The Food and Drug Administration has cleared the Tandem Mobi insulin pump for people with diabetes aged 6 years or older.

The product is half the size of the company’s t:slim X2 and is now the smallest of the commercially available durable tubed pumps. It is fully controllable from a mobile app through a user’s compatible iPhone.

Features of the Mobi include a 200-unit insulin cartridge and an on-pump button that can be used instead of the phone for bolusing insulin. The device can be clipped to clothing or worn on-body with an adhesive sleeve that is sold separately.

The Mobi is compatible with all existing Tandem-branded infusion sets manufactured by the Convatec Group, and there is a new 5-inch tubing option made just for the Tandem Mobi.

The Mobi is part of a hybrid-closed loop automated delivery system, along with the current Control-IQ technology and a compatible continuous glucose monitor (CGM). The CGM sensor predicts glucose values 30 minutes ahead and adjusts insulin delivery every 5 minutes to prevent highs and lows. Users must still manually bolus for meals. The system can deliver automatic correction boluses for up to 1 hour to prevent hyperglycemia.

Limited release of the Tandem Mobi is expected in late 2023, followed by full commercial availability in early 2024.
 

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

The Food and Drug Administration has cleared the Tandem Mobi insulin pump for people with diabetes aged 6 years or older.

The product is half the size of the company’s t:slim X2 and is now the smallest of the commercially available durable tubed pumps. It is fully controllable from a mobile app through a user’s compatible iPhone.

Features of the Mobi include a 200-unit insulin cartridge and an on-pump button that can be used instead of the phone for bolusing insulin. The device can be clipped to clothing or worn on-body with an adhesive sleeve that is sold separately.

The Mobi is compatible with all existing Tandem-branded infusion sets manufactured by the Convatec Group, and there is a new 5-inch tubing option made just for the Tandem Mobi.

The Mobi is part of a hybrid-closed loop automated delivery system, along with the current Control-IQ technology and a compatible continuous glucose monitor (CGM). The CGM sensor predicts glucose values 30 minutes ahead and adjusts insulin delivery every 5 minutes to prevent highs and lows. Users must still manually bolus for meals. The system can deliver automatic correction boluses for up to 1 hour to prevent hyperglycemia.

Limited release of the Tandem Mobi is expected in late 2023, followed by full commercial availability in early 2024.
 

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

The Food and Drug Administration has cleared the Tandem Mobi insulin pump for people with diabetes aged 6 years or older.

The product is half the size of the company’s t:slim X2 and is now the smallest of the commercially available durable tubed pumps. It is fully controllable from a mobile app through a user’s compatible iPhone.

Features of the Mobi include a 200-unit insulin cartridge and an on-pump button that can be used instead of the phone for bolusing insulin. The device can be clipped to clothing or worn on-body with an adhesive sleeve that is sold separately.

The Mobi is compatible with all existing Tandem-branded infusion sets manufactured by the Convatec Group, and there is a new 5-inch tubing option made just for the Tandem Mobi.

The Mobi is part of a hybrid-closed loop automated delivery system, along with the current Control-IQ technology and a compatible continuous glucose monitor (CGM). The CGM sensor predicts glucose values 30 minutes ahead and adjusts insulin delivery every 5 minutes to prevent highs and lows. Users must still manually bolus for meals. The system can deliver automatic correction boluses for up to 1 hour to prevent hyperglycemia.

Limited release of the Tandem Mobi is expected in late 2023, followed by full commercial availability in early 2024.
 

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

The Diagnosis: Mpox (Monkeypox)

Tests for active herpes simplex virus (HHV), gonorrhea, chlamydia, HIV, and syphilis were negative. Swabs from the penile lesion demonstrated positivity for the West African clade of mpox (monkeypox) virus (MPXV) by polymerase chain reaction. The patient was treated supportively without the addition of antiviral therapy, and he experienced a complete recovery.

Mpox virus was first isolated in 1958 in a research facility and was named after the laboratory animals that were housed there. The first human documentation of the disease occurred in 1970, and it was first documented in the United States in 2003 in an infection that was traced to a shipment of small mammals from Ghana to Texas.¹ The disease has always been endemic to Africa; however, the incidence has been increasing.² A new MPXV outbreak was reported in many countries in early 2022, including the United States.¹

The MPXV is a double-stranded DNA virus of the genus Orthopoxvirus, and 2 genetic clades have been identified: clade I (formerly the Central African clade) and clade II (formerly the West African clade). The virus has the capability to infect many mammals; however, its host remains unidentified.¹ The exact mechanism of transmission from infected animals to humans largely is unknown; however, direct or indirect contact with infected animals likely is responsible. Human-to-human transmission can occur by many mechanisms including contact with large respiratory droplets, bodily fluids, and contaminated surfaces. The incubation period is 5 to 21 days, and the symptoms last 2 to 5 weeks.¹

The clinical manifestations of MPXV during the most recent outbreak differ from prior outbreaks. Patients are more likely to experience minimal to no systemic symptoms, and cutaneous lesions can be few and localized to a focal area, especially on the face and in the anogenital region,³ similar to the presentation in our patient (Figure 1). Cutaneous lesions of the most recent MPXV outbreak also include painless ulcerations similar to syphilitic chancres and lesions that are in various stages of healing.³ Lesions often begin as pseudopustules, which are firm white papules with or without a necrotic center that resemble pustules; unlike true pustules, there is no identifiable purulent material within it. Bacterial superinfection of the lesions is not uncommon.⁴ Over time, a secondary pustular eruption resembling folliculitis also may occur,4 as noted in our patient (Figure 2).

Although we did not have a biopsy to support the diagnosis of associated erythema multiforme (EM) in our patient, features supportive of this diagnosis included the classic clinical appearance of typical, well-defined, targetoid plaques with 3 distinct zones (Figure 3); the association with a known infection; the distribution on the arms with truncal sparing; and self-limited lesions. More than 90% of EM cases are associated with infection, with HHV representing the most common culprit⁵; therefore, the relationship with a different virus is not an unreasonable suggestion. Additionally, there have been rare reports of EM in association with MPXV.⁴

Histopathology of MPXV may have distinctive features. Lesions often demonstrate keratinocytic necrosis and basal layer vacuolization with an associated superficial and deep perivascular lymphohistiocytic infiltrate. When the morphology of the lesion is vesicular, histopathology reveals spongiosis and ballooning degeneration with epidermal necrosis. Viral inclusion bodies within keratinocytes may be identified.¹ Death rates from MPXV has been reported from 1% to 11%, with increased mortality among high-risk populations including children and immunocompromised individuals. Treatment of the disease largely consists of supportive care and management of any associated complications including bacterial infection, pneumonia, and encephalitis.¹

The differential diagnosis of MPXV includes other ulcerative lesions that can occur on the genital skin. Fixed drug eruptions often present on the penis,⁶ but there was no identifiable inciting drug in our patient. Herpes simplex virus infection was very high on the differential given our patient’s history of recurrent infections and association with a targetoid rash, but HHV type 1 and HHV type 2 testing of the lesion was negative. A syphilitic chancre also may present with the nontender genital ulceration⁷ that was seen in our patient, but serology did not support this diagnosis. Cutaneous Crohn disease also may manifest with genital ulceration even before a diagnosis of Crohn disease is made, but these lesions often present as linear knife-cut ulcerations of the anogenital region.⁸

Our case further supports a clinical presentation that diverges from the more traditional cases of MPXV. Additionally, associated EM may be a clue to infection, especially in cases of negative HHV and other sexually transmitted infection testing.

The Diagnosis: Mpox (Monkeypox)

Tests for active herpes simplex virus (HHV), gonorrhea, chlamydia, HIV, and syphilis were negative. Swabs from the penile lesion demonstrated positivity for the West African clade of mpox (monkeypox) virus (MPXV) by polymerase chain reaction. The patient was treated supportively without the addition of antiviral therapy, and he experienced a complete recovery.

Mpox virus was first isolated in 1958 in a research facility and was named after the laboratory animals that were housed there. The first human documentation of the disease occurred in 1970, and it was first documented in the United States in 2003 in an infection that was traced to a shipment of small mammals from Ghana to Texas.¹ The disease has always been endemic to Africa; however, the incidence has been increasing.² A new MPXV outbreak was reported in many countries in early 2022, including the United States.¹

The MPXV is a double-stranded DNA virus of the genus Orthopoxvirus, and 2 genetic clades have been identified: clade I (formerly the Central African clade) and clade II (formerly the West African clade). The virus has the capability to infect many mammals; however, its host remains unidentified.¹ The exact mechanism of transmission from infected animals to humans largely is unknown; however, direct or indirect contact with infected animals likely is responsible. Human-to-human transmission can occur by many mechanisms including contact with large respiratory droplets, bodily fluids, and contaminated surfaces. The incubation period is 5 to 21 days, and the symptoms last 2 to 5 weeks.¹

The clinical manifestations of MPXV during the most recent outbreak differ from prior outbreaks. Patients are more likely to experience minimal to no systemic symptoms, and cutaneous lesions can be few and localized to a focal area, especially on the face and in the anogenital region,³ similar to the presentation in our patient (Figure 1). Cutaneous lesions of the most recent MPXV outbreak also include painless ulcerations similar to syphilitic chancres and lesions that are in various stages of healing.³ Lesions often begin as pseudopustules, which are firm white papules with or without a necrotic center that resemble pustules; unlike true pustules, there is no identifiable purulent material within it. Bacterial superinfection of the lesions is not uncommon.⁴ Over time, a secondary pustular eruption resembling folliculitis also may occur,4 as noted in our patient (Figure 2).

Although we did not have a biopsy to support the diagnosis of associated erythema multiforme (EM) in our patient, features supportive of this diagnosis included the classic clinical appearance of typical, well-defined, targetoid plaques with 3 distinct zones (Figure 3); the association with a known infection; the distribution on the arms with truncal sparing; and self-limited lesions. More than 90% of EM cases are associated with infection, with HHV representing the most common culprit⁵; therefore, the relationship with a different virus is not an unreasonable suggestion. Additionally, there have been rare reports of EM in association with MPXV.⁴

Histopathology of MPXV may have distinctive features. Lesions often demonstrate keratinocytic necrosis and basal layer vacuolization with an associated superficial and deep perivascular lymphohistiocytic infiltrate. When the morphology of the lesion is vesicular, histopathology reveals spongiosis and ballooning degeneration with epidermal necrosis. Viral inclusion bodies within keratinocytes may be identified.¹ Death rates from MPXV has been reported from 1% to 11%, with increased mortality among high-risk populations including children and immunocompromised individuals. Treatment of the disease largely consists of supportive care and management of any associated complications including bacterial infection, pneumonia, and encephalitis.¹

The differential diagnosis of MPXV includes other ulcerative lesions that can occur on the genital skin. Fixed drug eruptions often present on the penis,⁶ but there was no identifiable inciting drug in our patient. Herpes simplex virus infection was very high on the differential given our patient’s history of recurrent infections and association with a targetoid rash, but HHV type 1 and HHV type 2 testing of the lesion was negative. A syphilitic chancre also may present with the nontender genital ulceration⁷ that was seen in our patient, but serology did not support this diagnosis. Cutaneous Crohn disease also may manifest with genital ulceration even before a diagnosis of Crohn disease is made, but these lesions often present as linear knife-cut ulcerations of the anogenital region.⁸

Our case further supports a clinical presentation that diverges from the more traditional cases of MPXV. Additionally, associated EM may be a clue to infection, especially in cases of negative HHV and other sexually transmitted infection testing.

The Diagnosis: Mpox (Monkeypox)

Tests for active herpes simplex virus (HHV), gonorrhea, chlamydia, HIV, and syphilis were negative. Swabs from the penile lesion demonstrated positivity for the West African clade of mpox (monkeypox) virus (MPXV) by polymerase chain reaction. The patient was treated supportively without the addition of antiviral therapy, and he experienced a complete recovery.

