The struggle to defeat Ebola virus disease continues globally, although it may not always make the headlines. To catch up on what you may have missed, here are some notable news items and journal articles published over the past few weeks that are worth a second look.

The National Institutes of Health has established a new program to strengthen the research capacity to study Ebola, Lassa fever, yellow fever, and other emerging viral diseases.

CDC/Daniel J. DeNoon

The struggle to defeat Ebola virus disease continues globally, although it may not always make the headlines. To catch up on what you may have missed, here are some notable news items and journal articles published over the past few weeks that are worth a second look.

The National Institutes of Health has established a new program to strengthen the research capacity to study Ebola, Lassa fever, yellow fever, and other emerging viral diseases.

CDC/Daniel J. DeNoon

The struggle to defeat Ebola virus disease continues globally, although it may not always make the headlines. To catch up on what you may have missed, here are some notable news items and journal articles published over the past few weeks that are worth a second look.

The National Institutes of Health has established a new program to strengthen the research capacity to study Ebola, Lassa fever, yellow fever, and other emerging viral diseases.

CDC/Daniel J. DeNoon

BOSTON – Although current guidance calls for a liver biopsy prior to treatment withdrawal in autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), a retrospective observational analysis conducted by researchers from the Cleveland Clinic offers a different view.

“Maybe not everyone needs a liver biopsy before withdrawing treatment,” Yilien Alonso, MD, an internist at the Cleveland Clinic in Weston, Fla., said in an interview at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

Whitney McKnight/Frontline Medical News

[email protected]

On Twitter @whitneymcknight

BOSTON – Although current guidance calls for a liver biopsy prior to treatment withdrawal in autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), a retrospective observational analysis conducted by researchers from the Cleveland Clinic offers a different view.

“Maybe not everyone needs a liver biopsy before withdrawing treatment,” Yilien Alonso, MD, an internist at the Cleveland Clinic in Weston, Fla., said in an interview at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

Whitney McKnight/Frontline Medical News

[email protected]

On Twitter @whitneymcknight

BOSTON – Although current guidance calls for a liver biopsy prior to treatment withdrawal in autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), a retrospective observational analysis conducted by researchers from the Cleveland Clinic offers a different view.

“Maybe not everyone needs a liver biopsy before withdrawing treatment,” Yilien Alonso, MD, an internist at the Cleveland Clinic in Weston, Fla., said in an interview at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

Whitney McKnight/Frontline Medical News

[email protected]

On Twitter @whitneymcknight

A recently evolved strain of Mycobacterium is circulating in hospitals worldwide, causing nearly impossible-to-treat lung infections among patients with cystic fibrosis.

A genome-wide study has determined that Mycobacterium abscessus is not transmitted through soil and water, as once thought, but is a nosocomial infection transmitted person to person through droplet and surface contamination, Andres Floto, MD, reported in Science (2016 Nov 11;354[6313]:751-7).
 

“The bug initially seems to have entered the patient population from the environment, but we think it has recently evolved to become capable of jumping from patient to patient, getting more virulent as it does so,” Dr. Floto of the University of Cambridge, England, wrote in a press statement.

The path of global transmission is not yet entirely clear, the authors noted. But since it first appeared, around 1978, M. abscessus has spread globally, strongly suggesting that asymptomatic carriers may be one source of transmission.

“We found no evidence of cystic fibrosis patients or of equipment moving between centers in different countries, indicating that the global spread of M. abscessus may be driven by alternative human, zoonotic, or environmental vectors of transmission,” the researchers wrote.

The team conducted whole-genome sequencing on 1,080 samples of M. abscessus obtained from 517 cystic fibrosis patients in clinics and hospitals within the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe, and Australia. They identified three subspecies, some of which contained nearly genetically identical strains, “suggesting widespread transmission of circulating clones within the global cystic fibrosis patient community.”

Most patients (74%) were infected with these genetically identical strains despite their diverse geographic locations. The isolates were amazingly similar, the authors noted: 90% differed by less than 20 single nucleotide polymorphisms.

Using these strains, the researchers were able to construct several possible transmission chains in most of the cystic fibrosis centers included in the study. The three dominant circulating clones were all observed in the United States, European, and Australian samples, indicating transcontinental transmission.

“We also detected numerous examples of identical or near-identical isolates infecting groups of patients in different cystic fibrosis centers and, indeed, across different countries, indicating the recent global spread of M. abscessus clones throughout the international cystic fibrosis patient community.”

The team also determined that the common ancestor of these strains probably emerged around 1978.

Another sequencing series tracked specific isolates among individual patients. This strongly suggests person-to-person transmission. Adding this to their previous work on M. abscessus transmission, the authors postulated that spread was probably by surface contamination by droplet contamination and by cough aerosol from infected patients.

The team then looked at clinical outcomes associated with the bacteria and treatment with amikacin and macrolides – antibiotics typically used to fight this very-challenging infection. “We did observe increased rates of chronic infection in individuals,” infected with the clones, which were resistant to both those medications, they said.

In immunodeficient mice, the strains were more likely to cause granulomatous and inflammatory lung changes. And the bacteria tended to survive even after being consumed by macrophages, “suggesting that the establishment of transmission chains may have permitted multiple rounds of within-host genetic adaptation to allow M. abscessus to evolve from an environmental organism to a true lung pathogen.”

The research was funded by the Wellcome Trust and the Cystic Fibrosis Trust in the United Kingdom. There were no financial disclosures.

[email protected]
On Twitter @alz_gal

A recently evolved strain of Mycobacterium is circulating in hospitals worldwide, causing nearly impossible-to-treat lung infections among patients with cystic fibrosis.

A genome-wide study has determined that Mycobacterium abscessus is not transmitted through soil and water, as once thought, but is a nosocomial infection transmitted person to person through droplet and surface contamination, Andres Floto, MD, reported in Science (2016 Nov 11;354[6313]:751-7).
 

“The bug initially seems to have entered the patient population from the environment, but we think it has recently evolved to become capable of jumping from patient to patient, getting more virulent as it does so,” Dr. Floto of the University of Cambridge, England, wrote in a press statement.

The path of global transmission is not yet entirely clear, the authors noted. But since it first appeared, around 1978, M. abscessus has spread globally, strongly suggesting that asymptomatic carriers may be one source of transmission.

“We found no evidence of cystic fibrosis patients or of equipment moving between centers in different countries, indicating that the global spread of M. abscessus may be driven by alternative human, zoonotic, or environmental vectors of transmission,” the researchers wrote.

The team conducted whole-genome sequencing on 1,080 samples of M. abscessus obtained from 517 cystic fibrosis patients in clinics and hospitals within the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe, and Australia. They identified three subspecies, some of which contained nearly genetically identical strains, “suggesting widespread transmission of circulating clones within the global cystic fibrosis patient community.”

Most patients (74%) were infected with these genetically identical strains despite their diverse geographic locations. The isolates were amazingly similar, the authors noted: 90% differed by less than 20 single nucleotide polymorphisms.

Using these strains, the researchers were able to construct several possible transmission chains in most of the cystic fibrosis centers included in the study. The three dominant circulating clones were all observed in the United States, European, and Australian samples, indicating transcontinental transmission.

“We also detected numerous examples of identical or near-identical isolates infecting groups of patients in different cystic fibrosis centers and, indeed, across different countries, indicating the recent global spread of M. abscessus clones throughout the international cystic fibrosis patient community.”

The team also determined that the common ancestor of these strains probably emerged around 1978.

