Late-life depression is the onset of a major depressive disorder in an individual ≥ 60 years of age. Depressive illness compromises quality of life and is especially troublesome for older people. The prevalence of depression among individuals > 65 years of age is about 4% in women and 3% in men.¹ The estimated lifetime prevalence is approximately 24% for women and 10% for men.² Three factors account for this disparity: women exhibit greater susceptibility to depression; the illness persists longer in women than it does in men; and the probability of death related to depression is lower in women.²

Beyond its direct mental and emotional impacts, depression takes a financial toll; health care costs are higher for those with depression than for those without depression.³ Unpaid caregiver expense is the largest indirect financial burden with late-life depression.⁴ Additional indirect costs include less work productivity, early retirement, and diminished financial security.⁴

Many individuals with depression never receive treatment. Fortunately, there are many interventions in the primary care arsenal that can be used to treat older patients with depression and dramatically improve mood, comfort, and function.

The interactions of emotional and physical health

The pathophysiology of depression remains unclear. However, numerous factors are known to contribute to, exacerbate, or prolong depression among elderly populations. Insufficient social engagement and support is strongly associated with depressive mood.⁵ The loss of independence in giving up automobile driving can compromise self-confidence.⁶ Sleep difficulties predispose to, and predict, the emergence of a mood disorder, independent of other symptoms.⁷ Age-related hearing deficits also are associated with depression.⁸

There is a close relationship between emotional and physical health.⁹ Depression adds to the likelihood of medical illness, and somatic pathology increases the risk for mood disorders.⁹ Depression has been linked with obesity, frailty, diabetes, cognitive impairment, and terminal illness.⁹ Other conditions associated with depression include Parkinson disease, alcohol dependence,and chronic pain.^10-12 Cerebrovascular disease may predispose to, precipitate, or perpetuate this mood disorder.¹³

Inflammatory markers and depression may also be related. Plasma levels of interleukin­-6 and C-reactive protein were measured in a longitudinal aging study.¹⁴ A high level of interleukin-6, but not C-reactive protein, correlated with an increased prevalence of depression in older people.

Escitalopram is often better tolerated than paroxetine and has fewer pharmaceutical interactions, compared with sertraline.

Chronic cerebral ischemia can result in a “vascular depression”¹³ in which disruption of prefrontal systems by ischemic lesions is hypothesized to be an important factor in developing despair. Psychomotor retardation, executive dysfunction, severe disability, and a heightened risk for relapse are common features of vascular depression.¹⁵ Poststroke depression often follows a cerebrovascular episode¹⁶; the exact pathogenic mechanism is unknown.¹⁷

Continue to: A summation of common risk factors

A summation of common risk factors. A personal or family history of depression increases the risk for late-life depression. Other risk factors are female gender, bereavement, sleep disturbance, and disability.¹⁸ Poor general health, chronic pain, cognitive impairment, poor social support, and medical comorbidities with impaired functioning increase the likelihood of resultant mood disorders.¹⁸

Somatic complaints may overshadow diagnostic symptoms

Manifestations of depression include disturbed sleep and reductions in appetite, concentration, activity, and energy for daily function.¹⁹ These features, of course, may accompany medical disorders and some normal physiologic changes among elderly people. We find that while older individuals may report a sad mood, disturbed sleep, or other dysfunctions, they frequently emphasize their somatic complaints much more prominently than their emotions. This can make it difficult to recognize clinical depression.

For a diagnosis of major depression, ­5 of the following 9 symptoms must be present for most of the day or nearly every day over a period of at least 2 weeks¹⁹: depressed mood; diminished interest in most activities; significant weight loss or decreased appetite; insomnia or hypersomnia; agitation or retardation; fatigue or loss of energy; feelings of worthlessness or guilt; diminished concentration; and recurrent thoughts of death or suicide.¹⁹

Planning difficulties, apathy, disability, and anhedonia frequently occur. Executive dysfunction and inefficacy of antidepressant pharmacotherapy are related to compromised frontal-striatal-limbic pathways.²⁰ Since difficulties with planning and organization are associated with suboptimal response to antidepressant medications, a psychotherapeutic focus on these executive functions can augment drug-induced benefit.

Rule out these alternative diagnoses

Dementias can manifest as depression. Other brain pathologies, particularly Parkinson disease or stroke, also should be ruled out. Overmedication can simulate depression, so be sure to review the prescription and over-the-counter agents a patient is taking. Some medications can occasionally precipitate a clinical depression; these include stimulants, steroids, methyldopa, triptans, chemotherapeutic agents, and immunologic drugs, to name a few.¹⁹

Continue to: Pharmacotherapy, Yes, but first, consider these factors

Maintaining a close patient–doctor relationship augments all therapeutic interventions. Good eye contact when listening to and counseling patients is key, as is providing close follow-up appointments.

Encourage social interactions with family and friends, which can be particularly productive. Encouraging spiritual endeavors, such as attendance at religious services, can be beneficial.²¹

Recommend exercise. Physical exercise yields positive outcomes²²; it can enhance mood, improve sleep, and help to diminish anxiety. Encourage patients with depression to take a daily walk during the day; doing so can enhance emotional outlook, health, and even socialization.

What treatment will best serve your patient?

It’s important when caring for patients with depression to assess and address suicidal ideation. Depression with a previous suicide attempt is a strong risk factor for suicide. Inquire about suicidal intent or death wishes, access to guns, and other life-ending behaviors. Whenever suicide is an active issue, immediate crisis management is required. Psychiatric referral is an option, and hospitalization may be indicated. Advise family members to remove firearms or restrict access, be with the patient as much as possible, and assist at intervention planning and implementation.

It is worth mentioning, here, the connection between chronic pain and suicidal ideation. Pain management reduces suicidal ideation, regardless of depression severity.²³ 

Continue to: Psychotherapy and pharmacotherapies...

Psychotherapy and pharmacotherapies offered for the treatment of depression in geriatric practices are both effective, without much difference seen in efficacy.²⁴ Psychotherapy might include direct physician and family support to the patient or referral to a mental health professional. Base treatment choices on clinical access, patient preference, and medical contraindications and other illnesses.

Pros and cons of various pharmacotherapies

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are commonly prescribed first for elderly patients with depression.²⁵ Escitalopram is often better tolerated than paroxetine, which exhibits muscarinic antagonism and enzyme inhibition of cytochrome P450-2D6.²⁶ Escitalopram also has fewer pharmaceutical interactions compared with sertraline.²⁶

Generally, when prescribing an antidepressant drug, stay with the initial choice, gradually increasing the dose as clinically needed to its maximum limit. Suicidal ideation may be worsened by too quickly switching from one antidepressant to another or by co-prescribing anxiolytic or hypnotic medicines. Benzodiazepines have addictive and disinhibiting properties and should be avoided, if possible.²⁷ For patients withinsomnia, consider initially selecting a sedating antidepressant medication such as paroxetine or mirtazapine to augment sleep.

Alternatives to SSRIs. Nonselective serotonin reuptake inhibitors have similar efficacy as SSRIs. However, escitalopram is as effective as venlafaxine (a selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor [SSNRI]) and is better tolerated.²⁸ Duloxetine, another SSNRI, improves mood and often diminishes chronic pain.²⁹ Mirtazapine, an alpha-2 antagonist, might cause fewer drug-drug interactions and is effective, well tolerated, and especially helpful for patients with anxiety or insomnia.³⁰ Dry mouth, sedation, and weight gain are common adverse effects of mirtazapine. Obesity precautions are often necessary during mirtazapine therapy; this includes monitoring body weight and metabolic profiles, instituting dietary changes, and recommending an exercise regimen. In contrast to SSRIs, mirtazapine might induce less sexual dysfunction.³¹

Suicidal ideation may be worsened by too quickly switching from one antidepressant to another or by co-prescribing anxiolytic or hypnotic medicines.

Tricyclic antidepressant drugs can also be effective but may worsen cardiac conduction abnormalities, prostatic hypertrophy, or narrow angle glaucoma. Tricyclic antidepressants may be useful in patients without cardiac disease who have not responded to an SSRI or an SSNRI.

Continue to: The role of aripiprazole

The role of aripiprazole. Elderly patients not achieving remission from depression with antidepressant agents alone may benefit from co-prescribing aripiprazole.³² As an adjunct, aripiprazole is effective in achieving and sustaining remission, but it has the potential for less tolerability by inducing akathisia and parkinsonism.³²

Minimize risks and maximize ­benefits of antidepressants by following these recommendations:

1. Ascertain whether any antidepressant treatments have worked well in the past.
2. Start with an SSRI if no other antidepressant treatment has worked in the past.
3. Counsel patients about the need for treatment adherence. Antidepressants may take 2 weeks to 2 months to provide noticeable improvement.
4. Prescribe up to the maximum drug dose if needed to enhance benefit.
5. Use a mood measurement tool (eg, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9) to help evaluate treatment response.

Try a different class of drugs for patients who do not respond to treatment. For patients who have a partial response, augment with bupropion XL, mirtazapine, aripiprazole, or quetiapine.³³ Sertraline and nortriptyline are similarly effective on a population-wide basis, with sertraline having less-problematic adverse effects.³⁴ Trial-and-error treatments in practice may find one patient responding only to sertraline and another patient only to nortriptyline.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation is a promising, relatively new therapeutic option for treating refractory cases of depressive mood disorders.

Combinations of different drug classes may provide benefit for patients not responding to a single antidepressant. In geriatric patients, combined treatment with methylphenidate and citalopram enhances mood and well-being.³⁵ Compared with either drug alone, the combination yielded an augmented clinical response profile and a higher rate of remission. Cognitive functioning, energy, and mood improve even with methylphenidate alone, especially when fatigue is an issue. However, addictive properties limit its use to cases in which conventional antidepressant medications are not effective or indicated, and only when drug refills are closely monitored.

The challenges of advancing age. Antidepressant treatment needs increase with advanced age.³⁶ As mentioned earlier, elderly people often have medical illnesses complicating their depression and frequently are dealing with pain from the medical illness. When dementia coexists with depression, the efficacy of pharmacotherapies is compromised.

Continue to: When drug-related interventions fail

When drug-related interventions fail, therapy ought to be more psychologically focused.³⁷ Psychotherapy is usually helpful and is particularly indicated when recovery is suboptimal. Counseling might come from the treating physician or referral to a psychotherapist.

Nasal esketamine can be efficacious when supplementing antidepressant pharmacotherapy among older patients with treatment-resistant depression.³⁸ Elderly individuals responding to antidepressants do not benefit from adjunctive donepezil to correct mild cognitive impairment.³⁹ There is no advantage to off-label cholinesterase inhibitor prescribing for patients with both depression and dementia.

Other options. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) does not cause long-term cognitive problems and is reserved for ­treatment-resistant cases.⁴⁰ Patients with depression who also have had previous cognitive impairment often improve in mental ability following ECT.⁴¹

A promising new option. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a promising, relatively new therapeutic option for treating refractory cases of depressive mood disorders. In TMS, an electromagnetic coil that creates a magnetic field is placed over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (which is responsible for mood regulation). Referral for TMS administration may offer new hope for older patients with treatment-resistant depression.⁴²

Keep comorbidities in mind as you address depression

Coexisting psychiatric illnesses worsen emotions. Geriatric patients are susceptible to psychiatric comorbidities that include substance abuse, obsessive-compulsive characteristics, dysfunctional eating, and panic disorder.¹⁹ Myocardial and cerebral infarctions are detrimental to mental health, especially soon after such events.⁴³ Poststroke depression magnifies the risk for disability and mortality,^16,17 yet antidepressant pharmacotherapy often enhances prognoses. Along with early intervention algorithm-based plans and inclusion of a depression care manager, antidepressants often diminish poststroke depression severity.⁴⁴ Even when cancer is present, depression care reduces mortality.⁴⁴ So with this in mind, persist with antidepressant treatment, which will often benefit an elderly individual with depression.

Continue to: When possible, get ahead of depression before it sets in

Social participation and employment help to sustain an optimistic, euthymic mood.⁴⁵ Maintaining good physical health, in part through consistent activity levels (including exercise), can help prevent depression. Since persistent sleep disturbance predicts depression among those with a depression history, optimizing sleep among geriatric adults can avoid or alleviate depression.⁴⁶

Low vitamin D levels can contribute to depression, yet vitamin D supplementation may not improve mood.

Sleep hygiene education for patients is also helpful. A regular waking time often promotes a better sleeping schedule. Restful sleep also is more likely when an individual avoids excess caffeine, exercises during the day, and uses the bed only for sleeping (not for listening to music or watching television).

Because inflammation may precede ­depression, anti-inflammatory medications have been proposed as potential treatment, but such pharmacotherapies are often ineffective. Older adults generally do not benefit from low-dose aspirin administration to prevent depression.⁴⁷ Low vitamin D levels can contribute to depression, yet vitamin D supplementation may not improve mood.⁴⁸

Offering hope. Tell your patients that if they are feeling depressed, they should make an appointment with you, their primary care physician, because there are medications they can take and counseling they can avail themselves of that could help.

CORRESPONDENCE
Steven Lippmann, MD, University of Louisville-Psychiatry, 401 East Chestnut Street, Suite 610, Louisville, KY 40202; [email protected].

Late-life depression is the onset of a major depressive disorder in an individual ≥ 60 years of age. Depressive illness compromises quality of life and is especially troublesome for older people. The prevalence of depression among individuals > 65 years of age is about 4% in women and 3% in men.¹ The estimated lifetime prevalence is approximately 24% for women and 10% for men.² Three factors account for this disparity: women exhibit greater susceptibility to depression; the illness persists longer in women than it does in men; and the probability of death related to depression is lower in women.²

Beyond its direct mental and emotional impacts, depression takes a financial toll; health care costs are higher for those with depression than for those without depression.³ Unpaid caregiver expense is the largest indirect financial burden with late-life depression.⁴ Additional indirect costs include less work productivity, early retirement, and diminished financial security.⁴

Many individuals with depression never receive treatment. Fortunately, there are many interventions in the primary care arsenal that can be used to treat older patients with depression and dramatically improve mood, comfort, and function.

The interactions of emotional and physical health

The pathophysiology of depression remains unclear. However, numerous factors are known to contribute to, exacerbate, or prolong depression among elderly populations. Insufficient social engagement and support is strongly associated with depressive mood.⁵ The loss of independence in giving up automobile driving can compromise self-confidence.⁶ Sleep difficulties predispose to, and predict, the emergence of a mood disorder, independent of other symptoms.⁷ Age-related hearing deficits also are associated with depression.⁸

There is a close relationship between emotional and physical health.⁹ Depression adds to the likelihood of medical illness, and somatic pathology increases the risk for mood disorders.⁹ Depression has been linked with obesity, frailty, diabetes, cognitive impairment, and terminal illness.⁹ Other conditions associated with depression include Parkinson disease, alcohol dependence,and chronic pain.^10-12 Cerebrovascular disease may predispose to, precipitate, or perpetuate this mood disorder.¹³

Inflammatory markers and depression may also be related. Plasma levels of interleukin­-6 and C-reactive protein were measured in a longitudinal aging study.¹⁴ A high level of interleukin-6, but not C-reactive protein, correlated with an increased prevalence of depression in older people.

Escitalopram is often better tolerated than paroxetine and has fewer pharmaceutical interactions, compared with sertraline.

Chronic cerebral ischemia can result in a “vascular depression”¹³ in which disruption of prefrontal systems by ischemic lesions is hypothesized to be an important factor in developing despair. Psychomotor retardation, executive dysfunction, severe disability, and a heightened risk for relapse are common features of vascular depression.¹⁵ Poststroke depression often follows a cerebrovascular episode¹⁶; the exact pathogenic mechanism is unknown.¹⁷

Continue to: A summation of common risk factors

A summation of common risk factors. A personal or family history of depression increases the risk for late-life depression. Other risk factors are female gender, bereavement, sleep disturbance, and disability.¹⁸ Poor general health, chronic pain, cognitive impairment, poor social support, and medical comorbidities with impaired functioning increase the likelihood of resultant mood disorders.¹⁸

Somatic complaints may overshadow diagnostic symptoms

Manifestations of depression include disturbed sleep and reductions in appetite, concentration, activity, and energy for daily function.¹⁹ These features, of course, may accompany medical disorders and some normal physiologic changes among elderly people. We find that while older individuals may report a sad mood, disturbed sleep, or other dysfunctions, they frequently emphasize their somatic complaints much more prominently than their emotions. This can make it difficult to recognize clinical depression.

