User login
Vibrating Belt Receives Approval to Help Women With Osteopenia Keep Bone Strength
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a wearable belt device for postmenopausal women with osteopenia, the precursor to osteoporosis, according to the company’s manufacturer, Bone Health Technologies.
According to the company, the device (Osteoboost) is the first nonpharmacologic device-based, prescription-only treatment for postmenopausal women with low bone density. It has not been tested for ability to reduce fracture risk.
The device is worn around the hips and delivers calibrated mild vibrations to the hips and lumbar spine to help preserve bone strength and density. A vibration pack is mounted to the back of the belt.
FDA approval, announced on January 18, was based on the findings of a National Institutes of Health–funded double-blinded, sham-controlled study of 126 women with low bone density conducted at the University of Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha. The data were shared at the 2023 Endocrine Society and American Society for Bone and Mineral Research annual meetings and published in the Journal of the Endocrine Society.
Lead investigator Laura D. Bilek, PT, PhD, associate dean for research and associate professor at the University of Nebraska, and colleagues wrote that the primary outcome measurement was the change in vertebral strength measured by CT scans for women who used the device a minimum of three times per week compared with a sham group who wore a belt that emitted sound but had no vibrations.
Compressive strength and volumetric density of the first lumbar vertebra were analyzed.
In the active-belt group, women lost, on average, 0.48% bone strength, while those in the sham group lost nearly 2.84% (P = .014), about five times as much. Results also showed that participants in the active treatment group who used the device three times per week lost 0.29% bone mineral density (BMD) compared with the 1.97% BMD lost in the control group. No adverse events were reported in the study.
Sonali Khandelwal, MD, a rheumatologist at Rush University in Chicago, told this news organization there’s considerable fear among some patients about long-term use of available medications for bone health, “so any modality that is nontherapeutic — not a pill — is always exciting.”
The endpoints of the study are one good measure, she said, but she emphasized that it will be important to show that the improved bone density from the belt that is described in this study “is a true marker of decreased fracture risk.”
Because there are no apparent side effects, she said it may be effective in combination with weight-bearing exercise, vitamin D and calcium, and/or medication, depending on severity of bone loss.
Current medications on the market for osteoporosis have been shown to improve bone strength and reduce fracture risk, she noted.
“It could help; I just don’t think we have enough evidence that it will completely treat the bone loss,” Dr. Khandelwal said.
She said she sees the potential population most interested in the belt as premenopausal women with a family history of bone loss who may not meet the level of bone loss for medical management but are interested in prevention.
“I also think of individuals who might already meet medication needs but are completely averse to being on medication,” she said. The bulk of her practice is treating bone loss, she said, estimating that 20% of her patients do not want to be on medication.
Bone Health Technologies CEO Laura Yecies, MBA, told this news organization the company has not yet set the price for the device and noted that because it will be available by prescription only, out-of-pocket costs and copays will differ. She said the company expects to begin shipping later this year. Requests for update notifications can be made at the company’s website.
Dr. Bilek told this news organization the device was tested for a year, so it’s unclear how long people with osteopenia would need to wear the belt for maximum benefit.
The theory behind the mechanism of action, she said, “is that the vibration actually inhibits the cells [osteoclasts] that take away bone mass.”
The researchers included only postmenopausal women with osteopenia in the study, but Dr. Bilek said she would like to test the device on other groups, such as men with prostate cancer getting testosterone-blocking therapy, which can result in loss of bone density. An estimated 34 million people in the United States have osteopenia.
Dr. Bilek said a next step for the study is to enroll a more diverse cohort at an additional center to test the device because most of the women in this one were White.
She noted that women’s bone mass peaks at age 30 and then starts to decline.
“When women hit menopause, there’s a really rapid decline [in bone strength] for the next 5-7 years and then the decline levels off. If we can slow that decline, hopefully that woman’s bone density is maintained at a higher level throughout their life,” Dr. Bilek said.
Dr. Bilek is a scientific adviser to Bone Health Technologies. She and many coauthors of the study received grants or fees from the company and own stock in or are employees of the company. Ms. Yecies is the founder and CEO of Bone Health Technologies. Dr. Khandelwal had no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a wearable belt device for postmenopausal women with osteopenia, the precursor to osteoporosis, according to the company’s manufacturer, Bone Health Technologies.
According to the company, the device (Osteoboost) is the first nonpharmacologic device-based, prescription-only treatment for postmenopausal women with low bone density. It has not been tested for ability to reduce fracture risk.
The device is worn around the hips and delivers calibrated mild vibrations to the hips and lumbar spine to help preserve bone strength and density. A vibration pack is mounted to the back of the belt.
FDA approval, announced on January 18, was based on the findings of a National Institutes of Health–funded double-blinded, sham-controlled study of 126 women with low bone density conducted at the University of Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha. The data were shared at the 2023 Endocrine Society and American Society for Bone and Mineral Research annual meetings and published in the Journal of the Endocrine Society.
Lead investigator Laura D. Bilek, PT, PhD, associate dean for research and associate professor at the University of Nebraska, and colleagues wrote that the primary outcome measurement was the change in vertebral strength measured by CT scans for women who used the device a minimum of three times per week compared with a sham group who wore a belt that emitted sound but had no vibrations.
Compressive strength and volumetric density of the first lumbar vertebra were analyzed.
In the active-belt group, women lost, on average, 0.48% bone strength, while those in the sham group lost nearly 2.84% (P = .014), about five times as much. Results also showed that participants in the active treatment group who used the device three times per week lost 0.29% bone mineral density (BMD) compared with the 1.97% BMD lost in the control group. No adverse events were reported in the study.
Sonali Khandelwal, MD, a rheumatologist at Rush University in Chicago, told this news organization there’s considerable fear among some patients about long-term use of available medications for bone health, “so any modality that is nontherapeutic — not a pill — is always exciting.”
The endpoints of the study are one good measure, she said, but she emphasized that it will be important to show that the improved bone density from the belt that is described in this study “is a true marker of decreased fracture risk.”
Because there are no apparent side effects, she said it may be effective in combination with weight-bearing exercise, vitamin D and calcium, and/or medication, depending on severity of bone loss.
Current medications on the market for osteoporosis have been shown to improve bone strength and reduce fracture risk, she noted.
“It could help; I just don’t think we have enough evidence that it will completely treat the bone loss,” Dr. Khandelwal said.
She said she sees the potential population most interested in the belt as premenopausal women with a family history of bone loss who may not meet the level of bone loss for medical management but are interested in prevention.
“I also think of individuals who might already meet medication needs but are completely averse to being on medication,” she said. The bulk of her practice is treating bone loss, she said, estimating that 20% of her patients do not want to be on medication.
Bone Health Technologies CEO Laura Yecies, MBA, told this news organization the company has not yet set the price for the device and noted that because it will be available by prescription only, out-of-pocket costs and copays will differ. She said the company expects to begin shipping later this year. Requests for update notifications can be made at the company’s website.
Dr. Bilek told this news organization the device was tested for a year, so it’s unclear how long people with osteopenia would need to wear the belt for maximum benefit.
The theory behind the mechanism of action, she said, “is that the vibration actually inhibits the cells [osteoclasts] that take away bone mass.”
The researchers included only postmenopausal women with osteopenia in the study, but Dr. Bilek said she would like to test the device on other groups, such as men with prostate cancer getting testosterone-blocking therapy, which can result in loss of bone density. An estimated 34 million people in the United States have osteopenia.
Dr. Bilek said a next step for the study is to enroll a more diverse cohort at an additional center to test the device because most of the women in this one were White.
She noted that women’s bone mass peaks at age 30 and then starts to decline.
“When women hit menopause, there’s a really rapid decline [in bone strength] for the next 5-7 years and then the decline levels off. If we can slow that decline, hopefully that woman’s bone density is maintained at a higher level throughout their life,” Dr. Bilek said.
Dr. Bilek is a scientific adviser to Bone Health Technologies. She and many coauthors of the study received grants or fees from the company and own stock in or are employees of the company. Ms. Yecies is the founder and CEO of Bone Health Technologies. Dr. Khandelwal had no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a wearable belt device for postmenopausal women with osteopenia, the precursor to osteoporosis, according to the company’s manufacturer, Bone Health Technologies.
According to the company, the device (Osteoboost) is the first nonpharmacologic device-based, prescription-only treatment for postmenopausal women with low bone density. It has not been tested for ability to reduce fracture risk.
The device is worn around the hips and delivers calibrated mild vibrations to the hips and lumbar spine to help preserve bone strength and density. A vibration pack is mounted to the back of the belt.
FDA approval, announced on January 18, was based on the findings of a National Institutes of Health–funded double-blinded, sham-controlled study of 126 women with low bone density conducted at the University of Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha. The data were shared at the 2023 Endocrine Society and American Society for Bone and Mineral Research annual meetings and published in the Journal of the Endocrine Society.
Lead investigator Laura D. Bilek, PT, PhD, associate dean for research and associate professor at the University of Nebraska, and colleagues wrote that the primary outcome measurement was the change in vertebral strength measured by CT scans for women who used the device a minimum of three times per week compared with a sham group who wore a belt that emitted sound but had no vibrations.
Compressive strength and volumetric density of the first lumbar vertebra were analyzed.
In the active-belt group, women lost, on average, 0.48% bone strength, while those in the sham group lost nearly 2.84% (P = .014), about five times as much. Results also showed that participants in the active treatment group who used the device three times per week lost 0.29% bone mineral density (BMD) compared with the 1.97% BMD lost in the control group. No adverse events were reported in the study.
Sonali Khandelwal, MD, a rheumatologist at Rush University in Chicago, told this news organization there’s considerable fear among some patients about long-term use of available medications for bone health, “so any modality that is nontherapeutic — not a pill — is always exciting.”
The endpoints of the study are one good measure, she said, but she emphasized that it will be important to show that the improved bone density from the belt that is described in this study “is a true marker of decreased fracture risk.”
Because there are no apparent side effects, she said it may be effective in combination with weight-bearing exercise, vitamin D and calcium, and/or medication, depending on severity of bone loss.
Current medications on the market for osteoporosis have been shown to improve bone strength and reduce fracture risk, she noted.
“It could help; I just don’t think we have enough evidence that it will completely treat the bone loss,” Dr. Khandelwal said.
She said she sees the potential population most interested in the belt as premenopausal women with a family history of bone loss who may not meet the level of bone loss for medical management but are interested in prevention.
“I also think of individuals who might already meet medication needs but are completely averse to being on medication,” she said. The bulk of her practice is treating bone loss, she said, estimating that 20% of her patients do not want to be on medication.
Bone Health Technologies CEO Laura Yecies, MBA, told this news organization the company has not yet set the price for the device and noted that because it will be available by prescription only, out-of-pocket costs and copays will differ. She said the company expects to begin shipping later this year. Requests for update notifications can be made at the company’s website.
Dr. Bilek told this news organization the device was tested for a year, so it’s unclear how long people with osteopenia would need to wear the belt for maximum benefit.
The theory behind the mechanism of action, she said, “is that the vibration actually inhibits the cells [osteoclasts] that take away bone mass.”
The researchers included only postmenopausal women with osteopenia in the study, but Dr. Bilek said she would like to test the device on other groups, such as men with prostate cancer getting testosterone-blocking therapy, which can result in loss of bone density. An estimated 34 million people in the United States have osteopenia.
Dr. Bilek said a next step for the study is to enroll a more diverse cohort at an additional center to test the device because most of the women in this one were White.
She noted that women’s bone mass peaks at age 30 and then starts to decline.
“When women hit menopause, there’s a really rapid decline [in bone strength] for the next 5-7 years and then the decline levels off. If we can slow that decline, hopefully that woman’s bone density is maintained at a higher level throughout their life,” Dr. Bilek said.
Dr. Bilek is a scientific adviser to Bone Health Technologies. She and many coauthors of the study received grants or fees from the company and own stock in or are employees of the company. Ms. Yecies is the founder and CEO of Bone Health Technologies. Dr. Khandelwal had no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Hypocalcemia Risk Warning Added to Osteoporosis Drug
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has added a boxed warning to the label of the osteoporosis drug denosumab (Prolia) about increased risk for severe hypocalcemia in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD).
Denosumab is a monoclonal antibody, indicated for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who are at increased risk for fracture for whom other treatments aren’t effective or can’t be tolerated. It’s also indicated to increase bone mass in men with osteoporosis at high risk for fracture, treat glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis in men and women at high risk for fracture, increase bone mass in men at high risk for fracture receiving androgen-deprivation therapy for nonmetastatic prostate cancer, and increase bone mass in women at high risk for fracture receiving adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy for breast cancer.
This new warning updates a November 2022 alert based on preliminary evidence for a “substantial risk” for hypocalcemia in patients with CKD on dialysis.
Upon further examination of the data from two trials including more than 500,000 denosumab-treated women with CKD, the FDA concluded that severe hypocalcemia appears to be more common in those with CKD who also have mineral and bone disorder (CKD-MBD). And, for patients with advanced CKD taking denosumab, “severe hypocalcemia resulted in serious harm, including hospitalization, life-threatening events, and death.”
Most of the severe hypocalcemia events occurred 2-10 weeks after denosumab injection, with the greatest risk during weeks 2-5.
The new warning advises healthcare professionals to assess patients’ kidney function before prescribing denosumab, and for those with advanced CKD, “consider the risk of severe hypocalcemia with Prolia in the context of other available treatments for osteoporosis.”
If the drug is still being considered for those patients for initial or continued use, calcium blood levels should be checked, and patients should be evaluated for CKD-MBD. Prior to prescribing denosumab in these patients, CKD-MBD should be properly managed, hypocalcemia corrected, and patients supplemented with calcium and activated vitamin D to decrease the risk for severe hypocalcemia and associated complications.
