Expanded urine culture identified more pathogens

Article Type
Changed

 

– With the trade-off of an extra 24 hours for results, an enhanced protocol to culture clinically relevant urinary pathogens detected significantly more unique pathogens associated with urinary tract infection, compared with standard cultures, in a study of 150 women.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– With the trade-off of an extra 24 hours for results, an enhanced protocol to culture clinically relevant urinary pathogens detected significantly more unique pathogens associated with urinary tract infection, compared with standard cultures, in a study of 150 women.

 

– With the trade-off of an extra 24 hours for results, an enhanced protocol to culture clinically relevant urinary pathogens detected significantly more unique pathogens associated with urinary tract infection, compared with standard cultures, in a study of 150 women.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

AT ASM MICROBE 2017

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: An expanded urine culture protocol detected more clinically relevant pathogens than did a standard culture.

Major finding: Standard cultures missed 67% (122 of 182) of the uropathogens identified with the expanded culture protocol.

Data source: A prospective study of 150 women comparing UTI pathogen detection between standard and expanded culture analysis.

Disclosures: Mr. Price did not have any relevant disclosures.

Disqus Comments
Default

Add-on azithromycin cuts asthma exacerbations

The impact on community microbial resistance remains unclear
Article Type
Changed

 

Adults with persistent symptomatic asthma who took azithromycin as an add-on therapy experienced fewer exacerbations and had improved quality of life, compared with their peers who took a placebo, a multicenter, randomized trial demonstrated.

“Macrolide antibiotics have antibacterial, antiviral, and anti-inflammatory effects, and are reported to be beneficial in both eosinophilic and noneosinophilic subtypes,” a group of Australian researchers wrote online July 4 in The Lancet (doi: org/10.1016/S0140-6736[17]31281-3). “Systematic reviews of randomized, controlled trials report benefits of macrolides on asthma symptoms but [we] are unable to draw conclusions about the effects on other endpoints, including exacerbations, due to lack of data, heterogeneity of results, and inadequate study design and sample size.”

©MattZ90/thinkstockphotos.com
Led by Peter G. Gibson, MBBS, of Hunter Medical Research Institute, New South Wales, Australia, researchers at eight clinical sites conducted a randomized trial to test the hypothesis that the macrolide antibiotic azithromycin reduces asthma exacerbations and improves quality of life in patients with symptomatic asthma on inhaled maintenance therapy. To be eligible for the trial, known as Asthma and Macrolides: the Azithromycin Efficacy and Safety Study, or AMAZES – patients had to be at least 18 years of age, be using an inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting bronchodilator, and have no hearing impairment or abnormal prolongation of the corrected QT interval. Primary efficacy endpoints were the total number of asthma exacerbations (severe and moderate) over 48 weeks and asthma quality of life based on responses to the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (Chest. 1999 May;115[5]:1265-70). Of the 420 patients, 213 were allocated to take 500 mg azithromycin three times weekly and 207 were allocated to placebo. In all, 168 patients in the azithromycin group completed 48 weeks of treatment, compared with 166 in the placebo group. Their median age was 60 years, 76% had atopic asthma, and 38% were ex-smokers.

The researchers observed a significant reduction in the incidence of total asthma exacerbations in the azithromycin-treated group: 1.07/patient-year, compared with 1.86/patient year in the placebo group, which translated into an incidence rate ratio of 0.59 (P less than .0001). Specifically, 127 patients in the placebo group (61%) experienced at least one asthma exacerbation compared with 94 patients in the azithromycin group (44%; P less than .0001). A significant improvement in asthma-related quality of life was also seen among patients in the azithromycin group (adjusted mean difference of 0.36; P = .001).

Though the mechanism of the antiviral effect of macrolides is not yet determined, Dr. Gibson and his associates noted that respiratory viral infection is associated with severe exacerbations in eosinophilic asthma and causes most respiratory infections. “There is a known interaction between eosinophilic airway inflammation, exacerbation rate, and impaired innate antiviral immunity,” they wrote. “Since we observed a benefit of azithromycin on both asthma exacerbations and respiratory infections, we speculate that azithromycin might be acting to prevent viral-induced episodes in asthma.”

“Given the major impact of asthma exacerbations on patients and the community and the ongoing risk posed by these events in patients who remain symptomatic on maintenance therapy, we consider that azithromycin is a valuable addition to existing regimens for treating asthma,” the researchers concluded. “The long-term effects of this therapy on community microbial resistance require further evaluation.”

The overall rates and types of serious adverse events seen in both groups were not significantly different from each other, with serious adverse events having occurred in 16 (8%) patients treated with azithromycin and 26 (13%) patients given the placebo.

The study was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and the John Hunter Hospital Charitable Trust. The authors reported having no financial conflicts directly related to the study.

Body

 

Since microbial resistance is a well known side effect of antibiotic use, add-on therapy with azithromycin in asthma needs to be restricted to those patients with the highest unmet medical need (for example, frequent exacerbators) and to time periods with the greatest risk of exacerbations (such as winter). Biomarkers that predict the therapeutic response to macrolides might facilitate optimal patient selection. Further research is needed to elucidate the most important mechanism of action of these pleiotropic drugs. Macrolides have anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, and antiviral effects. However, the authors did not observe a reduction in inflammatory cell counts in sputum to support a definite anti-inflammatory effect. Azithromycin also was effective in patients with and without potentially pathogenic microorganisms in sputum cultures at baseline. Since azithromycin reduced both asthma exacerbations and respiratory infections, the benefits of azithromycin might be caused by preventing viral-induced attacks in asthma. Azithromycin stimulates phagocytosis of microbes and dead cells by macrophages (i.e., efferocytosis), an effect that is likely to be independent of the nature of the accompanying neutrophilic or eosinophilic airway inflammation.

Gibson and colleagues have clearly shown that add-on therapy with azithromycin is effective and safe in adult patients with uncontrolled asthma despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists. Azithromycin benefited patients with both eosinophilic and noneosinophilic asthma. However, the effects of long-term therapy with macrolides on community microbial resistance remain a public health concern. Future studies with potentially safer nonantibiotic macrolides in uncontrolled severe asthma are warranted. Since the antimicrobial effects probably contribute to the overall efficacy of macrolides, the beneficial effects of nonantibiotic macrolides might be intermediate between macrolide antibiotics and placebo.

This text is excerpted from a commentary published online July 4 in The Lancet (doi. org/10.1016/S0140-6736[17]31547-7). Guy Brusselle, MD, is with the department of respiratory medicine at Ghent (Belgium) University Hospital and Ian Pavord, MD, is with the University of Oxford’s Nuffield Department of Medicine, England. Both authors disclosed having received honoraria and other financial support from numerous pharmaceutical companies.

Publications
Topics
Sections
Body

 

Since microbial resistance is a well known side effect of antibiotic use, add-on therapy with azithromycin in asthma needs to be restricted to those patients with the highest unmet medical need (for example, frequent exacerbators) and to time periods with the greatest risk of exacerbations (such as winter). Biomarkers that predict the therapeutic response to macrolides might facilitate optimal patient selection. Further research is needed to elucidate the most important mechanism of action of these pleiotropic drugs. Macrolides have anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, and antiviral effects. However, the authors did not observe a reduction in inflammatory cell counts in sputum to support a definite anti-inflammatory effect. Azithromycin also was effective in patients with and without potentially pathogenic microorganisms in sputum cultures at baseline. Since azithromycin reduced both asthma exacerbations and respiratory infections, the benefits of azithromycin might be caused by preventing viral-induced attacks in asthma. Azithromycin stimulates phagocytosis of microbes and dead cells by macrophages (i.e., efferocytosis), an effect that is likely to be independent of the nature of the accompanying neutrophilic or eosinophilic airway inflammation.

Gibson and colleagues have clearly shown that add-on therapy with azithromycin is effective and safe in adult patients with uncontrolled asthma despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists. Azithromycin benefited patients with both eosinophilic and noneosinophilic asthma. However, the effects of long-term therapy with macrolides on community microbial resistance remain a public health concern. Future studies with potentially safer nonantibiotic macrolides in uncontrolled severe asthma are warranted. Since the antimicrobial effects probably contribute to the overall efficacy of macrolides, the beneficial effects of nonantibiotic macrolides might be intermediate between macrolide antibiotics and placebo.

This text is excerpted from a commentary published online July 4 in The Lancet (doi. org/10.1016/S0140-6736[17]31547-7). Guy Brusselle, MD, is with the department of respiratory medicine at Ghent (Belgium) University Hospital and Ian Pavord, MD, is with the University of Oxford’s Nuffield Department of Medicine, England. Both authors disclosed having received honoraria and other financial support from numerous pharmaceutical companies.

Body

 

Since microbial resistance is a well known side effect of antibiotic use, add-on therapy with azithromycin in asthma needs to be restricted to those patients with the highest unmet medical need (for example, frequent exacerbators) and to time periods with the greatest risk of exacerbations (such as winter). Biomarkers that predict the therapeutic response to macrolides might facilitate optimal patient selection. Further research is needed to elucidate the most important mechanism of action of these pleiotropic drugs. Macrolides have anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, and antiviral effects. However, the authors did not observe a reduction in inflammatory cell counts in sputum to support a definite anti-inflammatory effect. Azithromycin also was effective in patients with and without potentially pathogenic microorganisms in sputum cultures at baseline. Since azithromycin reduced both asthma exacerbations and respiratory infections, the benefits of azithromycin might be caused by preventing viral-induced attacks in asthma. Azithromycin stimulates phagocytosis of microbes and dead cells by macrophages (i.e., efferocytosis), an effect that is likely to be independent of the nature of the accompanying neutrophilic or eosinophilic airway inflammation.

Gibson and colleagues have clearly shown that add-on therapy with azithromycin is effective and safe in adult patients with uncontrolled asthma despite treatment with inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting beta-agonists. Azithromycin benefited patients with both eosinophilic and noneosinophilic asthma. However, the effects of long-term therapy with macrolides on community microbial resistance remain a public health concern. Future studies with potentially safer nonantibiotic macrolides in uncontrolled severe asthma are warranted. Since the antimicrobial effects probably contribute to the overall efficacy of macrolides, the beneficial effects of nonantibiotic macrolides might be intermediate between macrolide antibiotics and placebo.

This text is excerpted from a commentary published online July 4 in The Lancet (doi. org/10.1016/S0140-6736[17]31547-7). Guy Brusselle, MD, is with the department of respiratory medicine at Ghent (Belgium) University Hospital and Ian Pavord, MD, is with the University of Oxford’s Nuffield Department of Medicine, England. Both authors disclosed having received honoraria and other financial support from numerous pharmaceutical companies.

Title
The impact on community microbial resistance remains unclear
The impact on community microbial resistance remains unclear

 

Adults with persistent symptomatic asthma who took azithromycin as an add-on therapy experienced fewer exacerbations and had improved quality of life, compared with their peers who took a placebo, a multicenter, randomized trial demonstrated.

“Macrolide antibiotics have antibacterial, antiviral, and anti-inflammatory effects, and are reported to be beneficial in both eosinophilic and noneosinophilic subtypes,” a group of Australian researchers wrote online July 4 in The Lancet (doi: org/10.1016/S0140-6736[17]31281-3). “Systematic reviews of randomized, controlled trials report benefits of macrolides on asthma symptoms but [we] are unable to draw conclusions about the effects on other endpoints, including exacerbations, due to lack of data, heterogeneity of results, and inadequate study design and sample size.”

©MattZ90/thinkstockphotos.com
Led by Peter G. Gibson, MBBS, of Hunter Medical Research Institute, New South Wales, Australia, researchers at eight clinical sites conducted a randomized trial to test the hypothesis that the macrolide antibiotic azithromycin reduces asthma exacerbations and improves quality of life in patients with symptomatic asthma on inhaled maintenance therapy. To be eligible for the trial, known as Asthma and Macrolides: the Azithromycin Efficacy and Safety Study, or AMAZES – patients had to be at least 18 years of age, be using an inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting bronchodilator, and have no hearing impairment or abnormal prolongation of the corrected QT interval. Primary efficacy endpoints were the total number of asthma exacerbations (severe and moderate) over 48 weeks and asthma quality of life based on responses to the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (Chest. 1999 May;115[5]:1265-70). Of the 420 patients, 213 were allocated to take 500 mg azithromycin three times weekly and 207 were allocated to placebo. In all, 168 patients in the azithromycin group completed 48 weeks of treatment, compared with 166 in the placebo group. Their median age was 60 years, 76% had atopic asthma, and 38% were ex-smokers.