Another sequencing series tracked specific isolates among individual patients. This strongly suggests person-to-person transmission. Adding this to their previous work on M. abscessus transmission, the authors postulated that spread was probably by surface contamination by droplet contamination and by cough aerosol from infected patients.

The team then looked at clinical outcomes associated with the bacteria and treatment with amikacin and macrolides – antibiotics typically used to fight this very-challenging infection. “We did observe increased rates of chronic infection in individuals,” infected with the clones, which were resistant to both those medications, they said.

In immunodeficient mice, the strains were more likely to cause granulomatous and inflammatory lung changes. And the bacteria tended to survive even after being consumed by macrophages, “suggesting that the establishment of transmission chains may have permitted multiple rounds of within-host genetic adaptation to allow M. abscessus to evolve from an environmental organism to a true lung pathogen.”

The research was funded by the Wellcome Trust and the Cystic Fibrosis Trust in the United Kingdom. There were no financial disclosures.

[email protected]
On Twitter @alz_gal

A recently evolved strain of Mycobacterium is circulating in hospitals worldwide, causing nearly impossible-to-treat lung infections among patients with cystic fibrosis.

A genome-wide study has determined that Mycobacterium abscessus is not transmitted through soil and water, as once thought, but is a nosocomial infection transmitted person to person through droplet and surface contamination, Andres Floto, MD, reported in Science (2016 Nov 11;354[6313]:751-7).
 

“The bug initially seems to have entered the patient population from the environment, but we think it has recently evolved to become capable of jumping from patient to patient, getting more virulent as it does so,” Dr. Floto of the University of Cambridge, England, wrote in a press statement.

The path of global transmission is not yet entirely clear, the authors noted. But since it first appeared, around 1978, M. abscessus has spread globally, strongly suggesting that asymptomatic carriers may be one source of transmission.

“We found no evidence of cystic fibrosis patients or of equipment moving between centers in different countries, indicating that the global spread of M. abscessus may be driven by alternative human, zoonotic, or environmental vectors of transmission,” the researchers wrote.

The team conducted whole-genome sequencing on 1,080 samples of M. abscessus obtained from 517 cystic fibrosis patients in clinics and hospitals within the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe, and Australia. They identified three subspecies, some of which contained nearly genetically identical strains, “suggesting widespread transmission of circulating clones within the global cystic fibrosis patient community.”

Most patients (74%) were infected with these genetically identical strains despite their diverse geographic locations. The isolates were amazingly similar, the authors noted: 90% differed by less than 20 single nucleotide polymorphisms.

Using these strains, the researchers were able to construct several possible transmission chains in most of the cystic fibrosis centers included in the study. The three dominant circulating clones were all observed in the United States, European, and Australian samples, indicating transcontinental transmission.

“We also detected numerous examples of identical or near-identical isolates infecting groups of patients in different cystic fibrosis centers and, indeed, across different countries, indicating the recent global spread of M. abscessus clones throughout the international cystic fibrosis patient community.”

The team also determined that the common ancestor of these strains probably emerged around 1978.

Another sequencing series tracked specific isolates among individual patients. This strongly suggests person-to-person transmission. Adding this to their previous work on M. abscessus transmission, the authors postulated that spread was probably by surface contamination by droplet contamination and by cough aerosol from infected patients.

The team then looked at clinical outcomes associated with the bacteria and treatment with amikacin and macrolides – antibiotics typically used to fight this very-challenging infection. “We did observe increased rates of chronic infection in individuals,” infected with the clones, which were resistant to both those medications, they said.

In immunodeficient mice, the strains were more likely to cause granulomatous and inflammatory lung changes. And the bacteria tended to survive even after being consumed by macrophages, “suggesting that the establishment of transmission chains may have permitted multiple rounds of within-host genetic adaptation to allow M. abscessus to evolve from an environmental organism to a true lung pathogen.”

The research was funded by the Wellcome Trust and the Cystic Fibrosis Trust in the United Kingdom. There were no financial disclosures.

[email protected]
On Twitter @alz_gal

SAN DIEGO – Weight-loss medications have a role in the management of diabetes, as long as physicians and patients realize these drugs are not an easy fix.

In light of their side effects and other complications, weight-loss drugs haven’t reached their full diet-in-a-pill potential. Diet drugs remain controversial even as the Food and Drug Administration continues to approve new formulations. Such weight-loss medications can still play a role in the care of diabetic patient, according to a pair of diabetes educators.

The key, they say, is to understand the limits of their potential and their not-so-limited drawbacks. “There is no magic pill,” said Charmaine Rochester, PharmD, an associate professor of pharmacy with the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore. “Patients need to know that it is not an easy fix. They still have to change their lifestyles with the medications.”

Dr. Rochester and Lisa Meade, PharmD, CDE, an associate professor of pharmacy at Wingate (N.C.) University School of Pharmacy, spoke about weight loss medications and diabetes care at the annual meeting of the American Association of Diabetes Educators and in later interviews.

These medications produce weight loss in the 5%-10% range. Still, “weight loss as little as 5% can significantly improve glycemic control, and modest weight loss of 5% to under 10% has been associated with significant improvements in cardiovascular disease risk factors at 1 year – decreased inflammation, improvement in insulin resistance, improved blood pressure, and improved cholesterol,” Dr. Meade said. “Also, weight loss may decrease the amount of medication needed to achieve glycemic control.”

According to Dr. Meade, it’s common for diabetic patients to ask about weight-loss drugs. “They have heard about them from friends or have seen advertisements on TV or the Internet or in magazines,” she said. However, “in general we do not encourage the use of medications for weight loss until the patient has demonstrated weight loss on their own. Counseling is very important so patients realize they will have more weight loss if combined with diet and exercise.”

Dr. Meade noted that the newer weight-loss medications – Qsymia (phentermine and topiramate), Belviq (lorcaserin HCl), Contrave (naltrexone HCl/bupropion HCl), and Saxenda (liraglutide) – are indicated in obese adults with a body mass index of 30 or above or those with a BMI of 27 with at least one comorbid condition, such as hypertension, type 2 diabetes, or dyslipidemia. Contrave is unusual: It’s a mix of the antidepressant bupropion (Wellbutrin) and the addiction drug naltrexone (Revia).

There are several other weight-loss drugs, including orlistat, which is available both by prescription (Xenical) and over-the-counter (Alli). Orlistat is famously linked to “anal leakage” – GI problems and oily and fatty stools.

Weight-loss drugs are controversial. Consumer Reports has warned against using Alli, Xenical, Belviq, Qsymia, and Saxenda “because they don’t help most people lose much, if any, weight, and they all carry potentially serious risks.” Earlier this year, Consumer Reports took aim at Contrave, too: “Nearly 1 in 4 people in the clinical trials stopped taking the prescription weight loss pill because they couldn’t tolerate the common side effects, including nausea, headache, and vomiting.”

As for other side effects, Dr. Meade noted that weight loss can cause hypoglycemia, so diabetes medications may need to be reduced. “Educators need to know that phentermine [in Qsymia and other weight-loss medications] is contraindicated for patients with any type of coronary artery disease [uncontrolled hypertension, stroke, arrhythmias or heart failure],” she said. There are concerns about cardiac issues in patients who take other weight-loss drugs, too.

Also, Belviq is not recommended in patients who are taking certain medications for depression, Dr. Meade said, “and some medications for depression and smoking cessation would be contraindicated with Contrave.”

Dr. Meade cautioned that the new drugs often aren’t covered by insurance and can be too expensive for patients. Goodrx.com estimates the cash price for a month’s supply of Contrave at $264-$295, although discounts and coupons can reduce that amount.

