To the Editor:

The Moderna COVID-19 messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine was authorized for use on December 18, 2020, with the second dose beginning on January 15, 2021.^1-3 Some individuals who received the Moderna vaccine experienced an intense rash known as “COVID arm,” a harmless but bothersome adverse effect that typically appears within a week and is a localized and transient immunogenic response.⁴ COVID arm differs from most vaccine adverse effects. The rash emerges not immediately but 5 to 9 days after the initial dose—on average, 1 week later. Apart from being itchy, the rash does not appear to be harmful and is not a reason to hesitate getting vaccinated.

Dermatologists and allergists have been studying this adverse effect, which has been formally termed delayed cutaneous hypersensitivity. Of potential clinical consequence is that the efficacy of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine may be harmed if postvaccination dermal reactions necessitate systemic corticosteroid therapy. Because this vaccine stimulates an immune response as viral RNA integrates in cells secondary to production of the spike protein of the virus, the skin may be affected secondarily and manifestations of any underlying disease may be aggravated.⁵ We report a patient who developed a psoriasiform dermatitis after the first dose of the Moderna vaccine.

A 65-year-old woman presented to her primary care physician because of the severity of psoriasiform dermatitis that developed 5 days after she received the first dose of the Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. The patient had a medical history of Sjögren syndrome. Her medication history was negative, and her family history was negative for autoimmune disease. Physical examination by primary care revealed an erythematous scaly rash with plaques and papules on the neck and back (Figure 1). The patient presented again to primary care 2 days later with swollen, painful, discolored digits (Figure 2) and a stiff, sore neck.

Laboratory results were positive for anti–Sjögren syndrome–related antigens A and B. A complete blood cell count; comprehensive metabolic panel; erythrocyte sedimentation rate; and assays of rheumatoid factor, C-reactive protein, and anti–cyclic citrullinated peptide were within reference range. A biopsy of a lesion on the back showed psoriasiform dermatitis with confluent parakeratosis and scattered necrotic keratinocytes. There was superficial perivascular inflammation with rare eosinophils (Figure 3).

The patient was treated with a course of systemic corticosteroids. The rash resolved in 1 week. She did not receive the second dose due to the rash.

Two mRNA COVID-19 vaccines—Pfizer BioNTech and Moderna—have been granted emergency use authorization by the US Food and Drug Administration.⁶ The safety profile of the mRNA-1273 vaccine for the median 2-month follow-up showed no safety concerns.³ Minor localized adverse effects (eg, pain, redness, swelling) have been observed more frequently with the vaccines than with placebo. Systemic symptoms, such as fever, fatigue, headache, and muscle and joint pain, also were seen somewhat more often with the vaccines than with placebo; most such effects occurred 24 to 48 hours after vaccination.^3,6,7 The frequency of unsolicited adverse events and serious adverse events reported during the 28-day period after vaccination generally was similar among participants in the vaccine and placebo groups.³

There are 2 types of reactions to COVID-19 vaccination: immediate and delayed. Immediate reactions usually are due to anaphylaxis, requiring prompt recognition and treatment with epinephrine to stop rapid progression of life-threatening symptoms. Delayed reactions include localized reactions, such as urticaria and benign exanthema; serum sickness and serum sickness–like reactions; fever; and rare skin, organ, and neurologic sequelae.^1,6-8

Cutaneous manifestations, present in 16% to 50% of patients with Sjögren syndrome, are considered one of the most common extraglandular presentations of the syndrome. They are classified as nonvascular (eg, xerosis, angular cheilitis, eyelid dermatitis, annular erythema) and vascular (eg, Raynaud phenomenon, vasculitis).^9-11 Our patient did not have any of those findings. She had not taken any medications before the rash appeared, thereby ruling out a drug reaction.

The differential for our patient included post–urinary tract infection immune-reactive arthritis and rash, which is not typical with Escherichia coli infection but is described with infection with Chlamydia species and Salmonella species. Moreover, post–urinary tract infection immune-reactive arthritis and rash appear mostly on the palms and soles. Systemic lupus erythematosus–like rashes have a different histology and appear on sun-exposed areas; our patient’s rash was found mainly on unexposed areas.¹²

Because our patient received the Moderna vaccine 5 days before the rash appeared and later developed swelling of the digits with morning stiffness, a delayed serum sickness–like reaction secondary to COVID-19 vaccination was possible.^3,6

COVID-19 mRNA vaccines developed by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna incorporate a lipid-based nanoparticle carrier system that prevents rapid enzymatic degradation of mRNA and facilitates in vivo delivery of mRNA. This lipid-based nanoparticle carrier system is further stabilized by a polyethylene glycol 2000 lipid conjugate that provides a hydrophilic layer, thus prolonging half-life. The presence of lipid polyethylene glycol 2000 in mRNA vaccines has led to concern that this component could be implicated in anaphylaxis.⁶

COVID-19 antigens can give rise to varying clinical manifestations that are directly related to viral tissue damage or are indirectly induced by the antiviral immune response.^13,14 Hyperactivation of the immune system to eradicate COVID-19 may trigger autoimmunity; several immune-mediated disorders have been described in individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2. Dermal manifestations include cutaneous rash and vasculitis.^13-16 Crucial immunologic steps occur during SARS-CoV-2 infection that may link autoimmunity to COVID-19.^13,14 In preliminary published data on the efficacy of the Moderna vaccine on 45 trial enrollees, 3 did not receive the second dose of vaccination, including 1 who developed urticaria on both legs 5 days after the first dose.¹

Introduction of viral RNA can induce autoimmunity that can be explained by various phenomena, including epitope spreading, molecular mimicry, cryptic antigen, and bystander activation. Remarkably, more than one-third of immunogenic proteins in SARS-CoV-2 have potentially problematic homology to proteins that are key to the human adaptive immune system.⁵

Moreover, SARS-CoV-2 seems to induce organ injury through alternative mechanisms beyond direct viral infection, including immunologic injury. In some situations, hyperactivation of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 RNA can result in autoimmune disease. COVID-19 has been associated with immune-mediated systemic or organ-selective manifestations, some of which fulfill the diagnostic or classification criteria of specific autoimmune diseases. It is unclear whether those medical disorders are the result of transitory postinfectious epiphenomena.⁵

A few studies have shown that patients with rheumatic disease have an incidence and prevalence of COVID-19 that is similar to the general population. A similar pattern has been detected in COVID-19 morbidity and mortality rates, even among patients with an autoimmune disease, such as rheumatoid arthritis and Sjögren syndrome.^5,17 Furthermore, exacerbation of preexisting rheumatic symptoms may be due to hyperactivation of antiviral pathways in a person with an autoimmune disease.^17-19 The findings in our patient suggested a direct role for the vaccine in skin manifestations, rather than for reactivation or development of new systemic autoimmune processes, such as systemic lupus erythematosus.

Exacerbation of psoriasis following COVID-19 vaccination has been described²⁰; however, the case patient did not have a history of psoriasis. The mechanism(s) of such exacerbation remain unclear; COVID-19 vaccine–induced helper T cells (T_H17) may play a role.²¹ Other skin manifestations encountered following COVID-19 vaccination include lichen planus, leukocytoclastic vasculitic rash, erythema multiforme–like rash, and pityriasis rosea–like rash.^22-25 The immune mechanisms of these manifestations remain unclear.

The clinical presentation of delayed vaccination reactions can be attributed to the timing of symptoms and, in this case, the immune-mediated background of a psoriasiform reaction. Although adverse reactions to the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine are rare, more individuals should be studied after vaccination to confirm and better understand this phenomenon.

To the Editor:

The Moderna COVID-19 messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine was authorized for use on December 18, 2020, with the second dose beginning on January 15, 2021.^1-3 Some individuals who received the Moderna vaccine experienced an intense rash known as “COVID arm,” a harmless but bothersome adverse effect that typically appears within a week and is a localized and transient immunogenic response.⁴ COVID arm differs from most vaccine adverse effects. The rash emerges not immediately but 5 to 9 days after the initial dose—on average, 1 week later. Apart from being itchy, the rash does not appear to be harmful and is not a reason to hesitate getting vaccinated.

Dermatologists and allergists have been studying this adverse effect, which has been formally termed delayed cutaneous hypersensitivity. Of potential clinical consequence is that the efficacy of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine may be harmed if postvaccination dermal reactions necessitate systemic corticosteroid therapy. Because this vaccine stimulates an immune response as viral RNA integrates in cells secondary to production of the spike protein of the virus, the skin may be affected secondarily and manifestations of any underlying disease may be aggravated.⁵ We report a patient who developed a psoriasiform dermatitis after the first dose of the Moderna vaccine.

A 65-year-old woman presented to her primary care physician because of the severity of psoriasiform dermatitis that developed 5 days after she received the first dose of the Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. The patient had a medical history of Sjögren syndrome. Her medication history was negative, and her family history was negative for autoimmune disease. Physical examination by primary care revealed an erythematous scaly rash with plaques and papules on the neck and back (Figure 1). The patient presented again to primary care 2 days later with swollen, painful, discolored digits (Figure 2) and a stiff, sore neck.

Laboratory results were positive for anti–Sjögren syndrome–related antigens A and B. A complete blood cell count; comprehensive metabolic panel; erythrocyte sedimentation rate; and assays of rheumatoid factor, C-reactive protein, and anti–cyclic citrullinated peptide were within reference range. A biopsy of a lesion on the back showed psoriasiform dermatitis with confluent parakeratosis and scattered necrotic keratinocytes. There was superficial perivascular inflammation with rare eosinophils (Figure 3).

The patient was treated with a course of systemic corticosteroids. The rash resolved in 1 week. She did not receive the second dose due to the rash.

Two mRNA COVID-19 vaccines—Pfizer BioNTech and Moderna—have been granted emergency use authorization by the US Food and Drug Administration.⁶ The safety profile of the mRNA-1273 vaccine for the median 2-month follow-up showed no safety concerns.³ Minor localized adverse effects (eg, pain, redness, swelling) have been observed more frequently with the vaccines than with placebo. Systemic symptoms, such as fever, fatigue, headache, and muscle and joint pain, also were seen somewhat more often with the vaccines than with placebo; most such effects occurred 24 to 48 hours after vaccination.^3,6,7 The frequency of unsolicited adverse events and serious adverse events reported during the 28-day period after vaccination generally was similar among participants in the vaccine and placebo groups.³

There are 2 types of reactions to COVID-19 vaccination: immediate and delayed. Immediate reactions usually are due to anaphylaxis, requiring prompt recognition and treatment with epinephrine to stop rapid progression of life-threatening symptoms. Delayed reactions include localized reactions, such as urticaria and benign exanthema; serum sickness and serum sickness–like reactions; fever; and rare skin, organ, and neurologic sequelae.^1,6-8

Cutaneous manifestations, present in 16% to 50% of patients with Sjögren syndrome, are considered one of the most common extraglandular presentations of the syndrome. They are classified as nonvascular (eg, xerosis, angular cheilitis, eyelid dermatitis, annular erythema) and vascular (eg, Raynaud phenomenon, vasculitis).^9-11 Our patient did not have any of those findings. She had not taken any medications before the rash appeared, thereby ruling out a drug reaction.

The differential for our patient included post–urinary tract infection immune-reactive arthritis and rash, which is not typical with Escherichia coli infection but is described with infection with Chlamydia species and Salmonella species. Moreover, post–urinary tract infection immune-reactive arthritis and rash appear mostly on the palms and soles. Systemic lupus erythematosus–like rashes have a different histology and appear on sun-exposed areas; our patient’s rash was found mainly on unexposed areas.¹²

Because our patient received the Moderna vaccine 5 days before the rash appeared and later developed swelling of the digits with morning stiffness, a delayed serum sickness–like reaction secondary to COVID-19 vaccination was possible.^3,6

COVID-19 mRNA vaccines developed by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna incorporate a lipid-based nanoparticle carrier system that prevents rapid enzymatic degradation of mRNA and facilitates in vivo delivery of mRNA. This lipid-based nanoparticle carrier system is further stabilized by a polyethylene glycol 2000 lipid conjugate that provides a hydrophilic layer, thus prolonging half-life. The presence of lipid polyethylene glycol 2000 in mRNA vaccines has led to concern that this component could be implicated in anaphylaxis.⁶

COVID-19 antigens can give rise to varying clinical manifestations that are directly related to viral tissue damage or are indirectly induced by the antiviral immune response.^13,14 Hyperactivation of the immune system to eradicate COVID-19 may trigger autoimmunity; several immune-mediated disorders have been described in individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2. Dermal manifestations include cutaneous rash and vasculitis.^13-16 Crucial immunologic steps occur during SARS-CoV-2 infection that may link autoimmunity to COVID-19.^13,14 In preliminary published data on the efficacy of the Moderna vaccine on 45 trial enrollees, 3 did not receive the second dose of vaccination, including 1 who developed urticaria on both legs 5 days after the first dose.¹

Introduction of viral RNA can induce autoimmunity that can be explained by various phenomena, including epitope spreading, molecular mimicry, cryptic antigen, and bystander activation. Remarkably, more than one-third of immunogenic proteins in SARS-CoV-2 have potentially problematic homology to proteins that are key to the human adaptive immune system.⁵

Moreover, SARS-CoV-2 seems to induce organ injury through alternative mechanisms beyond direct viral infection, including immunologic injury. In some situations, hyperactivation of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 RNA can result in autoimmune disease. COVID-19 has been associated with immune-mediated systemic or organ-selective manifestations, some of which fulfill the diagnostic or classification criteria of specific autoimmune diseases. It is unclear whether those medical disorders are the result of transitory postinfectious epiphenomena.⁵

A few studies have shown that patients with rheumatic disease have an incidence and prevalence of COVID-19 that is similar to the general population. A similar pattern has been detected in COVID-19 morbidity and mortality rates, even among patients with an autoimmune disease, such as rheumatoid arthritis and Sjögren syndrome.^5,17 Furthermore, exacerbation of preexisting rheumatic symptoms may be due to hyperactivation of antiviral pathways in a person with an autoimmune disease.^17-19 The findings in our patient suggested a direct role for the vaccine in skin manifestations, rather than for reactivation or development of new systemic autoimmune processes, such as systemic lupus erythematosus.

Exacerbation of psoriasis following COVID-19 vaccination has been described²⁰; however, the case patient did not have a history of psoriasis. The mechanism(s) of such exacerbation remain unclear; COVID-19 vaccine–induced helper T cells (T_H17) may play a role.²¹ Other skin manifestations encountered following COVID-19 vaccination include lichen planus, leukocytoclastic vasculitic rash, erythema multiforme–like rash, and pityriasis rosea–like rash.^22-25 The immune mechanisms of these manifestations remain unclear.

The clinical presentation of delayed vaccination reactions can be attributed to the timing of symptoms and, in this case, the immune-mediated background of a psoriasiform reaction. Although adverse reactions to the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine are rare, more individuals should be studied after vaccination to confirm and better understand this phenomenon.

To the Editor:

The Moderna COVID-19 messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine was authorized for use on December 18, 2020, with the second dose beginning on January 15, 2021.^1-3 Some individuals who received the Moderna vaccine experienced an intense rash known as “COVID arm,” a harmless but bothersome adverse effect that typically appears within a week and is a localized and transient immunogenic response.⁴ COVID arm differs from most vaccine adverse effects. The rash emerges not immediately but 5 to 9 days after the initial dose—on average, 1 week later. Apart from being itchy, the rash does not appear to be harmful and is not a reason to hesitate getting vaccinated.

Dermatologists and allergists have been studying this adverse effect, which has been formally termed delayed cutaneous hypersensitivity. Of potential clinical consequence is that the efficacy of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine may be harmed if postvaccination dermal reactions necessitate systemic corticosteroid therapy. Because this vaccine stimulates an immune response as viral RNA integrates in cells secondary to production of the spike protein of the virus, the skin may be affected secondarily and manifestations of any underlying disease may be aggravated.⁵ We report a patient who developed a psoriasiform dermatitis after the first dose of the Moderna vaccine.

A 65-year-old woman presented to her primary care physician because of the severity of psoriasiform dermatitis that developed 5 days after she received the first dose of the Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. The patient had a medical history of Sjögren syndrome. Her medication history was negative, and her family history was negative for autoimmune disease. Physical examination by primary care revealed an erythematous scaly rash with plaques and papules on the neck and back (Figure 1). The patient presented again to primary care 2 days later with swollen, painful, discolored digits (Figure 2) and a stiff, sore neck.

Laboratory results were positive for anti–Sjögren syndrome–related antigens A and B. A complete blood cell count; comprehensive metabolic panel; erythrocyte sedimentation rate; and assays of rheumatoid factor, C-reactive protein, and anti–cyclic citrullinated peptide were within reference range. A biopsy of a lesion on the back showed psoriasiform dermatitis with confluent parakeratosis and scattered necrotic keratinocytes. There was superficial perivascular inflammation with rare eosinophils (Figure 3).

The patient was treated with a course of systemic corticosteroids. The rash resolved in 1 week. She did not receive the second dose due to the rash.

Two mRNA COVID-19 vaccines—Pfizer BioNTech and Moderna—have been granted emergency use authorization by the US Food and Drug Administration.⁶ The safety profile of the mRNA-1273 vaccine for the median 2-month follow-up showed no safety concerns.³ Minor localized adverse effects (eg, pain, redness, swelling) have been observed more frequently with the vaccines than with placebo. Systemic symptoms, such as fever, fatigue, headache, and muscle and joint pain, also were seen somewhat more often with the vaccines than with placebo; most such effects occurred 24 to 48 hours after vaccination.^3,6,7 The frequency of unsolicited adverse events and serious adverse events reported during the 28-day period after vaccination generally was similar among participants in the vaccine and placebo groups.³

There are 2 types of reactions to COVID-19 vaccination: immediate and delayed. Immediate reactions usually are due to anaphylaxis, requiring prompt recognition and treatment with epinephrine to stop rapid progression of life-threatening symptoms. Delayed reactions include localized reactions, such as urticaria and benign exanthema; serum sickness and serum sickness–like reactions; fever; and rare skin, organ, and neurologic sequelae.^1,6-8

Cutaneous manifestations, present in 16% to 50% of patients with Sjögren syndrome, are considered one of the most common extraglandular presentations of the syndrome. They are classified as nonvascular (eg, xerosis, angular cheilitis, eyelid dermatitis, annular erythema) and vascular (eg, Raynaud phenomenon, vasculitis).^9-11 Our patient did not have any of those findings. She had not taken any medications before the rash appeared, thereby ruling out a drug reaction.

The differential for our patient included post–urinary tract infection immune-reactive arthritis and rash, which is not typical with Escherichia coli infection but is described with infection with Chlamydia species and Salmonella species. Moreover, post–urinary tract infection immune-reactive arthritis and rash appear mostly on the palms and soles. Systemic lupus erythematosus–like rashes have a different histology and appear on sun-exposed areas; our patient’s rash was found mainly on unexposed areas.¹²

Because our patient received the Moderna vaccine 5 days before the rash appeared and later developed swelling of the digits with morning stiffness, a delayed serum sickness–like reaction secondary to COVID-19 vaccination was possible.^3,6

COVID-19 mRNA vaccines developed by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna incorporate a lipid-based nanoparticle carrier system that prevents rapid enzymatic degradation of mRNA and facilitates in vivo delivery of mRNA. This lipid-based nanoparticle carrier system is further stabilized by a polyethylene glycol 2000 lipid conjugate that provides a hydrophilic layer, thus prolonging half-life. The presence of lipid polyethylene glycol 2000 in mRNA vaccines has led to concern that this component could be implicated in anaphylaxis.⁶

COVID-19 antigens can give rise to varying clinical manifestations that are directly related to viral tissue damage or are indirectly induced by the antiviral immune response.^13,14 Hyperactivation of the immune system to eradicate COVID-19 may trigger autoimmunity; several immune-mediated disorders have been described in individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2. Dermal manifestations include cutaneous rash and vasculitis.^13-16 Crucial immunologic steps occur during SARS-CoV-2 infection that may link autoimmunity to COVID-19.^13,14 In preliminary published data on the efficacy of the Moderna vaccine on 45 trial enrollees, 3 did not receive the second dose of vaccination, including 1 who developed urticaria on both legs 5 days after the first dose.¹

Introduction of viral RNA can induce autoimmunity that can be explained by various phenomena, including epitope spreading, molecular mimicry, cryptic antigen, and bystander activation. Remarkably, more than one-third of immunogenic proteins in SARS-CoV-2 have potentially problematic homology to proteins that are key to the human adaptive immune system.⁵

Moreover, SARS-CoV-2 seems to induce organ injury through alternative mechanisms beyond direct viral infection, including immunologic injury. In some situations, hyperactivation of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 RNA can result in autoimmune disease. COVID-19 has been associated with immune-mediated systemic or organ-selective manifestations, some of which fulfill the diagnostic or classification criteria of specific autoimmune diseases. It is unclear whether those medical disorders are the result of transitory postinfectious epiphenomena.⁵

A few studies have shown that patients with rheumatic disease have an incidence and prevalence of COVID-19 that is similar to the general population. A similar pattern has been detected in COVID-19 morbidity and mortality rates, even among patients with an autoimmune disease, such as rheumatoid arthritis and Sjögren syndrome.^5,17 Furthermore, exacerbation of preexisting rheumatic symptoms may be due to hyperactivation of antiviral pathways in a person with an autoimmune disease.^17-19 The findings in our patient suggested a direct role for the vaccine in skin manifestations, rather than for reactivation or development of new systemic autoimmune processes, such as systemic lupus erythematosus.

Exacerbation of psoriasis following COVID-19 vaccination has been described²⁰; however, the case patient did not have a history of psoriasis. The mechanism(s) of such exacerbation remain unclear; COVID-19 vaccine–induced helper T cells (T_H17) may play a role.²¹ Other skin manifestations encountered following COVID-19 vaccination include lichen planus, leukocytoclastic vasculitic rash, erythema multiforme–like rash, and pityriasis rosea–like rash.^22-25 The immune mechanisms of these manifestations remain unclear.

The clinical presentation of delayed vaccination reactions can be attributed to the timing of symptoms and, in this case, the immune-mediated background of a psoriasiform reaction. Although adverse reactions to the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine are rare, more individuals should be studied after vaccination to confirm and better understand this phenomenon.

The terms Microtox, MicroBotox, Mesotox, and MesoBotox have been thrown around in the dermatology literature, clinical medicine, and the media, leaving patients confused about what they treat and physicians confused about what patients want when they mention one of these terms.

Let’s settle the nomenclature confusion. In this column, I define and outline suggested terminology based on studies and my 15 years of experience using neuromodulators. If any readers or colleagues disagree, please write to me and we can discuss the alternatives in a subsequent article; if you agree, please also write to me so we can collaboratively correct the discrepancies in the literature accordingly.

The term mesotherapy, originating from the Greek “mesos” referring to the early embryonic mesoderm, was identified in the 1950’s by Dr. Michel Pistor, a French physician who administered drugs intradermally. The term was defined as a minimally invasive technique by which drugs or bioactive substances are given in small quantities through dermal micropunctures. Drugs administered intradermally diffuse very slowly and therefore, stay in the tissue longer than those administered intramuscularly.

Thus, Mesotox is defined not by the concentration of the neuromodulator or location, but by the depth of injection in the superficial dermis. It can be delivered through individual injections or through a microneedling pen.

Microtox refers to the dilution of the neuromodulator at concentrations below the proposed dilution guidelines of the manufacturer: Less than 2.5 U per 0.1 mL for onabotulinumtoxinA (OBA), incobotulinumtoxinA (IBA), and prabotulinumtoxinA (PBA); and less than 10 U per 0.1 mL for abobotulinumtoxinA (ABO), This method allows for the injection of superficial cutaneous muscles softening the dynamic rhytids without complete paralysis.

Mesotox is widely used off label for facial lifting, reduction in skin laxity or crepiness, flushing of rosacea, acne, hyperhidrosis of the face, keloids, seborrhea, neck rejuvenation, contouring of the mandibular border, and scalp oiliness. Based on a review of articles using this technique, dilution methods were less than 2.5 U per 1 mL (OBA, IBA) and less than 10 U per 0.1 mL (ABO) depth of injection was the superficial to mid-dermis with injection points 0.5 cm to 1 cm apart.

In a study by Atwa and colleagues, 25 patients with mild facial skin laxity received intradermal Botox-A on one side and saline on the other. This split face study showed a highly significant difference with facial lifting on the treated side. Mesotox injection points vary based on the clinical indication and area being treated.

The treatment of dynamic muscles using standard neuromodulator dosing protocols include the treatment of the glabella, crow’s feet, forehead lines, masseter hypertrophy, bunny lines, gummy smile, perioral lines, mentalis hypertonia, platysmal bands, and marionette lines.

However, hyperdilute neuromodulators or Microtox can effectively be used alone or in combination with standard dosing for the following off-label uses. Used in combination with standard dosing of the forehead lines, I use Microtox in the lateral brow to soften the frontalis muscle without dropping the brow in patients with a low-set brow or lid laxity. I also use it for the jelly roll of the eyes and to open the aperture of the eyes. Along the nose, Microtox can also be used to treat a sagging nasal tip, decrease the width of the ala, and treat overactive facial muscles adjacent to the nose resulting in an overactive nasolabial fold.