For a diagnosis of major depression, ­5 of the following 9 symptoms must be present for most of the day or nearly every day over a period of at least 2 weeks¹⁹: depressed mood; diminished interest in most activities; significant weight loss or decreased appetite; insomnia or hypersomnia; agitation or retardation; fatigue or loss of energy; feelings of worthlessness or guilt; diminished concentration; and recurrent thoughts of death or suicide.¹⁹

Planning difficulties, apathy, disability, and anhedonia frequently occur. Executive dysfunction and inefficacy of antidepressant pharmacotherapy are related to compromised frontal-striatal-limbic pathways.²⁰ Since difficulties with planning and organization are associated with suboptimal response to antidepressant medications, a psychotherapeutic focus on these executive functions can augment drug-induced benefit.

Rule out these alternative diagnoses

Dementias can manifest as depression. Other brain pathologies, particularly Parkinson disease or stroke, also should be ruled out. Overmedication can simulate depression, so be sure to review the prescription and over-the-counter agents a patient is taking. Some medications can occasionally precipitate a clinical depression; these include stimulants, steroids, methyldopa, triptans, chemotherapeutic agents, and immunologic drugs, to name a few.¹⁹

Continue to: Pharmacotherapy, Yes, but first, consider these factors

Maintaining a close patient–doctor relationship augments all therapeutic interventions. Good eye contact when listening to and counseling patients is key, as is providing close follow-up appointments.

Encourage social interactions with family and friends, which can be particularly productive. Encouraging spiritual endeavors, such as attendance at religious services, can be beneficial.²¹

Recommend exercise. Physical exercise yields positive outcomes²²; it can enhance mood, improve sleep, and help to diminish anxiety. Encourage patients with depression to take a daily walk during the day; doing so can enhance emotional outlook, health, and even socialization.

What treatment will best serve your patient?

It’s important when caring for patients with depression to assess and address suicidal ideation. Depression with a previous suicide attempt is a strong risk factor for suicide. Inquire about suicidal intent or death wishes, access to guns, and other life-ending behaviors. Whenever suicide is an active issue, immediate crisis management is required. Psychiatric referral is an option, and hospitalization may be indicated. Advise family members to remove firearms or restrict access, be with the patient as much as possible, and assist at intervention planning and implementation.

It is worth mentioning, here, the connection between chronic pain and suicidal ideation. Pain management reduces suicidal ideation, regardless of depression severity.²³ 

Continue to: Psychotherapy and pharmacotherapies...

Psychotherapy and pharmacotherapies offered for the treatment of depression in geriatric practices are both effective, without much difference seen in efficacy.²⁴ Psychotherapy might include direct physician and family support to the patient or referral to a mental health professional. Base treatment choices on clinical access, patient preference, and medical contraindications and other illnesses.

Pros and cons of various pharmacotherapies

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are commonly prescribed first for elderly patients with depression.²⁵ Escitalopram is often better tolerated than paroxetine, which exhibits muscarinic antagonism and enzyme inhibition of cytochrome P450-2D6.²⁶ Escitalopram also has fewer pharmaceutical interactions compared with sertraline.²⁶

Generally, when prescribing an antidepressant drug, stay with the initial choice, gradually increasing the dose as clinically needed to its maximum limit. Suicidal ideation may be worsened by too quickly switching from one antidepressant to another or by co-prescribing anxiolytic or hypnotic medicines. Benzodiazepines have addictive and disinhibiting properties and should be avoided, if possible.²⁷ For patients withinsomnia, consider initially selecting a sedating antidepressant medication such as paroxetine or mirtazapine to augment sleep.

Alternatives to SSRIs. Nonselective serotonin reuptake inhibitors have similar efficacy as SSRIs. However, escitalopram is as effective as venlafaxine (a selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor [SSNRI]) and is better tolerated.²⁸ Duloxetine, another SSNRI, improves mood and often diminishes chronic pain.²⁹ Mirtazapine, an alpha-2 antagonist, might cause fewer drug-drug interactions and is effective, well tolerated, and especially helpful for patients with anxiety or insomnia.³⁰ Dry mouth, sedation, and weight gain are common adverse effects of mirtazapine. Obesity precautions are often necessary during mirtazapine therapy; this includes monitoring body weight and metabolic profiles, instituting dietary changes, and recommending an exercise regimen. In contrast to SSRIs, mirtazapine might induce less sexual dysfunction.³¹

Suicidal ideation may be worsened by too quickly switching from one antidepressant to another or by co-prescribing anxiolytic or hypnotic medicines.

Tricyclic antidepressant drugs can also be effective but may worsen cardiac conduction abnormalities, prostatic hypertrophy, or narrow angle glaucoma. Tricyclic antidepressants may be useful in patients without cardiac disease who have not responded to an SSRI or an SSNRI.

Continue to: The role of aripiprazole

The role of aripiprazole. Elderly patients not achieving remission from depression with antidepressant agents alone may benefit from co-prescribing aripiprazole.³² As an adjunct, aripiprazole is effective in achieving and sustaining remission, but it has the potential for less tolerability by inducing akathisia and parkinsonism.³²

Minimize risks and maximize ­benefits of antidepressants by following these recommendations:

1. Ascertain whether any antidepressant treatments have worked well in the past.
2. Start with an SSRI if no other antidepressant treatment has worked in the past.
3. Counsel patients about the need for treatment adherence. Antidepressants may take 2 weeks to 2 months to provide noticeable improvement.
4. Prescribe up to the maximum drug dose if needed to enhance benefit.
5. Use a mood measurement tool (eg, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9) to help evaluate treatment response.

Try a different class of drugs for patients who do not respond to treatment. For patients who have a partial response, augment with bupropion XL, mirtazapine, aripiprazole, or quetiapine.³³ Sertraline and nortriptyline are similarly effective on a population-wide basis, with sertraline having less-problematic adverse effects.³⁴ Trial-and-error treatments in practice may find one patient responding only to sertraline and another patient only to nortriptyline.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation is a promising, relatively new therapeutic option for treating refractory cases of depressive mood disorders.

Combinations of different drug classes may provide benefit for patients not responding to a single antidepressant. In geriatric patients, combined treatment with methylphenidate and citalopram enhances mood and well-being.³⁵ Compared with either drug alone, the combination yielded an augmented clinical response profile and a higher rate of remission. Cognitive functioning, energy, and mood improve even with methylphenidate alone, especially when fatigue is an issue. However, addictive properties limit its use to cases in which conventional antidepressant medications are not effective or indicated, and only when drug refills are closely monitored.

The challenges of advancing age. Antidepressant treatment needs increase with advanced age.³⁶ As mentioned earlier, elderly people often have medical illnesses complicating their depression and frequently are dealing with pain from the medical illness. When dementia coexists with depression, the efficacy of pharmacotherapies is compromised.

Continue to: When drug-related interventions fail

When drug-related interventions fail, therapy ought to be more psychologically focused.³⁷ Psychotherapy is usually helpful and is particularly indicated when recovery is suboptimal. Counseling might come from the treating physician or referral to a psychotherapist.

Nasal esketamine can be efficacious when supplementing antidepressant pharmacotherapy among older patients with treatment-resistant depression.³⁸ Elderly individuals responding to antidepressants do not benefit from adjunctive donepezil to correct mild cognitive impairment.³⁹ There is no advantage to off-label cholinesterase inhibitor prescribing for patients with both depression and dementia.

Other options. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) does not cause long-term cognitive problems and is reserved for ­treatment-resistant cases.⁴⁰ Patients with depression who also have had previous cognitive impairment often improve in mental ability following ECT.⁴¹

A promising new option. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a promising, relatively new therapeutic option for treating refractory cases of depressive mood disorders. In TMS, an electromagnetic coil that creates a magnetic field is placed over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (which is responsible for mood regulation). Referral for TMS administration may offer new hope for older patients with treatment-resistant depression.⁴²

Keep comorbidities in mind as you address depression

Coexisting psychiatric illnesses worsen emotions. Geriatric patients are susceptible to psychiatric comorbidities that include substance abuse, obsessive-compulsive characteristics, dysfunctional eating, and panic disorder.¹⁹ Myocardial and cerebral infarctions are detrimental to mental health, especially soon after such events.⁴³ Poststroke depression magnifies the risk for disability and mortality,^16,17 yet antidepressant pharmacotherapy often enhances prognoses. Along with early intervention algorithm-based plans and inclusion of a depression care manager, antidepressants often diminish poststroke depression severity.⁴⁴ Even when cancer is present, depression care reduces mortality.⁴⁴ So with this in mind, persist with antidepressant treatment, which will often benefit an elderly individual with depression.

Continue to: When possible, get ahead of depression before it sets in

Social participation and employment help to sustain an optimistic, euthymic mood.⁴⁵ Maintaining good physical health, in part through consistent activity levels (including exercise), can help prevent depression. Since persistent sleep disturbance predicts depression among those with a depression history, optimizing sleep among geriatric adults can avoid or alleviate depression.⁴⁶

Low vitamin D levels can contribute to depression, yet vitamin D supplementation may not improve mood.

Sleep hygiene education for patients is also helpful. A regular waking time often promotes a better sleeping schedule. Restful sleep also is more likely when an individual avoids excess caffeine, exercises during the day, and uses the bed only for sleeping (not for listening to music or watching television).

Because inflammation may precede ­depression, anti-inflammatory medications have been proposed as potential treatment, but such pharmacotherapies are often ineffective. Older adults generally do not benefit from low-dose aspirin administration to prevent depression.⁴⁷ Low vitamin D levels can contribute to depression, yet vitamin D supplementation may not improve mood.⁴⁸

Offering hope. Tell your patients that if they are feeling depressed, they should make an appointment with you, their primary care physician, because there are medications they can take and counseling they can avail themselves of that could help.

CORRESPONDENCE
Steven Lippmann, MD, University of Louisville-Psychiatry, 401 East Chestnut Street, Suite 610, Louisville, KY 40202; [email protected].

Late-life depression is the onset of a major depressive disorder in an individual ≥ 60 years of age. Depressive illness compromises quality of life and is especially troublesome for older people. The prevalence of depression among individuals > 65 years of age is about 4% in women and 3% in men.¹ The estimated lifetime prevalence is approximately 24% for women and 10% for men.² Three factors account for this disparity: women exhibit greater susceptibility to depression; the illness persists longer in women than it does in men; and the probability of death related to depression is lower in women.²

Beyond its direct mental and emotional impacts, depression takes a financial toll; health care costs are higher for those with depression than for those without depression.³ Unpaid caregiver expense is the largest indirect financial burden with late-life depression.⁴ Additional indirect costs include less work productivity, early retirement, and diminished financial security.⁴

Many individuals with depression never receive treatment. Fortunately, there are many interventions in the primary care arsenal that can be used to treat older patients with depression and dramatically improve mood, comfort, and function.

The interactions of emotional and physical health

The pathophysiology of depression remains unclear. However, numerous factors are known to contribute to, exacerbate, or prolong depression among elderly populations. Insufficient social engagement and support is strongly associated with depressive mood.⁵ The loss of independence in giving up automobile driving can compromise self-confidence.⁶ Sleep difficulties predispose to, and predict, the emergence of a mood disorder, independent of other symptoms.⁷ Age-related hearing deficits also are associated with depression.⁸

There is a close relationship between emotional and physical health.⁹ Depression adds to the likelihood of medical illness, and somatic pathology increases the risk for mood disorders.⁹ Depression has been linked with obesity, frailty, diabetes, cognitive impairment, and terminal illness.⁹ Other conditions associated with depression include Parkinson disease, alcohol dependence,and chronic pain.^10-12 Cerebrovascular disease may predispose to, precipitate, or perpetuate this mood disorder.¹³

Inflammatory markers and depression may also be related. Plasma levels of interleukin­-6 and C-reactive protein were measured in a longitudinal aging study.¹⁴ A high level of interleukin-6, but not C-reactive protein, correlated with an increased prevalence of depression in older people.

Escitalopram is often better tolerated than paroxetine and has fewer pharmaceutical interactions, compared with sertraline.

Chronic cerebral ischemia can result in a “vascular depression”¹³ in which disruption of prefrontal systems by ischemic lesions is hypothesized to be an important factor in developing despair. Psychomotor retardation, executive dysfunction, severe disability, and a heightened risk for relapse are common features of vascular depression.¹⁵ Poststroke depression often follows a cerebrovascular episode¹⁶; the exact pathogenic mechanism is unknown.¹⁷

Continue to: A summation of common risk factors

A summation of common risk factors. A personal or family history of depression increases the risk for late-life depression. Other risk factors are female gender, bereavement, sleep disturbance, and disability.¹⁸ Poor general health, chronic pain, cognitive impairment, poor social support, and medical comorbidities with impaired functioning increase the likelihood of resultant mood disorders.¹⁸

Somatic complaints may overshadow diagnostic symptoms

Manifestations of depression include disturbed sleep and reductions in appetite, concentration, activity, and energy for daily function.¹⁹ These features, of course, may accompany medical disorders and some normal physiologic changes among elderly people. We find that while older individuals may report a sad mood, disturbed sleep, or other dysfunctions, they frequently emphasize their somatic complaints much more prominently than their emotions. This can make it difficult to recognize clinical depression.

For a diagnosis of major depression, ­5 of the following 9 symptoms must be present for most of the day or nearly every day over a period of at least 2 weeks¹⁹: depressed mood; diminished interest in most activities; significant weight loss or decreased appetite; insomnia or hypersomnia; agitation or retardation; fatigue or loss of energy; feelings of worthlessness or guilt; diminished concentration; and recurrent thoughts of death or suicide.¹⁹

Planning difficulties, apathy, disability, and anhedonia frequently occur. Executive dysfunction and inefficacy of antidepressant pharmacotherapy are related to compromised frontal-striatal-limbic pathways.²⁰ Since difficulties with planning and organization are associated with suboptimal response to antidepressant medications, a psychotherapeutic focus on these executive functions can augment drug-induced benefit.

Rule out these alternative diagnoses

Dementias can manifest as depression. Other brain pathologies, particularly Parkinson disease or stroke, also should be ruled out. Overmedication can simulate depression, so be sure to review the prescription and over-the-counter agents a patient is taking. Some medications can occasionally precipitate a clinical depression; these include stimulants, steroids, methyldopa, triptans, chemotherapeutic agents, and immunologic drugs, to name a few.¹⁹

Continue to: Pharmacotherapy, Yes, but first, consider these factors

Maintaining a close patient–doctor relationship augments all therapeutic interventions. Good eye contact when listening to and counseling patients is key, as is providing close follow-up appointments.

Encourage social interactions with family and friends, which can be particularly productive. Encouraging spiritual endeavors, such as attendance at religious services, can be beneficial.²¹

Recommend exercise. Physical exercise yields positive outcomes²²; it can enhance mood, improve sleep, and help to diminish anxiety. Encourage patients with depression to take a daily walk during the day; doing so can enhance emotional outlook, health, and even socialization.

What treatment will best serve your patient?

It’s important when caring for patients with depression to assess and address suicidal ideation. Depression with a previous suicide attempt is a strong risk factor for suicide. Inquire about suicidal intent or death wishes, access to guns, and other life-ending behaviors. Whenever suicide is an active issue, immediate crisis management is required. Psychiatric referral is an option, and hospitalization may be indicated. Advise family members to remove firearms or restrict access, be with the patient as much as possible, and assist at intervention planning and implementation.

It is worth mentioning, here, the connection between chronic pain and suicidal ideation. Pain management reduces suicidal ideation, regardless of depression severity.²³ 

Continue to: Psychotherapy and pharmacotherapies...

Psychotherapy and pharmacotherapies offered for the treatment of depression in geriatric practices are both effective, without much difference seen in efficacy.²⁴ Psychotherapy might include direct physician and family support to the patient or referral to a mental health professional. Base treatment choices on clinical access, patient preference, and medical contraindications and other illnesses.

Pros and cons of various pharmacotherapies

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are commonly prescribed first for elderly patients with depression.²⁵ Escitalopram is often better tolerated than paroxetine, which exhibits muscarinic antagonism and enzyme inhibition of cytochrome P450-2D6.²⁶ Escitalopram also has fewer pharmaceutical interactions compared with sertraline.²⁶

Generally, when prescribing an antidepressant drug, stay with the initial choice, gradually increasing the dose as clinically needed to its maximum limit. Suicidal ideation may be worsened by too quickly switching from one antidepressant to another or by co-prescribing anxiolytic or hypnotic medicines. Benzodiazepines have addictive and disinhibiting properties and should be avoided, if possible.²⁷ For patients withinsomnia, consider initially selecting a sedating antidepressant medication such as paroxetine or mirtazapine to augment sleep.

Alternatives to SSRIs. Nonselective serotonin reuptake inhibitors have similar efficacy as SSRIs. However, escitalopram is as effective as venlafaxine (a selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor [SSNRI]) and is better tolerated.²⁸ Duloxetine, another SSNRI, improves mood and often diminishes chronic pain.²⁹ Mirtazapine, an alpha-2 antagonist, might cause fewer drug-drug interactions and is effective, well tolerated, and especially helpful for patients with anxiety or insomnia.³⁰ Dry mouth, sedation, and weight gain are common adverse effects of mirtazapine. Obesity precautions are often necessary during mirtazapine therapy; this includes monitoring body weight and metabolic profiles, instituting dietary changes, and recommending an exercise regimen. In contrast to SSRIs, mirtazapine might induce less sexual dysfunction.³¹

Suicidal ideation may be worsened by too quickly switching from one antidepressant to another or by co-prescribing anxiolytic or hypnotic medicines.

