VIDEO: Eptinezumab shows efficacy in episodic and chronic migraine trials

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 06/23/2023 - 18:28

– New results from phase 3 randomized trials of the prophylactic migraine treatment eptinezumab show significant reductions in the number of monthly migraine headache days experienced by patients with chronic or frequent episodic migraines.

Eptinezumab, an experimental monoclonal antibody delivered by intravenous infusion, is one of several antimigraine agents in development that targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), a key mediator of migraine.

At the annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology, Richard Lipton, MD, of Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York, presented results from PROMISE 2, a phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled trial of eptinezumab in patients with chronic migraine, or 15 or more days with migraine per month.

The investigators randomized 1,072 patients to quarterly IV infusions of eptinezumab 100 or 300 mg or placebo.

The vast majority of patients in the study were women, (86%-90% across groups) with a mean age of about 40 years. Patients reported 11-12 years of chronic migraine and about 16 migraine days per month at baseline, Dr. Lipton told the conference, reflecting a high level of disability in the cohort.

The primary endpoint of the study was mean change in monthly migraine days from baseline through week 12. Dr. Lipton reported that the placebo group saw a 5.6-day reduction in migraine, while the 100-mg group saw a 7.7-day reduction, and patients receiving the 300-mg dose saw an 8.2-day reduction during the first 12 weeks after injection (P less than .0001 for both).

One-third of patients receiving the highest dose saw a 75% or greater reduction in monthly migraine days by week 12, “a relatively high bar” to meet, Dr. Lipton said. Some 61% of patients on the high dose saw a reduction of 50% or more in the same time period.

 

 


A unique secondary endpoint of the study was the proportion of patients who experienced migraine on day 1 after the initial dose. The treatment groups saw a 52% reduction 1 day after receiving the study drug, while the placebo group saw a 27% reduction in the expected prevalence of migraine in the cohort for any single day, and the decrease was sustained through day 28. The results suggest a rapid onset of action for eptinezumab, followed by a sustained benefit, Dr. Lipton said.

Also at AAN, Stephen D. Silberstein, MD, of Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia, presented new 12-month results from the PROMISE 1 trial, a randomized clinical trial to evaluate quarterly IV infusions of eptinezumab 30 mg, 100 mg, 300 mg, or placebo, in 888 patients with episodic migraines, defined as 14 or fewer days per month with migraine.

The researchers, who last year published 6-month results showing significant reductions in monthly migraine days associated with eptinezumab treatment over placebo, described further reductions from patients’ baseline frequency of migraines with longer duration of treatment.

After their third and fourth quarterly injections, 70.7% of eptinezumab-treated patients achieved a 50% reduction of monthly migraine days from baseline, compared with 58.7% for placebo, the investigators reported. These findings represent an 8.9% improvement over the reductions experienced during the first two quarterly doses of eptinezumab in this cohort.

More than half of patients in the treatment arms achieved on average a 75% reduction or greater of monthly migraine days from baseline, compared with 38.7% for placebo, a 12.8% improvement from the reductions experienced with the first two doses of eptinezumab.

Adverse effects seen in the trials were upper respiratory infection, nasopharyngitis, sinusitis, and nausea.

Both trials were sponsored by eptinezumab’s manufacturer, Alder. Dr. Lipton, Dr. Silberstein, and several of their coauthors disclosed support from Alder and other manufacturers, while some coauthors on the studies are employees of Alder.

SOURCE: Saper J et al. AAN 2018, Abstract S20.001 and Lipton R et al. AAN 2018, Clinical Trials Plenary Session Abstract.

 

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

– New results from phase 3 randomized trials of the prophylactic migraine treatment eptinezumab show significant reductions in the number of monthly migraine headache days experienced by patients with chronic or frequent episodic migraines.

Eptinezumab, an experimental monoclonal antibody delivered by intravenous infusion, is one of several antimigraine agents in development that targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), a key mediator of migraine.

At the annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology, Richard Lipton, MD, of Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York, presented results from PROMISE 2, a phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled trial of eptinezumab in patients with chronic migraine, or 15 or more days with migraine per month.

The investigators randomized 1,072 patients to quarterly IV infusions of eptinezumab 100 or 300 mg or placebo.

The vast majority of patients in the study were women, (86%-90% across groups) with a mean age of about 40 years. Patients reported 11-12 years of chronic migraine and about 16 migraine days per month at baseline, Dr. Lipton told the conference, reflecting a high level of disability in the cohort.

The primary endpoint of the study was mean change in monthly migraine days from baseline through week 12. Dr. Lipton reported that the placebo group saw a 5.6-day reduction in migraine, while the 100-mg group saw a 7.7-day reduction, and patients receiving the 300-mg dose saw an 8.2-day reduction during the first 12 weeks after injection (P less than .0001 for both).

One-third of patients receiving the highest dose saw a 75% or greater reduction in monthly migraine days by week 12, “a relatively high bar” to meet, Dr. Lipton said. Some 61% of patients on the high dose saw a reduction of 50% or more in the same time period.

 

 


A unique secondary endpoint of the study was the proportion of patients who experienced migraine on day 1 after the initial dose. The treatment groups saw a 52% reduction 1 day after receiving the study drug, while the placebo group saw a 27% reduction in the expected prevalence of migraine in the cohort for any single day, and the decrease was sustained through day 28. The results suggest a rapid onset of action for eptinezumab, followed by a sustained benefit, Dr. Lipton said.

Also at AAN, Stephen D. Silberstein, MD, of Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia, presented new 12-month results from the PROMISE 1 trial, a randomized clinical trial to evaluate quarterly IV infusions of eptinezumab 30 mg, 100 mg, 300 mg, or placebo, in 888 patients with episodic migraines, defined as 14 or fewer days per month with migraine.

The researchers, who last year published 6-month results showing significant reductions in monthly migraine days associated with eptinezumab treatment over placebo, described further reductions from patients’ baseline frequency of migraines with longer duration of treatment.

After their third and fourth quarterly injections, 70.7% of eptinezumab-treated patients achieved a 50% reduction of monthly migraine days from baseline, compared with 58.7% for placebo, the investigators reported. These findings represent an 8.9% improvement over the reductions experienced during the first two quarterly doses of eptinezumab in this cohort.

More than half of patients in the treatment arms achieved on average a 75% reduction or greater of monthly migraine days from baseline, compared with 38.7% for placebo, a 12.8% improvement from the reductions experienced with the first two doses of eptinezumab.

Adverse effects seen in the trials were upper respiratory infection, nasopharyngitis, sinusitis, and nausea.

Both trials were sponsored by eptinezumab’s manufacturer, Alder. Dr. Lipton, Dr. Silberstein, and several of their coauthors disclosed support from Alder and other manufacturers, while some coauthors on the studies are employees of Alder.

SOURCE: Saper J et al. AAN 2018, Abstract S20.001 and Lipton R et al. AAN 2018, Clinical Trials Plenary Session Abstract.

 

– New results from phase 3 randomized trials of the prophylactic migraine treatment eptinezumab show significant reductions in the number of monthly migraine headache days experienced by patients with chronic or frequent episodic migraines.

Eptinezumab, an experimental monoclonal antibody delivered by intravenous infusion, is one of several antimigraine agents in development that targets calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), a key mediator of migraine.

At the annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology, Richard Lipton, MD, of Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York, presented results from PROMISE 2, a phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled trial of eptinezumab in patients with chronic migraine, or 15 or more days with migraine per month.

The investigators randomized 1,072 patients to quarterly IV infusions of eptinezumab 100 or 300 mg or placebo.

The vast majority of patients in the study were women, (86%-90% across groups) with a mean age of about 40 years. Patients reported 11-12 years of chronic migraine and about 16 migraine days per month at baseline, Dr. Lipton told the conference, reflecting a high level of disability in the cohort.

The primary endpoint of the study was mean change in monthly migraine days from baseline through week 12. Dr. Lipton reported that the placebo group saw a 5.6-day reduction in migraine, while the 100-mg group saw a 7.7-day reduction, and patients receiving the 300-mg dose saw an 8.2-day reduction during the first 12 weeks after injection (P less than .0001 for both).

One-third of patients receiving the highest dose saw a 75% or greater reduction in monthly migraine days by week 12, “a relatively high bar” to meet, Dr. Lipton said. Some 61% of patients on the high dose saw a reduction of 50% or more in the same time period.

 

 


A unique secondary endpoint of the study was the proportion of patients who experienced migraine on day 1 after the initial dose. The treatment groups saw a 52% reduction 1 day after receiving the study drug, while the placebo group saw a 27% reduction in the expected prevalence of migraine in the cohort for any single day, and the decrease was sustained through day 28. The results suggest a rapid onset of action for eptinezumab, followed by a sustained benefit, Dr. Lipton said.

Also at AAN, Stephen D. Silberstein, MD, of Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia, presented new 12-month results from the PROMISE 1 trial, a randomized clinical trial to evaluate quarterly IV infusions of eptinezumab 30 mg, 100 mg, 300 mg, or placebo, in 888 patients with episodic migraines, defined as 14 or fewer days per month with migraine.

The researchers, who last year published 6-month results showing significant reductions in monthly migraine days associated with eptinezumab treatment over placebo, described further reductions from patients’ baseline frequency of migraines with longer duration of treatment.

After their third and fourth quarterly injections, 70.7% of eptinezumab-treated patients achieved a 50% reduction of monthly migraine days from baseline, compared with 58.7% for placebo, the investigators reported. These findings represent an 8.9% improvement over the reductions experienced during the first two quarterly doses of eptinezumab in this cohort.

More than half of patients in the treatment arms achieved on average a 75% reduction or greater of monthly migraine days from baseline, compared with 38.7% for placebo, a 12.8% improvement from the reductions experienced with the first two doses of eptinezumab.