“Treatment with denosumab in patients with advanced CKD, including those on dialysis, and particularly patients with diagnosed CKD-MBD should involve a health care provider with expertise in the diagnosis and management of CKD-MBD,” the FDA advises.
Once denosumab is administered, close monitoring of blood calcium levels and prompt hypocalcemia management is essential to prevent complications including seizures or arrythmias. Patients should be advised to promptly report symptoms that could be consistent with hypocalcemia, including confusion, seizures, irregular heartbeat, fainting, muscle spasms or weakness, face twitching, tingling, or numbness anywhere in the body.
In 2022, an estimated 2.2 million Prolia prefilled syringes were sold by the manufacturer to US healthcare settings.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has added a boxed warning to the label of the osteoporosis drug denosumab (Prolia) about increased risk for severe hypocalcemia in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD).
Denosumab is a monoclonal antibody, indicated for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who are at increased risk for fracture for whom other treatments aren’t effective or can’t be tolerated. It’s also indicated to increase bone mass in men with osteoporosis at high risk for fracture, treat glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis in men and women at high risk for fracture, increase bone mass in men at high risk for fracture receiving androgen-deprivation therapy for nonmetastatic prostate cancer, and increase bone mass in women at high risk for fracture receiving adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy for breast cancer.
This new warning updates a November 2022 alert based on preliminary evidence for a “substantial risk” for hypocalcemia in patients with CKD on dialysis.
Upon further examination of the data from two trials including more than 500,000 denosumab-treated women with CKD, the FDA concluded that severe hypocalcemia appears to be more common in those with CKD who also have mineral and bone disorder (CKD-MBD). And, for patients with advanced CKD taking denosumab, “severe hypocalcemia resulted in serious harm, including hospitalization, life-threatening events, and death.”
Most of the severe hypocalcemia events occurred 2-10 weeks after denosumab injection, with the greatest risk during weeks 2-5.
The new warning advises healthcare professionals to assess patients’ kidney function before prescribing denosumab, and for those with advanced CKD, “consider the risk of severe hypocalcemia with Prolia in the context of other available treatments for osteoporosis.”
If the drug is still being considered for those patients for initial or continued use, calcium blood levels should be checked, and patients should be evaluated for CKD-MBD. Prior to prescribing denosumab in these patients, CKD-MBD should be properly managed, hypocalcemia corrected, and patients supplemented with calcium and activated vitamin D to decrease the risk for severe hypocalcemia and associated complications.
“Treatment with denosumab in patients with advanced CKD, including those on dialysis, and particularly patients with diagnosed CKD-MBD should involve a health care provider with expertise in the diagnosis and management of CKD-MBD,” the FDA advises.
Once denosumab is administered, close monitoring of blood calcium levels and prompt hypocalcemia management is essential to prevent complications including seizures or arrythmias. Patients should be advised to promptly report symptoms that could be consistent with hypocalcemia, including confusion, seizures, irregular heartbeat, fainting, muscle spasms or weakness, face twitching, tingling, or numbness anywhere in the body.
In 2022, an estimated 2.2 million Prolia prefilled syringes were sold by the manufacturer to US healthcare settings.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has added a boxed warning to the label of the osteoporosis drug denosumab (Prolia) about increased risk for severe hypocalcemia in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD).
Denosumab is a monoclonal antibody, indicated for the treatment of postmenopausal women with osteoporosis who are at increased risk for fracture for whom other treatments aren’t effective or can’t be tolerated. It’s also indicated to increase bone mass in men with osteoporosis at high risk for fracture, treat glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis in men and women at high risk for fracture, increase bone mass in men at high risk for fracture receiving androgen-deprivation therapy for nonmetastatic prostate cancer, and increase bone mass in women at high risk for fracture receiving adjuvant aromatase inhibitor therapy for breast cancer.
This new warning updates a November 2022 alert based on preliminary evidence for a “substantial risk” for hypocalcemia in patients with CKD on dialysis.
Upon further examination of the data from two trials including more than 500,000 denosumab-treated women with CKD, the FDA concluded that severe hypocalcemia appears to be more common in those with CKD who also have mineral and bone disorder (CKD-MBD). And, for patients with advanced CKD taking denosumab, “severe hypocalcemia resulted in serious harm, including hospitalization, life-threatening events, and death.”
Most of the severe hypocalcemia events occurred 2-10 weeks after denosumab injection, with the greatest risk during weeks 2-5.
The new warning advises healthcare professionals to assess patients’ kidney function before prescribing denosumab, and for those with advanced CKD, “consider the risk of severe hypocalcemia with Prolia in the context of other available treatments for osteoporosis.”
If the drug is still being considered for those patients for initial or continued use, calcium blood levels should be checked, and patients should be evaluated for CKD-MBD. Prior to prescribing denosumab in these patients, CKD-MBD should be properly managed, hypocalcemia corrected, and patients supplemented with calcium and activated vitamin D to decrease the risk for severe hypocalcemia and associated complications.
“Treatment with denosumab in patients with advanced CKD, including those on dialysis, and particularly patients with diagnosed CKD-MBD should involve a health care provider with expertise in the diagnosis and management of CKD-MBD,” the FDA advises.
Once denosumab is administered, close monitoring of blood calcium levels and prompt hypocalcemia management is essential to prevent complications including seizures or arrythmias. Patients should be advised to promptly report symptoms that could be consistent with hypocalcemia, including confusion, seizures, irregular heartbeat, fainting, muscle spasms or weakness, face twitching, tingling, or numbness anywhere in the body.
In 2022, an estimated 2.2 million Prolia prefilled syringes were sold by the manufacturer to US healthcare settings.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Testosterone Supplements: Overcoming Current Misconceptions
Underdiagnosis, reluctant doctors, patient preconceptions: Treating low testosterone levels is a tricky business in France despite the proven benefits of replacement therapy. About 20% of patients with symptomatic low testosterone levels are treated for the deficiency, said Eric Huygue, MD, PhD, urologic surgeon at Toulouse University Hospital in France, at the 117th annual conference of the French Urology Association (AFU).
, said Dr. Huygue, who was involved in drawing up the first French recommendations on treating low testosterone in 2021.
“We must keep up communication efforts to make patients and doctors aware” of the benefits of supplementation, he said.
Testosterone Levels
Testosterone deficiency mostly affects men older than 40 years. A drop in androgen levels, which varies by individual, can lead to sexual problems (such as erectile dysfunction and low libido), physical symptoms (fatigue, hot flashes, loss of muscle mass, and osteoporosis), and mental disorders (anxiety, irritability, and depression).
There are an estimated 340,000 men with symptomatic testosterone deficiency in France. Just 70,000 of these are receiving replacement therapy (see box), which accounts for only 20% of those affected. For Dr. Huygue, this low treatment rate is due to underdiagnosis, as well as reluctance on the part of doctors and patients.
Although routine screening of low testosterone in the general population is not recommended, some individuals are particularly at risk, noted the urologist.
This is especially true for patients with metabolic disorders associated with insulin resistance (such as obesity and type 2 diabetes), cardiovascular diseases (hypertension, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation), or other chronic conditions (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cancer, and depression). Some medications (corticosteroids, antipsychotics, chemotherapy drugs, and antiretroviral therapies) can also lead to low testosterone.
Per the French recommendations for managing low testosterone, diagnosis must be based on free or bioavailable testosterone and not total testosterone levels, which can give a skewed result. Levels must be tested twice, 1 month apart, in the morning and while fasting. The reference range is determined by taking the lower threshold level of young men as measured in the laboratory.
Threshold Values
The current practice of using the reference range associated with the patient’s age group undoubtedly contributes to the underdiagnosis of low testosterone, said Dr. Huygue. According to a survey of AFU members in 2021, the year in which the recommendations were published, 77% of urologists interviewed reported referring to reference ranges for patients of the same age.
In their defense, “this method has long been in use, but it has eventually become apparent that symptomatic patients with an undiagnosed deficiency could be in the reference patients’ group,” Dr. Huygue explained.
Once a deficiency has been diagnosed, doctors may be reluctant to prescribe replacement therapy due to the perceived risk of developing prostate cancer. Several international studies have shown that “the risk of prostate cancer is the single biggest reason for doctors refusing to prescribe testosterone,” said Dr. Huygue.
Despite this reluctance, numerous studies have clearly shown that there is no link between a high testosterone level and the risk of developing prostate cancer. It even seems that a low testosterone level might expose a person to an increased risk for an aggressive form of cancer.
“This is a time of many surprising discoveries concerning the link between the prostate and testosterone, which go against what we have thought up to now. It has been observed that men with low testosterone develop more serious types of cancer,” said Dr. Huygue at a previous meeting of the AFU, during which he announced the publication of the French recommendations.
Prostate Cancer Recurrence
Urologists are also wary of testosterone supplementation in patients with a previous history of prostate cancer. According to the AFU’s survey, 40% of urologists questioned think that testosterone is contraindicated in this population. One in two urologists prescribe testosterone after radical prostatectomy for low or intermediate risk and most commonly after 3 years of undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels.
Nevertheless, “several retrospective studies show the safety of testosterone replacement therapy in men who have undergone radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy or who are under active monitoring,” said Dr. Huygue. Testosterone “does not appear to increase the risk of relapse” after treatment of prostate cancer.
Dr. Huygue invited prescribing physicians to refer to the French recommendations, which specify that 1 year of undetectable PSA after prostatectomy is sufficient before prescribing replacement therapy. “This is clearly indicated in the recommendations for patients with a previous history of prostate cancer.”
Neither prostate cancer nor benign prostatic hyperplasia is a contraindication. According to the recommendations, the only contraindications to testosterone prescription are the following:
- Hematocrit > 54%
- Current breast or prostate cancer
- Cardiovascular event less than 3-6 months prior
- Trying to conceive
Cardiovascular Benefits
Another more commonly used argument by general practitioners and endocrinologists to justify their reluctance to prescribe testosterone is the risk to cardiovascular health. In early 2010, a series of American studies alerted clinicians to this risk when taking testosterone. Since then, other studies have had reassuring findings.
In response to the alert issued by the United States, the European Medicines Agency specified that “the data are not sufficient for a warning,” before the American Heart Association colleagues concluded that testosterone should only be avoided in the first 6 months following a severe cardiovascular event.
Conversely, in 2021, the European Society of Cardiology put forward the benefits of testosterone in an article in favor of replacement therapy to prevent cardiovascular risk. In particular, the hormone is thought to have a beneficial effect on arterial stiffness, the appearance of calcified plaques, and coronary artery dilatation.
The final hurdle to overcome before a testosterone prescription is filled relates to patients themselves, who often regard such treatment unfavorably. Many wrongly believe that androgens are hormones that “increase the risk of cancer, make you aggressive, cause weight gain, lead to hair loss, and cause body hair growth,” said Dr. Huygue.
Finally, breaks in the supply chain for Androtardyl, the only injectable form available for reimbursement by French social security schemes, were reported in the country in 2023, said Dr. Huygue. This situation only complicates further the prescription and use of testosterone replacement therapy.
Which Supplement?
Testosterone replacement therapies are available on the market in the following formulations:
Via transcutaneous administration: Testosterone-based gels, not covered by the French social security system (Androgel and Fortigel), to be applied daily. Users must be careful to avoid any potential transfer of the product to women or children in case of contact with the site after application.
Via an injection: Androtardyl (testosterone enanthate), covered by French social security, to be administered intramuscularly once a month. Nebido (testosterone undecanoate), not covered by French social security, with a more beneficial bioavailability profile, to be administered once every 3 months.
Pantestone (testosterone undecanoate), administered orally, is not marketed since 2021. It had the major disadvantage of requiring a high-fat diet to ensure optimal absorption.
This article was translated from the Medscape French edition. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Underdiagnosis, reluctant doctors, patient preconceptions: Treating low testosterone levels is a tricky business in France despite the proven benefits of replacement therapy. About 20% of patients with symptomatic low testosterone levels are treated for the deficiency, said Eric Huygue, MD, PhD, urologic surgeon at Toulouse University Hospital in France, at the 117th annual conference of the French Urology Association (AFU).
, said Dr. Huygue, who was involved in drawing up the first French recommendations on treating low testosterone in 2021.
“We must keep up communication efforts to make patients and doctors aware” of the benefits of supplementation, he said.
Testosterone Levels
Testosterone deficiency mostly affects men older than 40 years. A drop in androgen levels, which varies by individual, can lead to sexual problems (such as erectile dysfunction and low libido), physical symptoms (fatigue, hot flashes, loss of muscle mass, and osteoporosis), and mental disorders (anxiety, irritability, and depression).
There are an estimated 340,000 men with symptomatic testosterone deficiency in France. Just 70,000 of these are receiving replacement therapy (see box), which accounts for only 20% of those affected. For Dr. Huygue, this low treatment rate is due to underdiagnosis, as well as reluctance on the part of doctors and patients.
Although routine screening of low testosterone in the general population is not recommended, some individuals are particularly at risk, noted the urologist.
This is especially true for patients with metabolic disorders associated with insulin resistance (such as obesity and type 2 diabetes), cardiovascular diseases (hypertension, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation), or other chronic conditions (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cancer, and depression). Some medications (corticosteroids, antipsychotics, chemotherapy drugs, and antiretroviral therapies) can also lead to low testosterone.
Per the French recommendations for managing low testosterone, diagnosis must be based on free or bioavailable testosterone and not total testosterone levels, which can give a skewed result. Levels must be tested twice, 1 month apart, in the morning and while fasting. The reference range is determined by taking the lower threshold level of young men as measured in the laboratory.
