, and peer support,” first author Lucas Ogura Dantas, of Tufts Medical Center, Boston, and coauthors wrote in Lupus. “These may be particularly powerful tools in SLE which commonly affects young adults, who are typically avid smartphone users familiar with the use of mobile apps.”

[email protected]

SOURCE: Dantas LO et al. Lupus. 2020;29:144-56.

Mobile health technologies currently available for patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), particularly mobile health (mHealth) apps, are poor quality and have limited “The use of mobile technologies to support health (mHealth technologies), specifically mHealth applications (apps), has the potential to improve outcomes in SLE by empowering patients through education, symptom tracking, and peer support,” first author Lucas Ogura Dantas, of Tufts Medical Center, Boston, and coauthors wrote in Lupus. “These may be particularly powerful tools in SLE which commonly affects young adults, who are typically avid smartphone users familiar with the use of mobile apps.”

[email protected]

SOURCE: Dantas LO et al. Lupus. 2020;29:144-56.

The transmission rate of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was 1%-5% among 38,000 Chinese people in close contact with infected patients, according to the chief epidemiologist of the Chinese Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, Zunyou Wu, MD, PhD, who gave an update on the epidemic at the Conference on Retroviruses & Opportunistic Infections.

The rate of spread to family members – the driver of the infection in China – was 10% early in the outbreak, but fell to 3% with quicker recognition and isolation. The overall numbers are lower than might have been expected, and an important insight for clinicians trying to contain the outbreak in the United States.

Patients were most infectious at the onset of symptoms, when they spiked a fever and started coughing, but their ability to spread the infection dropped after that, Dr. Wu and others said at a special COVID-19 session at the meeting, which was scheduled to be in Boston, but was held online instead because of concerns about spreading the virus. The session has been posted.

Transmission from presymptomatic people is rare. Shedding persists to some degree for 7-12 days in mild/moderate cases, but 2 weeks or more in severe cases.

Dr. Wu said the numbers in China are moving in the right direction, which means that containment efforts there have worked.

The virus emerged in Wuhan, the capital of Hubei province in central China, in connection with a wildlife food market in December 2019. Bats are thought to be the reservoir, with perhaps an intermediate step between civet cats and raccoon dogs. Officials shut down the market.

Essentially, the entire population of China, more than a billion people, was told to stay home for 10 days to interrupt the transmission cycle after the virus spread throughout the country in a few weeks, and almost 60 million people in Hubei were put behind a cordon sanitaire, where they have been for 50 days and will remain “for a while,” Dr. Wu said.

It’s led to a steep drop in new cases and deaths in China since mid-February; both are now more common outside China than inside, and international numbers are lower than they were at the peak in China.

[email protected]

The transmission rate of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was 1%-5% among 38,000 Chinese people in close contact with infected patients, according to the chief epidemiologist of the Chinese Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, Zunyou Wu, MD, PhD, who gave an update on the epidemic at the Conference on Retroviruses & Opportunistic Infections.

The rate of spread to family members – the driver of the infection in China – was 10% early in the outbreak, but fell to 3% with quicker recognition and isolation. The overall numbers are lower than might have been expected, and an important insight for clinicians trying to contain the outbreak in the United States.

Patients were most infectious at the onset of symptoms, when they spiked a fever and started coughing, but their ability to spread the infection dropped after that, Dr. Wu and others said at a special COVID-19 session at the meeting, which was scheduled to be in Boston, but was held online instead because of concerns about spreading the virus. The session has been posted.

Transmission from presymptomatic people is rare. Shedding persists to some degree for 7-12 days in mild/moderate cases, but 2 weeks or more in severe cases.

Dr. Wu said the numbers in China are moving in the right direction, which means that containment efforts there have worked.

The virus emerged in Wuhan, the capital of Hubei province in central China, in connection with a wildlife food market in December 2019. Bats are thought to be the reservoir, with perhaps an intermediate step between civet cats and raccoon dogs. Officials shut down the market.

Essentially, the entire population of China, more than a billion people, was told to stay home for 10 days to interrupt the transmission cycle after the virus spread throughout the country in a few weeks, and almost 60 million people in Hubei were put behind a cordon sanitaire, where they have been for 50 days and will remain “for a while,” Dr. Wu said.

It’s led to a steep drop in new cases and deaths in China since mid-February; both are now more common outside China than inside, and international numbers are lower than they were at the peak in China.

[email protected]

The transmission rate of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was 1%-5% among 38,000 Chinese people in close contact with infected patients, according to the chief epidemiologist of the Chinese Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, Zunyou Wu, MD, PhD, who gave an update on the epidemic at the Conference on Retroviruses & Opportunistic Infections.

The rate of spread to family members – the driver of the infection in China – was 10% early in the outbreak, but fell to 3% with quicker recognition and isolation. The overall numbers are lower than might have been expected, and an important insight for clinicians trying to contain the outbreak in the United States.

Patients were most infectious at the onset of symptoms, when they spiked a fever and started coughing, but their ability to spread the infection dropped after that, Dr. Wu and others said at a special COVID-19 session at the meeting, which was scheduled to be in Boston, but was held online instead because of concerns about spreading the virus. The session has been posted.

Transmission from presymptomatic people is rare. Shedding persists to some degree for 7-12 days in mild/moderate cases, but 2 weeks or more in severe cases.

Dr. Wu said the numbers in China are moving in the right direction, which means that containment efforts there have worked.

The virus emerged in Wuhan, the capital of Hubei province in central China, in connection with a wildlife food market in December 2019. Bats are thought to be the reservoir, with perhaps an intermediate step between civet cats and raccoon dogs. Officials shut down the market.

Essentially, the entire population of China, more than a billion people, was told to stay home for 10 days to interrupt the transmission cycle after the virus spread throughout the country in a few weeks, and almost 60 million people in Hubei were put behind a cordon sanitaire, where they have been for 50 days and will remain “for a while,” Dr. Wu said.

It’s led to a steep drop in new cases and deaths in China since mid-February; both are now more common outside China than inside, and international numbers are lower than they were at the peak in China.

[email protected]

Officials at the Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research are taking the precautionary step of canceling or postponing advisory committee meetings and limiting staff travel in an effort to help curb the spread of the COVID-19.

Wikimedia Commons/FitzColinGerald/ Creative Commons License

“The outbreak of respiratory illness caused by a novel coronavirus, COVID-19, that started in China is spreading to other countries, including the United States,” CDER Director Janet Woodcock, MD, said in a memo to CDER staff. “As a precaution, FDA is canceling foreign official agency travel and limiting domestic travel to mission critical only, effective immediately and through April.”

Additionally, the memo notes that “CDER-organized external meetings, conferences, and workshops will be postponed or canceled from March 10 through April.”

“To mitigate the impact on our work, I encourage you to hold meetings with external stakeholders through teleconference, when possible,” she wrote.

Thus far, only a few CDER events on the FDA’s meeting webpage are listed as being canceled or postponed. Some of the affected meetings include a March 10 public meeting on patient-focused drug development for stimulant-use disorder, a March 11 meeting of the Nonprescription Drug Advisory Committee, and a March 30 public meeting on patient-focused drug development for vitiligo, all of which are postponed until further notice. The Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research also has postponed until further notice its U.S.–Japan Cellular and Gene Therapy Conference, originally scheduled for March 12.

Dr. Woodcock also noted in the memo that in relation to inspections, “we plan to use technology and established agreements with our foreign counterparts to minimize disruptions to the drug supply chain and to applications under review, so that Americans can continue to get their medications.”

[email protected]

Officials at the Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research are taking the precautionary step of canceling or postponing advisory committee meetings and limiting staff travel in an effort to help curb the spread of the COVID-19.

Wikimedia Commons/FitzColinGerald/ Creative Commons License

“The outbreak of respiratory illness caused by a novel coronavirus, COVID-19, that started in China is spreading to other countries, including the United States,” CDER Director Janet Woodcock, MD, said in a memo to CDER staff. “As a precaution, FDA is canceling foreign official agency travel and limiting domestic travel to mission critical only, effective immediately and through April.”

Additionally, the memo notes that “CDER-organized external meetings, conferences, and workshops will be postponed or canceled from March 10 through April.”

“To mitigate the impact on our work, I encourage you to hold meetings with external stakeholders through teleconference, when possible,” she wrote.

Thus far, only a few CDER events on the FDA’s meeting webpage are listed as being canceled or postponed. Some of the affected meetings include a March 10 public meeting on patient-focused drug development for stimulant-use disorder, a March 11 meeting of the Nonprescription Drug Advisory Committee, and a March 30 public meeting on patient-focused drug development for vitiligo, all of which are postponed until further notice. The Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research also has postponed until further notice its U.S.–Japan Cellular and Gene Therapy Conference, originally scheduled for March 12.

Dr. Woodcock also noted in the memo that in relation to inspections, “we plan to use technology and established agreements with our foreign counterparts to minimize disruptions to the drug supply chain and to applications under review, so that Americans can continue to get their medications.”

[email protected]

Officials at the Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research are taking the precautionary step of canceling or postponing advisory committee meetings and limiting staff travel in an effort to help curb the spread of the COVID-19.

Wikimedia Commons/FitzColinGerald/ Creative Commons License

“The outbreak of respiratory illness caused by a novel coronavirus, COVID-19, that started in China is spreading to other countries, including the United States,” CDER Director Janet Woodcock, MD, said in a memo to CDER staff. “As a precaution, FDA is canceling foreign official agency travel and limiting domestic travel to mission critical only, effective immediately and through April.”

Additionally, the memo notes that “CDER-organized external meetings, conferences, and workshops will be postponed or canceled from March 10 through April.”

“To mitigate the impact on our work, I encourage you to hold meetings with external stakeholders through teleconference, when possible,” she wrote.

Thus far, only a few CDER events on the FDA’s meeting webpage are listed as being canceled or postponed. Some of the affected meetings include a March 10 public meeting on patient-focused drug development for stimulant-use disorder, a March 11 meeting of the Nonprescription Drug Advisory Committee, and a March 30 public meeting on patient-focused drug development for vitiligo, all of which are postponed until further notice. The Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research also has postponed until further notice its U.S.–Japan Cellular and Gene Therapy Conference, originally scheduled for March 12.