Adverse effects seen in the trials were upper respiratory infection, nasopharyngitis, sinusitis, and nausea.

Both trials were sponsored by eptinezumab’s manufacturer, Alder. Dr. Lipton, Dr. Silberstein, and several of their coauthors disclosed support from Alder and other manufacturers, while some coauthors on the studies are employees of Alder.

SOURCE: Saper J et al. AAN 2018, Abstract S20.001 and Lipton R et al. AAN 2018, Clinical Trials Plenary Session Abstract.

 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM AAN 2018

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

VIDEOS: High-priced drugs, out-of-pocket costs raise challenges for neurologists

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 03/28/2019 - 14:38

 

– Neurologists can play an important role in helping patients gain access to high-cost, breakthrough drugs, while at the same time guiding patients to lower-cost options whenever possible, speakers said at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.

The use of the Orphan Drug approval pathway established in 1983 has gained a great deal of steam for rare neurologic diseases in recent years with the approval of a number of drugs, such as nusinersen (Spinraza) for spinal muscular atrophy, eteplirsen (Exondys 51) for Duchenne muscular dystrophy, and edaravone (Radicava) for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, said Nicholas Johnson, MD, a pediatric neuromuscular disease specialist at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City.

But given that only 2% of U.S. physicians are neurologists, yet 18% of rare diseases are neurologic and 11% of drugs in development overall are for neurologic diseases, there are a great deal of challenges arising for neurologists in getting access to these new high-priced drugs for their patients, said Dr. Johnson, who leads the AAN’s Neurology Drug Pricing Task Force and is also chair of the AAN Government Relations Committee.

These challenges range from increased administrative burden on staff, getting insurance approval, finding administration sites, and the ability to perform special patient assessments, he said in an interview.

Dr. Nicholas Johnson’s interview:
 

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel



Dr. Brian Callaghan’s interview:
 

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel



Many high-priced drugs commonly prescribed for chronic neurologic conditions and diagnostic tests also have high out-of-pocket costs for patients, but it is remarkably hard even for well-informed experts to find the actual costs that patients will pay out of pocket for such drugs and tests, according to Brian Callaghan, MD, a neuromuscular disease specialist at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

 

 


Neurologist can seek to find more affordable alternatives to drugs when the out-of-pocket expenses are too great, said Dr. Callaghan, who also serves on the Neurology Drug Pricing Task Force. It may be advisable to put certain drugs lower on a list of potential treatment options than others for a chronic condition such as epilepsy because of their out-of-pocket costs, but it can be frustratingly hard to determine these costs in advance.

The University of Michigan Health System is unique in having drug cost data provided as part of information presented to physicians in electronic health records, but this is not the case in most other clinics. Until doctors can regularly access patient-specific drug and diagnostic testing out-of-pocket costs through EHRs, finding the best affordable medications for patients will remain a costly and time-consuming process, he said in an interview.
 
Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– Neurologists can play an important role in helping patients gain access to high-cost, breakthrough drugs, while at the same time guiding patients to lower-cost options whenever possible, speakers said at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.

The use of the Orphan Drug approval pathway established in 1983 has gained a great deal of steam for rare neurologic diseases in recent years with the approval of a number of drugs, such as nusinersen (Spinraza) for spinal muscular atrophy, eteplirsen (Exondys 51) for Duchenne muscular dystrophy, and edaravone (Radicava) for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, said Nicholas Johnson, MD, a pediatric neuromuscular disease specialist at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City.

But given that only 2% of U.S. physicians are neurologists, yet 18% of rare diseases are neurologic and 11% of drugs in development overall are for neurologic diseases, there are a great deal of challenges arising for neurologists in getting access to these new high-priced drugs for their patients, said Dr. Johnson, who leads the AAN’s Neurology Drug Pricing Task Force and is also chair of the AAN Government Relations Committee.

These challenges range from increased administrative burden on staff, getting insurance approval, finding administration sites, and the ability to perform special patient assessments, he said in an interview.

Dr. Nicholas Johnson’s interview:
 

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel



Dr. Brian Callaghan’s interview:
 

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel



Many high-priced drugs commonly prescribed for chronic neurologic conditions and diagnostic tests also have high out-of-pocket costs for patients, but it is remarkably hard even for well-informed experts to find the actual costs that patients will pay out of pocket for such drugs and tests, according to Brian Callaghan, MD, a neuromuscular disease specialist at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

 

 


Neurologist can seek to find more affordable alternatives to drugs when the out-of-pocket expenses are too great, said Dr. Callaghan, who also serves on the Neurology Drug Pricing Task Force. It may be advisable to put certain drugs lower on a list of potential treatment options than others for a chronic condition such as epilepsy because of their out-of-pocket costs, but it can be frustratingly hard to determine these costs in advance.

The University of Michigan Health System is unique in having drug cost data provided as part of information presented to physicians in electronic health records, but this is not the case in most other clinics. Until doctors can regularly access patient-specific drug and diagnostic testing out-of-pocket costs through EHRs, finding the best affordable medications for patients will remain a costly and time-consuming process, he said in an interview.
 

 

– Neurologists can play an important role in helping patients gain access to high-cost, breakthrough drugs, while at the same time guiding patients to lower-cost options whenever possible, speakers said at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.

The use of the Orphan Drug approval pathway established in 1983 has gained a great deal of steam for rare neurologic diseases in recent years with the approval of a number of drugs, such as nusinersen (Spinraza) for spinal muscular atrophy, eteplirsen (Exondys 51) for Duchenne muscular dystrophy, and edaravone (Radicava) for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, said Nicholas Johnson, MD, a pediatric neuromuscular disease specialist at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City.

But given that only 2% of U.S. physicians are neurologists, yet 18% of rare diseases are neurologic and 11% of drugs in development overall are for neurologic diseases, there are a great deal of challenges arising for neurologists in getting access to these new high-priced drugs for their patients, said Dr. Johnson, who leads the AAN’s Neurology Drug Pricing Task Force and is also chair of the AAN Government Relations Committee.

These challenges range from increased administrative burden on staff, getting insurance approval, finding administration sites, and the ability to perform special patient assessments, he said in an interview.

Dr. Nicholas Johnson’s interview:
 

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel



Dr. Brian Callaghan’s interview:
 

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel



Many high-priced drugs commonly prescribed for chronic neurologic conditions and diagnostic tests also have high out-of-pocket costs for patients, but it is remarkably hard even for well-informed experts to find the actual costs that patients will pay out of pocket for such drugs and tests, according to Brian Callaghan, MD, a neuromuscular disease specialist at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

 

 


Neurologist can seek to find more affordable alternatives to drugs when the out-of-pocket expenses are too great, said Dr. Callaghan, who also serves on the Neurology Drug Pricing Task Force. It may be advisable to put certain drugs lower on a list of potential treatment options than others for a chronic condition such as epilepsy because of their out-of-pocket costs, but it can be frustratingly hard to determine these costs in advance.

The University of Michigan Health System is unique in having drug cost data provided as part of information presented to physicians in electronic health records, but this is not the case in most other clinics. Until doctors can regularly access patient-specific drug and diagnostic testing out-of-pocket costs through EHRs, finding the best affordable medications for patients will remain a costly and time-consuming process, he said in an interview.
 
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM AAN 2018

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

VIDEO: AAN MS guidelines aim to help clinicians weigh expanding drug choices

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 12/15/2022 - 14:51

– A new clinical guideline for adults with multiple sclerosis is designed to help clinicians navigate an increasingly complex landscape of treatment options, its authors say.

The new American Academy of Neurology (AAN) guideline includes some 30 recommendations related to starting a disease-modifying therapy (DMT), switching therapies, or stopping treatment. The guideline, presented April 23 at the AAN annual meeting and published online simultaneously in Neurology, is the first full MS practice guideline issued by AAN since 2002, when only a handful of medications were licensed for use in MS.

The new guideline does not present a hierarchy of DMTs to start but instead weighs evidence for 21 medications or formulations, including 8 used off label, with the idea that clinicians will tailor their choices by considering patient needs, preferences, potential adverse affects, cost of medicines, comorbidities (including depression), and likelihood of adherence, among other factors addressed.

“It’s a dramatically different landscape of the choices clinicians have,” guideline lead author Alexander Rae-Grant, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic, said at a press conference announcing the guideline.


The guideline encourages clinicians and patients “to have a detailed discussion of the risks and benefits of different therapies,” guideline coauthor Ruth Ann Marrie, MD, PhD, of the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, said at the press conference. “You need to have that informed ... discussion to share decision making – the guideline provides information for each provider-patient dyad to make decisions specific to that patient.”

The guideline incorporates findings from nearly 50 randomized trials, although few of these were head-to-head comparisons of therapies. The authors graded evidence for each DMT as compared with placebo or other DMTs in lowering relapse rate, taking into consideration study design and size. The guideline reflects changes to diagnostic criteria made in 2010, and a classification scheme issued in 2014 for MS subtypes, both of which have complicated the extension of clinical trial findings to some patient groups. It stresses early treatment, recommending that clinicians start DMTs in people with a single clinical demyelinating event and two or more brain lesions characteristic of MS.

Several drugs used off label in MS, including azathioprine and cladribine, were included in the evidence review, with cladribine described as a cost-effective option for patients without the resources to obtain approved agents.

 

 


Patients with a new diagnosis of MS should be counseled on starting DMTs not at the time of diagnosis but in a dedicated follow-up visit, the guideline says. Dr. Rae-Grant said that there’s a reasonable amount of “literature to suggest that at the time of diagnosis, what people hear after diagnosis is zero – and that deciding what medication to use is such a weighty decision, we did feel it was important to do that at a different time.”