If patients do want to try the weight-loss drugs, Dr. Rochester urges educators to inform them about “the reality of the weight loss expected and remind patients that the research was completed in patients who also incorporated diet and exercise.”

Dr. Rochester and Dr. Meade report no relevant disclosures.

SAN DIEGO – Weight-loss medications have a role in the management of diabetes, as long as physicians and patients realize these drugs are not an easy fix.

In light of their side effects and other complications, weight-loss drugs haven’t reached their full diet-in-a-pill potential. Diet drugs remain controversial even as the Food and Drug Administration continues to approve new formulations. Such weight-loss medications can still play a role in the care of diabetic patient, according to a pair of diabetes educators.

The key, they say, is to understand the limits of their potential and their not-so-limited drawbacks. “There is no magic pill,” said Charmaine Rochester, PharmD, an associate professor of pharmacy with the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore. “Patients need to know that it is not an easy fix. They still have to change their lifestyles with the medications.”

Dr. Rochester and Lisa Meade, PharmD, CDE, an associate professor of pharmacy at Wingate (N.C.) University School of Pharmacy, spoke about weight loss medications and diabetes care at the annual meeting of the American Association of Diabetes Educators and in later interviews.

These medications produce weight loss in the 5%-10% range. Still, “weight loss as little as 5% can significantly improve glycemic control, and modest weight loss of 5% to under 10% has been associated with significant improvements in cardiovascular disease risk factors at 1 year – decreased inflammation, improvement in insulin resistance, improved blood pressure, and improved cholesterol,” Dr. Meade said. “Also, weight loss may decrease the amount of medication needed to achieve glycemic control.”

According to Dr. Meade, it’s common for diabetic patients to ask about weight-loss drugs. “They have heard about them from friends or have seen advertisements on TV or the Internet or in magazines,” she said. However, “in general we do not encourage the use of medications for weight loss until the patient has demonstrated weight loss on their own. Counseling is very important so patients realize they will have more weight loss if combined with diet and exercise.”

Dr. Meade noted that the newer weight-loss medications – Qsymia (phentermine and topiramate), Belviq (lorcaserin HCl), Contrave (naltrexone HCl/bupropion HCl), and Saxenda (liraglutide) – are indicated in obese adults with a body mass index of 30 or above or those with a BMI of 27 with at least one comorbid condition, such as hypertension, type 2 diabetes, or dyslipidemia. Contrave is unusual: It’s a mix of the antidepressant bupropion (Wellbutrin) and the addiction drug naltrexone (Revia).

There are several other weight-loss drugs, including orlistat, which is available both by prescription (Xenical) and over-the-counter (Alli). Orlistat is famously linked to “anal leakage” – GI problems and oily and fatty stools.

Weight-loss drugs are controversial. Consumer Reports has warned against using Alli, Xenical, Belviq, Qsymia, and Saxenda “because they don’t help most people lose much, if any, weight, and they all carry potentially serious risks.” Earlier this year, Consumer Reports took aim at Contrave, too: “Nearly 1 in 4 people in the clinical trials stopped taking the prescription weight loss pill because they couldn’t tolerate the common side effects, including nausea, headache, and vomiting.”

As for other side effects, Dr. Meade noted that weight loss can cause hypoglycemia, so diabetes medications may need to be reduced. “Educators need to know that phentermine [in Qsymia and other weight-loss medications] is contraindicated for patients with any type of coronary artery disease [uncontrolled hypertension, stroke, arrhythmias or heart failure],” she said. There are concerns about cardiac issues in patients who take other weight-loss drugs, too.

Also, Belviq is not recommended in patients who are taking certain medications for depression, Dr. Meade said, “and some medications for depression and smoking cessation would be contraindicated with Contrave.”

Dr. Meade cautioned that the new drugs often aren’t covered by insurance and can be too expensive for patients. Goodrx.com estimates the cash price for a month’s supply of Contrave at $264-$295, although discounts and coupons can reduce that amount.

If patients do want to try the weight-loss drugs, Dr. Rochester urges educators to inform them about “the reality of the weight loss expected and remind patients that the research was completed in patients who also incorporated diet and exercise.”

Dr. Rochester and Dr. Meade report no relevant disclosures.

SAN DIEGO – Weight-loss medications have a role in the management of diabetes, as long as physicians and patients realize these drugs are not an easy fix.

In light of their side effects and other complications, weight-loss drugs haven’t reached their full diet-in-a-pill potential. Diet drugs remain controversial even as the Food and Drug Administration continues to approve new formulations. Such weight-loss medications can still play a role in the care of diabetic patient, according to a pair of diabetes educators.

The key, they say, is to understand the limits of their potential and their not-so-limited drawbacks. “There is no magic pill,” said Charmaine Rochester, PharmD, an associate professor of pharmacy with the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore. “Patients need to know that it is not an easy fix. They still have to change their lifestyles with the medications.”

Dr. Rochester and Lisa Meade, PharmD, CDE, an associate professor of pharmacy at Wingate (N.C.) University School of Pharmacy, spoke about weight loss medications and diabetes care at the annual meeting of the American Association of Diabetes Educators and in later interviews.

These medications produce weight loss in the 5%-10% range. Still, “weight loss as little as 5% can significantly improve glycemic control, and modest weight loss of 5% to under 10% has been associated with significant improvements in cardiovascular disease risk factors at 1 year – decreased inflammation, improvement in insulin resistance, improved blood pressure, and improved cholesterol,” Dr. Meade said. “Also, weight loss may decrease the amount of medication needed to achieve glycemic control.”

According to Dr. Meade, it’s common for diabetic patients to ask about weight-loss drugs. “They have heard about them from friends or have seen advertisements on TV or the Internet or in magazines,” she said. However, “in general we do not encourage the use of medications for weight loss until the patient has demonstrated weight loss on their own. Counseling is very important so patients realize they will have more weight loss if combined with diet and exercise.”

Dr. Meade noted that the newer weight-loss medications – Qsymia (phentermine and topiramate), Belviq (lorcaserin HCl), Contrave (naltrexone HCl/bupropion HCl), and Saxenda (liraglutide) – are indicated in obese adults with a body mass index of 30 or above or those with a BMI of 27 with at least one comorbid condition, such as hypertension, type 2 diabetes, or dyslipidemia. Contrave is unusual: It’s a mix of the antidepressant bupropion (Wellbutrin) and the addiction drug naltrexone (Revia).

There are several other weight-loss drugs, including orlistat, which is available both by prescription (Xenical) and over-the-counter (Alli). Orlistat is famously linked to “anal leakage” – GI problems and oily and fatty stools.

Weight-loss drugs are controversial. Consumer Reports has warned against using Alli, Xenical, Belviq, Qsymia, and Saxenda “because they don’t help most people lose much, if any, weight, and they all carry potentially serious risks.” Earlier this year, Consumer Reports took aim at Contrave, too: “Nearly 1 in 4 people in the clinical trials stopped taking the prescription weight loss pill because they couldn’t tolerate the common side effects, including nausea, headache, and vomiting.”

As for other side effects, Dr. Meade noted that weight loss can cause hypoglycemia, so diabetes medications may need to be reduced. “Educators need to know that phentermine [in Qsymia and other weight-loss medications] is contraindicated for patients with any type of coronary artery disease [uncontrolled hypertension, stroke, arrhythmias or heart failure],” she said. There are concerns about cardiac issues in patients who take other weight-loss drugs, too.

Also, Belviq is not recommended in patients who are taking certain medications for depression, Dr. Meade said, “and some medications for depression and smoking cessation would be contraindicated with Contrave.”