Threshold Values
The current practice of using the reference range associated with the patient’s age group undoubtedly contributes to the underdiagnosis of low testosterone, said Dr. Huygue. According to a survey of AFU members in 2021, the year in which the recommendations were published, 77% of urologists interviewed reported referring to reference ranges for patients of the same age.
In their defense, “this method has long been in use, but it has eventually become apparent that symptomatic patients with an undiagnosed deficiency could be in the reference patients’ group,” Dr. Huygue explained.
Once a deficiency has been diagnosed, doctors may be reluctant to prescribe replacement therapy due to the perceived risk of developing prostate cancer. Several international studies have shown that “the risk of prostate cancer is the single biggest reason for doctors refusing to prescribe testosterone,” said Dr. Huygue.
Despite this reluctance, numerous studies have clearly shown that there is no link between a high testosterone level and the risk of developing prostate cancer. It even seems that a low testosterone level might expose a person to an increased risk for an aggressive form of cancer.
“This is a time of many surprising discoveries concerning the link between the prostate and testosterone, which go against what we have thought up to now. It has been observed that men with low testosterone develop more serious types of cancer,” said Dr. Huygue at a previous meeting of the AFU, during which he announced the publication of the French recommendations.
Prostate Cancer Recurrence
Urologists are also wary of testosterone supplementation in patients with a previous history of prostate cancer. According to the AFU’s survey, 40% of urologists questioned think that testosterone is contraindicated in this population. One in two urologists prescribe testosterone after radical prostatectomy for low or intermediate risk and most commonly after 3 years of undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels.
Nevertheless, “several retrospective studies show the safety of testosterone replacement therapy in men who have undergone radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy or who are under active monitoring,” said Dr. Huygue. Testosterone “does not appear to increase the risk of relapse” after treatment of prostate cancer.
Dr. Huygue invited prescribing physicians to refer to the French recommendations, which specify that 1 year of undetectable PSA after prostatectomy is sufficient before prescribing replacement therapy. “This is clearly indicated in the recommendations for patients with a previous history of prostate cancer.”
Neither prostate cancer nor benign prostatic hyperplasia is a contraindication. According to the recommendations, the only contraindications to testosterone prescription are the following:
- Hematocrit > 54%
- Current breast or prostate cancer
- Cardiovascular event less than 3-6 months prior
- Trying to conceive
Cardiovascular Benefits
Another more commonly used argument by general practitioners and endocrinologists to justify their reluctance to prescribe testosterone is the risk to cardiovascular health. In early 2010, a series of American studies alerted clinicians to this risk when taking testosterone. Since then, other studies have had reassuring findings.
In response to the alert issued by the United States, the European Medicines Agency specified that “the data are not sufficient for a warning,” before the American Heart Association colleagues concluded that testosterone should only be avoided in the first 6 months following a severe cardiovascular event.
Conversely, in 2021, the European Society of Cardiology put forward the benefits of testosterone in an article in favor of replacement therapy to prevent cardiovascular risk. In particular, the hormone is thought to have a beneficial effect on arterial stiffness, the appearance of calcified plaques, and coronary artery dilatation.
The final hurdle to overcome before a testosterone prescription is filled relates to patients themselves, who often regard such treatment unfavorably. Many wrongly believe that androgens are hormones that “increase the risk of cancer, make you aggressive, cause weight gain, lead to hair loss, and cause body hair growth,” said Dr. Huygue.
Finally, breaks in the supply chain for Androtardyl, the only injectable form available for reimbursement by French social security schemes, were reported in the country in 2023, said Dr. Huygue. This situation only complicates further the prescription and use of testosterone replacement therapy.
Which Supplement?
Testosterone replacement therapies are available on the market in the following formulations:
Via transcutaneous administration: Testosterone-based gels, not covered by the French social security system (Androgel and Fortigel), to be applied daily. Users must be careful to avoid any potential transfer of the product to women or children in case of contact with the site after application.
Via an injection: Androtardyl (testosterone enanthate), covered by French social security, to be administered intramuscularly once a month. Nebido (testosterone undecanoate), not covered by French social security, with a more beneficial bioavailability profile, to be administered once every 3 months.
Pantestone (testosterone undecanoate), administered orally, is not marketed since 2021. It had the major disadvantage of requiring a high-fat diet to ensure optimal absorption.
This article was translated from the Medscape French edition. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Underdiagnosis, reluctant doctors, patient preconceptions: Treating low testosterone levels is a tricky business in France despite the proven benefits of replacement therapy. About 20% of patients with symptomatic low testosterone levels are treated for the deficiency, said Eric Huygue, MD, PhD, urologic surgeon at Toulouse University Hospital in France, at the 117th annual conference of the French Urology Association (AFU).
, said Dr. Huygue, who was involved in drawing up the first French recommendations on treating low testosterone in 2021.
“We must keep up communication efforts to make patients and doctors aware” of the benefits of supplementation, he said.
Testosterone Levels
Testosterone deficiency mostly affects men older than 40 years. A drop in androgen levels, which varies by individual, can lead to sexual problems (such as erectile dysfunction and low libido), physical symptoms (fatigue, hot flashes, loss of muscle mass, and osteoporosis), and mental disorders (anxiety, irritability, and depression).
There are an estimated 340,000 men with symptomatic testosterone deficiency in France. Just 70,000 of these are receiving replacement therapy (see box), which accounts for only 20% of those affected. For Dr. Huygue, this low treatment rate is due to underdiagnosis, as well as reluctance on the part of doctors and patients.
Although routine screening of low testosterone in the general population is not recommended, some individuals are particularly at risk, noted the urologist.
This is especially true for patients with metabolic disorders associated with insulin resistance (such as obesity and type 2 diabetes), cardiovascular diseases (hypertension, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation), or other chronic conditions (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cancer, and depression). Some medications (corticosteroids, antipsychotics, chemotherapy drugs, and antiretroviral therapies) can also lead to low testosterone.
Per the French recommendations for managing low testosterone, diagnosis must be based on free or bioavailable testosterone and not total testosterone levels, which can give a skewed result. Levels must be tested twice, 1 month apart, in the morning and while fasting. The reference range is determined by taking the lower threshold level of young men as measured in the laboratory.
Threshold Values
The current practice of using the reference range associated with the patient’s age group undoubtedly contributes to the underdiagnosis of low testosterone, said Dr. Huygue. According to a survey of AFU members in 2021, the year in which the recommendations were published, 77% of urologists interviewed reported referring to reference ranges for patients of the same age.
In their defense, “this method has long been in use, but it has eventually become apparent that symptomatic patients with an undiagnosed deficiency could be in the reference patients’ group,” Dr. Huygue explained.
Once a deficiency has been diagnosed, doctors may be reluctant to prescribe replacement therapy due to the perceived risk of developing prostate cancer. Several international studies have shown that “the risk of prostate cancer is the single biggest reason for doctors refusing to prescribe testosterone,” said Dr. Huygue.
Despite this reluctance, numerous studies have clearly shown that there is no link between a high testosterone level and the risk of developing prostate cancer. It even seems that a low testosterone level might expose a person to an increased risk for an aggressive form of cancer.
“This is a time of many surprising discoveries concerning the link between the prostate and testosterone, which go against what we have thought up to now. It has been observed that men with low testosterone develop more serious types of cancer,” said Dr. Huygue at a previous meeting of the AFU, during which he announced the publication of the French recommendations.
Prostate Cancer Recurrence
Urologists are also wary of testosterone supplementation in patients with a previous history of prostate cancer. According to the AFU’s survey, 40% of urologists questioned think that testosterone is contraindicated in this population. One in two urologists prescribe testosterone after radical prostatectomy for low or intermediate risk and most commonly after 3 years of undetectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels.
Nevertheless, “several retrospective studies show the safety of testosterone replacement therapy in men who have undergone radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy or who are under active monitoring,” said Dr. Huygue. Testosterone “does not appear to increase the risk of relapse” after treatment of prostate cancer.
Dr. Huygue invited prescribing physicians to refer to the French recommendations, which specify that 1 year of undetectable PSA after prostatectomy is sufficient before prescribing replacement therapy. “This is clearly indicated in the recommendations for patients with a previous history of prostate cancer.”
Neither prostate cancer nor benign prostatic hyperplasia is a contraindication. According to the recommendations, the only contraindications to testosterone prescription are the following:
- Hematocrit > 54%
- Current breast or prostate cancer
- Cardiovascular event less than 3-6 months prior
- Trying to conceive
Cardiovascular Benefits
Another more commonly used argument by general practitioners and endocrinologists to justify their reluctance to prescribe testosterone is the risk to cardiovascular health. In early 2010, a series of American studies alerted clinicians to this risk when taking testosterone. Since then, other studies have had reassuring findings.
In response to the alert issued by the United States, the European Medicines Agency specified that “the data are not sufficient for a warning,” before the American Heart Association colleagues concluded that testosterone should only be avoided in the first 6 months following a severe cardiovascular event.
Conversely, in 2021, the European Society of Cardiology put forward the benefits of testosterone in an article in favor of replacement therapy to prevent cardiovascular risk. In particular, the hormone is thought to have a beneficial effect on arterial stiffness, the appearance of calcified plaques, and coronary artery dilatation.
The final hurdle to overcome before a testosterone prescription is filled relates to patients themselves, who often regard such treatment unfavorably. Many wrongly believe that androgens are hormones that “increase the risk of cancer, make you aggressive, cause weight gain, lead to hair loss, and cause body hair growth,” said Dr. Huygue.
Finally, breaks in the supply chain for Androtardyl, the only injectable form available for reimbursement by French social security schemes, were reported in the country in 2023, said Dr. Huygue. This situation only complicates further the prescription and use of testosterone replacement therapy.
Which Supplement?
Testosterone replacement therapies are available on the market in the following formulations:
Via transcutaneous administration: Testosterone-based gels, not covered by the French social security system (Androgel and Fortigel), to be applied daily. Users must be careful to avoid any potential transfer of the product to women or children in case of contact with the site after application.
Via an injection: Androtardyl (testosterone enanthate), covered by French social security, to be administered intramuscularly once a month. Nebido (testosterone undecanoate), not covered by French social security, with a more beneficial bioavailability profile, to be administered once every 3 months.
Pantestone (testosterone undecanoate), administered orally, is not marketed since 2021. It had the major disadvantage of requiring a high-fat diet to ensure optimal absorption.
This article was translated from the Medscape French edition. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Prostate Risks Similar for Testosterone Therapy and Placebo
TOPLINE:
including cancer.
METHODOLOGY:
- Uncertainty and concern exist about a link between prostate cancer risk and testosterone levels. Most professional society guidelines recommend against TRT in men with a history of or an increased risk for prostate cancer.
- The Testosterone Replacement Therapy for Assessment of Long-Term Vascular Events and Efficacy Response in Hypogonadal Men included 5204 men (ages 45-80, 17% Black, 80% White), randomly assigned to receive testosterone gel or placebo.
- Men with a history of cardiovascular disease or increased cardiovascular risk were evaluated to exclude those at increased prostate cancer risk (fasting testosterone < 300 ng/dL, ≥ 1 hypogonadal symptoms).
- The primary prostate safety endpoint was high-grade prostate cancer incidence (Gleason score, ≥ 4 + 3).
- Secondary endpoints were incidences of any prostate cancer, acute urinary retention, invasive procedure for benign prostatic hyperplasia, prostate biopsy, and new pharmacologic treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms.
TAKEAWAY:
- During 14,304 person-years of follow-up, high-grade prostate cancer incidence did not differ significantly between the TRT and placebo (0.19% vs 0.12%; P = .51) groups.
- The incidences of prostate cancer, acute urinary retention, invasive procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia, prostate biopsy, and new pharmacologic treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms were also similar between the groups.
- TRT did not lead to an increase in lower urinary tract symptoms.
- The increase in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels was higher in the TRT group than in the placebo group (P < .001). However, the between-group difference did not widen after 12 months.
IN PRACTICE:
For “clinicians and patients who are considering testosterone replacement therapy for hypogonadism,” wrote the authors, “the study’s findings will facilitate a more informed appraisal of the potential prostate risks of testosterone replacement therapy.”
SOURCE:
Shalender Bhasin, MB, BS, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, led the study. It was published online in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS:
- The study findings do not apply to men with known prostate cancer or higher PSA values or those without confirmed hypogonadism.
- Although the TRAVERSE study was longer than many contemporary trials, carcinogens may require many years to induce malignant neoplasms.
- The trial’s structured evaluation of men after PSA testing did not include prostate imaging or other biomarker tests, which could affect the decision to perform a biopsy.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was funded by a consortium of testosterone manufacturers led by AbbVie Inc with additional financial support from Endo Pharmaceuticals, Acerus Pharmaceuticals Corp, and Upsher-Smith Laboratories. Mr. Bhasin and two coauthors declared receiving grants, consulting and personal fees, and other ties with pharmaceutical and device companies and other sources.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
including cancer.
METHODOLOGY:
- Uncertainty and concern exist about a link between prostate cancer risk and testosterone levels. Most professional society guidelines recommend against TRT in men with a history of or an increased risk for prostate cancer.
- The Testosterone Replacement Therapy for Assessment of Long-Term Vascular Events and Efficacy Response in Hypogonadal Men included 5204 men (ages 45-80, 17% Black, 80% White), randomly assigned to receive testosterone gel or placebo.
- Men with a history of cardiovascular disease or increased cardiovascular risk were evaluated to exclude those at increased prostate cancer risk (fasting testosterone < 300 ng/dL, ≥ 1 hypogonadal symptoms).
- The primary prostate safety endpoint was high-grade prostate cancer incidence (Gleason score, ≥ 4 + 3).