Dr. Marrie said the AAN guideline “shares some strong similarities” with guidelines released in 2017 by the European Academy of Neurology, including recommendations for early initiation of therapy, for maintaining therapies, and for switching DMTs in individuals not responding or who have breakthrough relapses or changes on MRI.

Dr. Marrie disclosed no conflicts of interest related to her work on the guidelines. Dr. Rae-Grant disclosed income from textbooks on neurology and MS, and no other financial conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Rae-Grant A et al. Neurology. 2018;90:777-88.

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

– A new clinical guideline for adults with multiple sclerosis is designed to help clinicians navigate an increasingly complex landscape of treatment options, its authors say.

The new American Academy of Neurology (AAN) guideline includes some 30 recommendations related to starting a disease-modifying therapy (DMT), switching therapies, or stopping treatment. The guideline, presented April 23 at the AAN annual meeting and published online simultaneously in Neurology, is the first full MS practice guideline issued by AAN since 2002, when only a handful of medications were licensed for use in MS.

The new guideline does not present a hierarchy of DMTs to start but instead weighs evidence for 21 medications or formulations, including 8 used off label, with the idea that clinicians will tailor their choices by considering patient needs, preferences, potential adverse affects, cost of medicines, comorbidities (including depression), and likelihood of adherence, among other factors addressed.

“It’s a dramatically different landscape of the choices clinicians have,” guideline lead author Alexander Rae-Grant, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic, said at a press conference announcing the guideline.


The guideline encourages clinicians and patients “to have a detailed discussion of the risks and benefits of different therapies,” guideline coauthor Ruth Ann Marrie, MD, PhD, of the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, said at the press conference. “You need to have that informed ... discussion to share decision making – the guideline provides information for each provider-patient dyad to make decisions specific to that patient.”

The guideline incorporates findings from nearly 50 randomized trials, although few of these were head-to-head comparisons of therapies. The authors graded evidence for each DMT as compared with placebo or other DMTs in lowering relapse rate, taking into consideration study design and size. The guideline reflects changes to diagnostic criteria made in 2010, and a classification scheme issued in 2014 for MS subtypes, both of which have complicated the extension of clinical trial findings to some patient groups. It stresses early treatment, recommending that clinicians start DMTs in people with a single clinical demyelinating event and two or more brain lesions characteristic of MS.

Several drugs used off label in MS, including azathioprine and cladribine, were included in the evidence review, with cladribine described as a cost-effective option for patients without the resources to obtain approved agents.

 

 


Patients with a new diagnosis of MS should be counseled on starting DMTs not at the time of diagnosis but in a dedicated follow-up visit, the guideline says. Dr. Rae-Grant said that there’s a reasonable amount of “literature to suggest that at the time of diagnosis, what people hear after diagnosis is zero – and that deciding what medication to use is such a weighty decision, we did feel it was important to do that at a different time.”

Dr. Marrie said the AAN guideline “shares some strong similarities” with guidelines released in 2017 by the European Academy of Neurology, including recommendations for early initiation of therapy, for maintaining therapies, and for switching DMTs in individuals not responding or who have breakthrough relapses or changes on MRI.

Dr. Marrie disclosed no conflicts of interest related to her work on the guidelines. Dr. Rae-Grant disclosed income from textbooks on neurology and MS, and no other financial conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Rae-Grant A et al. Neurology. 2018;90:777-88.

– A new clinical guideline for adults with multiple sclerosis is designed to help clinicians navigate an increasingly complex landscape of treatment options, its authors say.

The new American Academy of Neurology (AAN) guideline includes some 30 recommendations related to starting a disease-modifying therapy (DMT), switching therapies, or stopping treatment. The guideline, presented April 23 at the AAN annual meeting and published online simultaneously in Neurology, is the first full MS practice guideline issued by AAN since 2002, when only a handful of medications were licensed for use in MS.

The new guideline does not present a hierarchy of DMTs to start but instead weighs evidence for 21 medications or formulations, including 8 used off label, with the idea that clinicians will tailor their choices by considering patient needs, preferences, potential adverse affects, cost of medicines, comorbidities (including depression), and likelihood of adherence, among other factors addressed.

“It’s a dramatically different landscape of the choices clinicians have,” guideline lead author Alexander Rae-Grant, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic, said at a press conference announcing the guideline.


The guideline encourages clinicians and patients “to have a detailed discussion of the risks and benefits of different therapies,” guideline coauthor Ruth Ann Marrie, MD, PhD, of the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, said at the press conference. “You need to have that informed ... discussion to share decision making – the guideline provides information for each provider-patient dyad to make decisions specific to that patient.”

The guideline incorporates findings from nearly 50 randomized trials, although few of these were head-to-head comparisons of therapies. The authors graded evidence for each DMT as compared with placebo or other DMTs in lowering relapse rate, taking into consideration study design and size. The guideline reflects changes to diagnostic criteria made in 2010, and a classification scheme issued in 2014 for MS subtypes, both of which have complicated the extension of clinical trial findings to some patient groups. It stresses early treatment, recommending that clinicians start DMTs in people with a single clinical demyelinating event and two or more brain lesions characteristic of MS.

Several drugs used off label in MS, including azathioprine and cladribine, were included in the evidence review, with cladribine described as a cost-effective option for patients without the resources to obtain approved agents.

 

 


Patients with a new diagnosis of MS should be counseled on starting DMTs not at the time of diagnosis but in a dedicated follow-up visit, the guideline says. Dr. Rae-Grant said that there’s a reasonable amount of “literature to suggest that at the time of diagnosis, what people hear after diagnosis is zero – and that deciding what medication to use is such a weighty decision, we did feel it was important to do that at a different time.”

Dr. Marrie said the AAN guideline “shares some strong similarities” with guidelines released in 2017 by the European Academy of Neurology, including recommendations for early initiation of therapy, for maintaining therapies, and for switching DMTs in individuals not responding or who have breakthrough relapses or changes on MRI.

Dr. Marrie disclosed no conflicts of interest related to her work on the guidelines. Dr. Rae-Grant disclosed income from textbooks on neurology and MS, and no other financial conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Rae-Grant A et al. Neurology. 2018;90:777-88.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM AAN 2018

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

VIDEO: Encouraging results reported for novel Huntington’s disease therapy

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 08/18/2021 - 15:02

– Results from the first-in-human trial of the investigational antisense oligonucleotide therapy IONIS-HTTRx showed strong dose-dependent reductions in the toxic huntingtin protein in Huntington’s disease patients’ cerebrospinal fluid when compared with placebo.

An exploratory analysis also showed signals of clinical improvement among patients receiving the therapy, the study’s lead author, Sarah Tabrizi, MD, PhD, of University College London, reported at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.

The findings represent a potential breakthrough in the way Huntington’s – and possibly other neurodegenerative diseases – are treated, said Dr. Tabrizi of University College London. The intrathecally-delivered drug binds to mutant huntingtin protein mRNA to reduce the level of the toxic protein being made.

In the phase 1/2a trial, Dr. Tabrizi and her colleagues enrolled 46 patients with early-stage Huntington’s disease and randomized them to four doses of IONIS-HTTRx or placebo. Patients received four monthly injections of the study drug into the cerebrospinal fluid followed by a 4-month untreated follow-up period. IONIS-HTTRx was delivered in five ascending-dose cohorts.

IONIS-HTTRx was safe and well tolerated and all patients completed the study, Dr. Tabrizi reported. “Our results show that we had significant lowering of the toxic mutant huntingtin protein in the spinal fluid of the patients,” she said, noting that patients receiving the highest doses saw 40%-60% lowering of the protein, which preclinical work suggests correlates to reductions of the protein in the brain.

Dr. Tabrizi stressed that the main outcome measures in the study were reduction of the mutant protein in the CSF and safety and tolerance of the study drug. The investigators did not expect to see clinical measures to change in such a short, small study, she said.

“But then when we looked more carefully at the data with exploratory analysis we found a link between lowering of CSF mutant huntingtin and improvement in total motor score, which is a measure of neurological function, and also, improvement in the Symbol Digit Modalities Test.”

 

 


The clinical results are exploratory and require confirmation in larger studies, Dr. Tabrizi stressed.

The study was supported by Ionis Pharmaceuticals. Roche will develop the drug in further clinical trials.

SOURCE: Tabrizi S et al. AAN 2018 abstract CT.002.

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

– Results from the first-in-human trial of the investigational antisense oligonucleotide therapy IONIS-HTTRx showed strong dose-dependent reductions in the toxic huntingtin protein in Huntington’s disease patients’ cerebrospinal fluid when compared with placebo.

An exploratory analysis also showed signals of clinical improvement among patients receiving the therapy, the study’s lead author, Sarah Tabrizi, MD, PhD, of University College London, reported at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.

The findings represent a potential breakthrough in the way Huntington’s – and possibly other neurodegenerative diseases – are treated, said Dr. Tabrizi of University College London. The intrathecally-delivered drug binds to mutant huntingtin protein mRNA to reduce the level of the toxic protein being made.

In the phase 1/2a trial, Dr. Tabrizi and her colleagues enrolled 46 patients with early-stage Huntington’s disease and randomized them to four doses of IONIS-HTTRx or placebo. Patients received four monthly injections of the study drug into the cerebrospinal fluid followed by a 4-month untreated follow-up period. IONIS-HTTRx was delivered in five ascending-dose cohorts.

IONIS-HTTRx was safe and well tolerated and all patients completed the study, Dr. Tabrizi reported. “Our results show that we had significant lowering of the toxic mutant huntingtin protein in the spinal fluid of the patients,” she said, noting that patients receiving the highest doses saw 40%-60% lowering of the protein, which preclinical work suggests correlates to reductions of the protein in the brain.