Similarly, Microtox can be used to treat lateral smile lines and downward extensions of the crow’s feet. In all of the aforementioned treatment areas, I recommend approximately 0.5-1 U of toxin in each area divided at 1-cm intervals.Mesotox and Microtox are both highly effective strategies to treat the aging face. However, the nomenclature is not interchangeable. I propose that the term Mesotox be used only to articulate or define the superficial injection of a neuromodulator for the improvement of the skin that does not involve the injection into or paralysis of a cutaneous muscle (“tox” being used generically for all neuromodulators). I also propose that the term Microtox should be used to define the dilution of a neuromodulator beyond the manufacturer-recommended dilution protocols – used for the paralysis of a cutaneous muscle. In addition, I recommend that the terms MicroBotox and MesoBotox no longer be used. These procedures all have risks, and adverse events associated with Microtox and Mesotox are similar to those of any neuromodulator injection at FDA-recommended maximum doses, and dilution and storage protocols and proper injection techniques need to be followed. Expertise and training is crucial and treatment by a board-certified dermatologist or plastic surgeon is imperative.

 

Dr. Talakoub and Naissan O. Wesley, MD, are cocontributors to this column. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. This month’s column is by Dr. Talakoub. Write to her at [email protected]. Dr. Talakoub had no relevant disclosures.

References

Awaida CJ et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018 Sep;142(3):640-9.

Calvani F et al. Plast Surg (Oakv). 2019 May;27(2):156-61.

Iranmanesh B et al. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2022 Oct;21(10):4160-70.

Kandhari R et al. J Cutan Aesthet Surg. 2022 Apr-Jun;15(2):101-7.

Lewandowski M et al. Molecules. 2022 May 13;27(10):3143.

Mammucari M et al. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2011 Jun;15(6):682-94.

Park KY et al. Ann Dermatol. 2018 Dec;30(6):688-93.

Pistor M. Chir Dent Fr. 1976;46:59-60.

Rho NK, Gil YC. Toxins (Basel). 2021 Nov 19;13(11):817.

Wu WTL. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015 Nov;136(5 Suppl):92S-100S.

Zhang H et al. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2021 Apr 30;14:407-17.
 

The terms Microtox, MicroBotox, Mesotox, and MesoBotox have been thrown around in the dermatology literature, clinical medicine, and the media, leaving patients confused about what they treat and physicians confused about what patients want when they mention one of these terms.

Let’s settle the nomenclature confusion. In this column, I define and outline suggested terminology based on studies and my 15 years of experience using neuromodulators. If any readers or colleagues disagree, please write to me and we can discuss the alternatives in a subsequent article; if you agree, please also write to me so we can collaboratively correct the discrepancies in the literature accordingly.

The term mesotherapy, originating from the Greek “mesos” referring to the early embryonic mesoderm, was identified in the 1950’s by Dr. Michel Pistor, a French physician who administered drugs intradermally. The term was defined as a minimally invasive technique by which drugs or bioactive substances are given in small quantities through dermal micropunctures. Drugs administered intradermally diffuse very slowly and therefore, stay in the tissue longer than those administered intramuscularly.

Thus, Mesotox is defined not by the concentration of the neuromodulator or location, but by the depth of injection in the superficial dermis. It can be delivered through individual injections or through a microneedling pen.

Microtox refers to the dilution of the neuromodulator at concentrations below the proposed dilution guidelines of the manufacturer: Less than 2.5 U per 0.1 mL for onabotulinumtoxinA (OBA), incobotulinumtoxinA (IBA), and prabotulinumtoxinA (PBA); and less than 10 U per 0.1 mL for abobotulinumtoxinA (ABO), This method allows for the injection of superficial cutaneous muscles softening the dynamic rhytids without complete paralysis.

Mesotox is widely used off label for facial lifting, reduction in skin laxity or crepiness, flushing of rosacea, acne, hyperhidrosis of the face, keloids, seborrhea, neck rejuvenation, contouring of the mandibular border, and scalp oiliness. Based on a review of articles using this technique, dilution methods were less than 2.5 U per 1 mL (OBA, IBA) and less than 10 U per 0.1 mL (ABO) depth of injection was the superficial to mid-dermis with injection points 0.5 cm to 1 cm apart.

In a study by Atwa and colleagues, 25 patients with mild facial skin laxity received intradermal Botox-A on one side and saline on the other. This split face study showed a highly significant difference with facial lifting on the treated side. Mesotox injection points vary based on the clinical indication and area being treated.

The treatment of dynamic muscles using standard neuromodulator dosing protocols include the treatment of the glabella, crow’s feet, forehead lines, masseter hypertrophy, bunny lines, gummy smile, perioral lines, mentalis hypertonia, platysmal bands, and marionette lines.

However, hyperdilute neuromodulators or Microtox can effectively be used alone or in combination with standard dosing for the following off-label uses. Used in combination with standard dosing of the forehead lines, I use Microtox in the lateral brow to soften the frontalis muscle without dropping the brow in patients with a low-set brow or lid laxity. I also use it for the jelly roll of the eyes and to open the aperture of the eyes. Along the nose, Microtox can also be used to treat a sagging nasal tip, decrease the width of the ala, and treat overactive facial muscles adjacent to the nose resulting in an overactive nasolabial fold.

Similarly, Microtox can be used to treat lateral smile lines and downward extensions of the crow’s feet. In all of the aforementioned treatment areas, I recommend approximately 0.5-1 U of toxin in each area divided at 1-cm intervals.Mesotox and Microtox are both highly effective strategies to treat the aging face. However, the nomenclature is not interchangeable. I propose that the term Mesotox be used only to articulate or define the superficial injection of a neuromodulator for the improvement of the skin that does not involve the injection into or paralysis of a cutaneous muscle (“tox” being used generically for all neuromodulators). I also propose that the term Microtox should be used to define the dilution of a neuromodulator beyond the manufacturer-recommended dilution protocols – used for the paralysis of a cutaneous muscle. In addition, I recommend that the terms MicroBotox and MesoBotox no longer be used. These procedures all have risks, and adverse events associated with Microtox and Mesotox are similar to those of any neuromodulator injection at FDA-recommended maximum doses, and dilution and storage protocols and proper injection techniques need to be followed. Expertise and training is crucial and treatment by a board-certified dermatologist or plastic surgeon is imperative.

 

Dr. Talakoub and Naissan O. Wesley, MD, are cocontributors to this column. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. This month’s column is by Dr. Talakoub. Write to her at [email protected]. Dr. Talakoub had no relevant disclosures.

References

Awaida CJ et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018 Sep;142(3):640-9.

Calvani F et al. Plast Surg (Oakv). 2019 May;27(2):156-61.

Iranmanesh B et al. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2022 Oct;21(10):4160-70.

Kandhari R et al. J Cutan Aesthet Surg. 2022 Apr-Jun;15(2):101-7.

Lewandowski M et al. Molecules. 2022 May 13;27(10):3143.

Mammucari M et al. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2011 Jun;15(6):682-94.

Park KY et al. Ann Dermatol. 2018 Dec;30(6):688-93.

Pistor M. Chir Dent Fr. 1976;46:59-60.

Rho NK, Gil YC. Toxins (Basel). 2021 Nov 19;13(11):817.

Wu WTL. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015 Nov;136(5 Suppl):92S-100S.

Zhang H et al. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2021 Apr 30;14:407-17.
 

The terms Microtox, MicroBotox, Mesotox, and MesoBotox have been thrown around in the dermatology literature, clinical medicine, and the media, leaving patients confused about what they treat and physicians confused about what patients want when they mention one of these terms.

Let’s settle the nomenclature confusion. In this column, I define and outline suggested terminology based on studies and my 15 years of experience using neuromodulators. If any readers or colleagues disagree, please write to me and we can discuss the alternatives in a subsequent article; if you agree, please also write to me so we can collaboratively correct the discrepancies in the literature accordingly.

The term mesotherapy, originating from the Greek “mesos” referring to the early embryonic mesoderm, was identified in the 1950’s by Dr. Michel Pistor, a French physician who administered drugs intradermally. The term was defined as a minimally invasive technique by which drugs or bioactive substances are given in small quantities through dermal micropunctures. Drugs administered intradermally diffuse very slowly and therefore, stay in the tissue longer than those administered intramuscularly.

Thus, Mesotox is defined not by the concentration of the neuromodulator or location, but by the depth of injection in the superficial dermis. It can be delivered through individual injections or through a microneedling pen.

Microtox refers to the dilution of the neuromodulator at concentrations below the proposed dilution guidelines of the manufacturer: Less than 2.5 U per 0.1 mL for onabotulinumtoxinA (OBA), incobotulinumtoxinA (IBA), and prabotulinumtoxinA (PBA); and less than 10 U per 0.1 mL for abobotulinumtoxinA (ABO), This method allows for the injection of superficial cutaneous muscles softening the dynamic rhytids without complete paralysis.

Mesotox is widely used off label for facial lifting, reduction in skin laxity or crepiness, flushing of rosacea, acne, hyperhidrosis of the face, keloids, seborrhea, neck rejuvenation, contouring of the mandibular border, and scalp oiliness. Based on a review of articles using this technique, dilution methods were less than 2.5 U per 1 mL (OBA, IBA) and less than 10 U per 0.1 mL (ABO) depth of injection was the superficial to mid-dermis with injection points 0.5 cm to 1 cm apart.

In a study by Atwa and colleagues, 25 patients with mild facial skin laxity received intradermal Botox-A on one side and saline on the other. This split face study showed a highly significant difference with facial lifting on the treated side. Mesotox injection points vary based on the clinical indication and area being treated.

The treatment of dynamic muscles using standard neuromodulator dosing protocols include the treatment of the glabella, crow’s feet, forehead lines, masseter hypertrophy, bunny lines, gummy smile, perioral lines, mentalis hypertonia, platysmal bands, and marionette lines.

However, hyperdilute neuromodulators or Microtox can effectively be used alone or in combination with standard dosing for the following off-label uses. Used in combination with standard dosing of the forehead lines, I use Microtox in the lateral brow to soften the frontalis muscle without dropping the brow in patients with a low-set brow or lid laxity. I also use it for the jelly roll of the eyes and to open the aperture of the eyes. Along the nose, Microtox can also be used to treat a sagging nasal tip, decrease the width of the ala, and treat overactive facial muscles adjacent to the nose resulting in an overactive nasolabial fold.

Similarly, Microtox can be used to treat lateral smile lines and downward extensions of the crow’s feet. In all of the aforementioned treatment areas, I recommend approximately 0.5-1 U of toxin in each area divided at 1-cm intervals.Mesotox and Microtox are both highly effective strategies to treat the aging face. However, the nomenclature is not interchangeable. I propose that the term Mesotox be used only to articulate or define the superficial injection of a neuromodulator for the improvement of the skin that does not involve the injection into or paralysis of a cutaneous muscle (“tox” being used generically for all neuromodulators). I also propose that the term Microtox should be used to define the dilution of a neuromodulator beyond the manufacturer-recommended dilution protocols – used for the paralysis of a cutaneous muscle. In addition, I recommend that the terms MicroBotox and MesoBotox no longer be used. These procedures all have risks, and adverse events associated with Microtox and Mesotox are similar to those of any neuromodulator injection at FDA-recommended maximum doses, and dilution and storage protocols and proper injection techniques need to be followed. Expertise and training is crucial and treatment by a board-certified dermatologist or plastic surgeon is imperative.

 

Dr. Talakoub and Naissan O. Wesley, MD, are cocontributors to this column. Dr. Talakoub is in private practice in McLean, Va. Dr. Wesley practices dermatology in Beverly Hills, Calif. This month’s column is by Dr. Talakoub. Write to her at [email protected]. Dr. Talakoub had no relevant disclosures.

References

Awaida CJ et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018 Sep;142(3):640-9.

Calvani F et al. Plast Surg (Oakv). 2019 May;27(2):156-61.

Iranmanesh B et al. J Cosmet Dermatol. 2022 Oct;21(10):4160-70.

Kandhari R et al. J Cutan Aesthet Surg. 2022 Apr-Jun;15(2):101-7.

Lewandowski M et al. Molecules. 2022 May 13;27(10):3143.

Mammucari M et al. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2011 Jun;15(6):682-94.

Park KY et al. Ann Dermatol. 2018 Dec;30(6):688-93.

Pistor M. Chir Dent Fr. 1976;46:59-60.

Rho NK, Gil YC. Toxins (Basel). 2021 Nov 19;13(11):817.

Wu WTL. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015 Nov;136(5 Suppl):92S-100S.

Zhang H et al. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2021 Apr 30;14:407-17.
 

Ulmus davidiana, commonly known as yugeunpi, has a long history of use in Korea in treating burns, eczema, frostbite, difficulties in urination, inflammation, and psoriasis,¹ and has also been used in China for some of these indications, including skin inflammation.^2,3 Currently, there are several areas in which the bioactivity of U. davidiana are under investigation, with numerous potential applications in dermatology. This column focuses briefly on the evidence supporting the traditional uses of the plant and potential new applications.

Anti-inflammatory activity

Eom and colleagues studied the potential of a polysaccharide extract from the root bark of U. davidiana to serve as a suitable cosmetic ingredient for conferring moisturizing, anti-inflammatory, and photoprotective activity. In this 2006 investigation, the composition of the polysaccharide extract was found to be primarily rhamnose, galactose, and glucose. The root extract exhibited a similar humectant moisturizing effect as hyaluronic acid, the researchers reported. The U. davidiana root extract was also found to dose-dependently suppress prostaglandin E2. The inhibition of the release of interleukin-6 and IL-8 was also reported to be significant. The use of the U. davidiana extract also stimulated the recovery of human fibroblasts (two times that of positive control) exposed to UVA irradiation. The researchers suggested that their overall results point to the viability of U. davidiana root extract as a cosmetic agent ingredient to protect skin from UV exposure and the inflammation that follows.²

In 2013, Choi and colleagues found that a methanol extract of the stem and root barks of U. davidiana revealed anti-inflammatory properties, with activity attributed to two trihydroxy acids [then-new trihydroxy fatty acid, 9,12,13-trihydroxyoctadeca-10(Z),15(Z)-dienoic acid, and pinellic acid], both of which blocked prostaglandin D₂ production.⁴

That same year, Lyu and colleagues studied the antiallergic and anti-inflammatory effects of U. davidiana using a 1-fluoro-2,4-dinitrofluorobenzene (DNFB)–induced contact dermatitis mouse model. They found that treatment at a dose of 10 mg/mL successfully prevented skin lesions caused by consistent DNFB application. Further, the researchers observed that topically applied U. davidiana suppressed spongiosis and reduced total serum immunoglobulin and IgG2a levels. Overall, they concluded that the botanical treatment improved contact dermatitis in mice.¹

In 2019, So and colleagues studied the chemical components of U. davidiana root bark (isolating a chromane derivative and 22 known substances) and reported data supporting the traditional use of the root bark for gastroenteric and inflammatory indications.³

Bakuchiol [(1E,3S)-3-ethenyl-3,7-dimethyl-1,6-octadien-1-yl]phenol, a prenylated phenolic monoterpene found in the seeds and leaves of various plants, including U. davidiana, is used for its anti-inflammatory properties in traditional Korean medicine.⁵ Choi and colleagues determined that bakuchiol exhibited robust anti-inflammatory activity in a study of U. davidiana constituents, at least partially accounting for the anti-inflammatory functions of the plant.⁵

Antifungal activity

In 2021, Alishir and colleagues conducted a phytochemical analysis of the root bark extract of U. davidiana, resulting in the isolation of 10 substances including the novel coumarin glycoside derivative ulmusakidian. Some of the compounds exhibited antifungal activity against Cryptococcus neoformans, though none demonstrated antifungal activity against Candida albicans.⁶

Wound dressing

Park and colleagues demonstrated in 2020 that superabsorbing hydrogel wound dressings composed of U. davidiana root bark powders, which exhibit gelling activity, performed effectively in speeding up wound closure and cutaneous regeneration in skin-wound mice models. These dressings also displayed thermal stability and superior mechanical properties to pullulan-only gel films. The researchers concluded that gel films composed of U. davidiana have potential to surpass the effectiveness of current products.⁷

Anti–hair loss activity

Early in 2022, Kwon and colleagues investigated the anti–hair loss mechanism of U. davidiana and determined that supercritical extraction-residues of U. davidiana significantly hinder the secretion of transforming growth factor–beta but dose dependently salvage insulinlike growth factor 1, and substantially decrease dihydrotestosterone synthesis. They concluded that these U. davidiana supercritical fluid extract residues have the potential to halt the loss of human hair.⁸

Photoprotective potential

Late in 2020, Her and colleagues reported on their development and analysis of a new distillate derived from a fermented mixture of nine anti-inflammatory herbs including U. davidiana. The investigators assessed the effects of the topically applied distillate on UVB-induced skin damage in Institute of Cancer Research mice, finding significant improvements in the dorsal skin photodamage. Application of the distillate also ameliorated collagen production impairment and diminished proinflammatory cytokine levels of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)–alpha and IL-1B. The researchers concluded that this anti-inflammatory herbal distillate, which includes U. davidiana, displays the potential to serve as a photoprotective agent.⁹

Antiaging activity

In 2011, Yang and colleagues set out to identify constituent substances of the root bark of U. davidiana that have the capacity to suppress cellular senescence in human fibroblasts and human umbilical vein endothelial cells. They isolated 22 compounds, of which epifriedelanol, ssioriside, and catechin-7-O-beta-D-glucopyranoside impeded adriamycin-induced cellular senescence in human dermal fibroblasts and friedelin, epifriedelanol, and catechin-7-O-beta-apiofuranoside in the umbilical vein endothelial cells. Epifriedelanol was the most potent of the substances, leading the researchers to conclude that this U. davidiana component can diminish cellular senescence in human primary cells and has the potential as an oral and/or topical antiaging agent.¹⁰

Also that year, in a study on the protective effects of U. davidiana on UVB-irradiated hairless mice, the authors claimed that an ethanol extract of U. davidiana significantly suppressed wrinkle development in mice chronically exposed to UVB.¹¹ This study showed that U. davidiana extract exerts antioxidant activity as evidenced by a decrease in MMP-1 activity. It also demonstrated antielastase activity. The treated mice showed a decrease in wrinkles as compared with water-treated mice.¹¹ Although this is just one study in mice, it may demonstrate a protective effect on elastic fibers on skin exposed to UVB light.

Late in 2020, Lee and colleagues reported on their study of the possible antiaging effects on the skin of (-)-phenolic compounds isolated from the root bark of U. davidiana. The function of collagenase MMP-1 was found to be inhibited by the isolate (-)-catechin, which also halted collagen degradation caused by TNF-alpha in normal human dermal fibroblasts. Further, the investigators demonstrated that the U. davidiana isolate (-)-catechin reduced the expression of proinflammatory cytokines such as IL-1B and IL-6. They concluded that the U. davidiana isolate exhibits the potential to combat intrinsic as well as extrinsic cutaneous aging.¹²

These findings are particularly intriguing. There is much overlap between intrinsic and extrinsic aging. If U. davidiana can keep collagen intact and inhibit cellular senescence, it may serve as an early intervention toward slowing or preventing skin aging.
 

Summary

Ulmus davidiana has a long history of use in Asia, but is new to the United States. Research has provided evidence of the anti-inflammatory and antiaging properties of this botanical cosmeceutical ingredient. Of greatest interest now, perhaps, is its potential to impede cellular senescence. Senescent cells release a multitude of inflammatory and other factors that hasten intrinsic aging. Blocking cellular senescence is an important approach to the prevention and treatment of skin aging.

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author, and entrepreneur in Miami. She founded the division of cosmetic dermatology at the University of Miami in 1997. The third edition of her bestselling textbook, “Cosmetic Dermatology,” was published in 2022. Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Galderma, Johnson & Johnson, and Burt’s Bees. She is the CEO of Skin Type Solutions, a SaaS company used to generate skin care routines in the office and as an ecommerce solution. Write to her at [email protected].

References

1. Lyu J et al. J Pharmacopuncture. 2013 Jun;16(2):41-5.

2. Eom SY et al. J Cosmet Sci. 2006 Sep-Oct;57(5):355-67.

3. So HM et al. Bioorg Chem. 2019 Oct;91:103145.

4. Choi HG et al. Phytother Res. 2013 Sep;27(9):1376-80.

5. Choi SY et al. J Med Food. 2010 Aug;13(4):1019-23.

6. Alishir A et al. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2021 Mar 15;36:127828.

7. Park TH et al. Saudi Pharm J. 2020 Jul;28(7):791-802.

8. Kwon YE et al. Molecules. 2022 Feb 19;27(4):1419.

9. Her Y et al. Molecules. 2020 Dec 29;26(1):124.

10. Yang HH et al. Planta Med. 2011 Mar;77(5):441-9.

11. Kim YO et al. Korean Journal of Medicinal Crop Science. 2011;19(6):508-13.
 

12. Lee S et al. Antioxidants (Basel). 2020 Oct 13;9(10):981.

Ulmus davidiana, commonly known as yugeunpi, has a long history of use in Korea in treating burns, eczema, frostbite, difficulties in urination, inflammation, and psoriasis,¹ and has also been used in China for some of these indications, including skin inflammation.^2,3 Currently, there are several areas in which the bioactivity of U. davidiana are under investigation, with numerous potential applications in dermatology. This column focuses briefly on the evidence supporting the traditional uses of the plant and potential new applications.

Anti-inflammatory activity

Eom and colleagues studied the potential of a polysaccharide extract from the root bark of U. davidiana to serve as a suitable cosmetic ingredient for conferring moisturizing, anti-inflammatory, and photoprotective activity. In this 2006 investigation, the composition of the polysaccharide extract was found to be primarily rhamnose, galactose, and glucose. The root extract exhibited a similar humectant moisturizing effect as hyaluronic acid, the researchers reported. The U. davidiana root extract was also found to dose-dependently suppress prostaglandin E2. The inhibition of the release of interleukin-6 and IL-8 was also reported to be significant. The use of the U. davidiana extract also stimulated the recovery of human fibroblasts (two times that of positive control) exposed to UVA irradiation. The researchers suggested that their overall results point to the viability of U. davidiana root extract as a cosmetic agent ingredient to protect skin from UV exposure and the inflammation that follows.²

In 2013, Choi and colleagues found that a methanol extract of the stem and root barks of U. davidiana revealed anti-inflammatory properties, with activity attributed to two trihydroxy acids [then-new trihydroxy fatty acid, 9,12,13-trihydroxyoctadeca-10(Z),15(Z)-dienoic acid, and pinellic acid], both of which blocked prostaglandin D₂ production.⁴

That same year, Lyu and colleagues studied the antiallergic and anti-inflammatory effects of U. davidiana using a 1-fluoro-2,4-dinitrofluorobenzene (DNFB)–induced contact dermatitis mouse model. They found that treatment at a dose of 10 mg/mL successfully prevented skin lesions caused by consistent DNFB application. Further, the researchers observed that topically applied U. davidiana suppressed spongiosis and reduced total serum immunoglobulin and IgG2a levels. Overall, they concluded that the botanical treatment improved contact dermatitis in mice.¹

In 2019, So and colleagues studied the chemical components of U. davidiana root bark (isolating a chromane derivative and 22 known substances) and reported data supporting the traditional use of the root bark for gastroenteric and inflammatory indications.³

Bakuchiol [(1E,3S)-3-ethenyl-3,7-dimethyl-1,6-octadien-1-yl]phenol, a prenylated phenolic monoterpene found in the seeds and leaves of various plants, including U. davidiana, is used for its anti-inflammatory properties in traditional Korean medicine.⁵ Choi and colleagues determined that bakuchiol exhibited robust anti-inflammatory activity in a study of U. davidiana constituents, at least partially accounting for the anti-inflammatory functions of the plant.⁵

Antifungal activity

In 2021, Alishir and colleagues conducted a phytochemical analysis of the root bark extract of U. davidiana, resulting in the isolation of 10 substances including the novel coumarin glycoside derivative ulmusakidian. Some of the compounds exhibited antifungal activity against Cryptococcus neoformans, though none demonstrated antifungal activity against Candida albicans.⁶

Wound dressing

Park and colleagues demonstrated in 2020 that superabsorbing hydrogel wound dressings composed of U. davidiana root bark powders, which exhibit gelling activity, performed effectively in speeding up wound closure and cutaneous regeneration in skin-wound mice models. These dressings also displayed thermal stability and superior mechanical properties to pullulan-only gel films. The researchers concluded that gel films composed of U. davidiana have potential to surpass the effectiveness of current products.⁷

Anti–hair loss activity

Early in 2022, Kwon and colleagues investigated the anti–hair loss mechanism of U. davidiana and determined that supercritical extraction-residues of U. davidiana significantly hinder the secretion of transforming growth factor–beta but dose dependently salvage insulinlike growth factor 1, and substantially decrease dihydrotestosterone synthesis. They concluded that these U. davidiana supercritical fluid extract residues have the potential to halt the loss of human hair.⁸

Photoprotective potential

Late in 2020, Her and colleagues reported on their development and analysis of a new distillate derived from a fermented mixture of nine anti-inflammatory herbs including U. davidiana. The investigators assessed the effects of the topically applied distillate on UVB-induced skin damage in Institute of Cancer Research mice, finding significant improvements in the dorsal skin photodamage. Application of the distillate also ameliorated collagen production impairment and diminished proinflammatory cytokine levels of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)–alpha and IL-1B. The researchers concluded that this anti-inflammatory herbal distillate, which includes U. davidiana, displays the potential to serve as a photoprotective agent.⁹

Antiaging activity

In 2011, Yang and colleagues set out to identify constituent substances of the root bark of U. davidiana that have the capacity to suppress cellular senescence in human fibroblasts and human umbilical vein endothelial cells. They isolated 22 compounds, of which epifriedelanol, ssioriside, and catechin-7-O-beta-D-glucopyranoside impeded adriamycin-induced cellular senescence in human dermal fibroblasts and friedelin, epifriedelanol, and catechin-7-O-beta-apiofuranoside in the umbilical vein endothelial cells. Epifriedelanol was the most potent of the substances, leading the researchers to conclude that this U. davidiana component can diminish cellular senescence in human primary cells and has the potential as an oral and/or topical antiaging agent.¹⁰

Also that year, in a study on the protective effects of U. davidiana on UVB-irradiated hairless mice, the authors claimed that an ethanol extract of U. davidiana significantly suppressed wrinkle development in mice chronically exposed to UVB.¹¹ This study showed that U. davidiana extract exerts antioxidant activity as evidenced by a decrease in MMP-1 activity. It also demonstrated antielastase activity. The treated mice showed a decrease in wrinkles as compared with water-treated mice.¹¹ Although this is just one study in mice, it may demonstrate a protective effect on elastic fibers on skin exposed to UVB light.