Dr. Woodcock also noted in the memo that in relation to inspections, “we plan to use technology and established agreements with our foreign counterparts to minimize disruptions to the drug supply chain and to applications under review, so that Americans can continue to get their medications.”

[email protected]

MAUI, HAWAII – The 15% rule in scleroderma is a handy tool that raises awareness of the disease’s associated prevalence of various severe organ complications so clinicians can screen appropriately, Janet Pope, MD, said at the 2020 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

Dr. Pope and colleagues in the Canadian Scleroderma Research Group developed the 15% rule because they recognized that scleroderma is rare enough that most physicians practicing outside of a few specialized centers don’t see many affected patients. The systemic autoimmune disease is marked by numerous possible expressions of vascular inflammation and malfunction, fibrosis, and autoimmunity in different organ systems.

“A lot of clinicians do not know how common this stuff is,” according to Dr. Pope, professor of medicine at the University of Western Ontario and head of the division of rheumatology at St. Joseph’s Health Center in London, Ont.

Basically, the 15% rule holds that, at any given time, a patient with scleroderma has roughly a 15% chance – or one in six – of having any of an extensive array of severe organ complications. That means a 15% chance of having prevalent clinically significant pulmonary hypertension as defined by a systolic pulmonary artery pressure of 45 mm Hg or more on Doppler echocardiography, a 15% likelihood of interstitial lung disease or clinically significant pulmonary fibrosis as suggested by a forced vital capacity less than 70% of predicted, a 15% prevalence of Sjögren’s syndrome, a 15% likelihood of having pulmonary artery hypertension upon right heart catheterization, a 15% chance of inflammatory arthritis, and a one-in-six chance of having a myopathy or myositis. Also, diastolic dysfunction, 15%. Ditto symptomatic arrhythmias.

“It’s a good little rule of thumb,” Dr. Pope commented.

The odds of having a current digital ulcer on any given day? Again, about 15%. In addition, scleroderma patients have a 15% lifetime risk of developing a complicated digital ulcer requiring hospitalization and/or amputation, she continued.

And while the prevalence of scleroderma renal crisis in the overall population with scleroderma is low, at 3%, in the subgroup with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis, it climbs to 12%-15%.

Every rule has its exceptions. The 15% rule doesn’t apply to Raynaud’s phenomenon, which is present in nearly all patients with scleroderma, nor to gastroesophageal reflux disease or dysphagia, present in roughly 80% of patients.

Dr. Pope and coinvestigators developed the 15% rule pertaining to the prevalence of serious organ complications in scleroderma by conducting a systematic review of 69 published studies, each including a minimum of 50 scleroderma patients. The detailed results of the systematic review have been published.

Dr. Pope reported receiving research grants from and/or serving as a consultant to more than a dozen pharmaceutical companies.

[email protected]

MAUI, HAWAII – The 15% rule in scleroderma is a handy tool that raises awareness of the disease’s associated prevalence of various severe organ complications so clinicians can screen appropriately, Janet Pope, MD, said at the 2020 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

Dr. Pope and colleagues in the Canadian Scleroderma Research Group developed the 15% rule because they recognized that scleroderma is rare enough that most physicians practicing outside of a few specialized centers don’t see many affected patients. The systemic autoimmune disease is marked by numerous possible expressions of vascular inflammation and malfunction, fibrosis, and autoimmunity in different organ systems.

“A lot of clinicians do not know how common this stuff is,” according to Dr. Pope, professor of medicine at the University of Western Ontario and head of the division of rheumatology at St. Joseph’s Health Center in London, Ont.

Basically, the 15% rule holds that, at any given time, a patient with scleroderma has roughly a 15% chance – or one in six – of having any of an extensive array of severe organ complications. That means a 15% chance of having prevalent clinically significant pulmonary hypertension as defined by a systolic pulmonary artery pressure of 45 mm Hg or more on Doppler echocardiography, a 15% likelihood of interstitial lung disease or clinically significant pulmonary fibrosis as suggested by a forced vital capacity less than 70% of predicted, a 15% prevalence of Sjögren’s syndrome, a 15% likelihood of having pulmonary artery hypertension upon right heart catheterization, a 15% chance of inflammatory arthritis, and a one-in-six chance of having a myopathy or myositis. Also, diastolic dysfunction, 15%. Ditto symptomatic arrhythmias.

“It’s a good little rule of thumb,” Dr. Pope commented.

The odds of having a current digital ulcer on any given day? Again, about 15%. In addition, scleroderma patients have a 15% lifetime risk of developing a complicated digital ulcer requiring hospitalization and/or amputation, she continued.

And while the prevalence of scleroderma renal crisis in the overall population with scleroderma is low, at 3%, in the subgroup with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis, it climbs to 12%-15%.

Every rule has its exceptions. The 15% rule doesn’t apply to Raynaud’s phenomenon, which is present in nearly all patients with scleroderma, nor to gastroesophageal reflux disease or dysphagia, present in roughly 80% of patients.

Dr. Pope and coinvestigators developed the 15% rule pertaining to the prevalence of serious organ complications in scleroderma by conducting a systematic review of 69 published studies, each including a minimum of 50 scleroderma patients. The detailed results of the systematic review have been published.

Dr. Pope reported receiving research grants from and/or serving as a consultant to more than a dozen pharmaceutical companies.

[email protected]

MAUI, HAWAII – The 15% rule in scleroderma is a handy tool that raises awareness of the disease’s associated prevalence of various severe organ complications so clinicians can screen appropriately, Janet Pope, MD, said at the 2020 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

Dr. Pope and colleagues in the Canadian Scleroderma Research Group developed the 15% rule because they recognized that scleroderma is rare enough that most physicians practicing outside of a few specialized centers don’t see many affected patients. The systemic autoimmune disease is marked by numerous possible expressions of vascular inflammation and malfunction, fibrosis, and autoimmunity in different organ systems.

“A lot of clinicians do not know how common this stuff is,” according to Dr. Pope, professor of medicine at the University of Western Ontario and head of the division of rheumatology at St. Joseph’s Health Center in London, Ont.

Basically, the 15% rule holds that, at any given time, a patient with scleroderma has roughly a 15% chance – or one in six – of having any of an extensive array of severe organ complications. That means a 15% chance of having prevalent clinically significant pulmonary hypertension as defined by a systolic pulmonary artery pressure of 45 mm Hg or more on Doppler echocardiography, a 15% likelihood of interstitial lung disease or clinically significant pulmonary fibrosis as suggested by a forced vital capacity less than 70% of predicted, a 15% prevalence of Sjögren’s syndrome, a 15% likelihood of having pulmonary artery hypertension upon right heart catheterization, a 15% chance of inflammatory arthritis, and a one-in-six chance of having a myopathy or myositis. Also, diastolic dysfunction, 15%. Ditto symptomatic arrhythmias.

“It’s a good little rule of thumb,” Dr. Pope commented.

The odds of having a current digital ulcer on any given day? Again, about 15%. In addition, scleroderma patients have a 15% lifetime risk of developing a complicated digital ulcer requiring hospitalization and/or amputation, she continued.

And while the prevalence of scleroderma renal crisis in the overall population with scleroderma is low, at 3%, in the subgroup with diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis, it climbs to 12%-15%.

Every rule has its exceptions. The 15% rule doesn’t apply to Raynaud’s phenomenon, which is present in nearly all patients with scleroderma, nor to gastroesophageal reflux disease or dysphagia, present in roughly 80% of patients.

Dr. Pope and coinvestigators developed the 15% rule pertaining to the prevalence of serious organ complications in scleroderma by conducting a systematic review of 69 published studies, each including a minimum of 50 scleroderma patients. The detailed results of the systematic review have been published.

Dr. Pope reported receiving research grants from and/or serving as a consultant to more than a dozen pharmaceutical companies.

[email protected]

The American Academy of Dermatology annual meeting is the latest large medical conference to be canceled because of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak.

“After carefully weighing the emerging facts, as well as our duties to the Academy, our members, other meeting attendees, and the local communities we as dermatologists serve, the AAD has made the difficult but necessary decision to cancel the AAD 2020 Annual Meeting in Denver,” AAD President George Hruza, MD, said in an announcement posted on the AAD’s website late on March 9. “We also want to respect our physicians’ need to be available to and healthy for their own patients, communities, and countries,” he added.

Earlier in the day, the American College of Cardiology announced that its annual meeting would be canceled, as did the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.

In his statement, Dr. Hruza said that the AAD is looking into “virtual meeting options” to provide content that was scheduled to be presented at the meeting.

Updates on those plans will be posted on the AAD’s website at www.aad.org.

The American Academy of Dermatology annual meeting is the latest large medical conference to be canceled because of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak.

“After carefully weighing the emerging facts, as well as our duties to the Academy, our members, other meeting attendees, and the local communities we as dermatologists serve, the AAD has made the difficult but necessary decision to cancel the AAD 2020 Annual Meeting in Denver,” AAD President George Hruza, MD, said in an announcement posted on the AAD’s website late on March 9. “We also want to respect our physicians’ need to be available to and healthy for their own patients, communities, and countries,” he added.

Earlier in the day, the American College of Cardiology announced that its annual meeting would be canceled, as did the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.

In his statement, Dr. Hruza said that the AAD is looking into “virtual meeting options” to provide content that was scheduled to be presented at the meeting.

Updates on those plans will be posted on the AAD’s website at www.aad.org.

The American Academy of Dermatology annual meeting is the latest large medical conference to be canceled because of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak.

“After carefully weighing the emerging facts, as well as our duties to the Academy, our members, other meeting attendees, and the local communities we as dermatologists serve, the AAD has made the difficult but necessary decision to cancel the AAD 2020 Annual Meeting in Denver,” AAD President George Hruza, MD, said in an announcement posted on the AAD’s website late on March 9. “We also want to respect our physicians’ need to be available to and healthy for their own patients, communities, and countries,” he added.

Earlier in the day, the American College of Cardiology announced that its annual meeting would be canceled, as did the Society of Gynecologic Oncology.

In his statement, Dr. Hruza said that the AAD is looking into “virtual meeting options” to provide content that was scheduled to be presented at the meeting.

Updates on those plans will be posted on the AAD’s website at www.aad.org.