Dr. Tabrizi stressed that the main outcome measures in the study were reduction of the mutant protein in the CSF and safety and tolerance of the study drug. The investigators did not expect to see clinical measures to change in such a short, small study, she said.

“But then when we looked more carefully at the data with exploratory analysis we found a link between lowering of CSF mutant huntingtin and improvement in total motor score, which is a measure of neurological function, and also, improvement in the Symbol Digit Modalities Test.”

 

 


The clinical results are exploratory and require confirmation in larger studies, Dr. Tabrizi stressed.

The study was supported by Ionis Pharmaceuticals. Roche will develop the drug in further clinical trials.

SOURCE: Tabrizi S et al. AAN 2018 abstract CT.002.

– Results from the first-in-human trial of the investigational antisense oligonucleotide therapy IONIS-HTTRx showed strong dose-dependent reductions in the toxic huntingtin protein in Huntington’s disease patients’ cerebrospinal fluid when compared with placebo.

An exploratory analysis also showed signals of clinical improvement among patients receiving the therapy, the study’s lead author, Sarah Tabrizi, MD, PhD, of University College London, reported at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.

The findings represent a potential breakthrough in the way Huntington’s – and possibly other neurodegenerative diseases – are treated, said Dr. Tabrizi of University College London. The intrathecally-delivered drug binds to mutant huntingtin protein mRNA to reduce the level of the toxic protein being made.

In the phase 1/2a trial, Dr. Tabrizi and her colleagues enrolled 46 patients with early-stage Huntington’s disease and randomized them to four doses of IONIS-HTTRx or placebo. Patients received four monthly injections of the study drug into the cerebrospinal fluid followed by a 4-month untreated follow-up period. IONIS-HTTRx was delivered in five ascending-dose cohorts.

IONIS-HTTRx was safe and well tolerated and all patients completed the study, Dr. Tabrizi reported. “Our results show that we had significant lowering of the toxic mutant huntingtin protein in the spinal fluid of the patients,” she said, noting that patients receiving the highest doses saw 40%-60% lowering of the protein, which preclinical work suggests correlates to reductions of the protein in the brain.

Dr. Tabrizi stressed that the main outcome measures in the study were reduction of the mutant protein in the CSF and safety and tolerance of the study drug. The investigators did not expect to see clinical measures to change in such a short, small study, she said.

“But then when we looked more carefully at the data with exploratory analysis we found a link between lowering of CSF mutant huntingtin and improvement in total motor score, which is a measure of neurological function, and also, improvement in the Symbol Digit Modalities Test.”

 

 


The clinical results are exploratory and require confirmation in larger studies, Dr. Tabrizi stressed.

The study was supported by Ionis Pharmaceuticals. Roche will develop the drug in further clinical trials.

SOURCE: Tabrizi S et al. AAN 2018 abstract CT.002.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM AAN 2018

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

VIDEO: Ubrogepant reduced pain, related symptoms of a migraine attack

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 06/13/2019 - 15:40

– The investigational oral calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) blocker ubrogepant proved superior to placebo in treating a single, acute, moderate to severe migraine attack in the phase 3 ACHIEVE I trial.

Blocking the function of CGRP when it is pathologically released during a migraine attack is the mechanism of a bevy of antagonists under development for treating migraine, and the ACHIEVE I trial results are the first to be reported from a phase 3 trial of an oral small molecule to treat single migraine attacks rather than prevent attacks with monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP or its receptor, according to the lead author of ACHIEVE I, Joel M. Trugman, MD, director of clinical development for Allergan.

Dr. Trugman and his colleagues recruited 1,672 adult patients (88% female, mean age 41) with a history of migraine with or without aura, and randomized them to placebo, ubrogepant 50 mg, or ubrogepant 100 mg. Patients were instructed to treat a single migraine attack of moderate to severe pain intensity and record symptoms, such as pain, light sensitivity, and sound sensitivity, before and after taking the medication.

“The paradigm for this type of trial is to treat a single, well characterized migraine attack in a large population of patients,” Dr. Trugman said in a press conference at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.

At 2 hours after dosing, the percentage of ubrogepant-treated patients achieving freedom from pain was significantly greater than the percentage of those treated with placebo (50 mg: 19.2%, P = .0023; 100 mg: 21.2%, P = .0003; placebo: 11.8%).

The percentage of ubrogepant-treated patients achieving absence of their most bothersome symptom was also significantly greater than that of placebo (50 mg: 38.6%, P = .0023; 100 mg: 37.7%, P = .0023; placebo: 27.8%).

Adverse events in the ubrogepant groups were similar to those of placebo, the most reported to be nausea, somnolence, and dry mouth.

Several authors are employees of Allergan, which sponsored the study.

SOURCE: Trugman J et al. AAN 2018 emerging science abstract 008.

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

– The investigational oral calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) blocker ubrogepant proved superior to placebo in treating a single, acute, moderate to severe migraine attack in the phase 3 ACHIEVE I trial.

Blocking the function of CGRP when it is pathologically released during a migraine attack is the mechanism of a bevy of antagonists under development for treating migraine, and the ACHIEVE I trial results are the first to be reported from a phase 3 trial of an oral small molecule to treat single migraine attacks rather than prevent attacks with monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP or its receptor, according to the lead author of ACHIEVE I, Joel M. Trugman, MD, director of clinical development for Allergan.

Dr. Trugman and his colleagues recruited 1,672 adult patients (88% female, mean age 41) with a history of migraine with or without aura, and randomized them to placebo, ubrogepant 50 mg, or ubrogepant 100 mg. Patients were instructed to treat a single migraine attack of moderate to severe pain intensity and record symptoms, such as pain, light sensitivity, and sound sensitivity, before and after taking the medication.

“The paradigm for this type of trial is to treat a single, well characterized migraine attack in a large population of patients,” Dr. Trugman said in a press conference at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.

At 2 hours after dosing, the percentage of ubrogepant-treated patients achieving freedom from pain was significantly greater than the percentage of those treated with placebo (50 mg: 19.2%, P = .0023; 100 mg: 21.2%, P = .0003; placebo: 11.8%).

The percentage of ubrogepant-treated patients achieving absence of their most bothersome symptom was also significantly greater than that of placebo (50 mg: 38.6%, P = .0023; 100 mg: 37.7%, P = .0023; placebo: 27.8%).

Adverse events in the ubrogepant groups were similar to those of placebo, the most reported to be nausea, somnolence, and dry mouth.

Several authors are employees of Allergan, which sponsored the study.

SOURCE: Trugman J et al. AAN 2018 emerging science abstract 008.

– The investigational oral calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) blocker ubrogepant proved superior to placebo in treating a single, acute, moderate to severe migraine attack in the phase 3 ACHIEVE I trial.

Blocking the function of CGRP when it is pathologically released during a migraine attack is the mechanism of a bevy of antagonists under development for treating migraine, and the ACHIEVE I trial results are the first to be reported from a phase 3 trial of an oral small molecule to treat single migraine attacks rather than prevent attacks with monoclonal antibodies targeting CGRP or its receptor, according to the lead author of ACHIEVE I, Joel M. Trugman, MD, director of clinical development for Allergan.

Dr. Trugman and his colleagues recruited 1,672 adult patients (88% female, mean age 41) with a history of migraine with or without aura, and randomized them to placebo, ubrogepant 50 mg, or ubrogepant 100 mg. Patients were instructed to treat a single migraine attack of moderate to severe pain intensity and record symptoms, such as pain, light sensitivity, and sound sensitivity, before and after taking the medication.

“The paradigm for this type of trial is to treat a single, well characterized migraine attack in a large population of patients,” Dr. Trugman said in a press conference at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.

At 2 hours after dosing, the percentage of ubrogepant-treated patients achieving freedom from pain was significantly greater than the percentage of those treated with placebo (50 mg: 19.2%, P = .0023; 100 mg: 21.2%, P = .0003; placebo: 11.8%).

The percentage of ubrogepant-treated patients achieving absence of their most bothersome symptom was also significantly greater than that of placebo (50 mg: 38.6%, P = .0023; 100 mg: 37.7%, P = .0023; placebo: 27.8%).

Adverse events in the ubrogepant groups were similar to those of placebo, the most reported to be nausea, somnolence, and dry mouth.

Several authors are employees of Allergan, which sponsored the study.

SOURCE: Trugman J et al. AAN 2018 emerging science abstract 008.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM AAN 2018

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

VIDEO: Fix physician burnout? You need more than yoga

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 04/08/2019 - 12:01

– Among a growing number of physicians, the words of a Righteous Brothers’ song ring true about their careers: They’ve lost that loving feeling.

For burned-out physicians, “they’ve lost that sense that they’re making a difference,” explained Susan Thompson Hingle, MD, of Southern Illinois University in Springfield. And the solutions aren’t simple. “You can’t yoga your way out of this,” Dr. Hingle cautioned.

At the annual meeting of the American College of Physicians, Dr. Hingle and Daisy Smith, MD, vice president of clinical programs at the ACP, talked about solutions to burnout, including how more traditional approaches can boost physician well-being, such as team-based care, physician champions, and increasing the pool of primary care providers.

But they also detailed ways that struggling physicians can find support from an unlikely source: their patients.



Dr. Smith’s video interview:


Dr. Hingle’s video interview:

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

– Among a growing number of physicians, the words of a Righteous Brothers’ song ring true about their careers: They’ve lost that loving feeling.

For burned-out physicians, “they’ve lost that sense that they’re making a difference,” explained Susan Thompson Hingle, MD, of Southern Illinois University in Springfield. And the solutions aren’t simple. “You can’t yoga your way out of this,” Dr. Hingle cautioned.