Late in 2020, Lee and colleagues reported on their study of the possible antiaging effects on the skin of (-)-phenolic compounds isolated from the root bark of U. davidiana. The function of collagenase MMP-1 was found to be inhibited by the isolate (-)-catechin, which also halted collagen degradation caused by TNF-alpha in normal human dermal fibroblasts. Further, the investigators demonstrated that the U. davidiana isolate (-)-catechin reduced the expression of proinflammatory cytokines such as IL-1B and IL-6. They concluded that the U. davidiana isolate exhibits the potential to combat intrinsic as well as extrinsic cutaneous aging.¹²

These findings are particularly intriguing. There is much overlap between intrinsic and extrinsic aging. If U. davidiana can keep collagen intact and inhibit cellular senescence, it may serve as an early intervention toward slowing or preventing skin aging.
 

Summary

Ulmus davidiana has a long history of use in Asia, but is new to the United States. Research has provided evidence of the anti-inflammatory and antiaging properties of this botanical cosmeceutical ingredient. Of greatest interest now, perhaps, is its potential to impede cellular senescence. Senescent cells release a multitude of inflammatory and other factors that hasten intrinsic aging. Blocking cellular senescence is an important approach to the prevention and treatment of skin aging.

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author, and entrepreneur in Miami. She founded the division of cosmetic dermatology at the University of Miami in 1997. The third edition of her bestselling textbook, “Cosmetic Dermatology,” was published in 2022. Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Galderma, Johnson & Johnson, and Burt’s Bees. She is the CEO of Skin Type Solutions, a SaaS company used to generate skin care routines in the office and as an ecommerce solution. Write to her at [email protected].

References

1. Lyu J et al. J Pharmacopuncture. 2013 Jun;16(2):41-5.

2. Eom SY et al. J Cosmet Sci. 2006 Sep-Oct;57(5):355-67.

3. So HM et al. Bioorg Chem. 2019 Oct;91:103145.

4. Choi HG et al. Phytother Res. 2013 Sep;27(9):1376-80.

5. Choi SY et al. J Med Food. 2010 Aug;13(4):1019-23.

6. Alishir A et al. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2021 Mar 15;36:127828.

7. Park TH et al. Saudi Pharm J. 2020 Jul;28(7):791-802.

8. Kwon YE et al. Molecules. 2022 Feb 19;27(4):1419.

9. Her Y et al. Molecules. 2020 Dec 29;26(1):124.

10. Yang HH et al. Planta Med. 2011 Mar;77(5):441-9.

11. Kim YO et al. Korean Journal of Medicinal Crop Science. 2011;19(6):508-13.
 

12. Lee S et al. Antioxidants (Basel). 2020 Oct 13;9(10):981.

Ulmus davidiana, commonly known as yugeunpi, has a long history of use in Korea in treating burns, eczema, frostbite, difficulties in urination, inflammation, and psoriasis,¹ and has also been used in China for some of these indications, including skin inflammation.^2,3 Currently, there are several areas in which the bioactivity of U. davidiana are under investigation, with numerous potential applications in dermatology. This column focuses briefly on the evidence supporting the traditional uses of the plant and potential new applications.

Anti-inflammatory activity

Eom and colleagues studied the potential of a polysaccharide extract from the root bark of U. davidiana to serve as a suitable cosmetic ingredient for conferring moisturizing, anti-inflammatory, and photoprotective activity. In this 2006 investigation, the composition of the polysaccharide extract was found to be primarily rhamnose, galactose, and glucose. The root extract exhibited a similar humectant moisturizing effect as hyaluronic acid, the researchers reported. The U. davidiana root extract was also found to dose-dependently suppress prostaglandin E2. The inhibition of the release of interleukin-6 and IL-8 was also reported to be significant. The use of the U. davidiana extract also stimulated the recovery of human fibroblasts (two times that of positive control) exposed to UVA irradiation. The researchers suggested that their overall results point to the viability of U. davidiana root extract as a cosmetic agent ingredient to protect skin from UV exposure and the inflammation that follows.²

In 2013, Choi and colleagues found that a methanol extract of the stem and root barks of U. davidiana revealed anti-inflammatory properties, with activity attributed to two trihydroxy acids [then-new trihydroxy fatty acid, 9,12,13-trihydroxyoctadeca-10(Z),15(Z)-dienoic acid, and pinellic acid], both of which blocked prostaglandin D₂ production.⁴

That same year, Lyu and colleagues studied the antiallergic and anti-inflammatory effects of U. davidiana using a 1-fluoro-2,4-dinitrofluorobenzene (DNFB)–induced contact dermatitis mouse model. They found that treatment at a dose of 10 mg/mL successfully prevented skin lesions caused by consistent DNFB application. Further, the researchers observed that topically applied U. davidiana suppressed spongiosis and reduced total serum immunoglobulin and IgG2a levels. Overall, they concluded that the botanical treatment improved contact dermatitis in mice.¹

In 2019, So and colleagues studied the chemical components of U. davidiana root bark (isolating a chromane derivative and 22 known substances) and reported data supporting the traditional use of the root bark for gastroenteric and inflammatory indications.³

Bakuchiol [(1E,3S)-3-ethenyl-3,7-dimethyl-1,6-octadien-1-yl]phenol, a prenylated phenolic monoterpene found in the seeds and leaves of various plants, including U. davidiana, is used for its anti-inflammatory properties in traditional Korean medicine.⁵ Choi and colleagues determined that bakuchiol exhibited robust anti-inflammatory activity in a study of U. davidiana constituents, at least partially accounting for the anti-inflammatory functions of the plant.⁵

Antifungal activity

In 2021, Alishir and colleagues conducted a phytochemical analysis of the root bark extract of U. davidiana, resulting in the isolation of 10 substances including the novel coumarin glycoside derivative ulmusakidian. Some of the compounds exhibited antifungal activity against Cryptococcus neoformans, though none demonstrated antifungal activity against Candida albicans.⁶

Wound dressing

Park and colleagues demonstrated in 2020 that superabsorbing hydrogel wound dressings composed of U. davidiana root bark powders, which exhibit gelling activity, performed effectively in speeding up wound closure and cutaneous regeneration in skin-wound mice models. These dressings also displayed thermal stability and superior mechanical properties to pullulan-only gel films. The researchers concluded that gel films composed of U. davidiana have potential to surpass the effectiveness of current products.⁷

Anti–hair loss activity

Early in 2022, Kwon and colleagues investigated the anti–hair loss mechanism of U. davidiana and determined that supercritical extraction-residues of U. davidiana significantly hinder the secretion of transforming growth factor–beta but dose dependently salvage insulinlike growth factor 1, and substantially decrease dihydrotestosterone synthesis. They concluded that these U. davidiana supercritical fluid extract residues have the potential to halt the loss of human hair.⁸

Photoprotective potential

Late in 2020, Her and colleagues reported on their development and analysis of a new distillate derived from a fermented mixture of nine anti-inflammatory herbs including U. davidiana. The investigators assessed the effects of the topically applied distillate on UVB-induced skin damage in Institute of Cancer Research mice, finding significant improvements in the dorsal skin photodamage. Application of the distillate also ameliorated collagen production impairment and diminished proinflammatory cytokine levels of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)–alpha and IL-1B. The researchers concluded that this anti-inflammatory herbal distillate, which includes U. davidiana, displays the potential to serve as a photoprotective agent.⁹

Antiaging activity

In 2011, Yang and colleagues set out to identify constituent substances of the root bark of U. davidiana that have the capacity to suppress cellular senescence in human fibroblasts and human umbilical vein endothelial cells. They isolated 22 compounds, of which epifriedelanol, ssioriside, and catechin-7-O-beta-D-glucopyranoside impeded adriamycin-induced cellular senescence in human dermal fibroblasts and friedelin, epifriedelanol, and catechin-7-O-beta-apiofuranoside in the umbilical vein endothelial cells. Epifriedelanol was the most potent of the substances, leading the researchers to conclude that this U. davidiana component can diminish cellular senescence in human primary cells and has the potential as an oral and/or topical antiaging agent.¹⁰

Also that year, in a study on the protective effects of U. davidiana on UVB-irradiated hairless mice, the authors claimed that an ethanol extract of U. davidiana significantly suppressed wrinkle development in mice chronically exposed to UVB.¹¹ This study showed that U. davidiana extract exerts antioxidant activity as evidenced by a decrease in MMP-1 activity. It also demonstrated antielastase activity. The treated mice showed a decrease in wrinkles as compared with water-treated mice.¹¹ Although this is just one study in mice, it may demonstrate a protective effect on elastic fibers on skin exposed to UVB light.

Late in 2020, Lee and colleagues reported on their study of the possible antiaging effects on the skin of (-)-phenolic compounds isolated from the root bark of U. davidiana. The function of collagenase MMP-1 was found to be inhibited by the isolate (-)-catechin, which also halted collagen degradation caused by TNF-alpha in normal human dermal fibroblasts. Further, the investigators demonstrated that the U. davidiana isolate (-)-catechin reduced the expression of proinflammatory cytokines such as IL-1B and IL-6. They concluded that the U. davidiana isolate exhibits the potential to combat intrinsic as well as extrinsic cutaneous aging.¹²

These findings are particularly intriguing. There is much overlap between intrinsic and extrinsic aging. If U. davidiana can keep collagen intact and inhibit cellular senescence, it may serve as an early intervention toward slowing or preventing skin aging.
 

Summary

Ulmus davidiana has a long history of use in Asia, but is new to the United States. Research has provided evidence of the anti-inflammatory and antiaging properties of this botanical cosmeceutical ingredient. Of greatest interest now, perhaps, is its potential to impede cellular senescence. Senescent cells release a multitude of inflammatory and other factors that hasten intrinsic aging. Blocking cellular senescence is an important approach to the prevention and treatment of skin aging.

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author, and entrepreneur in Miami. She founded the division of cosmetic dermatology at the University of Miami in 1997. The third edition of her bestselling textbook, “Cosmetic Dermatology,” was published in 2022. Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Galderma, Johnson & Johnson, and Burt’s Bees. She is the CEO of Skin Type Solutions, a SaaS company used to generate skin care routines in the office and as an ecommerce solution. Write to her at [email protected].

References

1. Lyu J et al. J Pharmacopuncture. 2013 Jun;16(2):41-5.

2. Eom SY et al. J Cosmet Sci. 2006 Sep-Oct;57(5):355-67.

3. So HM et al. Bioorg Chem. 2019 Oct;91:103145.

4. Choi HG et al. Phytother Res. 2013 Sep;27(9):1376-80.

5. Choi SY et al. J Med Food. 2010 Aug;13(4):1019-23.

6. Alishir A et al. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2021 Mar 15;36:127828.

7. Park TH et al. Saudi Pharm J. 2020 Jul;28(7):791-802.

8. Kwon YE et al. Molecules. 2022 Feb 19;27(4):1419.

9. Her Y et al. Molecules. 2020 Dec 29;26(1):124.

10. Yang HH et al. Planta Med. 2011 Mar;77(5):441-9.

11. Kim YO et al. Korean Journal of Medicinal Crop Science. 2011;19(6):508-13.
 

12. Lee S et al. Antioxidants (Basel). 2020 Oct 13;9(10):981.

While many gastroenterologists may be comfortable with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), most are not experts in women’s concerns about pregnancy. One study found that, although women with IBD may have concerns about the interplay of their disease and reproductive health, many have not had extensive conversations with their gastroenterologist about it. In fact, that same study found most women expect their gastroenterologist to initiate these conversations.

GI & Hepatology News sought input from a patient advocate about questions women with IBD often think about but may not always discuss with their gastroenterologists, and then solicited responses from thought leaders in IBD and pregnancy. In this roundtable discussion, Uma Mahadevan, MD, professor of medicine and the director of the Colitis and Crohn’s Disease Center at the University of California, San Francisco; Marla C. Dubinsky, MD, professor of medicine at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York; and Sunanda V. Kane, MD, professor of medicine at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., share how they respond to these questions in their clinical practice.
 

What should a woman with IBD who is interested in having biological children in the future be thinking about now?

Dr. Mahadevan: Because active disease is associated with lower rates of conception and higher rates of pregnancy loss, women with IBD should first ensure they are in remission. I like to document endoscopic healing with a colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy, but, if this has been done recently, a fecal calprotectin test can be helpful.

Women with IBD, particularly those with small bowel disease, are at risk for nutritional deficiencies, so prior to conception, I also check vitamin B-12, vitamin D, and iron, and repeat as needed. Zinc and folate can be considered. Those who are underweight should work with a nutritionist to ensure adequate caloric intake.

Dr. Dubinsky: I think it’s also important to stress the importance of taking their IBD medications because they can help patients achieve and maintain disease remission. Uncontrolled inflammation is a key risk factor for spontaneous abortion in the first trimester. Medication we would use in pregnancy is not putting them at risk for spontaneous abortion or congenital anomalies, which is what mothers to be are understandably most concerned about.

I am very honest and transparent with my patients: “About the only thing I need to take care of is you. If you are good, the baby is good.”

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Mahadevan mentioned, women with IBD are at higher risk for vitamin deficiencies, so those need to be corrected before conception. If they smoke, they should stop before conceiving.

There is no increased risk of infertility unless there has been a history of abdominal surgery.

Also, if women are not actively planning on getting pregnant, that would be important to share because some gastroenterologists will avoid certain effective medications if pregnancy is a possibility.

If a woman has had surgery for her IBD, could that make it harder for her to get pregnant?

Dr. Kane: Yes, it can because scar tissue may develop within the pelvis. However, if surgery is indicated to manage a patient’s IBD, then talk to the surgeon about ways that they might be able to reduce the risk of scar tissue formation.

Dr. Dubinsky: One thing to note is that almost all the data of infertility risk and scarring are based on open surgical techniques that involve dissection of the rectum. On the other hand, we don’t yet have enough prospective data on the impact of the modern era of laparoscopic surgery to suggest whether it affects fertility. More data is needed because providers may be giving women old information that is no longer relevant in the modern era.
 

If a woman is experiencing IBD symptoms, should she attempt to conceive?

Dr. Kane: Gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with IBD could be from active disease but also other things, so it’s important to have a thorough check-up to assess if there is active disease or not. Active disease can (but does not always) lead to a more complicated pregnancy, and conception is not recommended while a patient has active IBD.

Dr. Dubinsky: Although some patients feel an urgency to conceive regardless of disease activity, we need to do our due diligence and explain that we need to focus on getting them into the deepest remission possible, including endoscopic findings, biomarkers, and symptoms.

The most important gift you can give your future moms is to optimize the therapy they’re on before they conceive.
 

Is it important for someone who’s working with a gastroenterologist and an obstetrician to also work with a maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) specialist?

Dr. Kane: Having a diagnosis of IBD makes a woman’s pregnancy “high risk” because just having the diagnosis is associated with a higher risk of prematurity and small for gestational age – but importantly, not birth defects. A woman whose IBD is in remission should still have a discussion with an MFM specialist, just so everyone is on the same page.

Dr. Dubinsky: I refer to care with MFM specialists as “tighter monitoring.” I tell my patients that MFM specialists have managed many complex pregnancies and feel confident around the safety of their medications, understand the impact of when the baby may be exposed to certain medications, and will focus on following them more closely.
 

What are the risks of IBD medications during pregnancy and while breastfeeding? Should women stop their medications during pregnancy and breastfeeding?

Dr. Dubinsky: Organogenesis occurs in the first 10 weeks, so any medicines that cross the placenta during that time are up for discussion and debate. Methotrexate and the newer small molecules, such as Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors and S1P receptor modulators, do cross the placenta during the first trimester and need to be discontinued before conception, sometimes as early as 3 months before conception.

However, biologics are very large proteins and do not cross the placenta until closer to week 27. We are not advocating stopping biologics in advance of conception, or during pregnancy, or during breastfeeding. There is more risk to stopping than continuing.

Dr. Mahadevan: Methotrexate should be stopped at least 3 months prior to conception and should not be taken during pregnancy.

There are limited antibiotic safety data in pregnancy for the longer periods of time used in IBD. I generally prefer amoxicillin/clavulanic acid over ciprofloxacin or metronidazole, but short term (less than 2 weeks) use of any of those three are not contraindicated.

Mesalamine agents and thiopurine monotherapy can be continued through pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Biologic agents, such as anti–tumor necrosis factor, anti-interleukin 23, anti-integrin, and biosimilars, can be continued through pregnancy and during breastfeeding. Given limited exposure in the first trimester, there is no evidence of increased risk of birth defects. As Dr. Dubinsky pointed out, there is active transfer, particularly in the third trimester and minimal transfer in breast milk, but this has not been associated with harm.

Lastly, small molecules, such as the JAK inhibitors tofacitinib and upadacitinib, as well as ozanimod, have virtually no human safety data during pregnancy, and animal data show harm. The use of these agents in pregnancy is not recommended.

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Dubinsky stated, most of the medications our patients take are low risk to continue through pregnancy if the patients are in remission. Although a woman “in remission” on steroids is not really in remission and should not get pregnant until she is on something else.

As far as breastfeeding goes, that should be stopped if the patient is on methotrexate, cyclosporine, or certain antibiotics. If she is on more than 20 mg of prednisone, this can pass to the infant, and a mother should not breastfeed.

Women should avoid fenugreek as a lactation aid, as that contains a compound that can promote bleeding. Lactation cookies are ok.

Otherwise, there are lots of potential benefits to breastfeeding, and I encourage it.
 

How is a flare treated if it occurs during pregnancy?

Dr. Dubinsky: A flare during pregnancy is treated the same as a flare outside of pregnancy. We want to use noninvasive ways to confirm it, but I think we don’t need to overly investigate in most of our women. If they’re already on a biologic, you may consider changing.

Some women may need corticosteroids. It’s not our favorite move, but there is an urgency to getting a flare under control during pregnancy because of possible complications.

Dr. Mahadevan: Some of this is contingent on when during pregnancy the flare occurs. A patient who has a flare at 38 weeks’ gestation will likely proceed with delivery and the flare will be dealt with separately. Someone at 8 weeks’ gestation is at high risk for pregnancy loss, so treatment should be quick and effective.

As does Dr. Dubinsky, I do try to avoid steroids if possible. For example, I would rather start an effective biologic right away than drag out steroids to see if they will respond.

Dr. Kane: I would add that, if a mother is losing weight, she might need to be hospitalized for additional nutritional support. If surgery is necessary, we usually try to time it for the second or third trimester.

What needs to be taken into consideration regarding mode of delivery? Also, if a woman has undergone prior surgeries, do they increase the risk of delivery complications?

For ulcerative colitis, mode of delivery is based on obstetric, not gastrointestinal, variables. For Crohn’s disease, if there is evidence of perianal disease, then a cesarean is appropriate.

If there is no history of perianal disease, then delivery is based on obstetric variables.

For a woman who has a J pouch, if possible, the surgeon who created it should be contacted to ask about the technical aspects of the pouch and how it lies in the pelvis.
 

What’s the risk of a postpartum flare if a woman’s IBD remains in clinical remission during pregnancy?

Dr. Mahadevan: There is no increased risk of postpartum flare if a woman continues her IBD medications after delivery. Many of the reports of flare are from stopping medications (mistakenly often) to breastfeed.

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Mahadevan said, the risk of a flare is usually because a woman stops taking her medications because she thinks that medication will be passed to the infant through breastfeeding, which in most cases is not true.

Otherwise, there is not an increased risk of a flare in a 12-month period. However, it is important to monitor for symptoms after delivery; the risk of a flare is not zero.
 

What symptoms should women watch out for after delivery that may indicate an uptick in disease activity?

Dr. Kane: The same symptoms as before they were pregnant. Diarrhea, abdominal pain, and rectal bleeding are not normal after delivery and should be considered signs of returning disease.

As a gastroenterologist, is there any additional advice you’d offer about conception, fertility, and pregnancy when treating women with IBD?

Dr. Mahadevan: Women with IBD should, when feasible, have a planned pregnancy when in documented remission and under the care of their gastroenterologists, obstetrician, and an MFM specialist. Life happens, and this is not always possible. That said, a woman with IBD has the same chance of getting pregnant as a woman of the same age without IBD, unless she has active disease or a history of pelvic surgery. Women with IBD in remission will generally have healthy pregnancies if they continue appropriate medications.

Dr. Kane: Agreed. The majority of women with IBD will have normal, healthy pregnancies. It is important for them to not stop their IBD therapy without talking to their gastroenterologist first. Well-intentioned but ignorant obstetricians or midwives may recommend stopping, but then panic when disease flares and the mother’s health is at risk. Active inflammation is the worst enemy to a pregnancy, not active therapy.

Dr. Dubinsky: One additional thing to consider is: How do we help women with IBD who have delivered meet the needs of their family and continue to stay on their meds and be in good inflammatory control?

For example, we can give the biologic in the hospital after they’ve had a cesarean or a vaginal delivery and before they leave. We know that that is safe, giving that to them before they leave the hospital is a huge value added.

Another thing is possibly changing their infusions to home infusions. That would be helpful for the moms as well.


Dr. Mahadevan reports being a consultant for AbbVie, Janssen, Pfizer, Gilead, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Protagonist, Prometheus, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Dubinsky is a consultant for AbbVie, Arena, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Takeda, and Prometheus BioSciences. She is a shareholder and CEO of a publicly traded company, Trellis Health. Dr. Kane is a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Gilead, Janssen, Takeda, Seres Therapeutics, TechLab, United Healthcare, Predicta-Med, and InveniAI, and is the editor for the IBD section of UptoDate.
 

AGA Resource

Planning for a family can be challenging, and if your patient has IBD, there are additional factors to consider. The AGA IBD Parenthood Project is the “go-to” resource for everything patients need to know about IBD and pregnancy throughout all stages of family planning.

While many gastroenterologists may be comfortable with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), most are not experts in women’s concerns about pregnancy. One study found that, although women with IBD may have concerns about the interplay of their disease and reproductive health, many have not had extensive conversations with their gastroenterologist about it. In fact, that same study found most women expect their gastroenterologist to initiate these conversations.

GI & Hepatology News sought input from a patient advocate about questions women with IBD often think about but may not always discuss with their gastroenterologists, and then solicited responses from thought leaders in IBD and pregnancy. In this roundtable discussion, Uma Mahadevan, MD, professor of medicine and the director of the Colitis and Crohn’s Disease Center at the University of California, San Francisco; Marla C. Dubinsky, MD, professor of medicine at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York; and Sunanda V. Kane, MD, professor of medicine at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., share how they respond to these questions in their clinical practice.
 

What should a woman with IBD who is interested in having biological children in the future be thinking about now?

Dr. Mahadevan: Because active disease is associated with lower rates of conception and higher rates of pregnancy loss, women with IBD should first ensure they are in remission. I like to document endoscopic healing with a colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy, but, if this has been done recently, a fecal calprotectin test can be helpful.

Women with IBD, particularly those with small bowel disease, are at risk for nutritional deficiencies, so prior to conception, I also check vitamin B-12, vitamin D, and iron, and repeat as needed. Zinc and folate can be considered. Those who are underweight should work with a nutritionist to ensure adequate caloric intake.

Dr. Dubinsky: I think it’s also important to stress the importance of taking their IBD medications because they can help patients achieve and maintain disease remission. Uncontrolled inflammation is a key risk factor for spontaneous abortion in the first trimester. Medication we would use in pregnancy is not putting them at risk for spontaneous abortion or congenital anomalies, which is what mothers to be are understandably most concerned about.

I am very honest and transparent with my patients: “About the only thing I need to take care of is you. If you are good, the baby is good.”

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Mahadevan mentioned, women with IBD are at higher risk for vitamin deficiencies, so those need to be corrected before conception. If they smoke, they should stop before conceiving.