Dr. Meade cautioned that the new drugs often aren’t covered by insurance and can be too expensive for patients. Goodrx.com estimates the cash price for a month’s supply of Contrave at $264-$295, although discounts and coupons can reduce that amount.

If patients do want to try the weight-loss drugs, Dr. Rochester urges educators to inform them about “the reality of the weight loss expected and remind patients that the research was completed in patients who also incorporated diet and exercise.”

Dr. Rochester and Dr. Meade report no relevant disclosures.

NEW ORLEANS – A single 300-mg injection of inclisiran, a novel non–monoclonal antibody PCSK9 inhibitor, plus statin therapy, achieved a mean 51% reduction in LDL cholesterol, compared with placebo plus a statin, an effect sustained for 90 days.

Moreover, a second subcutaneous 300-mg dose given at day 90 resulted in a 57% reduction in LDL sustained at day 180 with a highly favorable safety profile in the phase II ORION-1 study, Kausik K. Ray, MD, reported at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.

“The efficacy, safety and dosing profile of inclisiran are likely to ensure significant and durable reductions in LDL-C and thus could potentially impact cardiovascular outcomes,” said Dr. Ray, professor of public health at Imperial College London.

Inclisiran is a synthetic RNA interference agent. After injection it selectively goes to the liver, bypassing other tissues and thereby limiting toxicity. Inclisiran halts PCSK9 protein synthesis in the liver, with a resultant sharp, steep, and sustained drop in LDL levels.

Inclisiran achieves LDL lowering of a magnitude similar to that of the PCSK9-inhibiting monoclonal antibodies alirocumab (Praluent) and evolocumab (Repatha), but it will be less expensive to produce and far less costly to administer than the monoclonal antibodies. Dosing is planned to be two or three injections per year, rather than every 2 or 4 weeks, as with the PCSK9 inhibitor monoclonal antibodies, which cost a hefty $14,000 per year. And the sustained efficacy of a dose of inclisiran should make patient adherence to LDL-lowering therapy less of an issue, Dr. Ray continued.

ORION-1 (Inhibition of PCSK9 Synthesis Via RNA Interference) was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial comprising 501 patients already on maximally tolerated statin therapy for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or at high risk. Nevertheless, their baseline LDL was 125-135 mg/dL. Participants were randomized to one of six doses of inclisiran or placebo. At 90 days they received a second dose. Dr. Ray presented 90- and 180-day outcomes.

This was primarily a safety and dose-ranging study. Side effects at 90 days were no different from placebo regardless of whether patients received 100, 200, 300, or 500 mg of inclisiran. There was no signal of a problem with myalgia or elevated liver enzymes. Mild injection site reactions lasting for more than 4 hours occurred in 1.5%-3.3% of inclisiran-treated patients, but not in a dose-dependent fashion.

One 300-mg dose of inclisiran, in addition to achieving a mean 51% reduction in LDL from baseline at day 90, resulted in a mean 28% reduction in total cholesterol, a modest 10% drop in triglycerides, a 9% increase in HDL, a 37% drop in Apo-B, and a median 23% reduction in Lp(a). Plasma PCSK9 levels plunged in parallel with LDL.

The mean drop in LDL from baseline at day 180 after two 300-mg doses of inclisiran spaced 90 days apart was 65 mg/dL. The LDL reduction ranged from a minimum of 26.5 mg/dL to a maximum of 122 mg/dL.

Dr. Ray’s presentation of the ORION-1 findings followed on the heels of publication of a positive but much smaller phase I study of inclisiran (N Engl J Med. 2016 Nov 13. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1609243).

A large phase II clinical trial with cardiovascular outcomes is planned.

Discussant Borge G. Nordestgaard, MD, could find no fault with ORION-1 or inclisiran’s performance to date.

Bruce Jancin/Frontline Medical News

Dr. Ray discussed his findings in a video interview at the meeting.

[email protected]

NEW ORLEANS – A single 300-mg injection of inclisiran, a novel non–monoclonal antibody PCSK9 inhibitor, plus statin therapy, achieved a mean 51% reduction in LDL cholesterol, compared with placebo plus a statin, an effect sustained for 90 days.

Moreover, a second subcutaneous 300-mg dose given at day 90 resulted in a 57% reduction in LDL sustained at day 180 with a highly favorable safety profile in the phase II ORION-1 study, Kausik K. Ray, MD, reported at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.

“The efficacy, safety and dosing profile of inclisiran are likely to ensure significant and durable reductions in LDL-C and thus could potentially impact cardiovascular outcomes,” said Dr. Ray, professor of public health at Imperial College London.

Inclisiran is a synthetic RNA interference agent. After injection it selectively goes to the liver, bypassing other tissues and thereby limiting toxicity. Inclisiran halts PCSK9 protein synthesis in the liver, with a resultant sharp, steep, and sustained drop in LDL levels.

Inclisiran achieves LDL lowering of a magnitude similar to that of the PCSK9-inhibiting monoclonal antibodies alirocumab (Praluent) and evolocumab (Repatha), but it will be less expensive to produce and far less costly to administer than the monoclonal antibodies. Dosing is planned to be two or three injections per year, rather than every 2 or 4 weeks, as with the PCSK9 inhibitor monoclonal antibodies, which cost a hefty $14,000 per year. And the sustained efficacy of a dose of inclisiran should make patient adherence to LDL-lowering therapy less of an issue, Dr. Ray continued.

ORION-1 (Inhibition of PCSK9 Synthesis Via RNA Interference) was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial comprising 501 patients already on maximally tolerated statin therapy for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or at high risk. Nevertheless, their baseline LDL was 125-135 mg/dL. Participants were randomized to one of six doses of inclisiran or placebo. At 90 days they received a second dose. Dr. Ray presented 90- and 180-day outcomes.

This was primarily a safety and dose-ranging study. Side effects at 90 days were no different from placebo regardless of whether patients received 100, 200, 300, or 500 mg of inclisiran. There was no signal of a problem with myalgia or elevated liver enzymes. Mild injection site reactions lasting for more than 4 hours occurred in 1.5%-3.3% of inclisiran-treated patients, but not in a dose-dependent fashion.

One 300-mg dose of inclisiran, in addition to achieving a mean 51% reduction in LDL from baseline at day 90, resulted in a mean 28% reduction in total cholesterol, a modest 10% drop in triglycerides, a 9% increase in HDL, a 37% drop in Apo-B, and a median 23% reduction in Lp(a). Plasma PCSK9 levels plunged in parallel with LDL.

The mean drop in LDL from baseline at day 180 after two 300-mg doses of inclisiran spaced 90 days apart was 65 mg/dL. The LDL reduction ranged from a minimum of 26.5 mg/dL to a maximum of 122 mg/dL.

Dr. Ray’s presentation of the ORION-1 findings followed on the heels of publication of a positive but much smaller phase I study of inclisiran (N Engl J Med. 2016 Nov 13. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1609243).

A large phase II clinical trial with cardiovascular outcomes is planned.

Discussant Borge G. Nordestgaard, MD, could find no fault with ORION-1 or inclisiran’s performance to date.

Bruce Jancin/Frontline Medical News

Dr. Ray discussed his findings in a video interview at the meeting.

[email protected]

NEW ORLEANS – A single 300-mg injection of inclisiran, a novel non–monoclonal antibody PCSK9 inhibitor, plus statin therapy, achieved a mean 51% reduction in LDL cholesterol, compared with placebo plus a statin, an effect sustained for 90 days.