- Secondary endpoints were incidences of any prostate cancer, acute urinary retention, invasive procedure for benign prostatic hyperplasia, prostate biopsy, and new pharmacologic treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms.
TAKEAWAY:
- During 14,304 person-years of follow-up, high-grade prostate cancer incidence did not differ significantly between the TRT and placebo (0.19% vs 0.12%; P = .51) groups.
- The incidences of prostate cancer, acute urinary retention, invasive procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia, prostate biopsy, and new pharmacologic treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms were also similar between the groups.
- TRT did not lead to an increase in lower urinary tract symptoms.
- The increase in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels was higher in the TRT group than in the placebo group (P < .001). However, the between-group difference did not widen after 12 months.
IN PRACTICE:
For “clinicians and patients who are considering testosterone replacement therapy for hypogonadism,” wrote the authors, “the study’s findings will facilitate a more informed appraisal of the potential prostate risks of testosterone replacement therapy.”
SOURCE:
Shalender Bhasin, MB, BS, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, led the study. It was published online in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS:
- The study findings do not apply to men with known prostate cancer or higher PSA values or those without confirmed hypogonadism.
- Although the TRAVERSE study was longer than many contemporary trials, carcinogens may require many years to induce malignant neoplasms.
- The trial’s structured evaluation of men after PSA testing did not include prostate imaging or other biomarker tests, which could affect the decision to perform a biopsy.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was funded by a consortium of testosterone manufacturers led by AbbVie Inc with additional financial support from Endo Pharmaceuticals, Acerus Pharmaceuticals Corp, and Upsher-Smith Laboratories. Mr. Bhasin and two coauthors declared receiving grants, consulting and personal fees, and other ties with pharmaceutical and device companies and other sources.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
including cancer.
METHODOLOGY:
- Uncertainty and concern exist about a link between prostate cancer risk and testosterone levels. Most professional society guidelines recommend against TRT in men with a history of or an increased risk for prostate cancer.
- The Testosterone Replacement Therapy for Assessment of Long-Term Vascular Events and Efficacy Response in Hypogonadal Men included 5204 men (ages 45-80, 17% Black, 80% White), randomly assigned to receive testosterone gel or placebo.
- Men with a history of cardiovascular disease or increased cardiovascular risk were evaluated to exclude those at increased prostate cancer risk (fasting testosterone < 300 ng/dL, ≥ 1 hypogonadal symptoms).
- The primary prostate safety endpoint was high-grade prostate cancer incidence (Gleason score, ≥ 4 + 3).
- Secondary endpoints were incidences of any prostate cancer, acute urinary retention, invasive procedure for benign prostatic hyperplasia, prostate biopsy, and new pharmacologic treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms.
TAKEAWAY:
- During 14,304 person-years of follow-up, high-grade prostate cancer incidence did not differ significantly between the TRT and placebo (0.19% vs 0.12%; P = .51) groups.
- The incidences of prostate cancer, acute urinary retention, invasive procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia, prostate biopsy, and new pharmacologic treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms were also similar between the groups.
- TRT did not lead to an increase in lower urinary tract symptoms.
- The increase in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels was higher in the TRT group than in the placebo group (P < .001). However, the between-group difference did not widen after 12 months.
IN PRACTICE:
For “clinicians and patients who are considering testosterone replacement therapy for hypogonadism,” wrote the authors, “the study’s findings will facilitate a more informed appraisal of the potential prostate risks of testosterone replacement therapy.”
SOURCE:
Shalender Bhasin, MB, BS, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, led the study. It was published online in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS:
- The study findings do not apply to men with known prostate cancer or higher PSA values or those without confirmed hypogonadism.
- Although the TRAVERSE study was longer than many contemporary trials, carcinogens may require many years to induce malignant neoplasms.
- The trial’s structured evaluation of men after PSA testing did not include prostate imaging or other biomarker tests, which could affect the decision to perform a biopsy.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was funded by a consortium of testosterone manufacturers led by AbbVie Inc with additional financial support from Endo Pharmaceuticals, Acerus Pharmaceuticals Corp, and Upsher-Smith Laboratories. Mr. Bhasin and two coauthors declared receiving grants, consulting and personal fees, and other ties with pharmaceutical and device companies and other sources.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
EHR Tool Enhances Primary Aldosteronism Screening in Hypertensive Patients
Primary aldosteronism (PA) is a frequently overlooked yet common cause of secondary hypertension, presenting significant risk for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
But fewer than 4% of at-risk patients receive the recommended screening for PA, leaving a substantial gap in early detection and management, according to Adina F. Turcu, MD, MS, associate professor in endocrinology and internal medicine at University of Michigan Health in Ann Arbor.
In response to this clinical challenge, Dr. Turcu and her colleagues developed a best-practice advisory (BPA) to identify patients who were at risk for PA and embedded it into electronic health record at University of Michigan ambulatory clinics. Her team found that use of the tool led to increased rates of screening for PA, particularly among primary care physicians.
Over a 15-month period, Dr. Turcu and her colleagues tested the BPA through a quality improvement study, identifying 14,603 unique candidates for PA screening, with a mean age of 65.5 years and a diverse representation of ethnic backgrounds.
Notably, 48.1% of these candidates had treatment-resistant hypertension, 43.5% exhibited hypokalemia, 10.5% were younger than 35 years, and 3.1% had adrenal nodules. Of these candidates, 14.0% received orders for PA screening, with 70.5% completing the recommended screening within the system, and 17.4% receiving positive screening results.
The study, conducted over 6 months in 2023, targeted adults with hypertension and at least one of the following: Those who took four or more antihypertensive medications, exhibited hypokalemia, were younger than age 35 years, or had adrenal nodules. Patients previously tested for PA were excluded from the analysis.
The noninterruptive BPA was triggered during outpatient visits with clinicians who specialized in hypertension. The advisory would then offer an order set for PA screening and provide a link to interpretation guidance for results. Clinicians had the option to use, ignore, or decline the BPA.
“Although we were hoping for broader uptake of this EHR-embedded BPA, we were delighted to see an increase in PA screening rates to 14% of identified candidates as compared to an average of less than 3% in retrospective studies of similar populations, including in our own institution prior to implementing this BPA,” Dr. Turcu told this news organization.
Physician specialty played a crucial role in the utilization of the BPA. Internists and family medicine physicians accounted for the majority of screening orders, placing 40.0% and 28.1% of these, respectively. Family practitioners and internists predominantly used the embedded order set (80.3% and 68.9%, respectively).
“Hypertension often gets treated rather than screening for [causes of] secondary hypertension prior to treatment,” said Kaniksha Desai, MD, clinical associate professor and endocrinology quality director at Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, who was not involved in the research. But “primary hyperaldosteronism is a condition that can be treated surgically and has increased long term cardiovascular consequences if not identified. While guidelines recommend screening at-risk patients, this often can get lost in translation in clinical practice due to many factors, including time constraints and volume of patients.”
Patients who did vs did not undergo screening were more likely to be women, Black, and younger than age 35 years. Additionally, the likelihood of screening was higher among patients with obesity and dyslipidemia, whereas it was lower in those with chronic kidney disease and established cardiovascular complications.
According to Dr. Turcu, the findings from this study suggest that noninterruptive BPAs, especially when integrated into primary care workflows, hold promise as effective tools for PA screening.
When coupled with artificial intelligence to optimize detection yield, these refined BPAs could significantly contribute to personalized care for hypertension, the investigators said.
“Considering that in the United States almost one in two adults has hypertension, such automatized tools become instrumental to busy clinicians, particularly those in primary care,” Dr. Turcu said. “Our results indicate a promising opportunity to meaningfully improve PA awareness and enhance its diagnosis.”
Dr. Turcu reported receiving grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and Doris Duke Foundation, served as an investigator in a CinCor Pharma clinical trial, and received financial support to her institution during the conduct of the study. Dr. Desai reported no relevant financial disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Primary aldosteronism (PA) is a frequently overlooked yet common cause of secondary hypertension, presenting significant risk for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
But fewer than 4% of at-risk patients receive the recommended screening for PA, leaving a substantial gap in early detection and management, according to Adina F. Turcu, MD, MS, associate professor in endocrinology and internal medicine at University of Michigan Health in Ann Arbor.
In response to this clinical challenge, Dr. Turcu and her colleagues developed a best-practice advisory (BPA) to identify patients who were at risk for PA and embedded it into electronic health record at University of Michigan ambulatory clinics. Her team found that use of the tool led to increased rates of screening for PA, particularly among primary care physicians.
Over a 15-month period, Dr. Turcu and her colleagues tested the BPA through a quality improvement study, identifying 14,603 unique candidates for PA screening, with a mean age of 65.5 years and a diverse representation of ethnic backgrounds.
Notably, 48.1% of these candidates had treatment-resistant hypertension, 43.5% exhibited hypokalemia, 10.5% were younger than 35 years, and 3.1% had adrenal nodules. Of these candidates, 14.0% received orders for PA screening, with 70.5% completing the recommended screening within the system, and 17.4% receiving positive screening results.
The study, conducted over 6 months in 2023, targeted adults with hypertension and at least one of the following: Those who took four or more antihypertensive medications, exhibited hypokalemia, were younger than age 35 years, or had adrenal nodules. Patients previously tested for PA were excluded from the analysis.
The noninterruptive BPA was triggered during outpatient visits with clinicians who specialized in hypertension. The advisory would then offer an order set for PA screening and provide a link to interpretation guidance for results. Clinicians had the option to use, ignore, or decline the BPA.
“Although we were hoping for broader uptake of this EHR-embedded BPA, we were delighted to see an increase in PA screening rates to 14% of identified candidates as compared to an average of less than 3% in retrospective studies of similar populations, including in our own institution prior to implementing this BPA,” Dr. Turcu told this news organization.
Physician specialty played a crucial role in the utilization of the BPA. Internists and family medicine physicians accounted for the majority of screening orders, placing 40.0% and 28.1% of these, respectively. Family practitioners and internists predominantly used the embedded order set (80.3% and 68.9%, respectively).
“Hypertension often gets treated rather than screening for [causes of] secondary hypertension prior to treatment,” said Kaniksha Desai, MD, clinical associate professor and endocrinology quality director at Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, who was not involved in the research. But “primary hyperaldosteronism is a condition that can be treated surgically and has increased long term cardiovascular consequences if not identified. While guidelines recommend screening at-risk patients, this often can get lost in translation in clinical practice due to many factors, including time constraints and volume of patients.”
Patients who did vs did not undergo screening were more likely to be women, Black, and younger than age 35 years. Additionally, the likelihood of screening was higher among patients with obesity and dyslipidemia, whereas it was lower in those with chronic kidney disease and established cardiovascular complications.
According to Dr. Turcu, the findings from this study suggest that noninterruptive BPAs, especially when integrated into primary care workflows, hold promise as effective tools for PA screening.
When coupled with artificial intelligence to optimize detection yield, these refined BPAs could significantly contribute to personalized care for hypertension, the investigators said.
“Considering that in the United States almost one in two adults has hypertension, such automatized tools become instrumental to busy clinicians, particularly those in primary care,” Dr. Turcu said. “Our results indicate a promising opportunity to meaningfully improve PA awareness and enhance its diagnosis.”
Dr. Turcu reported receiving grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and Doris Duke Foundation, served as an investigator in a CinCor Pharma clinical trial, and received financial support to her institution during the conduct of the study. Dr. Desai reported no relevant financial disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Primary aldosteronism (PA) is a frequently overlooked yet common cause of secondary hypertension, presenting significant risk for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
But fewer than 4% of at-risk patients receive the recommended screening for PA, leaving a substantial gap in early detection and management, according to Adina F. Turcu, MD, MS, associate professor in endocrinology and internal medicine at University of Michigan Health in Ann Arbor.
In response to this clinical challenge, Dr. Turcu and her colleagues developed a best-practice advisory (BPA) to identify patients who were at risk for PA and embedded it into electronic health record at University of Michigan ambulatory clinics. Her team found that use of the tool led to increased rates of screening for PA, particularly among primary care physicians.
Over a 15-month period, Dr. Turcu and her colleagues tested the BPA through a quality improvement study, identifying 14,603 unique candidates for PA screening, with a mean age of 65.5 years and a diverse representation of ethnic backgrounds.
Notably, 48.1% of these candidates had treatment-resistant hypertension, 43.5% exhibited hypokalemia, 10.5% were younger than 35 years, and 3.1% had adrenal nodules. Of these candidates, 14.0% received orders for PA screening, with 70.5% completing the recommended screening within the system, and 17.4% receiving positive screening results.
The study, conducted over 6 months in 2023, targeted adults with hypertension and at least one of the following: Those who took four or more antihypertensive medications, exhibited hypokalemia, were younger than age 35 years, or had adrenal nodules. Patients previously tested for PA were excluded from the analysis.
The noninterruptive BPA was triggered during outpatient visits with clinicians who specialized in hypertension. The advisory would then offer an order set for PA screening and provide a link to interpretation guidance for results. Clinicians had the option to use, ignore, or decline the BPA.
“Although we were hoping for broader uptake of this EHR-embedded BPA, we were delighted to see an increase in PA screening rates to 14% of identified candidates as compared to an average of less than 3% in retrospective studies of similar populations, including in our own institution prior to implementing this BPA,” Dr. Turcu told this news organization.
Physician specialty played a crucial role in the utilization of the BPA. Internists and family medicine physicians accounted for the majority of screening orders, placing 40.0% and 28.1% of these, respectively. Family practitioners and internists predominantly used the embedded order set (80.3% and 68.9%, respectively).