There is no increased risk of infertility unless there has been a history of abdominal surgery.

Also, if women are not actively planning on getting pregnant, that would be important to share because some gastroenterologists will avoid certain effective medications if pregnancy is a possibility.

If a woman has had surgery for her IBD, could that make it harder for her to get pregnant?

Dr. Kane: Yes, it can because scar tissue may develop within the pelvis. However, if surgery is indicated to manage a patient’s IBD, then talk to the surgeon about ways that they might be able to reduce the risk of scar tissue formation.

Dr. Dubinsky: One thing to note is that almost all the data of infertility risk and scarring are based on open surgical techniques that involve dissection of the rectum. On the other hand, we don’t yet have enough prospective data on the impact of the modern era of laparoscopic surgery to suggest whether it affects fertility. More data is needed because providers may be giving women old information that is no longer relevant in the modern era.
 

If a woman is experiencing IBD symptoms, should she attempt to conceive?

Dr. Kane: Gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with IBD could be from active disease but also other things, so it’s important to have a thorough check-up to assess if there is active disease or not. Active disease can (but does not always) lead to a more complicated pregnancy, and conception is not recommended while a patient has active IBD.

Dr. Dubinsky: Although some patients feel an urgency to conceive regardless of disease activity, we need to do our due diligence and explain that we need to focus on getting them into the deepest remission possible, including endoscopic findings, biomarkers, and symptoms.

The most important gift you can give your future moms is to optimize the therapy they’re on before they conceive.
 

Is it important for someone who’s working with a gastroenterologist and an obstetrician to also work with a maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) specialist?

Dr. Kane: Having a diagnosis of IBD makes a woman’s pregnancy “high risk” because just having the diagnosis is associated with a higher risk of prematurity and small for gestational age – but importantly, not birth defects. A woman whose IBD is in remission should still have a discussion with an MFM specialist, just so everyone is on the same page.

Dr. Dubinsky: I refer to care with MFM specialists as “tighter monitoring.” I tell my patients that MFM specialists have managed many complex pregnancies and feel confident around the safety of their medications, understand the impact of when the baby may be exposed to certain medications, and will focus on following them more closely.
 

What are the risks of IBD medications during pregnancy and while breastfeeding? Should women stop their medications during pregnancy and breastfeeding?

Dr. Dubinsky: Organogenesis occurs in the first 10 weeks, so any medicines that cross the placenta during that time are up for discussion and debate. Methotrexate and the newer small molecules, such as Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors and S1P receptor modulators, do cross the placenta during the first trimester and need to be discontinued before conception, sometimes as early as 3 months before conception.

However, biologics are very large proteins and do not cross the placenta until closer to week 27. We are not advocating stopping biologics in advance of conception, or during pregnancy, or during breastfeeding. There is more risk to stopping than continuing.

Dr. Mahadevan: Methotrexate should be stopped at least 3 months prior to conception and should not be taken during pregnancy.

There are limited antibiotic safety data in pregnancy for the longer periods of time used in IBD. I generally prefer amoxicillin/clavulanic acid over ciprofloxacin or metronidazole, but short term (less than 2 weeks) use of any of those three are not contraindicated.

Mesalamine agents and thiopurine monotherapy can be continued through pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Biologic agents, such as anti–tumor necrosis factor, anti-interleukin 23, anti-integrin, and biosimilars, can be continued through pregnancy and during breastfeeding. Given limited exposure in the first trimester, there is no evidence of increased risk of birth defects. As Dr. Dubinsky pointed out, there is active transfer, particularly in the third trimester and minimal transfer in breast milk, but this has not been associated with harm.

Lastly, small molecules, such as the JAK inhibitors tofacitinib and upadacitinib, as well as ozanimod, have virtually no human safety data during pregnancy, and animal data show harm. The use of these agents in pregnancy is not recommended.

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Dubinsky stated, most of the medications our patients take are low risk to continue through pregnancy if the patients are in remission. Although a woman “in remission” on steroids is not really in remission and should not get pregnant until she is on something else.

As far as breastfeeding goes, that should be stopped if the patient is on methotrexate, cyclosporine, or certain antibiotics. If she is on more than 20 mg of prednisone, this can pass to the infant, and a mother should not breastfeed.

Women should avoid fenugreek as a lactation aid, as that contains a compound that can promote bleeding. Lactation cookies are ok.

Otherwise, there are lots of potential benefits to breastfeeding, and I encourage it.
 

How is a flare treated if it occurs during pregnancy?

Dr. Dubinsky: A flare during pregnancy is treated the same as a flare outside of pregnancy. We want to use noninvasive ways to confirm it, but I think we don’t need to overly investigate in most of our women. If they’re already on a biologic, you may consider changing.

Some women may need corticosteroids. It’s not our favorite move, but there is an urgency to getting a flare under control during pregnancy because of possible complications.

Dr. Mahadevan: Some of this is contingent on when during pregnancy the flare occurs. A patient who has a flare at 38 weeks’ gestation will likely proceed with delivery and the flare will be dealt with separately. Someone at 8 weeks’ gestation is at high risk for pregnancy loss, so treatment should be quick and effective.

As does Dr. Dubinsky, I do try to avoid steroids if possible. For example, I would rather start an effective biologic right away than drag out steroids to see if they will respond.

Dr. Kane: I would add that, if a mother is losing weight, she might need to be hospitalized for additional nutritional support. If surgery is necessary, we usually try to time it for the second or third trimester.

What needs to be taken into consideration regarding mode of delivery? Also, if a woman has undergone prior surgeries, do they increase the risk of delivery complications?

For ulcerative colitis, mode of delivery is based on obstetric, not gastrointestinal, variables. For Crohn’s disease, if there is evidence of perianal disease, then a cesarean is appropriate.

If there is no history of perianal disease, then delivery is based on obstetric variables.

For a woman who has a J pouch, if possible, the surgeon who created it should be contacted to ask about the technical aspects of the pouch and how it lies in the pelvis.
 

What’s the risk of a postpartum flare if a woman’s IBD remains in clinical remission during pregnancy?

Dr. Mahadevan: There is no increased risk of postpartum flare if a woman continues her IBD medications after delivery. Many of the reports of flare are from stopping medications (mistakenly often) to breastfeed.

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Mahadevan said, the risk of a flare is usually because a woman stops taking her medications because she thinks that medication will be passed to the infant through breastfeeding, which in most cases is not true.

Otherwise, there is not an increased risk of a flare in a 12-month period. However, it is important to monitor for symptoms after delivery; the risk of a flare is not zero.
 

What symptoms should women watch out for after delivery that may indicate an uptick in disease activity?

Dr. Kane: The same symptoms as before they were pregnant. Diarrhea, abdominal pain, and rectal bleeding are not normal after delivery and should be considered signs of returning disease.

As a gastroenterologist, is there any additional advice you’d offer about conception, fertility, and pregnancy when treating women with IBD?

Dr. Mahadevan: Women with IBD should, when feasible, have a planned pregnancy when in documented remission and under the care of their gastroenterologists, obstetrician, and an MFM specialist. Life happens, and this is not always possible. That said, a woman with IBD has the same chance of getting pregnant as a woman of the same age without IBD, unless she has active disease or a history of pelvic surgery. Women with IBD in remission will generally have healthy pregnancies if they continue appropriate medications.

Dr. Kane: Agreed. The majority of women with IBD will have normal, healthy pregnancies. It is important for them to not stop their IBD therapy without talking to their gastroenterologist first. Well-intentioned but ignorant obstetricians or midwives may recommend stopping, but then panic when disease flares and the mother’s health is at risk. Active inflammation is the worst enemy to a pregnancy, not active therapy.

Dr. Dubinsky: One additional thing to consider is: How do we help women with IBD who have delivered meet the needs of their family and continue to stay on their meds and be in good inflammatory control?

For example, we can give the biologic in the hospital after they’ve had a cesarean or a vaginal delivery and before they leave. We know that that is safe, giving that to them before they leave the hospital is a huge value added.

Another thing is possibly changing their infusions to home infusions. That would be helpful for the moms as well.


Dr. Mahadevan reports being a consultant for AbbVie, Janssen, Pfizer, Gilead, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Protagonist, Prometheus, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Dubinsky is a consultant for AbbVie, Arena, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Takeda, and Prometheus BioSciences. She is a shareholder and CEO of a publicly traded company, Trellis Health. Dr. Kane is a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Gilead, Janssen, Takeda, Seres Therapeutics, TechLab, United Healthcare, Predicta-Med, and InveniAI, and is the editor for the IBD section of UptoDate.
 

AGA Resource

Planning for a family can be challenging, and if your patient has IBD, there are additional factors to consider. The AGA IBD Parenthood Project is the “go-to” resource for everything patients need to know about IBD and pregnancy throughout all stages of family planning.

While many gastroenterologists may be comfortable with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), most are not experts in women’s concerns about pregnancy. One study found that, although women with IBD may have concerns about the interplay of their disease and reproductive health, many have not had extensive conversations with their gastroenterologist about it. In fact, that same study found most women expect their gastroenterologist to initiate these conversations.

GI & Hepatology News sought input from a patient advocate about questions women with IBD often think about but may not always discuss with their gastroenterologists, and then solicited responses from thought leaders in IBD and pregnancy. In this roundtable discussion, Uma Mahadevan, MD, professor of medicine and the director of the Colitis and Crohn’s Disease Center at the University of California, San Francisco; Marla C. Dubinsky, MD, professor of medicine at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York; and Sunanda V. Kane, MD, professor of medicine at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., share how they respond to these questions in their clinical practice.
 

What should a woman with IBD who is interested in having biological children in the future be thinking about now?

Dr. Mahadevan: Because active disease is associated with lower rates of conception and higher rates of pregnancy loss, women with IBD should first ensure they are in remission. I like to document endoscopic healing with a colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy, but, if this has been done recently, a fecal calprotectin test can be helpful.

Women with IBD, particularly those with small bowel disease, are at risk for nutritional deficiencies, so prior to conception, I also check vitamin B-12, vitamin D, and iron, and repeat as needed. Zinc and folate can be considered. Those who are underweight should work with a nutritionist to ensure adequate caloric intake.

Dr. Dubinsky: I think it’s also important to stress the importance of taking their IBD medications because they can help patients achieve and maintain disease remission. Uncontrolled inflammation is a key risk factor for spontaneous abortion in the first trimester. Medication we would use in pregnancy is not putting them at risk for spontaneous abortion or congenital anomalies, which is what mothers to be are understandably most concerned about.

I am very honest and transparent with my patients: “About the only thing I need to take care of is you. If you are good, the baby is good.”

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Mahadevan mentioned, women with IBD are at higher risk for vitamin deficiencies, so those need to be corrected before conception. If they smoke, they should stop before conceiving.

There is no increased risk of infertility unless there has been a history of abdominal surgery.

Also, if women are not actively planning on getting pregnant, that would be important to share because some gastroenterologists will avoid certain effective medications if pregnancy is a possibility.

If a woman has had surgery for her IBD, could that make it harder for her to get pregnant?

Dr. Kane: Yes, it can because scar tissue may develop within the pelvis. However, if surgery is indicated to manage a patient’s IBD, then talk to the surgeon about ways that they might be able to reduce the risk of scar tissue formation.

Dr. Dubinsky: One thing to note is that almost all the data of infertility risk and scarring are based on open surgical techniques that involve dissection of the rectum. On the other hand, we don’t yet have enough prospective data on the impact of the modern era of laparoscopic surgery to suggest whether it affects fertility. More data is needed because providers may be giving women old information that is no longer relevant in the modern era.
 

If a woman is experiencing IBD symptoms, should she attempt to conceive?

Dr. Kane: Gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with IBD could be from active disease but also other things, so it’s important to have a thorough check-up to assess if there is active disease or not. Active disease can (but does not always) lead to a more complicated pregnancy, and conception is not recommended while a patient has active IBD.

Dr. Dubinsky: Although some patients feel an urgency to conceive regardless of disease activity, we need to do our due diligence and explain that we need to focus on getting them into the deepest remission possible, including endoscopic findings, biomarkers, and symptoms.

The most important gift you can give your future moms is to optimize the therapy they’re on before they conceive.
 

Is it important for someone who’s working with a gastroenterologist and an obstetrician to also work with a maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) specialist?

Dr. Kane: Having a diagnosis of IBD makes a woman’s pregnancy “high risk” because just having the diagnosis is associated with a higher risk of prematurity and small for gestational age – but importantly, not birth defects. A woman whose IBD is in remission should still have a discussion with an MFM specialist, just so everyone is on the same page.

Dr. Dubinsky: I refer to care with MFM specialists as “tighter monitoring.” I tell my patients that MFM specialists have managed many complex pregnancies and feel confident around the safety of their medications, understand the impact of when the baby may be exposed to certain medications, and will focus on following them more closely.
 

What are the risks of IBD medications during pregnancy and while breastfeeding? Should women stop their medications during pregnancy and breastfeeding?

Dr. Dubinsky: Organogenesis occurs in the first 10 weeks, so any medicines that cross the placenta during that time are up for discussion and debate. Methotrexate and the newer small molecules, such as Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors and S1P receptor modulators, do cross the placenta during the first trimester and need to be discontinued before conception, sometimes as early as 3 months before conception.

However, biologics are very large proteins and do not cross the placenta until closer to week 27. We are not advocating stopping biologics in advance of conception, or during pregnancy, or during breastfeeding. There is more risk to stopping than continuing.

Dr. Mahadevan: Methotrexate should be stopped at least 3 months prior to conception and should not be taken during pregnancy.

There are limited antibiotic safety data in pregnancy for the longer periods of time used in IBD. I generally prefer amoxicillin/clavulanic acid over ciprofloxacin or metronidazole, but short term (less than 2 weeks) use of any of those three are not contraindicated.

Mesalamine agents and thiopurine monotherapy can be continued through pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Biologic agents, such as anti–tumor necrosis factor, anti-interleukin 23, anti-integrin, and biosimilars, can be continued through pregnancy and during breastfeeding. Given limited exposure in the first trimester, there is no evidence of increased risk of birth defects. As Dr. Dubinsky pointed out, there is active transfer, particularly in the third trimester and minimal transfer in breast milk, but this has not been associated with harm.

Lastly, small molecules, such as the JAK inhibitors tofacitinib and upadacitinib, as well as ozanimod, have virtually no human safety data during pregnancy, and animal data show harm. The use of these agents in pregnancy is not recommended.

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Dubinsky stated, most of the medications our patients take are low risk to continue through pregnancy if the patients are in remission. Although a woman “in remission” on steroids is not really in remission and should not get pregnant until she is on something else.

As far as breastfeeding goes, that should be stopped if the patient is on methotrexate, cyclosporine, or certain antibiotics. If she is on more than 20 mg of prednisone, this can pass to the infant, and a mother should not breastfeed.

Women should avoid fenugreek as a lactation aid, as that contains a compound that can promote bleeding. Lactation cookies are ok.

Otherwise, there are lots of potential benefits to breastfeeding, and I encourage it.
 

How is a flare treated if it occurs during pregnancy?

Dr. Dubinsky: A flare during pregnancy is treated the same as a flare outside of pregnancy. We want to use noninvasive ways to confirm it, but I think we don’t need to overly investigate in most of our women. If they’re already on a biologic, you may consider changing.

Some women may need corticosteroids. It’s not our favorite move, but there is an urgency to getting a flare under control during pregnancy because of possible complications.

Dr. Mahadevan: Some of this is contingent on when during pregnancy the flare occurs. A patient who has a flare at 38 weeks’ gestation will likely proceed with delivery and the flare will be dealt with separately. Someone at 8 weeks’ gestation is at high risk for pregnancy loss, so treatment should be quick and effective.

As does Dr. Dubinsky, I do try to avoid steroids if possible. For example, I would rather start an effective biologic right away than drag out steroids to see if they will respond.

Dr. Kane: I would add that, if a mother is losing weight, she might need to be hospitalized for additional nutritional support. If surgery is necessary, we usually try to time it for the second or third trimester.

What needs to be taken into consideration regarding mode of delivery? Also, if a woman has undergone prior surgeries, do they increase the risk of delivery complications?

For ulcerative colitis, mode of delivery is based on obstetric, not gastrointestinal, variables. For Crohn’s disease, if there is evidence of perianal disease, then a cesarean is appropriate.

If there is no history of perianal disease, then delivery is based on obstetric variables.

For a woman who has a J pouch, if possible, the surgeon who created it should be contacted to ask about the technical aspects of the pouch and how it lies in the pelvis.
 

What’s the risk of a postpartum flare if a woman’s IBD remains in clinical remission during pregnancy?

Dr. Mahadevan: There is no increased risk of postpartum flare if a woman continues her IBD medications after delivery. Many of the reports of flare are from stopping medications (mistakenly often) to breastfeed.

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Mahadevan said, the risk of a flare is usually because a woman stops taking her medications because she thinks that medication will be passed to the infant through breastfeeding, which in most cases is not true.

Otherwise, there is not an increased risk of a flare in a 12-month period. However, it is important to monitor for symptoms after delivery; the risk of a flare is not zero.
 

What symptoms should women watch out for after delivery that may indicate an uptick in disease activity?

Dr. Kane: The same symptoms as before they were pregnant. Diarrhea, abdominal pain, and rectal bleeding are not normal after delivery and should be considered signs of returning disease.

As a gastroenterologist, is there any additional advice you’d offer about conception, fertility, and pregnancy when treating women with IBD?

Dr. Mahadevan: Women with IBD should, when feasible, have a planned pregnancy when in documented remission and under the care of their gastroenterologists, obstetrician, and an MFM specialist. Life happens, and this is not always possible. That said, a woman with IBD has the same chance of getting pregnant as a woman of the same age without IBD, unless she has active disease or a history of pelvic surgery. Women with IBD in remission will generally have healthy pregnancies if they continue appropriate medications.

Dr. Kane: Agreed. The majority of women with IBD will have normal, healthy pregnancies. It is important for them to not stop their IBD therapy without talking to their gastroenterologist first. Well-intentioned but ignorant obstetricians or midwives may recommend stopping, but then panic when disease flares and the mother’s health is at risk. Active inflammation is the worst enemy to a pregnancy, not active therapy.

Dr. Dubinsky: One additional thing to consider is: How do we help women with IBD who have delivered meet the needs of their family and continue to stay on their meds and be in good inflammatory control?

For example, we can give the biologic in the hospital after they’ve had a cesarean or a vaginal delivery and before they leave. We know that that is safe, giving that to them before they leave the hospital is a huge value added.

Another thing is possibly changing their infusions to home infusions. That would be helpful for the moms as well.


Dr. Mahadevan reports being a consultant for AbbVie, Janssen, Pfizer, Gilead, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Protagonist, Prometheus, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Dubinsky is a consultant for AbbVie, Arena, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Takeda, and Prometheus BioSciences. She is a shareholder and CEO of a publicly traded company, Trellis Health. Dr. Kane is a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Gilead, Janssen, Takeda, Seres Therapeutics, TechLab, United Healthcare, Predicta-Med, and InveniAI, and is the editor for the IBD section of UptoDate.
 

AGA Resource

Planning for a family can be challenging, and if your patient has IBD, there are additional factors to consider. The AGA IBD Parenthood Project is the “go-to” resource for everything patients need to know about IBD and pregnancy throughout all stages of family planning.

While many gastroenterologists may be comfortable with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), most are not experts in women’s concerns about pregnancy. One study found that, although women with IBD may have concerns about the interplay of their disease and reproductive health, many have not had extensive conversations with their gastroenterologist about it. In fact, that same study found most women expect their gastroenterologist to initiate these conversations.

GI & Hepatology News sought input from a patient advocate about questions women with IBD often think about but may not always discuss with their gastroenterologists, and then solicited responses from thought leaders in IBD and pregnancy. In this roundtable discussion, Uma Mahadevan, MD, professor of medicine and the director of the Colitis and Crohn’s Disease Center at the University of California, San Francisco; Marla C. Dubinsky, MD, professor of medicine at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York; and Sunanda V. Kane, MD, professor of medicine at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., share how they respond to these questions in their clinical practice.
 

What should a woman with IBD who is interested in having biological children in the future be thinking about now?

Dr. Mahadevan: Because active disease is associated with lower rates of conception and higher rates of pregnancy loss, women with IBD should first ensure they are in remission. I like to document endoscopic healing with a colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy, but, if this has been done recently, a fecal calprotectin test can be helpful.

Women with IBD, particularly those with small bowel disease, are at risk for nutritional deficiencies, so prior to conception, I also check vitamin B-12, vitamin D, and iron, and repeat as needed. Zinc and folate can be considered. Those who are underweight should work with a nutritionist to ensure adequate caloric intake.

Dr. Dubinsky: I think it’s also important to stress the importance of taking their IBD medications because they can help patients achieve and maintain disease remission. Uncontrolled inflammation is a key risk factor for spontaneous abortion in the first trimester. Medication we would use in pregnancy is not putting them at risk for spontaneous abortion or congenital anomalies, which is what mothers to be are understandably most concerned about.

I am very honest and transparent with my patients: “About the only thing I need to take care of is you. If you are good, the baby is good.”

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Mahadevan mentioned, women with IBD are at higher risk for vitamin deficiencies so those need to be corrected before conception. If they smoke, they should stop before conceiving.

There is no increased risk of infertility unless there has been a history of abdominal surgery.

Also, if women are not actively planning on getting pregnant, that would be important to share because some gastroenterologists will avoid certain effective medications if pregnancy is a possibility.

If a woman has had surgery for her IBD, could that make it harder for her to get pregnant?

Dr. Kane: Yes, it can because scar tissue may develop within the pelvis. However, if surgery is indicated to manage a patient’s IBD, then talk to the surgeon about ways that they might be able to reduce the risk of scar tissue formation.

Dr. Dubinsky: One thing to note is that almost all the data of infertility risk and scarring are based on open surgical techniques that involve dissection of the rectum. On the other hand, we don’t yet have enough prospective data on the impact of the modern era of laparoscopic surgery to suggest whether it affects fertility. More data is needed because providers may be giving women old information that is no longer relevant in the modern era.
 

If a woman is experiencing IBD symptoms, should she attempt to conceive?

Dr. Kane: Gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with IBD could be from active disease but also other things, so it’s important to have a thorough check-up to assess if there is active disease or not. Active disease can (but does not always) lead to a more complicated pregnancy, and conception is not recommended while a patient has active IBD.

Dr. Dubinsky: Although some patients feel an urgency to conceive regardless of disease activity, we need to do our due diligence and explain that we need to focus on getting them into the deepest remission possible, including endoscopic findings, biomarkers, and symptoms.

The most important gift you can give your future moms is to optimize the therapy they’re on before they conceive.
 

Is it important for someone who’s working with a gastroenterologist and an obstetrician to also work with a maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) specialist?

Dr. Kane: Having a diagnosis of IBD makes a woman’s pregnancy “high risk” because just having the diagnosis is associated with a higher risk of prematurity and small for gestational age – but importantly, not birth defects. A woman whose IBD is in remission should still have a discussion with an MFM specialist, just so everyone is on the same page.

Dr. Dubinsky: I refer to care with MFM specialists as “tighter monitoring.” I tell my patients that MFM specialists have managed many complex pregnancies and feel confident around the safety of their medications, understand the impact of when the baby may be exposed to certain medications, and will focus on following them more closely.
 

What are the risks of IBD medications during pregnancy and while breastfeeding? Should women stop their medications during pregnancy and breastfeeding?

Dr. Dubinsky: Organogenesis occurs in the first 10 weeks, so any medicines that cross the placenta during that time are up for discussion and debate. Methotrexate and the newer small molecules, such as Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors and S1P receptor modulators, do cross the placenta during the first trimester and need to be discontinued before conception, sometimes as early as 3 months before conception.

However, biologics are very large proteins and do not cross the placenta until closer to week 27. We are not advocating stopping biologics in advance of conception, or during pregnancy, or during breastfeeding. There is more risk to stopping than continuing.

Dr. Mahadevan: Methotrexate should be stopped at least 3 months prior to conception and should not be taken during pregnancy.

There are limited antibiotic safety data in pregnancy for the longer periods of time used in IBD. I generally prefer amoxicillin/clavulanic acid over ciprofloxacin or metronidazole, but short term (less than 2 weeks) use of any of those three are not contraindicated.

Mesalamine agents and thiopurine monotherapy can be continued through pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Biologic agents, such as anti–tumor necrosis factor, anti-interleukin 23, anti-integrin, and biosimilars, can be continued through pregnancy and during breastfeeding. Given limited exposure in the first trimester, there is no evidence of increased risk of birth defects. As Dr. Dubinsky pointed out, there is active transfer, particularly in the third trimester and minimal transfer in breast milk, but this has not been associated with harm.

Lastly, small molecules, such as the JAK inhibitors tofacitinib and upadacitinib, as well as ozanimod, have virtually no human safety data during pregnancy, and animal data show harm. The use of these agents in pregnancy is not recommended.

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Dubinsky stated, most of the medications our patients take are low risk to continue through pregnancy if the patients are in remission. Although a woman “in remission” on steroids is not really in remission and should not get pregnant until she is on something else.

As far as breastfeeding goes, that should be stopped if the patient is on methotrexate, cyclosporine, or certain antibiotics. If she is on more than 20 mg of prednisone this can pass to the infant, and a mother should not breastfeed.