Moreover, a second subcutaneous 300-mg dose given at day 90 resulted in a 57% reduction in LDL sustained at day 180 with a highly favorable safety profile in the phase II ORION-1 study, Kausik K. Ray, MD, reported at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.

“The efficacy, safety and dosing profile of inclisiran are likely to ensure significant and durable reductions in LDL-C and thus could potentially impact cardiovascular outcomes,” said Dr. Ray, professor of public health at Imperial College London.

Inclisiran is a synthetic RNA interference agent. After injection it selectively goes to the liver, bypassing other tissues and thereby limiting toxicity. Inclisiran halts PCSK9 protein synthesis in the liver, with a resultant sharp, steep, and sustained drop in LDL levels.

Inclisiran achieves LDL lowering of a magnitude similar to that of the PCSK9-inhibiting monoclonal antibodies alirocumab (Praluent) and evolocumab (Repatha), but it will be less expensive to produce and far less costly to administer than the monoclonal antibodies. Dosing is planned to be two or three injections per year, rather than every 2 or 4 weeks, as with the PCSK9 inhibitor monoclonal antibodies, which cost a hefty $14,000 per year. And the sustained efficacy of a dose of inclisiran should make patient adherence to LDL-lowering therapy less of an issue, Dr. Ray continued.

ORION-1 (Inhibition of PCSK9 Synthesis Via RNA Interference) was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial comprising 501 patients already on maximally tolerated statin therapy for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or at high risk. Nevertheless, their baseline LDL was 125-135 mg/dL. Participants were randomized to one of six doses of inclisiran or placebo. At 90 days they received a second dose. Dr. Ray presented 90- and 180-day outcomes.

This was primarily a safety and dose-ranging study. Side effects at 90 days were no different from placebo regardless of whether patients received 100, 200, 300, or 500 mg of inclisiran. There was no signal of a problem with myalgia or elevated liver enzymes. Mild injection site reactions lasting for more than 4 hours occurred in 1.5%-3.3% of inclisiran-treated patients, but not in a dose-dependent fashion.

One 300-mg dose of inclisiran, in addition to achieving a mean 51% reduction in LDL from baseline at day 90, resulted in a mean 28% reduction in total cholesterol, a modest 10% drop in triglycerides, a 9% increase in HDL, a 37% drop in Apo-B, and a median 23% reduction in Lp(a). Plasma PCSK9 levels plunged in parallel with LDL.

The mean drop in LDL from baseline at day 180 after two 300-mg doses of inclisiran spaced 90 days apart was 65 mg/dL. The LDL reduction ranged from a minimum of 26.5 mg/dL to a maximum of 122 mg/dL.

Dr. Ray’s presentation of the ORION-1 findings followed on the heels of publication of a positive but much smaller phase I study of inclisiran (N Engl J Med. 2016 Nov 13. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1609243).

A large phase II clinical trial with cardiovascular outcomes is planned.

Discussant Borge G. Nordestgaard, MD, could find no fault with ORION-1 or inclisiran’s performance to date.

Bruce Jancin/Frontline Medical News

Dr. Ray discussed his findings in a video interview at the meeting.

[email protected]

A great volume of HIV and AIDS research enters the medical literature every month. It’s difficult to monitor everything, so here’s a quick look at some notable news items and journal articles published over the past few weeks.

A study in the American Journal of Pathology found that HIV impairs Mycobacterium tuberculosis antigen presentation in human dendritic cells, thereby suppressing an important cell-linking innate and adaptive immune response in TB.

alexskopje/ThinkStock.com

A great volume of HIV and AIDS research enters the medical literature every month. It’s difficult to monitor everything, so here’s a quick look at some notable news items and journal articles published over the past few weeks.

A study in the American Journal of Pathology found that HIV impairs Mycobacterium tuberculosis antigen presentation in human dendritic cells, thereby suppressing an important cell-linking innate and adaptive immune response in TB.

alexskopje/ThinkStock.com

A great volume of HIV and AIDS research enters the medical literature every month. It’s difficult to monitor everything, so here’s a quick look at some notable news items and journal articles published over the past few weeks.

A study in the American Journal of Pathology found that HIV impairs Mycobacterium tuberculosis antigen presentation in human dendritic cells, thereby suppressing an important cell-linking innate and adaptive immune response in TB.

alexskopje/ThinkStock.com

NEW ORLEANS – An interatrial septal shunt device continued to provide “sustained and meaningful clinical benefit” at 1-year follow-up for 64 patients who had heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), David M. Kaye, MD, PhD, reported at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.

The device is implanted via cardiac catheterization and is intended to reduce elevated left atrial pressure, particularly that associated with exertion, by allowing a small amount but not excessive left-to-right shunting. Patients showed improvements in 6-minute walk distance, New York Heart Association class, and HF-related quality of life scores at 6 months, and those effects persisted at the most recent (12-month) follow-up, he said in a presentation that was simultaneously published online in Circulation (2016 Nov 16).

American Heart Association

American Heart Association

NEW ORLEANS – An interatrial septal shunt device continued to provide “sustained and meaningful clinical benefit” at 1-year follow-up for 64 patients who had heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), David M. Kaye, MD, PhD, reported at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.

The device is implanted via cardiac catheterization and is intended to reduce elevated left atrial pressure, particularly that associated with exertion, by allowing a small amount but not excessive left-to-right shunting. Patients showed improvements in 6-minute walk distance, New York Heart Association class, and HF-related quality of life scores at 6 months, and those effects persisted at the most recent (12-month) follow-up, he said in a presentation that was simultaneously published online in Circulation (2016 Nov 16).

American Heart Association

American Heart Association

NEW ORLEANS – An interatrial septal shunt device continued to provide “sustained and meaningful clinical benefit” at 1-year follow-up for 64 patients who had heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), David M. Kaye, MD, PhD, reported at the American Heart Association scientific sessions.

The device is implanted via cardiac catheterization and is intended to reduce elevated left atrial pressure, particularly that associated with exertion, by allowing a small amount but not excessive left-to-right shunting. Patients showed improvements in 6-minute walk distance, New York Heart Association class, and HF-related quality of life scores at 6 months, and those effects persisted at the most recent (12-month) follow-up, he said in a presentation that was simultaneously published online in Circulation (2016 Nov 16).

American Heart Association

American Heart Association

BOSTON – State Medicaid programs have begun to loosen restrictions and improve transparency around access to direct-acting antiviral agents to treat hepatitis C virus infection, but inconsistencies are still the norm nationwide.

“Far too many states continue to restrict access in defiance to their obligations under the law,” said Robert Greenwald, clinical professor of law at Harvard University Center for Health Law and Policy Innovation (CHLPI), Boston.
 

Since 2014, the number of states that do not publish their access criteria for direct-acting antiviral agents (DAA) has dropped from 17 to 7, according to a report from CHLPI and the National Viral Hepatitis Roundtable (NVHR). Also during that period, 16 states relaxed or dropped fibrosis levels to qualify for access, and 7 decreased sobriety restrictions. The number of states that publish prescriber limitations has increased from 28 to 35. Because cost restrictions vary across insurance plans, some patients who need access get it, and others don’t, even if they have coverage, said Mr. Greenwald and Ryan Clary, NVHR executive director, who presented the report at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

NVHR is a coalition of advocacy groups and local governmental agencies with interests in HCV, HIV, and infectious diseases. Its sponsors include AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, OraSure Technologies, Quest Diagnostics, and Walgreens. CHLPI is supported in part by Gilead, BMS, Johnson & Johnson, and ViiV Health Care.