The researchers observed a significant reduction in the incidence of total asthma exacerbations in the azithromycin-treated group: 1.07/patient-year, compared with 1.86/patient year in the placebo group, which translated into an incidence rate ratio of 0.59 (P less than .0001). Specifically, 127 patients in the placebo group (61%) experienced at least one asthma exacerbation compared with 94 patients in the azithromycin group (44%; P less than .0001). A significant improvement in asthma-related quality of life was also seen among patients in the azithromycin group (adjusted mean difference of 0.36; P = .001).

Though the mechanism of the antiviral effect of macrolides is not yet determined, Dr. Gibson and his associates noted that respiratory viral infection is associated with severe exacerbations in eosinophilic asthma and causes most respiratory infections. “There is a known interaction between eosinophilic airway inflammation, exacerbation rate, and impaired innate antiviral immunity,” they wrote. “Since we observed a benefit of azithromycin on both asthma exacerbations and respiratory infections, we speculate that azithromycin might be acting to prevent viral-induced episodes in asthma.”

“Given the major impact of asthma exacerbations on patients and the community and the ongoing risk posed by these events in patients who remain symptomatic on maintenance therapy, we consider that azithromycin is a valuable addition to existing regimens for treating asthma,” the researchers concluded. “The long-term effects of this therapy on community microbial resistance require further evaluation.”

The overall rates and types of serious adverse events seen in both groups were not significantly different from each other, with serious adverse events having occurred in 16 (8%) patients treated with azithromycin and 26 (13%) patients given the placebo.

The study was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and the John Hunter Hospital Charitable Trust. The authors reported having no financial conflicts directly related to the study.

 

Adults with persistent symptomatic asthma who took azithromycin as an add-on therapy experienced fewer exacerbations and had improved quality of life, compared with their peers who took a placebo, a multicenter, randomized trial demonstrated.

“Macrolide antibiotics have antibacterial, antiviral, and anti-inflammatory effects, and are reported to be beneficial in both eosinophilic and noneosinophilic subtypes,” a group of Australian researchers wrote online July 4 in The Lancet (doi: org/10.1016/S0140-6736[17]31281-3). “Systematic reviews of randomized, controlled trials report benefits of macrolides on asthma symptoms but [we] are unable to draw conclusions about the effects on other endpoints, including exacerbations, due to lack of data, heterogeneity of results, and inadequate study design and sample size.”

©MattZ90/thinkstockphotos.com
Led by Peter G. Gibson, MBBS, of Hunter Medical Research Institute, New South Wales, Australia, researchers at eight clinical sites conducted a randomized trial to test the hypothesis that the macrolide antibiotic azithromycin reduces asthma exacerbations and improves quality of life in patients with symptomatic asthma on inhaled maintenance therapy. To be eligible for the trial, known as Asthma and Macrolides: the Azithromycin Efficacy and Safety Study, or AMAZES – patients had to be at least 18 years of age, be using an inhaled corticosteroid and long-acting bronchodilator, and have no hearing impairment or abnormal prolongation of the corrected QT interval. Primary efficacy endpoints were the total number of asthma exacerbations (severe and moderate) over 48 weeks and asthma quality of life based on responses to the Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (Chest. 1999 May;115[5]:1265-70). Of the 420 patients, 213 were allocated to take 500 mg azithromycin three times weekly and 207 were allocated to placebo. In all, 168 patients in the azithromycin group completed 48 weeks of treatment, compared with 166 in the placebo group. Their median age was 60 years, 76% had atopic asthma, and 38% were ex-smokers.

The researchers observed a significant reduction in the incidence of total asthma exacerbations in the azithromycin-treated group: 1.07/patient-year, compared with 1.86/patient year in the placebo group, which translated into an incidence rate ratio of 0.59 (P less than .0001). Specifically, 127 patients in the placebo group (61%) experienced at least one asthma exacerbation compared with 94 patients in the azithromycin group (44%; P less than .0001). A significant improvement in asthma-related quality of life was also seen among patients in the azithromycin group (adjusted mean difference of 0.36; P = .001).

Though the mechanism of the antiviral effect of macrolides is not yet determined, Dr. Gibson and his associates noted that respiratory viral infection is associated with severe exacerbations in eosinophilic asthma and causes most respiratory infections. “There is a known interaction between eosinophilic airway inflammation, exacerbation rate, and impaired innate antiviral immunity,” they wrote. “Since we observed a benefit of azithromycin on both asthma exacerbations and respiratory infections, we speculate that azithromycin might be acting to prevent viral-induced episodes in asthma.”

“Given the major impact of asthma exacerbations on patients and the community and the ongoing risk posed by these events in patients who remain symptomatic on maintenance therapy, we consider that azithromycin is a valuable addition to existing regimens for treating asthma,” the researchers concluded. “The long-term effects of this therapy on community microbial resistance require further evaluation.”

The overall rates and types of serious adverse events seen in both groups were not significantly different from each other, with serious adverse events having occurred in 16 (8%) patients treated with azithromycin and 26 (13%) patients given the placebo.

The study was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and the John Hunter Hospital Charitable Trust. The authors reported having no financial conflicts directly related to the study.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

FROM THE LANCET

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: Azithromycin might be a useful add-on therapy in persistent asthma.

Major finding: Azithromycin reduced the incidence of total asthma exacerbations, compared with placebo (1.07/patient-year vs. 1.86/patient-year, respectively, for an incidence rate ratio of 0.59; P less than .0001).

Data source: A randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial of 420 adults with persistent, uncontrolled asthma.

Disclosures: The study was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and the John Hunter Hospital Charitable Trust. The authors reported having no financial conflicts directly related to the study.

Disqus Comments
Default

Recovery: Where TAVR gains advantage over SAVR

‘Odious’ nature of comparisons
Article Type
Changed

 

A post hoc analysis of the first randomized clinical to show the superiority of an interventional technique for aortic valve repair over surgery in terms of postoperative death has found the period of 30 days to 4 months after the procedure to be the most perilous for surgery patients, when their risk of death was almost twice that of interventional patients, likely because surgery patients were more vulnerable to complications and were less likely to go home after the procedure.

Body

 

In his invited discussion, Craig R. Smith, MD, of New York, noted that comparisons “are odious” and that comparing clinical trials requires caution. (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;153:1300-1) He also acknowledged that surgeons would hope for evidence that the findings of the CoreValve US Pivotal High-Risk Trial were somehow wrong.

Dr. Smith raised a question about the CoreValve trial, which was designed to enroll high-risk patients, “but actually enrolled at the upper end of the intermediate risk range with a Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score of 7.4 versus 11.3 in the high-risk PARTNER 1.” However, he noted that it would not be fair to consider the self-expanding TAVR trial intermediate risk, because the intermediate risk PARTNER 2 trial had an STS score of 5.8. And while outcomes for SAVR in the CoreValve trial were within the expected variable of less than 1 using the STS Predicted Risk for Mortality, the “bulge” of deaths in the recovery phase raises “a whiff of concern.”

Dr. Smith said that the early technical mortalities with TAVR in the trial are already disappearing with experience. He also noted that Dr. Gaudiani and his coauthors pointed out the frequency of failure to repair and failure to recover. “Whether competing against TAVR in a randomized trial or operating on TAVR in eligible patients in the future, as the authors have emphasized, it behooves us to correct the problem as completely as possible and take the best possible care of our patients afterward,” Dr. Smith said. He also noted the difference in discharge rates home “illustrates a very significant advantage of TAVR.”

Dr. Smith disclosed he has received reimbursement for expenses in his leadership role in the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trials.

Publications
Topics
Sections
Body

 

In his invited discussion, Craig R. Smith, MD, of New York, noted that comparisons “are odious” and that comparing clinical trials requires caution. (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;153:1300-1) He also acknowledged that surgeons would hope for evidence that the findings of the CoreValve US Pivotal High-Risk Trial were somehow wrong.

Dr. Smith raised a question about the CoreValve trial, which was designed to enroll high-risk patients, “but actually enrolled at the upper end of the intermediate risk range with a Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score of 7.4 versus 11.3 in the high-risk PARTNER 1.” However, he noted that it would not be fair to consider the self-expanding TAVR trial intermediate risk, because the intermediate risk PARTNER 2 trial had an STS score of 5.8. And while outcomes for SAVR in the CoreValve trial were within the expected variable of less than 1 using the STS Predicted Risk for Mortality, the “bulge” of deaths in the recovery phase raises “a whiff of concern.”

Dr. Smith said that the early technical mortalities with TAVR in the trial are already disappearing with experience. He also noted that Dr. Gaudiani and his coauthors pointed out the frequency of failure to repair and failure to recover. “Whether competing against TAVR in a randomized trial or operating on TAVR in eligible patients in the future, as the authors have emphasized, it behooves us to correct the problem as completely as possible and take the best possible care of our patients afterward,” Dr. Smith said. He also noted the difference in discharge rates home “illustrates a very significant advantage of TAVR.”

Dr. Smith disclosed he has received reimbursement for expenses in his leadership role in the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trials.

Body

 

In his invited discussion, Craig R. Smith, MD, of New York, noted that comparisons “are odious” and that comparing clinical trials requires caution. (J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;153:1300-1) He also acknowledged that surgeons would hope for evidence that the findings of the CoreValve US Pivotal High-Risk Trial were somehow wrong.

Dr. Smith raised a question about the CoreValve trial, which was designed to enroll high-risk patients, “but actually enrolled at the upper end of the intermediate risk range with a Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score of 7.4 versus 11.3 in the high-risk PARTNER 1.” However, he noted that it would not be fair to consider the self-expanding TAVR trial intermediate risk, because the intermediate risk PARTNER 2 trial had an STS score of 5.8. And while outcomes for SAVR in the CoreValve trial were within the expected variable of less than 1 using the STS Predicted Risk for Mortality, the “bulge” of deaths in the recovery phase raises “a whiff of concern.”

Dr. Smith said that the early technical mortalities with TAVR in the trial are already disappearing with experience. He also noted that Dr. Gaudiani and his coauthors pointed out the frequency of failure to repair and failure to recover. “Whether competing against TAVR in a randomized trial or operating on TAVR in eligible patients in the future, as the authors have emphasized, it behooves us to correct the problem as completely as possible and take the best possible care of our patients afterward,” Dr. Smith said. He also noted the difference in discharge rates home “illustrates a very significant advantage of TAVR.”

Dr. Smith disclosed he has received reimbursement for expenses in his leadership role in the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trials.

Title
‘Odious’ nature of comparisons
‘Odious’ nature of comparisons

 

A post hoc analysis of the first randomized clinical to show the superiority of an interventional technique for aortic valve repair over surgery in terms of postoperative death has found the period of 30 days to 4 months after the procedure to be the most perilous for surgery patients, when their risk of death was almost twice that of interventional patients, likely because surgery patients were more vulnerable to complications and were less likely to go home after the procedure.

 

A post hoc analysis of the first randomized clinical to show the superiority of an interventional technique for aortic valve repair over surgery in terms of postoperative death has found the period of 30 days to 4 months after the procedure to be the most perilous for surgery patients, when their risk of death was almost twice that of interventional patients, likely because surgery patients were more vulnerable to complications and were less likely to go home after the procedure.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

FROM THE JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: Differences in survival between transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in high-risk patients appear to be driven primarily by issues with disease repair and patient recovery from SAVR.

Major finding: During the recovery period (31-120 days) the death rate was 4% for TAVR vs. 7.9% for SAVR (P = .025).

Data source: Post hoc analysis of CoreValve US Pivotal High-Risk Trial involving 750 patients and 45 sites with outcomes reported through 3 years.

Disclosures: Dr. Gaudiani disclosed that he is a consultant and paid instructor for Medtronic, St. Jude Medical, and Edwards Lifesciences. Coauthors disclosed relationships with Edwards Lifesciences, Terumo, Gore Medical, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and other device companies.

Disqus Comments
Default

Supportive care alone linked to worse outcomes in mucocutaneous reactions

Article Type
Changed

 

CHICAGO – Pediatric patients with Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis who received purely supportive care and surgical debridement had poorer outcomes, compared with other treatment modalities, a systematic review suggested.

Although rare in the pediatric population – with an incidence of approximately 1 case in 2 million – Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are both life-threatening mucocutaneous reactions.