Women should avoid fenugreek as a lactation aid, as that contains a compound that can promote bleeding. Lactation cookies are ok.

Otherwise, there are lots of potential benefits to breastfeeding, and I encourage it.
 

How is a flare treated if it occurs during pregnancy?

Dr. Dubinsky: A flare during pregnancy is treated the same as a flare outside of pregnancy. We want to use noninvasive ways to confirm it, but I think we don’t need to overly investigate in most of our women. If they’re already on a biologic, you may consider changing.

Some women may need corticosteroids. It’s not our favorite move, but there is an urgency to getting a flare under control during pregnancy because of possible complications.

Dr. Mahadevan: Some of this is contingent on when during pregnancy the flare occurs. A patient who has a flare at 38 weeks’ gestation will likely proceed with delivery and the flare will be dealt with separately. Someone at 8 weeks’ gestation is at high risk for pregnancy loss, so treatment should be quick and effective.

As does Dr. Dubinsky, I do try to avoid steroids if possible. For example, I would rather start an effective biologic right away than drag out steroids to see if they will respond.

Dr. Kane: I would add that, if a mother is losing weight, she might need to be hospitalized for additional nutritional support. If surgery is necessary, we usually try to time it for the second or third trimester.

What needs to be taken into consideration regarding mode of delivery? Also, if a woman has undergone prior surgeries, do they increase the risk of delivery complications?

For ulcerative colitis, mode of delivery is based on obstetric, not gastrointestinal, variables. For Crohn’s disease, if there is evidence of perianal disease, then a cesarean is appropriate.

If there is no history of perianal disease, then delivery is based on obstetric variables.

For a woman who has a J pouch, if possible, the surgeon who created it should be contacted to ask about the technical aspects of the pouch and how it lies in the pelvis.
 

What’s the risk of a postpartum flare if a woman’s IBD remains in clinical remission during pregnancy?

Dr. Mahadevan: There is no increased risk of postpartum flare if a woman continues her IBD medications after delivery. Many of the reports of flare are from stopping medications (mistakenly often) to breastfeed.

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Mahadevan said, the risk of a flare is usually because a woman stops taking her medications because she thinks that medication will be passed to the infant through breastfeeding, which in most cases is not true.

Otherwise, there is not an increased risk of a flare in a 12-month period. However, it is important to monitor for symptoms after delivery; the risk of a flare is not zero.
 

What symptoms should women watch out for after delivery that may indicate an uptick in disease activity?

Dr. Kane: The same symptoms as before they were pregnant. Diarrhea, abdominal pain, and rectal bleeding are not normal after delivery and should be considered signs of returning disease.

As a gastroenterologist, is there any additional advice you’d offer about conception, fertility, and pregnancy when treating women with IBD?

Dr. Mahadevan: Women with IBD should, when feasible, have a planned pregnancy when in documented remission and under the care of their gastroenterologists, obstetrician, and an MFM specialist. Life happens, and this is not always possible. That said, a woman with IBD has the same chance of getting pregnant as a woman of the same age without IBD, unless she has active disease or a history of pelvic surgery. Women with IBD in remission will generally have healthy pregnancies if they continue appropriate medications.

Dr. Kane: Agreed. The majority of women with IBD will have normal, healthy pregnancies. It is important for them to not stop their IBD therapy without talking to their gastroenterologist first. Well-intentioned but ignorant obstetricians or midwives may recommend stopping, but then panic when disease flares and the mother’s health is at risk. Active inflammation is the worst enemy to a pregnancy, not active therapy.

Dr. Dubinsky: One additional thing to consider is: How do we help women with IBD who have delivered meet the needs of their family and continue to stay on their meds and be in good inflammatory control?

For example, we can give the biologic in the hospital after they’ve had a cesarean or a vaginal delivery and before they leave. We know that that is safe, giving that to them before they leave the hospital is a huge value added.

Another thing is possibly changing their infusions to home infusions. That would be helpful for the moms as well.

Dr. Mahadevan reports being a consultant for AbbVie, Janssen, Pfizer, Gilead, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Protagonist, Prometheus, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Dubinsky is a consultant for AbbVie, Arena, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Takeda, and Prometheus BioSciences. She is a shareholder and CEO of a publicly traded company, Trellis Health. Dr. Kane is a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Gilead, Janssen, Takeda, Seres Therapeutics, TechLab, United Healthcare, Predicta-Med, and InveniAI, and is the editor for the IBD section of UptoDate.

While many gastroenterologists may be comfortable with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), most are not experts in women’s concerns about pregnancy. One study found that, although women with IBD may have concerns about the interplay of their disease and reproductive health, many have not had extensive conversations with their gastroenterologist about it. In fact, that same study found most women expect their gastroenterologist to initiate these conversations.

GI & Hepatology News sought input from a patient advocate about questions women with IBD often think about but may not always discuss with their gastroenterologists, and then solicited responses from thought leaders in IBD and pregnancy. In this roundtable discussion, Uma Mahadevan, MD, professor of medicine and the director of the Colitis and Crohn’s Disease Center at the University of California, San Francisco; Marla C. Dubinsky, MD, professor of medicine at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York; and Sunanda V. Kane, MD, professor of medicine at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., share how they respond to these questions in their clinical practice.
 

What should a woman with IBD who is interested in having biological children in the future be thinking about now?

Dr. Mahadevan: Because active disease is associated with lower rates of conception and higher rates of pregnancy loss, women with IBD should first ensure they are in remission. I like to document endoscopic healing with a colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy, but, if this has been done recently, a fecal calprotectin test can be helpful.

Women with IBD, particularly those with small bowel disease, are at risk for nutritional deficiencies, so prior to conception, I also check vitamin B-12, vitamin D, and iron, and repeat as needed. Zinc and folate can be considered. Those who are underweight should work with a nutritionist to ensure adequate caloric intake.

Dr. Dubinsky: I think it’s also important to stress the importance of taking their IBD medications because they can help patients achieve and maintain disease remission. Uncontrolled inflammation is a key risk factor for spontaneous abortion in the first trimester. Medication we would use in pregnancy is not putting them at risk for spontaneous abortion or congenital anomalies, which is what mothers to be are understandably most concerned about.

I am very honest and transparent with my patients: “About the only thing I need to take care of is you. If you are good, the baby is good.”

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Mahadevan mentioned, women with IBD are at higher risk for vitamin deficiencies so those need to be corrected before conception. If they smoke, they should stop before conceiving.

There is no increased risk of infertility unless there has been a history of abdominal surgery.

Also, if women are not actively planning on getting pregnant, that would be important to share because some gastroenterologists will avoid certain effective medications if pregnancy is a possibility.

If a woman has had surgery for her IBD, could that make it harder for her to get pregnant?

Dr. Kane: Yes, it can because scar tissue may develop within the pelvis. However, if surgery is indicated to manage a patient’s IBD, then talk to the surgeon about ways that they might be able to reduce the risk of scar tissue formation.

Dr. Dubinsky: One thing to note is that almost all the data of infertility risk and scarring are based on open surgical techniques that involve dissection of the rectum. On the other hand, we don’t yet have enough prospective data on the impact of the modern era of laparoscopic surgery to suggest whether it affects fertility. More data is needed because providers may be giving women old information that is no longer relevant in the modern era.
 

If a woman is experiencing IBD symptoms, should she attempt to conceive?

Dr. Kane: Gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with IBD could be from active disease but also other things, so it’s important to have a thorough check-up to assess if there is active disease or not. Active disease can (but does not always) lead to a more complicated pregnancy, and conception is not recommended while a patient has active IBD.

Dr. Dubinsky: Although some patients feel an urgency to conceive regardless of disease activity, we need to do our due diligence and explain that we need to focus on getting them into the deepest remission possible, including endoscopic findings, biomarkers, and symptoms.

The most important gift you can give your future moms is to optimize the therapy they’re on before they conceive.
 

Is it important for someone who’s working with a gastroenterologist and an obstetrician to also work with a maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) specialist?

Dr. Kane: Having a diagnosis of IBD makes a woman’s pregnancy “high risk” because just having the diagnosis is associated with a higher risk of prematurity and small for gestational age – but importantly, not birth defects. A woman whose IBD is in remission should still have a discussion with an MFM specialist, just so everyone is on the same page.

Dr. Dubinsky: I refer to care with MFM specialists as “tighter monitoring.” I tell my patients that MFM specialists have managed many complex pregnancies and feel confident around the safety of their medications, understand the impact of when the baby may be exposed to certain medications, and will focus on following them more closely.
 

What are the risks of IBD medications during pregnancy and while breastfeeding? Should women stop their medications during pregnancy and breastfeeding?

Dr. Dubinsky: Organogenesis occurs in the first 10 weeks, so any medicines that cross the placenta during that time are up for discussion and debate. Methotrexate and the newer small molecules, such as Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors and S1P receptor modulators, do cross the placenta during the first trimester and need to be discontinued before conception, sometimes as early as 3 months before conception.

However, biologics are very large proteins and do not cross the placenta until closer to week 27. We are not advocating stopping biologics in advance of conception, or during pregnancy, or during breastfeeding. There is more risk to stopping than continuing.

Dr. Mahadevan: Methotrexate should be stopped at least 3 months prior to conception and should not be taken during pregnancy.

There are limited antibiotic safety data in pregnancy for the longer periods of time used in IBD. I generally prefer amoxicillin/clavulanic acid over ciprofloxacin or metronidazole, but short term (less than 2 weeks) use of any of those three are not contraindicated.

Mesalamine agents and thiopurine monotherapy can be continued through pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Biologic agents, such as anti–tumor necrosis factor, anti-interleukin 23, anti-integrin, and biosimilars, can be continued through pregnancy and during breastfeeding. Given limited exposure in the first trimester, there is no evidence of increased risk of birth defects. As Dr. Dubinsky pointed out, there is active transfer, particularly in the third trimester and minimal transfer in breast milk, but this has not been associated with harm.

Lastly, small molecules, such as the JAK inhibitors tofacitinib and upadacitinib, as well as ozanimod, have virtually no human safety data during pregnancy, and animal data show harm. The use of these agents in pregnancy is not recommended.

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Dubinsky stated, most of the medications our patients take are low risk to continue through pregnancy if the patients are in remission. Although a woman “in remission” on steroids is not really in remission and should not get pregnant until she is on something else.

As far as breastfeeding goes, that should be stopped if the patient is on methotrexate, cyclosporine, or certain antibiotics. If she is on more than 20 mg of prednisone this can pass to the infant, and a mother should not breastfeed.

Women should avoid fenugreek as a lactation aid, as that contains a compound that can promote bleeding. Lactation cookies are ok.

Otherwise, there are lots of potential benefits to breastfeeding, and I encourage it.
 

How is a flare treated if it occurs during pregnancy?

Dr. Dubinsky: A flare during pregnancy is treated the same as a flare outside of pregnancy. We want to use noninvasive ways to confirm it, but I think we don’t need to overly investigate in most of our women. If they’re already on a biologic, you may consider changing.

Some women may need corticosteroids. It’s not our favorite move, but there is an urgency to getting a flare under control during pregnancy because of possible complications.

Dr. Mahadevan: Some of this is contingent on when during pregnancy the flare occurs. A patient who has a flare at 38 weeks’ gestation will likely proceed with delivery and the flare will be dealt with separately. Someone at 8 weeks’ gestation is at high risk for pregnancy loss, so treatment should be quick and effective.

As does Dr. Dubinsky, I do try to avoid steroids if possible. For example, I would rather start an effective biologic right away than drag out steroids to see if they will respond.

Dr. Kane: I would add that, if a mother is losing weight, she might need to be hospitalized for additional nutritional support. If surgery is necessary, we usually try to time it for the second or third trimester.

What needs to be taken into consideration regarding mode of delivery? Also, if a woman has undergone prior surgeries, do they increase the risk of delivery complications?

For ulcerative colitis, mode of delivery is based on obstetric, not gastrointestinal, variables. For Crohn’s disease, if there is evidence of perianal disease, then a cesarean is appropriate.

If there is no history of perianal disease, then delivery is based on obstetric variables.

For a woman who has a J pouch, if possible, the surgeon who created it should be contacted to ask about the technical aspects of the pouch and how it lies in the pelvis.
 

What’s the risk of a postpartum flare if a woman’s IBD remains in clinical remission during pregnancy?

Dr. Mahadevan: There is no increased risk of postpartum flare if a woman continues her IBD medications after delivery. Many of the reports of flare are from stopping medications (mistakenly often) to breastfeed.

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Mahadevan said, the risk of a flare is usually because a woman stops taking her medications because she thinks that medication will be passed to the infant through breastfeeding, which in most cases is not true.

Otherwise, there is not an increased risk of a flare in a 12-month period. However, it is important to monitor for symptoms after delivery; the risk of a flare is not zero.
 

What symptoms should women watch out for after delivery that may indicate an uptick in disease activity?

Dr. Kane: The same symptoms as before they were pregnant. Diarrhea, abdominal pain, and rectal bleeding are not normal after delivery and should be considered signs of returning disease.

As a gastroenterologist, is there any additional advice you’d offer about conception, fertility, and pregnancy when treating women with IBD?

Dr. Mahadevan: Women with IBD should, when feasible, have a planned pregnancy when in documented remission and under the care of their gastroenterologists, obstetrician, and an MFM specialist. Life happens, and this is not always possible. That said, a woman with IBD has the same chance of getting pregnant as a woman of the same age without IBD, unless she has active disease or a history of pelvic surgery. Women with IBD in remission will generally have healthy pregnancies if they continue appropriate medications.

Dr. Kane: Agreed. The majority of women with IBD will have normal, healthy pregnancies. It is important for them to not stop their IBD therapy without talking to their gastroenterologist first. Well-intentioned but ignorant obstetricians or midwives may recommend stopping, but then panic when disease flares and the mother’s health is at risk. Active inflammation is the worst enemy to a pregnancy, not active therapy.

Dr. Dubinsky: One additional thing to consider is: How do we help women with IBD who have delivered meet the needs of their family and continue to stay on their meds and be in good inflammatory control?

For example, we can give the biologic in the hospital after they’ve had a cesarean or a vaginal delivery and before they leave. We know that that is safe, giving that to them before they leave the hospital is a huge value added.

Another thing is possibly changing their infusions to home infusions. That would be helpful for the moms as well.

Dr. Mahadevan reports being a consultant for AbbVie, Janssen, Pfizer, Gilead, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Protagonist, Prometheus, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Dubinsky is a consultant for AbbVie, Arena, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Takeda, and Prometheus BioSciences. She is a shareholder and CEO of a publicly traded company, Trellis Health. Dr. Kane is a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Gilead, Janssen, Takeda, Seres Therapeutics, TechLab, United Healthcare, Predicta-Med, and InveniAI, and is the editor for the IBD section of UptoDate.

While many gastroenterologists may be comfortable with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), most are not experts in women’s concerns about pregnancy. One study found that, although women with IBD may have concerns about the interplay of their disease and reproductive health, many have not had extensive conversations with their gastroenterologist about it. In fact, that same study found most women expect their gastroenterologist to initiate these conversations.

GI & Hepatology News sought input from a patient advocate about questions women with IBD often think about but may not always discuss with their gastroenterologists, and then solicited responses from thought leaders in IBD and pregnancy. In this roundtable discussion, Uma Mahadevan, MD, professor of medicine and the director of the Colitis and Crohn’s Disease Center at the University of California, San Francisco; Marla C. Dubinsky, MD, professor of medicine at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York; and Sunanda V. Kane, MD, professor of medicine at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., share how they respond to these questions in their clinical practice.
 

What should a woman with IBD who is interested in having biological children in the future be thinking about now?

Dr. Mahadevan: Because active disease is associated with lower rates of conception and higher rates of pregnancy loss, women with IBD should first ensure they are in remission. I like to document endoscopic healing with a colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy, but, if this has been done recently, a fecal calprotectin test can be helpful.

Women with IBD, particularly those with small bowel disease, are at risk for nutritional deficiencies, so prior to conception, I also check vitamin B-12, vitamin D, and iron, and repeat as needed. Zinc and folate can be considered. Those who are underweight should work with a nutritionist to ensure adequate caloric intake.

Dr. Dubinsky: I think it’s also important to stress the importance of taking their IBD medications because they can help patients achieve and maintain disease remission. Uncontrolled inflammation is a key risk factor for spontaneous abortion in the first trimester. Medication we would use in pregnancy is not putting them at risk for spontaneous abortion or congenital anomalies, which is what mothers to be are understandably most concerned about.

I am very honest and transparent with my patients: “About the only thing I need to take care of is you. If you are good, the baby is good.”

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Mahadevan mentioned, women with IBD are at higher risk for vitamin deficiencies so those need to be corrected before conception. If they smoke, they should stop before conceiving.

There is no increased risk of infertility unless there has been a history of abdominal surgery.

Also, if women are not actively planning on getting pregnant, that would be important to share because some gastroenterologists will avoid certain effective medications if pregnancy is a possibility.

If a woman has had surgery for her IBD, could that make it harder for her to get pregnant?

Dr. Kane: Yes, it can because scar tissue may develop within the pelvis. However, if surgery is indicated to manage a patient’s IBD, then talk to the surgeon about ways that they might be able to reduce the risk of scar tissue formation.

Dr. Dubinsky: One thing to note is that almost all the data of infertility risk and scarring are based on open surgical techniques that involve dissection of the rectum. On the other hand, we don’t yet have enough prospective data on the impact of the modern era of laparoscopic surgery to suggest whether it affects fertility. More data is needed because providers may be giving women old information that is no longer relevant in the modern era.
 

If a woman is experiencing IBD symptoms, should she attempt to conceive?

Dr. Kane: Gastrointestinal symptoms in patients with IBD could be from active disease but also other things, so it’s important to have a thorough check-up to assess if there is active disease or not. Active disease can (but does not always) lead to a more complicated pregnancy, and conception is not recommended while a patient has active IBD.

Dr. Dubinsky: Although some patients feel an urgency to conceive regardless of disease activity, we need to do our due diligence and explain that we need to focus on getting them into the deepest remission possible, including endoscopic findings, biomarkers, and symptoms.

The most important gift you can give your future moms is to optimize the therapy they’re on before they conceive.
 

Is it important for someone who’s working with a gastroenterologist and an obstetrician to also work with a maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) specialist?

Dr. Kane: Having a diagnosis of IBD makes a woman’s pregnancy “high risk” because just having the diagnosis is associated with a higher risk of prematurity and small for gestational age – but importantly, not birth defects. A woman whose IBD is in remission should still have a discussion with an MFM specialist, just so everyone is on the same page.

Dr. Dubinsky: I refer to care with MFM specialists as “tighter monitoring.” I tell my patients that MFM specialists have managed many complex pregnancies and feel confident around the safety of their medications, understand the impact of when the baby may be exposed to certain medications, and will focus on following them more closely.
 

What are the risks of IBD medications during pregnancy and while breastfeeding? Should women stop their medications during pregnancy and breastfeeding?

Dr. Dubinsky: Organogenesis occurs in the first 10 weeks, so any medicines that cross the placenta during that time are up for discussion and debate. Methotrexate and the newer small molecules, such as Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors and S1P receptor modulators, do cross the placenta during the first trimester and need to be discontinued before conception, sometimes as early as 3 months before conception.

However, biologics are very large proteins and do not cross the placenta until closer to week 27. We are not advocating stopping biologics in advance of conception, or during pregnancy, or during breastfeeding. There is more risk to stopping than continuing.

Dr. Mahadevan: Methotrexate should be stopped at least 3 months prior to conception and should not be taken during pregnancy.

There are limited antibiotic safety data in pregnancy for the longer periods of time used in IBD. I generally prefer amoxicillin/clavulanic acid over ciprofloxacin or metronidazole, but short term (less than 2 weeks) use of any of those three are not contraindicated.

Mesalamine agents and thiopurine monotherapy can be continued through pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Biologic agents, such as anti–tumor necrosis factor, anti-interleukin 23, anti-integrin, and biosimilars, can be continued through pregnancy and during breastfeeding. Given limited exposure in the first trimester, there is no evidence of increased risk of birth defects. As Dr. Dubinsky pointed out, there is active transfer, particularly in the third trimester and minimal transfer in breast milk, but this has not been associated with harm.

Lastly, small molecules, such as the JAK inhibitors tofacitinib and upadacitinib, as well as ozanimod, have virtually no human safety data during pregnancy, and animal data show harm. The use of these agents in pregnancy is not recommended.

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Dubinsky stated, most of the medications our patients take are low risk to continue through pregnancy if the patients are in remission. Although a woman “in remission” on steroids is not really in remission and should not get pregnant until she is on something else.

As far as breastfeeding goes, that should be stopped if the patient is on methotrexate, cyclosporine, or certain antibiotics. If she is on more than 20 mg of prednisone this can pass to the infant, and a mother should not breastfeed.

Women should avoid fenugreek as a lactation aid, as that contains a compound that can promote bleeding. Lactation cookies are ok.

Otherwise, there are lots of potential benefits to breastfeeding, and I encourage it.
 

How is a flare treated if it occurs during pregnancy?

Dr. Dubinsky: A flare during pregnancy is treated the same as a flare outside of pregnancy. We want to use noninvasive ways to confirm it, but I think we don’t need to overly investigate in most of our women. If they’re already on a biologic, you may consider changing.

Some women may need corticosteroids. It’s not our favorite move, but there is an urgency to getting a flare under control during pregnancy because of possible complications.

Dr. Mahadevan: Some of this is contingent on when during pregnancy the flare occurs. A patient who has a flare at 38 weeks’ gestation will likely proceed with delivery and the flare will be dealt with separately. Someone at 8 weeks’ gestation is at high risk for pregnancy loss, so treatment should be quick and effective.

As does Dr. Dubinsky, I do try to avoid steroids if possible. For example, I would rather start an effective biologic right away than drag out steroids to see if they will respond.

Dr. Kane: I would add that, if a mother is losing weight, she might need to be hospitalized for additional nutritional support. If surgery is necessary, we usually try to time it for the second or third trimester.

What needs to be taken into consideration regarding mode of delivery? Also, if a woman has undergone prior surgeries, do they increase the risk of delivery complications?

For ulcerative colitis, mode of delivery is based on obstetric, not gastrointestinal, variables. For Crohn’s disease, if there is evidence of perianal disease, then a cesarean is appropriate.

If there is no history of perianal disease, then delivery is based on obstetric variables.

For a woman who has a J pouch, if possible, the surgeon who created it should be contacted to ask about the technical aspects of the pouch and how it lies in the pelvis.
 

What’s the risk of a postpartum flare if a woman’s IBD remains in clinical remission during pregnancy?

Dr. Mahadevan: There is no increased risk of postpartum flare if a woman continues her IBD medications after delivery. Many of the reports of flare are from stopping medications (mistakenly often) to breastfeed.

Dr. Kane: As Dr. Mahadevan said, the risk of a flare is usually because a woman stops taking her medications because she thinks that medication will be passed to the infant through breastfeeding, which in most cases is not true.

Otherwise, there is not an increased risk of a flare in a 12-month period. However, it is important to monitor for symptoms after delivery; the risk of a flare is not zero.
 

What symptoms should women watch out for after delivery that may indicate an uptick in disease activity?

Dr. Kane: The same symptoms as before they were pregnant. Diarrhea, abdominal pain, and rectal bleeding are not normal after delivery and should be considered signs of returning disease.

As a gastroenterologist, is there any additional advice you’d offer about conception, fertility, and pregnancy when treating women with IBD?

Dr. Mahadevan: Women with IBD should, when feasible, have a planned pregnancy when in documented remission and under the care of their gastroenterologists, obstetrician, and an MFM specialist. Life happens, and this is not always possible. That said, a woman with IBD has the same chance of getting pregnant as a woman of the same age without IBD, unless she has active disease or a history of pelvic surgery. Women with IBD in remission will generally have healthy pregnancies if they continue appropriate medications.

Dr. Kane: Agreed. The majority of women with IBD will have normal, healthy pregnancies. It is important for them to not stop their IBD therapy without talking to their gastroenterologist first. Well-intentioned but ignorant obstetricians or midwives may recommend stopping, but then panic when disease flares and the mother’s health is at risk. Active inflammation is the worst enemy to a pregnancy, not active therapy.

Dr. Dubinsky: One additional thing to consider is: How do we help women with IBD who have delivered meet the needs of their family and continue to stay on their meds and be in good inflammatory control?

For example, we can give the biologic in the hospital after they’ve had a cesarean or a vaginal delivery and before they leave. We know that that is safe, giving that to them before they leave the hospital is a huge value added.

Another thing is possibly changing their infusions to home infusions. That would be helpful for the moms as well.

Dr. Mahadevan reports being a consultant for AbbVie, Janssen, Pfizer, Gilead, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Protagonist, Prometheus, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Dubinsky is a consultant for AbbVie, Arena, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Takeda, and Prometheus BioSciences. She is a shareholder and CEO of a publicly traded company, Trellis Health. Dr. Kane is a consultant for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Gilead, Janssen, Takeda, Seres Therapeutics, TechLab, United Healthcare, Predicta-Med, and InveniAI, and is the editor for the IBD section of UptoDate.