In November 2015, the Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services issued guidance to states, noting that while the cost of DAAs is prohibitive, states should use “sound clinical judgment” when determining access, and to “not unreasonably restrict coverage.” Varied interpretation of the guidance by state Medicaid directors means there is still a great deal of inconsistency in coverage.

Robert W. Zavoski, MD, Connecticut medical director of social services, noted that his state is making gains on balancing patient and taxpayer interests by emphasizing prevention, curbing reinfection rates, and using predictive modeling to determine the cost of HCV comorbidities.

Whitney McKnight/Frontline Medical News

[email protected]

On Twitter @whitneymcknight

BOSTON – State Medicaid programs have begun to loosen restrictions and improve transparency around access to direct-acting antiviral agents to treat hepatitis C virus infection, but inconsistencies are still the norm nationwide.

“Far too many states continue to restrict access in defiance to their obligations under the law,” said Robert Greenwald, clinical professor of law at Harvard University Center for Health Law and Policy Innovation (CHLPI), Boston.
 

Since 2014, the number of states that do not publish their access criteria for direct-acting antiviral agents (DAA) has dropped from 17 to 7, according to a report from CHLPI and the National Viral Hepatitis Roundtable (NVHR). Also during that period, 16 states relaxed or dropped fibrosis levels to qualify for access, and 7 decreased sobriety restrictions. The number of states that publish prescriber limitations has increased from 28 to 35. Because cost restrictions vary across insurance plans, some patients who need access get it, and others don’t, even if they have coverage, said Mr. Greenwald and Ryan Clary, NVHR executive director, who presented the report at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

NVHR is a coalition of advocacy groups and local governmental agencies with interests in HCV, HIV, and infectious diseases. Its sponsors include AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, OraSure Technologies, Quest Diagnostics, and Walgreens. CHLPI is supported in part by Gilead, BMS, Johnson & Johnson, and ViiV Health Care.

In November 2015, the Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services issued guidance to states, noting that while the cost of DAAs is prohibitive, states should use “sound clinical judgment” when determining access, and to “not unreasonably restrict coverage.” Varied interpretation of the guidance by state Medicaid directors means there is still a great deal of inconsistency in coverage.

Robert W. Zavoski, MD, Connecticut medical director of social services, noted that his state is making gains on balancing patient and taxpayer interests by emphasizing prevention, curbing reinfection rates, and using predictive modeling to determine the cost of HCV comorbidities.

Whitney McKnight/Frontline Medical News

[email protected]

On Twitter @whitneymcknight

BOSTON – State Medicaid programs have begun to loosen restrictions and improve transparency around access to direct-acting antiviral agents to treat hepatitis C virus infection, but inconsistencies are still the norm nationwide.

“Far too many states continue to restrict access in defiance to their obligations under the law,” said Robert Greenwald, clinical professor of law at Harvard University Center for Health Law and Policy Innovation (CHLPI), Boston.
 

Since 2014, the number of states that do not publish their access criteria for direct-acting antiviral agents (DAA) has dropped from 17 to 7, according to a report from CHLPI and the National Viral Hepatitis Roundtable (NVHR). Also during that period, 16 states relaxed or dropped fibrosis levels to qualify for access, and 7 decreased sobriety restrictions. The number of states that publish prescriber limitations has increased from 28 to 35. Because cost restrictions vary across insurance plans, some patients who need access get it, and others don’t, even if they have coverage, said Mr. Greenwald and Ryan Clary, NVHR executive director, who presented the report at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.

NVHR is a coalition of advocacy groups and local governmental agencies with interests in HCV, HIV, and infectious diseases. Its sponsors include AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, OraSure Technologies, Quest Diagnostics, and Walgreens. CHLPI is supported in part by Gilead, BMS, Johnson & Johnson, and ViiV Health Care.

In November 2015, the Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services issued guidance to states, noting that while the cost of DAAs is prohibitive, states should use “sound clinical judgment” when determining access, and to “not unreasonably restrict coverage.” Varied interpretation of the guidance by state Medicaid directors means there is still a great deal of inconsistency in coverage.

Robert W. Zavoski, MD, Connecticut medical director of social services, noted that his state is making gains on balancing patient and taxpayer interests by emphasizing prevention, curbing reinfection rates, and using predictive modeling to determine the cost of HCV comorbidities.

Whitney McKnight/Frontline Medical News

[email protected]

On Twitter @whitneymcknight

Myth: Psoriasis treatments may cause depression

It has been well documented that patients with inflammatory diseases such as psoriasis have an increased risk for depression. One population-based cohort study in the United Kingdom reported the risk of depression was greater in patients with severe psoriasis versus mild psoriasis. Younger psoriasis patients also had a higher risk compared to older patients. A US population-based study also reported that psoriasis was associated with major depression, but the severity of psoriasis and patient's age were unrelated. Therefore, all psoriasis patients may be at risk.

But are some therapies associated with an increased risk of depression? Increased concentrations of proinflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor α have been associated with depression apart from psoriasis. Administering immunomodulating agents has been shown to increase the risk of depression.

Depression has been cited as an adverse effect of apremilast in the drug's package insert, which states, "Before using [apremilast] in patients with a history of depression and/or suicidal thoughts or behavior prescribers should carefully weigh the risks and benefits of treatment." In clinical trials, 1.3% (12/920) of participants treated with apremilast reported depression compared to 0.4% (2/506) treated with placebo. Dermatologists should remain vigilant about monitoring for symptoms of depression in patients treated with apremilast.

However, depression in the context of autoimmune disorders or any disorder with increased inflammation has responded to treatment with tumor necrosis factor α antagonists. The relationship between depression and inflammation suggests that there is an inflammatory subtype of depression and use of anti-inflammatory agents may treat both inflammation and depression.

Disease control has been shown to improve symptoms of depression in psoriasis patients. A study of 618 patients with moderate to severe psoriasis who were treated with etanercept or placebo for 12 weeks revealed that more patients receiving etanercept experienced 50% improvement in 2 rating scales of depression compared to placebo.

Excessive worrying, a form of psychological distress, can impact treatment outcomes in patients with psoriasis. A 2003 study found that patients with psoriasis who are classified as high-level worriers may benefit from adjunctive psychological intervention before and during treatment. In this cohort of psoriasis patients receiving psoralen plus UVA (PUVA) therapy, high-level worry was the only significant predictor of time taken for PUVA to clear psoriasis (P=.01). Patients in the high-level worry group cleared with PUVA treatment at a rate of 1.8 times slower than the low-level worry group.

In conclusion, psoriasis patients should follow the treatment plan outlined by dermatologists, as improving psoriasis symptoms may help alleviate depression or prevent it from occurring. Patients with a history of depression should be monitored carefully by dermatologists or referred to another health care professional, and patients as well as family and friends should be encouraged to report any depression symptoms.

Expert Commentary

The prescribing information for apremilast lists a warning (but not a black-box warning) for depression. Long-term registries will determine if there is truly an increased risk of depression when taking apremilast. When I counsel patients before prescribing apremilast, I mention this potential increased risk of depression as noted in the prescribing information, but I tell them that the risk is very low and that a true risk has not yet been determined in long-term registries. I mention to patients that if they really do feel depressed after starting apremilast, they should stop taking apremilast and contact me.

Long-term registries for etanercept, adalimumab, infliximab, and ustekinumab do not indicate an increased risk for depression. Intuitively, if a patient with severe psoriasis has depression worsened by their psoriasis, it stands to reason that improving their skin will likely improve their mood, which clinical trials have shown using patient-related outcomes.