Treatment with the antifungal agent terbinafine during pregnancy does not appear to increase the risk of major malformations or spontaneous abortions, according to results from a large registry study in Denmark.

digitalskillet/Thinkstock

Physicians have been reluctant to prescribe the drug during pregnancy because of the limited safety data. The drug has not been associated with any signs of fetal toxicity in animal studies, but only one study – in 54 pregnancies – has examined the issue in humans and did not identify an increased fetal risk, according to Niklas Worm Andersson, MD, of the department of clinical pharmacology, Copenhagen University Hospital at Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, and coauthors.

The retrospective, nationwide cohort study analyzed exposure to oral and tropical terbinafine in a large pregnancy registry and found no increase in the risk of major malformations or spontaneous abortions in exposed versus unexposed pregnancies. The study was published in JAMA Dermatology.

Still, these results fell short of certainty, the authors noted. “Although our results may provide reassurance for pregnancies exposed to oral terbinafine by reporting no overall increased risk of major malformations, we cannot exclude a potential increased risk of a specific malformation,” they wrote.

“To our knowledge, this is by far the largest, most statistically rigorous study in the literature regarding this topic,” Jenny E. Murase, MD, of the department of dermatology at the University of California, San Francisco, and Mary Kathryn Abel, a medical student at UCSF, wrote in an accompanying editorial. They described the study as “a substantial contribution to the nearly absent literature regarding the use of terbinafine during pregnancy. Among the antifungal medications, it is possible that terbinafine is the safest one currently available for use in pregnancy, particularly of the oral formulations.”

However, since asymptomatic onychomycosis “is typically a cosmetic, rather than medical, concern, waiting until after pregnancy to initiate therapy is reasonable. ... It is important to acknowledge the uncertainty in this field and question the appropriateness of treating non–life-threatening diseases during pregnancy and lactation,” they wrote.

The Danish researchers drew from a registry of 1,650,649 pregnancies between 1997 and 2016, which included 891 pregnancies exposed to oral terbinafine, and 3,174 exposed to topical terbinafine. Matched outcome analyses compared the exposed pregnancies with up to 40,650 controls unexposed during pregnancy.

Propensity-matched comparisons showed no increased risk of major malformations for oral terbinafine exposure versus no exposure (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.62) or topical exposure versus no exposure (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.81-1.44). There was also no difference in oral versus topical exposure (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.61-2.29).

iStock

With respect to spontaneous abortions, there was no significant association with oral terbinafine (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.86-1.32) or topical terbinafine (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.88-1.21), compared with unexposed pregnancies, or oral over topical terbinafine-exposed pregnancies (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.84-1.70).

The study is limited by the fact that it was conducted in a Danish population, and the data relied on filled prescriptions for determining exposure, which did not account for adherence. Residual confounding is possible because of the retrospective nature of the study, the authors pointed out.

No source of funding was disclosed. One of the authors has received grants and personal fees from Novartis. Dr. Murase has received fees from Sanofi Genzyme, Dermira, UCB, Regeneron, Ferndale, and UpToDate.
 

SOURCES: Andersson NW et al. JAMA Dermatol. 2020 Mar 4. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2020.0142; Murase JE, Abel MK. JAMA Dermatol. 2020 Mar 4. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2019.5036.

Treatment with the antifungal agent terbinafine during pregnancy does not appear to increase the risk of major malformations or spontaneous abortions, according to results from a large registry study in Denmark.

digitalskillet/Thinkstock

Physicians have been reluctant to prescribe the drug during pregnancy because of the limited safety data. The drug has not been associated with any signs of fetal toxicity in animal studies, but only one study – in 54 pregnancies – has examined the issue in humans and did not identify an increased fetal risk, according to Niklas Worm Andersson, MD, of the department of clinical pharmacology, Copenhagen University Hospital at Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, and coauthors.

The retrospective, nationwide cohort study analyzed exposure to oral and tropical terbinafine in a large pregnancy registry and found no increase in the risk of major malformations or spontaneous abortions in exposed versus unexposed pregnancies. The study was published in JAMA Dermatology.

Still, these results fell short of certainty, the authors noted. “Although our results may provide reassurance for pregnancies exposed to oral terbinafine by reporting no overall increased risk of major malformations, we cannot exclude a potential increased risk of a specific malformation,” they wrote.

“To our knowledge, this is by far the largest, most statistically rigorous study in the literature regarding this topic,” Jenny E. Murase, MD, of the department of dermatology at the University of California, San Francisco, and Mary Kathryn Abel, a medical student at UCSF, wrote in an accompanying editorial. They described the study as “a substantial contribution to the nearly absent literature regarding the use of terbinafine during pregnancy. Among the antifungal medications, it is possible that terbinafine is the safest one currently available for use in pregnancy, particularly of the oral formulations.”

However, since asymptomatic onychomycosis “is typically a cosmetic, rather than medical, concern, waiting until after pregnancy to initiate therapy is reasonable. ... It is important to acknowledge the uncertainty in this field and question the appropriateness of treating non–life-threatening diseases during pregnancy and lactation,” they wrote.

The Danish researchers drew from a registry of 1,650,649 pregnancies between 1997 and 2016, which included 891 pregnancies exposed to oral terbinafine, and 3,174 exposed to topical terbinafine. Matched outcome analyses compared the exposed pregnancies with up to 40,650 controls unexposed during pregnancy.

Propensity-matched comparisons showed no increased risk of major malformations for oral terbinafine exposure versus no exposure (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.62) or topical exposure versus no exposure (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.81-1.44). There was also no difference in oral versus topical exposure (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.61-2.29).

iStock

With respect to spontaneous abortions, there was no significant association with oral terbinafine (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.86-1.32) or topical terbinafine (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.88-1.21), compared with unexposed pregnancies, or oral over topical terbinafine-exposed pregnancies (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.84-1.70).

The study is limited by the fact that it was conducted in a Danish population, and the data relied on filled prescriptions for determining exposure, which did not account for adherence. Residual confounding is possible because of the retrospective nature of the study, the authors pointed out.

No source of funding was disclosed. One of the authors has received grants and personal fees from Novartis. Dr. Murase has received fees from Sanofi Genzyme, Dermira, UCB, Regeneron, Ferndale, and UpToDate.
 

SOURCES: Andersson NW et al. JAMA Dermatol. 2020 Mar 4. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2020.0142; Murase JE, Abel MK. JAMA Dermatol. 2020 Mar 4. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2019.5036.

Treatment with the antifungal agent terbinafine during pregnancy does not appear to increase the risk of major malformations or spontaneous abortions, according to results from a large registry study in Denmark.

digitalskillet/Thinkstock

Physicians have been reluctant to prescribe the drug during pregnancy because of the limited safety data. The drug has not been associated with any signs of fetal toxicity in animal studies, but only one study – in 54 pregnancies – has examined the issue in humans and did not identify an increased fetal risk, according to Niklas Worm Andersson, MD, of the department of clinical pharmacology, Copenhagen University Hospital at Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, and coauthors.

The retrospective, nationwide cohort study analyzed exposure to oral and tropical terbinafine in a large pregnancy registry and found no increase in the risk of major malformations or spontaneous abortions in exposed versus unexposed pregnancies. The study was published in JAMA Dermatology.

Still, these results fell short of certainty, the authors noted. “Although our results may provide reassurance for pregnancies exposed to oral terbinafine by reporting no overall increased risk of major malformations, we cannot exclude a potential increased risk of a specific malformation,” they wrote.

“To our knowledge, this is by far the largest, most statistically rigorous study in the literature regarding this topic,” Jenny E. Murase, MD, of the department of dermatology at the University of California, San Francisco, and Mary Kathryn Abel, a medical student at UCSF, wrote in an accompanying editorial. They described the study as “a substantial contribution to the nearly absent literature regarding the use of terbinafine during pregnancy. Among the antifungal medications, it is possible that terbinafine is the safest one currently available for use in pregnancy, particularly of the oral formulations.”

However, since asymptomatic onychomycosis “is typically a cosmetic, rather than medical, concern, waiting until after pregnancy to initiate therapy is reasonable. ... It is important to acknowledge the uncertainty in this field and question the appropriateness of treating non–life-threatening diseases during pregnancy and lactation,” they wrote.

The Danish researchers drew from a registry of 1,650,649 pregnancies between 1997 and 2016, which included 891 pregnancies exposed to oral terbinafine, and 3,174 exposed to topical terbinafine. Matched outcome analyses compared the exposed pregnancies with up to 40,650 controls unexposed during pregnancy.

Propensity-matched comparisons showed no increased risk of major malformations for oral terbinafine exposure versus no exposure (odds ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.62) or topical exposure versus no exposure (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.81-1.44). There was also no difference in oral versus topical exposure (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.61-2.29).

iStock

With respect to spontaneous abortions, there was no significant association with oral terbinafine (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.86-1.32) or topical terbinafine (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.88-1.21), compared with unexposed pregnancies, or oral over topical terbinafine-exposed pregnancies (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.84-1.70).

The study is limited by the fact that it was conducted in a Danish population, and the data relied on filled prescriptions for determining exposure, which did not account for adherence. Residual confounding is possible because of the retrospective nature of the study, the authors pointed out.

No source of funding was disclosed. One of the authors has received grants and personal fees from Novartis. Dr. Murase has received fees from Sanofi Genzyme, Dermira, UCB, Regeneron, Ferndale, and UpToDate.
 

SOURCES: Andersson NW et al. JAMA Dermatol. 2020 Mar 4. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2020.0142; Murase JE, Abel MK. JAMA Dermatol. 2020 Mar 4. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2019.5036.

Although a 14-day quarantine after exposure to novel coronavirus is “well supported” by evidence, some infected individuals will not become symptomatic until after that period, according to authors of a recent analysis published in Annals of Internal Medicine.

Most individuals infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) will develop symptoms by day 12 of the infection, which is within the 14-day period of active monitoring currently recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the authors wrote.

However, an estimated 101 out of 10,000 cases could become symptomatic after the end of that 14-day monitoring period, they cautioned.

“Our analyses do not preclude that estimate from being higher,” said the investigators, led by Stephen A. Lauer, PhD, MD, of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore.