ORLANDO – Hospitalization rates were higher in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) treated with dialysis than those treated with conservative management, among those with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) less than 25 mL/min/1.73m² and in most racial/ethnic groups, new research shows.

“Patients mostly start dialysis because of unpleasant symptoms that cause suffering, including high potassium levels and high levels of uremic toxins in the blood,” senior author Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh, MD, PhD, MPH, told this news organization.

“Conservative management serves to address and manage these symptoms and levels of toxicities without dialysis, so conservative management is an alternative approach, and patients should always be given a choice between [the two],” stressed Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh, professor of medicine at the University of California, Irvine.

The results were presented during the annual meeting of the American Society of Nephrology.

“There has been growing recognition of the importance of conservative nondialytic management as an alternative patient-centered treatment strategy for advanced kidney disease. However, conservative management remains under-utilized in the United States, which may in part be due to uncertainties regarding which patients will most benefit from dialysis versus nondialytic treatment,” said first author Connie Rhee, MD, also of the University of California, Irvine.

“We hope that these findings and further research can help inform treatment options for patients, care partners, and providers in the shared decision-making process of conservative management versus dialysis,” added Dr. Rhee, in a press release from the American Society of Nephrology.

Asked for comment, Sarah Davison, MD, noted that part of the Society’s strategy is, in fact, to promote conservative kidney management (CKM) as a key component of integrated care for patients with kidney failure. Dr. Davison is professor of medicine and chair of the International Society Working Group for Kidney Supportive Care and Conservative Kidney Management.

“We’ve recognized for a long time that there are many patients for whom dialysis provides neither a survival advantage nor a quality of life advantage,” she told this news organization.

“These patients tend to be those who have multiple morbidities, who are more frail, and who tend to be older, and in fact, the patients can live as long, if not longer, with better symptom management and better quality of life by not being on dialysis,” she stressed.
 

Study details

In the study, using data from the Optum Labs Data Warehouse, patients with advanced CKD were categorized according to whether or not they received conservative management, defined as those who did not receive dialysis within 2 years of the index eGFR (first eGFR < 25 mL/min/1.73m²) versus receipt of dialysis parsed as late versus early dialysis transition (eGFR < 15 vs. ≥ 15 mL/min/1.73m² at dialysis initiation).

Hospitalization rates were compared between those treated with conservative management, compared with late or early dialysis.

“Among 309,188 advanced CKD patients who met eligibility [criteria], 55% of patients had greater than or equal to 1 hospitalization(s) within 2 years of the index eGFR,” the authors report. The most common causes of hospitalization among all patients were congestive heart failure, respiratory symptoms, or hypertension.

In most racial groups (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic patients), patients on dialysis had higher hospitalization rates than those who received conservative management, and patients who started dialysis early (transitioned to dialysis at higher levels of kidney function) demonstrated the highest rates across all age groups, compared with those who started dialysis late (transitioned to dialysis at lower levels of kidney function) or were treated with conservative management.

Among Asian patients, those on dialysis also had higher hospitalization rates than those receiving conservative management, but patients who started dialysis late had higher rates than those on early dialysis, especially in older age groups, possibly because they were sicker, Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh suggested.
 

Conservative care has pros and cons, but Canada has embraced it

As Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh explained, conservative management has its pros and cons, compared with dialysis. “Conservative management requires that patients work with the multidisciplinary team including nephrologists, nutritionists, and others to try to manage CKD without dialysis, so it requires patient participation.”

On the other hand, dialysis is both easier and more lucrative than conservative management, at least for nephrologists, as they are well-trained in dialysis care, and it can be systematically applied. As to which patients with CKD might be optimal candidates for conservative management, Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh agreed this requires further study.

But he acknowledged that most nephrologists are not hugely supportive of conservative management because they are less well-trained in it, and it is more time-consuming. The one promising change is a new model introduced in 2022, a value-based kidney care model, that, if implemented, will be more incentivizing for nephrologists to offer conservative care more widely.

Dr. Davison meanwhile believes the “vast majority” of nephrologists based in Canada – as she is – are “highly supportive” of CKM as an important modality.

“The challenge, however, is that many nephrologists remain unsure as to how to best deliver or optimize all aspects of CKM, whether that is symptom management, advanced care planning, or how they must manage symptoms to align with a patient’s goals,” Dr. Davison explained.

“But it’s not that they do not believe in the value of CKM.”

Indeed, in her province, Alberta, nephrologists have been offering CKM for decades, and while they are currently standardizing care to make it easier to deliver, there is no financial incentive to offer dialysis over CKM.

“We are now seeing those elements of kidney supportive care as part of core competencies to manage any person with chronic illness, including CKD,” Dr. Davison said.

“So it’s absolutely doable, and contrary to one of the myths about CKM, it is not more time-consuming than dialysis – not when you know how to do it. You are just shifting your focus,” she emphasized.

The study was funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh has reported receiving honoraria and medical directorship fees from Fresenius and DaVita. Dr. Davison has reported no relevant financial relationships.

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

ORLANDO – Hospitalization rates were higher in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) treated with dialysis than those treated with conservative management, among those with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) less than 25 mL/min/1.73m² and in most racial/ethnic groups, new research shows.

“Patients mostly start dialysis because of unpleasant symptoms that cause suffering, including high potassium levels and high levels of uremic toxins in the blood,” senior author Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh, MD, PhD, MPH, told this news organization.

“Conservative management serves to address and manage these symptoms and levels of toxicities without dialysis, so conservative management is an alternative approach, and patients should always be given a choice between [the two],” stressed Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh, professor of medicine at the University of California, Irvine.

The results were presented during the annual meeting of the American Society of Nephrology.

“There has been growing recognition of the importance of conservative nondialytic management as an alternative patient-centered treatment strategy for advanced kidney disease. However, conservative management remains under-utilized in the United States, which may in part be due to uncertainties regarding which patients will most benefit from dialysis versus nondialytic treatment,” said first author Connie Rhee, MD, also of the University of California, Irvine.

“We hope that these findings and further research can help inform treatment options for patients, care partners, and providers in the shared decision-making process of conservative management versus dialysis,” added Dr. Rhee, in a press release from the American Society of Nephrology.

Asked for comment, Sarah Davison, MD, noted that part of the Society’s strategy is, in fact, to promote conservative kidney management (CKM) as a key component of integrated care for patients with kidney failure. Dr. Davison is professor of medicine and chair of the International Society Working Group for Kidney Supportive Care and Conservative Kidney Management.

“We’ve recognized for a long time that there are many patients for whom dialysis provides neither a survival advantage nor a quality of life advantage,” she told this news organization.

“These patients tend to be those who have multiple morbidities, who are more frail, and who tend to be older, and in fact, the patients can live as long, if not longer, with better symptom management and better quality of life by not being on dialysis,” she stressed.
 

Study details

In the study, using data from the Optum Labs Data Warehouse, patients with advanced CKD were categorized according to whether or not they received conservative management, defined as those who did not receive dialysis within 2 years of the index eGFR (first eGFR < 25 mL/min/1.73m²) versus receipt of dialysis parsed as late versus early dialysis transition (eGFR < 15 vs. ≥ 15 mL/min/1.73m² at dialysis initiation).

Hospitalization rates were compared between those treated with conservative management, compared with late or early dialysis.

“Among 309,188 advanced CKD patients who met eligibility [criteria], 55% of patients had greater than or equal to 1 hospitalization(s) within 2 years of the index eGFR,” the authors report. The most common causes of hospitalization among all patients were congestive heart failure, respiratory symptoms, or hypertension.

In most racial groups (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic patients), patients on dialysis had higher hospitalization rates than those who received conservative management, and patients who started dialysis early (transitioned to dialysis at higher levels of kidney function) demonstrated the highest rates across all age groups, compared with those who started dialysis late (transitioned to dialysis at lower levels of kidney function) or were treated with conservative management.

Among Asian patients, those on dialysis also had higher hospitalization rates than those receiving conservative management, but patients who started dialysis late had higher rates than those on early dialysis, especially in older age groups, possibly because they were sicker, Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh suggested.
 

Conservative care has pros and cons, but Canada has embraced it

As Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh explained, conservative management has its pros and cons, compared with dialysis. “Conservative management requires that patients work with the multidisciplinary team including nephrologists, nutritionists, and others to try to manage CKD without dialysis, so it requires patient participation.”

On the other hand, dialysis is both easier and more lucrative than conservative management, at least for nephrologists, as they are well-trained in dialysis care, and it can be systematically applied. As to which patients with CKD might be optimal candidates for conservative management, Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh agreed this requires further study.

But he acknowledged that most nephrologists are not hugely supportive of conservative management because they are less well-trained in it, and it is more time-consuming. The one promising change is a new model introduced in 2022, a value-based kidney care model, that, if implemented, will be more incentivizing for nephrologists to offer conservative care more widely.

Dr. Davison meanwhile believes the “vast majority” of nephrologists based in Canada – as she is – are “highly supportive” of CKM as an important modality.

“The challenge, however, is that many nephrologists remain unsure as to how to best deliver or optimize all aspects of CKM, whether that is symptom management, advanced care planning, or how they must manage symptoms to align with a patient’s goals,” Dr. Davison explained.

“But it’s not that they do not believe in the value of CKM.”

Indeed, in her province, Alberta, nephrologists have been offering CKM for decades, and while they are currently standardizing care to make it easier to deliver, there is no financial incentive to offer dialysis over CKM.

“We are now seeing those elements of kidney supportive care as part of core competencies to manage any person with chronic illness, including CKD,” Dr. Davison said.

“So it’s absolutely doable, and contrary to one of the myths about CKM, it is not more time-consuming than dialysis – not when you know how to do it. You are just shifting your focus,” she emphasized.

The study was funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh has reported receiving honoraria and medical directorship fees from Fresenius and DaVita. Dr. Davison has reported no relevant financial relationships.

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

ORLANDO – Hospitalization rates were higher in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) treated with dialysis than those treated with conservative management, among those with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) less than 25 mL/min/1.73m² and in most racial/ethnic groups, new research shows.

“Patients mostly start dialysis because of unpleasant symptoms that cause suffering, including high potassium levels and high levels of uremic toxins in the blood,” senior author Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh, MD, PhD, MPH, told this news organization.

“Conservative management serves to address and manage these symptoms and levels of toxicities without dialysis, so conservative management is an alternative approach, and patients should always be given a choice between [the two],” stressed Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh, professor of medicine at the University of California, Irvine.

The results were presented during the annual meeting of the American Society of Nephrology.

“There has been growing recognition of the importance of conservative nondialytic management as an alternative patient-centered treatment strategy for advanced kidney disease. However, conservative management remains under-utilized in the United States, which may in part be due to uncertainties regarding which patients will most benefit from dialysis versus nondialytic treatment,” said first author Connie Rhee, MD, also of the University of California, Irvine.

“We hope that these findings and further research can help inform treatment options for patients, care partners, and providers in the shared decision-making process of conservative management versus dialysis,” added Dr. Rhee, in a press release from the American Society of Nephrology.

Asked for comment, Sarah Davison, MD, noted that part of the Society’s strategy is, in fact, to promote conservative kidney management (CKM) as a key component of integrated care for patients with kidney failure. Dr. Davison is professor of medicine and chair of the International Society Working Group for Kidney Supportive Care and Conservative Kidney Management.

“We’ve recognized for a long time that there are many patients for whom dialysis provides neither a survival advantage nor a quality of life advantage,” she told this news organization.

“These patients tend to be those who have multiple morbidities, who are more frail, and who tend to be older, and in fact, the patients can live as long, if not longer, with better symptom management and better quality of life by not being on dialysis,” she stressed.
 

Study details

In the study, using data from the Optum Labs Data Warehouse, patients with advanced CKD were categorized according to whether or not they received conservative management, defined as those who did not receive dialysis within 2 years of the index eGFR (first eGFR < 25 mL/min/1.73m²) versus receipt of dialysis parsed as late versus early dialysis transition (eGFR < 15 vs. ≥ 15 mL/min/1.73m² at dialysis initiation).

Hospitalization rates were compared between those treated with conservative management, compared with late or early dialysis.

“Among 309,188 advanced CKD patients who met eligibility [criteria], 55% of patients had greater than or equal to 1 hospitalization(s) within 2 years of the index eGFR,” the authors report. The most common causes of hospitalization among all patients were congestive heart failure, respiratory symptoms, or hypertension.

In most racial groups (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic patients), patients on dialysis had higher hospitalization rates than those who received conservative management, and patients who started dialysis early (transitioned to dialysis at higher levels of kidney function) demonstrated the highest rates across all age groups, compared with those who started dialysis late (transitioned to dialysis at lower levels of kidney function) or were treated with conservative management.

Among Asian patients, those on dialysis also had higher hospitalization rates than those receiving conservative management, but patients who started dialysis late had higher rates than those on early dialysis, especially in older age groups, possibly because they were sicker, Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh suggested.
 

Conservative care has pros and cons, but Canada has embraced it

As Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh explained, conservative management has its pros and cons, compared with dialysis. “Conservative management requires that patients work with the multidisciplinary team including nephrologists, nutritionists, and others to try to manage CKD without dialysis, so it requires patient participation.”

On the other hand, dialysis is both easier and more lucrative than conservative management, at least for nephrologists, as they are well-trained in dialysis care, and it can be systematically applied. As to which patients with CKD might be optimal candidates for conservative management, Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh agreed this requires further study.

But he acknowledged that most nephrologists are not hugely supportive of conservative management because they are less well-trained in it, and it is more time-consuming. The one promising change is a new model introduced in 2022, a value-based kidney care model, that, if implemented, will be more incentivizing for nephrologists to offer conservative care more widely.

Dr. Davison meanwhile believes the “vast majority” of nephrologists based in Canada – as she is – are “highly supportive” of CKM as an important modality.

“The challenge, however, is that many nephrologists remain unsure as to how to best deliver or optimize all aspects of CKM, whether that is symptom management, advanced care planning, or how they must manage symptoms to align with a patient’s goals,” Dr. Davison explained.

“But it’s not that they do not believe in the value of CKM.”

Indeed, in her province, Alberta, nephrologists have been offering CKM for decades, and while they are currently standardizing care to make it easier to deliver, there is no financial incentive to offer dialysis over CKM.

“We are now seeing those elements of kidney supportive care as part of core competencies to manage any person with chronic illness, including CKD,” Dr. Davison said.

“So it’s absolutely doable, and contrary to one of the myths about CKM, it is not more time-consuming than dialysis – not when you know how to do it. You are just shifting your focus,” she emphasized.

The study was funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh has reported receiving honoraria and medical directorship fees from Fresenius and DaVita. Dr. Davison has reported no relevant financial relationships.

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

Many Americans turn to the latest big idea to lose weight – fad diets, fitness crazes, dodgy herbs and pills, bariatric surgery, just to name a few. They’re rarely the magic solution people dream of.

Now a wave of startups offer access to a new category of drugs coupled with intensive behavioral coaching online. But already concerns are emerging.

These startups, spurred by hundreds of millions of dollars in funding from blue-chip venture capital firms, have signed up well over 100,000 patients and could reach millions more. These patients pay hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars to access new drugs, called glucagonlike peptide–1 (GLP-1) agonists, along with online coaching to encourage healthy habits.

The startups initially positioned themselves in lofty terms. “This is the last weight-loss program you’ll try,” said a 2020 marketing analysis by startup Calibrate Health, in messaging designed to reach one of its target demographics, the “working mom.” (Company spokesperson Michelle Wellington said the document does not reflect Calibrate’s current marketing strategy.)

But while doctors and patients are intrigued by the new model, some customers complain online that reality is short of the buildup: They say they got canned advice and unresponsive clinicians – and some report they couldn’t get the newest drugs.

Calibrate Health, a New York City–based startup, reported earlier in 2022 it had served 20,000 people. Another startup, Found, headquartered in San Francisco, has served 135,000 patients since July 2020, CEO Sarah Jones Simmer said in an interview. Calibrate costs patients nearly $1,600 a year, not counting the price of drugs, which can hit nearly $1,500 monthly without insurance, according to drug price savings site GoodRx. (Insurers reimburse for GLP-1agonists in limited circumstances, patients said.) Found offers a 6-month plan for nearly $600, a company spokesperson said. (That price includes generic drugs, but not the newer GLP-1 agonists, like Wegovy.)

The two companies are beneficiaries of over $200 million in combined venture funding, according to tracking by Crunchbase, a repository of venture capital investments. The firms say they’re on the vanguard of weight care, both citing the influence of biology and other scientific factors as key ingredients to their approaches.

There’s potentially a big market for these startups. Just over 4 in 10 Americans are obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, driving up their risk for cardiovascular conditions and type 2 diabetes. Effective medical treatments are elusive and hard to access.

Centers that provide this specialty care “are overwhelmed,” said Fatima Stanford, MD, an obesity medicine specialist at Massachusetts General in Boston, a teaching hospital affiliated with Harvard. Her own clinic has a wait list of 3,000.

Dr. Stanford, who said she has advised several of these telemedicine startups, is bullish on their potential.

Scott Butsch, MD, director of obesity medicine at the Cleveland Clinic, said the startups can offer care with less judgment and stigma than in-person peers. They’re also more convenient.

Dr. Butsch, who learned about the model through consultancies, patients, and colleagues, wonders whether the startups are operating “to strategically find which patients respond to which drug.” He said they should coordinate well with behavioral specialists, as antidepressants or other medications may be driving weight gain. “Obesity is a complex disease and requires treatments that match its complexity. I think programs that do not have a multidisciplinary team are less comprehensive and, in the long term, less effective.”

The startups market a two-pronged product: first, the new class of GLP-1 agonists. While these medications are effective at provoking weight loss, Wegovy, one of two in this class specifically approved for this purpose, is in short supply because of manufacturing difficulties, according to its maker, Novo Nordisk. Others in the category can be prescribed off label. But doctors generally aren’t familiar with the medications, Stanford said. In theory, the startups can bridge some of those gaps: They offer more specialized, knowledgeable clinicians.

Then there’s the other prong: behavioral changes. The companies use televisits and online messaging with nutritionists or coaches to help patients incorporate new diet and exercise habits. The weight loss figures achieved by participants in clinical trials for the new drugs – up to 15% of body mass – were tied to such changes, according to Novo Nordisk.

Social media sites are bursting with these startups’ ads, everywhere from podcasts to Instagram. A search of Meta’s ad library finds 40,000 ads on Facebook and Instagram between the two firms.

The ads complement people’s own postings on social media: Numerous Facebook groups are devoted to the new type of drugs – some even focused on helping patients manage side effects, like changes in their bowel movements. The buzz is quantifiable: On TikTok, mentions of the new GLP-1 agonists tripled from last June to this June, according to an analysis by investment bankers at Morgan Stanley.

There’s now a feverish, expectant appetite for these medications among the startups’ clientele. Patients often complained that their friends had obtained a drug they weren’t offered, recalled Alexandra Coults, a former pharmacist consultant for Found. Ms. Coults said patients may have perceived some sort of bait-and-switch when in reality clinical reasons – like drug contraindications – guide prescribing decisions.

Patient expectations influence care, Ms. Coults said. Customers came in with ideas shaped by the culture of fad diets and New Year’s resolutions. “Quite a few people would sign up for 1 month and not continue.”

In interviews with KHN and in online complaints, patients also questioned the quality of care they received. Some said intake – which began by filling out a form and proceeded to an online visit with a doctor – was perfunctory. Once medication began, they said, requests for counseling about side effects were slow to be answered.

Jess Garrant, a Found patient, recalled that after she was prescribed zonisamide, a generic anticonvulsant that has shown some ability to help with weight loss, she felt “absolutely weird.”

“I was up all night and my thoughts were racing,” she wrote in a blog post. She developed sores in her mouth.

She sought advice and help from Found physicians, but their replies “weren’t quick.” Nonemergency communications are routed through the company’s portal.

It took a week to complete a switch of medications and have a new prescription arrive at her home, she said. Meanwhile, she said, she went to an urgent care clinic for the mouth sores.

Found frequently prescribes generic medications – often off label – rather than just the new GLP-1 agonists, company executives said in an interview. Found said older generics like zonisamide are more accessible than the GLP-1 agonists advertised on social media and their own website. Both Dr. Butsch and Dr. Stanford said they’ve prescribed zonisamide successfully. Dr. Butsch said ramping up dosage rapidly can increase the risk of side effects.

But Kim Boyd, MD, chief medical officer of competitor Calibrate, said the older drugs “just haven’t worked.”

Patients of both companies have critiqued online and in interviews the startups’ behavioral care – which experts across the board maintain is integral to successful weight loss treatment. But some patients felt they simply had canned advice.

Other patients said they had ups and downs with their coaches. Dana Crom, an attorney, said she had gone through many coaches with Calibrate. Some were good, effective cheerleaders; others, not so good. But when kinks in the program arose, she said, the coach wasn’t able to help her navigate them. While the coach can report trouble with medications or the app, it appears those reports are no more effective than messages sent through the portal, Ms. Crom said.

And what about when her yearlong subscription ends? Ms. Crom said she’d consider continuing with Calibrate.

Relationships with coaches, given the need to change behavior, are a critical element of the business models. Patients’ results depend “on how adherent they are to lifestyle changes,” said Found’s chief medical officer, Rehka Kumar, MD.

While the startups offer care to a larger geographic footprint, it’s not clear whether the demographics of their patient populations are different from those of the traditional bricks-and-mortar model. Calibrate’s patients are overwhelmingly White; over 8 in 10 have at least an undergraduate degree; and over 8 in 10 are women, according to the company.

And its earlier marketing strategies reflected that. The September 2020 “segmentation” document laid out three types of customers the company could hope to attract: perimenopausal or menopausal women, with income ranging from $75,000 to $150,000 a year; working mothers, with a similar income; and “men.”

Isabelle Kenyon, Calibrate’s CEO, said the company now hopes to expand its reach to partner with large employers, and that will help diversify its patients.

Patients will need to be convinced that the model – more affordable, more accessible – works for them. For her part, Ms. Garrant, who no longer is using Found, reflected on her experience, writing in her blog post that she was hoping for more follow-up and a more personal approach. “I don’t think it’s a helpful way to lose weight,” she said.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

Many Americans turn to the latest big idea to lose weight – fad diets, fitness crazes, dodgy herbs and pills, bariatric surgery, just to name a few. They’re rarely the magic solution people dream of.

Now a wave of startups offer access to a new category of drugs coupled with intensive behavioral coaching online. But already concerns are emerging.

These startups, spurred by hundreds of millions of dollars in funding from blue-chip venture capital firms, have signed up well over 100,000 patients and could reach millions more. These patients pay hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars to access new drugs, called glucagonlike peptide–1 (GLP-1) agonists, along with online coaching to encourage healthy habits.

The startups initially positioned themselves in lofty terms. “This is the last weight-loss program you’ll try,” said a 2020 marketing analysis by startup Calibrate Health, in messaging designed to reach one of its target demographics, the “working mom.” (Company spokesperson Michelle Wellington said the document does not reflect Calibrate’s current marketing strategy.)

But while doctors and patients are intrigued by the new model, some customers complain online that reality is short of the buildup: They say they got canned advice and unresponsive clinicians – and some report they couldn’t get the newest drugs.

Calibrate Health, a New York City–based startup, reported earlier in 2022 it had served 20,000 people. Another startup, Found, headquartered in San Francisco, has served 135,000 patients since July 2020, CEO Sarah Jones Simmer said in an interview. Calibrate costs patients nearly $1,600 a year, not counting the price of drugs, which can hit nearly $1,500 monthly without insurance, according to drug price savings site GoodRx. (Insurers reimburse for GLP-1agonists in limited circumstances, patients said.) Found offers a 6-month plan for nearly $600, a company spokesperson said. (That price includes generic drugs, but not the newer GLP-1 agonists, like Wegovy.)

The two companies are beneficiaries of over $200 million in combined venture funding, according to tracking by Crunchbase, a repository of venture capital investments. The firms say they’re on the vanguard of weight care, both citing the influence of biology and other scientific factors as key ingredients to their approaches.

There’s potentially a big market for these startups. Just over 4 in 10 Americans are obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, driving up their risk for cardiovascular conditions and type 2 diabetes. Effective medical treatments are elusive and hard to access.

Centers that provide this specialty care “are overwhelmed,” said Fatima Stanford, MD, an obesity medicine specialist at Massachusetts General in Boston, a teaching hospital affiliated with Harvard. Her own clinic has a wait list of 3,000.

Dr. Stanford, who said she has advised several of these telemedicine startups, is bullish on their potential.

Scott Butsch, MD, director of obesity medicine at the Cleveland Clinic, said the startups can offer care with less judgment and stigma than in-person peers. They’re also more convenient.

Dr. Butsch, who learned about the model through consultancies, patients, and colleagues, wonders whether the startups are operating “to strategically find which patients respond to which drug.” He said they should coordinate well with behavioral specialists, as antidepressants or other medications may be driving weight gain. “Obesity is a complex disease and requires treatments that match its complexity. I think programs that do not have a multidisciplinary team are less comprehensive and, in the long term, less effective.”

The startups market a two-pronged product: first, the new class of GLP-1 agonists. While these medications are effective at provoking weight loss, Wegovy, one of two in this class specifically approved for this purpose, is in short supply because of manufacturing difficulties, according to its maker, Novo Nordisk. Others in the category can be prescribed off label. But doctors generally aren’t familiar with the medications, Stanford said. In theory, the startups can bridge some of those gaps: They offer more specialized, knowledgeable clinicians.