—Jashin J. Wu, MD (Los Angeles, California)

Myth: Psoriasis treatments may cause depression

It has been well documented that patients with inflammatory diseases such as psoriasis have an increased risk for depression. One population-based cohort study in the United Kingdom reported the risk of depression was greater in patients with severe psoriasis versus mild psoriasis. Younger psoriasis patients also had a higher risk compared to older patients. A US population-based study also reported that psoriasis was associated with major depression, but the severity of psoriasis and patient's age were unrelated. Therefore, all psoriasis patients may be at risk.

But are some therapies associated with an increased risk of depression? Increased concentrations of proinflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor α have been associated with depression apart from psoriasis. Administering immunomodulating agents has been shown to increase the risk of depression.

Depression has been cited as an adverse effect of apremilast in the drug's package insert, which states, "Before using [apremilast] in patients with a history of depression and/or suicidal thoughts or behavior prescribers should carefully weigh the risks and benefits of treatment." In clinical trials, 1.3% (12/920) of participants treated with apremilast reported depression compared to 0.4% (2/506) treated with placebo. Dermatologists should remain vigilant about monitoring for symptoms of depression in patients treated with apremilast.

However, depression in the context of autoimmune disorders or any disorder with increased inflammation has responded to treatment with tumor necrosis factor α antagonists. The relationship between depression and inflammation suggests that there is an inflammatory subtype of depression and use of anti-inflammatory agents may treat both inflammation and depression.

Disease control has been shown to improve symptoms of depression in psoriasis patients. A study of 618 patients with moderate to severe psoriasis who were treated with etanercept or placebo for 12 weeks revealed that more patients receiving etanercept experienced 50% improvement in 2 rating scales of depression compared to placebo.

Excessive worrying, a form of psychological distress, can impact treatment outcomes in patients with psoriasis. A 2003 study found that patients with psoriasis who are classified as high-level worriers may benefit from adjunctive psychological intervention before and during treatment. In this cohort of psoriasis patients receiving psoralen plus UVA (PUVA) therapy, high-level worry was the only significant predictor of time taken for PUVA to clear psoriasis (P=.01). Patients in the high-level worry group cleared with PUVA treatment at a rate of 1.8 times slower than the low-level worry group.

In conclusion, psoriasis patients should follow the treatment plan outlined by dermatologists, as improving psoriasis symptoms may help alleviate depression or prevent it from occurring. Patients with a history of depression should be monitored carefully by dermatologists or referred to another health care professional, and patients as well as family and friends should be encouraged to report any depression symptoms.

Expert Commentary

The prescribing information for apremilast lists a warning (but not a black-box warning) for depression. Long-term registries will determine if there is truly an increased risk of depression when taking apremilast. When I counsel patients before prescribing apremilast, I mention this potential increased risk of depression as noted in the prescribing information, but I tell them that the risk is very low and that a true risk has not yet been determined in long-term registries. I mention to patients that if they really do feel depressed after starting apremilast, they should stop taking apremilast and contact me.

Long-term registries for etanercept, adalimumab, infliximab, and ustekinumab do not indicate an increased risk for depression. Intuitively, if a patient with severe psoriasis has depression worsened by their psoriasis, it stands to reason that improving their skin will likely improve their mood, which clinical trials have shown using patient-related outcomes.

—Jashin J. Wu, MD (Los Angeles, California)

Myth: Psoriasis treatments may cause depression

It has been well documented that patients with inflammatory diseases such as psoriasis have an increased risk for depression. One population-based cohort study in the United Kingdom reported the risk of depression was greater in patients with severe psoriasis versus mild psoriasis. Younger psoriasis patients also had a higher risk compared to older patients. A US population-based study also reported that psoriasis was associated with major depression, but the severity of psoriasis and patient's age were unrelated. Therefore, all psoriasis patients may be at risk.

But are some therapies associated with an increased risk of depression? Increased concentrations of proinflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor α have been associated with depression apart from psoriasis. Administering immunomodulating agents has been shown to increase the risk of depression.

Depression has been cited as an adverse effect of apremilast in the drug's package insert, which states, "Before using [apremilast] in patients with a history of depression and/or suicidal thoughts or behavior prescribers should carefully weigh the risks and benefits of treatment." In clinical trials, 1.3% (12/920) of participants treated with apremilast reported depression compared to 0.4% (2/506) treated with placebo. Dermatologists should remain vigilant about monitoring for symptoms of depression in patients treated with apremilast.

However, depression in the context of autoimmune disorders or any disorder with increased inflammation has responded to treatment with tumor necrosis factor α antagonists. The relationship between depression and inflammation suggests that there is an inflammatory subtype of depression and use of anti-inflammatory agents may treat both inflammation and depression.

Disease control has been shown to improve symptoms of depression in psoriasis patients. A study of 618 patients with moderate to severe psoriasis who were treated with etanercept or placebo for 12 weeks revealed that more patients receiving etanercept experienced 50% improvement in 2 rating scales of depression compared to placebo.

Excessive worrying, a form of psychological distress, can impact treatment outcomes in patients with psoriasis. A 2003 study found that patients with psoriasis who are classified as high-level worriers may benefit from adjunctive psychological intervention before and during treatment. In this cohort of psoriasis patients receiving psoralen plus UVA (PUVA) therapy, high-level worry was the only significant predictor of time taken for PUVA to clear psoriasis (P=.01). Patients in the high-level worry group cleared with PUVA treatment at a rate of 1.8 times slower than the low-level worry group.

In conclusion, psoriasis patients should follow the treatment plan outlined by dermatologists, as improving psoriasis symptoms may help alleviate depression or prevent it from occurring. Patients with a history of depression should be monitored carefully by dermatologists or referred to another health care professional, and patients as well as family and friends should be encouraged to report any depression symptoms.

Expert Commentary

The prescribing information for apremilast lists a warning (but not a black-box warning) for depression. Long-term registries will determine if there is truly an increased risk of depression when taking apremilast. When I counsel patients before prescribing apremilast, I mention this potential increased risk of depression as noted in the prescribing information, but I tell them that the risk is very low and that a true risk has not yet been determined in long-term registries. I mention to patients that if they really do feel depressed after starting apremilast, they should stop taking apremilast and contact me.

Long-term registries for etanercept, adalimumab, infliximab, and ustekinumab do not indicate an increased risk for depression. Intuitively, if a patient with severe psoriasis has depression worsened by their psoriasis, it stands to reason that improving their skin will likely improve their mood, which clinical trials have shown using patient-related outcomes.

—Jashin J. Wu, MD (Los Angeles, California)

A biomarker may show whether acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is focal or nonfocal, a study showed.

This is an important distinction because some research suggests nonfocal ARDS, characterized by diffuse lung aeration loss, may have a worse prognosis and the two subtypes may respond differently to interventions such as positive end-expiratory pressure and recruitment maneuvers.

At present, the only way to identify focal versus nonfocal ARDS is a computed tomography scan, but that is often impractical because of the risks of moving the patient.

The current research, published in the November issue of CHEST (2016;150:998-1007), revealed that patients with nonfocal ARDS have higher plasma levels of the soluble form of the receptor for advanced glycation end product (sRAGE). At a cutoff of 1,188 pg/ml, the blood test differentiated between focal and nonfocal ARDS with a 94% sensitivity and an 84% specificity.

“Elevated baseline plasma sRAGE is a strong marker of nonfocal CT-based lung-imaging pattern in patients with early ARDS,” reported Jean-Michel Constantin of University Hospital of Clermont-Ferrand (France) and colleagues in the Azurea network.