Doug Brunk
Danny Mansour
“Several treatment modalities have been proposed among both children and adult populations with variable results. Because of the lack of controlled studies, evaluating those modalities objectively becomes difficult – especially in children,” Danny Mansour said in an interview following the World Congress of Pediatric Dermatology.

Because reliable and validated data in the management of these conditions are lacking, he and his associates performed a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of reported treatment modalities using specific outcome measures.

“This study is unique in that it aims to not only capture more commonly employed interventions such as supportive care, surgical debridement, intravenous immunoglobulin [IVIG], and corticosteroids but also newer modalities that coincide with our improved understanding of the pathogenesis of the disease, such as the use of cyclosporine and biologics,” said Mr. Mansour, a third-year medical student at the University of Toronto.

The researchers systematically reviewed English and non-English articles using EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, and the Health Technology Assessment Database. They excluded nonpediatric cases and those in which specific treatment modalities and outcome measures of interest were missing. In all, 302 articles were included in the study – 197 that examined mortality and 105 that examined time for arrest of progression of blistering, re-epithelialization, and length of hospital stay.

The main treatment modalities included supportive care alone, IVIG, corticosteroids, cyclosporine, surgical debridement, and biologics. The average time for arrest of progression of blistering was 8.4 days for supportive care, 4 days for IVIG, 6 days for corticosteroids, 2.5 days for cyclosporine, and 1 for infliximab. No data were available for time to arrest of progression for surgical debridement alone.

The average time for re-epithelialization was 24 days for supportive care, 18 days for surgical debridement, 8.7 days for IVIG, 12.2 days for corticosteroids, 10.6 days for cyclosporine, and 13 days for infliximab. Average length of hospital stay varied from 15.6 days for supportive care, 24.3 days for surgical debridement, 17.4 days for IVIG, 11.5 for corticosteroids, 15.5 for cyclosporine, and 26.3 for biologics.

The overall mortality was 4.6% among those who received supportive care alone, 8.3% among those who received IVIG, 4.5% among those who received corticosteroids, and 0.9% among those who received IVIG plus corticosteroids. Specifically, the rates of mortality for SJS and TEN cases treated with supportive care alone were 2% for SJS cases and 15.3% for TEN cases, respectively. The rates for other treatment modalities were 3.1% and 11% for IVIG, 1.7% and 9.3% for corticosteroids, and 0% and 2.1% for IVIG plus corticosteroids.

“While it was not surprising that mortality rates in pediatric SJS and TEN are low, the rates were slightly higher than anticipated,” Mr. Mansour said. “In addition, our data show that, although mortality is not influenced by certain therapeutic interventions in SJS patients, it may play a role in the management of the more severe disease, TEN.”

He acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the fact that many of the data were derived from small-cohort retrospective studies and isolated case reports, giving rise to data heterogeneity and publication bias. “In addition, the mortality data we gathered may not necessarily represent patient survival, as many studies had variable follow-up duration,” he said. “Lastly, the additive effect of combination treatment and variable dosing was not captured in the present analysis, and further statistical analysis is required for re-epithelialization–based outcome measures and length of stay to ascertain significance.”

Mr. Mansour reported having no financial disclosures.
 
Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

CHICAGO – Pediatric patients with Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis who received purely supportive care and surgical debridement had poorer outcomes, compared with other treatment modalities, a systematic review suggested.

Although rare in the pediatric population – with an incidence of approximately 1 case in 2 million – Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are both life-threatening mucocutaneous reactions.

Doug Brunk
Danny Mansour
“Several treatment modalities have been proposed among both children and adult populations with variable results. Because of the lack of controlled studies, evaluating those modalities objectively becomes difficult – especially in children,” Danny Mansour said in an interview following the World Congress of Pediatric Dermatology.

Because reliable and validated data in the management of these conditions are lacking, he and his associates performed a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of reported treatment modalities using specific outcome measures.

“This study is unique in that it aims to not only capture more commonly employed interventions such as supportive care, surgical debridement, intravenous immunoglobulin [IVIG], and corticosteroids but also newer modalities that coincide with our improved understanding of the pathogenesis of the disease, such as the use of cyclosporine and biologics,” said Mr. Mansour, a third-year medical student at the University of Toronto.

The researchers systematically reviewed English and non-English articles using EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, and the Health Technology Assessment Database. They excluded nonpediatric cases and those in which specific treatment modalities and outcome measures of interest were missing. In all, 302 articles were included in the study – 197 that examined mortality and 105 that examined time for arrest of progression of blistering, re-epithelialization, and length of hospital stay.

The main treatment modalities included supportive care alone, IVIG, corticosteroids, cyclosporine, surgical debridement, and biologics. The average time for arrest of progression of blistering was 8.4 days for supportive care, 4 days for IVIG, 6 days for corticosteroids, 2.5 days for cyclosporine, and 1 for infliximab. No data were available for time to arrest of progression for surgical debridement alone.

The average time for re-epithelialization was 24 days for supportive care, 18 days for surgical debridement, 8.7 days for IVIG, 12.2 days for corticosteroids, 10.6 days for cyclosporine, and 13 days for infliximab. Average length of hospital stay varied from 15.6 days for supportive care, 24.3 days for surgical debridement, 17.4 days for IVIG, 11.5 for corticosteroids, 15.5 for cyclosporine, and 26.3 for biologics.

The overall mortality was 4.6% among those who received supportive care alone, 8.3% among those who received IVIG, 4.5% among those who received corticosteroids, and 0.9% among those who received IVIG plus corticosteroids. Specifically, the rates of mortality for SJS and TEN cases treated with supportive care alone were 2% for SJS cases and 15.3% for TEN cases, respectively. The rates for other treatment modalities were 3.1% and 11% for IVIG, 1.7% and 9.3% for corticosteroids, and 0% and 2.1% for IVIG plus corticosteroids.

“While it was not surprising that mortality rates in pediatric SJS and TEN are low, the rates were slightly higher than anticipated,” Mr. Mansour said. “In addition, our data show that, although mortality is not influenced by certain therapeutic interventions in SJS patients, it may play a role in the management of the more severe disease, TEN.”

He acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the fact that many of the data were derived from small-cohort retrospective studies and isolated case reports, giving rise to data heterogeneity and publication bias. “In addition, the mortality data we gathered may not necessarily represent patient survival, as many studies had variable follow-up duration,” he said. “Lastly, the additive effect of combination treatment and variable dosing was not captured in the present analysis, and further statistical analysis is required for re-epithelialization–based outcome measures and length of stay to ascertain significance.”

Mr. Mansour reported having no financial disclosures.
 

 

CHICAGO – Pediatric patients with Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis who received purely supportive care and surgical debridement had poorer outcomes, compared with other treatment modalities, a systematic review suggested.

Although rare in the pediatric population – with an incidence of approximately 1 case in 2 million – Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are both life-threatening mucocutaneous reactions.

Doug Brunk
Danny Mansour
“Several treatment modalities have been proposed among both children and adult populations with variable results. Because of the lack of controlled studies, evaluating those modalities objectively becomes difficult – especially in children,” Danny Mansour said in an interview following the World Congress of Pediatric Dermatology.

Because reliable and validated data in the management of these conditions are lacking, he and his associates performed a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of reported treatment modalities using specific outcome measures.

“This study is unique in that it aims to not only capture more commonly employed interventions such as supportive care, surgical debridement, intravenous immunoglobulin [IVIG], and corticosteroids but also newer modalities that coincide with our improved understanding of the pathogenesis of the disease, such as the use of cyclosporine and biologics,” said Mr. Mansour, a third-year medical student at the University of Toronto.

The researchers systematically reviewed English and non-English articles using EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database, and the Health Technology Assessment Database. They excluded nonpediatric cases and those in which specific treatment modalities and outcome measures of interest were missing. In all, 302 articles were included in the study – 197 that examined mortality and 105 that examined time for arrest of progression of blistering, re-epithelialization, and length of hospital stay.

The main treatment modalities included supportive care alone, IVIG, corticosteroids, cyclosporine, surgical debridement, and biologics. The average time for arrest of progression of blistering was 8.4 days for supportive care, 4 days for IVIG, 6 days for corticosteroids, 2.5 days for cyclosporine, and 1 for infliximab. No data were available for time to arrest of progression for surgical debridement alone.

The average time for re-epithelialization was 24 days for supportive care, 18 days for surgical debridement, 8.7 days for IVIG, 12.2 days for corticosteroids, 10.6 days for cyclosporine, and 13 days for infliximab. Average length of hospital stay varied from 15.6 days for supportive care, 24.3 days for surgical debridement, 17.4 days for IVIG, 11.5 for corticosteroids, 15.5 for cyclosporine, and 26.3 for biologics.

The overall mortality was 4.6% among those who received supportive care alone, 8.3% among those who received IVIG, 4.5% among those who received corticosteroids, and 0.9% among those who received IVIG plus corticosteroids. Specifically, the rates of mortality for SJS and TEN cases treated with supportive care alone were 2% for SJS cases and 15.3% for TEN cases, respectively. The rates for other treatment modalities were 3.1% and 11% for IVIG, 1.7% and 9.3% for corticosteroids, and 0% and 2.1% for IVIG plus corticosteroids.

“While it was not surprising that mortality rates in pediatric SJS and TEN are low, the rates were slightly higher than anticipated,” Mr. Mansour said. “In addition, our data show that, although mortality is not influenced by certain therapeutic interventions in SJS patients, it may play a role in the management of the more severe disease, TEN.”

He acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the fact that many of the data were derived from small-cohort retrospective studies and isolated case reports, giving rise to data heterogeneity and publication bias. “In addition, the mortality data we gathered may not necessarily represent patient survival, as many studies had variable follow-up duration,” he said. “Lastly, the additive effect of combination treatment and variable dosing was not captured in the present analysis, and further statistical analysis is required for re-epithelialization–based outcome measures and length of stay to ascertain significance.”

Mr. Mansour reported having no financial disclosures.
 
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

AT WCPD 2017

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: Reliable and validated data informing the best treatment intervention for Stevens-Johnson Syndrome (SJS) and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (TEN) are lacking.

Major finding: The overall mortality was 4.6% among those who received supportive care alone, 8.3% among those who received IVIG, 4.5% among those who received corticosteroids, and 0.9% among those who received IVIG plus corticosteroids.

Data source: A systematic review of 302 studies that evaluated the effectiveness of reported treatment modalities for SJS/TEN using specific outcome measures.

Disclosures: Mr. Mansour reported having no financial disclosures.

Disqus Comments
Default

Pediatric hospital medicine marches toward subspecialty recognition

Article Type
Changed

 

Pediatric hospital medicine is moving quickly toward recognition as a board-certified, fellowship-trained medical subspecialty, joining 14 other pediatric subspecialties now certified by the American Board of Pediatrics (ABP).

It was approved as a subspecialty by the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) at its October 2016 board meeting in Chicago in response to a petition from the ABP. Following years of discussion within the field,1 it will take 2 more years to describe pediatric hospital medicine’s specialized knowledge base and write test questions for biannual board exams that are projected to commence in the fall of 2019.

Dr. Daniel Rauch
“Now begins the work of an ABP sub-board on pediatric hospital medicine, which I chair, to establish the criteria that would allow one to sit for board certification and to define the core content specific to this field, which will provide the basis for the certifying exam,” said Daniel Rauch, MD, FHM, associate director of pediatrics at Elmhurst Hospital Center, Queens, N.Y. Although passing the exam is a necessary requirement for achieving board certification in the subspecialty, qualifying to sit for the exam will be possible through an experiential or practice pathway the first three times the exam is offered – in 2019, 2021 and 2023.

Eventually, starting in 2025, pediatric hospitalists will need to complete a fellowship of 2 years or more if they wish to sit for the exam and become board-certified in the field. But for the next 7 years, hospitalists in current practice will be able to qualify based on their work experience. Maintenance of certification requirements likely will be similar to those in other subspecialties, and doctors certified in pediatric hospital medicine won’t be required to maintain general pediatric certification, Dr. Rauch said.

Formal eligibility criteria have not been set, but likely will include working half-time overall in pediatric-related activities, and quarter-time in clinical practice in pediatric hospital medicine for 4 years prior to qualifying for the exam. How the hours might break down between clinical and other hospital responsibilities, and between pediatric or adult patients, still needs to be determined, Dr. Rauch said. He added that the experiential pathway is likely to be defined broadly, with latitude for determinations based on percentages of time worked, rather than absolute number of hours worked. Local pediatric institutions will be granted latitude to determine how that “plays out” in real world situations, he said, “and an ABP credentialing committee will be available to hear appeals for people who have complicated life circumstances.”