“Hypertension often gets treated rather than screening for [causes of] secondary hypertension prior to treatment,” said Kaniksha Desai, MD, clinical associate professor and endocrinology quality director at Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, who was not involved in the research. But “primary hyperaldosteronism is a condition that can be treated surgically and has increased long term cardiovascular consequences if not identified. While guidelines recommend screening at-risk patients, this often can get lost in translation in clinical practice due to many factors, including time constraints and volume of patients.”
Patients who did vs did not undergo screening were more likely to be women, Black, and younger than age 35 years. Additionally, the likelihood of screening was higher among patients with obesity and dyslipidemia, whereas it was lower in those with chronic kidney disease and established cardiovascular complications.
According to Dr. Turcu, the findings from this study suggest that noninterruptive BPAs, especially when integrated into primary care workflows, hold promise as effective tools for PA screening.
When coupled with artificial intelligence to optimize detection yield, these refined BPAs could significantly contribute to personalized care for hypertension, the investigators said.
“Considering that in the United States almost one in two adults has hypertension, such automatized tools become instrumental to busy clinicians, particularly those in primary care,” Dr. Turcu said. “Our results indicate a promising opportunity to meaningfully improve PA awareness and enhance its diagnosis.”
Dr. Turcu reported receiving grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and Doris Duke Foundation, served as an investigator in a CinCor Pharma clinical trial, and received financial support to her institution during the conduct of the study. Dr. Desai reported no relevant financial disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Direct Measurement of T3 Is Likely Vital, Say Researchers
To assess thyroid function, clinicians typically determine blood levels of thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) and thyroxine (T4) and do not directly measure triiodothyronine (T3).
However, linking socioeconomic forces, human biology, and aging,” researchers reported.
The study, with lead author Ralph I. Lawton, an MD-PhD student at Harvard Medical School, Boston, was published online on January 4, 2024, in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. In this national sample of healthy adults older than 20, free T3 was negatively related to household income. At age 40 and older, free T3 was significantly linked to being employed. Among adults from age 51 to 80, free T3 levels were inversely related to mortality.
“It is important to note that the more typically measured biomarkers for thyroid function (T4 and TSH) are poorly linked to free T3 levels,” Dr. Lawton and colleagues wrote.
The ratio of TSH:T4 explained only 1.7% of variation in T3 levels, they noted, which suggested that TSH and T4 may not be accurate surrogates of free T3. Thus, “direct measurement of free T3 is likely vital to properly stratify the effects of HPT-axis variation,” they maintained. “Improved methods for measurement [of T3] and further investigation of the role of free T3 in clinical conditions may be high yield,” according to the researchers.
Further studies of the relationship between the action of deiodinase in converting T4 to T3 and social forces and aging could elucidate critical biology. “New therapeutics targeting T3/T4 ratios,” they suggested, “may be more beneficial for a significant cohort of older individuals [with hypothyroidism] currently treated with levothyroxine [(LT4)].”
‘Cherry on Top’
“I think this is a really important paper,” thyroidology expert Antonio Bianco, MD, PhD, professor of medicine, The University of Chicago, who was not involved with this research, told this news organization.
His research group and others “have slowly been providing evidence of the relevance of measuring T3 levels,” he said. “This paper is sort of a cherry on top. It is really the most recent strong evidence that looking at T3 levels in plasma is really important. We need to do a better job at developing a much more precise assay for T3,” he said, “because now we know T3 is a very important parameter that endocrinologists should be looking for. We know that about 20 million Americans have hypothyroidism, and are being treated with T4 (levothyroxine),” Dr. Bianco continued.
“As endocrinologists, we believe that if you treat someone with levothyroxine, you normalize T3 levels. However, many times, with standard of care with levothyroxine, T3 levels are not normalized.”
Larger Variations in T3
Thyroid hormones (TSH, free T4, and free T3) influence many aspects of human physiology and behavior, but it is not known how variations in these levels in a population free of thyroid disease are associated with mortality and socioeconomic factors.
The researchers analyzed data from 7626 adults over age 20 up to age 80 who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey during 2007-2012 and had blood tests to determine TSH, free T4, and free T3 and were not being actively treated for thyroid conditions. Among the 3603 older adults (over age 50), there were 981 deaths up until the end of 2019. TSH levels were not linked to mortality, but increasing levels of free T3 and decreasing levels of free T4 were protective for mortality (hazard ratios, 0.88 and 1.26, respectively; P < .01).
There was a robust negative relationship between household income and employment and free T3 but no relationship between these factors and T4. There was a much larger variation across age in levels of free T3 than in levels of TSH or free T4. Free T4 and free T3 diverged at older ages, when free T4 increased and free T3 continually decreased.
Older adults with symptoms of hypothyroidism may have high free T4 levels despite low free T3, the researchers noted.
“In a nonclinical sample representative of the US population,” they summarized, “we find that free T3 is much more strongly related to all domains studied — age, sex, seasonality, household income, employment, and longevity — than the other molecules of the HPT axis.”
This work was supported by the Burroughs Wellcome Fund Career at Scientific Interface award, a Brain and Behavior Research Foundation young investigator award, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the National Institute of Aging, and the National Institute of General Medical Sciences. Dr. Bianco served as a consultant for AbbVie, Avion Pharmaceuticals, Synthonics, Synthion, and Thyron and recently published the book Rethinking Hypothyroidism: Why Treatment Must Change and What Patients Can Do.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
To assess thyroid function, clinicians typically determine blood levels of thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) and thyroxine (T4) and do not directly measure triiodothyronine (T3).
However, linking socioeconomic forces, human biology, and aging,” researchers reported.
The study, with lead author Ralph I. Lawton, an MD-PhD student at Harvard Medical School, Boston, was published online on January 4, 2024, in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. In this national sample of healthy adults older than 20, free T3 was negatively related to household income. At age 40 and older, free T3 was significantly linked to being employed. Among adults from age 51 to 80, free T3 levels were inversely related to mortality.
“It is important to note that the more typically measured biomarkers for thyroid function (T4 and TSH) are poorly linked to free T3 levels,” Dr. Lawton and colleagues wrote.
The ratio of TSH:T4 explained only 1.7% of variation in T3 levels, they noted, which suggested that TSH and T4 may not be accurate surrogates of free T3. Thus, “direct measurement of free T3 is likely vital to properly stratify the effects of HPT-axis variation,” they maintained. “Improved methods for measurement [of T3] and further investigation of the role of free T3 in clinical conditions may be high yield,” according to the researchers.
Further studies of the relationship between the action of deiodinase in converting T4 to T3 and social forces and aging could elucidate critical biology. “New therapeutics targeting T3/T4 ratios,” they suggested, “may be more beneficial for a significant cohort of older individuals [with hypothyroidism] currently treated with levothyroxine [(LT4)].”
‘Cherry on Top’
“I think this is a really important paper,” thyroidology expert Antonio Bianco, MD, PhD, professor of medicine, The University of Chicago, who was not involved with this research, told this news organization.
His research group and others “have slowly been providing evidence of the relevance of measuring T3 levels,” he said. “This paper is sort of a cherry on top. It is really the most recent strong evidence that looking at T3 levels in plasma is really important. We need to do a better job at developing a much more precise assay for T3,” he said, “because now we know T3 is a very important parameter that endocrinologists should be looking for. We know that about 20 million Americans have hypothyroidism, and are being treated with T4 (levothyroxine),” Dr. Bianco continued.
“As endocrinologists, we believe that if you treat someone with levothyroxine, you normalize T3 levels. However, many times, with standard of care with levothyroxine, T3 levels are not normalized.”
Larger Variations in T3
Thyroid hormones (TSH, free T4, and free T3) influence many aspects of human physiology and behavior, but it is not known how variations in these levels in a population free of thyroid disease are associated with mortality and socioeconomic factors.
The researchers analyzed data from 7626 adults over age 20 up to age 80 who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey during 2007-2012 and had blood tests to determine TSH, free T4, and free T3 and were not being actively treated for thyroid conditions. Among the 3603 older adults (over age 50), there were 981 deaths up until the end of 2019. TSH levels were not linked to mortality, but increasing levels of free T3 and decreasing levels of free T4 were protective for mortality (hazard ratios, 0.88 and 1.26, respectively; P < .01).
There was a robust negative relationship between household income and employment and free T3 but no relationship between these factors and T4. There was a much larger variation across age in levels of free T3 than in levels of TSH or free T4. Free T4 and free T3 diverged at older ages, when free T4 increased and free T3 continually decreased.
Older adults with symptoms of hypothyroidism may have high free T4 levels despite low free T3, the researchers noted.
“In a nonclinical sample representative of the US population,” they summarized, “we find that free T3 is much more strongly related to all domains studied — age, sex, seasonality, household income, employment, and longevity — than the other molecules of the HPT axis.”
This work was supported by the Burroughs Wellcome Fund Career at Scientific Interface award, a Brain and Behavior Research Foundation young investigator award, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the National Institute of Aging, and the National Institute of General Medical Sciences. Dr. Bianco served as a consultant for AbbVie, Avion Pharmaceuticals, Synthonics, Synthion, and Thyron and recently published the book Rethinking Hypothyroidism: Why Treatment Must Change and What Patients Can Do.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
To assess thyroid function, clinicians typically determine blood levels of thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) and thyroxine (T4) and do not directly measure triiodothyronine (T3).
However, linking socioeconomic forces, human biology, and aging,” researchers reported.
The study, with lead author Ralph I. Lawton, an MD-PhD student at Harvard Medical School, Boston, was published online on January 4, 2024, in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. In this national sample of healthy adults older than 20, free T3 was negatively related to household income. At age 40 and older, free T3 was significantly linked to being employed. Among adults from age 51 to 80, free T3 levels were inversely related to mortality.
“It is important to note that the more typically measured biomarkers for thyroid function (T4 and TSH) are poorly linked to free T3 levels,” Dr. Lawton and colleagues wrote.
The ratio of TSH:T4 explained only 1.7% of variation in T3 levels, they noted, which suggested that TSH and T4 may not be accurate surrogates of free T3. Thus, “direct measurement of free T3 is likely vital to properly stratify the effects of HPT-axis variation,” they maintained. “Improved methods for measurement [of T3] and further investigation of the role of free T3 in clinical conditions may be high yield,” according to the researchers.
Further studies of the relationship between the action of deiodinase in converting T4 to T3 and social forces and aging could elucidate critical biology. “New therapeutics targeting T3/T4 ratios,” they suggested, “may be more beneficial for a significant cohort of older individuals [with hypothyroidism] currently treated with levothyroxine [(LT4)].”
‘Cherry on Top’
“I think this is a really important paper,” thyroidology expert Antonio Bianco, MD, PhD, professor of medicine, The University of Chicago, who was not involved with this research, told this news organization.
His research group and others “have slowly been providing evidence of the relevance of measuring T3 levels,” he said. “This paper is sort of a cherry on top. It is really the most recent strong evidence that looking at T3 levels in plasma is really important. We need to do a better job at developing a much more precise assay for T3,” he said, “because now we know T3 is a very important parameter that endocrinologists should be looking for. We know that about 20 million Americans have hypothyroidism, and are being treated with T4 (levothyroxine),” Dr. Bianco continued.
“As endocrinologists, we believe that if you treat someone with levothyroxine, you normalize T3 levels. However, many times, with standard of care with levothyroxine, T3 levels are not normalized.”
Larger Variations in T3
Thyroid hormones (TSH, free T4, and free T3) influence many aspects of human physiology and behavior, but it is not known how variations in these levels in a population free of thyroid disease are associated with mortality and socioeconomic factors.
The researchers analyzed data from 7626 adults over age 20 up to age 80 who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey during 2007-2012 and had blood tests to determine TSH, free T4, and free T3 and were not being actively treated for thyroid conditions. Among the 3603 older adults (over age 50), there were 981 deaths up until the end of 2019. TSH levels were not linked to mortality, but increasing levels of free T3 and decreasing levels of free T4 were protective for mortality (hazard ratios, 0.88 and 1.26, respectively; P < .01).
There was a robust negative relationship between household income and employment and free T3 but no relationship between these factors and T4. There was a much larger variation across age in levels of free T3 than in levels of TSH or free T4. Free T4 and free T3 diverged at older ages, when free T4 increased and free T3 continually decreased.
Older adults with symptoms of hypothyroidism may have high free T4 levels despite low free T3, the researchers noted.
“In a nonclinical sample representative of the US population,” they summarized, “we find that free T3 is much more strongly related to all domains studied — age, sex, seasonality, household income, employment, and longevity — than the other molecules of the HPT axis.”
This work was supported by the Burroughs Wellcome Fund Career at Scientific Interface award, a Brain and Behavior Research Foundation young investigator award, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the National Institute of Aging, and the National Institute of General Medical Sciences. Dr. Bianco served as a consultant for AbbVie, Avion Pharmaceuticals, Synthonics, Synthion, and Thyron and recently published the book Rethinking Hypothyroidism: Why Treatment Must Change and What Patients Can Do.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Autoimmune Diseases and Perinatal Depression May Share Two-Way Link
Women with autoimmune disease are more likely to have perinatal depression (PND), according to findings from a new study that also suggested the reverse relationship is true: Women with a history of PND have a higher risk of developing autoimmune disease.
The research, published online on January 9, 2024, in Molecular Psychiatry, was led by Emma Bränn, PhD, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
The researchers used data from the Swedish Medical Birth Register and identified all women who had given birth in Sweden between 2001 and 2013. Out of the group of approximately 815,000 women and 1.3 million pregnancies, just more than 55,000 women had been diagnosed with depression during their pregnancy or within a year after delivery.
The researchers then compared the incidence of 41 autoimmune diseases in women who had and did not have PND. They controlled for factors including genetic makeup and childhood environment.