The analysis, based on 181 confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that were documented outside of the outbreak epicenter, Wuhan, China, makes “more conservative assumptions” about the window of symptom onset and potential for continued exposure, compared with analyses in previous studies, the researchers wrote.

The estimated incubation period for SARS-CoV-2 in the 181-patient study was a median of 5.1 days, which is comparable with previous estimates based on COVID-19 cases outside of Wuhan and consistent with other known human coronavirus diseases, such as SARS, which had a reported mean incubation period of 5 days, Dr. Lauer and colleagues noted.

Symptoms developed within 11.5 days for 97.5% of patients in the study.

Whether it’s acceptable to have 101 out of 10,000 cases becoming symptomatic beyond the recommended quarantine window depends on two factors, according to the authors. The first is the expected infection risk in the population that is being monitored, and the second is “judgment about the cost of missing cases,” wrote the authors.

In an interview, Aaron Eli Glatt, MD, chair of medicine at Mount Sinai South Nassau, Oceanside, N.Y., said that in practical terms, the results suggest that the majority of patients with COVID-19 will be identified within 14 days, with an “outside chance” of an infected individual leaving quarantine and transmitting virus for a short period of time before becoming symptomatic.

“I think the proper message to give those patients [who are asymptomatic upon leaving quarantine] is, ‘after 14 days, we’re pretty sure you’re out of the woods, but should you get any symptoms, immediately requarantine yourself and seek medical care,” he said.

Study coauthor Kyra H. Grantz, a doctoral graduate student at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said that extending a quarantine beyond 14 days might be considered in the highest-risk scenarios, though the benefits of doing so would have to be weighed against the costs to public health and to the individuals under quarantine.

“Our estimate of the incubation period definitely supports the 14-day recommendation that the CDC has been using,” she said in an interview.

Dr. Grantz emphasized that the estimate of 101 out of 10,000 cases developing symptoms after day 14 of active monitoring – representing the 99th percentile of cases – assumes the “most conservative, worst-case scenario” in a population that is fully infected.

“If you’re looking at a following a cohort of 1,000 people whom you think may have been exposed, only a certain percentage will be infected, and only a certain percentage of those will even develop symptoms – before we get to this idea of how many people would we miss,” she said.

The study was supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, and the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. Four authors reported disclosures related to those entities, and the remaining five reported no conflicts of interest.
 

SOURCE: Lauer SA et al. Ann Intern Med. 2020 Mar 9. doi:10.1101/2020.02.02.20020016.

Although a 14-day quarantine after exposure to novel coronavirus is “well supported” by evidence, some infected individuals will not become symptomatic until after that period, according to authors of a recent analysis published in Annals of Internal Medicine.

Most individuals infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) will develop symptoms by day 12 of the infection, which is within the 14-day period of active monitoring currently recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the authors wrote.

However, an estimated 101 out of 10,000 cases could become symptomatic after the end of that 14-day monitoring period, they cautioned.

“Our analyses do not preclude that estimate from being higher,” said the investigators, led by Stephen A. Lauer, PhD, MD, of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore.

The analysis, based on 181 confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that were documented outside of the outbreak epicenter, Wuhan, China, makes “more conservative assumptions” about the window of symptom onset and potential for continued exposure, compared with analyses in previous studies, the researchers wrote.

The estimated incubation period for SARS-CoV-2 in the 181-patient study was a median of 5.1 days, which is comparable with previous estimates based on COVID-19 cases outside of Wuhan and consistent with other known human coronavirus diseases, such as SARS, which had a reported mean incubation period of 5 days, Dr. Lauer and colleagues noted.

Symptoms developed within 11.5 days for 97.5% of patients in the study.

Whether it’s acceptable to have 101 out of 10,000 cases becoming symptomatic beyond the recommended quarantine window depends on two factors, according to the authors. The first is the expected infection risk in the population that is being monitored, and the second is “judgment about the cost of missing cases,” wrote the authors.

In an interview, Aaron Eli Glatt, MD, chair of medicine at Mount Sinai South Nassau, Oceanside, N.Y., said that in practical terms, the results suggest that the majority of patients with COVID-19 will be identified within 14 days, with an “outside chance” of an infected individual leaving quarantine and transmitting virus for a short period of time before becoming symptomatic.

“I think the proper message to give those patients [who are asymptomatic upon leaving quarantine] is, ‘after 14 days, we’re pretty sure you’re out of the woods, but should you get any symptoms, immediately requarantine yourself and seek medical care,” he said.

Study coauthor Kyra H. Grantz, a doctoral graduate student at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said that extending a quarantine beyond 14 days might be considered in the highest-risk scenarios, though the benefits of doing so would have to be weighed against the costs to public health and to the individuals under quarantine.

“Our estimate of the incubation period definitely supports the 14-day recommendation that the CDC has been using,” she said in an interview.

Dr. Grantz emphasized that the estimate of 101 out of 10,000 cases developing symptoms after day 14 of active monitoring – representing the 99th percentile of cases – assumes the “most conservative, worst-case scenario” in a population that is fully infected.

“If you’re looking at a following a cohort of 1,000 people whom you think may have been exposed, only a certain percentage will be infected, and only a certain percentage of those will even develop symptoms – before we get to this idea of how many people would we miss,” she said.

The study was supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, and the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. Four authors reported disclosures related to those entities, and the remaining five reported no conflicts of interest.
 

SOURCE: Lauer SA et al. Ann Intern Med. 2020 Mar 9. doi:10.1101/2020.02.02.20020016.

Although a 14-day quarantine after exposure to novel coronavirus is “well supported” by evidence, some infected individuals will not become symptomatic until after that period, according to authors of a recent analysis published in Annals of Internal Medicine.

Most individuals infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) will develop symptoms by day 12 of the infection, which is within the 14-day period of active monitoring currently recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the authors wrote.

However, an estimated 101 out of 10,000 cases could become symptomatic after the end of that 14-day monitoring period, they cautioned.

“Our analyses do not preclude that estimate from being higher,” said the investigators, led by Stephen A. Lauer, PhD, MD, of Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore.

The analysis, based on 181 confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) that were documented outside of the outbreak epicenter, Wuhan, China, makes “more conservative assumptions” about the window of symptom onset and potential for continued exposure, compared with analyses in previous studies, the researchers wrote.

The estimated incubation period for SARS-CoV-2 in the 181-patient study was a median of 5.1 days, which is comparable with previous estimates based on COVID-19 cases outside of Wuhan and consistent with other known human coronavirus diseases, such as SARS, which had a reported mean incubation period of 5 days, Dr. Lauer and colleagues noted.

Symptoms developed within 11.5 days for 97.5% of patients in the study.

Whether it’s acceptable to have 101 out of 10,000 cases becoming symptomatic beyond the recommended quarantine window depends on two factors, according to the authors. The first is the expected infection risk in the population that is being monitored, and the second is “judgment about the cost of missing cases,” wrote the authors.

In an interview, Aaron Eli Glatt, MD, chair of medicine at Mount Sinai South Nassau, Oceanside, N.Y., said that in practical terms, the results suggest that the majority of patients with COVID-19 will be identified within 14 days, with an “outside chance” of an infected individual leaving quarantine and transmitting virus for a short period of time before becoming symptomatic.

“I think the proper message to give those patients [who are asymptomatic upon leaving quarantine] is, ‘after 14 days, we’re pretty sure you’re out of the woods, but should you get any symptoms, immediately requarantine yourself and seek medical care,” he said.

Study coauthor Kyra H. Grantz, a doctoral graduate student at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said that extending a quarantine beyond 14 days might be considered in the highest-risk scenarios, though the benefits of doing so would have to be weighed against the costs to public health and to the individuals under quarantine.

“Our estimate of the incubation period definitely supports the 14-day recommendation that the CDC has been using,” she said in an interview.

Dr. Grantz emphasized that the estimate of 101 out of 10,000 cases developing symptoms after day 14 of active monitoring – representing the 99th percentile of cases – assumes the “most conservative, worst-case scenario” in a population that is fully infected.

“If you’re looking at a following a cohort of 1,000 people whom you think may have been exposed, only a certain percentage will be infected, and only a certain percentage of those will even develop symptoms – before we get to this idea of how many people would we miss,” she said.

The study was supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, and the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. Four authors reported disclosures related to those entities, and the remaining five reported no conflicts of interest.
 

SOURCE: Lauer SA et al. Ann Intern Med. 2020 Mar 9. doi:10.1101/2020.02.02.20020016.

You learned a lot of things in medical school. But there must have been some things that you unlearned on the way to your degree. For instance, you unlearned that you could catch a cold by playing outside on a cold damp day without your jacket. You unlearned that handling a toad would give you warts.

©KatarzynaBialasiewicz/Thinkstock

The authors of a recent study suggest that over your 4 years in medical school you also unlearned how to be empathetic (“Does Empathy Decline in the Clinical Phase of Medical Education? A Nationwide, Multi-institutional, Cross-Sectional Study of Students at DO-Granting Medical Schools,” Acad Med. 2020 Jan 21. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003175). The researchers surveyed more than 10,000 medical students at nearly 50 DO-granting medical schools using standardized questionnaire called the Jefferson Scale of Empathy. They discovered that the students in the clinical phase (years 3 and 4) had lower “empathy scores” than the students in the preclinical phase of their education (years 1 and 2). This decline was statistically significant but “negligible” in magnitude. One wonders why they even chose to publish their results, particularly when the number of respondents to the web-based survey declined with each successive year in medical school. Having looked at the a sample of some of the questions being asked, I can understand why third- and fourth-year students couldn’t be bothered to respond. They were too busy to answer a few dozen “lame” questions.

There may be a decline in empathy over the course our medical training, but I’m not sure that this study can speak to it. An older study found that although medical students scores on a self-administered scale declined between the second and third year, the observed empathetic behavior actually increased. If I had to choose, I would lean more heavily on the results of the behavioral observations.

Certainly, we all changed over the course of our medical education. Including postgraduate training, it may have lasted a decade or more. We saw hundreds of patients, observed life and death on a scale and with an intensity that most of us previously had never experienced. Our perspective changed from being a naive observer to playing the role of an active participant. Did that change include a decline in our capacity for empathy?