Mpox virus was first isolated in 1958 in a research facility and was named after the laboratory animals that were housed there. The first human documentation of the disease occurred in 1970, and it was first documented in the United States in 2003 in an infection that was traced to a shipment of small mammals from Ghana to Texas.¹ The disease has always been endemic to Africa; however, the incidence has been increasing.² A new MPXV outbreak was reported in many countries in early 2022, including the United States.¹

The MPXV is a double-stranded DNA virus of the genus Orthopoxvirus, and 2 genetic clades have been identified: clade I (formerly the Central African clade) and clade II (formerly the West African clade). The virus has the capability to infect many mammals; however, its host remains unidentified.¹ The exact mechanism of transmission from infected animals to humans largely is unknown; however, direct or indirect contact with infected animals likely is responsible. Human-to-human transmission can occur by many mechanisms including contact with large respiratory droplets, bodily fluids, and contaminated surfaces. The incubation period is 5 to 21 days, and the symptoms last 2 to 5 weeks.¹

The clinical manifestations of MPXV during the most recent outbreak differ from prior outbreaks. Patients are more likely to experience minimal to no systemic symptoms, and cutaneous lesions can be few and localized to a focal area, especially on the face and in the anogenital region,³ similar to the presentation in our patient (Figure 1). Cutaneous lesions of the most recent MPXV outbreak also include painless ulcerations similar to syphilitic chancres and lesions that are in various stages of healing.³ Lesions often begin as pseudopustules, which are firm white papules with or without a necrotic center that resemble pustules; unlike true pustules, there is no identifiable purulent material within it. Bacterial superinfection of the lesions is not uncommon.⁴ Over time, a secondary pustular eruption resembling folliculitis also may occur,4 as noted in our patient (Figure 2).

Although we did not have a biopsy to support the diagnosis of associated erythema multiforme (EM) in our patient, features supportive of this diagnosis included the classic clinical appearance of typical, well-defined, targetoid plaques with 3 distinct zones (Figure 3); the association with a known infection; the distribution on the arms with truncal sparing; and self-limited lesions. More than 90% of EM cases are associated with infection, with HHV representing the most common culprit⁵; therefore, the relationship with a different virus is not an unreasonable suggestion. Additionally, there have been rare reports of EM in association with MPXV.⁴

Histopathology of MPXV may have distinctive features. Lesions often demonstrate keratinocytic necrosis and basal layer vacuolization with an associated superficial and deep perivascular lymphohistiocytic infiltrate. When the morphology of the lesion is vesicular, histopathology reveals spongiosis and ballooning degeneration with epidermal necrosis. Viral inclusion bodies within keratinocytes may be identified.¹ Death rates from MPXV has been reported from 1% to 11%, with increased mortality among high-risk populations including children and immunocompromised individuals. Treatment of the disease largely consists of supportive care and management of any associated complications including bacterial infection, pneumonia, and encephalitis.¹

The differential diagnosis of MPXV includes other ulcerative lesions that can occur on the genital skin. Fixed drug eruptions often present on the penis,⁶ but there was no identifiable inciting drug in our patient. Herpes simplex virus infection was very high on the differential given our patient’s history of recurrent infections and association with a targetoid rash, but HHV type 1 and HHV type 2 testing of the lesion was negative. A syphilitic chancre also may present with the nontender genital ulceration⁷ that was seen in our patient, but serology did not support this diagnosis. Cutaneous Crohn disease also may manifest with genital ulceration even before a diagnosis of Crohn disease is made, but these lesions often present as linear knife-cut ulcerations of the anogenital region.⁸

Our case further supports a clinical presentation that diverges from the more traditional cases of MPXV. Additionally, associated EM may be a clue to infection, especially in cases of negative HHV and other sexually transmitted infection testing.

Findings from a recent study indicate that the less U.S. patients pay out of pocket for drugs that often have high co-pays, such as sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors or glucagonlike peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists, the more they adhere to taking these medications.

The study, led by Utibe R. Essien, MD, from University of California, Los Angeles, and Balvindar Singh, MD, PhD, from University of Pittsburgh, was published online in JAMA Cardiology.

Patient data from Clinformatics Data Mart, a health insurance claims database, was analyzed for the study. The information for 90,041 adults from the United States who had commercial and Medicare health insurance, and who started taking a GLP-1 agonist or SGLT2 inhibitor between 2014 and 2020 was reviewed. Participants had type 2 diabetes, heart failure, or both.

The primary outcome showed patients with a lower drug co-pay had significantly higher odds of 12-month adherence to GLP-1 agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors, compared with those with a higher co-pay. These differences persisted after controlling for patient demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic covariates.

After full adjustments were made and after the 12 months, patients with a high co-pay of $50 per month or more were 53% less likely to adhere to an SGLT2 inhibitor and 32% less likely to adhere to a GLP-1 agonist, compared with patients with a co-pay of less than $10 per month for these agents.

“Lowering high out-of-pocket prescription costs may be key to improving adherence to guideline-recommended therapies and advancing overall quality of care in patients with type 2 diabetes and heart failure,” the authors conclude.

The authors acknowledge the study’s limitations, including the inability to exclude residual confounding, uncertain generalizability for those without health insurance or with public insurance and possible misclassifications of type 2 diabetes and heart failure diagnoses or medical comorbidities. Additionally, this study did not have information on patients’ preferences associated with medication use, including specific reasons for poor adherence, and could not assess how co-payments influenced initial prescription receipt or abandonment at the pharmacy, or other factors including possible price inflation.

The study received no commercial funding. One author (not a lead author) is an adviser to several drug companies including ones that market SGLT2 inhibitors or GLP-1 agonists.

Findings from a recent study indicate that the less U.S. patients pay out of pocket for drugs that often have high co-pays, such as sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors or glucagonlike peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists, the more they adhere to taking these medications.

The study, led by Utibe R. Essien, MD, from University of California, Los Angeles, and Balvindar Singh, MD, PhD, from University of Pittsburgh, was published online in JAMA Cardiology.

Patient data from Clinformatics Data Mart, a health insurance claims database, was analyzed for the study. The information for 90,041 adults from the United States who had commercial and Medicare health insurance, and who started taking a GLP-1 agonist or SGLT2 inhibitor between 2014 and 2020 was reviewed. Participants had type 2 diabetes, heart failure, or both.

The primary outcome showed patients with a lower drug co-pay had significantly higher odds of 12-month adherence to GLP-1 agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors, compared with those with a higher co-pay. These differences persisted after controlling for patient demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic covariates.

After full adjustments were made and after the 12 months, patients with a high co-pay of $50 per month or more were 53% less likely to adhere to an SGLT2 inhibitor and 32% less likely to adhere to a GLP-1 agonist, compared with patients with a co-pay of less than $10 per month for these agents.

“Lowering high out-of-pocket prescription costs may be key to improving adherence to guideline-recommended therapies and advancing overall quality of care in patients with type 2 diabetes and heart failure,” the authors conclude.

The authors acknowledge the study’s limitations, including the inability to exclude residual confounding, uncertain generalizability for those without health insurance or with public insurance and possible misclassifications of type 2 diabetes and heart failure diagnoses or medical comorbidities. Additionally, this study did not have information on patients’ preferences associated with medication use, including specific reasons for poor adherence, and could not assess how co-payments influenced initial prescription receipt or abandonment at the pharmacy, or other factors including possible price inflation.

The study received no commercial funding. One author (not a lead author) is an adviser to several drug companies including ones that market SGLT2 inhibitors or GLP-1 agonists.

Findings from a recent study indicate that the less U.S. patients pay out of pocket for drugs that often have high co-pays, such as sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors or glucagonlike peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists, the more they adhere to taking these medications.

The study, led by Utibe R. Essien, MD, from University of California, Los Angeles, and Balvindar Singh, MD, PhD, from University of Pittsburgh, was published online in JAMA Cardiology.

Patient data from Clinformatics Data Mart, a health insurance claims database, was analyzed for the study. The information for 90,041 adults from the United States who had commercial and Medicare health insurance, and who started taking a GLP-1 agonist or SGLT2 inhibitor between 2014 and 2020 was reviewed. Participants had type 2 diabetes, heart failure, or both.

The primary outcome showed patients with a lower drug co-pay had significantly higher odds of 12-month adherence to GLP-1 agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors, compared with those with a higher co-pay. These differences persisted after controlling for patient demographic, clinical, and socioeconomic covariates.

After full adjustments were made and after the 12 months, patients with a high co-pay of $50 per month or more were 53% less likely to adhere to an SGLT2 inhibitor and 32% less likely to adhere to a GLP-1 agonist, compared with patients with a co-pay of less than $10 per month for these agents.

“Lowering high out-of-pocket prescription costs may be key to improving adherence to guideline-recommended therapies and advancing overall quality of care in patients with type 2 diabetes and heart failure,” the authors conclude.

The authors acknowledge the study’s limitations, including the inability to exclude residual confounding, uncertain generalizability for those without health insurance or with public insurance and possible misclassifications of type 2 diabetes and heart failure diagnoses or medical comorbidities. Additionally, this study did not have information on patients’ preferences associated with medication use, including specific reasons for poor adherence, and could not assess how co-payments influenced initial prescription receipt or abandonment at the pharmacy, or other factors including possible price inflation.

The study received no commercial funding. One author (not a lead author) is an adviser to several drug companies including ones that market SGLT2 inhibitors or GLP-1 agonists.

The Food and Drug Administration has determined that paclitaxel-delivering stents and balloons for peripheral-artery interventions do not pose an excess mortality risk, the agency July 11 in a statement to health care providers.

The FDA announcement comes about 4 years after it warned physicians of a “potentially concerning” signal of excess mortality linked to paclitaxel-coated balloons and paclitaxel-eluting stents in published analysis.

The agency’s concerns had been based on a December 2018 meta-analysis in the Journal of the American Heart Association that saw a 68% jump in mortality risk at 2 years and a 93% excess risk at 5 years associated with the paclitaxel devices in the periphery.

The findings, which led an FDA advisory committee to recommend device labeling changes and otherwise upended the practice of peripheral interventions, were followed by an FDA recommendation to limit the use of paclitaxel devices in the periphery to higher-risk cases.

In its July 11 update to providers, the FDA said it was satisfied the devices do not pose an excess mortality risk. It based its conclusion on extensive further evidence review and recently available “additional data” from the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) contributing to the meta-analysis that had ignited the controversy.

“FDA clinicians and statisticians reviewed the study data,” the agency said, “and concluded that the updated RCT meta-analysis does not indicate that the use of paclitaxel-coated devices is associated with a late mortality risk.”

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

The Food and Drug Administration has determined that paclitaxel-delivering stents and balloons for peripheral-artery interventions do not pose an excess mortality risk, the agency July 11 in a statement to health care providers.

The FDA announcement comes about 4 years after it warned physicians of a “potentially concerning” signal of excess mortality linked to paclitaxel-coated balloons and paclitaxel-eluting stents in published analysis.

The agency’s concerns had been based on a December 2018 meta-analysis in the Journal of the American Heart Association that saw a 68% jump in mortality risk at 2 years and a 93% excess risk at 5 years associated with the paclitaxel devices in the periphery.

The findings, which led an FDA advisory committee to recommend device labeling changes and otherwise upended the practice of peripheral interventions, were followed by an FDA recommendation to limit the use of paclitaxel devices in the periphery to higher-risk cases.

In its July 11 update to providers, the FDA said it was satisfied the devices do not pose an excess mortality risk. It based its conclusion on extensive further evidence review and recently available “additional data” from the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) contributing to the meta-analysis that had ignited the controversy.

“FDA clinicians and statisticians reviewed the study data,” the agency said, “and concluded that the updated RCT meta-analysis does not indicate that the use of paclitaxel-coated devices is associated with a late mortality risk.”

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

The Food and Drug Administration has determined that paclitaxel-delivering stents and balloons for peripheral-artery interventions do not pose an excess mortality risk, the agency July 11 in a statement to health care providers.