At the annual meeting of the American College of Physicians, Dr. Hingle and Daisy Smith, MD, vice president of clinical programs at the ACP, talked about solutions to burnout, including how more traditional approaches can boost physician well-being, such as team-based care, physician champions, and increasing the pool of primary care providers.

But they also detailed ways that struggling physicians can find support from an unlikely source: their patients.



Dr. Smith’s video interview:


Dr. Hingle’s video interview:

– Among a growing number of physicians, the words of a Righteous Brothers’ song ring true about their careers: They’ve lost that loving feeling.

For burned-out physicians, “they’ve lost that sense that they’re making a difference,” explained Susan Thompson Hingle, MD, of Southern Illinois University in Springfield. And the solutions aren’t simple. “You can’t yoga your way out of this,” Dr. Hingle cautioned.

At the annual meeting of the American College of Physicians, Dr. Hingle and Daisy Smith, MD, vice president of clinical programs at the ACP, talked about solutions to burnout, including how more traditional approaches can boost physician well-being, such as team-based care, physician champions, and increasing the pool of primary care providers.

But they also detailed ways that struggling physicians can find support from an unlikely source: their patients.



Dr. Smith’s video interview:


Dr. Hingle’s video interview:

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM ACP INTERNAL MEDICINE 

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

VIDEO: A treatment plan for medicine’s gender inequities

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 06/17/2019 - 15:44

– Gender inequities may pervade the medical profession, but a new generation of younger physicians – women and men – can help reshape medicine’s mindsets and workplaces.

At the annual meeting of the American College of Physicians, Sue Bornstein, MD, former chief of staff at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, and Darilyn Moyer, MD, CEO of the American College of Physicians, talked about the challenges to closing medicine’s gender-equity gaps, from structural bias to backlash. And they outlined strategies for women to broaden career opportunities and achieve fair payment – from mentoring and sponsoring, to leading change from the top of organizations.

The ACP published a position paper on achieving gender equity in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

Dr. Bornstein’s interview:

Dr. Moyer’s interview:

SOURCE: Ann Intern Med. 2018 Apr 17. doi: 10.7326/M17-3438.

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

– Gender inequities may pervade the medical profession, but a new generation of younger physicians – women and men – can help reshape medicine’s mindsets and workplaces.

At the annual meeting of the American College of Physicians, Sue Bornstein, MD, former chief of staff at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, and Darilyn Moyer, MD, CEO of the American College of Physicians, talked about the challenges to closing medicine’s gender-equity gaps, from structural bias to backlash. And they outlined strategies for women to broaden career opportunities and achieve fair payment – from mentoring and sponsoring, to leading change from the top of organizations.

The ACP published a position paper on achieving gender equity in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

Dr. Bornstein’s interview:

Dr. Moyer’s interview:

SOURCE: Ann Intern Med. 2018 Apr 17. doi: 10.7326/M17-3438.

– Gender inequities may pervade the medical profession, but a new generation of younger physicians – women and men – can help reshape medicine’s mindsets and workplaces.

At the annual meeting of the American College of Physicians, Sue Bornstein, MD, former chief of staff at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, and Darilyn Moyer, MD, CEO of the American College of Physicians, talked about the challenges to closing medicine’s gender-equity gaps, from structural bias to backlash. And they outlined strategies for women to broaden career opportunities and achieve fair payment – from mentoring and sponsoring, to leading change from the top of organizations.

The ACP published a position paper on achieving gender equity in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

Dr. Bornstein’s interview:

Dr. Moyer’s interview:

SOURCE: Ann Intern Med. 2018 Apr 17. doi: 10.7326/M17-3438.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM ACP Internal Medicine

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

VIDEO: ZIP code, not gene code – Social factors shape patients’ health

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 06/26/2019 - 09:14

– What happens outside the exam room often plays a crucial, and crucially overlooked, role in how well or poorly patients respond to medical therapy.

Social determinants – from the bus ride to a clinic to fitting medication compliance into a three-job work day – are at the center of a new push by the American College of Physicians to improve patient care and awaken physicians to the nonmedical factors that frustrate treatment and fuel outcomes failures.

When it comes to patients’ health, American College of Physicians President Jack Ende, MD, says it’s often ZIP code, not gene code, that can make all the difference.

At the annual meeting of the American College of Physicians, Dr. Ende of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Sarah Candler, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine, Houston; and Karen DeSalvo, MD, of the University of Texas, Austin, outlined how physicians can look beyond biology and into patients’ social environments, and they shared resources physicians can use to counter social determinants that harm health.

The ACP published a position paper on social determinants of health in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

Dr. Candler's interview:

Dr. DeSalvo's interview:

Dr. Ende's interview:

SOURCE: Ann Intern Med. 2018 Apr 17;168(8):577-8.

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

– What happens outside the exam room often plays a crucial, and crucially overlooked, role in how well or poorly patients respond to medical therapy.

Social determinants – from the bus ride to a clinic to fitting medication compliance into a three-job work day – are at the center of a new push by the American College of Physicians to improve patient care and awaken physicians to the nonmedical factors that frustrate treatment and fuel outcomes failures.

When it comes to patients’ health, American College of Physicians President Jack Ende, MD, says it’s often ZIP code, not gene code, that can make all the difference.

At the annual meeting of the American College of Physicians, Dr. Ende of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Sarah Candler, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine, Houston; and Karen DeSalvo, MD, of the University of Texas, Austin, outlined how physicians can look beyond biology and into patients’ social environments, and they shared resources physicians can use to counter social determinants that harm health.

The ACP published a position paper on social determinants of health in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

Dr. Candler's interview:

Dr. DeSalvo's interview:

Dr. Ende's interview:

SOURCE: Ann Intern Med. 2018 Apr 17;168(8):577-8.

– What happens outside the exam room often plays a crucial, and crucially overlooked, role in how well or poorly patients respond to medical therapy.

Social determinants – from the bus ride to a clinic to fitting medication compliance into a three-job work day – are at the center of a new push by the American College of Physicians to improve patient care and awaken physicians to the nonmedical factors that frustrate treatment and fuel outcomes failures.

When it comes to patients’ health, American College of Physicians President Jack Ende, MD, says it’s often ZIP code, not gene code, that can make all the difference.

At the annual meeting of the American College of Physicians, Dr. Ende of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; Sarah Candler, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine, Houston; and Karen DeSalvo, MD, of the University of Texas, Austin, outlined how physicians can look beyond biology and into patients’ social environments, and they shared resources physicians can use to counter social determinants that harm health.

The ACP published a position paper on social determinants of health in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

Dr. Candler's interview:

Dr. DeSalvo's interview:

Dr. Ende's interview:

SOURCE: Ann Intern Med. 2018 Apr 17;168(8):577-8.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM ACP INTERNAL MEDICINE

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

VIDEO: Screening ECG patch boosts AF diagnoses ninefold

Seek and you will find AF; then what?
Article Type
Changed
Tue, 07/21/2020 - 14:18

 

– An ECG patch worn twice for a total of about 24 days produced a nearly ninefold increase in the number of high-risk people diagnosed with atrial fibrillation, compared with those followed with usual care in a randomized trial with 2,655 people.

During 4 months of follow-up, 1,364 high-risk people assigned to ECG patch screening had a 5.1% rate of new atrial fibrillation (AF) diagnoses, compared with a 0.6% rate among 1,291 controls who wore the patch but were identified with new-onset AF using standard follow-up that did not take the patch data into account. This was a statistically significant difference for the study’s primary endpoint, Steven R. Steinhubl, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel


In addition to proving that the ECG patch can better identify asymptomatic people who have AF than conventional means – usually waiting until a stroke occurs or for symptoms to appear – the noninvasive and relatively low-cost patch also gives researchers a new way to try to address the more fundamental medical question created by this line of investigation: How clinically important are relatively brief, asymptomatic episodes of atrial fibrillation, and are patient outcomes improved by treatments begun in this early phase?

The study results “show we can look beyond implantable devices with a less expensive, noninvasive way” to identify patients with asymptomatic AF and determine its natural history and need for intervention, Dr. Steinhubl said in a video interview.

The mSToP (mHealth Screening to Prevent Strokes) trial ran at Scripps and began by identifying more than 359,000 U.S. residents with Aetna health insurance who met the study’s definition of having high AF risk, either by being at least 75 years old, or at least 55 years old and male or at least 65 years old and female. To qualify as high risk those younger than 75 years also had to have at least one clinical risk factor, which could include a prior cerebrovascular event, heart failure, hypertension plus diabetes, obstructive sleep apnea, or any of six other comorbidities. The researchers also excluded potential participants because of several factors, including a history of atrial fibrillation or flutter, current treatment with an anticoagulant, end-stage renal disease, and patients with an implanted pacemaker or defibrillator.

They invited more than 100,000 of these qualifying Aetna beneficiaries to participate, and 2,655 agreed and received by mail a pair of ECG measurement patches (Zio) with instructions to wear one for 2 weeks at the start of the study and to wear the second during the final 2 weeks of the 4-month study period. The participants averaged 73 years of age, and their average CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.

All patients in the study were told to wear their patches and mail them in, but the researchers used the collected ECG data for diagnosing AF in only the 1,364 patients randomized to the active arm. The ECG findings for the 1,291 controls wasn’t provided to their physicians, and so any new-onset AF had to be found either by symptom onset or incidentally. About one-third of the people assigned to each of the study arms never wore their patches. Those who wore their patches did so for an average of nearly 12 days each. Diagnosis of new-onset AF was based on finding either at least one AF episode recorded by the patches that lasted at least 30 seconds or an AF diagnosis appearing in the patient’s record. The average AF burden – the percentage of time a person with incident AF had an abnormal sinus rhythm – was 0.9%.

 

 


Even though many patients did not use their patches, the investigators assessed the primary endpoint of new AF diagnoses during the 4-month study period on an intention-to-treat basis. Their analysis showed an 8.8-fold higher rate of new AF diagnoses among people in the intervention arm whose patch data were used for immediate diagnosis, reported Dr. Steinhubl, an interventional cardiologist and director of digital medicine at the Scripps Translational Science Institute in La Jolla, Ca.

As a secondary endpoint, the researchers merged the entire group of 1,738 participants who had sent in patches with ECG data and compared their 1-year incidence of diagnosed AF against 3,476 matched controls from the Aetna database. After 1 year, the rate of new AF diagnoses was 6.3% in those with patch information and 2.3% among the controls, a threefold difference in diagnosis rates after adjustment for potential confounders.

“The clinical significance of the short AF episodes” manifested by many patch users identified with AF “requires greater clarity, especially in terms of stroke risk,” Dr. Steinhubl said. But he added, “I like to think that, as we learn more, we can look at more than just anticoagulation” as intervention options. For example, if a morbidly obese patient has asymptomatic AF found by patch screening, it might strengthen the case for bariatric surgery if it’s eventually shown that weight loss after bariatric surgery slows AF progression. The same holds true for more aggressive sleep apnea intervention in patients with sleep apnea and asymptomatic AF, as well as for patients with asymptomatic AF and another type of associated comorbidity.

SOURCE: Steinhubl S. ACC 18, Abstract 402-19.

Body

 

Results from several studies have now shown that some kind of monitoring for AF in asymptomatic, at-risk people results in an increased diagnosis of subclinical AF. Study results also suggest that, in general, people diagnosed with subclinical AF are at a lower risk of stroke than patients with symptomatic AF. As of now, no prospective study has evaluated the efficacy of anticoagulant therapy in people diagnosed with subclinical AF, although such studies are now in progress. Until we have these results, the question of how to manage patients with subclinical AF remains unanswered.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News
Dr. N.A. Mark Estes

N.A. Mark Estes, MD , is professor of medicine and director of the New England Cardiac Arrhythmia Center at Tufts Medical Center in Boston. He has been a consultant to Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and St. Jude. He made these comments as designated discussant for the mSToPS report.

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

 

Results from several studies have now shown that some kind of monitoring for AF in asymptomatic, at-risk people results in an increased diagnosis of subclinical AF. Study results also suggest that, in general, people diagnosed with subclinical AF are at a lower risk of stroke than patients with symptomatic AF. As of now, no prospective study has evaluated the efficacy of anticoagulant therapy in people diagnosed with subclinical AF, although such studies are now in progress. Until we have these results, the question of how to manage patients with subclinical AF remains unanswered.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News
Dr. N.A. Mark Estes

N.A. Mark Estes, MD , is professor of medicine and director of the New England Cardiac Arrhythmia Center at Tufts Medical Center in Boston. He has been a consultant to Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and St. Jude. He made these comments as designated discussant for the mSToPS report.

Body

 

Results from several studies have now shown that some kind of monitoring for AF in asymptomatic, at-risk people results in an increased diagnosis of subclinical AF. Study results also suggest that, in general, people diagnosed with subclinical AF are at a lower risk of stroke than patients with symptomatic AF. As of now, no prospective study has evaluated the efficacy of anticoagulant therapy in people diagnosed with subclinical AF, although such studies are now in progress. Until we have these results, the question of how to manage patients with subclinical AF remains unanswered.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News
Dr. N.A. Mark Estes

N.A. Mark Estes, MD , is professor of medicine and director of the New England Cardiac Arrhythmia Center at Tufts Medical Center in Boston. He has been a consultant to Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and St. Jude. He made these comments as designated discussant for the mSToPS report.

Title
Seek and you will find AF; then what?
Seek and you will find AF; then what?

 

– An ECG patch worn twice for a total of about 24 days produced a nearly ninefold increase in the number of high-risk people diagnosed with atrial fibrillation, compared with those followed with usual care in a randomized trial with 2,655 people.

During 4 months of follow-up, 1,364 high-risk people assigned to ECG patch screening had a 5.1% rate of new atrial fibrillation (AF) diagnoses, compared with a 0.6% rate among 1,291 controls who wore the patch but were identified with new-onset AF using standard follow-up that did not take the patch data into account. This was a statistically significant difference for the study’s primary endpoint, Steven R. Steinhubl, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel


In addition to proving that the ECG patch can better identify asymptomatic people who have AF than conventional means – usually waiting until a stroke occurs or for symptoms to appear – the noninvasive and relatively low-cost patch also gives researchers a new way to try to address the more fundamental medical question created by this line of investigation: How clinically important are relatively brief, asymptomatic episodes of atrial fibrillation, and are patient outcomes improved by treatments begun in this early phase?

The study results “show we can look beyond implantable devices with a less expensive, noninvasive way” to identify patients with asymptomatic AF and determine its natural history and need for intervention, Dr. Steinhubl said in a video interview.

The mSToP (mHealth Screening to Prevent Strokes) trial ran at Scripps and began by identifying more than 359,000 U.S. residents with Aetna health insurance who met the study’s definition of having high AF risk, either by being at least 75 years old, or at least 55 years old and male or at least 65 years old and female. To qualify as high risk those younger than 75 years also had to have at least one clinical risk factor, which could include a prior cerebrovascular event, heart failure, hypertension plus diabetes, obstructive sleep apnea, or any of six other comorbidities. The researchers also excluded potential participants because of several factors, including a history of atrial fibrillation or flutter, current treatment with an anticoagulant, end-stage renal disease, and patients with an implanted pacemaker or defibrillator.

They invited more than 100,000 of these qualifying Aetna beneficiaries to participate, and 2,655 agreed and received by mail a pair of ECG measurement patches (Zio) with instructions to wear one for 2 weeks at the start of the study and to wear the second during the final 2 weeks of the 4-month study period. The participants averaged 73 years of age, and their average CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.

All patients in the study were told to wear their patches and mail them in, but the researchers used the collected ECG data for diagnosing AF in only the 1,364 patients randomized to the active arm. The ECG findings for the 1,291 controls wasn’t provided to their physicians, and so any new-onset AF had to be found either by symptom onset or incidentally. About one-third of the people assigned to each of the study arms never wore their patches. Those who wore their patches did so for an average of nearly 12 days each. Diagnosis of new-onset AF was based on finding either at least one AF episode recorded by the patches that lasted at least 30 seconds or an AF diagnosis appearing in the patient’s record. The average AF burden – the percentage of time a person with incident AF had an abnormal sinus rhythm – was 0.9%.

 

 


Even though many patients did not use their patches, the investigators assessed the primary endpoint of new AF diagnoses during the 4-month study period on an intention-to-treat basis. Their analysis showed an 8.8-fold higher rate of new AF diagnoses among people in the intervention arm whose patch data were used for immediate diagnosis, reported Dr. Steinhubl, an interventional cardiologist and director of digital medicine at the Scripps Translational Science Institute in La Jolla, Ca.

As a secondary endpoint, the researchers merged the entire group of 1,738 participants who had sent in patches with ECG data and compared their 1-year incidence of diagnosed AF against 3,476 matched controls from the Aetna database. After 1 year, the rate of new AF diagnoses was 6.3% in those with patch information and 2.3% among the controls, a threefold difference in diagnosis rates after adjustment for potential confounders.

“The clinical significance of the short AF episodes” manifested by many patch users identified with AF “requires greater clarity, especially in terms of stroke risk,” Dr. Steinhubl said. But he added, “I like to think that, as we learn more, we can look at more than just anticoagulation” as intervention options. For example, if a morbidly obese patient has asymptomatic AF found by patch screening, it might strengthen the case for bariatric surgery if it’s eventually shown that weight loss after bariatric surgery slows AF progression. The same holds true for more aggressive sleep apnea intervention in patients with sleep apnea and asymptomatic AF, as well as for patients with asymptomatic AF and another type of associated comorbidity.

SOURCE: Steinhubl S. ACC 18, Abstract 402-19.

 

– An ECG patch worn twice for a total of about 24 days produced a nearly ninefold increase in the number of high-risk people diagnosed with atrial fibrillation, compared with those followed with usual care in a randomized trial with 2,655 people.

During 4 months of follow-up, 1,364 high-risk people assigned to ECG patch screening had a 5.1% rate of new atrial fibrillation (AF) diagnoses, compared with a 0.6% rate among 1,291 controls who wore the patch but were identified with new-onset AF using standard follow-up that did not take the patch data into account. This was a statistically significant difference for the study’s primary endpoint, Steven R. Steinhubl, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel


In addition to proving that the ECG patch can better identify asymptomatic people who have AF than conventional means – usually waiting until a stroke occurs or for symptoms to appear – the noninvasive and relatively low-cost patch also gives researchers a new way to try to address the more fundamental medical question created by this line of investigation: How clinically important are relatively brief, asymptomatic episodes of atrial fibrillation, and are patient outcomes improved by treatments begun in this early phase?

The study results “show we can look beyond implantable devices with a less expensive, noninvasive way” to identify patients with asymptomatic AF and determine its natural history and need for intervention, Dr. Steinhubl said in a video interview.

The mSToP (mHealth Screening to Prevent Strokes) trial ran at Scripps and began by identifying more than 359,000 U.S. residents with Aetna health insurance who met the study’s definition of having high AF risk, either by being at least 75 years old, or at least 55 years old and male or at least 65 years old and female. To qualify as high risk those younger than 75 years also had to have at least one clinical risk factor, which could include a prior cerebrovascular event, heart failure, hypertension plus diabetes, obstructive sleep apnea, or any of six other comorbidities. The researchers also excluded potential participants because of several factors, including a history of atrial fibrillation or flutter, current treatment with an anticoagulant, end-stage renal disease, and patients with an implanted pacemaker or defibrillator.

They invited more than 100,000 of these qualifying Aetna beneficiaries to participate, and 2,655 agreed and received by mail a pair of ECG measurement patches (Zio) with instructions to wear one for 2 weeks at the start of the study and to wear the second during the final 2 weeks of the 4-month study period. The participants averaged 73 years of age, and their average CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.

All patients in the study were told to wear their patches and mail them in, but the researchers used the collected ECG data for diagnosing AF in only the 1,364 patients randomized to the active arm. The ECG findings for the 1,291 controls wasn’t provided to their physicians, and so any new-onset AF had to be found either by symptom onset or incidentally. About one-third of the people assigned to each of the study arms never wore their patches. Those who wore their patches did so for an average of nearly 12 days each. Diagnosis of new-onset AF was based on finding either at least one AF episode recorded by the patches that lasted at least 30 seconds or an AF diagnosis appearing in the patient’s record. The average AF burden – the percentage of time a person with incident AF had an abnormal sinus rhythm – was 0.9%.

 

 


Even though many patients did not use their patches, the investigators assessed the primary endpoint of new AF diagnoses during the 4-month study period on an intention-to-treat basis. Their analysis showed an 8.8-fold higher rate of new AF diagnoses among people in the intervention arm whose patch data were used for immediate diagnosis, reported Dr. Steinhubl, an interventional cardiologist and director of digital medicine at the Scripps Translational Science Institute in La Jolla, Ca.

As a secondary endpoint, the researchers merged the entire group of 1,738 participants who had sent in patches with ECG data and compared their 1-year incidence of diagnosed AF against 3,476 matched controls from the Aetna database. After 1 year, the rate of new AF diagnoses was 6.3% in those with patch information and 2.3% among the controls, a threefold difference in diagnosis rates after adjustment for potential confounders.

“The clinical significance of the short AF episodes” manifested by many patch users identified with AF “requires greater clarity, especially in terms of stroke risk,” Dr. Steinhubl said. But he added, “I like to think that, as we learn more, we can look at more than just anticoagulation” as intervention options. For example, if a morbidly obese patient has asymptomatic AF found by patch screening, it might strengthen the case for bariatric surgery if it’s eventually shown that weight loss after bariatric surgery slows AF progression. The same holds true for more aggressive sleep apnea intervention in patients with sleep apnea and asymptomatic AF, as well as for patients with asymptomatic AF and another type of associated comorbidity.

SOURCE: Steinhubl S. ACC 18, Abstract 402-19.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM ACC 18

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

 

Key clinical point: An ECG patch was more effective than usual care for detecting asymptomatic AF.

Major finding: After 4 months, new AF diagnoses occurred in 5.1% of patch users and 0.6% of usual-care controls.

Study details: mSToPS, a single-center, randomized study with 2,655 people at high risk for developing AF.

Disclosures: mSToPS received support from Aetna, Janssen, and iRhythm. Dr. Steinhubl has been an advisor to Airstrip, DynoSense, EasyG, FocusMotion, LifeWatch, MyoKardia, Novartis, and Spry Health, he serves on the board of Celes Health, and he has received research support from Janssen and Novartis.

Source: Steinhubl S. ACC 18, Abstract 402-19.

Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

VIDEO: Triple-antihypertensive pill nails early therapy

Triple-drug pill boosts compliance, cuts adverse effects
Article Type
Changed
Tue, 07/21/2020 - 14:18

– Hypertensive adults started on a triple-drug, single daily pill regimen as either initial or early treatment had a sharply better rate of reaching their goal blood pressure after 6 months, compared with usual-care controls, in a multicenter, randomized trial with 700 patients.

“Early use of a low-dose, three-in-one blood pressure lowering pill is safe and provides faster and better control of blood pressure compared with usual care,” Ruth Webster, PhD, said at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News
Dr. Ruth Webster

The tested polypill contained half the standard doses of the angiotensin receptor blocker telmisartan (20 mg), the calcium channel blocker amlodipine (2.5 mg), and the diuretic chlorthalidone (12.5 mg). After 6 months on this regimen, 70% of patients were at their goal blood pressure, compared with 55% of the control patients, and patients on the polypill had on average a 10/5 mm Hg greater reduction in their blood pressure than did patients on usual care, reported Dr. Webster, head of research programs at the George Institute for Global Health in Sydney. Rates of total and serious adverse events and withdrawals because of adverse events were similar in the two study arms, and both arms also had nearly identical levels of treatment adherence, about 95%.

“No prior trial has evaluated a triple, low-dose pill for initial or early treatment,” she noted.

“This is a home run,” said Karol E. Watson, MD, professor of medicine and director of the Women’s Cardiovascular Health Center at the University of California, Los Angeles. “In the past, clinicians were told to pick one drug and push it as hard as you could and then maybe think about adding a second drug. Experience has shown that this does not increase efficacy, but it does increase adverse events, so current guidelines say start with two drugs. Now they are showing for the first time that you should start with three drugs. That goes with what we know.”

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News
Dr. Karol E. Watson


“Triple-drug therapy for the masses makes complete sense,” especially now that the blood pressure goal for most patients is less than 130/80 mm Hg, said William B. White, MD, professor of medicine and chief of hypertension and clinical pharmacology at the University of Connecticut in Farmington. Plus, “compliance is vastly improved when you use a combination-drug pill,” he noted.
Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News
Dr. William B. White


The blood pressure targets that Dr. Webster and her associates used were less than 140/90 mm Hg except in patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease, who had a target of less than 130/80 mm Hg. At the time researchers designed the trial the generally accepted blood pressure target for antihypertensive treatment was less than 140/90 mm Hg, Dr. Webster noted.

 

 


She also stressed that she did not believe the three specific drugs selected for the polypill made a difference. “The specific drugs we used was not that important. We would probably get the same result with different drugs. It’s about the strategy of using triple, low-dose therapy,” Dr. Webster suggested. Dr. Watson agreed.

The TRIUMPH (Triple Pill vs. Usual Care Management for Patients with Mild to Moderate Hypertension) study enrolled patients at 11 hospital outpatient clinics in Sri Lanka. The average age of the patients was 56 years. The average blood pressure was 154/90 mm Hg. About 59% of patients were not on any antihypertensive drug at baseline, with the rest on a single drug. The study protocol excluded patients on two or more drugs at entry. Roughly 30% of enrolled patients had diabetes, and 1%-2% had chronic kidney disease. Their target blood pressure on treatment during the study was less than 130/80 mm Hg.

The study’s primary endpoint was the percentage of patients at their goal blood pressure after 6 months. Patients in the triple-drug polypill group achieved their goal blood pressure 23% more often relative to the control, usual care patients, a statistically significant difference. The between group difference in achievement of goal blood pressure was apparent by the end of the first 6 weeks in the study. Patients in the control arm generally received either one or two drugs during the study, but often at full dose rather than the half doses used in the triple-drug patients. The study’s design specified that patients in the triple-drug arm who were not at their target blood pressure after 6 weeks could, at the discretion of their treating physician, switch to a second formulation that doubled the dosage of each of the three drugs. Patients in the usual care arm could have their treatment adjusted after 6 or 12 weeks as long as they continued to receive either one or two drugs. After 6 weeks, 68% of patients in the triple-drug arm and 44% receiving usual care were at their blood pressure goal. After 12 weeks, the percentages at goal were 73% of patients on the triple-drug pill and 47% on usual care.

Dr. Webster hypothesized that the triple-drug, low-dose strategy for initial or early treatment would surpass usual care not only in low- and middle-income countries, like Sri Lanka, but also in high-income, industrialized countries such as the United States.

TRIUMPH received no commercial funding. Dr. Webster had no disclosures. Dr. Watson has been a consultant to Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, and GlaxoSmithKline. Dr. White has been a consultant to Novartis.

SOURCE: Webster R. ACC 2018. Webster R et al. ACC 18 late breaker.

Body

 

The TRIUMPH results showed the feasibility and efficacy of achieving good blood pressure control with a single pill containing low doses of three different antihypertensive drugs that are well tolerated and have different mechanisms of action. This strategy avoids the adverse effects from drugs used at their maximum dose.

An attraction of this strategy is how seamless it is for patients. They take a single pill with three drugs, which can enhance compliance and in routine practice can reduce their copay. It’s much easier for patients to take a single pill.

Eileen M. Handberg, PhD , is a research professor of medicine and director of the Clinical Trials Program at the University of Florida in Gainesville. She had no relevant disclosures. She made these comments in an interview.

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

 

The TRIUMPH results showed the feasibility and efficacy of achieving good blood pressure control with a single pill containing low doses of three different antihypertensive drugs that are well tolerated and have different mechanisms of action. This strategy avoids the adverse effects from drugs used at their maximum dose.

An attraction of this strategy is how seamless it is for patients. They take a single pill with three drugs, which can enhance compliance and in routine practice can reduce their copay. It’s much easier for patients to take a single pill.

Eileen M. Handberg, PhD , is a research professor of medicine and director of the Clinical Trials Program at the University of Florida in Gainesville. She had no relevant disclosures. She made these comments in an interview.

Body

 

The TRIUMPH results showed the feasibility and efficacy of achieving good blood pressure control with a single pill containing low doses of three different antihypertensive drugs that are well tolerated and have different mechanisms of action. This strategy avoids the adverse effects from drugs used at their maximum dose.

An attraction of this strategy is how seamless it is for patients. They take a single pill with three drugs, which can enhance compliance and in routine practice can reduce their copay. It’s much easier for patients to take a single pill.

Eileen M. Handberg, PhD , is a research professor of medicine and director of the Clinical Trials Program at the University of Florida in Gainesville. She had no relevant disclosures. She made these comments in an interview.