Then there’s the other prong: behavioral changes. The companies use televisits and online messaging with nutritionists or coaches to help patients incorporate new diet and exercise habits. The weight loss figures achieved by participants in clinical trials for the new drugs – up to 15% of body mass – were tied to such changes, according to Novo Nordisk.

Social media sites are bursting with these startups’ ads, everywhere from podcasts to Instagram. A search of Meta’s ad library finds 40,000 ads on Facebook and Instagram between the two firms.

The ads complement people’s own postings on social media: Numerous Facebook groups are devoted to the new type of drugs – some even focused on helping patients manage side effects, like changes in their bowel movements. The buzz is quantifiable: On TikTok, mentions of the new GLP-1 agonists tripled from last June to this June, according to an analysis by investment bankers at Morgan Stanley.

There’s now a feverish, expectant appetite for these medications among the startups’ clientele. Patients often complained that their friends had obtained a drug they weren’t offered, recalled Alexandra Coults, a former pharmacist consultant for Found. Ms. Coults said patients may have perceived some sort of bait-and-switch when in reality clinical reasons – like drug contraindications – guide prescribing decisions.

Patient expectations influence care, Ms. Coults said. Customers came in with ideas shaped by the culture of fad diets and New Year’s resolutions. “Quite a few people would sign up for 1 month and not continue.”

In interviews with KHN and in online complaints, patients also questioned the quality of care they received. Some said intake – which began by filling out a form and proceeded to an online visit with a doctor – was perfunctory. Once medication began, they said, requests for counseling about side effects were slow to be answered.

Jess Garrant, a Found patient, recalled that after she was prescribed zonisamide, a generic anticonvulsant that has shown some ability to help with weight loss, she felt “absolutely weird.”

“I was up all night and my thoughts were racing,” she wrote in a blog post. She developed sores in her mouth.

She sought advice and help from Found physicians, but their replies “weren’t quick.” Nonemergency communications are routed through the company’s portal.

It took a week to complete a switch of medications and have a new prescription arrive at her home, she said. Meanwhile, she said, she went to an urgent care clinic for the mouth sores.

Found frequently prescribes generic medications – often off label – rather than just the new GLP-1 agonists, company executives said in an interview. Found said older generics like zonisamide are more accessible than the GLP-1 agonists advertised on social media and their own website. Both Dr. Butsch and Dr. Stanford said they’ve prescribed zonisamide successfully. Dr. Butsch said ramping up dosage rapidly can increase the risk of side effects.

But Kim Boyd, MD, chief medical officer of competitor Calibrate, said the older drugs “just haven’t worked.”

Patients of both companies have critiqued online and in interviews the startups’ behavioral care – which experts across the board maintain is integral to successful weight loss treatment. But some patients felt they simply had canned advice.

Other patients said they had ups and downs with their coaches. Dana Crom, an attorney, said she had gone through many coaches with Calibrate. Some were good, effective cheerleaders; others, not so good. But when kinks in the program arose, she said, the coach wasn’t able to help her navigate them. While the coach can report trouble with medications or the app, it appears those reports are no more effective than messages sent through the portal, Ms. Crom said.

And what about when her yearlong subscription ends? Ms. Crom said she’d consider continuing with Calibrate.

Relationships with coaches, given the need to change behavior, are a critical element of the business models. Patients’ results depend “on how adherent they are to lifestyle changes,” said Found’s chief medical officer, Rehka Kumar, MD.

While the startups offer care to a larger geographic footprint, it’s not clear whether the demographics of their patient populations are different from those of the traditional bricks-and-mortar model. Calibrate’s patients are overwhelmingly White; over 8 in 10 have at least an undergraduate degree; and over 8 in 10 are women, according to the company.

And its earlier marketing strategies reflected that. The September 2020 “segmentation” document laid out three types of customers the company could hope to attract: perimenopausal or menopausal women, with income ranging from $75,000 to $150,000 a year; working mothers, with a similar income; and “men.”

Isabelle Kenyon, Calibrate’s CEO, said the company now hopes to expand its reach to partner with large employers, and that will help diversify its patients.

Patients will need to be convinced that the model – more affordable, more accessible – works for them. For her part, Ms. Garrant, who no longer is using Found, reflected on her experience, writing in her blog post that she was hoping for more follow-up and a more personal approach. “I don’t think it’s a helpful way to lose weight,” she said.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

Many Americans turn to the latest big idea to lose weight – fad diets, fitness crazes, dodgy herbs and pills, bariatric surgery, just to name a few. They’re rarely the magic solution people dream of.

Now a wave of startups offer access to a new category of drugs coupled with intensive behavioral coaching online. But already concerns are emerging.

These startups, spurred by hundreds of millions of dollars in funding from blue-chip venture capital firms, have signed up well over 100,000 patients and could reach millions more. These patients pay hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars to access new drugs, called glucagonlike peptide–1 (GLP-1) agonists, along with online coaching to encourage healthy habits.

The startups initially positioned themselves in lofty terms. “This is the last weight-loss program you’ll try,” said a 2020 marketing analysis by startup Calibrate Health, in messaging designed to reach one of its target demographics, the “working mom.” (Company spokesperson Michelle Wellington said the document does not reflect Calibrate’s current marketing strategy.)

But while doctors and patients are intrigued by the new model, some customers complain online that reality is short of the buildup: They say they got canned advice and unresponsive clinicians – and some report they couldn’t get the newest drugs.

Calibrate Health, a New York City–based startup, reported earlier in 2022 it had served 20,000 people. Another startup, Found, headquartered in San Francisco, has served 135,000 patients since July 2020, CEO Sarah Jones Simmer said in an interview. Calibrate costs patients nearly $1,600 a year, not counting the price of drugs, which can hit nearly $1,500 monthly without insurance, according to drug price savings site GoodRx. (Insurers reimburse for GLP-1agonists in limited circumstances, patients said.) Found offers a 6-month plan for nearly $600, a company spokesperson said. (That price includes generic drugs, but not the newer GLP-1 agonists, like Wegovy.)

The two companies are beneficiaries of over $200 million in combined venture funding, according to tracking by Crunchbase, a repository of venture capital investments. The firms say they’re on the vanguard of weight care, both citing the influence of biology and other scientific factors as key ingredients to their approaches.

There’s potentially a big market for these startups. Just over 4 in 10 Americans are obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, driving up their risk for cardiovascular conditions and type 2 diabetes. Effective medical treatments are elusive and hard to access.

Centers that provide this specialty care “are overwhelmed,” said Fatima Stanford, MD, an obesity medicine specialist at Massachusetts General in Boston, a teaching hospital affiliated with Harvard. Her own clinic has a wait list of 3,000.

Dr. Stanford, who said she has advised several of these telemedicine startups, is bullish on their potential.

Scott Butsch, MD, director of obesity medicine at the Cleveland Clinic, said the startups can offer care with less judgment and stigma than in-person peers. They’re also more convenient.

Dr. Butsch, who learned about the model through consultancies, patients, and colleagues, wonders whether the startups are operating “to strategically find which patients respond to which drug.” He said they should coordinate well with behavioral specialists, as antidepressants or other medications may be driving weight gain. “Obesity is a complex disease and requires treatments that match its complexity. I think programs that do not have a multidisciplinary team are less comprehensive and, in the long term, less effective.”

The startups market a two-pronged product: first, the new class of GLP-1 agonists. While these medications are effective at provoking weight loss, Wegovy, one of two in this class specifically approved for this purpose, is in short supply because of manufacturing difficulties, according to its maker, Novo Nordisk. Others in the category can be prescribed off label. But doctors generally aren’t familiar with the medications, Stanford said. In theory, the startups can bridge some of those gaps: They offer more specialized, knowledgeable clinicians.

Then there’s the other prong: behavioral changes. The companies use televisits and online messaging with nutritionists or coaches to help patients incorporate new diet and exercise habits. The weight loss figures achieved by participants in clinical trials for the new drugs – up to 15% of body mass – were tied to such changes, according to Novo Nordisk.

Social media sites are bursting with these startups’ ads, everywhere from podcasts to Instagram. A search of Meta’s ad library finds 40,000 ads on Facebook and Instagram between the two firms.

The ads complement people’s own postings on social media: Numerous Facebook groups are devoted to the new type of drugs – some even focused on helping patients manage side effects, like changes in their bowel movements. The buzz is quantifiable: On TikTok, mentions of the new GLP-1 agonists tripled from last June to this June, according to an analysis by investment bankers at Morgan Stanley.

There’s now a feverish, expectant appetite for these medications among the startups’ clientele. Patients often complained that their friends had obtained a drug they weren’t offered, recalled Alexandra Coults, a former pharmacist consultant for Found. Ms. Coults said patients may have perceived some sort of bait-and-switch when in reality clinical reasons – like drug contraindications – guide prescribing decisions.

Patient expectations influence care, Ms. Coults said. Customers came in with ideas shaped by the culture of fad diets and New Year’s resolutions. “Quite a few people would sign up for 1 month and not continue.”

In interviews with KHN and in online complaints, patients also questioned the quality of care they received. Some said intake – which began by filling out a form and proceeded to an online visit with a doctor – was perfunctory. Once medication began, they said, requests for counseling about side effects were slow to be answered.

Jess Garrant, a Found patient, recalled that after she was prescribed zonisamide, a generic anticonvulsant that has shown some ability to help with weight loss, she felt “absolutely weird.”

“I was up all night and my thoughts were racing,” she wrote in a blog post. She developed sores in her mouth.

She sought advice and help from Found physicians, but their replies “weren’t quick.” Nonemergency communications are routed through the company’s portal.

It took a week to complete a switch of medications and have a new prescription arrive at her home, she said. Meanwhile, she said, she went to an urgent care clinic for the mouth sores.

Found frequently prescribes generic medications – often off label – rather than just the new GLP-1 agonists, company executives said in an interview. Found said older generics like zonisamide are more accessible than the GLP-1 agonists advertised on social media and their own website. Both Dr. Butsch and Dr. Stanford said they’ve prescribed zonisamide successfully. Dr. Butsch said ramping up dosage rapidly can increase the risk of side effects.

But Kim Boyd, MD, chief medical officer of competitor Calibrate, said the older drugs “just haven’t worked.”

Patients of both companies have critiqued online and in interviews the startups’ behavioral care – which experts across the board maintain is integral to successful weight loss treatment. But some patients felt they simply had canned advice.

Other patients said they had ups and downs with their coaches. Dana Crom, an attorney, said she had gone through many coaches with Calibrate. Some were good, effective cheerleaders; others, not so good. But when kinks in the program arose, she said, the coach wasn’t able to help her navigate them. While the coach can report trouble with medications or the app, it appears those reports are no more effective than messages sent through the portal, Ms. Crom said.

And what about when her yearlong subscription ends? Ms. Crom said she’d consider continuing with Calibrate.

Relationships with coaches, given the need to change behavior, are a critical element of the business models. Patients’ results depend “on how adherent they are to lifestyle changes,” said Found’s chief medical officer, Rehka Kumar, MD.

While the startups offer care to a larger geographic footprint, it’s not clear whether the demographics of their patient populations are different from those of the traditional bricks-and-mortar model. Calibrate’s patients are overwhelmingly White; over 8 in 10 have at least an undergraduate degree; and over 8 in 10 are women, according to the company.

And its earlier marketing strategies reflected that. The September 2020 “segmentation” document laid out three types of customers the company could hope to attract: perimenopausal or menopausal women, with income ranging from $75,000 to $150,000 a year; working mothers, with a similar income; and “men.”

Isabelle Kenyon, Calibrate’s CEO, said the company now hopes to expand its reach to partner with large employers, and that will help diversify its patients.

Patients will need to be convinced that the model – more affordable, more accessible – works for them. For her part, Ms. Garrant, who no longer is using Found, reflected on her experience, writing in her blog post that she was hoping for more follow-up and a more personal approach. “I don’t think it’s a helpful way to lose weight,” she said.

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

PHILADELPHIA – Prednisone appears to have the edge over colchicine for control of pain in patients with acute calcium pyrophosphate (CPP) crystal arthritis, an intensely painful rheumatic disease primarily affecting older patients.

Among 111 patients with acute CPP crystal arthritis randomized to receive either prednisone or colchicine for control of acute pain in a multicenter study, 2 days of therapy with the oral agents provided equivalent pain relief on the second day, and patients generally tolerated each agent well, reported Tristan Pascart, MD, from the Groupement Hospitalier de l’Institut Catholique de Lille (France).

Neil Osterweil/MDedge News

“Almost three-fourths of patients are considered to be good responders to both drugs on day 3, and, maybe, safety is the key issue distinguishing the two treatments: Colchicine was generally well tolerated, but even with this very short time frame of treatment, one patient out of five had diarrhea, which is more of a concern in this elderly population at risk of dehydration,” he said in an oral abstract session at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology.

In contrast, only about 6% of patients assigned to prednisone had diarrhea, and other adverse events that occurred more frequently with the corticosteroid, including hypertension, hyperglycemia, and insomnia all resolved after the therapy was stopped.
 

Common and acutely painful

Acute CPP crystal arthritis is a common complication that often occurs during hospitalization for primarily nonrheumatologic causes, Dr. Pascart said, and “in the absence of clinical trials, the management relies on expert opinion, which stems from extrapolated data from gap studies” primarily with prednisone or colchicine, Dr. Pascart said.

To fill in the knowledge gap, Dr. Pascart and colleagues conducted the COLCHICORT study to evaluate whether the two drugs were comparable in efficacy and safety for control of acute pain in a vulnerable population.

The multicenter, open-label trial included patients older than age 65 years with an estimated glomerular filtration rate above 30 mL/min per 1.73 m² who presented with acute CPP deposition arthritis with symptoms occurring within the previous 36 hours. CPP arthritis was defined by the identification of CPP crystals on synovial fluid analysis or typical clinical presentation with evidence of chondrocalcinosis on x-rays or ultrasound.

Patients with a history of gout, cognitive decline that could impair pain assessment, or contraindications to either of the study drugs were excluded.

The participants were randomized to receive either colchicine 1.5 mg (1 mg to start, then 0.5 mg one hour later) at baseline and then 1 mg on day 1, or oral prednisone 30 mg at baseline and on day 1. The patients also received 1 g of systemic acetaminophen, and three 50-mg doses of tramadol during the first 24 hours.

Of the 111 patients randomized, 54 were assigned to receive prednisone, and 57 were assigned to receive colchicine. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups, with a mean age of about 86 years, body mass index of around 25 kg/m², and blood pressure in the range of 130/69 mm Hg.

For nearly half of all patients in study each arm the most painful joint was the knee, followed by wrists and ankles.

There was no difference between the groups in the primary efficacy outcome of a change at 24 hours over baseline in visual analog scale (VAS) (0-100 mm) scores, either in a per-protocol analysis or modified intention-to-treat analysis. The mean change in VAS at 24 hours in the colchicine group was –36.6 mm, compared with –37.7 mm in the prednisone group. The investigators had previously determined that any difference between the two drugs of less than 13 mm on pain VAS at 24 hours would meet the definition for equivalent efficacy.

In both groups, a majority of patients had either an improvement greater than 50% in pain VAS scores and/or a pain VAS score less than 40 mm at both 24 and 48 hours.

At 7 days of follow-up, 21.8% of patients assigned to colchicine had diarrhea, compared with 5.6% of those assigned to prednisone. Adverse events occurring more frequently with prednisone included hyperglycemia, hypertension, and insomnia.

Patients who received colchicine and were also on statins had a trend toward a higher risk for diarrhea, but the study was not adequately powered to detect an association, and the trend was not statistically significant, Dr. Pascart said.

“Taken together, safety issues suggest that prednisone should be considered as the first-line therapy in acute CPP crystal arthritis. Future research is warranted to determine factors increasing the risk of colchicine-induced diarrhea,” he concluded.
 

Both drugs are used

Sara K. Tedeschi, MD, from Brigham & Women’s Hospital in Boston, who attended the session where the data were presented, has a special clinical interest in CPP deposition disease. She applauded Dr. Pascart and colleagues for conducting a rare clinical trial in CPP crystal arthritis.

In an interview, she said that the study suggests “we can keep in mind shorter courses of treatment for acute CPP crystal arthritis; I think that’s one big takeaway from this study.”

Asked whether she would change her practice based on the findings, Dr. Tedeschi replied: “I personally am not sure that I would be moved to use prednisone more than colchicine; I actually take away from this that colchicine is equivalent to prednisone for short-term use for CPP arthritis, but I think it’s also really important to note that this is in the context of quite a lot of acetaminophen and quite a lot of tramadol, and frankly I don’t usually use tramadol with my patients, but I might consider doing that, especially as there were no delirium events in this population.”

Dr. Tedeschi was not involved in the study.

Asked the same question, Michael Toprover, MD, from New York University Langone Medical Center, a moderator of the session who was not involved in the study, said: “I usually use a combination of medications. I generally, in someone who is hospitalized in particular and is in such severe pain, use a combination of colchicine and prednisone, unless I’m worried about infection, in which case I’ll start colchicine until we’ve proven that it’s CPPD, and then I’ll add prednisone.”

The study was funded by PHRC-1 GIRCI Nord Ouest, a clinical research program funded by the Ministry of Health in France. Dr. Pascart, Dr. Tedeschi, and Dr. Toprover all reported having no relevant conflicts of interest.

PHILADELPHIA – Prednisone appears to have the edge over colchicine for control of pain in patients with acute calcium pyrophosphate (CPP) crystal arthritis, an intensely painful rheumatic disease primarily affecting older patients.

Among 111 patients with acute CPP crystal arthritis randomized to receive either prednisone or colchicine for control of acute pain in a multicenter study, 2 days of therapy with the oral agents provided equivalent pain relief on the second day, and patients generally tolerated each agent well, reported Tristan Pascart, MD, from the Groupement Hospitalier de l’Institut Catholique de Lille (France).

Neil Osterweil/MDedge News

“Almost three-fourths of patients are considered to be good responders to both drugs on day 3, and, maybe, safety is the key issue distinguishing the two treatments: Colchicine was generally well tolerated, but even with this very short time frame of treatment, one patient out of five had diarrhea, which is more of a concern in this elderly population at risk of dehydration,” he said in an oral abstract session at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology.

In contrast, only about 6% of patients assigned to prednisone had diarrhea, and other adverse events that occurred more frequently with the corticosteroid, including hypertension, hyperglycemia, and insomnia all resolved after the therapy was stopped.
 

Common and acutely painful

Acute CPP crystal arthritis is a common complication that often occurs during hospitalization for primarily nonrheumatologic causes, Dr. Pascart said, and “in the absence of clinical trials, the management relies on expert opinion, which stems from extrapolated data from gap studies” primarily with prednisone or colchicine, Dr. Pascart said.

To fill in the knowledge gap, Dr. Pascart and colleagues conducted the COLCHICORT study to evaluate whether the two drugs were comparable in efficacy and safety for control of acute pain in a vulnerable population.

The multicenter, open-label trial included patients older than age 65 years with an estimated glomerular filtration rate above 30 mL/min per 1.73 m² who presented with acute CPP deposition arthritis with symptoms occurring within the previous 36 hours. CPP arthritis was defined by the identification of CPP crystals on synovial fluid analysis or typical clinical presentation with evidence of chondrocalcinosis on x-rays or ultrasound.

Patients with a history of gout, cognitive decline that could impair pain assessment, or contraindications to either of the study drugs were excluded.

The participants were randomized to receive either colchicine 1.5 mg (1 mg to start, then 0.5 mg one hour later) at baseline and then 1 mg on day 1, or oral prednisone 30 mg at baseline and on day 1. The patients also received 1 g of systemic acetaminophen, and three 50-mg doses of tramadol during the first 24 hours.

Of the 111 patients randomized, 54 were assigned to receive prednisone, and 57 were assigned to receive colchicine. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups, with a mean age of about 86 years, body mass index of around 25 kg/m², and blood pressure in the range of 130/69 mm Hg.

For nearly half of all patients in study each arm the most painful joint was the knee, followed by wrists and ankles.

There was no difference between the groups in the primary efficacy outcome of a change at 24 hours over baseline in visual analog scale (VAS) (0-100 mm) scores, either in a per-protocol analysis or modified intention-to-treat analysis. The mean change in VAS at 24 hours in the colchicine group was –36.6 mm, compared with –37.7 mm in the prednisone group. The investigators had previously determined that any difference between the two drugs of less than 13 mm on pain VAS at 24 hours would meet the definition for equivalent efficacy.

In both groups, a majority of patients had either an improvement greater than 50% in pain VAS scores and/or a pain VAS score less than 40 mm at both 24 and 48 hours.

At 7 days of follow-up, 21.8% of patients assigned to colchicine had diarrhea, compared with 5.6% of those assigned to prednisone. Adverse events occurring more frequently with prednisone included hyperglycemia, hypertension, and insomnia.

Patients who received colchicine and were also on statins had a trend toward a higher risk for diarrhea, but the study was not adequately powered to detect an association, and the trend was not statistically significant, Dr. Pascart said.

“Taken together, safety issues suggest that prednisone should be considered as the first-line therapy in acute CPP crystal arthritis. Future research is warranted to determine factors increasing the risk of colchicine-induced diarrhea,” he concluded.
 

Both drugs are used

Sara K. Tedeschi, MD, from Brigham & Women’s Hospital in Boston, who attended the session where the data were presented, has a special clinical interest in CPP deposition disease. She applauded Dr. Pascart and colleagues for conducting a rare clinical trial in CPP crystal arthritis.

In an interview, she said that the study suggests “we can keep in mind shorter courses of treatment for acute CPP crystal arthritis; I think that’s one big takeaway from this study.”

Asked whether she would change her practice based on the findings, Dr. Tedeschi replied: “I personally am not sure that I would be moved to use prednisone more than colchicine; I actually take away from this that colchicine is equivalent to prednisone for short-term use for CPP arthritis, but I think it’s also really important to note that this is in the context of quite a lot of acetaminophen and quite a lot of tramadol, and frankly I don’t usually use tramadol with my patients, but I might consider doing that, especially as there were no delirium events in this population.”

Dr. Tedeschi was not involved in the study.

Asked the same question, Michael Toprover, MD, from New York University Langone Medical Center, a moderator of the session who was not involved in the study, said: “I usually use a combination of medications. I generally, in someone who is hospitalized in particular and is in such severe pain, use a combination of colchicine and prednisone, unless I’m worried about infection, in which case I’ll start colchicine until we’ve proven that it’s CPPD, and then I’ll add prednisone.”

The study was funded by PHRC-1 GIRCI Nord Ouest, a clinical research program funded by the Ministry of Health in France. Dr. Pascart, Dr. Tedeschi, and Dr. Toprover all reported having no relevant conflicts of interest.

PHILADELPHIA – Prednisone appears to have the edge over colchicine for control of pain in patients with acute calcium pyrophosphate (CPP) crystal arthritis, an intensely painful rheumatic disease primarily affecting older patients.

Among 111 patients with acute CPP crystal arthritis randomized to receive either prednisone or colchicine for control of acute pain in a multicenter study, 2 days of therapy with the oral agents provided equivalent pain relief on the second day, and patients generally tolerated each agent well, reported Tristan Pascart, MD, from the Groupement Hospitalier de l’Institut Catholique de Lille (France).

Neil Osterweil/MDedge News

“Almost three-fourths of patients are considered to be good responders to both drugs on day 3, and, maybe, safety is the key issue distinguishing the two treatments: Colchicine was generally well tolerated, but even with this very short time frame of treatment, one patient out of five had diarrhea, which is more of a concern in this elderly population at risk of dehydration,” he said in an oral abstract session at the annual meeting of the American College of Rheumatology.

In contrast, only about 6% of patients assigned to prednisone had diarrhea, and other adverse events that occurred more frequently with the corticosteroid, including hypertension, hyperglycemia, and insomnia all resolved after the therapy was stopped.
 

Common and acutely painful

Acute CPP crystal arthritis is a common complication that often occurs during hospitalization for primarily nonrheumatologic causes, Dr. Pascart said, and “in the absence of clinical trials, the management relies on expert opinion, which stems from extrapolated data from gap studies” primarily with prednisone or colchicine, Dr. Pascart said.

To fill in the knowledge gap, Dr. Pascart and colleagues conducted the COLCHICORT study to evaluate whether the two drugs were comparable in efficacy and safety for control of acute pain in a vulnerable population.

The multicenter, open-label trial included patients older than age 65 years with an estimated glomerular filtration rate above 30 mL/min per 1.73 m² who presented with acute CPP deposition arthritis with symptoms occurring within the previous 36 hours. CPP arthritis was defined by the identification of CPP crystals on synovial fluid analysis or typical clinical presentation with evidence of chondrocalcinosis on x-rays or ultrasound.

Patients with a history of gout, cognitive decline that could impair pain assessment, or contraindications to either of the study drugs were excluded.

The participants were randomized to receive either colchicine 1.5 mg (1 mg to start, then 0.5 mg one hour later) at baseline and then 1 mg on day 1, or oral prednisone 30 mg at baseline and on day 1. The patients also received 1 g of systemic acetaminophen, and three 50-mg doses of tramadol during the first 24 hours.