The FDA announcement comes about 4 years after it warned physicians of a “potentially concerning” signal of excess mortality linked to paclitaxel-coated balloons and paclitaxel-eluting stents in published analysis.

The agency’s concerns had been based on a December 2018 meta-analysis in the Journal of the American Heart Association that saw a 68% jump in mortality risk at 2 years and a 93% excess risk at 5 years associated with the paclitaxel devices in the periphery.

The findings, which led an FDA advisory committee to recommend device labeling changes and otherwise upended the practice of peripheral interventions, were followed by an FDA recommendation to limit the use of paclitaxel devices in the periphery to higher-risk cases.

In its July 11 update to providers, the FDA said it was satisfied the devices do not pose an excess mortality risk. It based its conclusion on extensive further evidence review and recently available “additional data” from the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) contributing to the meta-analysis that had ignited the controversy.

“FDA clinicians and statisticians reviewed the study data,” the agency said, “and concluded that the updated RCT meta-analysis does not indicate that the use of paclitaxel-coated devices is associated with a late mortality risk.”

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

A smartphone-based app designed to deliver cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) to adults with type 2 diabetes received marketing approval as a class II medical device from the Food and Drug Administration on July 10, becoming the first digital behavioral therapeutic device for people with diabetes to receive this designation for U.S. patients.
 

Better Therapeutics representatives said that the app, formerly known as BT-001, will be called AspyreRX, with U.S. sales planned to launch in October-December 2023.

The app will be available to patients exclusively by prescription, with a planned 90-day use duration and an option for a second 90-day prescription. A company official said the price per prescription will be about $500-800, although this is not yet finalized. The app is intended for use in concert with the conventional pillars of glycemic control in people with type 2 diabetes: lifestyle modification and treatment with antidiabetes medications.

Senior staff members of Better Therapeutics acknowledged the critical need for an education program, which they will now launch for clinicians, payers, and patients to get across the message of the potential benefit and safety associated with using the CBT app. Their initial marketing will target patients with type 2 diabetes and poorly controlled hemoglobin A1c levels in five to six U.S. regions with high numbers of these patients. The company will also attempt to make the app available through the Department of Veterans Affairs health system and try to secure coverage by Medicare and commercial health-insurance providers.
 

Approval based on pivotal trial results

The FDA approval focused on data collected in the BT-001 randomized, controlled trial, which included 669 U.S. adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. Results, published in 2022 in Diabetes Care, showed that after 90 days, people using the app had an average incremental reduction in A1c of 0.39 percentage points, compared with control patients who didn’t use the app, the primary endpoint. Use of the app also appeared safe.

Subsequent meeting presentations of study findings showed that A1c-lowering linked with app use was durable during continued use for a total of 180 days, that the effectiveness of the app in helping to lower A1c levels was “dose dependent” relative to the number of lessons a person completed, and that using the app significantly linked with a reduced need for intensified glycemic control through added medications.

Another finding of the extended-use phase of the study was that 81% of patients assigned to the app-using group continued to regularly use the app after 180 days, a level of durable engagement by patients that “exceeded our expectations,” said Diane Gomez-Thinnes, chief commercial officer of Better Therapeutics, during a press conference.

The company plans to tweak the app prior to its launch based on additional analyses of results from the pivotal study to further improve patient engagement and app ease of use. The company is also planning to expand the range of smartphones that can support the app, although about 90%-95% of U.S. smartphones have this capability.

Better Therapeutics is also actively developing and testing other modifications to the basic CBT app to make it usable by people with other cardiometabolic disorders such as hypertension, obesity, and fatty liver disease.

The BT-001 study was funded by Better Therapeutics.

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

A smartphone-based app designed to deliver cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) to adults with type 2 diabetes received marketing approval as a class II medical device from the Food and Drug Administration on July 10, becoming the first digital behavioral therapeutic device for people with diabetes to receive this designation for U.S. patients.
 

Better Therapeutics representatives said that the app, formerly known as BT-001, will be called AspyreRX, with U.S. sales planned to launch in October-December 2023.

The app will be available to patients exclusively by prescription, with a planned 90-day use duration and an option for a second 90-day prescription. A company official said the price per prescription will be about $500-800, although this is not yet finalized. The app is intended for use in concert with the conventional pillars of glycemic control in people with type 2 diabetes: lifestyle modification and treatment with antidiabetes medications.

Senior staff members of Better Therapeutics acknowledged the critical need for an education program, which they will now launch for clinicians, payers, and patients to get across the message of the potential benefit and safety associated with using the CBT app. Their initial marketing will target patients with type 2 diabetes and poorly controlled hemoglobin A1c levels in five to six U.S. regions with high numbers of these patients. The company will also attempt to make the app available through the Department of Veterans Affairs health system and try to secure coverage by Medicare and commercial health-insurance providers.
 

Approval based on pivotal trial results

The FDA approval focused on data collected in the BT-001 randomized, controlled trial, which included 669 U.S. adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. Results, published in 2022 in Diabetes Care, showed that after 90 days, people using the app had an average incremental reduction in A1c of 0.39 percentage points, compared with control patients who didn’t use the app, the primary endpoint. Use of the app also appeared safe.

Subsequent meeting presentations of study findings showed that A1c-lowering linked with app use was durable during continued use for a total of 180 days, that the effectiveness of the app in helping to lower A1c levels was “dose dependent” relative to the number of lessons a person completed, and that using the app significantly linked with a reduced need for intensified glycemic control through added medications.

Another finding of the extended-use phase of the study was that 81% of patients assigned to the app-using group continued to regularly use the app after 180 days, a level of durable engagement by patients that “exceeded our expectations,” said Diane Gomez-Thinnes, chief commercial officer of Better Therapeutics, during a press conference.

The company plans to tweak the app prior to its launch based on additional analyses of results from the pivotal study to further improve patient engagement and app ease of use. The company is also planning to expand the range of smartphones that can support the app, although about 90%-95% of U.S. smartphones have this capability.

Better Therapeutics is also actively developing and testing other modifications to the basic CBT app to make it usable by people with other cardiometabolic disorders such as hypertension, obesity, and fatty liver disease.

The BT-001 study was funded by Better Therapeutics.

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

A smartphone-based app designed to deliver cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) to adults with type 2 diabetes received marketing approval as a class II medical device from the Food and Drug Administration on July 10, becoming the first digital behavioral therapeutic device for people with diabetes to receive this designation for U.S. patients.
 

Better Therapeutics representatives said that the app, formerly known as BT-001, will be called AspyreRX, with U.S. sales planned to launch in October-December 2023.

The app will be available to patients exclusively by prescription, with a planned 90-day use duration and an option for a second 90-day prescription. A company official said the price per prescription will be about $500-800, although this is not yet finalized. The app is intended for use in concert with the conventional pillars of glycemic control in people with type 2 diabetes: lifestyle modification and treatment with antidiabetes medications.

Senior staff members of Better Therapeutics acknowledged the critical need for an education program, which they will now launch for clinicians, payers, and patients to get across the message of the potential benefit and safety associated with using the CBT app. Their initial marketing will target patients with type 2 diabetes and poorly controlled hemoglobin A1c levels in five to six U.S. regions with high numbers of these patients. The company will also attempt to make the app available through the Department of Veterans Affairs health system and try to secure coverage by Medicare and commercial health-insurance providers.
 

Approval based on pivotal trial results

The FDA approval focused on data collected in the BT-001 randomized, controlled trial, which included 669 U.S. adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. Results, published in 2022 in Diabetes Care, showed that after 90 days, people using the app had an average incremental reduction in A1c of 0.39 percentage points, compared with control patients who didn’t use the app, the primary endpoint. Use of the app also appeared safe.

Subsequent meeting presentations of study findings showed that A1c-lowering linked with app use was durable during continued use for a total of 180 days, that the effectiveness of the app in helping to lower A1c levels was “dose dependent” relative to the number of lessons a person completed, and that using the app significantly linked with a reduced need for intensified glycemic control through added medications.

Another finding of the extended-use phase of the study was that 81% of patients assigned to the app-using group continued to regularly use the app after 180 days, a level of durable engagement by patients that “exceeded our expectations,” said Diane Gomez-Thinnes, chief commercial officer of Better Therapeutics, during a press conference.

The company plans to tweak the app prior to its launch based on additional analyses of results from the pivotal study to further improve patient engagement and app ease of use. The company is also planning to expand the range of smartphones that can support the app, although about 90%-95% of U.S. smartphones have this capability.

Better Therapeutics is also actively developing and testing other modifications to the basic CBT app to make it usable by people with other cardiometabolic disorders such as hypertension, obesity, and fatty liver disease.

The BT-001 study was funded by Better Therapeutics.

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

SAN DIEGO – The landmark Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) follow-up study has entered a new phase, focusing on a relatively recent phenomenon: aging in type 1 diabetes.

New funding for 2022-2027 for the DCCT long-term observational follow-up study, the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) will go toward investigating aspects of type 1 diabetes that are associated with aging and are also common in type 2 diabetes, including cardiovascular disease, fatty liver disease, and sleep apnea.

The original randomized DCCT clinical trial results, published in 1993 in the New England Journal of Medicine, proved that early intensive glycemic control was the key to preventing or slowing the progression of long-term eye, kidney, and nerve complications of type 1 diabetes. Subsequently, EDIC has yielded many more major findings including that early tight glycemic control also reduces cardiovascular risk and prolongs survival in type 1 diabetes.

And although the phenomenon of metabolic memory initially seen in EDIC means that early glycemic control is important, subsequent EDIC data also have suggested that it is never too late to initiate intensive glycemic control, speakers emphasized during a special symposium commemorating 40 years since the start of DCCT, held during the annual scientific sessions of the American Diabetes Association. As with the 30-year DCCT/EDIC commemorative symposium held in 2013, local study participants were in the audience and were acknowledged with long applause.

Together, DCCT and EDIC – both funded by the National Institutes of Health at 27 sites in the United States and Canada – have changed the standard of care for people with type 1 diabetes and continue to inform clinical practice. Prior to the DCCT, between 1930 and 1970, about a third of people with type 1 diabetes developed vision loss and one in five experienced kidney failure and/or myocardial infarction. Stroke and amputation were also common, DCCT/EDIC chair David M. Nathan, MD, said while introducing the symposium.

“All of the advances in care of type 1 diabetes have developed because this study demonstrated that it was important – continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), new insulins, better [insulin] pumps. ... I think the most profound finding is that mortality in our intensively treated cohort is the same as in the general population. That says it all,” Dr. Nathan said in an interview.

And now, “what we still have yet to contribute is what happens to type 1 diabetes as people get older,” added Dr. Nathan, a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and director of the Diabetes Center at Massachusetts General Hospital, both in Boston.
 

‘Something that heretofore none of us could have imagined’

The 1,441 DCCT participants had a mean age of 27 years at baseline in 1983, when they were randomized to intensive insulin therapy or usual care. The 1,375 participants (96%) who continued into EDIC in 1994 were an average of 35 years old at that point, when the usual care group was taught intensive glycemic management and all participants returned to their personal health care teams. The 1,075 participants in EDIC today are an average age of 63 years.

Only 11 participants had died at the start of EDIC, and just 250 (17%) have died as of 2023, said study coordinator cochair Gayle Lorenzi, RN, who is a certified diabetes care and education specialist at the University of California, San Diego.

“DCCT/EDIC because of its longevity represents a unique opportunity to explore aging in long duration of type 1 diabetes, something that heretofore none of us could have imagined, especially for those of you in the audience who started your careers in the 70s and 80s,” Ms. Lorenzi commented.

About 36% of the cohort now has overweight and 40% have obesity, mirroring the general population. And they now have a mean hemoglobin A1c of 7.3%.