Tricyclic antidepressant drugs can also be effective but may worsen cardiac conduction abnormalities, prostatic hypertrophy, or narrow angle glaucoma. Tricyclic antidepressants may be useful in patients without cardiac disease who have not responded to an SSRI or an SSNRI.

Continue to: The role of aripiprazole

The role of aripiprazole. Elderly patients not achieving remission from depression with antidepressant agents alone may benefit from co-prescribing aripiprazole.³² As an adjunct, aripiprazole is effective in achieving and sustaining remission, but it has the potential for less tolerability by inducing akathisia and parkinsonism.³²

Minimize risks and maximize ­benefits of antidepressants by following these recommendations:

1. Ascertain whether any antidepressant treatments have worked well in the past.
2. Start with an SSRI if no other antidepressant treatment has worked in the past.
3. Counsel patients about the need for treatment adherence. Antidepressants may take 2 weeks to 2 months to provide noticeable improvement.
4. Prescribe up to the maximum drug dose if needed to enhance benefit.
5. Use a mood measurement tool (eg, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9) to help evaluate treatment response.

Try a different class of drugs for patients who do not respond to treatment. For patients who have a partial response, augment with bupropion XL, mirtazapine, aripiprazole, or quetiapine.³³ Sertraline and nortriptyline are similarly effective on a population-wide basis, with sertraline having less-problematic adverse effects.³⁴ Trial-and-error treatments in practice may find one patient responding only to sertraline and another patient only to nortriptyline.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation is a promising, relatively new therapeutic option for treating refractory cases of depressive mood disorders.

Combinations of different drug classes may provide benefit for patients not responding to a single antidepressant. In geriatric patients, combined treatment with methylphenidate and citalopram enhances mood and well-being.³⁵ Compared with either drug alone, the combination yielded an augmented clinical response profile and a higher rate of remission. Cognitive functioning, energy, and mood improve even with methylphenidate alone, especially when fatigue is an issue. However, addictive properties limit its use to cases in which conventional antidepressant medications are not effective or indicated, and only when drug refills are closely monitored.

The challenges of advancing age. Antidepressant treatment needs increase with advanced age.³⁶ As mentioned earlier, elderly people often have medical illnesses complicating their depression and frequently are dealing with pain from the medical illness. When dementia coexists with depression, the efficacy of pharmacotherapies is compromised.

Continue to: When drug-related interventions fail

When drug-related interventions fail, therapy ought to be more psychologically focused.³⁷ Psychotherapy is usually helpful and is particularly indicated when recovery is suboptimal. Counseling might come from the treating physician or referral to a psychotherapist.

Nasal esketamine can be efficacious when supplementing antidepressant pharmacotherapy among older patients with treatment-resistant depression.³⁸ Elderly individuals responding to antidepressants do not benefit from adjunctive donepezil to correct mild cognitive impairment.³⁹ There is no advantage to off-label cholinesterase inhibitor prescribing for patients with both depression and dementia.

Other options. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) does not cause long-term cognitive problems and is reserved for ­treatment-resistant cases.⁴⁰ Patients with depression who also have had previous cognitive impairment often improve in mental ability following ECT.⁴¹

A promising new option. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a promising, relatively new therapeutic option for treating refractory cases of depressive mood disorders. In TMS, an electromagnetic coil that creates a magnetic field is placed over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (which is responsible for mood regulation). Referral for TMS administration may offer new hope for older patients with treatment-resistant depression.⁴²

Keep comorbidities in mind as you address depression

Coexisting psychiatric illnesses worsen emotions. Geriatric patients are susceptible to psychiatric comorbidities that include substance abuse, obsessive-compulsive characteristics, dysfunctional eating, and panic disorder.¹⁹ Myocardial and cerebral infarctions are detrimental to mental health, especially soon after such events.⁴³ Poststroke depression magnifies the risk for disability and mortality,^16,17 yet antidepressant pharmacotherapy often enhances prognoses. Along with early intervention algorithm-based plans and inclusion of a depression care manager, antidepressants often diminish poststroke depression severity.⁴⁴ Even when cancer is present, depression care reduces mortality.⁴⁴ So with this in mind, persist with antidepressant treatment, which will often benefit an elderly individual with depression.

Continue to: When possible, get ahead of depression before it sets in

Social participation and employment help to sustain an optimistic, euthymic mood.⁴⁵ Maintaining good physical health, in part through consistent activity levels (including exercise), can help prevent depression. Since persistent sleep disturbance predicts depression among those with a depression history, optimizing sleep among geriatric adults can avoid or alleviate depression.⁴⁶

Low vitamin D levels can contribute to depression, yet vitamin D supplementation may not improve mood.

Sleep hygiene education for patients is also helpful. A regular waking time often promotes a better sleeping schedule. Restful sleep also is more likely when an individual avoids excess caffeine, exercises during the day, and uses the bed only for sleeping (not for listening to music or watching television).

Because inflammation may precede ­depression, anti-inflammatory medications have been proposed as potential treatment, but such pharmacotherapies are often ineffective. Older adults generally do not benefit from low-dose aspirin administration to prevent depression.⁴⁷ Low vitamin D levels can contribute to depression, yet vitamin D supplementation may not improve mood.⁴⁸

Offering hope. Tell your patients that if they are feeling depressed, they should make an appointment with you, their primary care physician, because there are medications they can take and counseling they can avail themselves of that could help.

CORRESPONDENCE
Steven Lippmann, MD, University of Louisville-Psychiatry, 401 East Chestnut Street, Suite 610, Louisville, KY 40202; [email protected].

COPENHAGEN – A study of 260 patients with Crohn’s disease finds that vedolizumab led to significantly better clinical remission rates as compared with patients who were treated with anti–tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy.

The study was presented at the annual congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization by Wolfgang Mohl, MD, of the Center for Gastroenterology in Saarbrucken, Germany, who suggested this biologic, which is a monoclonal antibody, could possibly be used as a first-line treatment instead of as a second or third choice. Currently, TNF inhibitors are generally prescribed first.

“Compared to previous research clinical trials, this prospective 2-year real-world study comparing vedolizumab with anti-TNF showed that, in biologic-naive Crohn’s disease patients, remission rates at 2 years with vedolizumab were remarkably higher than with anti-TNF [therapy],” Dr. Mohl and colleagues wrote in the study abstract.

“Now we know vedolizumab is a good first-line drug and that patients can stay on it for a long time,” he said in an interview. “These data also suggest that we are wrong in thinking TNF inhibitors should be standard. I don’t think this belief holds true anymore.”

The study included 63 biologic-naive patients who were treated with vedolizumab and 197 patients who were treated with anti-TNF agents adalimumab (58.4%) and infliximab (41.6%).

After 2 years, approximately 83% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were still receiving treatment, but only 56% of patients who received anti-TNF therapy were still undergoing therapy with either adalimumab or infliximab. After 2 years of treatment, 64.2% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were in clinical remission, compared with 44.7% of patients who were treated with anti-TNF therapy. And, 62.5% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were not receiving steroid treatment, compared with 41.6% of patients in the anti-TNF therapy group. This, Dr. Mohl said, was a statistically significant difference (P < .05).

“It is clinically relevant to achieve remission without steroids because this is hard to obtain,” he said. “Patients really don’t want to have to take steroids because they can experience lots of side effects including osteoporosis. It’s good to be in remission, but to be in steroid-free remission is so much better.”

Vedolizumab is a relatively new drug, compared with infliximab and adalimumab, which were approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1998 and 2008, respectively. “We wanted real-world data to help us understand the pattern of outcomes outside of the clinical trial environment,” Dr. Mohl said.

From 45 treatment centers across Germany, researchers prospectively enrolled 1,200 biologic-naive and biologic-experienced patients with either Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis between 2017 and 2020 into the VEDOIBD study. This analysis was limited to 260 patients with Crohn’s disease.

In addition to a higher proportion of patients on vedolizumab continuing on treatment, compared with patients on anti–TNF inhibitor therapy, there was a significantly higher clinical remission rate with vedolizumab (64.2%), compared with anti-TNFi therapy (44.7%) after 2 years (P < .05). Researchers used a statistical method to determine the effect of 2-year maintenance in only those patients who responded to a 3-month induction, and they found a significantly better response in terms of clinical remission in patients on vedolizumab (88.6%), compared with anti-TNF inhibitors (45.8%) (P = .0001), and likewise in steroid-free remission with 86.8% for vedolizumab, compared with 44.1% for anti-TNF inhibitors (P < .001).

Dr. Mohl described his experience with vedolizumab in clinical practice. “Vedolizumab may take a little longer to work but then we don’t lose patients due to side effects, which we see more often with anti-TNF therapy,” he said, adding that around 60% of patients experience side effects but around 10% actually stop anti-TNF because of side effects.

“We often lose patients because they develop antidrug antibodies, but also due to escape mechanisms, as well as dermatological side effects including psoriasis which is really annoying for patients. We also find that anti-TNF drugs just stop working after 12-18 months, and then we need to use steroids which patients dislike,” he said.

Andreas Stallmach, MD, director of gastroenterology, Friedrich Schiller University Jena (Germany), described the findings as important.

“I see this as a really important real-world data study and to summarize, vedolizumab in Crohn’s disease is better than expected. The main explanation for the difference is due to loss of response in the anti-TNF group and this could be explained by the development of autoantibodies against anti-TNF drugs. Now, vedolizumab could be a first-line treatment in patients with Crohn’s disease, especially patients with risk factors for, or history of infections, of comorbidities,” he said.

As a modern monoclonal antibody, vedolizumab uses fewer autoantibodies, compared with infliximab, which is much older, Dr. Stallmach said. “If we combine infliximab with an immunosuppressant agent, such as azathioprine, then we can prevent autoantibody development and increase the efficacy and adherence rate, but with this comes the increased risk of infections and malignancies.”

Dr. Mohl receives research support from companies involved in making biologics for inflammatory bowel disease. Dr. Stallmach is on the advisory boards of most companies that make biologics, including Takeda, which sponsored this study.

* This article was updated March 10, 2023.

COPENHAGEN – A study of 260 patients with Crohn’s disease finds that vedolizumab led to significantly better clinical remission rates as compared with patients who were treated with anti–tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy.

The study was presented at the annual congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization by Wolfgang Mohl, MD, of the Center for Gastroenterology in Saarbrucken, Germany, who suggested this biologic, which is a monoclonal antibody, could possibly be used as a first-line treatment instead of as a second or third choice. Currently, TNF inhibitors are generally prescribed first.

“Compared to previous research clinical trials, this prospective 2-year real-world study comparing vedolizumab with anti-TNF showed that, in biologic-naive Crohn’s disease patients, remission rates at 2 years with vedolizumab were remarkably higher than with anti-TNF [therapy],” Dr. Mohl and colleagues wrote in the study abstract.

“Now we know vedolizumab is a good first-line drug and that patients can stay on it for a long time,” he said in an interview. “These data also suggest that we are wrong in thinking TNF inhibitors should be standard. I don’t think this belief holds true anymore.”

The study included 63 biologic-naive patients who were treated with vedolizumab and 197 patients who were treated with anti-TNF agents adalimumab (58.4%) and infliximab (41.6%).

After 2 years, approximately 83% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were still receiving treatment, but only 56% of patients who received anti-TNF therapy were still undergoing therapy with either adalimumab or infliximab. After 2 years of treatment, 64.2% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were in clinical remission, compared with 44.7% of patients who were treated with anti-TNF therapy. And, 62.5% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were not receiving steroid treatment, compared with 41.6% of patients in the anti-TNF therapy group. This, Dr. Mohl said, was a statistically significant difference (P < .05).

“It is clinically relevant to achieve remission without steroids because this is hard to obtain,” he said. “Patients really don’t want to have to take steroids because they can experience lots of side effects including osteoporosis. It’s good to be in remission, but to be in steroid-free remission is so much better.”

Vedolizumab is a relatively new drug, compared with infliximab and adalimumab, which were approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1998 and 2008, respectively. “We wanted real-world data to help us understand the pattern of outcomes outside of the clinical trial environment,” Dr. Mohl said.

From 45 treatment centers across Germany, researchers prospectively enrolled 1,200 biologic-naive and biologic-experienced patients with either Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis between 2017 and 2020 into the VEDOIBD study. This analysis was limited to 260 patients with Crohn’s disease.

In addition to a higher proportion of patients on vedolizumab continuing on treatment, compared with patients on anti–TNF inhibitor therapy, there was a significantly higher clinical remission rate with vedolizumab (64.2%), compared with anti-TNFi therapy (44.7%) after 2 years (P < .05). Researchers used a statistical method to determine the effect of 2-year maintenance in only those patients who responded to a 3-month induction, and they found a significantly better response in terms of clinical remission in patients on vedolizumab (88.6%), compared with anti-TNF inhibitors (45.8%) (P = .0001), and likewise in steroid-free remission with 86.8% for vedolizumab, compared with 44.1% for anti-TNF inhibitors (P < .001).

Dr. Mohl described his experience with vedolizumab in clinical practice. “Vedolizumab may take a little longer to work but then we don’t lose patients due to side effects, which we see more often with anti-TNF therapy,” he said, adding that around 60% of patients experience side effects but around 10% actually stop anti-TNF because of side effects.

“We often lose patients because they develop antidrug antibodies, but also due to escape mechanisms, as well as dermatological side effects including psoriasis which is really annoying for patients. We also find that anti-TNF drugs just stop working after 12-18 months, and then we need to use steroids which patients dislike,” he said.

Andreas Stallmach, MD, director of gastroenterology, Friedrich Schiller University Jena (Germany), described the findings as important.

“I see this as a really important real-world data study and to summarize, vedolizumab in Crohn’s disease is better than expected. The main explanation for the difference is due to loss of response in the anti-TNF group and this could be explained by the development of autoantibodies against anti-TNF drugs. Now, vedolizumab could be a first-line treatment in patients with Crohn’s disease, especially patients with risk factors for, or history of infections, of comorbidities,” he said.

As a modern monoclonal antibody, vedolizumab uses fewer autoantibodies, compared with infliximab, which is much older, Dr. Stallmach said. “If we combine infliximab with an immunosuppressant agent, such as azathioprine, then we can prevent autoantibody development and increase the efficacy and adherence rate, but with this comes the increased risk of infections and malignancies.”

Dr. Mohl receives research support from companies involved in making biologics for inflammatory bowel disease. Dr. Stallmach is on the advisory boards of most companies that make biologics, including Takeda, which sponsored this study.

* This article was updated March 10, 2023.

COPENHAGEN – A study of 260 patients with Crohn’s disease finds that vedolizumab led to significantly better clinical remission rates as compared with patients who were treated with anti–tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy.

The study was presented at the annual congress of the European Crohn’s and Colitis Organization by Wolfgang Mohl, MD, of the Center for Gastroenterology in Saarbrucken, Germany, who suggested this biologic, which is a monoclonal antibody, could possibly be used as a first-line treatment instead of as a second or third choice. Currently, TNF inhibitors are generally prescribed first.

“Compared to previous research clinical trials, this prospective 2-year real-world study comparing vedolizumab with anti-TNF showed that, in biologic-naive Crohn’s disease patients, remission rates at 2 years with vedolizumab were remarkably higher than with anti-TNF [therapy],” Dr. Mohl and colleagues wrote in the study abstract.

“Now we know vedolizumab is a good first-line drug and that patients can stay on it for a long time,” he said in an interview. “These data also suggest that we are wrong in thinking TNF inhibitors should be standard. I don’t think this belief holds true anymore.”

The study included 63 biologic-naive patients who were treated with vedolizumab and 197 patients who were treated with anti-TNF agents adalimumab (58.4%) and infliximab (41.6%).

After 2 years, approximately 83% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were still receiving treatment, but only 56% of patients who received anti-TNF therapy were still undergoing therapy with either adalimumab or infliximab. After 2 years of treatment, 64.2% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were in clinical remission, compared with 44.7% of patients who were treated with anti-TNF therapy. And, 62.5% of patients who were treated with vedolizumab were not receiving steroid treatment, compared with 41.6% of patients in the anti-TNF therapy group. This, Dr. Mohl said, was a statistically significant difference (P < .05).

“It is clinically relevant to achieve remission without steroids because this is hard to obtain,” he said. “Patients really don’t want to have to take steroids because they can experience lots of side effects including osteoporosis. It’s good to be in remission, but to be in steroid-free remission is so much better.”