Dr. Ricardo Quinonez
The Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) didn’t have any formal role in developing subspecialty certification, although it includes members who work in pediatrics and led the development of Pediatric Hospital Medicine Core Competencies,2 a cornerstone of the field’s development, said Ricardo Quinonez, MD, FAAP, FHM, past chair of the AAP’s Section on Hospital Medicine and chief of the division of pediatric hospital medicine at Texas Children’s Hospital, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston.

“I was part of a committee that explored these issues. We were an independent group of hospitalists who decided that board certification was a good way to advance the field,” Dr. Quinonez said. “We’ve seen what subspecialty certification has done, for example, for pediatric emergency medicine and pediatric critical care medicine – advancing them tremendously from a research standpoint and helping to develop a distinct body of knowledge reflecting increased severity of illness in hospitalized children.”

Discrepancy between practicing hospitalists, fellowships

An estimated 4,000 pediatric hospitalists now practice in the United States, and 2,100 of those belong to the American Academy of Pediatrics’ Section on Hospital Medicine. There are 40 pediatric hospital medicine fellowship programs listed on the website of AAP’s Section on Hospital Medicine (http://phmfellows.org/phm-programs/), although formal training assessment criteria will be needed for the American College of Graduate Medical Education to recognize programs that qualify their fellows to sit for the PHM exam. A wide gap is anticipated between the demand for pediatric hospitalists and currently available fellowship training slots to generate new candidates for board certification, although Dr. Rauch projects that fellowship slots will double in coming years.

“My message to the field is that historically, board certification has been the launching point for further development of the field,” Dr. Rauch said. “It leads to standardization of who is a subspecialist. Right now, who is a pediatric hospitalist is subject to wide variation. We need to standardize training and to create for this field the same distinction and stature as other medical subspecialties,” he said, noting that subspecialty status also has ramifications for academic settings, and for career advancement and career satisfaction for the individuals who choose to pursue it.

“I know there has been some hue and cry about this in the field, but in most cases certification will not change a pediatric hospitalist’s ability to obtain a job,” he said. “Already, you can’t become a division leader at a children’s hospital without additional training. This isn’t going to change that reality. But for people who don’t want to follow an academic career path, there will never be enough board-certified or fellowship-trained pediatric hospitalists to fill all of the pediatric positions in all the hospitals in the country. Community hospitals aren’t going to say: We won’t hire you unless you are board certified.”

 

 

Is the fellowship good for the field?

The subspecialty development process clearly is moving forward. Those in favor believe it will increase scholarship, research, and recognition for the subspecialty by the public for its specialized body of knowledge. But not everyone in the field agrees. Last fall The Hospitalist published3 an opinion piece questioning the need for fellowship-based board certification in pediatric hospital medicine. The author recommended instead retaining the current voluntary approach to fellowships and establishing a pediatric “focused practice” incorporated into residency training, much as the American Board of Internal Medicine and the American Board of Family Medicine have done for hospitalists in adult medicine.

Dr. Weijen W. Chang
Weijen Chang, MD, SFHM, chief of the division of pediatric hospital medicine at Baystate Children’s Hospital in Springfield, Mass., wrote an introduction for that article. He wonders if board certification will eventually become necessary to continue seeing pediatric patients in the hospital. “This process leaves that question to local hospitals as the decision makers. But we can’t know what your local hospital credentialing committee will do,” he said.

“Will it lead to uncertainty among those currently in residency programs? If you are a pediatric resident and you want to become a board-certified pediatric hospitalist, you’ll need at least 2 years more of training. Is that going to deter qualified individuals?” Dr. Chang said. “The people this decision will impact the most are med-peds doctors – who complete a combined internal medicine and pediatrics residency – and part-timers. They may find themselves in a difficult position if the number of hours don’t add up for them to sit for the boards. For the most part, we’ll have to wait and see for answers to these questions.”

Brian Alverson, MD, FAAP, current chair of the AAP’s Section on Hospital Medicine and associate professor of pediatrics at Brown University, Providence, R.I., says he can see both sides of the debate.

Dr. Brian Alverson
“I think for the field of pediatric hospital medicine, as far as advancing our knowledge and the care of children in the hospital, this is a very good thing,” he said. “It will push academic children’s hospitals that don’t have a division of hospital medicine to invest in one. All of the really sick children are in the hospital, and if we’re going to attend to those children at their most vulnerable time, we need to address the existing knowledge gap in pediatric hospital medicine.”

But at the same time, there is a significant opportunity cost for doing 2 more years of fellowship training, Dr. Alverson said.

“We don’t know how much the board certification test will improve actual care,” he noted. “Does it truly identify higher quality doctors, or just doctors who are good at taking multiple choice exams? There are a number of people in pediatrics who do a lot of different things in their jobs, and it’s important that they not lose their ability to practice in the field. Two-thirds of our work force is in community hospitals, not academic medical centers. They work hard to provide the backbone of hospital care for young patients, and many of them are unlikely to ever do a fellowship.”

Nonetheless, Dr. Alverson believes pediatric hospitalists needn’t worry. “You still have plenty of time to figure out what’s going to happen in your hospital,” he said.

References

1. Section on Hospital Medicine. Guiding principles for pediatric hospital medicine program. Pediatrics; 2013; 132:782-786.

2. Stucky E. The Pediatric Hospital Medicine Core Competencies. Wiley-Blackwell; 2010.

3. Feldman LS, Monash B, Eniasivam A. Why required pediatric hospital medicine fellowships are unnecessary. The Hospitalist Magazine, October 8, 2016.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Pediatric hospital medicine is moving quickly toward recognition as a board-certified, fellowship-trained medical subspecialty, joining 14 other pediatric subspecialties now certified by the American Board of Pediatrics (ABP).

It was approved as a subspecialty by the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) at its October 2016 board meeting in Chicago in response to a petition from the ABP. Following years of discussion within the field,1 it will take 2 more years to describe pediatric hospital medicine’s specialized knowledge base and write test questions for biannual board exams that are projected to commence in the fall of 2019.

Dr. Daniel Rauch
“Now begins the work of an ABP sub-board on pediatric hospital medicine, which I chair, to establish the criteria that would allow one to sit for board certification and to define the core content specific to this field, which will provide the basis for the certifying exam,” said Daniel Rauch, MD, FHM, associate director of pediatrics at Elmhurst Hospital Center, Queens, N.Y. Although passing the exam is a necessary requirement for achieving board certification in the subspecialty, qualifying to sit for the exam will be possible through an experiential or practice pathway the first three times the exam is offered – in 2019, 2021 and 2023.

Eventually, starting in 2025, pediatric hospitalists will need to complete a fellowship of 2 years or more if they wish to sit for the exam and become board-certified in the field. But for the next 7 years, hospitalists in current practice will be able to qualify based on their work experience. Maintenance of certification requirements likely will be similar to those in other subspecialties, and doctors certified in pediatric hospital medicine won’t be required to maintain general pediatric certification, Dr. Rauch said.

Formal eligibility criteria have not been set, but likely will include working half-time overall in pediatric-related activities, and quarter-time in clinical practice in pediatric hospital medicine for 4 years prior to qualifying for the exam. How the hours might break down between clinical and other hospital responsibilities, and between pediatric or adult patients, still needs to be determined, Dr. Rauch said. He added that the experiential pathway is likely to be defined broadly, with latitude for determinations based on percentages of time worked, rather than absolute number of hours worked. Local pediatric institutions will be granted latitude to determine how that “plays out” in real world situations, he said, “and an ABP credentialing committee will be available to hear appeals for people who have complicated life circumstances.”

Dr. Ricardo Quinonez
The Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) didn’t have any formal role in developing subspecialty certification, although it includes members who work in pediatrics and led the development of Pediatric Hospital Medicine Core Competencies,2 a cornerstone of the field’s development, said Ricardo Quinonez, MD, FAAP, FHM, past chair of the AAP’s Section on Hospital Medicine and chief of the division of pediatric hospital medicine at Texas Children’s Hospital, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston.

“I was part of a committee that explored these issues. We were an independent group of hospitalists who decided that board certification was a good way to advance the field,” Dr. Quinonez said. “We’ve seen what subspecialty certification has done, for example, for pediatric emergency medicine and pediatric critical care medicine – advancing them tremendously from a research standpoint and helping to develop a distinct body of knowledge reflecting increased severity of illness in hospitalized children.”

Discrepancy between practicing hospitalists, fellowships

An estimated 4,000 pediatric hospitalists now practice in the United States, and 2,100 of those belong to the American Academy of Pediatrics’ Section on Hospital Medicine. There are 40 pediatric hospital medicine fellowship programs listed on the website of AAP’s Section on Hospital Medicine (http://phmfellows.org/phm-programs/), although formal training assessment criteria will be needed for the American College of Graduate Medical Education to recognize programs that qualify their fellows to sit for the PHM exam. A wide gap is anticipated between the demand for pediatric hospitalists and currently available fellowship training slots to generate new candidates for board certification, although Dr. Rauch projects that fellowship slots will double in coming years.

“My message to the field is that historically, board certification has been the launching point for further development of the field,” Dr. Rauch said. “It leads to standardization of who is a subspecialist. Right now, who is a pediatric hospitalist is subject to wide variation. We need to standardize training and to create for this field the same distinction and stature as other medical subspecialties,” he said, noting that subspecialty status also has ramifications for academic settings, and for career advancement and career satisfaction for the individuals who choose to pursue it.

“I know there has been some hue and cry about this in the field, but in most cases certification will not change a pediatric hospitalist’s ability to obtain a job,” he said. “Already, you can’t become a division leader at a children’s hospital without additional training. This isn’t going to change that reality. But for people who don’t want to follow an academic career path, there will never be enough board-certified or fellowship-trained pediatric hospitalists to fill all of the pediatric positions in all the hospitals in the country. Community hospitals aren’t going to say: We won’t hire you unless you are board certified.”

 

 

Is the fellowship good for the field?

The subspecialty development process clearly is moving forward. Those in favor believe it will increase scholarship, research, and recognition for the subspecialty by the public for its specialized body of knowledge. But not everyone in the field agrees. Last fall The Hospitalist published3 an opinion piece questioning the need for fellowship-based board certification in pediatric hospital medicine. The author recommended instead retaining the current voluntary approach to fellowships and establishing a pediatric “focused practice” incorporated into residency training, much as the American Board of Internal Medicine and the American Board of Family Medicine have done for hospitalists in adult medicine.

Dr. Weijen W. Chang
Weijen Chang, MD, SFHM, chief of the division of pediatric hospital medicine at Baystate Children’s Hospital in Springfield, Mass., wrote an introduction for that article. He wonders if board certification will eventually become necessary to continue seeing pediatric patients in the hospital. “This process leaves that question to local hospitals as the decision makers. But we can’t know what your local hospital credentialing committee will do,” he said.

“Will it lead to uncertainty among those currently in residency programs? If you are a pediatric resident and you want to become a board-certified pediatric hospitalist, you’ll need at least 2 years more of training. Is that going to deter qualified individuals?” Dr. Chang said. “The people this decision will impact the most are med-peds doctors – who complete a combined internal medicine and pediatrics residency – and part-timers. They may find themselves in a difficult position if the number of hours don’t add up for them to sit for the boards. For the most part, we’ll have to wait and see for answers to these questions.”

Brian Alverson, MD, FAAP, current chair of the AAP’s Section on Hospital Medicine and associate professor of pediatrics at Brown University, Providence, R.I., says he can see both sides of the debate.

Dr. Brian Alverson
“I think for the field of pediatric hospital medicine, as far as advancing our knowledge and the care of children in the hospital, this is a very good thing,” he said. “It will push academic children’s hospitals that don’t have a division of hospital medicine to invest in one. All of the really sick children are in the hospital, and if we’re going to attend to those children at their most vulnerable time, we need to address the existing knowledge gap in pediatric hospital medicine.”

But at the same time, there is a significant opportunity cost for doing 2 more years of fellowship training, Dr. Alverson said.

“We don’t know how much the board certification test will improve actual care,” he noted. “Does it truly identify higher quality doctors, or just doctors who are good at taking multiple choice exams? There are a number of people in pediatrics who do a lot of different things in their jobs, and it’s important that they not lose their ability to practice in the field. Two-thirds of our work force is in community hospitals, not academic medical centers. They work hard to provide the backbone of hospital care for young patients, and many of them are unlikely to ever do a fellowship.”