According to Barbara H. Braffett, PhD, co–principal investigator at the DCCT/EDIC data coordinating center: “The EDIC study is now shifting its focus during the next 5 years to understand the clinical course of type 1 diabetes in the setting of advancing duration and age, as well as increasing adiposity, which has progressively affected individuals with type 1 diabetes and has potential long-term adverse consequences.”

Dr. Braffett outlined the new study approaches added in 2022-2027. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing, two-dimensional Doppler echocardiography, and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity will be used to quantify functional and structural changes central to heart failure.

Dr. Nathan commented that, although enough cardiovascular events were available in EDIC by 2006 to demonstrate a significant 58% reduction in the intensive therapy group, “now we can start looking at the aging heart. We have a bunch of great cardiologists working with us who will be guiding us on measuring everything.”

Fatty liver disease in the setting of increasing adiposity will also be investigated using transient elastography (FibroScan) and the Fibrosis-4 index, a quantification of liver enzymes and platelet count.

Dr. Nathan noted that the study participants have had “this kind of funny metabolic milieu in their liver for decades. They don’t make insulin in their pancreas, and therefore, the insulin they get is peripheral and then it goes to their liver. Well, what does that do to them?”

Participants will also complete three symptom questionnaires assessing obstructive sleep apnea, aimed at guiding future sleep studies in those found to be at high risk, Dr. Braffett said.
 

DCCT/EDIC over 40 years: ‘Incredibly complete picture’

As of 2023, the DCCT/EDIC participants have been studied for longer than 60% of their lifespans and for over 80% of their diabetes duration, Dr. Braffett noted.

During the EDIC 2017-2022 cycle, Dr. Braffett and other speakers summarized, prior EDIC efforts had focused on aspects of cognitive function, physical function, and cheiroarthropathy.

Other DCCT/EDIC studies examined the relationship of A1c and diabetes duration in cardiovascular disease risk, the association of microvascular complications with the risk of cardiovascular disease beyond traditional risk factors, and the risk of severe hypoglycemia over the first 30 years of DCCT/EDIC follow-up.

Moreover, the longitudinal eye and kidney assessments over the 40 years have informed screening guidelines for retinopathy and urinary albumin.

Dr. Nathan said: “Today, the number with horrible complications is very few, but we haven’t erased complications entirely. ... We have this incredibly complete picture of type 1 diabetes that allows us to explore everything. We welcome people to come to us with ideas. That’s the value of this research.”

Dr. Nathan, Ms. Lorenzi, and Dr. Braffett reported no relevant financial relationships.

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

SAN DIEGO – The landmark Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) follow-up study has entered a new phase, focusing on a relatively recent phenomenon: aging in type 1 diabetes.

New funding for 2022-2027 for the DCCT long-term observational follow-up study, the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) will go toward investigating aspects of type 1 diabetes that are associated with aging and are also common in type 2 diabetes, including cardiovascular disease, fatty liver disease, and sleep apnea.

The original randomized DCCT clinical trial results, published in 1993 in the New England Journal of Medicine, proved that early intensive glycemic control was the key to preventing or slowing the progression of long-term eye, kidney, and nerve complications of type 1 diabetes. Subsequently, EDIC has yielded many more major findings including that early tight glycemic control also reduces cardiovascular risk and prolongs survival in type 1 diabetes.

And although the phenomenon of metabolic memory initially seen in EDIC means that early glycemic control is important, subsequent EDIC data also have suggested that it is never too late to initiate intensive glycemic control, speakers emphasized during a special symposium commemorating 40 years since the start of DCCT, held during the annual scientific sessions of the American Diabetes Association. As with the 30-year DCCT/EDIC commemorative symposium held in 2013, local study participants were in the audience and were acknowledged with long applause.

Together, DCCT and EDIC – both funded by the National Institutes of Health at 27 sites in the United States and Canada – have changed the standard of care for people with type 1 diabetes and continue to inform clinical practice. Prior to the DCCT, between 1930 and 1970, about a third of people with type 1 diabetes developed vision loss and one in five experienced kidney failure and/or myocardial infarction. Stroke and amputation were also common, DCCT/EDIC chair David M. Nathan, MD, said while introducing the symposium.

“All of the advances in care of type 1 diabetes have developed because this study demonstrated that it was important – continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), new insulins, better [insulin] pumps. ... I think the most profound finding is that mortality in our intensively treated cohort is the same as in the general population. That says it all,” Dr. Nathan said in an interview.

And now, “what we still have yet to contribute is what happens to type 1 diabetes as people get older,” added Dr. Nathan, a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and director of the Diabetes Center at Massachusetts General Hospital, both in Boston.
 

‘Something that heretofore none of us could have imagined’

The 1,441 DCCT participants had a mean age of 27 years at baseline in 1983, when they were randomized to intensive insulin therapy or usual care. The 1,375 participants (96%) who continued into EDIC in 1994 were an average of 35 years old at that point, when the usual care group was taught intensive glycemic management and all participants returned to their personal health care teams. The 1,075 participants in EDIC today are an average age of 63 years.

Only 11 participants had died at the start of EDIC, and just 250 (17%) have died as of 2023, said study coordinator cochair Gayle Lorenzi, RN, who is a certified diabetes care and education specialist at the University of California, San Diego.

“DCCT/EDIC because of its longevity represents a unique opportunity to explore aging in long duration of type 1 diabetes, something that heretofore none of us could have imagined, especially for those of you in the audience who started your careers in the 70s and 80s,” Ms. Lorenzi commented.

About 36% of the cohort now has overweight and 40% have obesity, mirroring the general population. And they now have a mean hemoglobin A1c of 7.3%.

According to Barbara H. Braffett, PhD, co–principal investigator at the DCCT/EDIC data coordinating center: “The EDIC study is now shifting its focus during the next 5 years to understand the clinical course of type 1 diabetes in the setting of advancing duration and age, as well as increasing adiposity, which has progressively affected individuals with type 1 diabetes and has potential long-term adverse consequences.”

Dr. Braffett outlined the new study approaches added in 2022-2027. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing, two-dimensional Doppler echocardiography, and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity will be used to quantify functional and structural changes central to heart failure.

Dr. Nathan commented that, although enough cardiovascular events were available in EDIC by 2006 to demonstrate a significant 58% reduction in the intensive therapy group, “now we can start looking at the aging heart. We have a bunch of great cardiologists working with us who will be guiding us on measuring everything.”

Fatty liver disease in the setting of increasing adiposity will also be investigated using transient elastography (FibroScan) and the Fibrosis-4 index, a quantification of liver enzymes and platelet count.

Dr. Nathan noted that the study participants have had “this kind of funny metabolic milieu in their liver for decades. They don’t make insulin in their pancreas, and therefore, the insulin they get is peripheral and then it goes to their liver. Well, what does that do to them?”

Participants will also complete three symptom questionnaires assessing obstructive sleep apnea, aimed at guiding future sleep studies in those found to be at high risk, Dr. Braffett said.
 

DCCT/EDIC over 40 years: ‘Incredibly complete picture’

As of 2023, the DCCT/EDIC participants have been studied for longer than 60% of their lifespans and for over 80% of their diabetes duration, Dr. Braffett noted.

During the EDIC 2017-2022 cycle, Dr. Braffett and other speakers summarized, prior EDIC efforts had focused on aspects of cognitive function, physical function, and cheiroarthropathy.

Other DCCT/EDIC studies examined the relationship of A1c and diabetes duration in cardiovascular disease risk, the association of microvascular complications with the risk of cardiovascular disease beyond traditional risk factors, and the risk of severe hypoglycemia over the first 30 years of DCCT/EDIC follow-up.

Moreover, the longitudinal eye and kidney assessments over the 40 years have informed screening guidelines for retinopathy and urinary albumin.

Dr. Nathan said: “Today, the number with horrible complications is very few, but we haven’t erased complications entirely. ... We have this incredibly complete picture of type 1 diabetes that allows us to explore everything. We welcome people to come to us with ideas. That’s the value of this research.”

Dr. Nathan, Ms. Lorenzi, and Dr. Braffett reported no relevant financial relationships.

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

SAN DIEGO – The landmark Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) follow-up study has entered a new phase, focusing on a relatively recent phenomenon: aging in type 1 diabetes.

New funding for 2022-2027 for the DCCT long-term observational follow-up study, the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) will go toward investigating aspects of type 1 diabetes that are associated with aging and are also common in type 2 diabetes, including cardiovascular disease, fatty liver disease, and sleep apnea.

The original randomized DCCT clinical trial results, published in 1993 in the New England Journal of Medicine, proved that early intensive glycemic control was the key to preventing or slowing the progression of long-term eye, kidney, and nerve complications of type 1 diabetes. Subsequently, EDIC has yielded many more major findings including that early tight glycemic control also reduces cardiovascular risk and prolongs survival in type 1 diabetes.

And although the phenomenon of metabolic memory initially seen in EDIC means that early glycemic control is important, subsequent EDIC data also have suggested that it is never too late to initiate intensive glycemic control, speakers emphasized during a special symposium commemorating 40 years since the start of DCCT, held during the annual scientific sessions of the American Diabetes Association. As with the 30-year DCCT/EDIC commemorative symposium held in 2013, local study participants were in the audience and were acknowledged with long applause.

Together, DCCT and EDIC – both funded by the National Institutes of Health at 27 sites in the United States and Canada – have changed the standard of care for people with type 1 diabetes and continue to inform clinical practice. Prior to the DCCT, between 1930 and 1970, about a third of people with type 1 diabetes developed vision loss and one in five experienced kidney failure and/or myocardial infarction. Stroke and amputation were also common, DCCT/EDIC chair David M. Nathan, MD, said while introducing the symposium.

“All of the advances in care of type 1 diabetes have developed because this study demonstrated that it was important – continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), new insulins, better [insulin] pumps. ... I think the most profound finding is that mortality in our intensively treated cohort is the same as in the general population. That says it all,” Dr. Nathan said in an interview.

And now, “what we still have yet to contribute is what happens to type 1 diabetes as people get older,” added Dr. Nathan, a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and director of the Diabetes Center at Massachusetts General Hospital, both in Boston.
 

‘Something that heretofore none of us could have imagined’

The 1,441 DCCT participants had a mean age of 27 years at baseline in 1983, when they were randomized to intensive insulin therapy or usual care. The 1,375 participants (96%) who continued into EDIC in 1994 were an average of 35 years old at that point, when the usual care group was taught intensive glycemic management and all participants returned to their personal health care teams. The 1,075 participants in EDIC today are an average age of 63 years.

Only 11 participants had died at the start of EDIC, and just 250 (17%) have died as of 2023, said study coordinator cochair Gayle Lorenzi, RN, who is a certified diabetes care and education specialist at the University of California, San Diego.

“DCCT/EDIC because of its longevity represents a unique opportunity to explore aging in long duration of type 1 diabetes, something that heretofore none of us could have imagined, especially for those of you in the audience who started your careers in the 70s and 80s,” Ms. Lorenzi commented.

About 36% of the cohort now has overweight and 40% have obesity, mirroring the general population. And they now have a mean hemoglobin A1c of 7.3%.

According to Barbara H. Braffett, PhD, co–principal investigator at the DCCT/EDIC data coordinating center: “The EDIC study is now shifting its focus during the next 5 years to understand the clinical course of type 1 diabetes in the setting of advancing duration and age, as well as increasing adiposity, which has progressively affected individuals with type 1 diabetes and has potential long-term adverse consequences.”

Dr. Braffett outlined the new study approaches added in 2022-2027. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing, two-dimensional Doppler echocardiography, and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity will be used to quantify functional and structural changes central to heart failure.

Dr. Nathan commented that, although enough cardiovascular events were available in EDIC by 2006 to demonstrate a significant 58% reduction in the intensive therapy group, “now we can start looking at the aging heart. We have a bunch of great cardiologists working with us who will be guiding us on measuring everything.”

Fatty liver disease in the setting of increasing adiposity will also be investigated using transient elastography (FibroScan) and the Fibrosis-4 index, a quantification of liver enzymes and platelet count.