Vedolizumab is a relatively new drug, compared with infliximab and adalimumab, which were approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1998 and 2008, respectively. “We wanted real-world data to help us understand the pattern of outcomes outside of the clinical trial environment,” Dr. Mohl said.

From 45 treatment centers across Germany, researchers prospectively enrolled 1,200 biologic-naive and biologic-experienced patients with either Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis between 2017 and 2020 into the VEDOIBD study. This analysis was limited to 260 patients with Crohn’s disease.

In addition to a higher proportion of patients on vedolizumab continuing on treatment, compared with patients on anti–TNF inhibitor therapy, there was a significantly higher clinical remission rate with vedolizumab (64.2%), compared with anti-TNFi therapy (44.7%) after 2 years (P < .05). Researchers used a statistical method to determine the effect of 2-year maintenance in only those patients who responded to a 3-month induction, and they found a significantly better response in terms of clinical remission in patients on vedolizumab (88.6%), compared with anti-TNF inhibitors (45.8%) (P = .0001), and likewise in steroid-free remission with 86.8% for vedolizumab, compared with 44.1% for anti-TNF inhibitors (P < .001).

Dr. Mohl described his experience with vedolizumab in clinical practice. “Vedolizumab may take a little longer to work but then we don’t lose patients due to side effects, which we see more often with anti-TNF therapy,” he said, adding that around 60% of patients experience side effects but around 10% actually stop anti-TNF because of side effects.

“We often lose patients because they develop antidrug antibodies, but also due to escape mechanisms, as well as dermatological side effects including psoriasis which is really annoying for patients. We also find that anti-TNF drugs just stop working after 12-18 months, and then we need to use steroids which patients dislike,” he said.

Andreas Stallmach, MD, director of gastroenterology, Friedrich Schiller University Jena (Germany), described the findings as important.

“I see this as a really important real-world data study and to summarize, vedolizumab in Crohn’s disease is better than expected. The main explanation for the difference is due to loss of response in the anti-TNF group and this could be explained by the development of autoantibodies against anti-TNF drugs. Now, vedolizumab could be a first-line treatment in patients with Crohn’s disease, especially patients with risk factors for, or history of infections, of comorbidities,” he said.

As a modern monoclonal antibody, vedolizumab uses fewer autoantibodies, compared with infliximab, which is much older, Dr. Stallmach said. “If we combine infliximab with an immunosuppressant agent, such as azathioprine, then we can prevent autoantibody development and increase the efficacy and adherence rate, but with this comes the increased risk of infections and malignancies.”

Dr. Mohl receives research support from companies involved in making biologics for inflammatory bowel disease. Dr. Stallmach is on the advisory boards of most companies that make biologics, including Takeda, which sponsored this study.

* This article was updated March 10, 2023.

Individuals with a history of depressive symptoms have a 46% higher risk for stroke than those with no depression history, new research suggests.

Data from the international INTERSTROKE study also showed that those with depressive symptoms before a stroke had worse outcomes, including a significantly higher mortality rate in the first month after a stroke.

These findings build on prior research on the link between depression and stroke, including one study that showed an increased risk for incident stroke among those with a high number of depressive symptoms and another that found that worsening depression can precede stroke in older adults.

“Depression is an important risk factor for acute stroke and is potentially a modifiable contributor to the global burden of stroke,” lead investigator Robert Murphy, MB, a consultant in stroke and geriatric medicine and a researcher with the clinical research facility at the University of Galway, Ireland, told this news organization. “Even mild depressive symptoms were found in this study to be associated with increased risk of stroke and this adds to the literature that across the full range of depressive symptoms there is an association with increased risk of stroke.”

The findings were published online March 8 in Neurology.
 

Significant stroke risk

For the analysis, investigators collected data on 26,877 cases and controls across 32 countries who participated in INTERSTROKE, an international case-control study of risk factors for a first acute stroke. Participants were recruited between 2007 and 2015 and completed a series of questionnaires about stroke risk factors, including measures of depressive symptoms experienced in the past 12 months.

After adjustment for occupation, education, wealth index, diet, physical activity, alcohol consumption, and smoking history, having prestroke depressive symptoms was associated with greater odds for acute stroke (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-1.58), including both intracerebral hemorrhage (aOR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.28-1.91) and ischemic stroke (aOR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.31-1.58).

Stroke risk increased with increasing severity of depression, but even those with mild depression had a 35% increased risk (aOR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.19-1.53).

The increased risk held even after the researchers adjusted further for diabetes, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, and body mass index, and work, home, and financial stress.

The association was consistent across geographical regions and age groups, but was stronger in men and in those without hypertension.

“This study looks at different constructs of depression and identifies that across the spectrum of mild, moderate, and severe depressive symptoms that there is an association present with acute stroke and that a biological gradient emerges with increasing burden of depressive symptoms associated with increasing risk,” Dr. Murphy said.
 

An antidepressant mediating effect?

While prestroke depressive symptoms were not associated with a greater odds of worse stroke severity, they were associated with worse outcomes (P < .001) and higher mortality (10% vs. 8.1%; P = .003) 1 month after a stroke.

In a subgroup analysis, researchers found no association between depressive symptoms and stroke risk in patients who were taking antidepressants.

While no assumptions of causality can be drawn from these findings, “this subgroup analysis does suggest that an increased risk of stroke in those with depression may be attenuated if a patient is on appropriate treatment,” Dr. Murphy said. “This is an area that warrants further exploration.”

The mechanisms that link depression to stroke are unclear, but these findings offer strong evidence that this link exists, Dr. Murphy said.

“We adjusted for potential confounders in sequential models and after adjusting for traditional cardiovascular risk factors there was a consistent association between depressive symptoms and stroke identifying that there is likely an independent association between depression and stroke,” Dr. Murphy said.
 

Questions remain

Commenting on the study, Daniel T. Lackland DrPH, professor, division of translational neurosciences and population studies, department of neurology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, said it adds to a growing body of work on the association of stroke and depression.

“In this case, depression may be a risk factor for having a stroke,” said Dr. Lackland, who was not part of the study. In addition, the study suggests that “treating depression can have additional benefits beyond mental health, in this case, reduced stroke risks.”

However, it’s important, as with any observational study, that there may be confounding factors that may offer an alternative explanation for the findings.

“Further, it is often difficult to accurately assess depression in all individuals, and specifically in individuals who have had a stroke,” Dr. Lackland said. “While this particular study adds depression as a risk factor and suggests treatment of depression in reducing risks, it is important to emphasize that the traditional stroke risk factors including hypertension should [be] continually recognized and treat[ed] with high rigor.”

The INTERSTROKE study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, the Canadian Stroke Network, the Swedish Research Council, the Swedish Heart Lung Foundation, AFA Insurance, The Health & Medical Care Committee of the Regional Executive Board, Region Västra Götaland, and through unrestricted grants from several pharmaceutical companies with major contributions from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada), Pfizer (Canada), Merck Sharp & Dohme, the Swedish Heart Lung Foundation, Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland, and the Stroke Association (United Kingdom). Dr. Murphy and Dr. Lackland have reported no relevant financial relationships.

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

Individuals with a history of depressive symptoms have a 46% higher risk for stroke than those with no depression history, new research suggests.

Data from the international INTERSTROKE study also showed that those with depressive symptoms before a stroke had worse outcomes, including a significantly higher mortality rate in the first month after a stroke.

These findings build on prior research on the link between depression and stroke, including one study that showed an increased risk for incident stroke among those with a high number of depressive symptoms and another that found that worsening depression can precede stroke in older adults.

“Depression is an important risk factor for acute stroke and is potentially a modifiable contributor to the global burden of stroke,” lead investigator Robert Murphy, MB, a consultant in stroke and geriatric medicine and a researcher with the clinical research facility at the University of Galway, Ireland, told this news organization. “Even mild depressive symptoms were found in this study to be associated with increased risk of stroke and this adds to the literature that across the full range of depressive symptoms there is an association with increased risk of stroke.”

The findings were published online March 8 in Neurology.
 

Significant stroke risk

For the analysis, investigators collected data on 26,877 cases and controls across 32 countries who participated in INTERSTROKE, an international case-control study of risk factors for a first acute stroke. Participants were recruited between 2007 and 2015 and completed a series of questionnaires about stroke risk factors, including measures of depressive symptoms experienced in the past 12 months.

After adjustment for occupation, education, wealth index, diet, physical activity, alcohol consumption, and smoking history, having prestroke depressive symptoms was associated with greater odds for acute stroke (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-1.58), including both intracerebral hemorrhage (aOR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.28-1.91) and ischemic stroke (aOR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.31-1.58).

Stroke risk increased with increasing severity of depression, but even those with mild depression had a 35% increased risk (aOR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.19-1.53).

The increased risk held even after the researchers adjusted further for diabetes, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, and body mass index, and work, home, and financial stress.

The association was consistent across geographical regions and age groups, but was stronger in men and in those without hypertension.

“This study looks at different constructs of depression and identifies that across the spectrum of mild, moderate, and severe depressive symptoms that there is an association present with acute stroke and that a biological gradient emerges with increasing burden of depressive symptoms associated with increasing risk,” Dr. Murphy said.
 

An antidepressant mediating effect?

While prestroke depressive symptoms were not associated with a greater odds of worse stroke severity, they were associated with worse outcomes (P < .001) and higher mortality (10% vs. 8.1%; P = .003) 1 month after a stroke.

In a subgroup analysis, researchers found no association between depressive symptoms and stroke risk in patients who were taking antidepressants.

While no assumptions of causality can be drawn from these findings, “this subgroup analysis does suggest that an increased risk of stroke in those with depression may be attenuated if a patient is on appropriate treatment,” Dr. Murphy said. “This is an area that warrants further exploration.”

The mechanisms that link depression to stroke are unclear, but these findings offer strong evidence that this link exists, Dr. Murphy said.

“We adjusted for potential confounders in sequential models and after adjusting for traditional cardiovascular risk factors there was a consistent association between depressive symptoms and stroke identifying that there is likely an independent association between depression and stroke,” Dr. Murphy said.
 

Questions remain

Commenting on the study, Daniel T. Lackland DrPH, professor, division of translational neurosciences and population studies, department of neurology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, said it adds to a growing body of work on the association of stroke and depression.

“In this case, depression may be a risk factor for having a stroke,” said Dr. Lackland, who was not part of the study. In addition, the study suggests that “treating depression can have additional benefits beyond mental health, in this case, reduced stroke risks.”

However, it’s important, as with any observational study, that there may be confounding factors that may offer an alternative explanation for the findings.

“Further, it is often difficult to accurately assess depression in all individuals, and specifically in individuals who have had a stroke,” Dr. Lackland said. “While this particular study adds depression as a risk factor and suggests treatment of depression in reducing risks, it is important to emphasize that the traditional stroke risk factors including hypertension should [be] continually recognized and treat[ed] with high rigor.”

The INTERSTROKE study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, the Canadian Stroke Network, the Swedish Research Council, the Swedish Heart Lung Foundation, AFA Insurance, The Health & Medical Care Committee of the Regional Executive Board, Region Västra Götaland, and through unrestricted grants from several pharmaceutical companies with major contributions from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada), Pfizer (Canada), Merck Sharp & Dohme, the Swedish Heart Lung Foundation, Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland, and the Stroke Association (United Kingdom). Dr. Murphy and Dr. Lackland have reported no relevant financial relationships.

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

Individuals with a history of depressive symptoms have a 46% higher risk for stroke than those with no depression history, new research suggests.

Data from the international INTERSTROKE study also showed that those with depressive symptoms before a stroke had worse outcomes, including a significantly higher mortality rate in the first month after a stroke.

These findings build on prior research on the link between depression and stroke, including one study that showed an increased risk for incident stroke among those with a high number of depressive symptoms and another that found that worsening depression can precede stroke in older adults.

“Depression is an important risk factor for acute stroke and is potentially a modifiable contributor to the global burden of stroke,” lead investigator Robert Murphy, MB, a consultant in stroke and geriatric medicine and a researcher with the clinical research facility at the University of Galway, Ireland, told this news organization. “Even mild depressive symptoms were found in this study to be associated with increased risk of stroke and this adds to the literature that across the full range of depressive symptoms there is an association with increased risk of stroke.”

The findings were published online March 8 in Neurology.
 

Significant stroke risk

For the analysis, investigators collected data on 26,877 cases and controls across 32 countries who participated in INTERSTROKE, an international case-control study of risk factors for a first acute stroke. Participants were recruited between 2007 and 2015 and completed a series of questionnaires about stroke risk factors, including measures of depressive symptoms experienced in the past 12 months.

After adjustment for occupation, education, wealth index, diet, physical activity, alcohol consumption, and smoking history, having prestroke depressive symptoms was associated with greater odds for acute stroke (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-1.58), including both intracerebral hemorrhage (aOR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.28-1.91) and ischemic stroke (aOR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.31-1.58).

Stroke risk increased with increasing severity of depression, but even those with mild depression had a 35% increased risk (aOR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.19-1.53).

The increased risk held even after the researchers adjusted further for diabetes, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, and body mass index, and work, home, and financial stress.

The association was consistent across geographical regions and age groups, but was stronger in men and in those without hypertension.

“This study looks at different constructs of depression and identifies that across the spectrum of mild, moderate, and severe depressive symptoms that there is an association present with acute stroke and that a biological gradient emerges with increasing burden of depressive symptoms associated with increasing risk,” Dr. Murphy said.
 

An antidepressant mediating effect?

While prestroke depressive symptoms were not associated with a greater odds of worse stroke severity, they were associated with worse outcomes (P < .001) and higher mortality (10% vs. 8.1%; P = .003) 1 month after a stroke.

In a subgroup analysis, researchers found no association between depressive symptoms and stroke risk in patients who were taking antidepressants.

While no assumptions of causality can be drawn from these findings, “this subgroup analysis does suggest that an increased risk of stroke in those with depression may be attenuated if a patient is on appropriate treatment,” Dr. Murphy said. “This is an area that warrants further exploration.”

The mechanisms that link depression to stroke are unclear, but these findings offer strong evidence that this link exists, Dr. Murphy said.

“We adjusted for potential confounders in sequential models and after adjusting for traditional cardiovascular risk factors there was a consistent association between depressive symptoms and stroke identifying that there is likely an independent association between depression and stroke,” Dr. Murphy said.
 

Questions remain

Commenting on the study, Daniel T. Lackland DrPH, professor, division of translational neurosciences and population studies, department of neurology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, said it adds to a growing body of work on the association of stroke and depression.

“In this case, depression may be a risk factor for having a stroke,” said Dr. Lackland, who was not part of the study. In addition, the study suggests that “treating depression can have additional benefits beyond mental health, in this case, reduced stroke risks.”

However, it’s important, as with any observational study, that there may be confounding factors that may offer an alternative explanation for the findings.

“Further, it is often difficult to accurately assess depression in all individuals, and specifically in individuals who have had a stroke,” Dr. Lackland said. “While this particular study adds depression as a risk factor and suggests treatment of depression in reducing risks, it is important to emphasize that the traditional stroke risk factors including hypertension should [be] continually recognized and treat[ed] with high rigor.”

The INTERSTROKE study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, the Canadian Stroke Network, the Swedish Research Council, the Swedish Heart Lung Foundation, AFA Insurance, The Health & Medical Care Committee of the Regional Executive Board, Region Västra Götaland, and through unrestricted grants from several pharmaceutical companies with major contributions from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada), Pfizer (Canada), Merck Sharp & Dohme, the Swedish Heart Lung Foundation, Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland, and the Stroke Association (United Kingdom). Dr. Murphy and Dr. Lackland have reported no relevant financial relationships.

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

A Michigan physician has been indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of health care fraud and conspiracy to distribute controlled substances.

Sangita Patel, MD, 50, practiced at Advance Medical Home Physicians in Troy.

According to court documents, between July 2020 and June 2022 Patel was responsible for submitting Medicare claims for improper telehealth visits she didn’t conduct herself.

Dr. Patel, who accepted patients who paid in cash as well as those with Medicare and Medicaid coverage, billed approximately $3.4 million to Medicare between 2018 and 2022, according to court documents. An unusual number of these visits were billed using complex codes, an indication of health care fraud. The investigation also found that on many days, Dr. Patel billed for more than 24 hours of services. During this period, according to the document, 76% of Dr. Patel’s Medicare reimbursements were for telehealth.

Prosecutors say that Dr. Patel prescribed Schedule II controlled substances to more than 90% of the patients in these telehealth visits. She delegated her prescription authority to an unlicensed medical assistant. Through undercover visits and cell site search warrant data, the investigation found that Dr. Patel directed patients to contact, via cell phone, this assistant, who then entered electronic prescriptions into the electronic medical records system. Dr. Patel then signed the prescriptions and sent them to the pharmacies without ever interacting with the patients. Prosecutors also used text messages, obtained by search warrant, between Dr. Patel and her assistant and between the assistant and undercover informers to build their case.