Something had to change. We found quickly that we didn’t have the time or emotional energy to learn as much about the person hiding behind every complaint as we once thought we should. We had to cut corners. Sometimes we cut too many. On the other hand, as we saw more patients we may have learned more efficient ways of discovering what we needed to know about them to become an effective and caring physician. If we found ourselves in a specialty in which patients have a high mortality, we were forced to learn ways of protecting ourselves from the emotional damage.

What would you call this process? Was it empathy erosion? Was it a hardening or toughening? Or was it simply maturation? Whatever term you use, it was an obligatory process if we hoped to survive. However, not all of us have done it well. Some of us have narrowed our focus to see only the complaint and the diagnosis, and we too often fail to see the human hiding in plain sight.

For those of us who completed our training with our empathy intact, was this the result of a genetic gift or the atmosphere our parents had created at home? I suspect that in most cases our capacity for empathy as physicians was nurtured and enhanced by the role models we encountered during our training. The mentors we most revered were those who had already been through the annealing process of medical school and specialty training and become even more skilled at caring than when they left college. It is an intangible that can’t be taught. Sadly, there is no way of guaranteeing that everyone who enters medical school will be exposed to or benefit from even one of these master physicians.
 

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].

You learned a lot of things in medical school. But there must have been some things that you unlearned on the way to your degree. For instance, you unlearned that you could catch a cold by playing outside on a cold damp day without your jacket. You unlearned that handling a toad would give you warts.

©KatarzynaBialasiewicz/Thinkstock

The authors of a recent study suggest that over your 4 years in medical school you also unlearned how to be empathetic (“Does Empathy Decline in the Clinical Phase of Medical Education? A Nationwide, Multi-institutional, Cross-Sectional Study of Students at DO-Granting Medical Schools,” Acad Med. 2020 Jan 21. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003175). The researchers surveyed more than 10,000 medical students at nearly 50 DO-granting medical schools using standardized questionnaire called the Jefferson Scale of Empathy. They discovered that the students in the clinical phase (years 3 and 4) had lower “empathy scores” than the students in the preclinical phase of their education (years 1 and 2). This decline was statistically significant but “negligible” in magnitude. One wonders why they even chose to publish their results, particularly when the number of respondents to the web-based survey declined with each successive year in medical school. Having looked at the a sample of some of the questions being asked, I can understand why third- and fourth-year students couldn’t be bothered to respond. They were too busy to answer a few dozen “lame” questions.

There may be a decline in empathy over the course our medical training, but I’m not sure that this study can speak to it. An older study found that although medical students scores on a self-administered scale declined between the second and third year, the observed empathetic behavior actually increased. If I had to choose, I would lean more heavily on the results of the behavioral observations.

Certainly, we all changed over the course of our medical education. Including postgraduate training, it may have lasted a decade or more. We saw hundreds of patients, observed life and death on a scale and with an intensity that most of us previously had never experienced. Our perspective changed from being a naive observer to playing the role of an active participant. Did that change include a decline in our capacity for empathy?

Something had to change. We found quickly that we didn’t have the time or emotional energy to learn as much about the person hiding behind every complaint as we once thought we should. We had to cut corners. Sometimes we cut too many. On the other hand, as we saw more patients we may have learned more efficient ways of discovering what we needed to know about them to become an effective and caring physician. If we found ourselves in a specialty in which patients have a high mortality, we were forced to learn ways of protecting ourselves from the emotional damage.

What would you call this process? Was it empathy erosion? Was it a hardening or toughening? Or was it simply maturation? Whatever term you use, it was an obligatory process if we hoped to survive. However, not all of us have done it well. Some of us have narrowed our focus to see only the complaint and the diagnosis, and we too often fail to see the human hiding in plain sight.

For those of us who completed our training with our empathy intact, was this the result of a genetic gift or the atmosphere our parents had created at home? I suspect that in most cases our capacity for empathy as physicians was nurtured and enhanced by the role models we encountered during our training. The mentors we most revered were those who had already been through the annealing process of medical school and specialty training and become even more skilled at caring than when they left college. It is an intangible that can’t be taught. Sadly, there is no way of guaranteeing that everyone who enters medical school will be exposed to or benefit from even one of these master physicians.
 

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].

You learned a lot of things in medical school. But there must have been some things that you unlearned on the way to your degree. For instance, you unlearned that you could catch a cold by playing outside on a cold damp day without your jacket. You unlearned that handling a toad would give you warts.

©KatarzynaBialasiewicz/Thinkstock

The authors of a recent study suggest that over your 4 years in medical school you also unlearned how to be empathetic (“Does Empathy Decline in the Clinical Phase of Medical Education? A Nationwide, Multi-institutional, Cross-Sectional Study of Students at DO-Granting Medical Schools,” Acad Med. 2020 Jan 21. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003175). The researchers surveyed more than 10,000 medical students at nearly 50 DO-granting medical schools using standardized questionnaire called the Jefferson Scale of Empathy. They discovered that the students in the clinical phase (years 3 and 4) had lower “empathy scores” than the students in the preclinical phase of their education (years 1 and 2). This decline was statistically significant but “negligible” in magnitude. One wonders why they even chose to publish their results, particularly when the number of respondents to the web-based survey declined with each successive year in medical school. Having looked at the a sample of some of the questions being asked, I can understand why third- and fourth-year students couldn’t be bothered to respond. They were too busy to answer a few dozen “lame” questions.

There may be a decline in empathy over the course our medical training, but I’m not sure that this study can speak to it. An older study found that although medical students scores on a self-administered scale declined between the second and third year, the observed empathetic behavior actually increased. If I had to choose, I would lean more heavily on the results of the behavioral observations.

Certainly, we all changed over the course of our medical education. Including postgraduate training, it may have lasted a decade or more. We saw hundreds of patients, observed life and death on a scale and with an intensity that most of us previously had never experienced. Our perspective changed from being a naive observer to playing the role of an active participant. Did that change include a decline in our capacity for empathy?

Something had to change. We found quickly that we didn’t have the time or emotional energy to learn as much about the person hiding behind every complaint as we once thought we should. We had to cut corners. Sometimes we cut too many. On the other hand, as we saw more patients we may have learned more efficient ways of discovering what we needed to know about them to become an effective and caring physician. If we found ourselves in a specialty in which patients have a high mortality, we were forced to learn ways of protecting ourselves from the emotional damage.

What would you call this process? Was it empathy erosion? Was it a hardening or toughening? Or was it simply maturation? Whatever term you use, it was an obligatory process if we hoped to survive. However, not all of us have done it well. Some of us have narrowed our focus to see only the complaint and the diagnosis, and we too often fail to see the human hiding in plain sight.

For those of us who completed our training with our empathy intact, was this the result of a genetic gift or the atmosphere our parents had created at home? I suspect that in most cases our capacity for empathy as physicians was nurtured and enhanced by the role models we encountered during our training. The mentors we most revered were those who had already been through the annealing process of medical school and specialty training and become even more skilled at caring than when they left college. It is an intangible that can’t be taught. Sadly, there is no way of guaranteeing that everyone who enters medical school will be exposed to or benefit from even one of these master physicians.
 

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].

LONDON – Disrupting how microorganisms communicate with each other could be a way to overcome antibiotic resistance and to help heal chronic wounds in patients with epidermolysis bullosa (EB), according to presenters at the EB World Congress, organized by the Dystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa Association (DEBRA).

The majority of chronic wounds in patients with EB are colonized with microorganisms, with a predominance of Staphylococcus species, said Erik Gerner, an industrial PhD student at Mölnlycke Health Care in Gothenburg, Sweden, and Gothenburg University.

Because of the growing problem of antibiotic resistance, alternative treatments are needed, and one possible alternative for treating infected wounds could be interfering with quorum sensing, the cell-to-cell communication used by bacteria, he said. He is hoping to explore this possibility as a novel treatment strategy for infected wounds.

“Quorum sensing is defined as the ability to detect and respond to population density,” Mr. Gerner said, noting that, when there is a sufficient density of bacteria, “they start to communicate with each other.” This enables them to act as a community and perform actions that they could not do as individual cells. Such actions include forming biofilms, which helps protect bacteria from their environment, such as the immune system. Other actions include collectively switching on the production of virulence factors and becoming resistant to treatments.

“Bacteria use quorum sensing to act collectively,” Mr. Gerner said. “If we could shut down this quorum sensing system, it would be very beneficial … and increase the chances to heal the wound.”

The quorum sensing system is based on the production of signaling molecules called AHL (N-acyl homoserine lactones), which are constantly produced at a low rate. This isn’t a problem until the level of bacteria increases and the level of quorum sensing breaches a threshold, he explained.

There are several benefits of inhibiting bacterial communication through disrupting quorum sensing, namely, “a low risk of resistance,” Mr. Gerner said. There is also potentially less toxin production by bacteria, and this could help the immune system in killing the invading bacteria.

One approach to disrupting quorum testing that Mr. Gerner has been investigating is the use of sodium salicylate (NaSa). So far, preclinical work shows that NaSa can reduce toxin production but not the growth rate of bacteria. The advantage of using NaSa is that it is nontoxic to human dermal fibroblasts, with similar results seen in human keratinocytes and immune cells. His work to date has shown that NaSa reduced activity of NF-kB (a proinflammatory signaling pathway) in differentiated and lipopolysaccharide-stimulated monocytes; NF-kB activated production of proinflammatory cytokines (such as interleukin-1 beta and IL-6) are elevated in EB wounds. “My studies support the bodies of evidence that bacteria use quorum sensing to coordinate … and to produce a large number of toxic factors,” Mr. Gerner concluded. Future studies will look at the potential of NaSa to disrupt this activity.
 

Skin microbiome of EB wounds

Understanding what bacteria most commonly colonize wounds in patients with EB was the subject of two unrelated presentations at the EB World Congress. Liat Samuelov, MD, of the department of molecular dermatology at Tel Aviv (Israel) Sourasky Medical Center, presented data on skin microbiome characteristics in eight patients with recessive dystrophic EB (RDEB). This showed that there was reduced bacterial diversity in wounds, and a “progressive development of dysbiosis across different stages of DEB wound formation.”

The skin microbiome has been implicated in several skin diseases, Dr. Samuelov and associates observed in a poster presentation. That includes the autoimmune blistering disease bullous pemphigoid (Exp Dermatol. 2017 Dec;26[12]:1221-7). “Colonization of DEB chronic wounds may lead to systemic infections, result in delayed healing, and possibly be involved in the development of squamous cell carcinoma,” they noted in the poster, “thus accurate delineation of the dysbiotic profile … may point to corrective measures of great therapeutic potential.”

The aim was to see what microorganisms were present in the chronic wounds of the patients. To be included in the study, patients must not have had any antibiotic treatment – oral or topical – in the past 6 months. Samples were taken from an untreated wound, around the wound, and from uninvolved skin, which were compared with samples taken from similar areas in age-matched controls.

Reduced bacterial diversity was observed in RDEB wounds, compared with uninvolved or perilesional areas and the skin of control subjects, Dr. Samuelov said in an oral presentation of the study results. There was increased abundance of Staphylococcus epidermidis and decreased Cutibacterium acnes, which she noted was in contrast to other studies where S. aureus was the most common colonizer in RDEB wounds.

Bacterial composition in each group was calculated using the beta-diversity score, while control samples showed similar microbial composition, the DEB samples had no microbial similarities among different samples. These data “suggest the need to ascertain the potential therapeutic benefit of interventions aimed at restoring normal microbiome composition in DEB,” Dr. Samuelov concluded.

Wound colonization and squamous cell carcinoma

Other research on wound microbiology was presented by Laura E. Levin, MD, a dermatologist at New York–Presbyterian, and associates. “Given the potential role of bacteria-induced inflammation in the development of wound-associated SCC [squamous cell carcinoma] in a subset of patients, we sought to improve our understanding of what microbes colonize and infect the wounds of patients with epidermolysis bullosa,” they explained in their poster.

The researchers, from New York–Presbyterian Morgan Stanley Children’s Hospital and Columbia University Irvine Medical Center, New York, presented data from a retrospective analysis of 739 wound cultures taken between 2001 and 2017 from 158 patients enrolled in the Epidermolysis Bullosa Clinical Characterization and Outcomes Database. In the analysis, just under 70% of patients had DEB, of which 90% were of the RDEB subtype; 13% had EB simplex, 14% had junctional EB, and 3% had an unknown EB subtype.

At least one organism grew in 87% of cultures, with the most common microorganism isolated being Staphylococcus aureus (84% of cultures). Other commonly isolated microbes were Pseudomonas aeruginosa in 35% of cultures, Streptococcus group A in 34% of cultures (of which 22% were Streptococcus pyogenes), Corynebacterium species in 31% of cultures, and Proteus species in 18% of cultures.

“Improved understanding of what microbes are colonizing the wounds of our patients may help improve antibiotic stewardship,” the researchers stated.

Looking at the antibiotic susceptibilities, Dr. Levin and associates found that 68% of 115 cultures were sensitive to methicillin and 60% of 15 cultures were sensitive to mupirocin. “Resistance to many systemic and topical antibiotic agents in EB patients supports surveillance cultures with routine testing for mupirocin susceptibility,” they suggested.

A total of 23 patients developed SCC of whom 10 had cultures that grew S. aureus (90%) and P. aeruginosa (50%), and Proteus species (20%). Among the patients who did not develop SCC, the respective cultures positive for each of those microorganisms were 83%, 34%, and 11%. Perhaps “gram-negative and flagellated organisms may be more common in wounds of patients at risk for SCC,” they observed, adding that further studies were needed to determine if “wound microbiome interventions inhibit the risk of development of SCC and improve outcomes.”

Mr. Gerner’s research is supported by Mölnlycke Health Care. Dr. Samuelov had no disclosures. The work by Dr. Levin and associates is supported by the Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance, EB Research Partnership, and the Epidermolysis Bullosa Medical Research Foundation.

LONDON – Disrupting how microorganisms communicate with each other could be a way to overcome antibiotic resistance and to help heal chronic wounds in patients with epidermolysis bullosa (EB), according to presenters at the EB World Congress, organized by the Dystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa Association (DEBRA).

The majority of chronic wounds in patients with EB are colonized with microorganisms, with a predominance of Staphylococcus species, said Erik Gerner, an industrial PhD student at Mölnlycke Health Care in Gothenburg, Sweden, and Gothenburg University.

Because of the growing problem of antibiotic resistance, alternative treatments are needed, and one possible alternative for treating infected wounds could be interfering with quorum sensing, the cell-to-cell communication used by bacteria, he said. He is hoping to explore this possibility as a novel treatment strategy for infected wounds.

“Quorum sensing is defined as the ability to detect and respond to population density,” Mr. Gerner said, noting that, when there is a sufficient density of bacteria, “they start to communicate with each other.” This enables them to act as a community and perform actions that they could not do as individual cells. Such actions include forming biofilms, which helps protect bacteria from their environment, such as the immune system. Other actions include collectively switching on the production of virulence factors and becoming resistant to treatments.

“Bacteria use quorum sensing to act collectively,” Mr. Gerner said. “If we could shut down this quorum sensing system, it would be very beneficial … and increase the chances to heal the wound.”

The quorum sensing system is based on the production of signaling molecules called AHL (N-acyl homoserine lactones), which are constantly produced at a low rate. This isn’t a problem until the level of bacteria increases and the level of quorum sensing breaches a threshold, he explained.

There are several benefits of inhibiting bacterial communication through disrupting quorum sensing, namely, “a low risk of resistance,” Mr. Gerner said. There is also potentially less toxin production by bacteria, and this could help the immune system in killing the invading bacteria.

One approach to disrupting quorum testing that Mr. Gerner has been investigating is the use of sodium salicylate (NaSa). So far, preclinical work shows that NaSa can reduce toxin production but not the growth rate of bacteria. The advantage of using NaSa is that it is nontoxic to human dermal fibroblasts, with similar results seen in human keratinocytes and immune cells. His work to date has shown that NaSa reduced activity of NF-kB (a proinflammatory signaling pathway) in differentiated and lipopolysaccharide-stimulated monocytes; NF-kB activated production of proinflammatory cytokines (such as interleukin-1 beta and IL-6) are elevated in EB wounds. “My studies support the bodies of evidence that bacteria use quorum sensing to coordinate … and to produce a large number of toxic factors,” Mr. Gerner concluded. Future studies will look at the potential of NaSa to disrupt this activity.
 

Skin microbiome of EB wounds

Understanding what bacteria most commonly colonize wounds in patients with EB was the subject of two unrelated presentations at the EB World Congress. Liat Samuelov, MD, of the department of molecular dermatology at Tel Aviv (Israel) Sourasky Medical Center, presented data on skin microbiome characteristics in eight patients with recessive dystrophic EB (RDEB). This showed that there was reduced bacterial diversity in wounds, and a “progressive development of dysbiosis across different stages of DEB wound formation.”

The skin microbiome has been implicated in several skin diseases, Dr. Samuelov and associates observed in a poster presentation. That includes the autoimmune blistering disease bullous pemphigoid (Exp Dermatol. 2017 Dec;26[12]:1221-7). “Colonization of DEB chronic wounds may lead to systemic infections, result in delayed healing, and possibly be involved in the development of squamous cell carcinoma,” they noted in the poster, “thus accurate delineation of the dysbiotic profile … may point to corrective measures of great therapeutic potential.”

The aim was to see what microorganisms were present in the chronic wounds of the patients. To be included in the study, patients must not have had any antibiotic treatment – oral or topical – in the past 6 months. Samples were taken from an untreated wound, around the wound, and from uninvolved skin, which were compared with samples taken from similar areas in age-matched controls.

Reduced bacterial diversity was observed in RDEB wounds, compared with uninvolved or perilesional areas and the skin of control subjects, Dr. Samuelov said in an oral presentation of the study results. There was increased abundance of Staphylococcus epidermidis and decreased Cutibacterium acnes, which she noted was in contrast to other studies where S. aureus was the most common colonizer in RDEB wounds.

Bacterial composition in each group was calculated using the beta-diversity score, while control samples showed similar microbial composition, the DEB samples had no microbial similarities among different samples. These data “suggest the need to ascertain the potential therapeutic benefit of interventions aimed at restoring normal microbiome composition in DEB,” Dr. Samuelov concluded.

Wound colonization and squamous cell carcinoma

Other research on wound microbiology was presented by Laura E. Levin, MD, a dermatologist at New York–Presbyterian, and associates. “Given the potential role of bacteria-induced inflammation in the development of wound-associated SCC [squamous cell carcinoma] in a subset of patients, we sought to improve our understanding of what microbes colonize and infect the wounds of patients with epidermolysis bullosa,” they explained in their poster.

The researchers, from New York–Presbyterian Morgan Stanley Children’s Hospital and Columbia University Irvine Medical Center, New York, presented data from a retrospective analysis of 739 wound cultures taken between 2001 and 2017 from 158 patients enrolled in the Epidermolysis Bullosa Clinical Characterization and Outcomes Database. In the analysis, just under 70% of patients had DEB, of which 90% were of the RDEB subtype; 13% had EB simplex, 14% had junctional EB, and 3% had an unknown EB subtype.

At least one organism grew in 87% of cultures, with the most common microorganism isolated being Staphylococcus aureus (84% of cultures). Other commonly isolated microbes were Pseudomonas aeruginosa in 35% of cultures, Streptococcus group A in 34% of cultures (of which 22% were Streptococcus pyogenes), Corynebacterium species in 31% of cultures, and Proteus species in 18% of cultures.

“Improved understanding of what microbes are colonizing the wounds of our patients may help improve antibiotic stewardship,” the researchers stated.

Looking at the antibiotic susceptibilities, Dr. Levin and associates found that 68% of 115 cultures were sensitive to methicillin and 60% of 15 cultures were sensitive to mupirocin. “Resistance to many systemic and topical antibiotic agents in EB patients supports surveillance cultures with routine testing for mupirocin susceptibility,” they suggested.

A total of 23 patients developed SCC of whom 10 had cultures that grew S. aureus (90%) and P. aeruginosa (50%), and Proteus species (20%). Among the patients who did not develop SCC, the respective cultures positive for each of those microorganisms were 83%, 34%, and 11%. Perhaps “gram-negative and flagellated organisms may be more common in wounds of patients at risk for SCC,” they observed, adding that further studies were needed to determine if “wound microbiome interventions inhibit the risk of development of SCC and improve outcomes.”

Mr. Gerner’s research is supported by Mölnlycke Health Care. Dr. Samuelov had no disclosures. The work by Dr. Levin and associates is supported by the Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance, EB Research Partnership, and the Epidermolysis Bullosa Medical Research Foundation.

LONDON – Disrupting how microorganisms communicate with each other could be a way to overcome antibiotic resistance and to help heal chronic wounds in patients with epidermolysis bullosa (EB), according to presenters at the EB World Congress, organized by the Dystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa Association (DEBRA).

The majority of chronic wounds in patients with EB are colonized with microorganisms, with a predominance of Staphylococcus species, said Erik Gerner, an industrial PhD student at Mölnlycke Health Care in Gothenburg, Sweden, and Gothenburg University.

Because of the growing problem of antibiotic resistance, alternative treatments are needed, and one possible alternative for treating infected wounds could be interfering with quorum sensing, the cell-to-cell communication used by bacteria, he said. He is hoping to explore this possibility as a novel treatment strategy for infected wounds.

“Quorum sensing is defined as the ability to detect and respond to population density,” Mr. Gerner said, noting that, when there is a sufficient density of bacteria, “they start to communicate with each other.” This enables them to act as a community and perform actions that they could not do as individual cells. Such actions include forming biofilms, which helps protect bacteria from their environment, such as the immune system. Other actions include collectively switching on the production of virulence factors and becoming resistant to treatments.

“Bacteria use quorum sensing to act collectively,” Mr. Gerner said. “If we could shut down this quorum sensing system, it would be very beneficial … and increase the chances to heal the wound.”

The quorum sensing system is based on the production of signaling molecules called AHL (N-acyl homoserine lactones), which are constantly produced at a low rate. This isn’t a problem until the level of bacteria increases and the level of quorum sensing breaches a threshold, he explained.

There are several benefits of inhibiting bacterial communication through disrupting quorum sensing, namely, “a low risk of resistance,” Mr. Gerner said. There is also potentially less toxin production by bacteria, and this could help the immune system in killing the invading bacteria.

One approach to disrupting quorum testing that Mr. Gerner has been investigating is the use of sodium salicylate (NaSa). So far, preclinical work shows that NaSa can reduce toxin production but not the growth rate of bacteria. The advantage of using NaSa is that it is nontoxic to human dermal fibroblasts, with similar results seen in human keratinocytes and immune cells. His work to date has shown that NaSa reduced activity of NF-kB (a proinflammatory signaling pathway) in differentiated and lipopolysaccharide-stimulated monocytes; NF-kB activated production of proinflammatory cytokines (such as interleukin-1 beta and IL-6) are elevated in EB wounds. “My studies support the bodies of evidence that bacteria use quorum sensing to coordinate … and to produce a large number of toxic factors,” Mr. Gerner concluded. Future studies will look at the potential of NaSa to disrupt this activity.
 

Skin microbiome of EB wounds

Understanding what bacteria most commonly colonize wounds in patients with EB was the subject of two unrelated presentations at the EB World Congress. Liat Samuelov, MD, of the department of molecular dermatology at Tel Aviv (Israel) Sourasky Medical Center, presented data on skin microbiome characteristics in eight patients with recessive dystrophic EB (RDEB). This showed that there was reduced bacterial diversity in wounds, and a “progressive development of dysbiosis across different stages of DEB wound formation.”

The skin microbiome has been implicated in several skin diseases, Dr. Samuelov and associates observed in a poster presentation. That includes the autoimmune blistering disease bullous pemphigoid (Exp Dermatol. 2017 Dec;26[12]:1221-7). “Colonization of DEB chronic wounds may lead to systemic infections, result in delayed healing, and possibly be involved in the development of squamous cell carcinoma,” they noted in the poster, “thus accurate delineation of the dysbiotic profile … may point to corrective measures of great therapeutic potential.”

The aim was to see what microorganisms were present in the chronic wounds of the patients. To be included in the study, patients must not have had any antibiotic treatment – oral or topical – in the past 6 months. Samples were taken from an untreated wound, around the wound, and from uninvolved skin, which were compared with samples taken from similar areas in age-matched controls.

Reduced bacterial diversity was observed in RDEB wounds, compared with uninvolved or perilesional areas and the skin of control subjects, Dr. Samuelov said in an oral presentation of the study results. There was increased abundance of Staphylococcus epidermidis and decreased Cutibacterium acnes, which she noted was in contrast to other studies where S. aureus was the most common colonizer in RDEB wounds.

Bacterial composition in each group was calculated using the beta-diversity score, while control samples showed similar microbial composition, the DEB samples had no microbial similarities among different samples. These data “suggest the need to ascertain the potential therapeutic benefit of interventions aimed at restoring normal microbiome composition in DEB,” Dr. Samuelov concluded.

Wound colonization and squamous cell carcinoma

Other research on wound microbiology was presented by Laura E. Levin, MD, a dermatologist at New York–Presbyterian, and associates. “Given the potential role of bacteria-induced inflammation in the development of wound-associated SCC [squamous cell carcinoma] in a subset of patients, we sought to improve our understanding of what microbes colonize and infect the wounds of patients with epidermolysis bullosa,” they explained in their poster.

The researchers, from New York–Presbyterian Morgan Stanley Children’s Hospital and Columbia University Irvine Medical Center, New York, presented data from a retrospective analysis of 739 wound cultures taken between 2001 and 2017 from 158 patients enrolled in the Epidermolysis Bullosa Clinical Characterization and Outcomes Database. In the analysis, just under 70% of patients had DEB, of which 90% were of the RDEB subtype; 13% had EB simplex, 14% had junctional EB, and 3% had an unknown EB subtype.

At least one organism grew in 87% of cultures, with the most common microorganism isolated being Staphylococcus aureus (84% of cultures). Other commonly isolated microbes were Pseudomonas aeruginosa in 35% of cultures, Streptococcus group A in 34% of cultures (of which 22% were Streptococcus pyogenes), Corynebacterium species in 31% of cultures, and Proteus species in 18% of cultures.

“Improved understanding of what microbes are colonizing the wounds of our patients may help improve antibiotic stewardship,” the researchers stated.

Looking at the antibiotic susceptibilities, Dr. Levin and associates found that 68% of 115 cultures were sensitive to methicillin and 60% of 15 cultures were sensitive to mupirocin. “Resistance to many systemic and topical antibiotic agents in EB patients supports surveillance cultures with routine testing for mupirocin susceptibility,” they suggested.

A total of 23 patients developed SCC of whom 10 had cultures that grew S. aureus (90%) and P. aeruginosa (50%), and Proteus species (20%). Among the patients who did not develop SCC, the respective cultures positive for each of those microorganisms were 83%, 34%, and 11%. Perhaps “gram-negative and flagellated organisms may be more common in wounds of patients at risk for SCC,” they observed, adding that further studies were needed to determine if “wound microbiome interventions inhibit the risk of development of SCC and improve outcomes.”

Mr. Gerner’s research is supported by Mölnlycke Health Care. Dr. Samuelov had no disclosures. The work by Dr. Levin and associates is supported by the Pediatric Dermatology Research Alliance, EB Research Partnership, and the Epidermolysis Bullosa Medical Research Foundation.

ORLANDO – Biotin is the most popular consumer supplement for alopecia and highly popular online, but should patients be taking it?

Patients may want something “natural” to treat their hair loss, but “natural is not always good,” Amy McMichael, MD, professor and chair of the department of dermatology at Wake Forest Baptist Health, Winston-Salem, N.C., said at the ODAC Dermatology, Aesthetic, & Surgical Conference.

Dosages of commercially available biotin supplements can vary significantly, with some doses as high as 10,000 mcg, making supraphysiological dosing possible. Dr. McMichael said that, not only is biotin unlikely to help with a patient’s alopecia, but a high intake of biotin can interfere with certain assays that use streptavidin-biotin capture techniques (Clin Chem Lab Med. 2017 May 1;55[6]:817-25). This could present a problem for a patient who experiences an MI or has a thyroid disorder where a high level of biotin could affect lab results, she noted.

Dr. McMichael advises patients that there is a low likelihood that biotin will help their hair loss, and suggests that they stop taking the supplements, noting that all hair supplements contain biotin.

Questioning side effects of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors

Research in the early 2010s associated the 5-alpha reductase inhibitor finasteride with persistent sexual side effects and depression. But a later meta-analysis of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial and other trials did not find evidence of persistent sexual side effects or depression in men on finasteride, and the authors said that double-blind, placebo-controlled studies were needed (J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2014 Dec;7[12]:51-5).

However, two meta-analyses of 34 clinical trials published in 2015 found that none of the clinical trials evaluating finasteride treatment in patients with androgenic alopecia had accurate safety reporting (JAMA Dermatol. 2015 Jun;151[6]:600-6). Another study published by the same group in 2017 found that 0.8% of men aged 16-42 years to exposed to a 5-alpha reductase inhibitor developed persistent erectile dysfunction after a longer duration of exposure (median, 1,534 days). compared with a shorter duration of exposure (PeerJ. 2017 Mar 9;5:e3020).

The bottom line when considering use of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors in men is to discuss the outlier data on persistent sexual dysfunction in the studies, ask patients whether they have a history of sexual dysfunction and depression, and then only treat appropriate patients with no such history, Dr. McMichael said.

Use of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors also appears to be related to an increased risk of type 2 diabetes in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia, according to more recent data. In a study of patients in the U.K. Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Taiwanese National Health Insurance Research Database who received dutasteride, finasteride, or the alpha blocker tamsulosin, there was a slightly increased risk of type 2 diabetes among those who took the two 5-alpha reductase inhibitors, compared with those on tamsulosin (BMJ. 2019;365:l1204). In light of these results, Dr. McMichael advised clinicians to be aware of these risks and to consider screening patients for type 2 diabetes and ask them about their family history, but the results shouldn’t affect patients at risk for type 2 diabetes or metabolic disorder.
 