Nonetheless, Dr. Alverson believes pediatric hospitalists needn’t worry. “You still have plenty of time to figure out what’s going to happen in your hospital,” he said.

References

1. Section on Hospital Medicine. Guiding principles for pediatric hospital medicine program. Pediatrics; 2013; 132:782-786.

2. Stucky E. The Pediatric Hospital Medicine Core Competencies. Wiley-Blackwell; 2010.

3. Feldman LS, Monash B, Eniasivam A. Why required pediatric hospital medicine fellowships are unnecessary. The Hospitalist Magazine, October 8, 2016.

 

Pediatric hospital medicine is moving quickly toward recognition as a board-certified, fellowship-trained medical subspecialty, joining 14 other pediatric subspecialties now certified by the American Board of Pediatrics (ABP).

It was approved as a subspecialty by the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS) at its October 2016 board meeting in Chicago in response to a petition from the ABP. Following years of discussion within the field,1 it will take 2 more years to describe pediatric hospital medicine’s specialized knowledge base and write test questions for biannual board exams that are projected to commence in the fall of 2019.

Dr. Daniel Rauch
“Now begins the work of an ABP sub-board on pediatric hospital medicine, which I chair, to establish the criteria that would allow one to sit for board certification and to define the core content specific to this field, which will provide the basis for the certifying exam,” said Daniel Rauch, MD, FHM, associate director of pediatrics at Elmhurst Hospital Center, Queens, N.Y. Although passing the exam is a necessary requirement for achieving board certification in the subspecialty, qualifying to sit for the exam will be possible through an experiential or practice pathway the first three times the exam is offered – in 2019, 2021 and 2023.

Eventually, starting in 2025, pediatric hospitalists will need to complete a fellowship of 2 years or more if they wish to sit for the exam and become board-certified in the field. But for the next 7 years, hospitalists in current practice will be able to qualify based on their work experience. Maintenance of certification requirements likely will be similar to those in other subspecialties, and doctors certified in pediatric hospital medicine won’t be required to maintain general pediatric certification, Dr. Rauch said.

Formal eligibility criteria have not been set, but likely will include working half-time overall in pediatric-related activities, and quarter-time in clinical practice in pediatric hospital medicine for 4 years prior to qualifying for the exam. How the hours might break down between clinical and other hospital responsibilities, and between pediatric or adult patients, still needs to be determined, Dr. Rauch said. He added that the experiential pathway is likely to be defined broadly, with latitude for determinations based on percentages of time worked, rather than absolute number of hours worked. Local pediatric institutions will be granted latitude to determine how that “plays out” in real world situations, he said, “and an ABP credentialing committee will be available to hear appeals for people who have complicated life circumstances.”

Dr. Ricardo Quinonez
The Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) didn’t have any formal role in developing subspecialty certification, although it includes members who work in pediatrics and led the development of Pediatric Hospital Medicine Core Competencies,2 a cornerstone of the field’s development, said Ricardo Quinonez, MD, FAAP, FHM, past chair of the AAP’s Section on Hospital Medicine and chief of the division of pediatric hospital medicine at Texas Children’s Hospital, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston.

“I was part of a committee that explored these issues. We were an independent group of hospitalists who decided that board certification was a good way to advance the field,” Dr. Quinonez said. “We’ve seen what subspecialty certification has done, for example, for pediatric emergency medicine and pediatric critical care medicine – advancing them tremendously from a research standpoint and helping to develop a distinct body of knowledge reflecting increased severity of illness in hospitalized children.”

Discrepancy between practicing hospitalists, fellowships

An estimated 4,000 pediatric hospitalists now practice in the United States, and 2,100 of those belong to the American Academy of Pediatrics’ Section on Hospital Medicine. There are 40 pediatric hospital medicine fellowship programs listed on the website of AAP’s Section on Hospital Medicine (http://phmfellows.org/phm-programs/), although formal training assessment criteria will be needed for the American College of Graduate Medical Education to recognize programs that qualify their fellows to sit for the PHM exam. A wide gap is anticipated between the demand for pediatric hospitalists and currently available fellowship training slots to generate new candidates for board certification, although Dr. Rauch projects that fellowship slots will double in coming years.

“My message to the field is that historically, board certification has been the launching point for further development of the field,” Dr. Rauch said. “It leads to standardization of who is a subspecialist. Right now, who is a pediatric hospitalist is subject to wide variation. We need to standardize training and to create for this field the same distinction and stature as other medical subspecialties,” he said, noting that subspecialty status also has ramifications for academic settings, and for career advancement and career satisfaction for the individuals who choose to pursue it.

“I know there has been some hue and cry about this in the field, but in most cases certification will not change a pediatric hospitalist’s ability to obtain a job,” he said. “Already, you can’t become a division leader at a children’s hospital without additional training. This isn’t going to change that reality. But for people who don’t want to follow an academic career path, there will never be enough board-certified or fellowship-trained pediatric hospitalists to fill all of the pediatric positions in all the hospitals in the country. Community hospitals aren’t going to say: We won’t hire you unless you are board certified.”

 

 

Is the fellowship good for the field?

The subspecialty development process clearly is moving forward. Those in favor believe it will increase scholarship, research, and recognition for the subspecialty by the public for its specialized body of knowledge. But not everyone in the field agrees. Last fall The Hospitalist published3 an opinion piece questioning the need for fellowship-based board certification in pediatric hospital medicine. The author recommended instead retaining the current voluntary approach to fellowships and establishing a pediatric “focused practice” incorporated into residency training, much as the American Board of Internal Medicine and the American Board of Family Medicine have done for hospitalists in adult medicine.

Dr. Weijen W. Chang
Weijen Chang, MD, SFHM, chief of the division of pediatric hospital medicine at Baystate Children’s Hospital in Springfield, Mass., wrote an introduction for that article. He wonders if board certification will eventually become necessary to continue seeing pediatric patients in the hospital. “This process leaves that question to local hospitals as the decision makers. But we can’t know what your local hospital credentialing committee will do,” he said.

“Will it lead to uncertainty among those currently in residency programs? If you are a pediatric resident and you want to become a board-certified pediatric hospitalist, you’ll need at least 2 years more of training. Is that going to deter qualified individuals?” Dr. Chang said. “The people this decision will impact the most are med-peds doctors – who complete a combined internal medicine and pediatrics residency – and part-timers. They may find themselves in a difficult position if the number of hours don’t add up for them to sit for the boards. For the most part, we’ll have to wait and see for answers to these questions.”

Brian Alverson, MD, FAAP, current chair of the AAP’s Section on Hospital Medicine and associate professor of pediatrics at Brown University, Providence, R.I., says he can see both sides of the debate.

Dr. Brian Alverson
“I think for the field of pediatric hospital medicine, as far as advancing our knowledge and the care of children in the hospital, this is a very good thing,” he said. “It will push academic children’s hospitals that don’t have a division of hospital medicine to invest in one. All of the really sick children are in the hospital, and if we’re going to attend to those children at their most vulnerable time, we need to address the existing knowledge gap in pediatric hospital medicine.”

But at the same time, there is a significant opportunity cost for doing 2 more years of fellowship training, Dr. Alverson said.

“We don’t know how much the board certification test will improve actual care,” he noted. “Does it truly identify higher quality doctors, or just doctors who are good at taking multiple choice exams? There are a number of people in pediatrics who do a lot of different things in their jobs, and it’s important that they not lose their ability to practice in the field. Two-thirds of our work force is in community hospitals, not academic medical centers. They work hard to provide the backbone of hospital care for young patients, and many of them are unlikely to ever do a fellowship.”

Nonetheless, Dr. Alverson believes pediatric hospitalists needn’t worry. “You still have plenty of time to figure out what’s going to happen in your hospital,” he said.

References

1. Section on Hospital Medicine. Guiding principles for pediatric hospital medicine program. Pediatrics; 2013; 132:782-786.

2. Stucky E. The Pediatric Hospital Medicine Core Competencies. Wiley-Blackwell; 2010.

3. Feldman LS, Monash B, Eniasivam A. Why required pediatric hospital medicine fellowships are unnecessary. The Hospitalist Magazine, October 8, 2016.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

IMiD/Anti-CD20 combo induces complete responses in r/r NHL

Article Type
Changed

 

– A combination of obinutuzumab (Gazyva) and the experimental immunomodulatory agent CC-122 showed “clinically meaningful” activity against relapsed/refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in a phase 1b study.

Among 38 patients with heavily pretreated, relapsed/refractory DLBCL, follicular lymphoma (FL), or marginal zone lymphoma (MZL), the overall response rate was 66%, including 12 patients (32%) with a complete response (CR), reported Jean-Marie Michot, MD, from the Goustave-Roussy Cancer Center in Villejuif, France.

Dr. Jean-Marie Michot
“CC-122 at doses 3 mg and higher combined with obinutuzumab showed increased overall response rates and longer duration of responses in DLBCL and follicular lymphoma,” he said at the 14th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma.

CC-122 is a thalidomide analog that shares a molecular target with its cousin lenalidomide (Revlimid). Both molecules bind to the protein cereblon to cause degradation of the lymphoid transcription factors Aiolos and Ikaros.

As a single agent, CC-122 has been shown to have immunomodulatory effects on T-cell and natural killer (NK)–cell functions and has shown clinical activity in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed refractory NHL, including various cell-of-origin–based DLBCL subtypes, Dr, Michot said.

In preclinical studies, the combination of CC-122 and obinutuzumab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, has shown synergistic effects against FL and greater antilymphoma effects against DLBCL than either agent alone, he added.

In a multicenter, open-label, phase 1b dose-escalation and expansion study, investigators enrolled 19 patients with FL or MZL for whom at least one prior regimen had failed and 19 patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL following at least two prior regimens and failed autologous stem cell transplant.

The patients received oral CC-122 at different dose levels for 5 of 7 days in each 28 day treatment cycle, plus intravenous obinutuzumab 1000 mg on days 2, 8, and 15 of cycle 1 and day 1 of cycles 2 through 8.

Responses were assessed according to International Working Group 2007 revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma.

Among all 38 patients, 25 (66%) had a response. Responses consisted of 12 CR (3 in patients with DLBCL, and 9 in patients with FL/MZL) and 13 partial responses (six and seven patients, respectively),

The median time to best response was 57 days. Responses were seen in 23 of the 30 patients who received CC-122 at dose level of 3 mg or higher.

“To date, patients receiving CC-122 at a dose of 3 mg and higher have the best and more durable responses to CC-122 plus obinutuzumab,” Dr. Michot said.

Patients generally tolerated the combination well. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were hematologic and included grade 4 febrile neutropenia in two patients. Two patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events.

There was a dose-limiting toxicity, grade 4 neutropenia in one patient who received CC-122 at the 3 mg dose level, and one death from a tumor flare reaction in a patient treated at the 4 mg dose level.

The dose-escalation arm of the study has completed, and investigators are enrolling patients in a dose expansion phase at the 3 mg level.

The study was sponsored by Celgene. Hoffman La-Roche contributed obinutuzumab for the study. Dr. Michot reported serving as an advisor to Bristol-Myers Squibb and receiving travel grants from BMS, Pfizer, and Roche. Seven coauthors are Celgene employees and stockholders.
Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– A combination of obinutuzumab (Gazyva) and the experimental immunomodulatory agent CC-122 showed “clinically meaningful” activity against relapsed/refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in a phase 1b study.

Among 38 patients with heavily pretreated, relapsed/refractory DLBCL, follicular lymphoma (FL), or marginal zone lymphoma (MZL), the overall response rate was 66%, including 12 patients (32%) with a complete response (CR), reported Jean-Marie Michot, MD, from the Goustave-Roussy Cancer Center in Villejuif, France.

Dr. Jean-Marie Michot
“CC-122 at doses 3 mg and higher combined with obinutuzumab showed increased overall response rates and longer duration of responses in DLBCL and follicular lymphoma,” he said at the 14th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma.

CC-122 is a thalidomide analog that shares a molecular target with its cousin lenalidomide (Revlimid). Both molecules bind to the protein cereblon to cause degradation of the lymphoid transcription factors Aiolos and Ikaros.

As a single agent, CC-122 has been shown to have immunomodulatory effects on T-cell and natural killer (NK)–cell functions and has shown clinical activity in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed refractory NHL, including various cell-of-origin–based DLBCL subtypes, Dr, Michot said.

In preclinical studies, the combination of CC-122 and obinutuzumab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, has shown synergistic effects against FL and greater antilymphoma effects against DLBCL than either agent alone, he added.