Dr. Patel is also accused of referring patients to other providers, who in turn billed Medicare for claims associated with those patients. Advance Medical received $143,000 from these providers, potentially in violation of anti-kickback laws, according to bank records obtained by subpoena.

If convicted, Dr. Patel could be sentenced to up to 10 years in federal prison.

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

A Michigan physician has been indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of health care fraud and conspiracy to distribute controlled substances.

Sangita Patel, MD, 50, practiced at Advance Medical Home Physicians in Troy.

According to court documents, between July 2020 and June 2022 Patel was responsible for submitting Medicare claims for improper telehealth visits she didn’t conduct herself.

Dr. Patel, who accepted patients who paid in cash as well as those with Medicare and Medicaid coverage, billed approximately $3.4 million to Medicare between 2018 and 2022, according to court documents. An unusual number of these visits were billed using complex codes, an indication of health care fraud. The investigation also found that on many days, Dr. Patel billed for more than 24 hours of services. During this period, according to the document, 76% of Dr. Patel’s Medicare reimbursements were for telehealth.

Prosecutors say that Dr. Patel prescribed Schedule II controlled substances to more than 90% of the patients in these telehealth visits. She delegated her prescription authority to an unlicensed medical assistant. Through undercover visits and cell site search warrant data, the investigation found that Dr. Patel directed patients to contact, via cell phone, this assistant, who then entered electronic prescriptions into the electronic medical records system. Dr. Patel then signed the prescriptions and sent them to the pharmacies without ever interacting with the patients. Prosecutors also used text messages, obtained by search warrant, between Dr. Patel and her assistant and between the assistant and undercover informers to build their case.

Dr. Patel is also accused of referring patients to other providers, who in turn billed Medicare for claims associated with those patients. Advance Medical received $143,000 from these providers, potentially in violation of anti-kickback laws, according to bank records obtained by subpoena.

If convicted, Dr. Patel could be sentenced to up to 10 years in federal prison.

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

A Michigan physician has been indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of health care fraud and conspiracy to distribute controlled substances.

Sangita Patel, MD, 50, practiced at Advance Medical Home Physicians in Troy.

According to court documents, between July 2020 and June 2022 Patel was responsible for submitting Medicare claims for improper telehealth visits she didn’t conduct herself.

Dr. Patel, who accepted patients who paid in cash as well as those with Medicare and Medicaid coverage, billed approximately $3.4 million to Medicare between 2018 and 2022, according to court documents. An unusual number of these visits were billed using complex codes, an indication of health care fraud. The investigation also found that on many days, Dr. Patel billed for more than 24 hours of services. During this period, according to the document, 76% of Dr. Patel’s Medicare reimbursements were for telehealth.

Prosecutors say that Dr. Patel prescribed Schedule II controlled substances to more than 90% of the patients in these telehealth visits. She delegated her prescription authority to an unlicensed medical assistant. Through undercover visits and cell site search warrant data, the investigation found that Dr. Patel directed patients to contact, via cell phone, this assistant, who then entered electronic prescriptions into the electronic medical records system. Dr. Patel then signed the prescriptions and sent them to the pharmacies without ever interacting with the patients. Prosecutors also used text messages, obtained by search warrant, between Dr. Patel and her assistant and between the assistant and undercover informers to build their case.

Dr. Patel is also accused of referring patients to other providers, who in turn billed Medicare for claims associated with those patients. Advance Medical received $143,000 from these providers, potentially in violation of anti-kickback laws, according to bank records obtained by subpoena.

If convicted, Dr. Patel could be sentenced to up to 10 years in federal prison.

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

Children who experience migraine headaches in the aftermath of a concussion are more likely to experience prolonged symptoms of the head injury than are those with other forms of headache or no headaches at all, researchers have found.

“Early assessment of headache – and whether it has migraine features – after concussion can be helpful in predicting which children are at risk for poor outcomes and identifying children who require targeted intervention,” said senior author Keith Owen Yeates, PhD, the Ronald and Irene Ward Chair in Pediatric Brain Injury Professor and head of the department of psychology at the University of Calgary (Alta.). “Posttraumatic headache, especially when it involves migraine features, is a strong predictor of persisting symptoms and poorer quality of life after childhood concussion.”

Approximately 840,000 children per year visit an emergency department in the United States after having a traumatic brain injury. As many as 90% of those visits are considered to involve a concussion, according to the investigators. Although most children recover quickly, approximately one-third continue to report symptoms a month after the event.

Posttraumatic headache occurs in up to 90% of children, most commonly with features of migraine.

The new study, published in JAMA Network Open, was a secondary analysis of the Advancing Concussion Assessment in Pediatrics (A-CAP) prospective cohort study. The study was conducted at five emergency departments in Canada from September 2016 to July 2019 and included children and adolescents aged 8-17 years who presented with acute concussion or an orthopedic injury.

Children were included in the concussion group if they had a history of blunt head trauma resulting in at least one of three criteria consistent with the World Health Organization definition of mild traumatic brain injury. The criteria include loss of consciousness for less than 30 minutes, a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 13 or 14, or at least one acute sign or symptom of concussion, as noted by emergency clinicians.

Patients were excluded from the concussion group if they had deteriorating neurologic status, underwent neurosurgical intervention, had posttraumatic amnesia that lasted more than 24 hours, or had a score higher than 4 on the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS). The orthopedic injury group included patients without symptoms of concussion and with blunt trauma associated with an AIS 13 score of 4 or less. Patients were excluded from both groups if they had an overnight hospitalization for traumatic brain injury, a concussion within the past 3 months, or a neurodevelopmental disorder.

The researchers analyzed data from 928 children of 967 enrolled in the study. The median age was 12.2 years, and 41.3% were female. The final study cohort included 239 children with orthopedic injuries but no headache, 160 with a concussion and no headache, 134 with a concussion and nonmigraine headaches, and 254 with a concussion and migraine headaches.

Children with posttraumatic migraines 10 days after a concussion had the most severe symptoms and worst quality of life 3 months following their head trauma, the researchers found. Children without headaches within 10 days after concussion had the best 3-month outcomes, comparable to those with orthopedic injuries alone.

The researchers said the strengths of their study included its large population and its inclusion of various causes of head trauma, not just sports-related concussions. Limitations included self-reports of headaches instead of a physician diagnosis and lack of control for clinical interventions that might have affected the outcomes.

Charles Tator, MD, PhD, director of the Canadian Concussion Centre at Toronto Western Hospital, said the findings were unsurprising.

“Headaches are the most common symptom after concussion,” Dr. Tator, who was not involved in the latest research, told this news organization. “In my practice and research with concussed kids 11 and up and with adults, those with preconcussion history of migraine are the most difficult to treat because their headaches don’t improve unless specific measures are taken.”

Dr. Tator, who also is a professor of neurosurgery at the University of Toronto, said clinicians who treat concussions must determine which type of headaches children are experiencing – and refer as early as possible for migraine prevention or treatment and medication, as warranted.

“Early recognition after concussion that migraine headaches are occurring will save kids a lot of suffering,” he said.

The study was supported by a Canadian Institute of Health Research Foundation Grant and by funds from the Alberta Children’s Hospital Foundation and the Alberta Children’s Hospital Research Institute. Dr. Tator has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
 

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

Children who experience migraine headaches in the aftermath of a concussion are more likely to experience prolonged symptoms of the head injury than are those with other forms of headache or no headaches at all, researchers have found.

“Early assessment of headache – and whether it has migraine features – after concussion can be helpful in predicting which children are at risk for poor outcomes and identifying children who require targeted intervention,” said senior author Keith Owen Yeates, PhD, the Ronald and Irene Ward Chair in Pediatric Brain Injury Professor and head of the department of psychology at the University of Calgary (Alta.). “Posttraumatic headache, especially when it involves migraine features, is a strong predictor of persisting symptoms and poorer quality of life after childhood concussion.”

Approximately 840,000 children per year visit an emergency department in the United States after having a traumatic brain injury. As many as 90% of those visits are considered to involve a concussion, according to the investigators. Although most children recover quickly, approximately one-third continue to report symptoms a month after the event.

Posttraumatic headache occurs in up to 90% of children, most commonly with features of migraine.

The new study, published in JAMA Network Open, was a secondary analysis of the Advancing Concussion Assessment in Pediatrics (A-CAP) prospective cohort study. The study was conducted at five emergency departments in Canada from September 2016 to July 2019 and included children and adolescents aged 8-17 years who presented with acute concussion or an orthopedic injury.

Children were included in the concussion group if they had a history of blunt head trauma resulting in at least one of three criteria consistent with the World Health Organization definition of mild traumatic brain injury. The criteria include loss of consciousness for less than 30 minutes, a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 13 or 14, or at least one acute sign or symptom of concussion, as noted by emergency clinicians.

Patients were excluded from the concussion group if they had deteriorating neurologic status, underwent neurosurgical intervention, had posttraumatic amnesia that lasted more than 24 hours, or had a score higher than 4 on the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS). The orthopedic injury group included patients without symptoms of concussion and with blunt trauma associated with an AIS 13 score of 4 or less. Patients were excluded from both groups if they had an overnight hospitalization for traumatic brain injury, a concussion within the past 3 months, or a neurodevelopmental disorder.

The researchers analyzed data from 928 children of 967 enrolled in the study. The median age was 12.2 years, and 41.3% were female. The final study cohort included 239 children with orthopedic injuries but no headache, 160 with a concussion and no headache, 134 with a concussion and nonmigraine headaches, and 254 with a concussion and migraine headaches.

Children with posttraumatic migraines 10 days after a concussion had the most severe symptoms and worst quality of life 3 months following their head trauma, the researchers found. Children without headaches within 10 days after concussion had the best 3-month outcomes, comparable to those with orthopedic injuries alone.

The researchers said the strengths of their study included its large population and its inclusion of various causes of head trauma, not just sports-related concussions. Limitations included self-reports of headaches instead of a physician diagnosis and lack of control for clinical interventions that might have affected the outcomes.

Charles Tator, MD, PhD, director of the Canadian Concussion Centre at Toronto Western Hospital, said the findings were unsurprising.

“Headaches are the most common symptom after concussion,” Dr. Tator, who was not involved in the latest research, told this news organization. “In my practice and research with concussed kids 11 and up and with adults, those with preconcussion history of migraine are the most difficult to treat because their headaches don’t improve unless specific measures are taken.”

Dr. Tator, who also is a professor of neurosurgery at the University of Toronto, said clinicians who treat concussions must determine which type of headaches children are experiencing – and refer as early as possible for migraine prevention or treatment and medication, as warranted.

“Early recognition after concussion that migraine headaches are occurring will save kids a lot of suffering,” he said.

The study was supported by a Canadian Institute of Health Research Foundation Grant and by funds from the Alberta Children’s Hospital Foundation and the Alberta Children’s Hospital Research Institute. Dr. Tator has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
 

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

Children who experience migraine headaches in the aftermath of a concussion are more likely to experience prolonged symptoms of the head injury than are those with other forms of headache or no headaches at all, researchers have found.

“Early assessment of headache – and whether it has migraine features – after concussion can be helpful in predicting which children are at risk for poor outcomes and identifying children who require targeted intervention,” said senior author Keith Owen Yeates, PhD, the Ronald and Irene Ward Chair in Pediatric Brain Injury Professor and head of the department of psychology at the University of Calgary (Alta.). “Posttraumatic headache, especially when it involves migraine features, is a strong predictor of persisting symptoms and poorer quality of life after childhood concussion.”

Approximately 840,000 children per year visit an emergency department in the United States after having a traumatic brain injury. As many as 90% of those visits are considered to involve a concussion, according to the investigators. Although most children recover quickly, approximately one-third continue to report symptoms a month after the event.

Posttraumatic headache occurs in up to 90% of children, most commonly with features of migraine.

The new study, published in JAMA Network Open, was a secondary analysis of the Advancing Concussion Assessment in Pediatrics (A-CAP) prospective cohort study. The study was conducted at five emergency departments in Canada from September 2016 to July 2019 and included children and adolescents aged 8-17 years who presented with acute concussion or an orthopedic injury.

Children were included in the concussion group if they had a history of blunt head trauma resulting in at least one of three criteria consistent with the World Health Organization definition of mild traumatic brain injury. The criteria include loss of consciousness for less than 30 minutes, a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 13 or 14, or at least one acute sign or symptom of concussion, as noted by emergency clinicians.

Patients were excluded from the concussion group if they had deteriorating neurologic status, underwent neurosurgical intervention, had posttraumatic amnesia that lasted more than 24 hours, or had a score higher than 4 on the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS). The orthopedic injury group included patients without symptoms of concussion and with blunt trauma associated with an AIS 13 score of 4 or less. Patients were excluded from both groups if they had an overnight hospitalization for traumatic brain injury, a concussion within the past 3 months, or a neurodevelopmental disorder.

The researchers analyzed data from 928 children of 967 enrolled in the study. The median age was 12.2 years, and 41.3% were female. The final study cohort included 239 children with orthopedic injuries but no headache, 160 with a concussion and no headache, 134 with a concussion and nonmigraine headaches, and 254 with a concussion and migraine headaches.

Children with posttraumatic migraines 10 days after a concussion had the most severe symptoms and worst quality of life 3 months following their head trauma, the researchers found. Children without headaches within 10 days after concussion had the best 3-month outcomes, comparable to those with orthopedic injuries alone.

The researchers said the strengths of their study included its large population and its inclusion of various causes of head trauma, not just sports-related concussions. Limitations included self-reports of headaches instead of a physician diagnosis and lack of control for clinical interventions that might have affected the outcomes.

Charles Tator, MD, PhD, director of the Canadian Concussion Centre at Toronto Western Hospital, said the findings were unsurprising.

“Headaches are the most common symptom after concussion,” Dr. Tator, who was not involved in the latest research, told this news organization. “In my practice and research with concussed kids 11 and up and with adults, those with preconcussion history of migraine are the most difficult to treat because their headaches don’t improve unless specific measures are taken.”

Dr. Tator, who also is a professor of neurosurgery at the University of Toronto, said clinicians who treat concussions must determine which type of headaches children are experiencing – and refer as early as possible for migraine prevention or treatment and medication, as warranted.

“Early recognition after concussion that migraine headaches are occurring will save kids a lot of suffering,” he said.

The study was supported by a Canadian Institute of Health Research Foundation Grant and by funds from the Alberta Children’s Hospital Foundation and the Alberta Children’s Hospital Research Institute. Dr. Tator has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
 

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

With the rising popularity of weight-loss drug injections, I’ve received many questions from patients about the pros, cons, and costs. While Ozempic (semaglutide) is perhaps the best known, it’s technically an agent approved only for type 2 diabetes that has been used off label for obesity. The same substance, semaglutide, is approved for use in obesity, but at a higher dose, under the brand name Wegovy. Alternatives are available, and results will vary depending on the specific agent used and the individual.

Ultimately, I decided to try these new injections for myself. I am not a paid representative for, nor an advocate of, any of these medications; I’m here only to share my personal experience.

In my discussions with patients about weight, I sometimes felt like an imposter. While I was overweight by medical standards, I fortunately had none of the underlying health problems. I wasn’t on medications for blood pressure nor did I have diabetes, but I was counseling people to lose weight and eat better while not always following my own advice.

Since having children and turning 40, my metabolism, like many other women’s, seems to have plummeted. I tried a number of older weight-loss medications, like phentermine and phendimetrazine, under the supervision of medical professionals.

Each time, the efforts worked for a short while, particularly when I followed good portion control and practiced moderate exercise. Once the side effects (that is, tachycardia, palpitations, mood changes, constipation) became intolerable, or I became tired or fearful of being on the medications too long, I’d stop and I would regain some of the weight.

When the newer subcutaneous injectable medications arrived on the scene and I started to talk to my patients about them, I was intrigued by their novel mode of action and seeming benefits.

These medications, glucagonlike peptide–1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, were first approved for type 2 diabetes, and it soon became apparent that patients were losing significant amounts of weight taking them, so manufacturers conducted further trials in obesity patients without type 2 diabetes.

The first of these, liraglutide, is injected daily and was first approved as Victoza for type 2 diabetes; it later received an additional approval for obesity, in December 2014, as Saxenda.

Semaglutide, another of the new GLP-1 agonists, was first approved for type 2 diabetes as Ozempic but again was found to lead to substantial weight loss, so a subsequent approval of the drug for obesity, as Wegovy, came in June 2021. Semaglutide is injected once a week.

Semaglutide was branded a “game changer” when it was licensed for obesity because the mean weight loss seen in trials was around 15%, more than for any other drug and approaching what could be achieved with bariatric surgery, some doctors said.

These medications work in a different way from the older weight loss drugs, which had focused on the use of amphetamines. The newer medications became very popular because treating obesity helps lower blood glucose, blood pressure, cholesterol, kidney disease risk, and other comorbidities that occur with diabetes. Plus, for most people, there were fewer side effects.