Of the 111 patients randomized, 54 were assigned to receive prednisone, and 57 were assigned to receive colchicine. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups, with a mean age of about 86 years, body mass index of around 25 kg/m², and blood pressure in the range of 130/69 mm Hg.

For nearly half of all patients in study each arm the most painful joint was the knee, followed by wrists and ankles.

There was no difference between the groups in the primary efficacy outcome of a change at 24 hours over baseline in visual analog scale (VAS) (0-100 mm) scores, either in a per-protocol analysis or modified intention-to-treat analysis. The mean change in VAS at 24 hours in the colchicine group was –36.6 mm, compared with –37.7 mm in the prednisone group. The investigators had previously determined that any difference between the two drugs of less than 13 mm on pain VAS at 24 hours would meet the definition for equivalent efficacy.

In both groups, a majority of patients had either an improvement greater than 50% in pain VAS scores and/or a pain VAS score less than 40 mm at both 24 and 48 hours.

At 7 days of follow-up, 21.8% of patients assigned to colchicine had diarrhea, compared with 5.6% of those assigned to prednisone. Adverse events occurring more frequently with prednisone included hyperglycemia, hypertension, and insomnia.

Patients who received colchicine and were also on statins had a trend toward a higher risk for diarrhea, but the study was not adequately powered to detect an association, and the trend was not statistically significant, Dr. Pascart said.

“Taken together, safety issues suggest that prednisone should be considered as the first-line therapy in acute CPP crystal arthritis. Future research is warranted to determine factors increasing the risk of colchicine-induced diarrhea,” he concluded.
 

Both drugs are used

Sara K. Tedeschi, MD, from Brigham & Women’s Hospital in Boston, who attended the session where the data were presented, has a special clinical interest in CPP deposition disease. She applauded Dr. Pascart and colleagues for conducting a rare clinical trial in CPP crystal arthritis.

In an interview, she said that the study suggests “we can keep in mind shorter courses of treatment for acute CPP crystal arthritis; I think that’s one big takeaway from this study.”

Asked whether she would change her practice based on the findings, Dr. Tedeschi replied: “I personally am not sure that I would be moved to use prednisone more than colchicine; I actually take away from this that colchicine is equivalent to prednisone for short-term use for CPP arthritis, but I think it’s also really important to note that this is in the context of quite a lot of acetaminophen and quite a lot of tramadol, and frankly I don’t usually use tramadol with my patients, but I might consider doing that, especially as there were no delirium events in this population.”

Dr. Tedeschi was not involved in the study.

Asked the same question, Michael Toprover, MD, from New York University Langone Medical Center, a moderator of the session who was not involved in the study, said: “I usually use a combination of medications. I generally, in someone who is hospitalized in particular and is in such severe pain, use a combination of colchicine and prednisone, unless I’m worried about infection, in which case I’ll start colchicine until we’ve proven that it’s CPPD, and then I’ll add prednisone.”

The study was funded by PHRC-1 GIRCI Nord Ouest, a clinical research program funded by the Ministry of Health in France. Dr. Pascart, Dr. Tedeschi, and Dr. Toprover all reported having no relevant conflicts of interest.

CHICAGO – Renal denervation, relative to a sham procedure, was linked with statistically significant reductions in blood pressure in the newly completed SPYRAL HTN–ON MED trial, but several factors are likely to have worked in concert to prevent the study from meeting its primary endpoint.

Of these differences, probably none was more important than the substantially higher proportion of patients in the sham group that received additional BP-lowering medications over the course of the study, David E. Kandzari, MD, reported at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.

Ted Bosworth/MDedge News

The SPYRAL HTN–ON MED pivotal trial followed the previously completed SPYRAL HTN–ON MED pilot study, which did show a significant BP-lowering effect on antihypertensive medications followed radiofrequency denervation. In a recent update of the pilot study, the effect was persistent out to 3 years.

In the SPYRAL HTN–ON MED program, patients on their second screening visit were required to have a systolic pressure of between 140 and 170 mm Hg on 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) while taking up to three antihypertensive medications. Patients who entered the study were randomized to renal denervation or sham control while maintaining their baseline antihypertensive therapies.

The previously reported pilot study comprised 80 patients. The expansion pivotal trial added 257 more patients for a total cohort of 337 patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was based on a Bayesian analysis of change in 24-hour systolic ABPM at 6 months for those in the experimental arm versus those on medications alone. Participants from both the pilot and pivotal trials were included.

The prespecified definition of success for renal denervation was a 97.5% threshold for probability of superiority on the basis of this Bayesian analysis. However, the Bayesian analysis was distorted by differences in the pilot and expansion cohorts, which complicated the superiority calculation. As a result, the analysis only yielded a 51% probability of superiority, a level substantially below the predefined threshold.

Despite differences seen in BP control in favor of renal denervation, several factors were identified that likely contributed to the missed primary endpoint. One stood out.

“Significant differences in medication prescriptions were disproportionate in favor of the sham group,” reported Dr. Kandzari, chief of Piedmont Heart Institute, Atlanta. He said these differences, which were a violation of the protocol mandate, led to a “bias toward the null” for the primary outcome.

The failure to meet the primary outcome was particularly disappointing in the wake of the favorable pilot study and the SPYRAL HTN–OFF MED pivotal trial, which were both positive.

In the pilot study, which did not have a medication imbalance, a 7.3–mm Hg reduction (P = .004) in 24-hour ABPM was seen at 6 months. Relative reductions in office-based systolic pressure reductions for renal denervation versus sham were 6.6 mm Hg (P = .03) and 4.0 mm Hg (P = .03) for the pilot and expansions groups, respectively.

On the basis of a Win ratio derived from a hierarchical analysis of ABMP and medication burden reduction, the 1.50 advantage (P = .005) for the renal denervation arm in the newly completed SPYRAL HTN–ON MED trial was also compelling.

At study entry, the median number of medications was 1.9 in both the renal denervation and sham arms. At the end of 6 months, the median number of medications was unchanged in the experimental arm but rose to 2.1 (P = .01) in the sham group. Similarly, there was little change in the medication burden from the start to the end of the trial in the denervation group (2.8 vs. 3.0), but a statistically significant change in the sham group (2.9 vs. 3.5; P = .04).

Furthermore, the net percentage change of patients receiving medications favoring BP reduction over the course of the study did not differ between the experimental and control arms of the pilot cohort, but was more than 10 times higher among controls in the expansion group (1.9% vs. 21.8%; P < .0001).

Medication changes over the course of the SPYRAL HTN–ON MED trial were even greater in some specific subgroups. Among Black participants, for example, 14.2% of those randomized to renal denervation and 54.6% of those randomized to the sham group increased their antihypertensive therapies over the course of the study.

The COVID-19 epidemic is suspected of playing another role in the negative results, according to Dr. Kandzari. After a brief pause in enrollment, the SPYRAL HTN–ON MED trial was resumed, but approximately 80% of the expansion cohort data were collected during this period. When compared, variances in office and 24-hour ABPM were observed for participants who were or were not evaluated during COVID.

“Significant differences in 24-hour ABPM patterns pre- and during COVID may reflect changes in patient behavior and lifestyle,” Dr. Kandzari speculated.

The data from this study differ from essentially all of the other studies in the SPYRAL HTN program as well as several other sham-controlled studies with renal denervation, according to Dr. Kandzari.

Ted Bosworth/MDedge News

The AHA-invited discussant, Ajay J. Kirtane, MD, director of the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratories at Columbia University, New York, largely agreed that several variables appeared to conspire against a positive result in this trial, but he zeroed in on the imbalance of antihypertensive medications.

“Any trial that attempts to show a difference between renal denervation and a sham procedure must insure that antihypertensive medications are the same in the two arms. They cannot be different,” he said.

As an active investigator in the field of renal denervation, Dr. Kirtane thinks the evidence does support a benefit from renal denervation, but he believes data are still needed to determine which patients are candidates.

“Renal denervation is not going to be a replacement for previous established therapies, but it will be an adjunct,” he predicted. The preponderance of evidence supports clinically meaningful reductions in BP with this approach, “but we need to determine who to consider [for this therapy] and to have realistic expectations about the degree of benefit.”

Dr. Kandzari reported financial relationships with Abbott Vascular, Ablative Solutions, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Medtronic Cardiovascular, OrbusNeich, and Teleflex. Dr. Kirtane reported financial relationships with Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, Boston Scientific, Cardiovascular Systems, Cathworks, Chiesi, Medtronic, Opens, Philipps, Regeneron, ReCor Medical, Siemens, Spectranetics, and Zoll.
 

CHICAGO – Renal denervation, relative to a sham procedure, was linked with statistically significant reductions in blood pressure in the newly completed SPYRAL HTN–ON MED trial, but several factors are likely to have worked in concert to prevent the study from meeting its primary endpoint.

Of these differences, probably none was more important than the substantially higher proportion of patients in the sham group that received additional BP-lowering medications over the course of the study, David E. Kandzari, MD, reported at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.

Ted Bosworth/MDedge News

The SPYRAL HTN–ON MED pivotal trial followed the previously completed SPYRAL HTN–ON MED pilot study, which did show a significant BP-lowering effect on antihypertensive medications followed radiofrequency denervation. In a recent update of the pilot study, the effect was persistent out to 3 years.

In the SPYRAL HTN–ON MED program, patients on their second screening visit were required to have a systolic pressure of between 140 and 170 mm Hg on 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) while taking up to three antihypertensive medications. Patients who entered the study were randomized to renal denervation or sham control while maintaining their baseline antihypertensive therapies.

The previously reported pilot study comprised 80 patients. The expansion pivotal trial added 257 more patients for a total cohort of 337 patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was based on a Bayesian analysis of change in 24-hour systolic ABPM at 6 months for those in the experimental arm versus those on medications alone. Participants from both the pilot and pivotal trials were included.

The prespecified definition of success for renal denervation was a 97.5% threshold for probability of superiority on the basis of this Bayesian analysis. However, the Bayesian analysis was distorted by differences in the pilot and expansion cohorts, which complicated the superiority calculation. As a result, the analysis only yielded a 51% probability of superiority, a level substantially below the predefined threshold.

Despite differences seen in BP control in favor of renal denervation, several factors were identified that likely contributed to the missed primary endpoint. One stood out.

“Significant differences in medication prescriptions were disproportionate in favor of the sham group,” reported Dr. Kandzari, chief of Piedmont Heart Institute, Atlanta. He said these differences, which were a violation of the protocol mandate, led to a “bias toward the null” for the primary outcome.

The failure to meet the primary outcome was particularly disappointing in the wake of the favorable pilot study and the SPYRAL HTN–OFF MED pivotal trial, which were both positive.

In the pilot study, which did not have a medication imbalance, a 7.3–mm Hg reduction (P = .004) in 24-hour ABPM was seen at 6 months. Relative reductions in office-based systolic pressure reductions for renal denervation versus sham were 6.6 mm Hg (P = .03) and 4.0 mm Hg (P = .03) for the pilot and expansions groups, respectively.

On the basis of a Win ratio derived from a hierarchical analysis of ABMP and medication burden reduction, the 1.50 advantage (P = .005) for the renal denervation arm in the newly completed SPYRAL HTN–ON MED trial was also compelling.

At study entry, the median number of medications was 1.9 in both the renal denervation and sham arms. At the end of 6 months, the median number of medications was unchanged in the experimental arm but rose to 2.1 (P = .01) in the sham group. Similarly, there was little change in the medication burden from the start to the end of the trial in the denervation group (2.8 vs. 3.0), but a statistically significant change in the sham group (2.9 vs. 3.5; P = .04).

Furthermore, the net percentage change of patients receiving medications favoring BP reduction over the course of the study did not differ between the experimental and control arms of the pilot cohort, but was more than 10 times higher among controls in the expansion group (1.9% vs. 21.8%; P < .0001).

Medication changes over the course of the SPYRAL HTN–ON MED trial were even greater in some specific subgroups. Among Black participants, for example, 14.2% of those randomized to renal denervation and 54.6% of those randomized to the sham group increased their antihypertensive therapies over the course of the study.

The COVID-19 epidemic is suspected of playing another role in the negative results, according to Dr. Kandzari. After a brief pause in enrollment, the SPYRAL HTN–ON MED trial was resumed, but approximately 80% of the expansion cohort data were collected during this period. When compared, variances in office and 24-hour ABPM were observed for participants who were or were not evaluated during COVID.

“Significant differences in 24-hour ABPM patterns pre- and during COVID may reflect changes in patient behavior and lifestyle,” Dr. Kandzari speculated.

The data from this study differ from essentially all of the other studies in the SPYRAL HTN program as well as several other sham-controlled studies with renal denervation, according to Dr. Kandzari.

Ted Bosworth/MDedge News

The AHA-invited discussant, Ajay J. Kirtane, MD, director of the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratories at Columbia University, New York, largely agreed that several variables appeared to conspire against a positive result in this trial, but he zeroed in on the imbalance of antihypertensive medications.

“Any trial that attempts to show a difference between renal denervation and a sham procedure must insure that antihypertensive medications are the same in the two arms. They cannot be different,” he said.

As an active investigator in the field of renal denervation, Dr. Kirtane thinks the evidence does support a benefit from renal denervation, but he believes data are still needed to determine which patients are candidates.

“Renal denervation is not going to be a replacement for previous established therapies, but it will be an adjunct,” he predicted. The preponderance of evidence supports clinically meaningful reductions in BP with this approach, “but we need to determine who to consider [for this therapy] and to have realistic expectations about the degree of benefit.”

Dr. Kandzari reported financial relationships with Abbott Vascular, Ablative Solutions, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Medtronic Cardiovascular, OrbusNeich, and Teleflex. Dr. Kirtane reported financial relationships with Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, Boston Scientific, Cardiovascular Systems, Cathworks, Chiesi, Medtronic, Opens, Philipps, Regeneron, ReCor Medical, Siemens, Spectranetics, and Zoll.
 

CHICAGO – Renal denervation, relative to a sham procedure, was linked with statistically significant reductions in blood pressure in the newly completed SPYRAL HTN–ON MED trial, but several factors are likely to have worked in concert to prevent the study from meeting its primary endpoint.

Of these differences, probably none was more important than the substantially higher proportion of patients in the sham group that received additional BP-lowering medications over the course of the study, David E. Kandzari, MD, reported at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.

Ted Bosworth/MDedge News

The SPYRAL HTN–ON MED pivotal trial followed the previously completed SPYRAL HTN–ON MED pilot study, which did show a significant BP-lowering effect on antihypertensive medications followed radiofrequency denervation. In a recent update of the pilot study, the effect was persistent out to 3 years.

In the SPYRAL HTN–ON MED program, patients on their second screening visit were required to have a systolic pressure of between 140 and 170 mm Hg on 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) while taking up to three antihypertensive medications. Patients who entered the study were randomized to renal denervation or sham control while maintaining their baseline antihypertensive therapies.

The previously reported pilot study comprised 80 patients. The expansion pivotal trial added 257 more patients for a total cohort of 337 patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was based on a Bayesian analysis of change in 24-hour systolic ABPM at 6 months for those in the experimental arm versus those on medications alone. Participants from both the pilot and pivotal trials were included.

The prespecified definition of success for renal denervation was a 97.5% threshold for probability of superiority on the basis of this Bayesian analysis. However, the Bayesian analysis was distorted by differences in the pilot and expansion cohorts, which complicated the superiority calculation. As a result, the analysis only yielded a 51% probability of superiority, a level substantially below the predefined threshold.

Despite differences seen in BP control in favor of renal denervation, several factors were identified that likely contributed to the missed primary endpoint. One stood out.

“Significant differences in medication prescriptions were disproportionate in favor of the sham group,” reported Dr. Kandzari, chief of Piedmont Heart Institute, Atlanta. He said these differences, which were a violation of the protocol mandate, led to a “bias toward the null” for the primary outcome.

The failure to meet the primary outcome was particularly disappointing in the wake of the favorable pilot study and the SPYRAL HTN–OFF MED pivotal trial, which were both positive.

In the pilot study, which did not have a medication imbalance, a 7.3–mm Hg reduction (P = .004) in 24-hour ABPM was seen at 6 months. Relative reductions in office-based systolic pressure reductions for renal denervation versus sham were 6.6 mm Hg (P = .03) and 4.0 mm Hg (P = .03) for the pilot and expansions groups, respectively.

On the basis of a Win ratio derived from a hierarchical analysis of ABMP and medication burden reduction, the 1.50 advantage (P = .005) for the renal denervation arm in the newly completed SPYRAL HTN–ON MED trial was also compelling.

At study entry, the median number of medications was 1.9 in both the renal denervation and sham arms. At the end of 6 months, the median number of medications was unchanged in the experimental arm but rose to 2.1 (P = .01) in the sham group. Similarly, there was little change in the medication burden from the start to the end of the trial in the denervation group (2.8 vs. 3.0), but a statistically significant change in the sham group (2.9 vs. 3.5; P = .04).

Furthermore, the net percentage change of patients receiving medications favoring BP reduction over the course of the study did not differ between the experimental and control arms of the pilot cohort, but was more than 10 times higher among controls in the expansion group (1.9% vs. 21.8%; P < .0001).

Medication changes over the course of the SPYRAL HTN–ON MED trial were even greater in some specific subgroups. Among Black participants, for example, 14.2% of those randomized to renal denervation and 54.6% of those randomized to the sham group increased their antihypertensive therapies over the course of the study.

The COVID-19 epidemic is suspected of playing another role in the negative results, according to Dr. Kandzari. After a brief pause in enrollment, the SPYRAL HTN–ON MED trial was resumed, but approximately 80% of the expansion cohort data were collected during this period. When compared, variances in office and 24-hour ABPM were observed for participants who were or were not evaluated during COVID.

“Significant differences in 24-hour ABPM patterns pre- and during COVID may reflect changes in patient behavior and lifestyle,” Dr. Kandzari speculated.

The data from this study differ from essentially all of the other studies in the SPYRAL HTN program as well as several other sham-controlled studies with renal denervation, according to Dr. Kandzari.

Ted Bosworth/MDedge News

The AHA-invited discussant, Ajay J. Kirtane, MD, director of the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratories at Columbia University, New York, largely agreed that several variables appeared to conspire against a positive result in this trial, but he zeroed in on the imbalance of antihypertensive medications.

“Any trial that attempts to show a difference between renal denervation and a sham procedure must insure that antihypertensive medications are the same in the two arms. They cannot be different,” he said.

As an active investigator in the field of renal denervation, Dr. Kirtane thinks the evidence does support a benefit from renal denervation, but he believes data are still needed to determine which patients are candidates.

“Renal denervation is not going to be a replacement for previous established therapies, but it will be an adjunct,” he predicted. The preponderance of evidence supports clinically meaningful reductions in BP with this approach, “but we need to determine who to consider [for this therapy] and to have realistic expectations about the degree of benefit.”

Dr. Kandzari reported financial relationships with Abbott Vascular, Ablative Solutions, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Medtronic Cardiovascular, OrbusNeich, and Teleflex. Dr. Kirtane reported financial relationships with Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, Boston Scientific, Cardiovascular Systems, Cathworks, Chiesi, Medtronic, Opens, Philipps, Regeneron, ReCor Medical, Siemens, Spectranetics, and Zoll.
 

The incidence of new COVID-19 cases in children seems to have stabilized as the national count remained under 30,000 for the fifth consecutive week, but hospitalization data may indicate some possible turbulence.

Just over 28,000 pediatric cases were reported during the week of Nov. 4-10, a drop of 5.4% from the previous week, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children’s Hospital Association said in their weekly COVID-19 report involving data from state and territorial health departments, several of which are no longer updating their websites.

The stability in weekly cases, however, comes in contrast to a very recent and considerable increase in new hospital admissions of children aged 0-17 years with confirmed COVID-19. That rate, which was 0.18 hospitalizations per 100,000 population on Nov. 7 and 0.19 per 100,000 on Nov. 8 and 9, jumped all the way to 0.34 on Nov. 10 and 0.48 on Nov. 11, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That is the highest rate since the closing days of the Omicron surge in February.

The rate for Nov. 12, the most recent one available, was down slightly to 0.47 admissions per 100,000. There doesn’t seem to be any evidence in the CDC’s data of a similar sudden increase in new hospitalizations among any other age group, and no age group, including children, shows any sign of a recent increase in emergency department visits with diagnosed COVID. (The CDC has not yet responded to our inquiry about this development.)

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

The two most recent 7-day averages for new admissions in children aged 0-17 show a small increase, but they cover the periods of Oct. 15 to Oct. 31, when there were 126 admissions per day, and Nov. 1 to Nov. 7, when the average went up to 133 per day, the CDC said on its COVID Data Tracker.

The CDC does not publish a weekly count of new COVID cases, but its latest data on the rate of incident cases seem to agree with the AAP/CHA figures: A gradual decline in all age groups, including children, since the beginning of September.

Vaccinations, on the other hand, bucked their recent trend and increased in the last week. About 43,000 children under age 5 years received their initial dose of COVID vaccine during Nov. 3-9, compared with 30,000 and 33,000 the 2 previous weeks, while 5- to 11-year-olds hit their highest weekly mark (31,000) since late August and 12- to 17-year-olds had their biggest week (27,000) since mid-August, the AAP reported based on CDC data.


 

The incidence of new COVID-19 cases in children seems to have stabilized as the national count remained under 30,000 for the fifth consecutive week, but hospitalization data may indicate some possible turbulence.

Just over 28,000 pediatric cases were reported during the week of Nov. 4-10, a drop of 5.4% from the previous week, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children’s Hospital Association said in their weekly COVID-19 report involving data from state and territorial health departments, several of which are no longer updating their websites.

The stability in weekly cases, however, comes in contrast to a very recent and considerable increase in new hospital admissions of children aged 0-17 years with confirmed COVID-19. That rate, which was 0.18 hospitalizations per 100,000 population on Nov. 7 and 0.19 per 100,000 on Nov. 8 and 9, jumped all the way to 0.34 on Nov. 10 and 0.48 on Nov. 11, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That is the highest rate since the closing days of the Omicron surge in February.

The rate for Nov. 12, the most recent one available, was down slightly to 0.47 admissions per 100,000. There doesn’t seem to be any evidence in the CDC’s data of a similar sudden increase in new hospitalizations among any other age group, and no age group, including children, shows any sign of a recent increase in emergency department visits with diagnosed COVID. (The CDC has not yet responded to our inquiry about this development.)

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

The two most recent 7-day averages for new admissions in children aged 0-17 show a small increase, but they cover the periods of Oct. 15 to Oct. 31, when there were 126 admissions per day, and Nov. 1 to Nov. 7, when the average went up to 133 per day, the CDC said on its COVID Data Tracker.

The CDC does not publish a weekly count of new COVID cases, but its latest data on the rate of incident cases seem to agree with the AAP/CHA figures: A gradual decline in all age groups, including children, since the beginning of September.

Vaccinations, on the other hand, bucked their recent trend and increased in the last week. About 43,000 children under age 5 years received their initial dose of COVID vaccine during Nov. 3-9, compared with 30,000 and 33,000 the 2 previous weeks, while 5- to 11-year-olds hit their highest weekly mark (31,000) since late August and 12- to 17-year-olds had their biggest week (27,000) since mid-August, the AAP reported based on CDC data.


 

The incidence of new COVID-19 cases in children seems to have stabilized as the national count remained under 30,000 for the fifth consecutive week, but hospitalization data may indicate some possible turbulence.

Just over 28,000 pediatric cases were reported during the week of Nov. 4-10, a drop of 5.4% from the previous week, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children’s Hospital Association said in their weekly COVID-19 report involving data from state and territorial health departments, several of which are no longer updating their websites.

The stability in weekly cases, however, comes in contrast to a very recent and considerable increase in new hospital admissions of children aged 0-17 years with confirmed COVID-19. That rate, which was 0.18 hospitalizations per 100,000 population on Nov. 7 and 0.19 per 100,000 on Nov. 8 and 9, jumped all the way to 0.34 on Nov. 10 and 0.48 on Nov. 11, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That is the highest rate since the closing days of the Omicron surge in February.

The rate for Nov. 12, the most recent one available, was down slightly to 0.47 admissions per 100,000. There doesn’t seem to be any evidence in the CDC’s data of a similar sudden increase in new hospitalizations among any other age group, and no age group, including children, shows any sign of a recent increase in emergency department visits with diagnosed COVID. (The CDC has not yet responded to our inquiry about this development.)

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

The two most recent 7-day averages for new admissions in children aged 0-17 show a small increase, but they cover the periods of Oct. 15 to Oct. 31, when there were 126 admissions per day, and Nov. 1 to Nov. 7, when the average went up to 133 per day, the CDC said on its COVID Data Tracker.

The CDC does not publish a weekly count of new COVID cases, but its latest data on the rate of incident cases seem to agree with the AAP/CHA figures: A gradual decline in all age groups, including children, since the beginning of September.

Vaccinations, on the other hand, bucked their recent trend and increased in the last week. About 43,000 children under age 5 years received their initial dose of COVID vaccine during Nov. 3-9, compared with 30,000 and 33,000 the 2 previous weeks, while 5- to 11-year-olds hit their highest weekly mark (31,000) since late August and 12- to 17-year-olds had their biggest week (27,000) since mid-August, the AAP reported based on CDC data.