In a multicenter, open-label, phase 1b dose-escalation and expansion study, investigators enrolled 19 patients with FL or MZL for whom at least one prior regimen had failed and 19 patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL following at least two prior regimens and failed autologous stem cell transplant.

The patients received oral CC-122 at different dose levels for 5 of 7 days in each 28 day treatment cycle, plus intravenous obinutuzumab 1000 mg on days 2, 8, and 15 of cycle 1 and day 1 of cycles 2 through 8.

Responses were assessed according to International Working Group 2007 revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma.

Among all 38 patients, 25 (66%) had a response. Responses consisted of 12 CR (3 in patients with DLBCL, and 9 in patients with FL/MZL) and 13 partial responses (six and seven patients, respectively),

The median time to best response was 57 days. Responses were seen in 23 of the 30 patients who received CC-122 at dose level of 3 mg or higher.

“To date, patients receiving CC-122 at a dose of 3 mg and higher have the best and more durable responses to CC-122 plus obinutuzumab,” Dr. Michot said.

Patients generally tolerated the combination well. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were hematologic and included grade 4 febrile neutropenia in two patients. Two patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events.

There was a dose-limiting toxicity, grade 4 neutropenia in one patient who received CC-122 at the 3 mg dose level, and one death from a tumor flare reaction in a patient treated at the 4 mg dose level.

The dose-escalation arm of the study has completed, and investigators are enrolling patients in a dose expansion phase at the 3 mg level.

The study was sponsored by Celgene. Hoffman La-Roche contributed obinutuzumab for the study. Dr. Michot reported serving as an advisor to Bristol-Myers Squibb and receiving travel grants from BMS, Pfizer, and Roche. Seven coauthors are Celgene employees and stockholders.

 

– A combination of obinutuzumab (Gazyva) and the experimental immunomodulatory agent CC-122 showed “clinically meaningful” activity against relapsed/refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in a phase 1b study.

Among 38 patients with heavily pretreated, relapsed/refractory DLBCL, follicular lymphoma (FL), or marginal zone lymphoma (MZL), the overall response rate was 66%, including 12 patients (32%) with a complete response (CR), reported Jean-Marie Michot, MD, from the Goustave-Roussy Cancer Center in Villejuif, France.

Dr. Jean-Marie Michot
“CC-122 at doses 3 mg and higher combined with obinutuzumab showed increased overall response rates and longer duration of responses in DLBCL and follicular lymphoma,” he said at the 14th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma.

CC-122 is a thalidomide analog that shares a molecular target with its cousin lenalidomide (Revlimid). Both molecules bind to the protein cereblon to cause degradation of the lymphoid transcription factors Aiolos and Ikaros.

As a single agent, CC-122 has been shown to have immunomodulatory effects on T-cell and natural killer (NK)–cell functions and has shown clinical activity in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed refractory NHL, including various cell-of-origin–based DLBCL subtypes, Dr, Michot said.

In preclinical studies, the combination of CC-122 and obinutuzumab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, has shown synergistic effects against FL and greater antilymphoma effects against DLBCL than either agent alone, he added.

In a multicenter, open-label, phase 1b dose-escalation and expansion study, investigators enrolled 19 patients with FL or MZL for whom at least one prior regimen had failed and 19 patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL following at least two prior regimens and failed autologous stem cell transplant.

The patients received oral CC-122 at different dose levels for 5 of 7 days in each 28 day treatment cycle, plus intravenous obinutuzumab 1000 mg on days 2, 8, and 15 of cycle 1 and day 1 of cycles 2 through 8.

Responses were assessed according to International Working Group 2007 revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma.

Among all 38 patients, 25 (66%) had a response. Responses consisted of 12 CR (3 in patients with DLBCL, and 9 in patients with FL/MZL) and 13 partial responses (six and seven patients, respectively),

The median time to best response was 57 days. Responses were seen in 23 of the 30 patients who received CC-122 at dose level of 3 mg or higher.

“To date, patients receiving CC-122 at a dose of 3 mg and higher have the best and more durable responses to CC-122 plus obinutuzumab,” Dr. Michot said.

Patients generally tolerated the combination well. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were hematologic and included grade 4 febrile neutropenia in two patients. Two patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events.

There was a dose-limiting toxicity, grade 4 neutropenia in one patient who received CC-122 at the 3 mg dose level, and one death from a tumor flare reaction in a patient treated at the 4 mg dose level.

The dose-escalation arm of the study has completed, and investigators are enrolling patients in a dose expansion phase at the 3 mg level.

The study was sponsored by Celgene. Hoffman La-Roche contributed obinutuzumab for the study. Dr. Michot reported serving as an advisor to Bristol-Myers Squibb and receiving travel grants from BMS, Pfizer, and Roche. Seven coauthors are Celgene employees and stockholders.
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

AT 14-ICML

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: A combination of the experimental immunomodulator CC-122 and obinutuzumab showed significant activity against relapsed/refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Major finding: The overall response rate was 66%, including 32% complete responses.

Data source: A multicenter open-label phase 1b dose-escalation study in 19 patients with DLBCL and 19 with follicular lymphoma or marginal zone lymphoma.

Disclosures: The study was sponsored by Celgene. Hoffman La-Roche contributed obinutuzumab for the study. Dr. Michot reported serving as an advisor to Bristol-Myers Squibb and receiving travel grants from BMS, Pfizer, and Roche. Seven coauthors are Celgene employees and stockholders.

Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Hospitalizations may speed up cognitive decline in older adults

Article Type
Changed

 

– Older adult patients who already had cognitive decline when they were admitted to a hospital often left with a significantly accelerated rate of decline, according to findings from a large longitudinal cohort study.

The study found up to a 62% acceleration of prehospital cognitive decline after any hospitalization. Urgent or emergency hospitalizations exacted the biggest toll on cognitive health, Bryan James, PhD, said at the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference.

shironosov/Thinkstock
“There are some remaining questions, though, about what is driving this association,” said Dr. James of the Rush Alzheimer’s Disease Center, Chicago. “Is it the illness that brought the person into the hospital or procedures done there or something about the hospital environment that’s actually the cause of decline?”

Cognitive decline after hospitalization in older patients is a common occurrence but still poorly understood, he said. “Some data suggest this could actually be seen as a public health crisis since 40% of all hospitalized patients in the U.S. are older than 65, and the risk of past-hospitalization cognitive impairment rises with age.

“Given the risk to cognitive health, older patients, families, and physicians require information on when to admit to the hospital,” Dr. James said. “We wondered if those who decline rapidly after the hospital admission were already declining before. Our second question was whether elective hospital admissions are associated with the same negative cognitive outcomes as nonelective (emergent or urgent) admissions.”

To examine this, Dr. James and his colleagues used patient data from the Rush Memory and Aging Project, which provides each participant with an annual cognitive assessment consisting of 19 neuropsychological tests. They linked these data to each patient’s Medicare claims record, allowing them to assess cognitive function both before and after the index hospitalization.

The cohort comprised 930 patients who were followed for a mean of 5 years. Hospitalized patients were older (81 vs. 79 years). Most patients in both groups had at least one medical condition, such as hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, cancer, thyroid disease, head injury, or stroke. Cognition was already impaired in many of the hospitalized patients; 62% had mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and 35% had dementia. Among the nonhospitalized subjects, 49% had MCI and 24% had dementia.

Of the cohort, 66% experienced a hospitalization during follow-up. Most hospitalizations (57%) were either for urgent or emergency problems. The rest were elective admissions. The main outcome was change in global cognition – an averaged z-score of all 19 tests of working memory, episodic memory, semantic memory, visuospatial processing, and perceptual speed.

Elective admissions were mostly planned surgeries (94%), and unplanned surgeries occurred in 64% of the nonelective admissions. Most of the elective admissions (81%) involved anesthesia, compared with 32% of the nonelective admissions. About 40% of each group required a stay in the intensive care unit. Around 11% in each group had a critical illness – a stroke, hemorrhage, or brain trauma in about 6% of each group.

A multivariate analysis looked at the change in cognition during two time points: 2 years before the index hospitalization and up to 8 years after it. As could be expected of aged subjects in a memory study cohort, most patients experienced a decline in cognition over the study period. However, nonhospitalized patients continued on a smooth linear slope of decline. Hospitalized patients experienced a significant 62% increased rate of decline, even after controlling for age, education, comorbidities, depression, Activities of Daily Living disability, and physical activity.

Visuospatial processing was the only domain not significantly affected by a hospital admission. All of the memory domains, as well as perceptual speed, declined significantly faster after hospitalization than before.

The second analysis examined which type of admission was most dangerous for cognitive health. This controlled for even more potential confounding factors, including length of stay, surgery and anesthesia, Charlson comorbidity index, critical illness, brain injury, and number of hospitalizations during the follow-up period.

Urgent and emergency admissions drove virtually all of the increase in decline, Dr. James said, with a 60% increase in the rate of decline, compared with the prehospitalization rate. Patients who had elective admissions showed no variance from their baseline rate of decline, and, in fact, followed the same slope as nonhospitalized patients. Again, change was seen in the global score and in all the memory domains and perceptual speed. Only visuospatial processing was unaffected.

“It’s unclear why the urgent and emergent admissions drove this finding, even after we controlled for illness and injury severity and other factors,” Dr. James said. “Obviously, we need more research in this area.”

He had no financial disclosures.

 

 

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event
Related Articles

 

– Older adult patients who already had cognitive decline when they were admitted to a hospital often left with a significantly accelerated rate of decline, according to findings from a large longitudinal cohort study.

The study found up to a 62% acceleration of prehospital cognitive decline after any hospitalization. Urgent or emergency hospitalizations exacted the biggest toll on cognitive health, Bryan James, PhD, said at the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference.

shironosov/Thinkstock
“There are some remaining questions, though, about what is driving this association,” said Dr. James of the Rush Alzheimer’s Disease Center, Chicago. “Is it the illness that brought the person into the hospital or procedures done there or something about the hospital environment that’s actually the cause of decline?”

Cognitive decline after hospitalization in older patients is a common occurrence but still poorly understood, he said. “Some data suggest this could actually be seen as a public health crisis since 40% of all hospitalized patients in the U.S. are older than 65, and the risk of past-hospitalization cognitive impairment rises with age.

“Given the risk to cognitive health, older patients, families, and physicians require information on when to admit to the hospital,” Dr. James said. “We wondered if those who decline rapidly after the hospital admission were already declining before. Our second question was whether elective hospital admissions are associated with the same negative cognitive outcomes as nonelective (emergent or urgent) admissions.”

To examine this, Dr. James and his colleagues used patient data from the Rush Memory and Aging Project, which provides each participant with an annual cognitive assessment consisting of 19 neuropsychological tests. They linked these data to each patient’s Medicare claims record, allowing them to assess cognitive function both before and after the index hospitalization.

The cohort comprised 930 patients who were followed for a mean of 5 years. Hospitalized patients were older (81 vs. 79 years). Most patients in both groups had at least one medical condition, such as hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, cancer, thyroid disease, head injury, or stroke. Cognition was already impaired in many of the hospitalized patients; 62% had mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and 35% had dementia. Among the nonhospitalized subjects, 49% had MCI and 24% had dementia.

Of the cohort, 66% experienced a hospitalization during follow-up. Most hospitalizations (57%) were either for urgent or emergency problems. The rest were elective admissions. The main outcome was change in global cognition – an averaged z-score of all 19 tests of working memory, episodic memory, semantic memory, visuospatial processing, and perceptual speed.

Elective admissions were mostly planned surgeries (94%), and unplanned surgeries occurred in 64% of the nonelective admissions. Most of the elective admissions (81%) involved anesthesia, compared with 32% of the nonelective admissions. About 40% of each group required a stay in the intensive care unit. Around 11% in each group had a critical illness – a stroke, hemorrhage, or brain trauma in about 6% of each group.

A multivariate analysis looked at the change in cognition during two time points: 2 years before the index hospitalization and up to 8 years after it. As could be expected of aged subjects in a memory study cohort, most patients experienced a decline in cognition over the study period. However, nonhospitalized patients continued on a smooth linear slope of decline. Hospitalized patients experienced a significant 62% increased rate of decline, even after controlling for age, education, comorbidities, depression, Activities of Daily Living disability, and physical activity.

Visuospatial processing was the only domain not significantly affected by a hospital admission. All of the memory domains, as well as perceptual speed, declined significantly faster after hospitalization than before.