JAK inhibitors for alopecia areata

Within the past few years, promising results for Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors like tofacitinib and ruxolitinib for alopecia areata have been reported, but they are currently not a first-line therapy, Dr. McMichael said. Consider methotrexate first in older adolescents and adults with more than 50% hair loss, followed by a JAK inhibitor if there is no improvement or methotrexate is not tolerated well.

Clinicians can consider enrolling their patients in a clinical trial to give them access to JAK inhibitors as a treatment option, she noted, and if a trial is not available, it may be worth appealing to an insurance company using an article titled “Alopecia areata is a medical disease” coauthored by Dr. McMichael and others (Am Acad Dermatol. 2018 Apr;78[4]:832-4). After two denials by insurance, the manufacturer’s patient assistance program (Xelsource) may be helpful in obtaining tofacitinib (Xeljanz) through a letter and references. There are adolescent data on JAK inhibitors for alopecia, but “absolutely no data” in very young children, so prior to adolescence, she would not recommend this treatment. In a study of 13 adolescents with alopecia areata, totalis, or universalis, those treated with tofacitinib for a mean of 6.5 months, 9 had significant hair regrowth with treatment and adverse events were mild (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017 Jan;76[1]:29-32).

Dr. McMichael reports being an investigator for Allergan, Intendis, Proctor & Gamble, Samumed, Cassiopia, Concert, Aclaris, and Incyte; and is a consultant for Johnson & Johnson, Proctor & Gamble, Allergan, Bayer, Galderma, Incyte, Samumed, Aclaris, Anacor, Pfizer, Nutrafol, Bioniz, and Almirall.

ORLANDO – Biotin is the most popular consumer supplement for alopecia and highly popular online, but should patients be taking it?

Patients may want something “natural” to treat their hair loss, but “natural is not always good,” Amy McMichael, MD, professor and chair of the department of dermatology at Wake Forest Baptist Health, Winston-Salem, N.C., said at the ODAC Dermatology, Aesthetic, & Surgical Conference.

Dosages of commercially available biotin supplements can vary significantly, with some doses as high as 10,000 mcg, making supraphysiological dosing possible. Dr. McMichael said that, not only is biotin unlikely to help with a patient’s alopecia, but a high intake of biotin can interfere with certain assays that use streptavidin-biotin capture techniques (Clin Chem Lab Med. 2017 May 1;55[6]:817-25). This could present a problem for a patient who experiences an MI or has a thyroid disorder where a high level of biotin could affect lab results, she noted.

Dr. McMichael advises patients that there is a low likelihood that biotin will help their hair loss, and suggests that they stop taking the supplements, noting that all hair supplements contain biotin.

Questioning side effects of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors

Research in the early 2010s associated the 5-alpha reductase inhibitor finasteride with persistent sexual side effects and depression. But a later meta-analysis of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial and other trials did not find evidence of persistent sexual side effects or depression in men on finasteride, and the authors said that double-blind, placebo-controlled studies were needed (J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2014 Dec;7[12]:51-5).

However, two meta-analyses of 34 clinical trials published in 2015 found that none of the clinical trials evaluating finasteride treatment in patients with androgenic alopecia had accurate safety reporting (JAMA Dermatol. 2015 Jun;151[6]:600-6). Another study published by the same group in 2017 found that 0.8% of men aged 16-42 years to exposed to a 5-alpha reductase inhibitor developed persistent erectile dysfunction after a longer duration of exposure (median, 1,534 days). compared with a shorter duration of exposure (PeerJ. 2017 Mar 9;5:e3020).

The bottom line when considering use of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors in men is to discuss the outlier data on persistent sexual dysfunction in the studies, ask patients whether they have a history of sexual dysfunction and depression, and then only treat appropriate patients with no such history, Dr. McMichael said.

Use of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors also appears to be related to an increased risk of type 2 diabetes in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia, according to more recent data. In a study of patients in the U.K. Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Taiwanese National Health Insurance Research Database who received dutasteride, finasteride, or the alpha blocker tamsulosin, there was a slightly increased risk of type 2 diabetes among those who took the two 5-alpha reductase inhibitors, compared with those on tamsulosin (BMJ. 2019;365:l1204). In light of these results, Dr. McMichael advised clinicians to be aware of these risks and to consider screening patients for type 2 diabetes and ask them about their family history, but the results shouldn’t affect patients at risk for type 2 diabetes or metabolic disorder.
 

JAK inhibitors for alopecia areata

Within the past few years, promising results for Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors like tofacitinib and ruxolitinib for alopecia areata have been reported, but they are currently not a first-line therapy, Dr. McMichael said. Consider methotrexate first in older adolescents and adults with more than 50% hair loss, followed by a JAK inhibitor if there is no improvement or methotrexate is not tolerated well.

Clinicians can consider enrolling their patients in a clinical trial to give them access to JAK inhibitors as a treatment option, she noted, and if a trial is not available, it may be worth appealing to an insurance company using an article titled “Alopecia areata is a medical disease” coauthored by Dr. McMichael and others (Am Acad Dermatol. 2018 Apr;78[4]:832-4). After two denials by insurance, the manufacturer’s patient assistance program (Xelsource) may be helpful in obtaining tofacitinib (Xeljanz) through a letter and references. There are adolescent data on JAK inhibitors for alopecia, but “absolutely no data” in very young children, so prior to adolescence, she would not recommend this treatment. In a study of 13 adolescents with alopecia areata, totalis, or universalis, those treated with tofacitinib for a mean of 6.5 months, 9 had significant hair regrowth with treatment and adverse events were mild (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017 Jan;76[1]:29-32).

Dr. McMichael reports being an investigator for Allergan, Intendis, Proctor & Gamble, Samumed, Cassiopia, Concert, Aclaris, and Incyte; and is a consultant for Johnson & Johnson, Proctor & Gamble, Allergan, Bayer, Galderma, Incyte, Samumed, Aclaris, Anacor, Pfizer, Nutrafol, Bioniz, and Almirall.

ORLANDO – Biotin is the most popular consumer supplement for alopecia and highly popular online, but should patients be taking it?

Patients may want something “natural” to treat their hair loss, but “natural is not always good,” Amy McMichael, MD, professor and chair of the department of dermatology at Wake Forest Baptist Health, Winston-Salem, N.C., said at the ODAC Dermatology, Aesthetic, & Surgical Conference.

Dosages of commercially available biotin supplements can vary significantly, with some doses as high as 10,000 mcg, making supraphysiological dosing possible. Dr. McMichael said that, not only is biotin unlikely to help with a patient’s alopecia, but a high intake of biotin can interfere with certain assays that use streptavidin-biotin capture techniques (Clin Chem Lab Med. 2017 May 1;55[6]:817-25). This could present a problem for a patient who experiences an MI or has a thyroid disorder where a high level of biotin could affect lab results, she noted.

Dr. McMichael advises patients that there is a low likelihood that biotin will help their hair loss, and suggests that they stop taking the supplements, noting that all hair supplements contain biotin.

Questioning side effects of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors

Research in the early 2010s associated the 5-alpha reductase inhibitor finasteride with persistent sexual side effects and depression. But a later meta-analysis of the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial and other trials did not find evidence of persistent sexual side effects or depression in men on finasteride, and the authors said that double-blind, placebo-controlled studies were needed (J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2014 Dec;7[12]:51-5).

However, two meta-analyses of 34 clinical trials published in 2015 found that none of the clinical trials evaluating finasteride treatment in patients with androgenic alopecia had accurate safety reporting (JAMA Dermatol. 2015 Jun;151[6]:600-6). Another study published by the same group in 2017 found that 0.8% of men aged 16-42 years to exposed to a 5-alpha reductase inhibitor developed persistent erectile dysfunction after a longer duration of exposure (median, 1,534 days). compared with a shorter duration of exposure (PeerJ. 2017 Mar 9;5:e3020).

The bottom line when considering use of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors in men is to discuss the outlier data on persistent sexual dysfunction in the studies, ask patients whether they have a history of sexual dysfunction and depression, and then only treat appropriate patients with no such history, Dr. McMichael said.

Use of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors also appears to be related to an increased risk of type 2 diabetes in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia, according to more recent data. In a study of patients in the U.K. Clinical Practice Research Datalink and Taiwanese National Health Insurance Research Database who received dutasteride, finasteride, or the alpha blocker tamsulosin, there was a slightly increased risk of type 2 diabetes among those who took the two 5-alpha reductase inhibitors, compared with those on tamsulosin (BMJ. 2019;365:l1204). In light of these results, Dr. McMichael advised clinicians to be aware of these risks and to consider screening patients for type 2 diabetes and ask them about their family history, but the results shouldn’t affect patients at risk for type 2 diabetes or metabolic disorder.
 

JAK inhibitors for alopecia areata

Within the past few years, promising results for Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors like tofacitinib and ruxolitinib for alopecia areata have been reported, but they are currently not a first-line therapy, Dr. McMichael said. Consider methotrexate first in older adolescents and adults with more than 50% hair loss, followed by a JAK inhibitor if there is no improvement or methotrexate is not tolerated well.

Clinicians can consider enrolling their patients in a clinical trial to give them access to JAK inhibitors as a treatment option, she noted, and if a trial is not available, it may be worth appealing to an insurance company using an article titled “Alopecia areata is a medical disease” coauthored by Dr. McMichael and others (Am Acad Dermatol. 2018 Apr;78[4]:832-4). After two denials by insurance, the manufacturer’s patient assistance program (Xelsource) may be helpful in obtaining tofacitinib (Xeljanz) through a letter and references. There are adolescent data on JAK inhibitors for alopecia, but “absolutely no data” in very young children, so prior to adolescence, she would not recommend this treatment. In a study of 13 adolescents with alopecia areata, totalis, or universalis, those treated with tofacitinib for a mean of 6.5 months, 9 had significant hair regrowth with treatment and adverse events were mild (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017 Jan;76[1]:29-32).

Dr. McMichael reports being an investigator for Allergan, Intendis, Proctor & Gamble, Samumed, Cassiopia, Concert, Aclaris, and Incyte; and is a consultant for Johnson & Johnson, Proctor & Gamble, Allergan, Bayer, Galderma, Incyte, Samumed, Aclaris, Anacor, Pfizer, Nutrafol, Bioniz, and Almirall.