Results indicated that women with autoimmune disease were 30% more likely to have PND (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.25-1.35). Conversely, women with PND were 30% more likely than women with no PND to develop an autoimmune disease (hazard ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.25-1.36).
A sibling comparison helped confirm the results by controlling for some shared genetic and early life environmental factors related to the household in which sisters grew up.
Potential Shared Biological Mechanisms
The association was independent of psychiatric comorbidities, suggesting there may be shared biological mechanisms.
Dr. Bränn told this news organization that the research team wanted to do the study because previous research has shown involvement of the immune system in depression, with similarities in both the symptoms of immune system–activated diseases and depression and the molecular pathways activated by the immune system.
“Adding on top of the tremendous changes in the immune system that we see in the body of the woman during the perinatal period, we hypothesized that autoimmune diseases could be associated to perinatal depression,” she said. “This had also been shown in some previous literature but not to the extent as what we have investigated in this paper.”
She said their results help make a case for counseling women at several points in healthcare interactions — before and after conception and childbirth — and in rheumatology visits to inform women with autoimmune diseases who are contemplating motherhood of the association with developing PND. The results may also demonstrate a need for monitoring women in these groups for depression or autoimmune disease.
Fred Miller, MD, PhD, retired Scientist Emeritus of the Environmental Autoimmunity Group at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, who was not part of the study, said the results seem plausible as they build on early work that demonstrated selected associations between autoimmune conditions and mental illness.
“These associations may be the result of shared genetic and environmental risk factors, including stress, hormonal changes, medications, and the proinflammatory states that can lead to both,” he said.
The novelty, he said, is in the relatively strong associations of PND with autoimmune disease overall and with specific autoimmune diseases.
Strong Link Found With Multiple Sclerosis (MS)
According to the paper, a significant positive bidirectional link was found for autoimmune thyroid disease, psoriasis, MS, ulcerative colitis, and celiac disease.
Researchers found a particularly strong association — double the risk in both directions — between PND and MS.
Dr. Miller said though it is unclear from this study why the association of PND with MS was stronger than with other autoimmune diseases, people with MS are known to be at a high risk for depression in general. That may come from greater shared genetic and environmental risk factors, he added.
Additionally, MS is one of the more common autoimmune diseases, he noted, so the population is larger for study.
He said he was surprised the researchers didn’t investigate medication use because medications used in depression have immunologic effects and medications used in autoimmune diseases could have effects on mental conditions.
The study has implications for clinicians in a wide variety of specialties, Dr. Miller noted.
“It suggests that caregivers be more alert to the signs of developing autoimmune disease in women with perinatal depression and to the signs of developing perinatal depression in those with autoimmune disease,” Dr. Miller said, “so that appropriate screening, diagnostics, and interventions may be undertaken.”
The researchers say they will continue to examine the long-term effects of depression during pregnancy and in the year after childbirth.
“Depression during this sensitive period can have serious consequences for both the mother and the baby,” Dr. Bränn said. “We hope that our results will help decision-makers to steer funding toward maternal healthcare so that more women can get help and support in time.”
The study was financed by Karolinska Institute, Forte (the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare), the Swedish Research Council, and the Icelandic Research Fund.
The researchers and Dr. Miller reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Women with autoimmune disease are more likely to have perinatal depression (PND), according to findings from a new study that also suggested the reverse relationship is true: Women with a history of PND have a higher risk of developing autoimmune disease.
The research, published online on January 9, 2024, in Molecular Psychiatry, was led by Emma Bränn, PhD, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
The researchers used data from the Swedish Medical Birth Register and identified all women who had given birth in Sweden between 2001 and 2013. Out of the group of approximately 815,000 women and 1.3 million pregnancies, just more than 55,000 women had been diagnosed with depression during their pregnancy or within a year after delivery.
The researchers then compared the incidence of 41 autoimmune diseases in women who had and did not have PND. They controlled for factors including genetic makeup and childhood environment.
Results indicated that women with autoimmune disease were 30% more likely to have PND (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.25-1.35). Conversely, women with PND were 30% more likely than women with no PND to develop an autoimmune disease (hazard ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.25-1.36).
A sibling comparison helped confirm the results by controlling for some shared genetic and early life environmental factors related to the household in which sisters grew up.
Potential Shared Biological Mechanisms
The association was independent of psychiatric comorbidities, suggesting there may be shared biological mechanisms.
Dr. Bränn told this news organization that the research team wanted to do the study because previous research has shown involvement of the immune system in depression, with similarities in both the symptoms of immune system–activated diseases and depression and the molecular pathways activated by the immune system.
“Adding on top of the tremendous changes in the immune system that we see in the body of the woman during the perinatal period, we hypothesized that autoimmune diseases could be associated to perinatal depression,” she said. “This had also been shown in some previous literature but not to the extent as what we have investigated in this paper.”
She said their results help make a case for counseling women at several points in healthcare interactions — before and after conception and childbirth — and in rheumatology visits to inform women with autoimmune diseases who are contemplating motherhood of the association with developing PND. The results may also demonstrate a need for monitoring women in these groups for depression or autoimmune disease.
Fred Miller, MD, PhD, retired Scientist Emeritus of the Environmental Autoimmunity Group at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, who was not part of the study, said the results seem plausible as they build on early work that demonstrated selected associations between autoimmune conditions and mental illness.
“These associations may be the result of shared genetic and environmental risk factors, including stress, hormonal changes, medications, and the proinflammatory states that can lead to both,” he said.
The novelty, he said, is in the relatively strong associations of PND with autoimmune disease overall and with specific autoimmune diseases.
Strong Link Found With Multiple Sclerosis (MS)
According to the paper, a significant positive bidirectional link was found for autoimmune thyroid disease, psoriasis, MS, ulcerative colitis, and celiac disease.
Researchers found a particularly strong association — double the risk in both directions — between PND and MS.
Dr. Miller said though it is unclear from this study why the association of PND with MS was stronger than with other autoimmune diseases, people with MS are known to be at a high risk for depression in general. That may come from greater shared genetic and environmental risk factors, he added.
Additionally, MS is one of the more common autoimmune diseases, he noted, so the population is larger for study.
He said he was surprised the researchers didn’t investigate medication use because medications used in depression have immunologic effects and medications used in autoimmune diseases could have effects on mental conditions.
The study has implications for clinicians in a wide variety of specialties, Dr. Miller noted.
“It suggests that caregivers be more alert to the signs of developing autoimmune disease in women with perinatal depression and to the signs of developing perinatal depression in those with autoimmune disease,” Dr. Miller said, “so that appropriate screening, diagnostics, and interventions may be undertaken.”
The researchers say they will continue to examine the long-term effects of depression during pregnancy and in the year after childbirth.
“Depression during this sensitive period can have serious consequences for both the mother and the baby,” Dr. Bränn said. “We hope that our results will help decision-makers to steer funding toward maternal healthcare so that more women can get help and support in time.”
The study was financed by Karolinska Institute, Forte (the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare), the Swedish Research Council, and the Icelandic Research Fund.
The researchers and Dr. Miller reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Women with autoimmune disease are more likely to have perinatal depression (PND), according to findings from a new study that also suggested the reverse relationship is true: Women with a history of PND have a higher risk of developing autoimmune disease.
The research, published online on January 9, 2024, in Molecular Psychiatry, was led by Emma Bränn, PhD, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
The researchers used data from the Swedish Medical Birth Register and identified all women who had given birth in Sweden between 2001 and 2013. Out of the group of approximately 815,000 women and 1.3 million pregnancies, just more than 55,000 women had been diagnosed with depression during their pregnancy or within a year after delivery.
The researchers then compared the incidence of 41 autoimmune diseases in women who had and did not have PND. They controlled for factors including genetic makeup and childhood environment.
Results indicated that women with autoimmune disease were 30% more likely to have PND (odds ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.25-1.35). Conversely, women with PND were 30% more likely than women with no PND to develop an autoimmune disease (hazard ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.25-1.36).
A sibling comparison helped confirm the results by controlling for some shared genetic and early life environmental factors related to the household in which sisters grew up.
Potential Shared Biological Mechanisms
The association was independent of psychiatric comorbidities, suggesting there may be shared biological mechanisms.
Dr. Bränn told this news organization that the research team wanted to do the study because previous research has shown involvement of the immune system in depression, with similarities in both the symptoms of immune system–activated diseases and depression and the molecular pathways activated by the immune system.
“Adding on top of the tremendous changes in the immune system that we see in the body of the woman during the perinatal period, we hypothesized that autoimmune diseases could be associated to perinatal depression,” she said. “This had also been shown in some previous literature but not to the extent as what we have investigated in this paper.”
She said their results help make a case for counseling women at several points in healthcare interactions — before and after conception and childbirth — and in rheumatology visits to inform women with autoimmune diseases who are contemplating motherhood of the association with developing PND. The results may also demonstrate a need for monitoring women in these groups for depression or autoimmune disease.
Fred Miller, MD, PhD, retired Scientist Emeritus of the Environmental Autoimmunity Group at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, who was not part of the study, said the results seem plausible as they build on early work that demonstrated selected associations between autoimmune conditions and mental illness.
“These associations may be the result of shared genetic and environmental risk factors, including stress, hormonal changes, medications, and the proinflammatory states that can lead to both,” he said.
The novelty, he said, is in the relatively strong associations of PND with autoimmune disease overall and with specific autoimmune diseases.
Strong Link Found With Multiple Sclerosis (MS)
According to the paper, a significant positive bidirectional link was found for autoimmune thyroid disease, psoriasis, MS, ulcerative colitis, and celiac disease.
Researchers found a particularly strong association — double the risk in both directions — between PND and MS.
Dr. Miller said though it is unclear from this study why the association of PND with MS was stronger than with other autoimmune diseases, people with MS are known to be at a high risk for depression in general. That may come from greater shared genetic and environmental risk factors, he added.
Additionally, MS is one of the more common autoimmune diseases, he noted, so the population is larger for study.
He said he was surprised the researchers didn’t investigate medication use because medications used in depression have immunologic effects and medications used in autoimmune diseases could have effects on mental conditions.
The study has implications for clinicians in a wide variety of specialties, Dr. Miller noted.
“It suggests that caregivers be more alert to the signs of developing autoimmune disease in women with perinatal depression and to the signs of developing perinatal depression in those with autoimmune disease,” Dr. Miller said, “so that appropriate screening, diagnostics, and interventions may be undertaken.”
The researchers say they will continue to examine the long-term effects of depression during pregnancy and in the year after childbirth.
“Depression during this sensitive period can have serious consequences for both the mother and the baby,” Dr. Bränn said. “We hope that our results will help decision-makers to steer funding toward maternal healthcare so that more women can get help and support in time.”
The study was financed by Karolinska Institute, Forte (the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare), the Swedish Research Council, and the Icelandic Research Fund.
The researchers and Dr. Miller reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM MOLECULAR PSYCHIATRY
CMS Okays Payment for Novel AI Prostate Test
The Centers for Medicare & Medicare Services (CMS) on January 1 approved the payment rate for ArteraAI as a clinical diagnostic laboratory test. The test is the first that can both predict therapeutic benefit and prognosticate long-term outcomes in localized prostate cancer.
Daniel Spratt, MD, chair of radiation oncology at UH Seidman Cancer Center in Cleveland, who has been involved in researching ArteraAI, told this news organization that the test improves risk stratification or prognostication over standard clinical and pathologic tools, such as prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, and T-stage, or risk groupings such as those from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN).
“Medicare approval allows this test to reach more patients without the financial burden of covering the test out of pocket. The test is found among other tests in NCCN guidelines as a tool to improve risk stratification and personalization of treatment,” said Dr. Spratt, who serves on the network’s prostate cancer panel.
ArteraAI combines a patient’s standard clinical and pathologic information into an algorithm, alongside a digitized image analysis of the patients’ prostate biopsy. The result is a score that estimates a patient’s risk of developing metastasis or dying from prostate cancer.
Dr. Spratt was the lead author of article last June in NEJM Evidence that validated ArteraAI. He said ArteraAI is 80% accurate as a prognostic test compared with 65% accuracy using NCCN stratification systems.
The AI test spares about two thirds of men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who are starting radiation therapy from androgen deprivation and its side effects, such as weight gain, breast enlargement, hot flashes, heart disease, and brain problems, Dr. Spratt added.
Andre Esteva, CEO and co-founder of San Francisco-based ArteraAI, said, “After someone is diagnosed with localized prostate cancer, deciding on a treatment can feel very overwhelming as there are so many factors to consider. During this time, knowledge is power, and having detailed, personalized information can increase confidence when making these challenging decisions. The ArteraAI Prostate Test was developed with this in mind and can predict whether a patient will benefit from hormone therapy and estimate long-term outcomes.”
Bruno Barrey is one of Dr. Spratt’s patients. Barrey, a robotics engineer from suburban Detroit who was transitioning from active surveillance with Gleason 3+4 intermediate-risk prostate cancer to radiation therapy, said, “I was concerned about the side effects from androgen-deprivation therapy. I was relieved that the AI test allowed me to avoid hormone therapy.”
Dr. Spratt reported working with NRG Oncology, a clinical trials group funded by the National Cancer Institute, and as an academic collaborator with ArteraAI.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicare Services (CMS) on January 1 approved the payment rate for ArteraAI as a clinical diagnostic laboratory test. The test is the first that can both predict therapeutic benefit and prognosticate long-term outcomes in localized prostate cancer.
Daniel Spratt, MD, chair of radiation oncology at UH Seidman Cancer Center in Cleveland, who has been involved in researching ArteraAI, told this news organization that the test improves risk stratification or prognostication over standard clinical and pathologic tools, such as prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, and T-stage, or risk groupings such as those from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN).