Dr. Nathan noted that the study participants have had “this kind of funny metabolic milieu in their liver for decades. They don’t make insulin in their pancreas, and therefore, the insulin they get is peripheral and then it goes to their liver. Well, what does that do to them?”

Participants will also complete three symptom questionnaires assessing obstructive sleep apnea, aimed at guiding future sleep studies in those found to be at high risk, Dr. Braffett said.
 

DCCT/EDIC over 40 years: ‘Incredibly complete picture’

As of 2023, the DCCT/EDIC participants have been studied for longer than 60% of their lifespans and for over 80% of their diabetes duration, Dr. Braffett noted.

During the EDIC 2017-2022 cycle, Dr. Braffett and other speakers summarized, prior EDIC efforts had focused on aspects of cognitive function, physical function, and cheiroarthropathy.

Other DCCT/EDIC studies examined the relationship of A1c and diabetes duration in cardiovascular disease risk, the association of microvascular complications with the risk of cardiovascular disease beyond traditional risk factors, and the risk of severe hypoglycemia over the first 30 years of DCCT/EDIC follow-up.

Moreover, the longitudinal eye and kidney assessments over the 40 years have informed screening guidelines for retinopathy and urinary albumin.

Dr. Nathan said: “Today, the number with horrible complications is very few, but we haven’t erased complications entirely. ... We have this incredibly complete picture of type 1 diabetes that allows us to explore everything. We welcome people to come to us with ideas. That’s the value of this research.”

Dr. Nathan, Ms. Lorenzi, and Dr. Braffett reported no relevant financial relationships.

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

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

At ENDO 2023, I presented our systematic review and meta-analysis related to body image concerns in women and individuals with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). PCOS is the most common endocrine condition affecting women worldwide. It’s as common as 10%-15%.

Previously thought to be a benign condition affecting a small proportion of women of reproductive age, it’s changed now. It affects women of all ages, all ethnicities, and throughout the world. Body image concern is an area where one feels uncomfortable with how they look and how they feel. Someone might wonder, why worry about body image concerns? When people have body image concerns, it leads to low self-esteem.

Low self-esteem can lead to depression and anxiety, eventually making you a not-so-productive member of society. Several studies have also shown that body image concerns can lead to eating disorders such as anorexia and bulimia, which can be life threatening. Several studies in the past have shown there is a link between PCOS and body image concerns, but what exactly is the link? We don’t know. How big is the problem? We didn’t know until now.

To answer this, we looked at everything published about PCOS and body image concerns together, be it a randomized study, a cluster study, or any kind of study. We put them all into one place and studied them for evidence. The second objective of our work was that we wanted to share any evidence with the international PCOS guidelines group, who are currently reviewing and revising the guidelines for 2023.

We looked at all the major scientific databases, such as PubMed, PubMed Central, and Medline, for any study that’s been published for polycystic ovary syndrome and body image concerns where they specifically used a validated questionnaire – that’s important, and I’ll come back to that later.

We found 6,221 articles on an initial search. After meticulously looking through all of them, we narrowed it down to 9 articles that were relevant to our work. That’s going from 6,221 articles to 9, which were reviewed by 2 independent researchers. If there was any conflict between them, a third independent researcher resolved the conflict.

We found some studies had used the same questionnaires and some had their own questionnaire. We combined the studies where they used the same questionnaire and we did what we call a meta-analysis. We used their data and combined them to find an additional analysis, which is a combination of the two.

The two most commonly used questionnaires were the Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire (MBSRQ) survey and the Body-Esteem Scale for Adolescents and Adults (BESAA). I’m not going into detail, but in simplest terms, the MBSRQ has 69 questions, which breaks down into 5 subscales, and BESAA has 3 subscales, which has 23 questions.

When we combined the results in the MBSRQ questionnaire, women with PCOS fared worse in all the subscales, showing there is a concern about body image in women with PCOS when compared with their colleagues who are healthy and do not have PCOS.

With BESAA, we found a little bit of a mixed picture. There was still a significant difference about weight perception, but how they felt and how they attributed, there was no significant difference. Probably the main reason was that only two studies used it and there was a smaller number of people involved in the study.

Why is this important? This is the first systematic search on body image concerns in PCOS. We feel that by identifying or diagnosing body image concerns, we will be addressing patient concerns. That is important because we clinicians have our own thoughts of what we need to do to help women with PCOS to prevent long-term risk, but it’s also important to talk to the person sitting in front of you right now. What is their concern?

There’s also been a generational shift where women with PCOS used say, “Oh, I’m worried that I can’t have a kid,” to now say, “I’m worried that I don’t feel well about myself.” We need to address that.

When we shared these findings with the international PCOS guidelines, they said we should probably approach this on an individual case-by-case basis because it will mean that the length of consultation might increase if we spend time with body image concerns.

This is where questionnaires come into play. With a validated questionnaire, a person can complete that before they come into the consultation, thereby minimizing the amount of time spent. If they’re not scoring high on the questionnaire, we don’t need to address that. If they are scoring high, then it can be picked up as a topic to discuss.

As I mentioned, there are a couple of limitations, one being the fewer studies and lower numbers of people in the studies. We need to address this in the future.

Long story short, at the moment, there is evidence to say that body image concerns are quite significantly high in women and individuals with PCOS. This is something we need to address as soon as possible.

We are planning future work to understand how social media comes into play, how society influences body image, and how health care professionals across the world are addressing PCOS and body image concerns. Hopefully, we will be able to share these findings in the near future. Thank you.

Dr. Kempegowda is assistant professor in endocrinology, diabetes, and general medicine at the Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, and a consultant in endocrinology, diabetes and acute medicine, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, England, and disclosed no relevant conflicts of interest.

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

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

At ENDO 2023, I presented our systematic review and meta-analysis related to body image concerns in women and individuals with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). PCOS is the most common endocrine condition affecting women worldwide. It’s as common as 10%-15%.

Previously thought to be a benign condition affecting a small proportion of women of reproductive age, it’s changed now. It affects women of all ages, all ethnicities, and throughout the world. Body image concern is an area where one feels uncomfortable with how they look and how they feel. Someone might wonder, why worry about body image concerns? When people have body image concerns, it leads to low self-esteem.

Low self-esteem can lead to depression and anxiety, eventually making you a not-so-productive member of society. Several studies have also shown that body image concerns can lead to eating disorders such as anorexia and bulimia, which can be life threatening. Several studies in the past have shown there is a link between PCOS and body image concerns, but what exactly is the link? We don’t know. How big is the problem? We didn’t know until now.

To answer this, we looked at everything published about PCOS and body image concerns together, be it a randomized study, a cluster study, or any kind of study. We put them all into one place and studied them for evidence. The second objective of our work was that we wanted to share any evidence with the international PCOS guidelines group, who are currently reviewing and revising the guidelines for 2023.

We looked at all the major scientific databases, such as PubMed, PubMed Central, and Medline, for any study that’s been published for polycystic ovary syndrome and body image concerns where they specifically used a validated questionnaire – that’s important, and I’ll come back to that later.

We found 6,221 articles on an initial search. After meticulously looking through all of them, we narrowed it down to 9 articles that were relevant to our work. That’s going from 6,221 articles to 9, which were reviewed by 2 independent researchers. If there was any conflict between them, a third independent researcher resolved the conflict.

We found some studies had used the same questionnaires and some had their own questionnaire. We combined the studies where they used the same questionnaire and we did what we call a meta-analysis. We used their data and combined them to find an additional analysis, which is a combination of the two.

The two most commonly used questionnaires were the Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire (MBSRQ) survey and the Body-Esteem Scale for Adolescents and Adults (BESAA). I’m not going into detail, but in simplest terms, the MBSRQ has 69 questions, which breaks down into 5 subscales, and BESAA has 3 subscales, which has 23 questions.

When we combined the results in the MBSRQ questionnaire, women with PCOS fared worse in all the subscales, showing there is a concern about body image in women with PCOS when compared with their colleagues who are healthy and do not have PCOS.

With BESAA, we found a little bit of a mixed picture. There was still a significant difference about weight perception, but how they felt and how they attributed, there was no significant difference. Probably the main reason was that only two studies used it and there was a smaller number of people involved in the study.

Why is this important? This is the first systematic search on body image concerns in PCOS. We feel that by identifying or diagnosing body image concerns, we will be addressing patient concerns. That is important because we clinicians have our own thoughts of what we need to do to help women with PCOS to prevent long-term risk, but it’s also important to talk to the person sitting in front of you right now. What is their concern?

There’s also been a generational shift where women with PCOS used say, “Oh, I’m worried that I can’t have a kid,” to now say, “I’m worried that I don’t feel well about myself.” We need to address that.

When we shared these findings with the international PCOS guidelines, they said we should probably approach this on an individual case-by-case basis because it will mean that the length of consultation might increase if we spend time with body image concerns.

This is where questionnaires come into play. With a validated questionnaire, a person can complete that before they come into the consultation, thereby minimizing the amount of time spent. If they’re not scoring high on the questionnaire, we don’t need to address that. If they are scoring high, then it can be picked up as a topic to discuss.

As I mentioned, there are a couple of limitations, one being the fewer studies and lower numbers of people in the studies. We need to address this in the future.

Long story short, at the moment, there is evidence to say that body image concerns are quite significantly high in women and individuals with PCOS. This is something we need to address as soon as possible.

We are planning future work to understand how social media comes into play, how society influences body image, and how health care professionals across the world are addressing PCOS and body image concerns. Hopefully, we will be able to share these findings in the near future. Thank you.

Dr. Kempegowda is assistant professor in endocrinology, diabetes, and general medicine at the Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, and a consultant in endocrinology, diabetes and acute medicine, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, England, and disclosed no relevant conflicts of interest.

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

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

At ENDO 2023, I presented our systematic review and meta-analysis related to body image concerns in women and individuals with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). PCOS is the most common endocrine condition affecting women worldwide. It’s as common as 10%-15%.

Previously thought to be a benign condition affecting a small proportion of women of reproductive age, it’s changed now. It affects women of all ages, all ethnicities, and throughout the world. Body image concern is an area where one feels uncomfortable with how they look and how they feel. Someone might wonder, why worry about body image concerns? When people have body image concerns, it leads to low self-esteem.

Low self-esteem can lead to depression and anxiety, eventually making you a not-so-productive member of society. Several studies have also shown that body image concerns can lead to eating disorders such as anorexia and bulimia, which can be life threatening. Several studies in the past have shown there is a link between PCOS and body image concerns, but what exactly is the link? We don’t know. How big is the problem? We didn’t know until now.

To answer this, we looked at everything published about PCOS and body image concerns together, be it a randomized study, a cluster study, or any kind of study. We put them all into one place and studied them for evidence. The second objective of our work was that we wanted to share any evidence with the international PCOS guidelines group, who are currently reviewing and revising the guidelines for 2023.

We looked at all the major scientific databases, such as PubMed, PubMed Central, and Medline, for any study that’s been published for polycystic ovary syndrome and body image concerns where they specifically used a validated questionnaire – that’s important, and I’ll come back to that later.

We found 6,221 articles on an initial search. After meticulously looking through all of them, we narrowed it down to 9 articles that were relevant to our work. That’s going from 6,221 articles to 9, which were reviewed by 2 independent researchers. If there was any conflict between them, a third independent researcher resolved the conflict.

We found some studies had used the same questionnaires and some had their own questionnaire. We combined the studies where they used the same questionnaire and we did what we call a meta-analysis. We used their data and combined them to find an additional analysis, which is a combination of the two.

The two most commonly used questionnaires were the Multidimensional Body-Self Relations Questionnaire (MBSRQ) survey and the Body-Esteem Scale for Adolescents and Adults (BESAA). I’m not going into detail, but in simplest terms, the MBSRQ has 69 questions, which breaks down into 5 subscales, and BESAA has 3 subscales, which has 23 questions.

When we combined the results in the MBSRQ questionnaire, women with PCOS fared worse in all the subscales, showing there is a concern about body image in women with PCOS when compared with their colleagues who are healthy and do not have PCOS.