I first tried Saxenda when it arrived on the market, via some samples that our pharmaceutical representative brought, both out of curiosity and to see if it would help me lose the stubborn baby weight. I ended up stopping the daily injections after my second or third week because of nausea and vomiting. I took a break, got a prescription for antinausea medicine, and tried again because it did indeed decrease my appetite. However, when I took my prescription to the pharmacy, my insurance wouldn’t cover it. It happens to doctors, too.

Fast-forward to 2017-2018. The baby weight was still holding on despite lifestyle changes, diet, and exercising. The newer drug classes hit the market, and again we had samples from our reps. When our rep explained the potential for weight loss in patients without diabetes, I tried Ozempic off label. Within the first 2 weeks, I noticed a 3- to- 5-lb weight loss.

When Ozempic was on backorder, I switched to a low dose of Mounjaro (tirzepatide), a new dual GLP-1 and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide agonist, approved for type 2 diabetes in May 2022, again using it off label as a weekly injection, as it isn’t currently approved for weight loss. However, it does produce significant weight loss and is awaiting approval for obesity.

With these new medications, I noticed that both my patients and I didn’t complain as much about nausea and vomiting, but I did experience stomach upset, constipation, and acid reflux.

The appetite suppression is effective. It slows down the emptying of the gut so I feel full longer. I’ve lost 30 lb with these weekly injections and would like to lose another 20 lb. I follow a routine of reasonable, portion-controlled eating and moderate exercise (30 minutes of cardiovascular activity at least two to three times a week).

Discontinuing the medications may cause rebound weight gain, especially if I’m no longer following a routine of healthy eating and/or moderate exercise. I deal with minimal constipation by taking stool softeners, and I take antacids for acid reflux.

Here’s what I recommend applying when working with patients who have obesity: First, explain how these medications work. Then conduct a health history to make sure these injections are right for them. Patients with a family history of pancreatic cancer can’t take these medications. You also want to monitor use in patients with a history of hypoglycemia so their blood sugar doesn’t drop too low. It’s also important to make sure your patients are able to afford the medication. My husband takes Ozempic for diabetes, and recently we were told that a refill would cost about $1,500 a month, even with insurance. “Covered” doesn’t necessarily mean affordable.

Take a baseline hemoglobin A1c and repeat it after the patient has been on the medication for 2-3 weeks. Also remind them that they can’t rely solely on the medication but need to practice portion control and healthier eating and to exercise more.

For myself, I want to lose those remaining 20 lb or so by eating healthy and being physically active without having to rely on medication for the rest of my life. Research on these medications is still early so we don’t know the long-term effects yet.

As clinicians, I feel it’s okay to be honest with our patients about our own personal struggles to help them understand that they are not alone and that losing weight is a challenge for everyone.

Dr. Swiner is a family physician in Durham, N.C. She reported no conflicts of interest.

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

With the rising popularity of weight-loss drug injections, I’ve received many questions from patients about the pros, cons, and costs. While Ozempic (semaglutide) is perhaps the best known, it’s technically an agent approved only for type 2 diabetes that has been used off label for obesity. The same substance, semaglutide, is approved for use in obesity, but at a higher dose, under the brand name Wegovy. Alternatives are available, and results will vary depending on the specific agent used and the individual.

Ultimately, I decided to try these new injections for myself. I am not a paid representative for, nor an advocate of, any of these medications; I’m here only to share my personal experience.

In my discussions with patients about weight, I sometimes felt like an imposter. While I was overweight by medical standards, I fortunately had none of the underlying health problems. I wasn’t on medications for blood pressure nor did I have diabetes, but I was counseling people to lose weight and eat better while not always following my own advice.

Since having children and turning 40, my metabolism, like many other women’s, seems to have plummeted. I tried a number of older weight-loss medications, like phentermine and phendimetrazine, under the supervision of medical professionals.

Each time, the efforts worked for a short while, particularly when I followed good portion control and practiced moderate exercise. Once the side effects (that is, tachycardia, palpitations, mood changes, constipation) became intolerable, or I became tired or fearful of being on the medications too long, I’d stop and I would regain some of the weight.

When the newer subcutaneous injectable medications arrived on the scene and I started to talk to my patients about them, I was intrigued by their novel mode of action and seeming benefits.

These medications, glucagonlike peptide–1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, were first approved for type 2 diabetes, and it soon became apparent that patients were losing significant amounts of weight taking them, so manufacturers conducted further trials in obesity patients without type 2 diabetes.

The first of these, liraglutide, is injected daily and was first approved as Victoza for type 2 diabetes; it later received an additional approval for obesity, in December 2014, as Saxenda.

Semaglutide, another of the new GLP-1 agonists, was first approved for type 2 diabetes as Ozempic but again was found to lead to substantial weight loss, so a subsequent approval of the drug for obesity, as Wegovy, came in June 2021. Semaglutide is injected once a week.

Semaglutide was branded a “game changer” when it was licensed for obesity because the mean weight loss seen in trials was around 15%, more than for any other drug and approaching what could be achieved with bariatric surgery, some doctors said.

These medications work in a different way from the older weight loss drugs, which had focused on the use of amphetamines. The newer medications became very popular because treating obesity helps lower blood glucose, blood pressure, cholesterol, kidney disease risk, and other comorbidities that occur with diabetes. Plus, for most people, there were fewer side effects.

I first tried Saxenda when it arrived on the market, via some samples that our pharmaceutical representative brought, both out of curiosity and to see if it would help me lose the stubborn baby weight. I ended up stopping the daily injections after my second or third week because of nausea and vomiting. I took a break, got a prescription for antinausea medicine, and tried again because it did indeed decrease my appetite. However, when I took my prescription to the pharmacy, my insurance wouldn’t cover it. It happens to doctors, too.

Fast-forward to 2017-2018. The baby weight was still holding on despite lifestyle changes, diet, and exercising. The newer drug classes hit the market, and again we had samples from our reps. When our rep explained the potential for weight loss in patients without diabetes, I tried Ozempic off label. Within the first 2 weeks, I noticed a 3- to- 5-lb weight loss.

When Ozempic was on backorder, I switched to a low dose of Mounjaro (tirzepatide), a new dual GLP-1 and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide agonist, approved for type 2 diabetes in May 2022, again using it off label as a weekly injection, as it isn’t currently approved for weight loss. However, it does produce significant weight loss and is awaiting approval for obesity.

With these new medications, I noticed that both my patients and I didn’t complain as much about nausea and vomiting, but I did experience stomach upset, constipation, and acid reflux.

The appetite suppression is effective. It slows down the emptying of the gut so I feel full longer. I’ve lost 30 lb with these weekly injections and would like to lose another 20 lb. I follow a routine of reasonable, portion-controlled eating and moderate exercise (30 minutes of cardiovascular activity at least two to three times a week).

Discontinuing the medications may cause rebound weight gain, especially if I’m no longer following a routine of healthy eating and/or moderate exercise. I deal with minimal constipation by taking stool softeners, and I take antacids for acid reflux.

Here’s what I recommend applying when working with patients who have obesity: First, explain how these medications work. Then conduct a health history to make sure these injections are right for them. Patients with a family history of pancreatic cancer can’t take these medications. You also want to monitor use in patients with a history of hypoglycemia so their blood sugar doesn’t drop too low. It’s also important to make sure your patients are able to afford the medication. My husband takes Ozempic for diabetes, and recently we were told that a refill would cost about $1,500 a month, even with insurance. “Covered” doesn’t necessarily mean affordable.

Take a baseline hemoglobin A1c and repeat it after the patient has been on the medication for 2-3 weeks. Also remind them that they can’t rely solely on the medication but need to practice portion control and healthier eating and to exercise more.

For myself, I want to lose those remaining 20 lb or so by eating healthy and being physically active without having to rely on medication for the rest of my life. Research on these medications is still early so we don’t know the long-term effects yet.

As clinicians, I feel it’s okay to be honest with our patients about our own personal struggles to help them understand that they are not alone and that losing weight is a challenge for everyone.

Dr. Swiner is a family physician in Durham, N.C. She reported no conflicts of interest.

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

With the rising popularity of weight-loss drug injections, I’ve received many questions from patients about the pros, cons, and costs. While Ozempic (semaglutide) is perhaps the best known, it’s technically an agent approved only for type 2 diabetes that has been used off label for obesity. The same substance, semaglutide, is approved for use in obesity, but at a higher dose, under the brand name Wegovy. Alternatives are available, and results will vary depending on the specific agent used and the individual.

Ultimately, I decided to try these new injections for myself. I am not a paid representative for, nor an advocate of, any of these medications; I’m here only to share my personal experience.

In my discussions with patients about weight, I sometimes felt like an imposter. While I was overweight by medical standards, I fortunately had none of the underlying health problems. I wasn’t on medications for blood pressure nor did I have diabetes, but I was counseling people to lose weight and eat better while not always following my own advice.

Since having children and turning 40, my metabolism, like many other women’s, seems to have plummeted. I tried a number of older weight-loss medications, like phentermine and phendimetrazine, under the supervision of medical professionals.

Each time, the efforts worked for a short while, particularly when I followed good portion control and practiced moderate exercise. Once the side effects (that is, tachycardia, palpitations, mood changes, constipation) became intolerable, or I became tired or fearful of being on the medications too long, I’d stop and I would regain some of the weight.

When the newer subcutaneous injectable medications arrived on the scene and I started to talk to my patients about them, I was intrigued by their novel mode of action and seeming benefits.

These medications, glucagonlike peptide–1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, were first approved for type 2 diabetes, and it soon became apparent that patients were losing significant amounts of weight taking them, so manufacturers conducted further trials in obesity patients without type 2 diabetes.

The first of these, liraglutide, is injected daily and was first approved as Victoza for type 2 diabetes; it later received an additional approval for obesity, in December 2014, as Saxenda.

Semaglutide, another of the new GLP-1 agonists, was first approved for type 2 diabetes as Ozempic but again was found to lead to substantial weight loss, so a subsequent approval of the drug for obesity, as Wegovy, came in June 2021. Semaglutide is injected once a week.

Semaglutide was branded a “game changer” when it was licensed for obesity because the mean weight loss seen in trials was around 15%, more than for any other drug and approaching what could be achieved with bariatric surgery, some doctors said.

These medications work in a different way from the older weight loss drugs, which had focused on the use of amphetamines. The newer medications became very popular because treating obesity helps lower blood glucose, blood pressure, cholesterol, kidney disease risk, and other comorbidities that occur with diabetes. Plus, for most people, there were fewer side effects.

I first tried Saxenda when it arrived on the market, via some samples that our pharmaceutical representative brought, both out of curiosity and to see if it would help me lose the stubborn baby weight. I ended up stopping the daily injections after my second or third week because of nausea and vomiting. I took a break, got a prescription for antinausea medicine, and tried again because it did indeed decrease my appetite. However, when I took my prescription to the pharmacy, my insurance wouldn’t cover it. It happens to doctors, too.

Fast-forward to 2017-2018. The baby weight was still holding on despite lifestyle changes, diet, and exercising. The newer drug classes hit the market, and again we had samples from our reps. When our rep explained the potential for weight loss in patients without diabetes, I tried Ozempic off label. Within the first 2 weeks, I noticed a 3- to- 5-lb weight loss.

When Ozempic was on backorder, I switched to a low dose of Mounjaro (tirzepatide), a new dual GLP-1 and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide agonist, approved for type 2 diabetes in May 2022, again using it off label as a weekly injection, as it isn’t currently approved for weight loss. However, it does produce significant weight loss and is awaiting approval for obesity.

With these new medications, I noticed that both my patients and I didn’t complain as much about nausea and vomiting, but I did experience stomach upset, constipation, and acid reflux.

The appetite suppression is effective. It slows down the emptying of the gut so I feel full longer. I’ve lost 30 lb with these weekly injections and would like to lose another 20 lb. I follow a routine of reasonable, portion-controlled eating and moderate exercise (30 minutes of cardiovascular activity at least two to three times a week).

Discontinuing the medications may cause rebound weight gain, especially if I’m no longer following a routine of healthy eating and/or moderate exercise. I deal with minimal constipation by taking stool softeners, and I take antacids for acid reflux.

Here’s what I recommend applying when working with patients who have obesity: First, explain how these medications work. Then conduct a health history to make sure these injections are right for them. Patients with a family history of pancreatic cancer can’t take these medications. You also want to monitor use in patients with a history of hypoglycemia so their blood sugar doesn’t drop too low. It’s also important to make sure your patients are able to afford the medication. My husband takes Ozempic for diabetes, and recently we were told that a refill would cost about $1,500 a month, even with insurance. “Covered” doesn’t necessarily mean affordable.

Take a baseline hemoglobin A1c and repeat it after the patient has been on the medication for 2-3 weeks. Also remind them that they can’t rely solely on the medication but need to practice portion control and healthier eating and to exercise more.

For myself, I want to lose those remaining 20 lb or so by eating healthy and being physically active without having to rely on medication for the rest of my life. Research on these medications is still early so we don’t know the long-term effects yet.

As clinicians, I feel it’s okay to be honest with our patients about our own personal struggles to help them understand that they are not alone and that losing weight is a challenge for everyone.

Dr. Swiner is a family physician in Durham, N.C. She reported no conflicts of interest.

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

A new documentary premiering at the 2023 South by Southwest (SXSW) Festival illustrates the human consequences of insulin’s high cost in the United States. Its creators hope that it will help spur action toward overall prescription pricing reform.

Pay or Die: A Documentary is scheduled to premiere March 11. It will be shown twice more during the festival, which runs from March 10 to 19 in Austin, Texas. The documentary was co-created and directed by filmmaker and cinematographer Scott Alexander Ruderman, who has type 1 diabetes, and his partner, producer and journalist Rachael Dyer. One of the executive producers is Sarah Silverman, a comic, actor, producer, and health care reform advocate.

The 90-minute film follows three human stories: A mother and young daughter who both have type 1 diabetes and become homeless after spending their rent money on insulin, a young adult diagnosed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and a mother whose 26-year-old son died from diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) after his insulin was rationed.

“As an Australian now living in the U.S. and seeing how the health care system works here, especially for people with type 1 diabetes like Scott, and how access to insulin is a life-or-death situation, has been very eye-opening for me. I’m also half Canadian, and both are countries where access to health care is a human right, not a business,” Ms. Dyer said in an interview.

In response to the March 1 announcement from Eli Lilly about its insulin price cut, the film’s team told this news organization: “While we commend Eli Lilly in taking this first step and hope that Novo Nordisk and Sanofi [the two other major insulin manufacturers] follow suit, it is important to remember that the key issue is not about these companies voluntarily slashing prices; it’s about changing laws so the insulin manufacturers do not have the ability to raise the prices again.

“This is the life-or-death issue that we focus on in our documentary Pay or Die. It’s also important to note that insulin is just one of the many expensive prescription drugs in the U.S., which is why we need to call for reform. Affordable medication needs to be a basic human right within reach for all Americans.”
 

Physician perspective: Good news on insulin, but broader issues

The film features four physicians. One, Mayo Clinic oncologist/hematologist S. Vincent Rajkumar, MD, has spoken and published widely on insulin prices specifically and U.S. drug costs more broadly.

The other three are Joslin Clinic endocrinologist Elizabeth Halprin, MD, Massachusetts General Hospital internist Leigh Simmons, MD, and New York University physician and essayist Danielle Ofri, MD, PhD.

In an interview after the Lilly announcement, Dr. Rajkumar said, “I think this is very, very good news for patients. ... The fact that they’re doing it means they’re listening to us and listening to patients, which is good. And I do hope that other insulin manufacturers do the same shortly.”

However, he added, “for prescription drug prices and particularly cancer drug prices, there’s more reform that’s needed, and that’s at the policy level. ... The goal of the film was to use insulin to highlight the prescription drug price problem in the U.S.”
 

‘Then life changed’

The filmmaker, Mr. Ruderman, was diagnosed at age 19, during his freshman year in college. He spent several days hospitalized with DKA, and “then life changed,” he said in an interview. He went into photography first and later filmmaking, always with the uneasy knowledge that he could lose access to insulin at any time.

The impetus for the film came after he and Ms. Dyer walked into a pharmacy while visiting Canada in 2018 and discovered how much cheaper insulin was compared to the United States – roughly $20 per vial, compared to $300 in the U.S.

“When Rachael [Dyer] and I came back to the U.S., we were actually quite shocked about how many people are struggling to afford their medication ... the uninsured, those aging off their parents’ health insurance. So that was really the kickoff to us going into the field for the last 4 years making this documentary.”

As a freelancer, Mr. Ruderman has been personally paying for expensive “premium” health insurance that covers the pump and glucose monitors he uses. He buys insulin overseas as often as possible.