The second analysis examined which type of admission was most dangerous for cognitive health. This controlled for even more potential confounding factors, including length of stay, surgery and anesthesia, Charlson comorbidity index, critical illness, brain injury, and number of hospitalizations during the follow-up period.

Urgent and emergency admissions drove virtually all of the increase in decline, Dr. James said, with a 60% increase in the rate of decline, compared with the prehospitalization rate. Patients who had elective admissions showed no variance from their baseline rate of decline, and, in fact, followed the same slope as nonhospitalized patients. Again, change was seen in the global score and in all the memory domains and perceptual speed. Only visuospatial processing was unaffected.

“It’s unclear why the urgent and emergent admissions drove this finding, even after we controlled for illness and injury severity and other factors,” Dr. James said. “Obviously, we need more research in this area.”

He had no financial disclosures.

 

 

 

– Older adult patients who already had cognitive decline when they were admitted to a hospital often left with a significantly accelerated rate of decline, according to findings from a large longitudinal cohort study.

The study found up to a 62% acceleration of prehospital cognitive decline after any hospitalization. Urgent or emergency hospitalizations exacted the biggest toll on cognitive health, Bryan James, PhD, said at the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference.

shironosov/Thinkstock
“There are some remaining questions, though, about what is driving this association,” said Dr. James of the Rush Alzheimer’s Disease Center, Chicago. “Is it the illness that brought the person into the hospital or procedures done there or something about the hospital environment that’s actually the cause of decline?”

Cognitive decline after hospitalization in older patients is a common occurrence but still poorly understood, he said. “Some data suggest this could actually be seen as a public health crisis since 40% of all hospitalized patients in the U.S. are older than 65, and the risk of past-hospitalization cognitive impairment rises with age.

“Given the risk to cognitive health, older patients, families, and physicians require information on when to admit to the hospital,” Dr. James said. “We wondered if those who decline rapidly after the hospital admission were already declining before. Our second question was whether elective hospital admissions are associated with the same negative cognitive outcomes as nonelective (emergent or urgent) admissions.”

To examine this, Dr. James and his colleagues used patient data from the Rush Memory and Aging Project, which provides each participant with an annual cognitive assessment consisting of 19 neuropsychological tests. They linked these data to each patient’s Medicare claims record, allowing them to assess cognitive function both before and after the index hospitalization.

The cohort comprised 930 patients who were followed for a mean of 5 years. Hospitalized patients were older (81 vs. 79 years). Most patients in both groups had at least one medical condition, such as hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, cancer, thyroid disease, head injury, or stroke. Cognition was already impaired in many of the hospitalized patients; 62% had mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and 35% had dementia. Among the nonhospitalized subjects, 49% had MCI and 24% had dementia.

Of the cohort, 66% experienced a hospitalization during follow-up. Most hospitalizations (57%) were either for urgent or emergency problems. The rest were elective admissions. The main outcome was change in global cognition – an averaged z-score of all 19 tests of working memory, episodic memory, semantic memory, visuospatial processing, and perceptual speed.

Elective admissions were mostly planned surgeries (94%), and unplanned surgeries occurred in 64% of the nonelective admissions. Most of the elective admissions (81%) involved anesthesia, compared with 32% of the nonelective admissions. About 40% of each group required a stay in the intensive care unit. Around 11% in each group had a critical illness – a stroke, hemorrhage, or brain trauma in about 6% of each group.

A multivariate analysis looked at the change in cognition during two time points: 2 years before the index hospitalization and up to 8 years after it. As could be expected of aged subjects in a memory study cohort, most patients experienced a decline in cognition over the study period. However, nonhospitalized patients continued on a smooth linear slope of decline. Hospitalized patients experienced a significant 62% increased rate of decline, even after controlling for age, education, comorbidities, depression, Activities of Daily Living disability, and physical activity.

Visuospatial processing was the only domain not significantly affected by a hospital admission. All of the memory domains, as well as perceptual speed, declined significantly faster after hospitalization than before.

The second analysis examined which type of admission was most dangerous for cognitive health. This controlled for even more potential confounding factors, including length of stay, surgery and anesthesia, Charlson comorbidity index, critical illness, brain injury, and number of hospitalizations during the follow-up period.

Urgent and emergency admissions drove virtually all of the increase in decline, Dr. James said, with a 60% increase in the rate of decline, compared with the prehospitalization rate. Patients who had elective admissions showed no variance from their baseline rate of decline, and, in fact, followed the same slope as nonhospitalized patients. Again, change was seen in the global score and in all the memory domains and perceptual speed. Only visuospatial processing was unaffected.

“It’s unclear why the urgent and emergent admissions drove this finding, even after we controlled for illness and injury severity and other factors,” Dr. James said. “Obviously, we need more research in this area.”

He had no financial disclosures.

 

 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

AT AAIC 2017

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: Hospitalizations – especially unplanned admissions – may speed up the rate of cognitive decline in older adult patients.

Major finding: Urgent or emergency admissions accelerated the rate of cognitive decline by 60%, compared with the prehospitalization rate. Elective admissions did not change the rate of cognitive decline.

Data source: The 930 patients were drawn from the Rush Memory and Aging Project.

Disclosures: The presenter had no financial disclosures.

Disqus Comments
Default

Bowel prep score helps predict missed polyps

Article Type
Changed

 

“Several recent prospective studies of one-time colonoscopies have demonstrated an association between higher BBPS (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale) scores and higher polyp and adenoma detection rates,” wrote Matthew A. Kluge, MD, of Boston University Medical Center, and his colleagues.

“We hypothesized that the BBPS could predict the likelihood of missed polyps based on initial BBPS segment scores among a large consortium of gastroenterology practices throughout the United States, thereby providing evidence to inform recommendations for repeat colonoscopy after less-than-perfect bowel preparation,” they said.

The researchers reviewed data from 335 pairs of colonoscopy exams in which the second exam (C2) was performed within 3 years of the first exam (C1). The primary endpoint was the detection of polyps and advanced polyps among colon segments at C2 stratified by BBPS scores at C1 (Gastrointest Endosc. 2017 Jun 22. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.06.012).

Overall, patients with inadequate bowel prep were significantly more likely than those with adequate prep to be male (71% vs. 60%) and younger (average age, 59 years vs. 61 years). *

In a multivariate model, the risk of advanced polyps at C2 was significantly higher for patients who had advanced polyps at C1 (odds ratio, 3.5), but inadequate BBPS scores at C1 had no significant impact on advanced polyp risk at C2. The risk of advanced polyps at C2 increased slightly with each year of age (OR, 1.1), but was not impacted by sex or time between C1 and C2 visits.

In addition, polyps at C2 were significantly more likely in patients with inadequate examinations at C1 vs. adequate C1 exams (18% vs. 7%).

The study’s strengths include the use of a large database, but limitations include lack of information about pathology and the use of surrogate measures of polyp size, the researchers noted. However, the results highlight the importance of proper bowel prep and support previous observations that “individuals with a BBPS segment score of 0 and 1 may be at increased risk for missed polyps, especially if advanced polyps are detected,” they said.

The study was supported in part by the Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative (CORI) and by the National Institutes of Health, and CORI has received infrastructure support from companies including AstraZeneca, Bard International, Endosoft, Ethicon, GIVEN Imaging, Pentax USA, and ProVation. Lead author Dr. Kluge had no financial conflicts to disclose.

* This story was updated on 7/26/2017

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

“Several recent prospective studies of one-time colonoscopies have demonstrated an association between higher BBPS (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale) scores and higher polyp and adenoma detection rates,” wrote Matthew A. Kluge, MD, of Boston University Medical Center, and his colleagues.

“We hypothesized that the BBPS could predict the likelihood of missed polyps based on initial BBPS segment scores among a large consortium of gastroenterology practices throughout the United States, thereby providing evidence to inform recommendations for repeat colonoscopy after less-than-perfect bowel preparation,” they said.

The researchers reviewed data from 335 pairs of colonoscopy exams in which the second exam (C2) was performed within 3 years of the first exam (C1). The primary endpoint was the detection of polyps and advanced polyps among colon segments at C2 stratified by BBPS scores at C1 (Gastrointest Endosc. 2017 Jun 22. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.06.012).

Overall, patients with inadequate bowel prep were significantly more likely than those with adequate prep to be male (71% vs. 60%) and younger (average age, 59 years vs. 61 years). *

In a multivariate model, the risk of advanced polyps at C2 was significantly higher for patients who had advanced polyps at C1 (odds ratio, 3.5), but inadequate BBPS scores at C1 had no significant impact on advanced polyp risk at C2. The risk of advanced polyps at C2 increased slightly with each year of age (OR, 1.1), but was not impacted by sex or time between C1 and C2 visits.

In addition, polyps at C2 were significantly more likely in patients with inadequate examinations at C1 vs. adequate C1 exams (18% vs. 7%).

The study’s strengths include the use of a large database, but limitations include lack of information about pathology and the use of surrogate measures of polyp size, the researchers noted. However, the results highlight the importance of proper bowel prep and support previous observations that “individuals with a BBPS segment score of 0 and 1 may be at increased risk for missed polyps, especially if advanced polyps are detected,” they said.

The study was supported in part by the Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative (CORI) and by the National Institutes of Health, and CORI has received infrastructure support from companies including AstraZeneca, Bard International, Endosoft, Ethicon, GIVEN Imaging, Pentax USA, and ProVation. Lead author Dr. Kluge had no financial conflicts to disclose.

* This story was updated on 7/26/2017

 

“Several recent prospective studies of one-time colonoscopies have demonstrated an association between higher BBPS (Boston Bowel Preparation Scale) scores and higher polyp and adenoma detection rates,” wrote Matthew A. Kluge, MD, of Boston University Medical Center, and his colleagues.

“We hypothesized that the BBPS could predict the likelihood of missed polyps based on initial BBPS segment scores among a large consortium of gastroenterology practices throughout the United States, thereby providing evidence to inform recommendations for repeat colonoscopy after less-than-perfect bowel preparation,” they said.

The researchers reviewed data from 335 pairs of colonoscopy exams in which the second exam (C2) was performed within 3 years of the first exam (C1). The primary endpoint was the detection of polyps and advanced polyps among colon segments at C2 stratified by BBPS scores at C1 (Gastrointest Endosc. 2017 Jun 22. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.06.012).

Overall, patients with inadequate bowel prep were significantly more likely than those with adequate prep to be male (71% vs. 60%) and younger (average age, 59 years vs. 61 years). *

In a multivariate model, the risk of advanced polyps at C2 was significantly higher for patients who had advanced polyps at C1 (odds ratio, 3.5), but inadequate BBPS scores at C1 had no significant impact on advanced polyp risk at C2. The risk of advanced polyps at C2 increased slightly with each year of age (OR, 1.1), but was not impacted by sex or time between C1 and C2 visits.

In addition, polyps at C2 were significantly more likely in patients with inadequate examinations at C1 vs. adequate C1 exams (18% vs. 7%).

The study’s strengths include the use of a large database, but limitations include lack of information about pathology and the use of surrogate measures of polyp size, the researchers noted. However, the results highlight the importance of proper bowel prep and support previous observations that “individuals with a BBPS segment score of 0 and 1 may be at increased risk for missed polyps, especially if advanced polyps are detected,” they said.

The study was supported in part by the Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative (CORI) and by the National Institutes of Health, and CORI has received infrastructure support from companies including AstraZeneca, Bard International, Endosoft, Ethicon, GIVEN Imaging, Pentax USA, and ProVation. Lead author Dr. Kluge had no financial conflicts to disclose.

* This story was updated on 7/26/2017

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

FROM GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: Individuals with a score of 0 or 1 on the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale may be at increased risk for missed polyps.

Major finding: Polyps at a second colonoscopy were significantly more likely in patients who had advanced polyps at an initial visit (odds ratio, 3.5).

Data source: The data come from a prospective, observational study of adults aged 50-75 years who had average risk screening colonoscopies.

Disclosures: The study was supported in part by the Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative (CORI) and by the National Institutes of Health, and CORI has received infrastructure support from companies including AstraZeneca, Bard International, Endosoft, Ethicon, GIVEN Imaging, Pentax USA, and ProVation. Dr. Kluge had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Disqus Comments
Default

Early neuroimaging essential for Zika-exposed neonates

Article Type
Changed

 

– The experience gleaned at ground zero of the Brazilian Zika virus epidemic drives home a clinical imperative: every neonate whose pregnant mother has presumed or confirmed Zika infection needs to undergo prompt neuroimaging, even if head circumference at birth is normal, Vanessa van der Linden, MD, said at the annual meeting of the Teratology Society.

Dr. van der Linden, a pediatric neurologist at the Association for Assistance of Disabled Children in Recife, Brazil, has done pioneering work in characterizing the recently recognized congenital Zika syndrome. She was the lead author of the first report of infants who had laboratory evidence of congenital Zika infection and normal head circumference at birth but who developed poor head growth and microcephaly later in infancy.

copyright Devonyu/Thinkstock
The report described 13 Brazilian infants with laboratory-confirmed congenital Zika infection and normal head size at birth. Of these, 11 were born at term, and the other 2 were born at 35 and 36 weeks gestation. Brain imaging with contrast-free CT and/or MRI performed as early as day 2 of life showed that all infants had abnormalities consistent with congenital Zika syndrome, including reduced brain volume, subcortical calcifications, ventriculomegaly, and cortical malformations. Head growth decelerated as early as 5 months, and 11 of the infants developed microcephaly.

Comprehensive multispecialty medical and developmental follow-up documented that 10 of 13 infants had dysphagia, 7 had epilepsy, 3 had chorioretinal abnormalities, all 13 had hypertonia, and 12 had pyramidal and extrapyramidal signs with dystonia (MMWR. 2016 Dec 2;65[47]:1343-8).

In another recent publication, Dr. van der Linden and her coinvestigators described classic congenital Zika syndrome with microcephaly at birth as simply the tip of the Zika virus iceberg. In their retrospective review of 77 infants exposed to Zika in utero, 9 had microcephaly at birth, 7 developed microcephaly postnatally, and 3 didn’t have microcephaly at all. Those with microcephaly at birth showed the traditional neuroimaging findings of congenital Zika syndrome, including reduced brain volume, ventriculomegaly, subcortical calcifications, corpus callosum abnormalities, and an enlarged extra-axial space.

Those who subsequently developed microcephaly later in infancy showed most of the same neuroimaging abnormalities. The three infants who remained normocephalic displayed calcifications in the cortico-subcortical junction, asymmetric frontal polymicrogyria, delayed myelination, and milder ventriculomegaly than in the other two groups (AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2017 Jul;38[7]:1427-34).

The rehabilitation center where Dr. van der Linden and her colleagues are currently following roughly 200 children with congenital Zika syndrome is in the state of Pernambuco, which was particularly hard hit by the Zika epidemic.

She reported having no relevant financial disclosures.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– The experience gleaned at ground zero of the Brazilian Zika virus epidemic drives home a clinical imperative: every neonate whose pregnant mother has presumed or confirmed Zika infection needs to undergo prompt neuroimaging, even if head circumference at birth is normal, Vanessa van der Linden, MD, said at the annual meeting of the Teratology Society.

Dr. van der Linden, a pediatric neurologist at the Association for Assistance of Disabled Children in Recife, Brazil, has done pioneering work in characterizing the recently recognized congenital Zika syndrome. She was the lead author of the first report of infants who had laboratory evidence of congenital Zika infection and normal head circumference at birth but who developed poor head growth and microcephaly later in infancy.

copyright Devonyu/Thinkstock
The report described 13 Brazilian infants with laboratory-confirmed congenital Zika infection and normal head size at birth. Of these, 11 were born at term, and the other 2 were born at 35 and 36 weeks gestation. Brain imaging with contrast-free CT and/or MRI performed as early as day 2 of life showed that all infants had abnormalities consistent with congenital Zika syndrome, including reduced brain volume, subcortical calcifications, ventriculomegaly, and cortical malformations. Head growth decelerated as early as 5 months, and 11 of the infants developed microcephaly.

Comprehensive multispecialty medical and developmental follow-up documented that 10 of 13 infants had dysphagia, 7 had epilepsy, 3 had chorioretinal abnormalities, all 13 had hypertonia, and 12 had pyramidal and extrapyramidal signs with dystonia (MMWR. 2016 Dec 2;65[47]:1343-8).

In another recent publication, Dr. van der Linden and her coinvestigators described classic congenital Zika syndrome with microcephaly at birth as simply the tip of the Zika virus iceberg. In their retrospective review of 77 infants exposed to Zika in utero, 9 had microcephaly at birth, 7 developed microcephaly postnatally, and 3 didn’t have microcephaly at all. Those with microcephaly at birth showed the traditional neuroimaging findings of congenital Zika syndrome, including reduced brain volume, ventriculomegaly, subcortical calcifications, corpus callosum abnormalities, and an enlarged extra-axial space.

Those who subsequently developed microcephaly later in infancy showed most of the same neuroimaging abnormalities. The three infants who remained normocephalic displayed calcifications in the cortico-subcortical junction, asymmetric frontal polymicrogyria, delayed myelination, and milder ventriculomegaly than in the other two groups (AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2017 Jul;38[7]:1427-34).

The rehabilitation center where Dr. van der Linden and her colleagues are currently following roughly 200 children with congenital Zika syndrome is in the state of Pernambuco, which was particularly hard hit by the Zika epidemic.

She reported having no relevant financial disclosures.

 

– The experience gleaned at ground zero of the Brazilian Zika virus epidemic drives home a clinical imperative: every neonate whose pregnant mother has presumed or confirmed Zika infection needs to undergo prompt neuroimaging, even if head circumference at birth is normal, Vanessa van der Linden, MD, said at the annual meeting of the Teratology Society.

Dr. van der Linden, a pediatric neurologist at the Association for Assistance of Disabled Children in Recife, Brazil, has done pioneering work in characterizing the recently recognized congenital Zika syndrome. She was the lead author of the first report of infants who had laboratory evidence of congenital Zika infection and normal head circumference at birth but who developed poor head growth and microcephaly later in infancy.

copyright Devonyu/Thinkstock
The report described 13 Brazilian infants with laboratory-confirmed congenital Zika infection and normal head size at birth. Of these, 11 were born at term, and the other 2 were born at 35 and 36 weeks gestation. Brain imaging with contrast-free CT and/or MRI performed as early as day 2 of life showed that all infants had abnormalities consistent with congenital Zika syndrome, including reduced brain volume, subcortical calcifications, ventriculomegaly, and cortical malformations. Head growth decelerated as early as 5 months, and 11 of the infants developed microcephaly.

Comprehensive multispecialty medical and developmental follow-up documented that 10 of 13 infants had dysphagia, 7 had epilepsy, 3 had chorioretinal abnormalities, all 13 had hypertonia, and 12 had pyramidal and extrapyramidal signs with dystonia (MMWR. 2016 Dec 2;65[47]:1343-8).

In another recent publication, Dr. van der Linden and her coinvestigators described classic congenital Zika syndrome with microcephaly at birth as simply the tip of the Zika virus iceberg. In their retrospective review of 77 infants exposed to Zika in utero, 9 had microcephaly at birth, 7 developed microcephaly postnatally, and 3 didn’t have microcephaly at all. Those with microcephaly at birth showed the traditional neuroimaging findings of congenital Zika syndrome, including reduced brain volume, ventriculomegaly, subcortical calcifications, corpus callosum abnormalities, and an enlarged extra-axial space.

Those who subsequently developed microcephaly later in infancy showed most of the same neuroimaging abnormalities. The three infants who remained normocephalic displayed calcifications in the cortico-subcortical junction, asymmetric frontal polymicrogyria, delayed myelination, and milder ventriculomegaly than in the other two groups (AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2017 Jul;38[7]:1427-34).

The rehabilitation center where Dr. van der Linden and her colleagues are currently following roughly 200 children with congenital Zika syndrome is in the state of Pernambuco, which was particularly hard hit by the Zika epidemic.

She reported having no relevant financial disclosures.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM TERATOLOGY SOCIETY 2017

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

FDA approves new treatment for adults with HCV

Article Type
Changed

 

The Food and Drug Administration announced on July 18 the approval of Vosevi to treat adults with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes 1-6 without cirrhosis or with mild cirrhosis.

Vosevi is now the first treatment for patients who have been previously treated with the direct-acting antiviral drug sofosbuvir or other drugs for HCV that inhibit a protein called NS5A. The new drug is a fixed-dose, combination tablet containing sofosbuvir and velpatasvir (both approved before) and a new drug – voxilaprevir.

In two phase 3 clinical trials, 750 adults without cirrhosis or with mild cirrhosis were enrolled. The first trial compared 12 weeks of Vosevi treatment with placebo in adults with genotype 1 who had previously failed treatment with an NS5A inhibitor drug; those with genotypes 2-6 received Vosevi. The second trial compared 12 weeks of Vosevi with sofosbuvir and velpatasvir in adults with genotypes 1, 2, or 3 who had previously failed treatment with sofosbuvir but not an NS5A inhibitor drug. Results of both trials showed that 96%-97% of patients who received Vosevi had no virus detected in the blood 12 weeks after finishing treatment, indicating that patients’ infection had been cured.

It is noted that treatment recommendations for Vosevi are different depending on viral genotype and prior treatment history. Vosevi is contraindicated in patients taking the drug rifampin.

“Direct-acting antiviral drugs prevent the virus from multiplying and often cure HCV. Vosevi provides a treatment option for some patients who were not successfully treated with other HCV drugs in the past,” Edward Cox, MD, director of the Office of Antimicrobial Products in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said in a press release.

Read the full press release on the FDA’s website.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

The Food and Drug Administration announced on July 18 the approval of Vosevi to treat adults with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes 1-6 without cirrhosis or with mild cirrhosis.

Vosevi is now the first treatment for patients who have been previously treated with the direct-acting antiviral drug sofosbuvir or other drugs for HCV that inhibit a protein called NS5A. The new drug is a fixed-dose, combination tablet containing sofosbuvir and velpatasvir (both approved before) and a new drug – voxilaprevir.

In two phase 3 clinical trials, 750 adults without cirrhosis or with mild cirrhosis were enrolled. The first trial compared 12 weeks of Vosevi treatment with placebo in adults with genotype 1 who had previously failed treatment with an NS5A inhibitor drug; those with genotypes 2-6 received Vosevi. The second trial compared 12 weeks of Vosevi with sofosbuvir and velpatasvir in adults with genotypes 1, 2, or 3 who had previously failed treatment with sofosbuvir but not an NS5A inhibitor drug. Results of both trials showed that 96%-97% of patients who received Vosevi had no virus detected in the blood 12 weeks after finishing treatment, indicating that patients’ infection had been cured.

It is noted that treatment recommendations for Vosevi are different depending on viral genotype and prior treatment history. Vosevi is contraindicated in patients taking the drug rifampin.

“Direct-acting antiviral drugs prevent the virus from multiplying and often cure HCV. Vosevi provides a treatment option for some patients who were not successfully treated with other HCV drugs in the past,” Edward Cox, MD, director of the Office of Antimicrobial Products in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said in a press release.

Read the full press release on the FDA’s website.

 

The Food and Drug Administration announced on July 18 the approval of Vosevi to treat adults with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes 1-6 without cirrhosis or with mild cirrhosis.

Vosevi is now the first treatment for patients who have been previously treated with the direct-acting antiviral drug sofosbuvir or other drugs for HCV that inhibit a protein called NS5A. The new drug is a fixed-dose, combination tablet containing sofosbuvir and velpatasvir (both approved before) and a new drug – voxilaprevir.

In two phase 3 clinical trials, 750 adults without cirrhosis or with mild cirrhosis were enrolled. The first trial compared 12 weeks of Vosevi treatment with placebo in adults with genotype 1 who had previously failed treatment with an NS5A inhibitor drug; those with genotypes 2-6 received Vosevi. The second trial compared 12 weeks of Vosevi with sofosbuvir and velpatasvir in adults with genotypes 1, 2, or 3 who had previously failed treatment with sofosbuvir but not an NS5A inhibitor drug. Results of both trials showed that 96%-97% of patients who received Vosevi had no virus detected in the blood 12 weeks after finishing treatment, indicating that patients’ infection had been cured.

It is noted that treatment recommendations for Vosevi are different depending on viral genotype and prior treatment history. Vosevi is contraindicated in patients taking the drug rifampin.

“Direct-acting antiviral drugs prevent the virus from multiplying and often cure HCV. Vosevi provides a treatment option for some patients who were not successfully treated with other HCV drugs in the past,” Edward Cox, MD, director of the Office of Antimicrobial Products in the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said in a press release.

Read the full press release on the FDA’s website.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default