With BESAA, we found a little bit of a mixed picture. There was still a significant difference about weight perception, but how they felt and how they attributed, there was no significant difference. Probably the main reason was that only two studies used it and there was a smaller number of people involved in the study.

Why is this important? This is the first systematic search on body image concerns in PCOS. We feel that by identifying or diagnosing body image concerns, we will be addressing patient concerns. That is important because we clinicians have our own thoughts of what we need to do to help women with PCOS to prevent long-term risk, but it’s also important to talk to the person sitting in front of you right now. What is their concern?

There’s also been a generational shift where women with PCOS used say, “Oh, I’m worried that I can’t have a kid,” to now say, “I’m worried that I don’t feel well about myself.” We need to address that.

When we shared these findings with the international PCOS guidelines, they said we should probably approach this on an individual case-by-case basis because it will mean that the length of consultation might increase if we spend time with body image concerns.

This is where questionnaires come into play. With a validated questionnaire, a person can complete that before they come into the consultation, thereby minimizing the amount of time spent. If they’re not scoring high on the questionnaire, we don’t need to address that. If they are scoring high, then it can be picked up as a topic to discuss.

As I mentioned, there are a couple of limitations, one being the fewer studies and lower numbers of people in the studies. We need to address this in the future.

Long story short, at the moment, there is evidence to say that body image concerns are quite significantly high in women and individuals with PCOS. This is something we need to address as soon as possible.

We are planning future work to understand how social media comes into play, how society influences body image, and how health care professionals across the world are addressing PCOS and body image concerns. Hopefully, we will be able to share these findings in the near future. Thank you.

Dr. Kempegowda is assistant professor in endocrinology, diabetes, and general medicine at the Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, and a consultant in endocrinology, diabetes and acute medicine, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, England, and disclosed no relevant conflicts of interest.

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

The results of a phase 3 trial that assessed the use of a highly selective, potent oral vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) inhibitor for patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) were recently published.

The trial, dubbed FRESCO-2, found that use of fruquintinib “resulted in a significant and clinically meaningful benefit in overall survival, compared with placebo in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.”

More specifically, the median overall survival benefit was 2.6 months – 7.4 months with fruquintinib versus 4.8 months with placebo – among 691 heavily pretreated adults with metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma. The difference translated to a 34% reduction in the risk of death with fruquintinib at a median follow-up of about 11 months.

These patients had received “all current standard approved cytotoxic and targeted therapies and progressed on or were intolerant to trifluridine-tipiracil or regorafenib,” a less-selective VEGF inhibitor, according to investigators led by Arvind Dasari, MD, from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.

Dr. Dasari and colleagues celebrated the results, stressing that “these data support the use of fruquintinib as a global treatment option for patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.”

The VEGF inhibitor has been approved in China for refractory metastatic CRC since 2018, and the recent phase 3 findings support the bid for Food and Drug Administration approval for this indication. The FDA granted fruquintinib priority review in May 2023.

However, in a tweet, Vinay Prasad, MD, an oncologist/epidemiologist at the University of California, San Francisco, who is an outspoken critic of the pharmaceutical industry, called the trial design “unethical.”

Fruquintinib, he explained, was compared with placebo, not investigators’ choice of treatment for patients dying of CRC.

Trial participants were considered to have refractory cases of CRC after previous lines of systemic treatment had failed. For almost three quarters of patients, more than three lines of therapy had failed, and patients still had options, including fluorouracil (5FU), oxaliplatin, or irinotecan, Dr. Prasad argued.

“Everyone who treats CRC would pull [their] mom off the trial and give 5FU and [bevacizumab] or IrOx [irinotecan plus oxaliplatin] or FOLFOX again, perhaps slightly differently,” Dr. Prasad said.

The “proof is they give [these drugs] post progression,” he continued. “After the control arm patients progressed, many doctors did try” these other options.

Hutchmed, the Hong Kong maker of fruquintinib, which sponsored the trial, did not respond to questions from this news organization about why the trial was designed with a placebo arm instead of investigators’ choice of treatment.

However, CRC specialist Alan Venook, MD, who was not involved in the trial, weighed in. He explained that he understands Dr. Prasad’s concerns but doesn’t necessarily think the trial was unethical.

For patients such as those in FRESCO-2, the impact of current treatment options is “so minimal” that forgoing active drug treatment is “not crazy,” said Dr. Venook, a medical oncologist at UCSF.

“If your chances of getting benefit are 1 in 20 and you are much more likely to get toxicity than benefit, you could argue” that having a placebo control arm in the trial is ethical, provided people understand what they are getting into, Dr. Venook said.

In the trial, almost two thirds of patients who received fruquintinib had grade 3 or worse toxicities, compared with half of placebo patients. The most common were hypertension (14% with fruquintinib vs. 1% with placebo), asthenia (8% vs. 4%), and hand-foot syndrome (6% vs. 0%).

Part of the risk-benefit assessment may also include weighing the estimated costs of fruquintinib against the 2.6-month median overall survival benefit.

“One could debate if 2.6 months of more time is worth the medication getting regulatory approval, or debate pricing when it’s approved, or delve closely into toxicity and quality of life data,” tweeted medical oncologist Temidayo Fadelu, MD, MPH, of Dana-Farber Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, in response to Dr. Prasad’s thread. However, like Dr. Venook, Dr. Fadelu did not consider the trial design or the way the trial was conducted to be unethical.

Dr. Venook added that a treatment break is also not out of the question in this context. Some might even say that, given the risk-benefit ratio of current options, a temporary break from treatment “is the right thing to do.”

The study was funded by Hutchmed. The investigators reported ties to Hutchmed and other pharmaceutical companies. Dr. Dasari reported grants, contracts, speaker’s fees, and other payments from Hutchmed and other companies. Dr. Venook disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

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

The results of a phase 3 trial that assessed the use of a highly selective, potent oral vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) inhibitor for patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) were recently published.

The trial, dubbed FRESCO-2, found that use of fruquintinib “resulted in a significant and clinically meaningful benefit in overall survival, compared with placebo in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.”

More specifically, the median overall survival benefit was 2.6 months – 7.4 months with fruquintinib versus 4.8 months with placebo – among 691 heavily pretreated adults with metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma. The difference translated to a 34% reduction in the risk of death with fruquintinib at a median follow-up of about 11 months.

These patients had received “all current standard approved cytotoxic and targeted therapies and progressed on or were intolerant to trifluridine-tipiracil or regorafenib,” a less-selective VEGF inhibitor, according to investigators led by Arvind Dasari, MD, from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.

Dr. Dasari and colleagues celebrated the results, stressing that “these data support the use of fruquintinib as a global treatment option for patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.”

The VEGF inhibitor has been approved in China for refractory metastatic CRC since 2018, and the recent phase 3 findings support the bid for Food and Drug Administration approval for this indication. The FDA granted fruquintinib priority review in May 2023.

However, in a tweet, Vinay Prasad, MD, an oncologist/epidemiologist at the University of California, San Francisco, who is an outspoken critic of the pharmaceutical industry, called the trial design “unethical.”

Fruquintinib, he explained, was compared with placebo, not investigators’ choice of treatment for patients dying of CRC.

Trial participants were considered to have refractory cases of CRC after previous lines of systemic treatment had failed. For almost three quarters of patients, more than three lines of therapy had failed, and patients still had options, including fluorouracil (5FU), oxaliplatin, or irinotecan, Dr. Prasad argued.

“Everyone who treats CRC would pull [their] mom off the trial and give 5FU and [bevacizumab] or IrOx [irinotecan plus oxaliplatin] or FOLFOX again, perhaps slightly differently,” Dr. Prasad said.

The “proof is they give [these drugs] post progression,” he continued. “After the control arm patients progressed, many doctors did try” these other options.

Hutchmed, the Hong Kong maker of fruquintinib, which sponsored the trial, did not respond to questions from this news organization about why the trial was designed with a placebo arm instead of investigators’ choice of treatment.

However, CRC specialist Alan Venook, MD, who was not involved in the trial, weighed in. He explained that he understands Dr. Prasad’s concerns but doesn’t necessarily think the trial was unethical.

For patients such as those in FRESCO-2, the impact of current treatment options is “so minimal” that forgoing active drug treatment is “not crazy,” said Dr. Venook, a medical oncologist at UCSF.

“If your chances of getting benefit are 1 in 20 and you are much more likely to get toxicity than benefit, you could argue” that having a placebo control arm in the trial is ethical, provided people understand what they are getting into, Dr. Venook said.

In the trial, almost two thirds of patients who received fruquintinib had grade 3 or worse toxicities, compared with half of placebo patients. The most common were hypertension (14% with fruquintinib vs. 1% with placebo), asthenia (8% vs. 4%), and hand-foot syndrome (6% vs. 0%).

Part of the risk-benefit assessment may also include weighing the estimated costs of fruquintinib against the 2.6-month median overall survival benefit.

“One could debate if 2.6 months of more time is worth the medication getting regulatory approval, or debate pricing when it’s approved, or delve closely into toxicity and quality of life data,” tweeted medical oncologist Temidayo Fadelu, MD, MPH, of Dana-Farber Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, in response to Dr. Prasad’s thread. However, like Dr. Venook, Dr. Fadelu did not consider the trial design or the way the trial was conducted to be unethical.

Dr. Venook added that a treatment break is also not out of the question in this context. Some might even say that, given the risk-benefit ratio of current options, a temporary break from treatment “is the right thing to do.”

The study was funded by Hutchmed. The investigators reported ties to Hutchmed and other pharmaceutical companies. Dr. Dasari reported grants, contracts, speaker’s fees, and other payments from Hutchmed and other companies. Dr. Venook disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

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

The results of a phase 3 trial that assessed the use of a highly selective, potent oral vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) inhibitor for patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) were recently published.

The trial, dubbed FRESCO-2, found that use of fruquintinib “resulted in a significant and clinically meaningful benefit in overall survival, compared with placebo in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.”

More specifically, the median overall survival benefit was 2.6 months – 7.4 months with fruquintinib versus 4.8 months with placebo – among 691 heavily pretreated adults with metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma. The difference translated to a 34% reduction in the risk of death with fruquintinib at a median follow-up of about 11 months.

These patients had received “all current standard approved cytotoxic and targeted therapies and progressed on or were intolerant to trifluridine-tipiracil or regorafenib,” a less-selective VEGF inhibitor, according to investigators led by Arvind Dasari, MD, from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.

Dr. Dasari and colleagues celebrated the results, stressing that “these data support the use of fruquintinib as a global treatment option for patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.”

The VEGF inhibitor has been approved in China for refractory metastatic CRC since 2018, and the recent phase 3 findings support the bid for Food and Drug Administration approval for this indication. The FDA granted fruquintinib priority review in May 2023.

However, in a tweet, Vinay Prasad, MD, an oncologist/epidemiologist at the University of California, San Francisco, who is an outspoken critic of the pharmaceutical industry, called the trial design “unethical.”

Fruquintinib, he explained, was compared with placebo, not investigators’ choice of treatment for patients dying of CRC.

Trial participants were considered to have refractory cases of CRC after previous lines of systemic treatment had failed. For almost three quarters of patients, more than three lines of therapy had failed, and patients still had options, including fluorouracil (5FU), oxaliplatin, or irinotecan, Dr. Prasad argued.

“Everyone who treats CRC would pull [their] mom off the trial and give 5FU and [bevacizumab] or IrOx [irinotecan plus oxaliplatin] or FOLFOX again, perhaps slightly differently,” Dr. Prasad said.

The “proof is they give [these drugs] post progression,” he continued. “After the control arm patients progressed, many doctors did try” these other options.

Hutchmed, the Hong Kong maker of fruquintinib, which sponsored the trial, did not respond to questions from this news organization about why the trial was designed with a placebo arm instead of investigators’ choice of treatment.

However, CRC specialist Alan Venook, MD, who was not involved in the trial, weighed in. He explained that he understands Dr. Prasad’s concerns but doesn’t necessarily think the trial was unethical.

For patients such as those in FRESCO-2, the impact of current treatment options is “so minimal” that forgoing active drug treatment is “not crazy,” said Dr. Venook, a medical oncologist at UCSF.

“If your chances of getting benefit are 1 in 20 and you are much more likely to get toxicity than benefit, you could argue” that having a placebo control arm in the trial is ethical, provided people understand what they are getting into, Dr. Venook said.

In the trial, almost two thirds of patients who received fruquintinib had grade 3 or worse toxicities, compared with half of placebo patients. The most common were hypertension (14% with fruquintinib vs. 1% with placebo), asthenia (8% vs. 4%), and hand-foot syndrome (6% vs. 0%).

Part of the risk-benefit assessment may also include weighing the estimated costs of fruquintinib against the 2.6-month median overall survival benefit.

“One could debate if 2.6 months of more time is worth the medication getting regulatory approval, or debate pricing when it’s approved, or delve closely into toxicity and quality of life data,” tweeted medical oncologist Temidayo Fadelu, MD, MPH, of Dana-Farber Cancer Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, in response to Dr. Prasad’s thread. However, like Dr. Venook, Dr. Fadelu did not consider the trial design or the way the trial was conducted to be unethical.

Dr. Venook added that a treatment break is also not out of the question in this context. Some might even say that, given the risk-benefit ratio of current options, a temporary break from treatment “is the right thing to do.”

The study was funded by Hutchmed. The investigators reported ties to Hutchmed and other pharmaceutical companies. Dr. Dasari reported grants, contracts, speaker’s fees, and other payments from Hutchmed and other companies. Dr. Venook disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

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

Primary care is the ideal setting to screen for mild cognitive impairment. Screening can be performed in under 10 minutes using brief cognitive assessment tools. When it comes to treatment, deprescribing is a priority, as many drug interactions contribute to cognitive disorders. Drugs also influence the value of nondrug therapies.

At the XXIX National Congress of General and Family Medicine of the Spanish Society for General and Family Physicians, Granada, Spain, Alberto Freire, MD, a family doctor and head of the society’s neurology group, presented a way to detect cognitive impairment in a few minutes during a primary care office visit. He also presented a stepwise algorithm for diagnosing and treating the condition, which is highly prevalent and underdiagnosed.

The specialist dismissed the idea that “memory problems are associated with age,” though it is true that in normal aging, “cognitive frailty develops, and some processes will move a little slower. But there won’t be significant functional impairment.” Mild cognitive impairment falls between normal aging and dementia.

“Primary care is essential for screening for mild cognitive impairment due to its high level of accessibility, proximity, and continuity, but most of all due to its longitudinal perspective, which differentiates it from other specialties,” said Dr. Freire. He pointed out that screening is not the same as diagnosis because screening merely indicates probability or well-founded suspicion that can then be confirmed in secondary care.

He also highlighted the need for assessment of cognitive function using brief cognitive tests, as well as the need for functional assessment of activities of daily living. Many cognitive function tests are available, some of which are patient oriented and some caregiver oriented.

“The patient initially comes to see us due to memory loss that he or she, or that some reliable reporter, has detected,” said Dr. Freire. He indicated that 18.5% of consultations for cognitive impairment are prompted by subjective perceptions of memory complaints, which represent the most common subtype of the condition: mild amnestic cognitive impairment.
 

Quick cognitive tests

Dr. Freire was in favor of picture-based tests, which he strongly recommended. “These are the most-studied tests in Spain for detecting neurocognitive impairment, and they eliminate the reading factor. They’re quick, they’re easy to use and interpret, and are well-accepted by patients. Also, they assess executive function (verbal fluency) and memory.” Dr. Freire stressed the importance of referencing categories when showing the pictures, as well as the fact that the test is available for free online.

He also questioned whether the Mini-Mental State Examination is dead because “there’s an abbreviated version that the author rejects, and the author’s permission is required to use it. It’s very appropriate for Alzheimer’s disease, but not for cognitive impairment.”

Another notable test is the episodic test (a test that avoids interfering with working memory). It has been validated for amnestic mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease, but a reliable caregiver is required to verify patient responses.

For caregiver-oriented tests, Dr. Freire pointed to AD8, which, when paired with any brief cognitive test, significantly increases detection of cognitive impairment.

He also recommended a useful website for everyday consultations created by several scientific societies, including the Spanish Society of General and Family Physicians. The site includes the AD8 and Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) questionnaires that can be completed online. “It produces a score that indicates the likelihood that the patient has cognitive impairment, and it can be filled out by family members or caregivers to get the result during the consultation,” he said.
 

Functional assessment

“Functional assessment of the patient’s level of independence for their life in society is what conceptually differentiates mild cognitive impairment from dementia,” explained Dr. Freire. “There are several types of activities of daily living. The instrumental activities (cooking, laundry, talking on the phone, using transportation, managing finances, taking medications, etc.) are the activities that truly distinguish between mild cognitive impairment and dementia. They allow the person to adjust to their environment and retain their independence within the community.”

There are multiple tools for assessing activities of daily living, but Dr. Freire singled out the Mongil test (from Spain), which covers basic, instrumental, and advanced activities. The higher the score, the worse the patient’s condition, so the goal is to lower the score. On the other hand, grouping certain items together helps determine whether there is a risk of falling, sarcopenia, depression, or suicide, among other outcomes. “So, it’s not only useful for diagnosis and treatment but also detects geriatric problems and syndromes. That is, it’s useful for prevention and allows planning of preventive and therapeutic medical interventions,” he explained.
 

Reversible dementia

Dr. Freire presented a diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm for cognitive impairment to be used when brief cognitive tests are positive. “The first thing is to perform a clinical assessment because although many cases of cognitive impairment go undiagnosed, 10% of the cases of symptomatic dementia are potentially reversible. We shouldn’t overlook these.” These cases of dementia may be brought on by medication use, alcoholism, chronic meningoencephalitis, toxins, normal pressure hydrocephalus, certain brain tumors, hypothyroidism, and nutritional deficits, among other causes. Functional assessment follows, using the scales mentioned above.

Interactions and deprescribing

“As to polypharmacy, there is underuse of good, evidence-backed medications with no major contraindications. But care must also be taken with inappropriate or off-label medications, overtreatment, drug interactions, and adherence,” said Dr. Freire.

“We need to start deprescribing because the chemical basis of cognitive impairment traces back to reduced cholinergic activity, increased dopaminergic activity in the brain, or both. There are many commonly prescribed drugs with anticholinergic interactions that can cause cognitive disorders. These could be psychotropics, hypnotics, analgesics (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), first-generation antihistamines, antihypertensives, antiarrhythmics, histamine2 blockers, and even antibiotics like penicillin and quinolones, among many others,” he emphasized.

The next step is to perform comprehensive laboratory testing to rule out vitamin and mineral deficiencies, diabetes, thyroid disorders, kidney failure, liver diseases, urinary infections, and infections of the central nervous system. After that, neuroimaging should be performed. MRI is the preferred method because it allows quantification of atrophy and volumetric measurements.
 

Strict cardiovascular control

“At this point, treatment can be started, and the patient can be referred to secondary care,” said Dr. Freire, as he proceeded through a therapeutic algorithm following diagnosis of the patient. Regular exercise increases coordination synapses, prevents disease onset, improves executive function, and delays the onset of dementia. “The problem lies in not knowing how much time should be spent daily and weekly on exercise to achieve these goals.

“It is known that a Mediterranean diet and omega-3 fatty acids improve cognitive impairment. However, care should be taken with omega-3s as they are no longer helpful in dementia that has already been established.” The importance of strictly controlling cardiovascular risk factors must also be kept in mind, as backed by validated studies; it has been shown that blood pressure levels below 128 mm Hg make mild cognitive impairment and dementia worse, atrial fibrillation increases the risk of dementia by a factor of 1.4-2.4, diabetes is a risk factor for developing amnestic mild cognitive impairment, tobacco use also leads to cognitive impairment – even in individuals exposed to second-hand smoke – and statins do not change the risk in cases of dyslipidemia.
 

Nondrug treatment

Dr. Freire also highlighted the importance of multiple nondrug therapies in this field, such as cognitive training and rehabilitation, reminiscence, music therapy, cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy, and sensory interventions, among others. He also recommended patient groups for these individuals.

He added: “In mild cognitive impairment, there is currently no drug that is an improvement over nondrug therapies.”

The drugs aim to improve memory loss, prevent or delay the onset of mild cognitive impairment, and treat initial symptoms of dementia if applicable. The most commonly prescribed drugs are citicoline alone in vascular disease and memory loss, EGb 761 (which is the only approved dose-dependent drug), and others such as phosphatidylserine, nimodipine, and memantine combined with galantamine or piracetam, Dr. Freire concluded.

Dr. Freire had declared receiving funding as a student in training and outreach activities for popular science sponsored by Ferrer, and on the topic of pain by Esteve, Grünenthal Pharma, and Menarini. He has also reported being a consultant for GSK, Lilly, and Pfizer.

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

Primary care is the ideal setting to screen for mild cognitive impairment. Screening can be performed in under 10 minutes using brief cognitive assessment tools. When it comes to treatment, deprescribing is a priority, as many drug interactions contribute to cognitive disorders. Drugs also influence the value of nondrug therapies.

At the XXIX National Congress of General and Family Medicine of the Spanish Society for General and Family Physicians, Granada, Spain, Alberto Freire, MD, a family doctor and head of the society’s neurology group, presented a way to detect cognitive impairment in a few minutes during a primary care office visit. He also presented a stepwise algorithm for diagnosing and treating the condition, which is highly prevalent and underdiagnosed.

The specialist dismissed the idea that “memory problems are associated with age,” though it is true that in normal aging, “cognitive frailty develops, and some processes will move a little slower. But there won’t be significant functional impairment.” Mild cognitive impairment falls between normal aging and dementia.

“Primary care is essential for screening for mild cognitive impairment due to its high level of accessibility, proximity, and continuity, but most of all due to its longitudinal perspective, which differentiates it from other specialties,” said Dr. Freire. He pointed out that screening is not the same as diagnosis because screening merely indicates probability or well-founded suspicion that can then be confirmed in secondary care.

He also highlighted the need for assessment of cognitive function using brief cognitive tests, as well as the need for functional assessment of activities of daily living. Many cognitive function tests are available, some of which are patient oriented and some caregiver oriented.

“The patient initially comes to see us due to memory loss that he or she, or that some reliable reporter, has detected,” said Dr. Freire. He indicated that 18.5% of consultations for cognitive impairment are prompted by subjective perceptions of memory complaints, which represent the most common subtype of the condition: mild amnestic cognitive impairment.
 

Quick cognitive tests

Dr. Freire was in favor of picture-based tests, which he strongly recommended. “These are the most-studied tests in Spain for detecting neurocognitive impairment, and they eliminate the reading factor. They’re quick, they’re easy to use and interpret, and are well-accepted by patients. Also, they assess executive function (verbal fluency) and memory.” Dr. Freire stressed the importance of referencing categories when showing the pictures, as well as the fact that the test is available for free online.

He also questioned whether the Mini-Mental State Examination is dead because “there’s an abbreviated version that the author rejects, and the author’s permission is required to use it. It’s very appropriate for Alzheimer’s disease, but not for cognitive impairment.”

Another notable test is the episodic test (a test that avoids interfering with working memory). It has been validated for amnestic mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease, but a reliable caregiver is required to verify patient responses.

For caregiver-oriented tests, Dr. Freire pointed to AD8, which, when paired with any brief cognitive test, significantly increases detection of cognitive impairment.

He also recommended a useful website for everyday consultations created by several scientific societies, including the Spanish Society of General and Family Physicians. The site includes the AD8 and Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) questionnaires that can be completed online. “It produces a score that indicates the likelihood that the patient has cognitive impairment, and it can be filled out by family members or caregivers to get the result during the consultation,” he said.
 

Functional assessment

“Functional assessment of the patient’s level of independence for their life in society is what conceptually differentiates mild cognitive impairment from dementia,” explained Dr. Freire. “There are several types of activities of daily living. The instrumental activities (cooking, laundry, talking on the phone, using transportation, managing finances, taking medications, etc.) are the activities that truly distinguish between mild cognitive impairment and dementia. They allow the person to adjust to their environment and retain their independence within the community.”

There are multiple tools for assessing activities of daily living, but Dr. Freire singled out the Mongil test (from Spain), which covers basic, instrumental, and advanced activities. The higher the score, the worse the patient’s condition, so the goal is to lower the score. On the other hand, grouping certain items together helps determine whether there is a risk of falling, sarcopenia, depression, or suicide, among other outcomes. “So, it’s not only useful for diagnosis and treatment but also detects geriatric problems and syndromes. That is, it’s useful for prevention and allows planning of preventive and therapeutic medical interventions,” he explained.
 

Reversible dementia

Dr. Freire presented a diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm for cognitive impairment to be used when brief cognitive tests are positive. “The first thing is to perform a clinical assessment because although many cases of cognitive impairment go undiagnosed, 10% of the cases of symptomatic dementia are potentially reversible. We shouldn’t overlook these.” These cases of dementia may be brought on by medication use, alcoholism, chronic meningoencephalitis, toxins, normal pressure hydrocephalus, certain brain tumors, hypothyroidism, and nutritional deficits, among other causes. Functional assessment follows, using the scales mentioned above.

Interactions and deprescribing

“As to polypharmacy, there is underuse of good, evidence-backed medications with no major contraindications. But care must also be taken with inappropriate or off-label medications, overtreatment, drug interactions, and adherence,” said Dr. Freire.

“We need to start deprescribing because the chemical basis of cognitive impairment traces back to reduced cholinergic activity, increased dopaminergic activity in the brain, or both. There are many commonly prescribed drugs with anticholinergic interactions that can cause cognitive disorders. These could be psychotropics, hypnotics, analgesics (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), first-generation antihistamines, antihypertensives, antiarrhythmics, histamine2 blockers, and even antibiotics like penicillin and quinolones, among many others,” he emphasized.

The next step is to perform comprehensive laboratory testing to rule out vitamin and mineral deficiencies, diabetes, thyroid disorders, kidney failure, liver diseases, urinary infections, and infections of the central nervous system. After that, neuroimaging should be performed. MRI is the preferred method because it allows quantification of atrophy and volumetric measurements.
 

Strict cardiovascular control

“At this point, treatment can be started, and the patient can be referred to secondary care,” said Dr. Freire, as he proceeded through a therapeutic algorithm following diagnosis of the patient. Regular exercise increases coordination synapses, prevents disease onset, improves executive function, and delays the onset of dementia. “The problem lies in not knowing how much time should be spent daily and weekly on exercise to achieve these goals.

“It is known that a Mediterranean diet and omega-3 fatty acids improve cognitive impairment. However, care should be taken with omega-3s as they are no longer helpful in dementia that has already been established.” The importance of strictly controlling cardiovascular risk factors must also be kept in mind, as backed by validated studies; it has been shown that blood pressure levels below 128 mm Hg make mild cognitive impairment and dementia worse, atrial fibrillation increases the risk of dementia by a factor of 1.4-2.4, diabetes is a risk factor for developing amnestic mild cognitive impairment, tobacco use also leads to cognitive impairment – even in individuals exposed to second-hand smoke – and statins do not change the risk in cases of dyslipidemia.
 

Nondrug treatment

Dr. Freire also highlighted the importance of multiple nondrug therapies in this field, such as cognitive training and rehabilitation, reminiscence, music therapy, cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy, and sensory interventions, among others. He also recommended patient groups for these individuals.

He added: “In mild cognitive impairment, there is currently no drug that is an improvement over nondrug therapies.”

The drugs aim to improve memory loss, prevent or delay the onset of mild cognitive impairment, and treat initial symptoms of dementia if applicable. The most commonly prescribed drugs are citicoline alone in vascular disease and memory loss, EGb 761 (which is the only approved dose-dependent drug), and others such as phosphatidylserine, nimodipine, and memantine combined with galantamine or piracetam, Dr. Freire concluded.

Dr. Freire had declared receiving funding as a student in training and outreach activities for popular science sponsored by Ferrer, and on the topic of pain by Esteve, Grünenthal Pharma, and Menarini. He has also reported being a consultant for GSK, Lilly, and Pfizer.

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

Primary care is the ideal setting to screen for mild cognitive impairment. Screening can be performed in under 10 minutes using brief cognitive assessment tools. When it comes to treatment, deprescribing is a priority, as many drug interactions contribute to cognitive disorders. Drugs also influence the value of nondrug therapies.

At the XXIX National Congress of General and Family Medicine of the Spanish Society for General and Family Physicians, Granada, Spain, Alberto Freire, MD, a family doctor and head of the society’s neurology group, presented a way to detect cognitive impairment in a few minutes during a primary care office visit. He also presented a stepwise algorithm for diagnosing and treating the condition, which is highly prevalent and underdiagnosed.

The specialist dismissed the idea that “memory problems are associated with age,” though it is true that in normal aging, “cognitive frailty develops, and some processes will move a little slower. But there won’t be significant functional impairment.” Mild cognitive impairment falls between normal aging and dementia.

“Primary care is essential for screening for mild cognitive impairment due to its high level of accessibility, proximity, and continuity, but most of all due to its longitudinal perspective, which differentiates it from other specialties,” said Dr. Freire. He pointed out that screening is not the same as diagnosis because screening merely indicates probability or well-founded suspicion that can then be confirmed in secondary care.

He also highlighted the need for assessment of cognitive function using brief cognitive tests, as well as the need for functional assessment of activities of daily living. Many cognitive function tests are available, some of which are patient oriented and some caregiver oriented.

“The patient initially comes to see us due to memory loss that he or she, or that some reliable reporter, has detected,” said Dr. Freire. He indicated that 18.5% of consultations for cognitive impairment are prompted by subjective perceptions of memory complaints, which represent the most common subtype of the condition: mild amnestic cognitive impairment.
 

Quick cognitive tests

Dr. Freire was in favor of picture-based tests, which he strongly recommended. “These are the most-studied tests in Spain for detecting neurocognitive impairment, and they eliminate the reading factor. They’re quick, they’re easy to use and interpret, and are well-accepted by patients. Also, they assess executive function (verbal fluency) and memory.” Dr. Freire stressed the importance of referencing categories when showing the pictures, as well as the fact that the test is available for free online.

He also questioned whether the Mini-Mental State Examination is dead because “there’s an abbreviated version that the author rejects, and the author’s permission is required to use it. It’s very appropriate for Alzheimer’s disease, but not for cognitive impairment.”

Another notable test is the episodic test (a test that avoids interfering with working memory). It has been validated for amnestic mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease, but a reliable caregiver is required to verify patient responses.

For caregiver-oriented tests, Dr. Freire pointed to AD8, which, when paired with any brief cognitive test, significantly increases detection of cognitive impairment.

He also recommended a useful website for everyday consultations created by several scientific societies, including the Spanish Society of General and Family Physicians. The site includes the AD8 and Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) questionnaires that can be completed online. “It produces a score that indicates the likelihood that the patient has cognitive impairment, and it can be filled out by family members or caregivers to get the result during the consultation,” he said.
 

Functional assessment

“Functional assessment of the patient’s level of independence for their life in society is what conceptually differentiates mild cognitive impairment from dementia,” explained Dr. Freire. “There are several types of activities of daily living. The instrumental activities (cooking, laundry, talking on the phone, using transportation, managing finances, taking medications, etc.) are the activities that truly distinguish between mild cognitive impairment and dementia. They allow the person to adjust to their environment and retain their independence within the community.”

There are multiple tools for assessing activities of daily living, but Dr. Freire singled out the Mongil test (from Spain), which covers basic, instrumental, and advanced activities. The higher the score, the worse the patient’s condition, so the goal is to lower the score. On the other hand, grouping certain items together helps determine whether there is a risk of falling, sarcopenia, depression, or suicide, among other outcomes. “So, it’s not only useful for diagnosis and treatment but also detects geriatric problems and syndromes. That is, it’s useful for prevention and allows planning of preventive and therapeutic medical interventions,” he explained.
 

Reversible dementia

Dr. Freire presented a diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm for cognitive impairment to be used when brief cognitive tests are positive. “The first thing is to perform a clinical assessment because although many cases of cognitive impairment go undiagnosed, 10% of the cases of symptomatic dementia are potentially reversible. We shouldn’t overlook these.” These cases of dementia may be brought on by medication use, alcoholism, chronic meningoencephalitis, toxins, normal pressure hydrocephalus, certain brain tumors, hypothyroidism, and nutritional deficits, among other causes. Functional assessment follows, using the scales mentioned above.

Interactions and deprescribing

“As to polypharmacy, there is underuse of good, evidence-backed medications with no major contraindications. But care must also be taken with inappropriate or off-label medications, overtreatment, drug interactions, and adherence,” said Dr. Freire.

“We need to start deprescribing because the chemical basis of cognitive impairment traces back to reduced cholinergic activity, increased dopaminergic activity in the brain, or both. There are many commonly prescribed drugs with anticholinergic interactions that can cause cognitive disorders. These could be psychotropics, hypnotics, analgesics (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), first-generation antihistamines, antihypertensives, antiarrhythmics, histamine2 blockers, and even antibiotics like penicillin and quinolones, among many others,” he emphasized.

The next step is to perform comprehensive laboratory testing to rule out vitamin and mineral deficiencies, diabetes, thyroid disorders, kidney failure, liver diseases, urinary infections, and infections of the central nervous system. After that, neuroimaging should be performed. MRI is the preferred method because it allows quantification of atrophy and volumetric measurements.
 

Strict cardiovascular control

“At this point, treatment can be started, and the patient can be referred to secondary care,” said Dr. Freire, as he proceeded through a therapeutic algorithm following diagnosis of the patient. Regular exercise increases coordination synapses, prevents disease onset, improves executive function, and delays the onset of dementia. “The problem lies in not knowing how much time should be spent daily and weekly on exercise to achieve these goals.

“It is known that a Mediterranean diet and omega-3 fatty acids improve cognitive impairment. However, care should be taken with omega-3s as they are no longer helpful in dementia that has already been established.” The importance of strictly controlling cardiovascular risk factors must also be kept in mind, as backed by validated studies; it has been shown that blood pressure levels below 128 mm Hg make mild cognitive impairment and dementia worse, atrial fibrillation increases the risk of dementia by a factor of 1.4-2.4, diabetes is a risk factor for developing amnestic mild cognitive impairment, tobacco use also leads to cognitive impairment – even in individuals exposed to second-hand smoke – and statins do not change the risk in cases of dyslipidemia.
 

Nondrug treatment

Dr. Freire also highlighted the importance of multiple nondrug therapies in this field, such as cognitive training and rehabilitation, reminiscence, music therapy, cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy, and sensory interventions, among others. He also recommended patient groups for these individuals.

He added: “In mild cognitive impairment, there is currently no drug that is an improvement over nondrug therapies.”

The drugs aim to improve memory loss, prevent or delay the onset of mild cognitive impairment, and treat initial symptoms of dementia if applicable. The most commonly prescribed drugs are citicoline alone in vascular disease and memory loss, EGb 761 (which is the only approved dose-dependent drug), and others such as phosphatidylserine, nimodipine, and memantine combined with galantamine or piracetam, Dr. Freire concluded.

Dr. Freire had declared receiving funding as a student in training and outreach activities for popular science sponsored by Ferrer, and on the topic of pain by Esteve, Grünenthal Pharma, and Menarini. He has also reported being a consultant for GSK, Lilly, and Pfizer.

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