Title
Triple-drug pill boosts compliance, cuts adverse effects
Triple-drug pill boosts compliance, cuts adverse effects

– Hypertensive adults started on a triple-drug, single daily pill regimen as either initial or early treatment had a sharply better rate of reaching their goal blood pressure after 6 months, compared with usual-care controls, in a multicenter, randomized trial with 700 patients.

“Early use of a low-dose, three-in-one blood pressure lowering pill is safe and provides faster and better control of blood pressure compared with usual care,” Ruth Webster, PhD, said at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News
Dr. Ruth Webster

The tested polypill contained half the standard doses of the angiotensin receptor blocker telmisartan (20 mg), the calcium channel blocker amlodipine (2.5 mg), and the diuretic chlorthalidone (12.5 mg). After 6 months on this regimen, 70% of patients were at their goal blood pressure, compared with 55% of the control patients, and patients on the polypill had on average a 10/5 mm Hg greater reduction in their blood pressure than did patients on usual care, reported Dr. Webster, head of research programs at the George Institute for Global Health in Sydney. Rates of total and serious adverse events and withdrawals because of adverse events were similar in the two study arms, and both arms also had nearly identical levels of treatment adherence, about 95%.

“No prior trial has evaluated a triple, low-dose pill for initial or early treatment,” she noted.

“This is a home run,” said Karol E. Watson, MD, professor of medicine and director of the Women’s Cardiovascular Health Center at the University of California, Los Angeles. “In the past, clinicians were told to pick one drug and push it as hard as you could and then maybe think about adding a second drug. Experience has shown that this does not increase efficacy, but it does increase adverse events, so current guidelines say start with two drugs. Now they are showing for the first time that you should start with three drugs. That goes with what we know.”

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News
Dr. Karol E. Watson


“Triple-drug therapy for the masses makes complete sense,” especially now that the blood pressure goal for most patients is less than 130/80 mm Hg, said William B. White, MD, professor of medicine and chief of hypertension and clinical pharmacology at the University of Connecticut in Farmington. Plus, “compliance is vastly improved when you use a combination-drug pill,” he noted.
Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News
Dr. William B. White


The blood pressure targets that Dr. Webster and her associates used were less than 140/90 mm Hg except in patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease, who had a target of less than 130/80 mm Hg. At the time researchers designed the trial the generally accepted blood pressure target for antihypertensive treatment was less than 140/90 mm Hg, Dr. Webster noted.

 

 


She also stressed that she did not believe the three specific drugs selected for the polypill made a difference. “The specific drugs we used was not that important. We would probably get the same result with different drugs. It’s about the strategy of using triple, low-dose therapy,” Dr. Webster suggested. Dr. Watson agreed.

The TRIUMPH (Triple Pill vs. Usual Care Management for Patients with Mild to Moderate Hypertension) study enrolled patients at 11 hospital outpatient clinics in Sri Lanka. The average age of the patients was 56 years. The average blood pressure was 154/90 mm Hg. About 59% of patients were not on any antihypertensive drug at baseline, with the rest on a single drug. The study protocol excluded patients on two or more drugs at entry. Roughly 30% of enrolled patients had diabetes, and 1%-2% had chronic kidney disease. Their target blood pressure on treatment during the study was less than 130/80 mm Hg.

The study’s primary endpoint was the percentage of patients at their goal blood pressure after 6 months. Patients in the triple-drug polypill group achieved their goal blood pressure 23% more often relative to the control, usual care patients, a statistically significant difference. The between group difference in achievement of goal blood pressure was apparent by the end of the first 6 weeks in the study. Patients in the control arm generally received either one or two drugs during the study, but often at full dose rather than the half doses used in the triple-drug patients. The study’s design specified that patients in the triple-drug arm who were not at their target blood pressure after 6 weeks could, at the discretion of their treating physician, switch to a second formulation that doubled the dosage of each of the three drugs. Patients in the usual care arm could have their treatment adjusted after 6 or 12 weeks as long as they continued to receive either one or two drugs. After 6 weeks, 68% of patients in the triple-drug arm and 44% receiving usual care were at their blood pressure goal. After 12 weeks, the percentages at goal were 73% of patients on the triple-drug pill and 47% on usual care.

Dr. Webster hypothesized that the triple-drug, low-dose strategy for initial or early treatment would surpass usual care not only in low- and middle-income countries, like Sri Lanka, but also in high-income, industrialized countries such as the United States.

TRIUMPH received no commercial funding. Dr. Webster had no disclosures. Dr. Watson has been a consultant to Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, and GlaxoSmithKline. Dr. White has been a consultant to Novartis.

SOURCE: Webster R. ACC 2018. Webster R et al. ACC 18 late breaker.

– Hypertensive adults started on a triple-drug, single daily pill regimen as either initial or early treatment had a sharply better rate of reaching their goal blood pressure after 6 months, compared with usual-care controls, in a multicenter, randomized trial with 700 patients.

“Early use of a low-dose, three-in-one blood pressure lowering pill is safe and provides faster and better control of blood pressure compared with usual care,” Ruth Webster, PhD, said at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News
Dr. Ruth Webster

The tested polypill contained half the standard doses of the angiotensin receptor blocker telmisartan (20 mg), the calcium channel blocker amlodipine (2.5 mg), and the diuretic chlorthalidone (12.5 mg). After 6 months on this regimen, 70% of patients were at their goal blood pressure, compared with 55% of the control patients, and patients on the polypill had on average a 10/5 mm Hg greater reduction in their blood pressure than did patients on usual care, reported Dr. Webster, head of research programs at the George Institute for Global Health in Sydney. Rates of total and serious adverse events and withdrawals because of adverse events were similar in the two study arms, and both arms also had nearly identical levels of treatment adherence, about 95%.

“No prior trial has evaluated a triple, low-dose pill for initial or early treatment,” she noted.

“This is a home run,” said Karol E. Watson, MD, professor of medicine and director of the Women’s Cardiovascular Health Center at the University of California, Los Angeles. “In the past, clinicians were told to pick one drug and push it as hard as you could and then maybe think about adding a second drug. Experience has shown that this does not increase efficacy, but it does increase adverse events, so current guidelines say start with two drugs. Now they are showing for the first time that you should start with three drugs. That goes with what we know.”

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News
Dr. Karol E. Watson


“Triple-drug therapy for the masses makes complete sense,” especially now that the blood pressure goal for most patients is less than 130/80 mm Hg, said William B. White, MD, professor of medicine and chief of hypertension and clinical pharmacology at the University of Connecticut in Farmington. Plus, “compliance is vastly improved when you use a combination-drug pill,” he noted.
Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News
Dr. William B. White


The blood pressure targets that Dr. Webster and her associates used were less than 140/90 mm Hg except in patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease, who had a target of less than 130/80 mm Hg. At the time researchers designed the trial the generally accepted blood pressure target for antihypertensive treatment was less than 140/90 mm Hg, Dr. Webster noted.

 

 


She also stressed that she did not believe the three specific drugs selected for the polypill made a difference. “The specific drugs we used was not that important. We would probably get the same result with different drugs. It’s about the strategy of using triple, low-dose therapy,” Dr. Webster suggested. Dr. Watson agreed.

The TRIUMPH (Triple Pill vs. Usual Care Management for Patients with Mild to Moderate Hypertension) study enrolled patients at 11 hospital outpatient clinics in Sri Lanka. The average age of the patients was 56 years. The average blood pressure was 154/90 mm Hg. About 59% of patients were not on any antihypertensive drug at baseline, with the rest on a single drug. The study protocol excluded patients on two or more drugs at entry. Roughly 30% of enrolled patients had diabetes, and 1%-2% had chronic kidney disease. Their target blood pressure on treatment during the study was less than 130/80 mm Hg.

The study’s primary endpoint was the percentage of patients at their goal blood pressure after 6 months. Patients in the triple-drug polypill group achieved their goal blood pressure 23% more often relative to the control, usual care patients, a statistically significant difference. The between group difference in achievement of goal blood pressure was apparent by the end of the first 6 weeks in the study. Patients in the control arm generally received either one or two drugs during the study, but often at full dose rather than the half doses used in the triple-drug patients. The study’s design specified that patients in the triple-drug arm who were not at their target blood pressure after 6 weeks could, at the discretion of their treating physician, switch to a second formulation that doubled the dosage of each of the three drugs. Patients in the usual care arm could have their treatment adjusted after 6 or 12 weeks as long as they continued to receive either one or two drugs. After 6 weeks, 68% of patients in the triple-drug arm and 44% receiving usual care were at their blood pressure goal. After 12 weeks, the percentages at goal were 73% of patients on the triple-drug pill and 47% on usual care.

Dr. Webster hypothesized that the triple-drug, low-dose strategy for initial or early treatment would surpass usual care not only in low- and middle-income countries, like Sri Lanka, but also in high-income, industrialized countries such as the United States.

TRIUMPH received no commercial funding. Dr. Webster had no disclosures. Dr. Watson has been a consultant to Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, and GlaxoSmithKline. Dr. White has been a consultant to Novartis.

SOURCE: Webster R. ACC 2018. Webster R et al. ACC 18 late breaker.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM ACC 18

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

 

Key clinical point: Starting hypertensive patients on a single, triple-drug pill produced excellent control.

Major finding: After 6 months, 70% of patients on the triple-drug pill reached target blood pressure, compared with 55% of control patients.

Study details: TRIUMPH, a multicenter, randomized trial with 700 hypertensive adults.

Disclosures: TRIUMPH received no commercial funding. Dr. Webster had no disclosures. Dr. Watson has been a consultant to Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo, and GlaxoSmithKline. Dr. White has been a consultant to Novartis.

Source: Webster R et al. ACC 18 late breaker.

Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.