“Fortunately, I haven’t been in a situation where I’ve had to ration my insulin, but the fear is instilled in me. What if there’s a month when I can’t afford it? What am I going to do?” (Note: The writer of this article is in the same situation, which could be alleviated by Lilly’s action.)
 

Timing is everything

To be sure, even before Lilly’s announcement, some progress had been made since work on the film began.

The issue of insulin pricing has received wide media attention. More than 20 states have passed copay caps on insulin, and a new law capping the cost of insulin for Medicare beneficiaries at $35/month went into effect in January 2023. President Biden mentioned insulin during his State of the Union address, and Georgia Senator Raphael Warnock made the issue a centerpiece of his campaign.

But there have also been losses, including the failure thus far to pass a nationwide copay cap.

These recent developments make this a good time for the film’s debut, producer Yael Melamede said in an interview. “There’s a lot happening in the space, but also a lot of incredible disappointments along the way, so we are really interested in getting this film out now.”

Ms. Melamede, who owns a film production company, said, “I’ve done a lot of films that have some issue advocacy side to them. I love this film because it’s grounded in the stories of real people. ... We feel this is a perfect catalyst to keep the energy going and for people to say this is super-important and not get distracted.”

While the film doesn’t advocate for specific policies, there is a “call to action” at the end that points viewers to resources on the website for writing to their members of Congress along with additional ways to become personally involved.

Ms. Dyer told this news organization, “This film is not only focusing on type 1 diabetes. That is obviously the crux of the issue, but it is a broader health care message for everyone wanting to make a change for health care in this country, the richest country in the world.”

At SXSW, Pay or Die will be competing with seven other films in the documentary feature competition, and it is eligible to win other awards.

Several other activities at the festival will address the topics of diabetes and U.S. health care costs, including a panel discussion titled Crushing: The Burden of Diabetes on Patients, featuring musician and actor Nick Jonas, who has type 1 diabetes, and a representative from the continuous glucose monitor manufacturer Dexcom.

Another panel, Young and Uninsured: Pay or Die, will include Dr. Rajkumar, Mr. Ruderman, Texas Representative James Talarico, who is advancing an insulin cap bill in that state, and Nicole Smith-Holt, the Minnesota mother of the young man who died because he couldn’t afford his insulin.

Mr. Ruderman, Ms. Dyer, Ms. Melamede, and Dr. Rajkumar have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

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

A new documentary premiering at the 2023 South by Southwest (SXSW) Festival illustrates the human consequences of insulin’s high cost in the United States. Its creators hope that it will help spur action toward overall prescription pricing reform.

Pay or Die: A Documentary is scheduled to premiere March 11. It will be shown twice more during the festival, which runs from March 10 to 19 in Austin, Texas. The documentary was co-created and directed by filmmaker and cinematographer Scott Alexander Ruderman, who has type 1 diabetes, and his partner, producer and journalist Rachael Dyer. One of the executive producers is Sarah Silverman, a comic, actor, producer, and health care reform advocate.

The 90-minute film follows three human stories: A mother and young daughter who both have type 1 diabetes and become homeless after spending their rent money on insulin, a young adult diagnosed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and a mother whose 26-year-old son died from diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) after his insulin was rationed.

“As an Australian now living in the U.S. and seeing how the health care system works here, especially for people with type 1 diabetes like Scott, and how access to insulin is a life-or-death situation, has been very eye-opening for me. I’m also half Canadian, and both are countries where access to health care is a human right, not a business,” Ms. Dyer said in an interview.

In response to the March 1 announcement from Eli Lilly about its insulin price cut, the film’s team told this news organization: “While we commend Eli Lilly in taking this first step and hope that Novo Nordisk and Sanofi [the two other major insulin manufacturers] follow suit, it is important to remember that the key issue is not about these companies voluntarily slashing prices; it’s about changing laws so the insulin manufacturers do not have the ability to raise the prices again.

“This is the life-or-death issue that we focus on in our documentary Pay or Die. It’s also important to note that insulin is just one of the many expensive prescription drugs in the U.S., which is why we need to call for reform. Affordable medication needs to be a basic human right within reach for all Americans.”
 

Physician perspective: Good news on insulin, but broader issues

The film features four physicians. One, Mayo Clinic oncologist/hematologist S. Vincent Rajkumar, MD, has spoken and published widely on insulin prices specifically and U.S. drug costs more broadly.

The other three are Joslin Clinic endocrinologist Elizabeth Halprin, MD, Massachusetts General Hospital internist Leigh Simmons, MD, and New York University physician and essayist Danielle Ofri, MD, PhD.

In an interview after the Lilly announcement, Dr. Rajkumar said, “I think this is very, very good news for patients. ... The fact that they’re doing it means they’re listening to us and listening to patients, which is good. And I do hope that other insulin manufacturers do the same shortly.”

However, he added, “for prescription drug prices and particularly cancer drug prices, there’s more reform that’s needed, and that’s at the policy level. ... The goal of the film was to use insulin to highlight the prescription drug price problem in the U.S.”
 

‘Then life changed’

The filmmaker, Mr. Ruderman, was diagnosed at age 19, during his freshman year in college. He spent several days hospitalized with DKA, and “then life changed,” he said in an interview. He went into photography first and later filmmaking, always with the uneasy knowledge that he could lose access to insulin at any time.

The impetus for the film came after he and Ms. Dyer walked into a pharmacy while visiting Canada in 2018 and discovered how much cheaper insulin was compared to the United States – roughly $20 per vial, compared to $300 in the U.S.

“When Rachael [Dyer] and I came back to the U.S., we were actually quite shocked about how many people are struggling to afford their medication ... the uninsured, those aging off their parents’ health insurance. So that was really the kickoff to us going into the field for the last 4 years making this documentary.”

As a freelancer, Mr. Ruderman has been personally paying for expensive “premium” health insurance that covers the pump and glucose monitors he uses. He buys insulin overseas as often as possible.

“Fortunately, I haven’t been in a situation where I’ve had to ration my insulin, but the fear is instilled in me. What if there’s a month when I can’t afford it? What am I going to do?” (Note: The writer of this article is in the same situation, which could be alleviated by Lilly’s action.)
 

Timing is everything

To be sure, even before Lilly’s announcement, some progress had been made since work on the film began.

The issue of insulin pricing has received wide media attention. More than 20 states have passed copay caps on insulin, and a new law capping the cost of insulin for Medicare beneficiaries at $35/month went into effect in January 2023. President Biden mentioned insulin during his State of the Union address, and Georgia Senator Raphael Warnock made the issue a centerpiece of his campaign.

But there have also been losses, including the failure thus far to pass a nationwide copay cap.

These recent developments make this a good time for the film’s debut, producer Yael Melamede said in an interview. “There’s a lot happening in the space, but also a lot of incredible disappointments along the way, so we are really interested in getting this film out now.”

Ms. Melamede, who owns a film production company, said, “I’ve done a lot of films that have some issue advocacy side to them. I love this film because it’s grounded in the stories of real people. ... We feel this is a perfect catalyst to keep the energy going and for people to say this is super-important and not get distracted.”

While the film doesn’t advocate for specific policies, there is a “call to action” at the end that points viewers to resources on the website for writing to their members of Congress along with additional ways to become personally involved.

Ms. Dyer told this news organization, “This film is not only focusing on type 1 diabetes. That is obviously the crux of the issue, but it is a broader health care message for everyone wanting to make a change for health care in this country, the richest country in the world.”

At SXSW, Pay or Die will be competing with seven other films in the documentary feature competition, and it is eligible to win other awards.

Several other activities at the festival will address the topics of diabetes and U.S. health care costs, including a panel discussion titled Crushing: The Burden of Diabetes on Patients, featuring musician and actor Nick Jonas, who has type 1 diabetes, and a representative from the continuous glucose monitor manufacturer Dexcom.

Another panel, Young and Uninsured: Pay or Die, will include Dr. Rajkumar, Mr. Ruderman, Texas Representative James Talarico, who is advancing an insulin cap bill in that state, and Nicole Smith-Holt, the Minnesota mother of the young man who died because he couldn’t afford his insulin.

Mr. Ruderman, Ms. Dyer, Ms. Melamede, and Dr. Rajkumar have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

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

A new documentary premiering at the 2023 South by Southwest (SXSW) Festival illustrates the human consequences of insulin’s high cost in the United States. Its creators hope that it will help spur action toward overall prescription pricing reform.

Pay or Die: A Documentary is scheduled to premiere March 11. It will be shown twice more during the festival, which runs from March 10 to 19 in Austin, Texas. The documentary was co-created and directed by filmmaker and cinematographer Scott Alexander Ruderman, who has type 1 diabetes, and his partner, producer and journalist Rachael Dyer. One of the executive producers is Sarah Silverman, a comic, actor, producer, and health care reform advocate.

The 90-minute film follows three human stories: A mother and young daughter who both have type 1 diabetes and become homeless after spending their rent money on insulin, a young adult diagnosed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and a mother whose 26-year-old son died from diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) after his insulin was rationed.

“As an Australian now living in the U.S. and seeing how the health care system works here, especially for people with type 1 diabetes like Scott, and how access to insulin is a life-or-death situation, has been very eye-opening for me. I’m also half Canadian, and both are countries where access to health care is a human right, not a business,” Ms. Dyer said in an interview.

In response to the March 1 announcement from Eli Lilly about its insulin price cut, the film’s team told this news organization: “While we commend Eli Lilly in taking this first step and hope that Novo Nordisk and Sanofi [the two other major insulin manufacturers] follow suit, it is important to remember that the key issue is not about these companies voluntarily slashing prices; it’s about changing laws so the insulin manufacturers do not have the ability to raise the prices again.

“This is the life-or-death issue that we focus on in our documentary Pay or Die. It’s also important to note that insulin is just one of the many expensive prescription drugs in the U.S., which is why we need to call for reform. Affordable medication needs to be a basic human right within reach for all Americans.”
 

Physician perspective: Good news on insulin, but broader issues

The film features four physicians. One, Mayo Clinic oncologist/hematologist S. Vincent Rajkumar, MD, has spoken and published widely on insulin prices specifically and U.S. drug costs more broadly.

The other three are Joslin Clinic endocrinologist Elizabeth Halprin, MD, Massachusetts General Hospital internist Leigh Simmons, MD, and New York University physician and essayist Danielle Ofri, MD, PhD.

In an interview after the Lilly announcement, Dr. Rajkumar said, “I think this is very, very good news for patients. ... The fact that they’re doing it means they’re listening to us and listening to patients, which is good. And I do hope that other insulin manufacturers do the same shortly.”

However, he added, “for prescription drug prices and particularly cancer drug prices, there’s more reform that’s needed, and that’s at the policy level. ... The goal of the film was to use insulin to highlight the prescription drug price problem in the U.S.”
 

‘Then life changed’

The filmmaker, Mr. Ruderman, was diagnosed at age 19, during his freshman year in college. He spent several days hospitalized with DKA, and “then life changed,” he said in an interview. He went into photography first and later filmmaking, always with the uneasy knowledge that he could lose access to insulin at any time.

The impetus for the film came after he and Ms. Dyer walked into a pharmacy while visiting Canada in 2018 and discovered how much cheaper insulin was compared to the United States – roughly $20 per vial, compared to $300 in the U.S.

“When Rachael [Dyer] and I came back to the U.S., we were actually quite shocked about how many people are struggling to afford their medication ... the uninsured, those aging off their parents’ health insurance. So that was really the kickoff to us going into the field for the last 4 years making this documentary.”

As a freelancer, Mr. Ruderman has been personally paying for expensive “premium” health insurance that covers the pump and glucose monitors he uses. He buys insulin overseas as often as possible.

“Fortunately, I haven’t been in a situation where I’ve had to ration my insulin, but the fear is instilled in me. What if there’s a month when I can’t afford it? What am I going to do?” (Note: The writer of this article is in the same situation, which could be alleviated by Lilly’s action.)
 

Timing is everything

To be sure, even before Lilly’s announcement, some progress had been made since work on the film began.

The issue of insulin pricing has received wide media attention. More than 20 states have passed copay caps on insulin, and a new law capping the cost of insulin for Medicare beneficiaries at $35/month went into effect in January 2023. President Biden mentioned insulin during his State of the Union address, and Georgia Senator Raphael Warnock made the issue a centerpiece of his campaign.

But there have also been losses, including the failure thus far to pass a nationwide copay cap.

These recent developments make this a good time for the film’s debut, producer Yael Melamede said in an interview. “There’s a lot happening in the space, but also a lot of incredible disappointments along the way, so we are really interested in getting this film out now.”

Ms. Melamede, who owns a film production company, said, “I’ve done a lot of films that have some issue advocacy side to them. I love this film because it’s grounded in the stories of real people. ... We feel this is a perfect catalyst to keep the energy going and for people to say this is super-important and not get distracted.”

While the film doesn’t advocate for specific policies, there is a “call to action” at the end that points viewers to resources on the website for writing to their members of Congress along with additional ways to become personally involved.

Ms. Dyer told this news organization, “This film is not only focusing on type 1 diabetes. That is obviously the crux of the issue, but it is a broader health care message for everyone wanting to make a change for health care in this country, the richest country in the world.”

At SXSW, Pay or Die will be competing with seven other films in the documentary feature competition, and it is eligible to win other awards.

Several other activities at the festival will address the topics of diabetes and U.S. health care costs, including a panel discussion titled Crushing: The Burden of Diabetes on Patients, featuring musician and actor Nick Jonas, who has type 1 diabetes, and a representative from the continuous glucose monitor manufacturer Dexcom.

Another panel, Young and Uninsured: Pay or Die, will include Dr. Rajkumar, Mr. Ruderman, Texas Representative James Talarico, who is advancing an insulin cap bill in that state, and Nicole Smith-Holt, the Minnesota mother of the young man who died because he couldn’t afford his insulin.

Mr. Ruderman, Ms. Dyer, Ms. Melamede, and Dr. Rajkumar have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

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

A 43-year-old man presents to the emergency department with dizziness and a 6-hour history of passing maroon stool. He has been in good health with the only medical problem in his history being depression.

He is taking sertraline. On exam, his blood pressure is 100/60, and his pulse is 100, both while lying down. His blood pressure while standing is 90/60 and his pulse while standing is 130. The rest of his exam is normal. His lab values include hemoglobin of 10, hematocrit of 30, white blood cell of 4.6, platelet count of 175,000, sodium of 142, chloride of 100, bicarbonate of 24, potassium of 3.8, blood urea nitrogen (BUN) of 38, and creatinine clearance (Cr) of 1.1.

What is the most likely source of his bleeding?

A. Gastric ulcer

B. Meckel’s diverticulum

C. Arteriovenous malformation

D. Diverticulosis

E. Hemorrhoids

What makes the most sense

The most likely cause of this patient’s maroon stool is an upper gastrointestinal bleed, so it would make the most sense for a gastric ulcer to be the source of his bleeding. The clue here is the very high BUN/Cr ratio.

We were all taught early in our training that a high BUN/Cr ratio represented volume depletion. This is certainly the most common cause, but very high BUN/Cr ratios (over 30) can represent causes beyond volume depletion.

Witting and colleagues studied factors that predicted upper GI bleeding in patients presenting without hematemesis. They found that the three strongest predictors were black stool (odds ratio, 16.6), BUN/Cr ratio greater than 30 (OR, 10), and age greater than 50 (OR, 8.4).¹

Srygley and colleagues reviewed high-quality studies of factors associated with upper GI bleeding.² Factors that were found to increase the likelihood of an upper gastrointestinal bleed were Melenic stool on exam (likelihood ratio, 25), blood or coffee grounds on nasogastric aspiration (LR, 9.6), and BUN/Cr ratio greater than 30 (LR, 7.5).

Very high BUN/Cr ratios can indicate problems other than UGI bleeding and volume depletion. High BUN/Cr ratios are seen in patients with heart failure.

Zhang and colleagues studied if a high BUN/Cr ratio helped distinguish heart failure from asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).³ They found that, compared with those in the asthma group, the BUN/Cr ratios were significantly increased in the heart failure group (P < .05), whereas no significant differences in BUN/Cr ratios were found between the asthma and COPD groups.

Cheang and colleagues conducted their own study, as well as a meta-analysis, looking to see if high BUN/Cr ratios predicted increased mortality in patients with acute heart failure.⁴ In the meta-analysis of 8 studies (including their own), they found that the highest BUN/Cr ratio category was associated with an 77% higher all-cause mortality than the lowest category (hazard ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.52-2.07).

High dose corticosteroids can raise BUN levels, especially in patients with chronic kidney disease, and cause unexpectedly high BUN/Cr ratios.
 

Pearl

Very high BUN/Cr ratios (greater than 30) can signify upper GI bleeding, heart failure, or high-dose corticosteroid use.

Dr. Paauw is professor of medicine in the division of general internal medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, and he serves as third-year medical student clerkship director at the University of Washington. Contact Dr. Paauw at [email protected].

References

1. Am J Emerg Med. 2006 May;24(3):280-5.

2. JAMA. 2012;307(10):1072-9.

3. Comput Math Methods Med. 2022 Jul 21. doi: 10.1155/2022/4586458.

4. Cardiorenal Med. 2020;10:415-28.

A 43-year-old man presents to the emergency department with dizziness and a 6-hour history of passing maroon stool. He has been in good health with the only medical problem in his history being depression.

He is taking sertraline. On exam, his blood pressure is 100/60, and his pulse is 100, both while lying down. His blood pressure while standing is 90/60 and his pulse while standing is 130. The rest of his exam is normal. His lab values include hemoglobin of 10, hematocrit of 30, white blood cell of 4.6, platelet count of 175,000, sodium of 142, chloride of 100, bicarbonate of 24, potassium of 3.8, blood urea nitrogen (BUN) of 38, and creatinine clearance (Cr) of 1.1.

What is the most likely source of his bleeding?

A. Gastric ulcer

B. Meckel’s diverticulum

C. Arteriovenous malformation

D. Diverticulosis

E. Hemorrhoids

What makes the most sense

The most likely cause of this patient’s maroon stool is an upper gastrointestinal bleed, so it would make the most sense for a gastric ulcer to be the source of his bleeding. The clue here is the very high BUN/Cr ratio.

We were all taught early in our training that a high BUN/Cr ratio represented volume depletion. This is certainly the most common cause, but very high BUN/Cr ratios (over 30) can represent causes beyond volume depletion.

Witting and colleagues studied factors that predicted upper GI bleeding in patients presenting without hematemesis. They found that the three strongest predictors were black stool (odds ratio, 16.6), BUN/Cr ratio greater than 30 (OR, 10), and age greater than 50 (OR, 8.4).¹

Srygley and colleagues reviewed high-quality studies of factors associated with upper GI bleeding.² Factors that were found to increase the likelihood of an upper gastrointestinal bleed were Melenic stool on exam (likelihood ratio, 25), blood or coffee grounds on nasogastric aspiration (LR, 9.6), and BUN/Cr ratio greater than 30 (LR, 7.5).

Very high BUN/Cr ratios can indicate problems other than UGI bleeding and volume depletion. High BUN/Cr ratios are seen in patients with heart failure.

Zhang and colleagues studied if a high BUN/Cr ratio helped distinguish heart failure from asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).³ They found that, compared with those in the asthma group, the BUN/Cr ratios were significantly increased in the heart failure group (P < .05), whereas no significant differences in BUN/Cr ratios were found between the asthma and COPD groups.

Cheang and colleagues conducted their own study, as well as a meta-analysis, looking to see if high BUN/Cr ratios predicted increased mortality in patients with acute heart failure.⁴ In the meta-analysis of 8 studies (including their own), they found that the highest BUN/Cr ratio category was associated with an 77% higher all-cause mortality than the lowest category (hazard ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.52-2.07).

High dose corticosteroids can raise BUN levels, especially in patients with chronic kidney disease, and cause unexpectedly high BUN/Cr ratios.
 

Pearl

Very high BUN/Cr ratios (greater than 30) can signify upper GI bleeding, heart failure, or high-dose corticosteroid use.

Dr. Paauw is professor of medicine in the division of general internal medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, and he serves as third-year medical student clerkship director at the University of Washington. Contact Dr. Paauw at [email protected].

References

1. Am J Emerg Med. 2006 May;24(3):280-5.

2. JAMA. 2012;307(10):1072-9.

3. Comput Math Methods Med. 2022 Jul 21. doi: 10.1155/2022/4586458.

4. Cardiorenal Med. 2020;10:415-28.

A 43-year-old man presents to the emergency department with dizziness and a 6-hour history of passing maroon stool. He has been in good health with the only medical problem in his history being depression.

He is taking sertraline. On exam, his blood pressure is 100/60, and his pulse is 100, both while lying down. His blood pressure while standing is 90/60 and his pulse while standing is 130. The rest of his exam is normal. His lab values include hemoglobin of 10, hematocrit of 30, white blood cell of 4.6, platelet count of 175,000, sodium of 142, chloride of 100, bicarbonate of 24, potassium of 3.8, blood urea nitrogen (BUN) of 38, and creatinine clearance (Cr) of 1.1.

What is the most likely source of his bleeding?

A. Gastric ulcer

B. Meckel’s diverticulum

C. Arteriovenous malformation

D. Diverticulosis

E. Hemorrhoids

What makes the most sense

The most likely cause of this patient’s maroon stool is an upper gastrointestinal bleed, so it would make the most sense for a gastric ulcer to be the source of his bleeding. The clue here is the very high BUN/Cr ratio.

We were all taught early in our training that a high BUN/Cr ratio represented volume depletion. This is certainly the most common cause, but very high BUN/Cr ratios (over 30) can represent causes beyond volume depletion.

Witting and colleagues studied factors that predicted upper GI bleeding in patients presenting without hematemesis. They found that the three strongest predictors were black stool (odds ratio, 16.6), BUN/Cr ratio greater than 30 (OR, 10), and age greater than 50 (OR, 8.4).¹

Srygley and colleagues reviewed high-quality studies of factors associated with upper GI bleeding.² Factors that were found to increase the likelihood of an upper gastrointestinal bleed were Melenic stool on exam (likelihood ratio, 25), blood or coffee grounds on nasogastric aspiration (LR, 9.6), and BUN/Cr ratio greater than 30 (LR, 7.5).

Very high BUN/Cr ratios can indicate problems other than UGI bleeding and volume depletion. High BUN/Cr ratios are seen in patients with heart failure.

Zhang and colleagues studied if a high BUN/Cr ratio helped distinguish heart failure from asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).³ They found that, compared with those in the asthma group, the BUN/Cr ratios were significantly increased in the heart failure group (P < .05), whereas no significant differences in BUN/Cr ratios were found between the asthma and COPD groups.

Cheang and colleagues conducted their own study, as well as a meta-analysis, looking to see if high BUN/Cr ratios predicted increased mortality in patients with acute heart failure.⁴ In the meta-analysis of 8 studies (including their own), they found that the highest BUN/Cr ratio category was associated with an 77% higher all-cause mortality than the lowest category (hazard ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.52-2.07).

High dose corticosteroids can raise BUN levels, especially in patients with chronic kidney disease, and cause unexpectedly high BUN/Cr ratios.
 

Pearl

Very high BUN/Cr ratios (greater than 30) can signify upper GI bleeding, heart failure, or high-dose corticosteroid use.

Dr. Paauw is professor of medicine in the division of general internal medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, and he serves as third-year medical student clerkship director at the University of Washington. Contact Dr. Paauw at [email protected].

References

1. Am J Emerg Med. 2006 May;24(3):280-5.

2. JAMA. 2012;307(10):1072-9.

3. Comput Math Methods Med. 2022 Jul 21. doi: 10.1155/2022/4586458.

4. Cardiorenal Med. 2020;10:415-28.

With regard to advanced targeted therapies, there is concern about the side effects of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, especially in patients with comorbidities. To address safety concerns with upadacitinib, a selective JAK1 inhibitor, Burmester and colleagues conducted an integrated safety analysis of 12 phase 3 trials that included 6991 patients (PsA n = 907; rheumatoid arthritis [RA] n = 3209; ankylosing spondylitis n = 182; and atopic dermatitis n = 2693) who received upadacitinib (15 or 30 mg once daily). Some trials included active comparators; therefore, safety among 1008 patients (RA n = 579; PsA n = 429) who received 40-mg adalimumab every other week and 314 patients with RA who received methotrexate were compared with those treated with upadacitinib. Overall, patients with PsA receiving 15-mg upadacitinib once daily had acceptable rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE; 244.8/100 patient-years [PY]), serious TEAE (11.1/100 PY), TEAE leading to discontinuation (5.4/100 PY), and death (0.8/100 PY). Patients with PsA treated with upadacitinib had higher rates of herpes zoster, nonmelanoma skin cancer, and elevations in creatine phosphokinase when compared with patients treated with adalimumab. Although these results are reassuring to clinicians treating PsA, continued surveillance regarding the risks for venous thrombosis, cardiovascular events, and cancer are required.

In a post hoc analysis of 10 clinical trials that included patients with PsA (n = 783) and psoriasis (n = 3663) who received tofacitinib, Kristensen and colleagues reported that the risk for major adverse cardiac events was higher among patients with PsA and a high 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk vs patients with a low ASCVD risk. The incidence of cancer was highest in patients with PsA and an intermediate 10-year ASCVD risk. Although these studies are reassuring, the assessment and risk stratification of adverse events with JAK inhibitors and therapies in PsA will require longer-term comparative clinical trials as well as an evaluation of observational data from disease registries.

Comorbidities also have an impact on treatment persistence in PsA. Tillett and colleagues conducted a retrospective study including 9057 patients with plaque psoriasis alone or with concomitant PsA who received either ustekinumab or conventional systemic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. They demonstrated that among patients receiving ustekinumab, those with concomitant PsA had a higher comorbidity burden, including diabetes, hypertension, and obesity, and a shorter time to ustekinumab discontinuation when compared with those with psoriasis alone. Secondary failure of advanced therapies is increasingly noted in the management of psoriatic disease. Female sex, depression, previous exposure to biologics, and the presence of comorbidities are important risk factors. Comprehensive management of psoriatic disease should include appropriate management of comorbidities for better long-term treatment persistence and outcomes.

With regard to advanced targeted therapies, there is concern about the side effects of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, especially in patients with comorbidities. To address safety concerns with upadacitinib, a selective JAK1 inhibitor, Burmester and colleagues conducted an integrated safety analysis of 12 phase 3 trials that included 6991 patients (PsA n = 907; rheumatoid arthritis [RA] n = 3209; ankylosing spondylitis n = 182; and atopic dermatitis n = 2693) who received upadacitinib (15 or 30 mg once daily). Some trials included active comparators; therefore, safety among 1008 patients (RA n = 579; PsA n = 429) who received 40-mg adalimumab every other week and 314 patients with RA who received methotrexate were compared with those treated with upadacitinib. Overall, patients with PsA receiving 15-mg upadacitinib once daily had acceptable rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE; 244.8/100 patient-years [PY]), serious TEAE (11.1/100 PY), TEAE leading to discontinuation (5.4/100 PY), and death (0.8/100 PY). Patients with PsA treated with upadacitinib had higher rates of herpes zoster, nonmelanoma skin cancer, and elevations in creatine phosphokinase when compared with patients treated with adalimumab. Although these results are reassuring to clinicians treating PsA, continued surveillance regarding the risks for venous thrombosis, cardiovascular events, and cancer are required.

In a post hoc analysis of 10 clinical trials that included patients with PsA (n = 783) and psoriasis (n = 3663) who received tofacitinib, Kristensen and colleagues reported that the risk for major adverse cardiac events was higher among patients with PsA and a high 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk vs patients with a low ASCVD risk. The incidence of cancer was highest in patients with PsA and an intermediate 10-year ASCVD risk. Although these studies are reassuring, the assessment and risk stratification of adverse events with JAK inhibitors and therapies in PsA will require longer-term comparative clinical trials as well as an evaluation of observational data from disease registries.

Comorbidities also have an impact on treatment persistence in PsA. Tillett and colleagues conducted a retrospective study including 9057 patients with plaque psoriasis alone or with concomitant PsA who received either ustekinumab or conventional systemic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. They demonstrated that among patients receiving ustekinumab, those with concomitant PsA had a higher comorbidity burden, including diabetes, hypertension, and obesity, and a shorter time to ustekinumab discontinuation when compared with those with psoriasis alone. Secondary failure of advanced therapies is increasingly noted in the management of psoriatic disease. Female sex, depression, previous exposure to biologics, and the presence of comorbidities are important risk factors. Comprehensive management of psoriatic disease should include appropriate management of comorbidities for better long-term treatment persistence and outcomes.

With regard to advanced targeted therapies, there is concern about the side effects of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, especially in patients with comorbidities. To address safety concerns with upadacitinib, a selective JAK1 inhibitor, Burmester and colleagues conducted an integrated safety analysis of 12 phase 3 trials that included 6991 patients (PsA n = 907; rheumatoid arthritis [RA] n = 3209; ankylosing spondylitis n = 182; and atopic dermatitis n = 2693) who received upadacitinib (15 or 30 mg once daily). Some trials included active comparators; therefore, safety among 1008 patients (RA n = 579; PsA n = 429) who received 40-mg adalimumab every other week and 314 patients with RA who received methotrexate were compared with those treated with upadacitinib. Overall, patients with PsA receiving 15-mg upadacitinib once daily had acceptable rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE; 244.8/100 patient-years [PY]), serious TEAE (11.1/100 PY), TEAE leading to discontinuation (5.4/100 PY), and death (0.8/100 PY). Patients with PsA treated with upadacitinib had higher rates of herpes zoster, nonmelanoma skin cancer, and elevations in creatine phosphokinase when compared with patients treated with adalimumab. Although these results are reassuring to clinicians treating PsA, continued surveillance regarding the risks for venous thrombosis, cardiovascular events, and cancer are required.

In a post hoc analysis of 10 clinical trials that included patients with PsA (n = 783) and psoriasis (n = 3663) who received tofacitinib, Kristensen and colleagues reported that the risk for major adverse cardiac events was higher among patients with PsA and a high 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk vs patients with a low ASCVD risk. The incidence of cancer was highest in patients with PsA and an intermediate 10-year ASCVD risk. Although these studies are reassuring, the assessment and risk stratification of adverse events with JAK inhibitors and therapies in PsA will require longer-term comparative clinical trials as well as an evaluation of observational data from disease registries.

Comorbidities also have an impact on treatment persistence in PsA. Tillett and colleagues conducted a retrospective study including 9057 patients with plaque psoriasis alone or with concomitant PsA who received either ustekinumab or conventional systemic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. They demonstrated that among patients receiving ustekinumab, those with concomitant PsA had a higher comorbidity burden, including diabetes, hypertension, and obesity, and a shorter time to ustekinumab discontinuation when compared with those with psoriasis alone. Secondary failure of advanced therapies is increasingly noted in the management of psoriatic disease. Female sex, depression, previous exposure to biologics, and the presence of comorbidities are important risk factors. Comprehensive management of psoriatic disease should include appropriate management of comorbidities for better long-term treatment persistence and outcomes.

Key clinical point: Nearly half of the patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treated with apremilast achieved disease activity index for psoriatic arthritis (DAPSA) low disease activity/remission at 6 or 12 months, with lower baseline disease activity being the only factor associated with the achievement of low disease activity or remission.

Major finding: Overall, 42.7% and 54.9% of patients achieved DAPSA low disease activity or remission at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Baseline DAPSA was inversely associated with the odds of achieving low disease activity or remission at 6 months (odds ratio [OR] 0.84) and 12 months (OR 0.91; both P < .01).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective study including 293 patients with PsA who were treated with apremilast.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any external funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Becciolini A et al. Predictors of DAPSA response in psoriatic arthritis patients treated with apremilast in a retrospective observational multi-centric study. Biomedicines. 2023;11(2):433 (Feb 2). Doi: 10.3390/biomedicines11020433

Key clinical point: Nearly half of the patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treated with apremilast achieved disease activity index for psoriatic arthritis (DAPSA) low disease activity/remission at 6 or 12 months, with lower baseline disease activity being the only factor associated with the achievement of low disease activity or remission.

Major finding: Overall, 42.7% and 54.9% of patients achieved DAPSA low disease activity or remission at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Baseline DAPSA was inversely associated with the odds of achieving low disease activity or remission at 6 months (odds ratio [OR] 0.84) and 12 months (OR 0.91; both P < .01).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective study including 293 patients with PsA who were treated with apremilast.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any external funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Becciolini A et al. Predictors of DAPSA response in psoriatic arthritis patients treated with apremilast in a retrospective observational multi-centric study. Biomedicines. 2023;11(2):433 (Feb 2). Doi: 10.3390/biomedicines11020433

Key clinical point: Nearly half of the patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treated with apremilast achieved disease activity index for psoriatic arthritis (DAPSA) low disease activity/remission at 6 or 12 months, with lower baseline disease activity being the only factor associated with the achievement of low disease activity or remission.

Major finding: Overall, 42.7% and 54.9% of patients achieved DAPSA low disease activity or remission at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Baseline DAPSA was inversely associated with the odds of achieving low disease activity or remission at 6 months (odds ratio [OR] 0.84) and 12 months (OR 0.91; both P < .01).

Study details: Findings are from a retrospective study including 293 patients with PsA who were treated with apremilast.

Disclosures: This study did not receive any external funding. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

Source: Becciolini A et al. Predictors of DAPSA response in psoriatic arthritis patients treated with apremilast in a retrospective observational multi-centric study. Biomedicines. 2023;11(2):433 (Feb 2). Doi: 10.3390/biomedicines11020433