“Medicare approval allows this test to reach more patients without the financial burden of covering the test out of pocket. The test is found among other tests in NCCN guidelines as a tool to improve risk stratification and personalization of treatment,” said Dr. Spratt, who serves on the network’s prostate cancer panel.
ArteraAI combines a patient’s standard clinical and pathologic information into an algorithm, alongside a digitized image analysis of the patients’ prostate biopsy. The result is a score that estimates a patient’s risk of developing metastasis or dying from prostate cancer.
Dr. Spratt was the lead author of article last June in NEJM Evidence that validated ArteraAI. He said ArteraAI is 80% accurate as a prognostic test compared with 65% accuracy using NCCN stratification systems.
The AI test spares about two thirds of men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who are starting radiation therapy from androgen deprivation and its side effects, such as weight gain, breast enlargement, hot flashes, heart disease, and brain problems, Dr. Spratt added.
Andre Esteva, CEO and co-founder of San Francisco-based ArteraAI, said, “After someone is diagnosed with localized prostate cancer, deciding on a treatment can feel very overwhelming as there are so many factors to consider. During this time, knowledge is power, and having detailed, personalized information can increase confidence when making these challenging decisions. The ArteraAI Prostate Test was developed with this in mind and can predict whether a patient will benefit from hormone therapy and estimate long-term outcomes.”
Bruno Barrey is one of Dr. Spratt’s patients. Barrey, a robotics engineer from suburban Detroit who was transitioning from active surveillance with Gleason 3+4 intermediate-risk prostate cancer to radiation therapy, said, “I was concerned about the side effects from androgen-deprivation therapy. I was relieved that the AI test allowed me to avoid hormone therapy.”
Dr. Spratt reported working with NRG Oncology, a clinical trials group funded by the National Cancer Institute, and as an academic collaborator with ArteraAI.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicare Services (CMS) on January 1 approved the payment rate for ArteraAI as a clinical diagnostic laboratory test. The test is the first that can both predict therapeutic benefit and prognosticate long-term outcomes in localized prostate cancer.
Daniel Spratt, MD, chair of radiation oncology at UH Seidman Cancer Center in Cleveland, who has been involved in researching ArteraAI, told this news organization that the test improves risk stratification or prognostication over standard clinical and pathologic tools, such as prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, and T-stage, or risk groupings such as those from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN).
“Medicare approval allows this test to reach more patients without the financial burden of covering the test out of pocket. The test is found among other tests in NCCN guidelines as a tool to improve risk stratification and personalization of treatment,” said Dr. Spratt, who serves on the network’s prostate cancer panel.
ArteraAI combines a patient’s standard clinical and pathologic information into an algorithm, alongside a digitized image analysis of the patients’ prostate biopsy. The result is a score that estimates a patient’s risk of developing metastasis or dying from prostate cancer.
Dr. Spratt was the lead author of article last June in NEJM Evidence that validated ArteraAI. He said ArteraAI is 80% accurate as a prognostic test compared with 65% accuracy using NCCN stratification systems.
The AI test spares about two thirds of men with intermediate-risk prostate cancer who are starting radiation therapy from androgen deprivation and its side effects, such as weight gain, breast enlargement, hot flashes, heart disease, and brain problems, Dr. Spratt added.
Andre Esteva, CEO and co-founder of San Francisco-based ArteraAI, said, “After someone is diagnosed with localized prostate cancer, deciding on a treatment can feel very overwhelming as there are so many factors to consider. During this time, knowledge is power, and having detailed, personalized information can increase confidence when making these challenging decisions. The ArteraAI Prostate Test was developed with this in mind and can predict whether a patient will benefit from hormone therapy and estimate long-term outcomes.”
Bruno Barrey is one of Dr. Spratt’s patients. Barrey, a robotics engineer from suburban Detroit who was transitioning from active surveillance with Gleason 3+4 intermediate-risk prostate cancer to radiation therapy, said, “I was concerned about the side effects from androgen-deprivation therapy. I was relieved that the AI test allowed me to avoid hormone therapy.”
Dr. Spratt reported working with NRG Oncology, a clinical trials group funded by the National Cancer Institute, and as an academic collaborator with ArteraAI.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Testosterone Replacement Therapy and Prostate Cancer Risk
TOPLINE:
Testosterone replacement therapy in middle-aged and older men with hypogonadism does not increase the risk for high-grade or any prostate cancer, new data confirmed.
METHODOLOGY:
- Epidemiologic studies have shown inconsistent findings, and clinical trials have not examined prostate safety. As a result, guidelines generally advise against testosterone replacement therapy in men with a history of or increased risk for prostate cancer.
- The current placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group randomized study included 5204 men, ages 45-80, who had two fasting testosterone concentrations < 300 ng/dL, one or more hypogonadal symptoms, and a history of cardiovascular disease or increased . Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either testosterone replacement therapy or placebo.
- The primary prostate safety endpoint was incident high-grade prostate cancer (Gleason score 4 + 3 or higher).
- Secondary endpoints included incidence of any prostate cancer, acute urinary retention, invasive procedure for , , and new pharmacologic treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms.
TAKEAWAY:
- The incidence of high-grade prostate cancer did not differ significantly between groups. Over a mean follow-up of 33 months, only 0.19% (5 of 2596 participants) in the testosterone replacement therapy group and 0.12% (3 of 2602) in the placebo group were diagnosed with high-grade disease (hazard ratio [HR], 1.62; P = .51).
- The rate of any prostate cancer also did not differ significantly between the testosterone vs placebo groups (0.46% vs 0.42%; HR, 1.07; P = .87).
- The rates of acute urinary retention (0.77% vs 0.61%; HR, 1.25; P = .50), invasive procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia (0.89% vs 0.46%; HR, 1.91; P = .07), prostate biopsy (0.62% vs 0.54%; HR, 1.13; P = .74), or new treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms (3.89% vs 3.34%; HR, 1.16; P = .32) did not differ significantly between the testosterone vs placebo groups.
- Compared with placebo, testosterone therapy did increase prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, but the differences were small and did not increase after 12 months.
IN PRACTICE:
In a population of middle-aged and older men with hypogonadism, “the incidences of high-grade or any prostate cancer and other prostate events were low and did not differ significantly between testosterone- and placebo-treated men,” the authors concluded. “The study’s findings will facilitate a more informed appraisal of the potential prostate risks of testosterone replacement therapy.”
SOURCE:
This study, led by Shalender Bhasin, MB, BS, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, was published online in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS:
These study findings do not apply to men with known prostate cancer, higher PSA values, or those without confirmed hypogonadism. The study design did not include prostate imaging or other biomarker tests after PSA testing, which may have affected the decision to perform a biopsy. Also, the rates of treatment discontinuation and loss to follow-up were high.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was funded by a consortium of testosterone manufacturers led by AbbVie Inc., with additional financial support from Endo Pharmaceuticals, Acerus Pharmaceuticals Corporation, and Upsher-Smith Laboratories. Bhasin, Lincoff, and Khera reported receiving grants and consulting and personal fees from various sources. The remaining authors disclosed no conflicts of interest.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Testosterone replacement therapy in middle-aged and older men with hypogonadism does not increase the risk for high-grade or any prostate cancer, new data confirmed.
METHODOLOGY:
- Epidemiologic studies have shown inconsistent findings, and clinical trials have not examined prostate safety. As a result, guidelines generally advise against testosterone replacement therapy in men with a history of or increased risk for prostate cancer.
- The current placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group randomized study included 5204 men, ages 45-80, who had two fasting testosterone concentrations < 300 ng/dL, one or more hypogonadal symptoms, and a history of cardiovascular disease or increased . Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either testosterone replacement therapy or placebo.
- The primary prostate safety endpoint was incident high-grade prostate cancer (Gleason score 4 + 3 or higher).
- Secondary endpoints included incidence of any prostate cancer, acute urinary retention, invasive procedure for , , and new pharmacologic treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms.
TAKEAWAY:
- The incidence of high-grade prostate cancer did not differ significantly between groups. Over a mean follow-up of 33 months, only 0.19% (5 of 2596 participants) in the testosterone replacement therapy group and 0.12% (3 of 2602) in the placebo group were diagnosed with high-grade disease (hazard ratio [HR], 1.62; P = .51).
- The rate of any prostate cancer also did not differ significantly between the testosterone vs placebo groups (0.46% vs 0.42%; HR, 1.07; P = .87).
- The rates of acute urinary retention (0.77% vs 0.61%; HR, 1.25; P = .50), invasive procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia (0.89% vs 0.46%; HR, 1.91; P = .07), prostate biopsy (0.62% vs 0.54%; HR, 1.13; P = .74), or new treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms (3.89% vs 3.34%; HR, 1.16; P = .32) did not differ significantly between the testosterone vs placebo groups.
- Compared with placebo, testosterone therapy did increase prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, but the differences were small and did not increase after 12 months.
IN PRACTICE:
In a population of middle-aged and older men with hypogonadism, “the incidences of high-grade or any prostate cancer and other prostate events were low and did not differ significantly between testosterone- and placebo-treated men,” the authors concluded. “The study’s findings will facilitate a more informed appraisal of the potential prostate risks of testosterone replacement therapy.”
SOURCE:
This study, led by Shalender Bhasin, MB, BS, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, was published online in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS:
These study findings do not apply to men with known prostate cancer, higher PSA values, or those without confirmed hypogonadism. The study design did not include prostate imaging or other biomarker tests after PSA testing, which may have affected the decision to perform a biopsy. Also, the rates of treatment discontinuation and loss to follow-up were high.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was funded by a consortium of testosterone manufacturers led by AbbVie Inc., with additional financial support from Endo Pharmaceuticals, Acerus Pharmaceuticals Corporation, and Upsher-Smith Laboratories. Bhasin, Lincoff, and Khera reported receiving grants and consulting and personal fees from various sources. The remaining authors disclosed no conflicts of interest.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Testosterone replacement therapy in middle-aged and older men with hypogonadism does not increase the risk for high-grade or any prostate cancer, new data confirmed.
METHODOLOGY:
- Epidemiologic studies have shown inconsistent findings, and clinical trials have not examined prostate safety. As a result, guidelines generally advise against testosterone replacement therapy in men with a history of or increased risk for prostate cancer.
- The current placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group randomized study included 5204 men, ages 45-80, who had two fasting testosterone concentrations < 300 ng/dL, one or more hypogonadal symptoms, and a history of cardiovascular disease or increased . Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either testosterone replacement therapy or placebo.
- The primary prostate safety endpoint was incident high-grade prostate cancer (Gleason score 4 + 3 or higher).
- Secondary endpoints included incidence of any prostate cancer, acute urinary retention, invasive procedure for , , and new pharmacologic treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms.
TAKEAWAY:
- The incidence of high-grade prostate cancer did not differ significantly between groups. Over a mean follow-up of 33 months, only 0.19% (5 of 2596 participants) in the testosterone replacement therapy group and 0.12% (3 of 2602) in the placebo group were diagnosed with high-grade disease (hazard ratio [HR], 1.62; P = .51).
- The rate of any prostate cancer also did not differ significantly between the testosterone vs placebo groups (0.46% vs 0.42%; HR, 1.07; P = .87).
- The rates of acute urinary retention (0.77% vs 0.61%; HR, 1.25; P = .50), invasive procedures for benign prostatic hyperplasia (0.89% vs 0.46%; HR, 1.91; P = .07), prostate biopsy (0.62% vs 0.54%; HR, 1.13; P = .74), or new treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms (3.89% vs 3.34%; HR, 1.16; P = .32) did not differ significantly between the testosterone vs placebo groups.
- Compared with placebo, testosterone therapy did increase prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, but the differences were small and did not increase after 12 months.
IN PRACTICE:
In a population of middle-aged and older men with hypogonadism, “the incidences of high-grade or any prostate cancer and other prostate events were low and did not differ significantly between testosterone- and placebo-treated men,” the authors concluded. “The study’s findings will facilitate a more informed appraisal of the potential prostate risks of testosterone replacement therapy.”
SOURCE:
This study, led by Shalender Bhasin, MB, BS, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, was published online in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS:
These study findings do not apply to men with known prostate cancer, higher PSA values, or those without confirmed hypogonadism. The study design did not include prostate imaging or other biomarker tests after PSA testing, which may have affected the decision to perform a biopsy. Also, the rates of treatment discontinuation and loss to follow-up were high.
DISCLOSURES:
This study was funded by a consortium of testosterone manufacturers led by AbbVie Inc., with additional financial support from Endo Pharmaceuticals, Acerus Pharmaceuticals Corporation, and Upsher-Smith Laboratories. Bhasin, Lincoff, and Khera reported receiving grants and consulting and personal fees from various sources. The remaining authors disclosed no conflicts of interest.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Paget Disease of the Bone Progression Halted With Genetic Screening, Targeted Treatment
Prophylactic treatment with zoledronic acid (ZA) in individuals at high genetic risk for Paget disease of the bone (PDB) can prevent the development or progression of the condition, according to a new study. The authors argued that the positive results from the trial suggest that individuals with a familial history of PDB should undergo genetic screening.
“If it’s positive, you should be able to have a bone scan and take it from there,” senior author Stuart Ralston, MBChB, MD, professor of rheumatology at the University of Edinburgh (Scotland), said in an interview.
PDB is a chronic skeletal growth disorder that affects an estimated 1-3 million people in the United States and is most prevalent in individuals over 65 years old. Symptoms of the disease may not present until later stages when there is already skeletal damage that cannot be resolved by medications. Earlier intervention in individuals who have not yet shown signs of the condition could potentially halt disease progression, Dr. Ralston said.