The researchers recruited 119 consecutive ARDS patients from 10 intensive care units in France. They measured plasma levels of sRAGE, plasminogen activator inhibitor–1 (PAI-1), soluble intercellular adhesion molecule–1, and surfactant protein–D within 24 hours of ARDS onset. Each patient underwent a lung CT scan within 48 hours to assess focal versus nonfocal lung morphology.

Twenty-seven percent of patients had focal ARDS, while 73% were categorized as nonfocal. Mean plasma levels of sRAGE were much higher in nonfocal patients (3,074 pg/ml vs. 877 pg/ml, P less than .001). A cutoff value of 1,188 ng/ml distinguished focal and nonfocal ARDS with a sensitivity of 93% (95% confidence interval, 85%-97%) and a specificity of 84% (95% CI, 66%-95%). The test’s positive predictive value was 94% (95% CI, 87%-98%), and its negative predictive value was 81% (95% CI, 64%-93%).

The research is still in its early stage, but has a couple possible applications, according to Daniel R. Ouellette, MD, of Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit. “We might conceive of using this as a marker for nonfocal ARDS, and potentially use it to identify patients with worse outcomes. The other thing is, it may be a clue to help us learn about the underlying physiology of the disease,” he said in an interview.

If physicians can confidently categorize a patient, it could inform treatment. “We know that patients who have diffuse disease may be more likely to be treated successfully with advanced ventilator techniques. These techniques would be more useful and likely to lead to recovery in patients that don’t have focal disease,” said Dr. Ouellette.

However, he added that more research is needed. “These results are exciting, but they are very preliminary,” Dr Ouellette said.

The study was funded by the Auvergne Regional Council, the French Agence Nationale de la Recherche, and the Direction Generale de l’Offre de Soins, and the University Hospital of Clermont-Ferrand. The authors reported receiving funds from various pharmaceutical companies.

A biomarker may show whether acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is focal or nonfocal, a study showed.

This is an important distinction because some research suggests nonfocal ARDS, characterized by diffuse lung aeration loss, may have a worse prognosis and the two subtypes may respond differently to interventions such as positive end-expiratory pressure and recruitment maneuvers.

At present, the only way to identify focal versus nonfocal ARDS is a computed tomography scan, but that is often impractical because of the risks of moving the patient.

The current research, published in the November issue of CHEST (2016;150:998-1007), revealed that patients with nonfocal ARDS have higher plasma levels of the soluble form of the receptor for advanced glycation end product (sRAGE). At a cutoff of 1,188 pg/ml, the blood test differentiated between focal and nonfocal ARDS with a 94% sensitivity and an 84% specificity.

“Elevated baseline plasma sRAGE is a strong marker of nonfocal CT-based lung-imaging pattern in patients with early ARDS,” reported Jean-Michel Constantin of University Hospital of Clermont-Ferrand (France) and colleagues in the Azurea network.

The researchers recruited 119 consecutive ARDS patients from 10 intensive care units in France. They measured plasma levels of sRAGE, plasminogen activator inhibitor–1 (PAI-1), soluble intercellular adhesion molecule–1, and surfactant protein–D within 24 hours of ARDS onset. Each patient underwent a lung CT scan within 48 hours to assess focal versus nonfocal lung morphology.

Twenty-seven percent of patients had focal ARDS, while 73% were categorized as nonfocal. Mean plasma levels of sRAGE were much higher in nonfocal patients (3,074 pg/ml vs. 877 pg/ml, P less than .001). A cutoff value of 1,188 ng/ml distinguished focal and nonfocal ARDS with a sensitivity of 93% (95% confidence interval, 85%-97%) and a specificity of 84% (95% CI, 66%-95%). The test’s positive predictive value was 94% (95% CI, 87%-98%), and its negative predictive value was 81% (95% CI, 64%-93%).

The research is still in its early stage, but has a couple possible applications, according to Daniel R. Ouellette, MD, of Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit. “We might conceive of using this as a marker for nonfocal ARDS, and potentially use it to identify patients with worse outcomes. The other thing is, it may be a clue to help us learn about the underlying physiology of the disease,” he said in an interview.

If physicians can confidently categorize a patient, it could inform treatment. “We know that patients who have diffuse disease may be more likely to be treated successfully with advanced ventilator techniques. These techniques would be more useful and likely to lead to recovery in patients that don’t have focal disease,” said Dr. Ouellette.

However, he added that more research is needed. “These results are exciting, but they are very preliminary,” Dr Ouellette said.

The study was funded by the Auvergne Regional Council, the French Agence Nationale de la Recherche, and the Direction Generale de l’Offre de Soins, and the University Hospital of Clermont-Ferrand. The authors reported receiving funds from various pharmaceutical companies.

A biomarker may show whether acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is focal or nonfocal, a study showed.

This is an important distinction because some research suggests nonfocal ARDS, characterized by diffuse lung aeration loss, may have a worse prognosis and the two subtypes may respond differently to interventions such as positive end-expiratory pressure and recruitment maneuvers.

At present, the only way to identify focal versus nonfocal ARDS is a computed tomography scan, but that is often impractical because of the risks of moving the patient.

The current research, published in the November issue of CHEST (2016;150:998-1007), revealed that patients with nonfocal ARDS have higher plasma levels of the soluble form of the receptor for advanced glycation end product (sRAGE). At a cutoff of 1,188 pg/ml, the blood test differentiated between focal and nonfocal ARDS with a 94% sensitivity and an 84% specificity.

“Elevated baseline plasma sRAGE is a strong marker of nonfocal CT-based lung-imaging pattern in patients with early ARDS,” reported Jean-Michel Constantin of University Hospital of Clermont-Ferrand (France) and colleagues in the Azurea network.

The researchers recruited 119 consecutive ARDS patients from 10 intensive care units in France. They measured plasma levels of sRAGE, plasminogen activator inhibitor–1 (PAI-1), soluble intercellular adhesion molecule–1, and surfactant protein–D within 24 hours of ARDS onset. Each patient underwent a lung CT scan within 48 hours to assess focal versus nonfocal lung morphology.

Twenty-seven percent of patients had focal ARDS, while 73% were categorized as nonfocal. Mean plasma levels of sRAGE were much higher in nonfocal patients (3,074 pg/ml vs. 877 pg/ml, P less than .001). A cutoff value of 1,188 ng/ml distinguished focal and nonfocal ARDS with a sensitivity of 93% (95% confidence interval, 85%-97%) and a specificity of 84% (95% CI, 66%-95%). The test’s positive predictive value was 94% (95% CI, 87%-98%), and its negative predictive value was 81% (95% CI, 64%-93%).

The research is still in its early stage, but has a couple possible applications, according to Daniel R. Ouellette, MD, of Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit. “We might conceive of using this as a marker for nonfocal ARDS, and potentially use it to identify patients with worse outcomes. The other thing is, it may be a clue to help us learn about the underlying physiology of the disease,” he said in an interview.

If physicians can confidently categorize a patient, it could inform treatment. “We know that patients who have diffuse disease may be more likely to be treated successfully with advanced ventilator techniques. These techniques would be more useful and likely to lead to recovery in patients that don’t have focal disease,” said Dr. Ouellette.

However, he added that more research is needed. “These results are exciting, but they are very preliminary,” Dr Ouellette said.

The study was funded by the Auvergne Regional Council, the French Agence Nationale de la Recherche, and the Direction Generale de l’Offre de Soins, and the University Hospital of Clermont-Ferrand. The authors reported receiving funds from various pharmaceutical companies.