Genetics plays a substantial role in PDB, especially pathogenic variants of the gene SQSTM1. An estimated 40%-50% of people with a familial history of PDB have these variants, according to the study, which are associated with earlier PDB onset and more severe disease.
However, it was unclear if early interventions in these higher-risk individuals may result in better health outcomes.
In this new study, published on December 20, 2023, in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, researchers recruited participants through family members already diagnosed with PDB who received treatment at outpatient clinics. Over 1400 individuals with PDB underwent genetic testing for pathogenic SQSTM1 variants. If they tested positive, their first-degree relatives — primarily children — were offered the same genetic test. In total, 350 relatives tested positive for these pathogenic SQSTM1 variants, and of these individuals, 222 agreed to participate in the trial.
At the beginning of the study, all participants received a radionuclide bone scan to screen for bone lesions. They also underwent testing for the bone resorption marker type I collagen C-terminal telopeptides (CTX) and the bone formation marker procollagen type I amino-terminal propeptide (P1NP).
Participants were then randomized to receive either a single intravenous infusion of 5 mg of ZA or placebo treatment. Researchers followed up with participants annually for a median of 84 months (7 years), and then baseline assessments were repeated.
A total of 90 individuals in the ZA treatment group and 90 individuals in the placebo group completed the trial.
Participants were, on average, 50 years old at the beginning of the study. In the ZA group, nine individuals had lesions detected in bone scans at baseline, compared with just one at the study’s end. In the placebo group, 12 individuals had detectable lesions at baseline, compared with 11 individuals at the study’s end.
While the proportion of individuals with lesions was similar between the two groups, there were about twice as many lesions overall in the placebo group, compared with the ZA group (29 vs 15), which researchers said was by chance. All but two lesions disappeared in the ZA group, compared with 26 lesions remaining in the placebo group (P < .0001).
“The bone scan reversal of abnormalities was amazing,” said Ralston, where eight of nine patients with lesions in the ZA group “had their bone scan evidence completely wiped out,” he said. “That’s a very powerful result.”
Both CTX and P1NP concentrations fell in the ZA group at 12 months and remained significantly lower than the placebo group throughout the study (P < .0001 for each).
Overall, the researchers reported that eight individuals in the placebo group and no individuals in the ZA group had a poor outcome, defined as new bone lesions or lesions that were unchanged or progressed (odds ratio, 0.08; P = .003). Two individuals in the placebo group developed lesions during the study, compared with none in the ZA group, but this difference was not statistically significant.
Importantly, there were no differences in adverse events between the two groups.
While only a small number of people in the study had legions — around 9% of participants — the effect of ZA is “dramatic,” Linda A. Russell, MD, director of the Osteoporosis and Metabolic Bone Health Center at the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York City, told this news organization.
While clinicians primarily diagnose PDB with X-rays or an alkaline phosphatase blood test, testing for SQSTM1 is a new way to understand if someone is at higher risk for the disease, she said.
“Now, it seems like [the test] is fairly easily available, so probably it’s something we can begin to incorporate into our armamentarium,” Dr. Russell said.
Individuals who test positive for pathogenic variants of SQSTM1 could then get a bone scan, while those who tested negative may not need any additional testing, she added.
Dr. Ralston and coauthors noted that the effect size shown in this study is similar to that of studies examining adjuvant bisphosphonate therapy for postmenopausal women with early breast cancer. That practice, they write, is now a part of the standard of care.
“We believe that a similar approach is now justified in people with a family history of PDB who test positive for SQSTM1 mutations,” they wrote.
However, it is not clear if all individuals with pathogenic SQSTM1 should receive ZA treatment or if treatment should be given to only those with bone lesions.
“Future research to gather the views of people with a family history of PDB will help to inform the most appropriate way forward,” the authors wrote.
The UK Medical Research Council and Arthritis Research UK funded the trial. Zoledronic acid and a placebo were supplied by Novartis. Dr. Ralston reported funding to his institution from Kyowa Kirin, UCB, the Paget’s Association, and the Royal Osteoporosis Society. Some coauthors reported financial relationships with pharmaceutical companies outside the trial. Dr. Russell had no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Prophylactic treatment with zoledronic acid (ZA) in individuals at high genetic risk for Paget disease of the bone (PDB) can prevent the development or progression of the condition, according to a new study. The authors argued that the positive results from the trial suggest that individuals with a familial history of PDB should undergo genetic screening.
“If it’s positive, you should be able to have a bone scan and take it from there,” senior author Stuart Ralston, MBChB, MD, professor of rheumatology at the University of Edinburgh (Scotland), said in an interview.
PDB is a chronic skeletal growth disorder that affects an estimated 1-3 million people in the United States and is most prevalent in individuals over 65 years old. Symptoms of the disease may not present until later stages when there is already skeletal damage that cannot be resolved by medications. Earlier intervention in individuals who have not yet shown signs of the condition could potentially halt disease progression, Dr. Ralston said.
Genetics plays a substantial role in PDB, especially pathogenic variants of the gene SQSTM1. An estimated 40%-50% of people with a familial history of PDB have these variants, according to the study, which are associated with earlier PDB onset and more severe disease.
However, it was unclear if early interventions in these higher-risk individuals may result in better health outcomes.
In this new study, published on December 20, 2023, in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, researchers recruited participants through family members already diagnosed with PDB who received treatment at outpatient clinics. Over 1400 individuals with PDB underwent genetic testing for pathogenic SQSTM1 variants. If they tested positive, their first-degree relatives — primarily children — were offered the same genetic test. In total, 350 relatives tested positive for these pathogenic SQSTM1 variants, and of these individuals, 222 agreed to participate in the trial.
At the beginning of the study, all participants received a radionuclide bone scan to screen for bone lesions. They also underwent testing for the bone resorption marker type I collagen C-terminal telopeptides (CTX) and the bone formation marker procollagen type I amino-terminal propeptide (P1NP).
Participants were then randomized to receive either a single intravenous infusion of 5 mg of ZA or placebo treatment. Researchers followed up with participants annually for a median of 84 months (7 years), and then baseline assessments were repeated.
A total of 90 individuals in the ZA treatment group and 90 individuals in the placebo group completed the trial.
Participants were, on average, 50 years old at the beginning of the study. In the ZA group, nine individuals had lesions detected in bone scans at baseline, compared with just one at the study’s end. In the placebo group, 12 individuals had detectable lesions at baseline, compared with 11 individuals at the study’s end.
While the proportion of individuals with lesions was similar between the two groups, there were about twice as many lesions overall in the placebo group, compared with the ZA group (29 vs 15), which researchers said was by chance. All but two lesions disappeared in the ZA group, compared with 26 lesions remaining in the placebo group (P < .0001).
“The bone scan reversal of abnormalities was amazing,” said Ralston, where eight of nine patients with lesions in the ZA group “had their bone scan evidence completely wiped out,” he said. “That’s a very powerful result.”
Both CTX and P1NP concentrations fell in the ZA group at 12 months and remained significantly lower than the placebo group throughout the study (P < .0001 for each).
Overall, the researchers reported that eight individuals in the placebo group and no individuals in the ZA group had a poor outcome, defined as new bone lesions or lesions that were unchanged or progressed (odds ratio, 0.08; P = .003). Two individuals in the placebo group developed lesions during the study, compared with none in the ZA group, but this difference was not statistically significant.
Importantly, there were no differences in adverse events between the two groups.
While only a small number of people in the study had legions — around 9% of participants — the effect of ZA is “dramatic,” Linda A. Russell, MD, director of the Osteoporosis and Metabolic Bone Health Center at the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York City, told this news organization.
While clinicians primarily diagnose PDB with X-rays or an alkaline phosphatase blood test, testing for SQSTM1 is a new way to understand if someone is at higher risk for the disease, she said.
“Now, it seems like [the test] is fairly easily available, so probably it’s something we can begin to incorporate into our armamentarium,” Dr. Russell said.
Individuals who test positive for pathogenic variants of SQSTM1 could then get a bone scan, while those who tested negative may not need any additional testing, she added.
Dr. Ralston and coauthors noted that the effect size shown in this study is similar to that of studies examining adjuvant bisphosphonate therapy for postmenopausal women with early breast cancer. That practice, they write, is now a part of the standard of care.
“We believe that a similar approach is now justified in people with a family history of PDB who test positive for SQSTM1 mutations,” they wrote.
However, it is not clear if all individuals with pathogenic SQSTM1 should receive ZA treatment or if treatment should be given to only those with bone lesions.
“Future research to gather the views of people with a family history of PDB will help to inform the most appropriate way forward,” the authors wrote.
The UK Medical Research Council and Arthritis Research UK funded the trial. Zoledronic acid and a placebo were supplied by Novartis. Dr. Ralston reported funding to his institution from Kyowa Kirin, UCB, the Paget’s Association, and the Royal Osteoporosis Society. Some coauthors reported financial relationships with pharmaceutical companies outside the trial. Dr. Russell had no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Prophylactic treatment with zoledronic acid (ZA) in individuals at high genetic risk for Paget disease of the bone (PDB) can prevent the development or progression of the condition, according to a new study. The authors argued that the positive results from the trial suggest that individuals with a familial history of PDB should undergo genetic screening.
“If it’s positive, you should be able to have a bone scan and take it from there,” senior author Stuart Ralston, MBChB, MD, professor of rheumatology at the University of Edinburgh (Scotland), said in an interview.
PDB is a chronic skeletal growth disorder that affects an estimated 1-3 million people in the United States and is most prevalent in individuals over 65 years old. Symptoms of the disease may not present until later stages when there is already skeletal damage that cannot be resolved by medications. Earlier intervention in individuals who have not yet shown signs of the condition could potentially halt disease progression, Dr. Ralston said.
Genetics plays a substantial role in PDB, especially pathogenic variants of the gene SQSTM1. An estimated 40%-50% of people with a familial history of PDB have these variants, according to the study, which are associated with earlier PDB onset and more severe disease.
However, it was unclear if early interventions in these higher-risk individuals may result in better health outcomes.
In this new study, published on December 20, 2023, in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, researchers recruited participants through family members already diagnosed with PDB who received treatment at outpatient clinics. Over 1400 individuals with PDB underwent genetic testing for pathogenic SQSTM1 variants. If they tested positive, their first-degree relatives — primarily children — were offered the same genetic test. In total, 350 relatives tested positive for these pathogenic SQSTM1 variants, and of these individuals, 222 agreed to participate in the trial.
At the beginning of the study, all participants received a radionuclide bone scan to screen for bone lesions. They also underwent testing for the bone resorption marker type I collagen C-terminal telopeptides (CTX) and the bone formation marker procollagen type I amino-terminal propeptide (P1NP).
Participants were then randomized to receive either a single intravenous infusion of 5 mg of ZA or placebo treatment. Researchers followed up with participants annually for a median of 84 months (7 years), and then baseline assessments were repeated.
A total of 90 individuals in the ZA treatment group and 90 individuals in the placebo group completed the trial.
Participants were, on average, 50 years old at the beginning of the study. In the ZA group, nine individuals had lesions detected in bone scans at baseline, compared with just one at the study’s end. In the placebo group, 12 individuals had detectable lesions at baseline, compared with 11 individuals at the study’s end.
While the proportion of individuals with lesions was similar between the two groups, there were about twice as many lesions overall in the placebo group, compared with the ZA group (29 vs 15), which researchers said was by chance. All but two lesions disappeared in the ZA group, compared with 26 lesions remaining in the placebo group (P < .0001).
“The bone scan reversal of abnormalities was amazing,” said Ralston, where eight of nine patients with lesions in the ZA group “had their bone scan evidence completely wiped out,” he said. “That’s a very powerful result.”
Both CTX and P1NP concentrations fell in the ZA group at 12 months and remained significantly lower than the placebo group throughout the study (P < .0001 for each).
Overall, the researchers reported that eight individuals in the placebo group and no individuals in the ZA group had a poor outcome, defined as new bone lesions or lesions that were unchanged or progressed (odds ratio, 0.08; P = .003). Two individuals in the placebo group developed lesions during the study, compared with none in the ZA group, but this difference was not statistically significant.
Importantly, there were no differences in adverse events between the two groups.
While only a small number of people in the study had legions — around 9% of participants — the effect of ZA is “dramatic,” Linda A. Russell, MD, director of the Osteoporosis and Metabolic Bone Health Center at the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York City, told this news organization.
While clinicians primarily diagnose PDB with X-rays or an alkaline phosphatase blood test, testing for SQSTM1 is a new way to understand if someone is at higher risk for the disease, she said.
“Now, it seems like [the test] is fairly easily available, so probably it’s something we can begin to incorporate into our armamentarium,” Dr. Russell said.
Individuals who test positive for pathogenic variants of SQSTM1 could then get a bone scan, while those who tested negative may not need any additional testing, she added.
Dr. Ralston and coauthors noted that the effect size shown in this study is similar to that of studies examining adjuvant bisphosphonate therapy for postmenopausal women with early breast cancer. That practice, they write, is now a part of the standard of care.
“We believe that a similar approach is now justified in people with a family history of PDB who test positive for SQSTM1 mutations,” they wrote.
However, it is not clear if all individuals with pathogenic SQSTM1 should receive ZA treatment or if treatment should be given to only those with bone lesions.
“Future research to gather the views of people with a family history of PDB will help to inform the most appropriate way forward,” the authors wrote.
The UK Medical Research Council and Arthritis Research UK funded the trial. Zoledronic acid and a placebo were supplied by Novartis. Dr. Ralston reported funding to his institution from Kyowa Kirin, UCB, the Paget’s Association, and the Royal Osteoporosis Society. Some coauthors reported financial relationships with pharmaceutical companies outside the trial. Dr. Russell had no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES