User login
For MD-IQ use only
Key Abortion Paper Retracted
, aka an “abortion pill.”
Sage, the publisher of Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology, announced the retractions yesterday and posted a retraction notice covering the three articles.
For one of those articles, initially flagged by a reader, “an independent reviewer with expertise in statistical analyses evaluated the concerns and opined that the article’s presentation of the data in Figures 2 and 3 leads to an inaccurate conclusion and that the composition of the cohort studied has problems that could affect the article’s conclusions,” according to the notice.
The notice also said Sage “confirmed that all but one of the article’s authors had an affiliation with one or more of Charlotte Lozier Institute, Elliot Institute, and American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, all pro-life advocacy organizations, despite having declared they had no conflicts of interest when they submitted the article for publication or in the article itself.”
One of the peer reviewers, Sage learned, “was affiliated with Charlotte Lozier Institute at the time of the review,” leading the publisher and journal editor to determine “the peer review for initial publication was unreliable.” That referee also reviewed the other two now-retracted papers, according to Sage.
James Studnicki, the lead author of the three papers, told Retraction Watch the retractions were “a blatant attempt to discredit excellent research which is incongruent with a preferred abortion narrative.” He told The Daily Wire, a conservative news outlet that was first to report on the retractions, the move was “completely unjustified.” The Daily Wire notes that “The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in March on the legality of restricting the abortion pill based on [Judge Matthew] Kacsmaryk’s ruling, proceedings that will certainly be impacted by the retractions.”
Sage had subjected one of the papers to an expression of concern in August 2023, saying they were investigating “potential issues regarding the representation of data in the article and author conflicts of interest” after being alerted by a reader. As News From The States reported then, the notice came after Chris Adkins, a professor at South University who teaches pharmaceutical sciences, raised concerns with Sage. As News From The States noted in August:
Kacsmaryk leaned hard on a 2021 study that was designed, funded and produced by the research arm of one of the most powerful anti-abortion political groups in the U.S. The judge cited this paper — which looked at Medicaid patients’ visits to the emergency room within 30 days of having an abortion — to justify that a group of anti-abortion doctors and medical groups have legal standing to force the FDA to recall mifepristone.
In a point-by-point response to Sage’s critiques of the paper sent to the publisher in November and now shared with Retraction Watch, Studnicki and colleagues pointed out they had noted their affiliations in the original manuscript and the then-proposed retractions “misrepresent ICMJE disclosure standards,” referring to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors’ guidelines. They also call some of the post-publication peer reviewers’ critiques “factually incorrect” and “unfounded.” They conclude:
No single specific finding in any of the three papers has been explicitly challenged, let alone invalidated.
There is no evidence of a major error, miscalculation, fabrication, or falsification.
There is no breach of any of the COPE guidelines that could permit Sage to retract any of our published papers.
The retraction of any of these papers, let alone all three, is demonstrably unwarranted.
Adkins told Retraction Watch he is “pleased the journal approached my concerns with legitimate and serious consideration.” He continued:
It is reassuring that my initial concerns with the 2021 Studnicki et al. article were verified and affirmed by other experts. Despite the length of time spanning my initial communications with the journal and today’s retractions, I understand that thorough investigations and re-review processes take time. Given that these now-retracted articles have been excessively cited by parties involved in ongoing federal judicial cases, now positioned before the SCOTUS, Sage’s retractions should help our courts remain informed by the highest standards and quality in scientific and medical evidence.
Update, 2/6/24, 2100 UTC: We note that — contrary to best industry practices described by the Committee on Publication Ethics — Sage has removed the original versions of the articles. They are available at these links:
“A Longitudinal Cohort Study of Emergency Room Utilization Following Mifepristone Chemical and Surgical Abortions, 1999–2015”
“Doctors Who Perform Abortions: Their Characteristics and Patterns of Holding and Using Hospital Privileges”
“A Post Hoc Exploratory Analysis: Induced Abortion Complications Mistaken for Miscarriage in the Emergency Room are a Risk Factor for Hospitalization”
DISCLOSURE: Adam Marcus, a cofounder of Retraction Watch, is an editor at Medscape.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
, aka an “abortion pill.”
Sage, the publisher of Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology, announced the retractions yesterday and posted a retraction notice covering the three articles.
For one of those articles, initially flagged by a reader, “an independent reviewer with expertise in statistical analyses evaluated the concerns and opined that the article’s presentation of the data in Figures 2 and 3 leads to an inaccurate conclusion and that the composition of the cohort studied has problems that could affect the article’s conclusions,” according to the notice.
The notice also said Sage “confirmed that all but one of the article’s authors had an affiliation with one or more of Charlotte Lozier Institute, Elliot Institute, and American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, all pro-life advocacy organizations, despite having declared they had no conflicts of interest when they submitted the article for publication or in the article itself.”
One of the peer reviewers, Sage learned, “was affiliated with Charlotte Lozier Institute at the time of the review,” leading the publisher and journal editor to determine “the peer review for initial publication was unreliable.” That referee also reviewed the other two now-retracted papers, according to Sage.
James Studnicki, the lead author of the three papers, told Retraction Watch the retractions were “a blatant attempt to discredit excellent research which is incongruent with a preferred abortion narrative.” He told The Daily Wire, a conservative news outlet that was first to report on the retractions, the move was “completely unjustified.” The Daily Wire notes that “The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in March on the legality of restricting the abortion pill based on [Judge Matthew] Kacsmaryk’s ruling, proceedings that will certainly be impacted by the retractions.”
Sage had subjected one of the papers to an expression of concern in August 2023, saying they were investigating “potential issues regarding the representation of data in the article and author conflicts of interest” after being alerted by a reader. As News From The States reported then, the notice came after Chris Adkins, a professor at South University who teaches pharmaceutical sciences, raised concerns with Sage. As News From The States noted in August:
Kacsmaryk leaned hard on a 2021 study that was designed, funded and produced by the research arm of one of the most powerful anti-abortion political groups in the U.S. The judge cited this paper — which looked at Medicaid patients’ visits to the emergency room within 30 days of having an abortion — to justify that a group of anti-abortion doctors and medical groups have legal standing to force the FDA to recall mifepristone.
In a point-by-point response to Sage’s critiques of the paper sent to the publisher in November and now shared with Retraction Watch, Studnicki and colleagues pointed out they had noted their affiliations in the original manuscript and the then-proposed retractions “misrepresent ICMJE disclosure standards,” referring to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors’ guidelines. They also call some of the post-publication peer reviewers’ critiques “factually incorrect” and “unfounded.” They conclude:
No single specific finding in any of the three papers has been explicitly challenged, let alone invalidated.
There is no evidence of a major error, miscalculation, fabrication, or falsification.
There is no breach of any of the COPE guidelines that could permit Sage to retract any of our published papers.
The retraction of any of these papers, let alone all three, is demonstrably unwarranted.
Adkins told Retraction Watch he is “pleased the journal approached my concerns with legitimate and serious consideration.” He continued:
It is reassuring that my initial concerns with the 2021 Studnicki et al. article were verified and affirmed by other experts. Despite the length of time spanning my initial communications with the journal and today’s retractions, I understand that thorough investigations and re-review processes take time. Given that these now-retracted articles have been excessively cited by parties involved in ongoing federal judicial cases, now positioned before the SCOTUS, Sage’s retractions should help our courts remain informed by the highest standards and quality in scientific and medical evidence.
Update, 2/6/24, 2100 UTC: We note that — contrary to best industry practices described by the Committee on Publication Ethics — Sage has removed the original versions of the articles. They are available at these links:
“A Longitudinal Cohort Study of Emergency Room Utilization Following Mifepristone Chemical and Surgical Abortions, 1999–2015”
“Doctors Who Perform Abortions: Their Characteristics and Patterns of Holding and Using Hospital Privileges”
“A Post Hoc Exploratory Analysis: Induced Abortion Complications Mistaken for Miscarriage in the Emergency Room are a Risk Factor for Hospitalization”
DISCLOSURE: Adam Marcus, a cofounder of Retraction Watch, is an editor at Medscape.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
, aka an “abortion pill.”
Sage, the publisher of Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology, announced the retractions yesterday and posted a retraction notice covering the three articles.
For one of those articles, initially flagged by a reader, “an independent reviewer with expertise in statistical analyses evaluated the concerns and opined that the article’s presentation of the data in Figures 2 and 3 leads to an inaccurate conclusion and that the composition of the cohort studied has problems that could affect the article’s conclusions,” according to the notice.
The notice also said Sage “confirmed that all but one of the article’s authors had an affiliation with one or more of Charlotte Lozier Institute, Elliot Institute, and American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, all pro-life advocacy organizations, despite having declared they had no conflicts of interest when they submitted the article for publication or in the article itself.”
One of the peer reviewers, Sage learned, “was affiliated with Charlotte Lozier Institute at the time of the review,” leading the publisher and journal editor to determine “the peer review for initial publication was unreliable.” That referee also reviewed the other two now-retracted papers, according to Sage.
James Studnicki, the lead author of the three papers, told Retraction Watch the retractions were “a blatant attempt to discredit excellent research which is incongruent with a preferred abortion narrative.” He told The Daily Wire, a conservative news outlet that was first to report on the retractions, the move was “completely unjustified.” The Daily Wire notes that “The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in March on the legality of restricting the abortion pill based on [Judge Matthew] Kacsmaryk’s ruling, proceedings that will certainly be impacted by the retractions.”
Sage had subjected one of the papers to an expression of concern in August 2023, saying they were investigating “potential issues regarding the representation of data in the article and author conflicts of interest” after being alerted by a reader. As News From The States reported then, the notice came after Chris Adkins, a professor at South University who teaches pharmaceutical sciences, raised concerns with Sage. As News From The States noted in August:
Kacsmaryk leaned hard on a 2021 study that was designed, funded and produced by the research arm of one of the most powerful anti-abortion political groups in the U.S. The judge cited this paper — which looked at Medicaid patients’ visits to the emergency room within 30 days of having an abortion — to justify that a group of anti-abortion doctors and medical groups have legal standing to force the FDA to recall mifepristone.
In a point-by-point response to Sage’s critiques of the paper sent to the publisher in November and now shared with Retraction Watch, Studnicki and colleagues pointed out they had noted their affiliations in the original manuscript and the then-proposed retractions “misrepresent ICMJE disclosure standards,” referring to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors’ guidelines. They also call some of the post-publication peer reviewers’ critiques “factually incorrect” and “unfounded.” They conclude:
No single specific finding in any of the three papers has been explicitly challenged, let alone invalidated.
There is no evidence of a major error, miscalculation, fabrication, or falsification.
There is no breach of any of the COPE guidelines that could permit Sage to retract any of our published papers.
The retraction of any of these papers, let alone all three, is demonstrably unwarranted.
Adkins told Retraction Watch he is “pleased the journal approached my concerns with legitimate and serious consideration.” He continued:
It is reassuring that my initial concerns with the 2021 Studnicki et al. article were verified and affirmed by other experts. Despite the length of time spanning my initial communications with the journal and today’s retractions, I understand that thorough investigations and re-review processes take time. Given that these now-retracted articles have been excessively cited by parties involved in ongoing federal judicial cases, now positioned before the SCOTUS, Sage’s retractions should help our courts remain informed by the highest standards and quality in scientific and medical evidence.
Update, 2/6/24, 2100 UTC: We note that — contrary to best industry practices described by the Committee on Publication Ethics — Sage has removed the original versions of the articles. They are available at these links:
“A Longitudinal Cohort Study of Emergency Room Utilization Following Mifepristone Chemical and Surgical Abortions, 1999–2015”
“Doctors Who Perform Abortions: Their Characteristics and Patterns of Holding and Using Hospital Privileges”
“A Post Hoc Exploratory Analysis: Induced Abortion Complications Mistaken for Miscarriage in the Emergency Room are a Risk Factor for Hospitalization”
DISCLOSURE: Adam Marcus, a cofounder of Retraction Watch, is an editor at Medscape.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
2024 Will See Major Advances in Glaucoma Care
Dry eye and glaucoma may be the two most confounding conditions ophthalmologists face. Meanwhile, several investigative treatments for both chronic ailments will continue to move forward.
Undry Those Eyes
Based on a 2022 study in JAMA Ophthalmology, about 27 million Americans have some form of DED or meibomian gland dysfunction. Treatments aim to preserve and enhance tears and tear production to counteract the grittiness and itchiness that accompany DED.
“For decades, we only had one treatment [cyclosporine] for dry eye, then the second one a few years ago, which is lifitegrast, but nothing innovative until very recently,” Marjan Farid, MD, director of cornea, cataract and refractive surgery at the Gavin Herbert Eye Institute at the University of California-Irvine, told this news organization.
“In 2023, I feel that innovation from the pharmaceutical standpoint in this space really exploded, and it’s very exciting because dry eye disease is such a multifactorial disease that you can’t just go after one angle,” said Dr. Farid, who is also chair of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery’s cornea clinical committee. “You really need to be able to attack dry eye disease from multiple areas, when the meibomian glands are involved, or whether or not there’s blephartitis.”
The three treatments for DED the FDA approved last year are lotilaner 0.25% ophthalmic solution, which targets the Demodex mites that cause of Demodex blepharitis, a trigger for DED; perfluorohexyloctane ophthalmic solution; and cyclosporine ophthalmic solution 0.1%. The latter two agents coat the ocular surface — perfluorohexyloctane acting as a shield to prevent tear evaporation and cyclosporine 0.1% using perfluorobutylpentane to allow the immunosuppressant cyclosporine to penetrate deeper into the eye.
This year, Dr. Farid said, while ophthalmologists will be adopting those treatments, they’ll also be watching three emerging treatments poised to report results from clinical trial or take other steps toward FDA approval. They include:
- Selenium sulfide 0.5% ophthalmic ointment will move into phase 3 trials. This ointment is applied directly to the lower eyelid to open the meibomian gland (MGs), secretions from which prevent tear evaporation and tear overflow. Results last year from a phase 2 trial demonstrated improvement in MG secretions in treated patients. “It’s a very unique compound because it’s the only compound that could potentially open the meibomian gland orifices along lid margin and improve the quality of secretions,” Dr. Farid said.
- Reproxalap, a reactive aldehyde species (RASP) inhibitor, will be the subject of a new drug application (NDA) resubmission this year. RASPs have been found in elevated levels in ocular and systemic inflammatory disease. The FDA last year notified drug developer Aldeyra Therapeutics that an additional trial was needed to demonstrate efficacy in treating symptoms of DED. Aldeyra said it would resubmit the NDA and report topline trial results in the first half of the year. “That’s a really nice anti-inflammatory eye drop that works early in the inflammatory cascade,” Dr. Farid said. “It acts almost like a steroid does without having the side effects of the steroid.”
- AR-15512, a topical transient receptor potential melastatin 8 agonist, may also be the subject of an NDA this year. Topline results from two phase 3 trials last year demonstrated a clinically meaningful increase in tear production.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates 3 million Americans have glaucoma. The use of daily eye drops to lower intraocular pressure (IOP) has been a mainstay of glaucoma therapy treatment for decades. However, a 2018 study put the rates of nonadherence as high at 67%.
In part to skirt the adherence issue, several approaches have evolved to lower IOP without relying on drops. They include laser treatments to perforate the eye’s trabecular meshwork and improve the outflow of aqueous humor, minimally invasive glaucoma surgery to create a small tunnel or even insert a shunt to enable aqueous outflow, and, more recently, implantable depots that release IOP-lowering drugs within the eye over months.
“Glaucoma is a disease that has a slow onset, so you have to diagnose it as early as possible,” Andrew Iwach, MD, a glaucoma specialist in San Francisco and clinical spokesperson for the American Academy of Ophthalmology, told this news organization. “One challenge with glaucoma is its chronic nature. There are different methods that are being looked at to achieve sustained release of drugs — ways you can implant a little bolus of this medicine,” Dr. Iwach added.
Glaucoma also requires regular monitoring of changes in IOP, Iwach noted. “During COVID, there was an increased interest in during this remotely,” he said. A remote monitoring platform, Peripherex, was registered last year with the FDA. It consists of a diagnostic online visual field test that can enable patients with glaucoma to provide data on disease changes from home.
A laser platform, the Belkin Eagle Nd:YAG laser for performing selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT), in December 2023 received FDA clearance. Dr. Iwach said this is the first innovation in lasers in 20 years in that it eliminates the need for placing a diagnostic lens on the eye itself to direct the laser pulses, a technique called direct SLT. It uses a computer-driven tacking device.
Looking Ahead
A laser in development is ViaLase, which offers femtosecond laser image-guided high-precision trabeculotomy or FLigHT. The VIA-002 study, which began enrolling patients in September 2023, is comparing ViaLase with SLT to determine reduction in unmedicated IOP at 6 and 12 months. A small feasibility study published last year demonstrated safety of the procedure with an average reduction in IOP of 34.6% at 24 months.
Microshunts inserted into the eye also have been used to reduce IOP. An early stage study is evaluating a new-generation, minimally invasive shunt that, once implanted, allows the ophthalmologist to adjust the level of aqueous outflow in an office-based procedure.
Another December 2023 FDA approval was iDose TR, an implant loaded with the prostaglandin analog travoprost 75 mcg. The implant is scheduled for commercial release in the first quarter of 2024, with a projected wholesale acquisition cost of $13,950 per dose or implant.
Two phase 3 trials compared two iDose TR models with two different travoprost release intervals, defined as the fast- and slow-release iDose TR models, respectively, with topical timolol ophthalmic solution, 0.5% twice a day. The trials demonstrated comparable IOP reduction between all three vehicles. At 12 months, 81% of iDose TR subjects required no IOP-lowering topical medications across both trials.
Also in development is an implant that uses a cilioscleral technique to preserve the anterior chamber of the eye, reducing the risk for complications, such as endothelial cell loss or a filtration bleb, that can occur with other implant procedures. Preliminary results of a 12-month study of 57 patients fitted with a new design with the cilioscleral interpositioning device (CID) showed it lowered IOP an average of 13.9 mmHg vs 15.1 mmHg in earlier studies with the device. In the latest study, more than 85% of patients reported being medication free at 12 months. The CID procedure spares the conjunctiva, requiring only a local incision, according to its developers.
As for topical agents that reduce IOP, cannabinoids may soon find their way into the glaucoma specialist’s toolbox. A phase 2 trial evaluating SBI-100 ophthalmic emulsion started enrolling patients late last year. SBI-100 OE is a synthetic prodrug of tetrahydrocannabinol that can bind and activate cannabinoid receptor type 1 in ocular tissues. The trial is scheduled for completion later this year. A phase 1 trial last year demonstrated an average reduction in IOP of 24%.
Another area of focus is on the use of preservatives in topical drops. “One of big issues we’re dealing with is preservatives because you’re marinating these eyes over years with these drops,” Dr. Iwach said. Late last year, the first preservative-free form of latanoprost ophthalmic solution 0.005% launched in the United States. Other delivery systems that remove preservatives from topical drops and preservative-free formulations are in the investigative stage, he said.
Dr. Farid disclosed financial relationships with Alcon Laboratories, Allergan/AbbVie, Bausch + Lomb, Bio-Tissue, CorneaGen, Harrow, Kala Pharmaceuticals, and Tarsus Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Iwach disclosed a previous financial relationship with Belkin Vision as well as relationships with Alcon Laboratories and Innovia.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Dry eye and glaucoma may be the two most confounding conditions ophthalmologists face. Meanwhile, several investigative treatments for both chronic ailments will continue to move forward.
Undry Those Eyes
Based on a 2022 study in JAMA Ophthalmology, about 27 million Americans have some form of DED or meibomian gland dysfunction. Treatments aim to preserve and enhance tears and tear production to counteract the grittiness and itchiness that accompany DED.
“For decades, we only had one treatment [cyclosporine] for dry eye, then the second one a few years ago, which is lifitegrast, but nothing innovative until very recently,” Marjan Farid, MD, director of cornea, cataract and refractive surgery at the Gavin Herbert Eye Institute at the University of California-Irvine, told this news organization.
“In 2023, I feel that innovation from the pharmaceutical standpoint in this space really exploded, and it’s very exciting because dry eye disease is such a multifactorial disease that you can’t just go after one angle,” said Dr. Farid, who is also chair of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery’s cornea clinical committee. “You really need to be able to attack dry eye disease from multiple areas, when the meibomian glands are involved, or whether or not there’s blephartitis.”
The three treatments for DED the FDA approved last year are lotilaner 0.25% ophthalmic solution, which targets the Demodex mites that cause of Demodex blepharitis, a trigger for DED; perfluorohexyloctane ophthalmic solution; and cyclosporine ophthalmic solution 0.1%. The latter two agents coat the ocular surface — perfluorohexyloctane acting as a shield to prevent tear evaporation and cyclosporine 0.1% using perfluorobutylpentane to allow the immunosuppressant cyclosporine to penetrate deeper into the eye.
This year, Dr. Farid said, while ophthalmologists will be adopting those treatments, they’ll also be watching three emerging treatments poised to report results from clinical trial or take other steps toward FDA approval. They include:
- Selenium sulfide 0.5% ophthalmic ointment will move into phase 3 trials. This ointment is applied directly to the lower eyelid to open the meibomian gland (MGs), secretions from which prevent tear evaporation and tear overflow. Results last year from a phase 2 trial demonstrated improvement in MG secretions in treated patients. “It’s a very unique compound because it’s the only compound that could potentially open the meibomian gland orifices along lid margin and improve the quality of secretions,” Dr. Farid said.
- Reproxalap, a reactive aldehyde species (RASP) inhibitor, will be the subject of a new drug application (NDA) resubmission this year. RASPs have been found in elevated levels in ocular and systemic inflammatory disease. The FDA last year notified drug developer Aldeyra Therapeutics that an additional trial was needed to demonstrate efficacy in treating symptoms of DED. Aldeyra said it would resubmit the NDA and report topline trial results in the first half of the year. “That’s a really nice anti-inflammatory eye drop that works early in the inflammatory cascade,” Dr. Farid said. “It acts almost like a steroid does without having the side effects of the steroid.”
- AR-15512, a topical transient receptor potential melastatin 8 agonist, may also be the subject of an NDA this year. Topline results from two phase 3 trials last year demonstrated a clinically meaningful increase in tear production.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates 3 million Americans have glaucoma. The use of daily eye drops to lower intraocular pressure (IOP) has been a mainstay of glaucoma therapy treatment for decades. However, a 2018 study put the rates of nonadherence as high at 67%.
In part to skirt the adherence issue, several approaches have evolved to lower IOP without relying on drops. They include laser treatments to perforate the eye’s trabecular meshwork and improve the outflow of aqueous humor, minimally invasive glaucoma surgery to create a small tunnel or even insert a shunt to enable aqueous outflow, and, more recently, implantable depots that release IOP-lowering drugs within the eye over months.
“Glaucoma is a disease that has a slow onset, so you have to diagnose it as early as possible,” Andrew Iwach, MD, a glaucoma specialist in San Francisco and clinical spokesperson for the American Academy of Ophthalmology, told this news organization. “One challenge with glaucoma is its chronic nature. There are different methods that are being looked at to achieve sustained release of drugs — ways you can implant a little bolus of this medicine,” Dr. Iwach added.
Glaucoma also requires regular monitoring of changes in IOP, Iwach noted. “During COVID, there was an increased interest in during this remotely,” he said. A remote monitoring platform, Peripherex, was registered last year with the FDA. It consists of a diagnostic online visual field test that can enable patients with glaucoma to provide data on disease changes from home.
A laser platform, the Belkin Eagle Nd:YAG laser for performing selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT), in December 2023 received FDA clearance. Dr. Iwach said this is the first innovation in lasers in 20 years in that it eliminates the need for placing a diagnostic lens on the eye itself to direct the laser pulses, a technique called direct SLT. It uses a computer-driven tacking device.
Looking Ahead
A laser in development is ViaLase, which offers femtosecond laser image-guided high-precision trabeculotomy or FLigHT. The VIA-002 study, which began enrolling patients in September 2023, is comparing ViaLase with SLT to determine reduction in unmedicated IOP at 6 and 12 months. A small feasibility study published last year demonstrated safety of the procedure with an average reduction in IOP of 34.6% at 24 months.
Microshunts inserted into the eye also have been used to reduce IOP. An early stage study is evaluating a new-generation, minimally invasive shunt that, once implanted, allows the ophthalmologist to adjust the level of aqueous outflow in an office-based procedure.
Another December 2023 FDA approval was iDose TR, an implant loaded with the prostaglandin analog travoprost 75 mcg. The implant is scheduled for commercial release in the first quarter of 2024, with a projected wholesale acquisition cost of $13,950 per dose or implant.
Two phase 3 trials compared two iDose TR models with two different travoprost release intervals, defined as the fast- and slow-release iDose TR models, respectively, with topical timolol ophthalmic solution, 0.5% twice a day. The trials demonstrated comparable IOP reduction between all three vehicles. At 12 months, 81% of iDose TR subjects required no IOP-lowering topical medications across both trials.
Also in development is an implant that uses a cilioscleral technique to preserve the anterior chamber of the eye, reducing the risk for complications, such as endothelial cell loss or a filtration bleb, that can occur with other implant procedures. Preliminary results of a 12-month study of 57 patients fitted with a new design with the cilioscleral interpositioning device (CID) showed it lowered IOP an average of 13.9 mmHg vs 15.1 mmHg in earlier studies with the device. In the latest study, more than 85% of patients reported being medication free at 12 months. The CID procedure spares the conjunctiva, requiring only a local incision, according to its developers.
As for topical agents that reduce IOP, cannabinoids may soon find their way into the glaucoma specialist’s toolbox. A phase 2 trial evaluating SBI-100 ophthalmic emulsion started enrolling patients late last year. SBI-100 OE is a synthetic prodrug of tetrahydrocannabinol that can bind and activate cannabinoid receptor type 1 in ocular tissues. The trial is scheduled for completion later this year. A phase 1 trial last year demonstrated an average reduction in IOP of 24%.
Another area of focus is on the use of preservatives in topical drops. “One of big issues we’re dealing with is preservatives because you’re marinating these eyes over years with these drops,” Dr. Iwach said. Late last year, the first preservative-free form of latanoprost ophthalmic solution 0.005% launched in the United States. Other delivery systems that remove preservatives from topical drops and preservative-free formulations are in the investigative stage, he said.
Dr. Farid disclosed financial relationships with Alcon Laboratories, Allergan/AbbVie, Bausch + Lomb, Bio-Tissue, CorneaGen, Harrow, Kala Pharmaceuticals, and Tarsus Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Iwach disclosed a previous financial relationship with Belkin Vision as well as relationships with Alcon Laboratories and Innovia.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Dry eye and glaucoma may be the two most confounding conditions ophthalmologists face. Meanwhile, several investigative treatments for both chronic ailments will continue to move forward.
Undry Those Eyes
Based on a 2022 study in JAMA Ophthalmology, about 27 million Americans have some form of DED or meibomian gland dysfunction. Treatments aim to preserve and enhance tears and tear production to counteract the grittiness and itchiness that accompany DED.
“For decades, we only had one treatment [cyclosporine] for dry eye, then the second one a few years ago, which is lifitegrast, but nothing innovative until very recently,” Marjan Farid, MD, director of cornea, cataract and refractive surgery at the Gavin Herbert Eye Institute at the University of California-Irvine, told this news organization.
“In 2023, I feel that innovation from the pharmaceutical standpoint in this space really exploded, and it’s very exciting because dry eye disease is such a multifactorial disease that you can’t just go after one angle,” said Dr. Farid, who is also chair of the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery’s cornea clinical committee. “You really need to be able to attack dry eye disease from multiple areas, when the meibomian glands are involved, or whether or not there’s blephartitis.”
The three treatments for DED the FDA approved last year are lotilaner 0.25% ophthalmic solution, which targets the Demodex mites that cause of Demodex blepharitis, a trigger for DED; perfluorohexyloctane ophthalmic solution; and cyclosporine ophthalmic solution 0.1%. The latter two agents coat the ocular surface — perfluorohexyloctane acting as a shield to prevent tear evaporation and cyclosporine 0.1% using perfluorobutylpentane to allow the immunosuppressant cyclosporine to penetrate deeper into the eye.
This year, Dr. Farid said, while ophthalmologists will be adopting those treatments, they’ll also be watching three emerging treatments poised to report results from clinical trial or take other steps toward FDA approval. They include:
- Selenium sulfide 0.5% ophthalmic ointment will move into phase 3 trials. This ointment is applied directly to the lower eyelid to open the meibomian gland (MGs), secretions from which prevent tear evaporation and tear overflow. Results last year from a phase 2 trial demonstrated improvement in MG secretions in treated patients. “It’s a very unique compound because it’s the only compound that could potentially open the meibomian gland orifices along lid margin and improve the quality of secretions,” Dr. Farid said.
- Reproxalap, a reactive aldehyde species (RASP) inhibitor, will be the subject of a new drug application (NDA) resubmission this year. RASPs have been found in elevated levels in ocular and systemic inflammatory disease. The FDA last year notified drug developer Aldeyra Therapeutics that an additional trial was needed to demonstrate efficacy in treating symptoms of DED. Aldeyra said it would resubmit the NDA and report topline trial results in the first half of the year. “That’s a really nice anti-inflammatory eye drop that works early in the inflammatory cascade,” Dr. Farid said. “It acts almost like a steroid does without having the side effects of the steroid.”
- AR-15512, a topical transient receptor potential melastatin 8 agonist, may also be the subject of an NDA this year. Topline results from two phase 3 trials last year demonstrated a clinically meaningful increase in tear production.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates 3 million Americans have glaucoma. The use of daily eye drops to lower intraocular pressure (IOP) has been a mainstay of glaucoma therapy treatment for decades. However, a 2018 study put the rates of nonadherence as high at 67%.
In part to skirt the adherence issue, several approaches have evolved to lower IOP without relying on drops. They include laser treatments to perforate the eye’s trabecular meshwork and improve the outflow of aqueous humor, minimally invasive glaucoma surgery to create a small tunnel or even insert a shunt to enable aqueous outflow, and, more recently, implantable depots that release IOP-lowering drugs within the eye over months.
“Glaucoma is a disease that has a slow onset, so you have to diagnose it as early as possible,” Andrew Iwach, MD, a glaucoma specialist in San Francisco and clinical spokesperson for the American Academy of Ophthalmology, told this news organization. “One challenge with glaucoma is its chronic nature. There are different methods that are being looked at to achieve sustained release of drugs — ways you can implant a little bolus of this medicine,” Dr. Iwach added.
Glaucoma also requires regular monitoring of changes in IOP, Iwach noted. “During COVID, there was an increased interest in during this remotely,” he said. A remote monitoring platform, Peripherex, was registered last year with the FDA. It consists of a diagnostic online visual field test that can enable patients with glaucoma to provide data on disease changes from home.
A laser platform, the Belkin Eagle Nd:YAG laser for performing selective laser trabeculoplasty (SLT), in December 2023 received FDA clearance. Dr. Iwach said this is the first innovation in lasers in 20 years in that it eliminates the need for placing a diagnostic lens on the eye itself to direct the laser pulses, a technique called direct SLT. It uses a computer-driven tacking device.
Looking Ahead
A laser in development is ViaLase, which offers femtosecond laser image-guided high-precision trabeculotomy or FLigHT. The VIA-002 study, which began enrolling patients in September 2023, is comparing ViaLase with SLT to determine reduction in unmedicated IOP at 6 and 12 months. A small feasibility study published last year demonstrated safety of the procedure with an average reduction in IOP of 34.6% at 24 months.
Microshunts inserted into the eye also have been used to reduce IOP. An early stage study is evaluating a new-generation, minimally invasive shunt that, once implanted, allows the ophthalmologist to adjust the level of aqueous outflow in an office-based procedure.
Another December 2023 FDA approval was iDose TR, an implant loaded with the prostaglandin analog travoprost 75 mcg. The implant is scheduled for commercial release in the first quarter of 2024, with a projected wholesale acquisition cost of $13,950 per dose or implant.
Two phase 3 trials compared two iDose TR models with two different travoprost release intervals, defined as the fast- and slow-release iDose TR models, respectively, with topical timolol ophthalmic solution, 0.5% twice a day. The trials demonstrated comparable IOP reduction between all three vehicles. At 12 months, 81% of iDose TR subjects required no IOP-lowering topical medications across both trials.
Also in development is an implant that uses a cilioscleral technique to preserve the anterior chamber of the eye, reducing the risk for complications, such as endothelial cell loss or a filtration bleb, that can occur with other implant procedures. Preliminary results of a 12-month study of 57 patients fitted with a new design with the cilioscleral interpositioning device (CID) showed it lowered IOP an average of 13.9 mmHg vs 15.1 mmHg in earlier studies with the device. In the latest study, more than 85% of patients reported being medication free at 12 months. The CID procedure spares the conjunctiva, requiring only a local incision, according to its developers.
As for topical agents that reduce IOP, cannabinoids may soon find their way into the glaucoma specialist’s toolbox. A phase 2 trial evaluating SBI-100 ophthalmic emulsion started enrolling patients late last year. SBI-100 OE is a synthetic prodrug of tetrahydrocannabinol that can bind and activate cannabinoid receptor type 1 in ocular tissues. The trial is scheduled for completion later this year. A phase 1 trial last year demonstrated an average reduction in IOP of 24%.
Another area of focus is on the use of preservatives in topical drops. “One of big issues we’re dealing with is preservatives because you’re marinating these eyes over years with these drops,” Dr. Iwach said. Late last year, the first preservative-free form of latanoprost ophthalmic solution 0.005% launched in the United States. Other delivery systems that remove preservatives from topical drops and preservative-free formulations are in the investigative stage, he said.
Dr. Farid disclosed financial relationships with Alcon Laboratories, Allergan/AbbVie, Bausch + Lomb, Bio-Tissue, CorneaGen, Harrow, Kala Pharmaceuticals, and Tarsus Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Iwach disclosed a previous financial relationship with Belkin Vision as well as relationships with Alcon Laboratories and Innovia.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Is Your Patient With PCOS at Risk for Suicide?
Women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) may be as much as eight times more likely to attempt suicide than are those without the disorder, according to a new study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine on February 5.
The results point to the importance of mental health screening for all patients who may have syndrome, the researchers concluded.
“If we can know such conditions earlier in our clinical practice, we may reduce the subsequence risk and bad consequences,” said Mu-Hong Chen, MD, PhD, an attending psychiatrist at the Department of Psychiatry at Taipei Veterans General Hospital in Taiwan, a coauthor of the study.
PCOS affects as many as 15% of reproductive-age women in the United States, or approximately six million people. The condition is associated with an increased risk for metabolic disorders, like diabetes and metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular problems, like hypertension and stroke. The disorder is associated with infertility, weight gain, hirsutism, and skin changes. Evidence also shows that these changes can lead to poorer self-image and mental health conditions like depression and anxiety.
Dr. Chen and his coauthors compared the records of nearly 19,000 women between ages 12 and 64 years who had a PCOS diagnosis with a matched control group of 189,600 women and girls without PCOS using data from 1997 to 2012 in the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Cohorts were matched by age, income, urbanization level, and mental health conditions.
Older women with PCOS had slightly lower risk compared with younger women, but the risk was higher compared with older women without PCOS. Studies in other countries have shown similar results.
Adolescents with PCOS had more than five times the risk for attempted suicide than did the control group (hazard ratio [HR], 5.38; 95% CI, 3.93-7.3). Those between ages 20 and 40 years had more than nine times the risk for attempted suicide (HR, 9.15; 95% CI, 8.03-10.42), and those older than 40 years had the lowest risk (HR, 3.75; 95% CI, 2.23-6.28).
The number of women with PCOS in the study was likely underreported, and those who were included likely had more serious cases, according to Ricardo Azziz, MD, MPH, MBA, professor in the Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology and the Department of Medicine at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.
The findings, “speak to the fact that women with PCOS do have a greater incidence of mental health disorders and do require clinicians and patients themselves and their families to be aware of these risks,” said Dr. Azziz, former CEO of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.
Clinicians should ask their patients with PCOS about suicide risk and mental health, according to Dr. Azziz.
“It’s not infrequent that those of us in clinical practice see patients who are significantly depressed, and we need to ask the right questions,” he said.
Though he was only aware of a few patients with PCOS who have attempted suicide, he said that clinicians should be prepared to refer these patients to another professional who can address mental health concerns if they express any signs of distress.
“Simply asking and inviting patients to speak about this will allow physicians to identify patients who may need to be referred,” Dr. Azziz said.
The study was funded by grants from the Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Yen Tjing Ling Medical Foundation, and the Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan.
The study authors report no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) may be as much as eight times more likely to attempt suicide than are those without the disorder, according to a new study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine on February 5.
The results point to the importance of mental health screening for all patients who may have syndrome, the researchers concluded.
“If we can know such conditions earlier in our clinical practice, we may reduce the subsequence risk and bad consequences,” said Mu-Hong Chen, MD, PhD, an attending psychiatrist at the Department of Psychiatry at Taipei Veterans General Hospital in Taiwan, a coauthor of the study.
PCOS affects as many as 15% of reproductive-age women in the United States, or approximately six million people. The condition is associated with an increased risk for metabolic disorders, like diabetes and metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular problems, like hypertension and stroke. The disorder is associated with infertility, weight gain, hirsutism, and skin changes. Evidence also shows that these changes can lead to poorer self-image and mental health conditions like depression and anxiety.
Dr. Chen and his coauthors compared the records of nearly 19,000 women between ages 12 and 64 years who had a PCOS diagnosis with a matched control group of 189,600 women and girls without PCOS using data from 1997 to 2012 in the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Cohorts were matched by age, income, urbanization level, and mental health conditions.
Older women with PCOS had slightly lower risk compared with younger women, but the risk was higher compared with older women without PCOS. Studies in other countries have shown similar results.
Adolescents with PCOS had more than five times the risk for attempted suicide than did the control group (hazard ratio [HR], 5.38; 95% CI, 3.93-7.3). Those between ages 20 and 40 years had more than nine times the risk for attempted suicide (HR, 9.15; 95% CI, 8.03-10.42), and those older than 40 years had the lowest risk (HR, 3.75; 95% CI, 2.23-6.28).
The number of women with PCOS in the study was likely underreported, and those who were included likely had more serious cases, according to Ricardo Azziz, MD, MPH, MBA, professor in the Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology and the Department of Medicine at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.
The findings, “speak to the fact that women with PCOS do have a greater incidence of mental health disorders and do require clinicians and patients themselves and their families to be aware of these risks,” said Dr. Azziz, former CEO of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.
Clinicians should ask their patients with PCOS about suicide risk and mental health, according to Dr. Azziz.
“It’s not infrequent that those of us in clinical practice see patients who are significantly depressed, and we need to ask the right questions,” he said.
Though he was only aware of a few patients with PCOS who have attempted suicide, he said that clinicians should be prepared to refer these patients to another professional who can address mental health concerns if they express any signs of distress.
“Simply asking and inviting patients to speak about this will allow physicians to identify patients who may need to be referred,” Dr. Azziz said.
The study was funded by grants from the Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Yen Tjing Ling Medical Foundation, and the Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan.
The study authors report no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) may be as much as eight times more likely to attempt suicide than are those without the disorder, according to a new study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine on February 5.
The results point to the importance of mental health screening for all patients who may have syndrome, the researchers concluded.
“If we can know such conditions earlier in our clinical practice, we may reduce the subsequence risk and bad consequences,” said Mu-Hong Chen, MD, PhD, an attending psychiatrist at the Department of Psychiatry at Taipei Veterans General Hospital in Taiwan, a coauthor of the study.
PCOS affects as many as 15% of reproductive-age women in the United States, or approximately six million people. The condition is associated with an increased risk for metabolic disorders, like diabetes and metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular problems, like hypertension and stroke. The disorder is associated with infertility, weight gain, hirsutism, and skin changes. Evidence also shows that these changes can lead to poorer self-image and mental health conditions like depression and anxiety.
Dr. Chen and his coauthors compared the records of nearly 19,000 women between ages 12 and 64 years who had a PCOS diagnosis with a matched control group of 189,600 women and girls without PCOS using data from 1997 to 2012 in the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Cohorts were matched by age, income, urbanization level, and mental health conditions.
Older women with PCOS had slightly lower risk compared with younger women, but the risk was higher compared with older women without PCOS. Studies in other countries have shown similar results.
Adolescents with PCOS had more than five times the risk for attempted suicide than did the control group (hazard ratio [HR], 5.38; 95% CI, 3.93-7.3). Those between ages 20 and 40 years had more than nine times the risk for attempted suicide (HR, 9.15; 95% CI, 8.03-10.42), and those older than 40 years had the lowest risk (HR, 3.75; 95% CI, 2.23-6.28).
The number of women with PCOS in the study was likely underreported, and those who were included likely had more serious cases, according to Ricardo Azziz, MD, MPH, MBA, professor in the Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology and the Department of Medicine at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.
The findings, “speak to the fact that women with PCOS do have a greater incidence of mental health disorders and do require clinicians and patients themselves and their families to be aware of these risks,” said Dr. Azziz, former CEO of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.
Clinicians should ask their patients with PCOS about suicide risk and mental health, according to Dr. Azziz.
“It’s not infrequent that those of us in clinical practice see patients who are significantly depressed, and we need to ask the right questions,” he said.
Though he was only aware of a few patients with PCOS who have attempted suicide, he said that clinicians should be prepared to refer these patients to another professional who can address mental health concerns if they express any signs of distress.
“Simply asking and inviting patients to speak about this will allow physicians to identify patients who may need to be referred,” Dr. Azziz said.
The study was funded by grants from the Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Yen Tjing Ling Medical Foundation, and the Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan.
The study authors report no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
New Findings on Vitamin D, Omega-3 Supplements for Preventing Autoimmune Diseases
Two years after the end of a randomized trial that showed a benefit of daily vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acid (n-3 FA) supplementation for reducing risk for autoimmune diseases, the salubrious effects of daily vitamin D appear to have waned after the supplement was discontinued, while the protection from n-3 lived on for at least 2 additional years.
As previously reported, the randomized VITAL, which was designed primarily to study the effects of vitamin D and n-3 supplementation on incident cancer and cardiovascular disease, also showed that 5 years of vitamin D supplementation was associated with a 22% reduction in risk for confirmed autoimmune diseases, and 5 years of n-3 FA supplementation was associated with an 18% reduction in confirmed and probable incident autoimmune diseases.
Now, investigators Karen H. Costenbader, MD, MPH, of Brigham & Women’s Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts, and colleagues reported that among 21,592 participants in VITAL who agreed to be followed for an additional 2 years after discontinuation, the protection against autoimmune diseases from daily vitamin D (cholecalciferol; 2000 IU/d) was no longer statistically significant, but the benefits of daily marine n-3 FAs (1 g/d as a fish-oil capsule containing 460 mg of eicosapentaenoic acid and 380 mg of docosahexaenoic acid) remained significant.
“VITAL observational extension results suggest that vitamin D supplementation should be given on a continuous basis for long-term prevention of [autoimmune diseases]. The beneficial effects of n-3 fatty acids, however, may be prolonged for at least 2 years after discontinuation,” they wrote in an article published in Arthritis & Rheumatology.
Dr. Costenbader told this news organization that the results of the observational extension study suggest that the benefits of vitamin D “wear off more quickly, and it should be continued for a longer period of time or indefinitely, rather than only for 5 years.”
In addition to the disparity in the duration of the protective effect, the investigators also saw differences in the effects across different autoimmune diseases.
“The protective effect of vitamin D seemed strongest for psoriasis, while for omega-3 fatty acids, the protective effects were strongest for rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease,” she said.
Mixed Effects
In an interview with this news organization, Janet Funk, MD, MS, vice chair of research in the Department of Medicine and professor in the School of Nutritional Science and Wellness at the University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, who was not involved in the study, saidthat the results suggest that while each supplement may offer protection against autoimmune diseases, the effects are inconsistent and may not apply to all patients.
“I think the VITAL extension results suggest that either supplement (or both together) may have benefits in reducing risk of autoimmune diseases, including possible persistent effects posttreatment, but that these effects are nuanced (ie, only in normal weight post-vitamin D treatment) and possibly not uniform across all autoimmune diseases (including possible adverse effects for some — eg, inverse association between prior omega-3 and psoriasis and tendency for increased autoimmune thyroid disease for vitamin D), although the study was not powered sufficiently to draw disease-specific conclusions,” she said.
In an editorial accompanying the study, rheumatologist Joel M. Kremer, MD, of Albany Medical College and the Corrona Research Foundation in Delray Beach, Florida, wrote that “[T]he studies by Dr. Costenbader, et al. have shed new light on the possibility that dietary supplements of n-3 FA [fatty acid] may prevent the onset of [autoimmune disease]. The sustained benefits they describe for as long as 2 years after the supplements are discontinued are consistent with the chronicity of FA species in cellular plasma membranes where they serve as substrates for a diverse array of salient metabolic and inflammatory pathways.”
VITAL Then
To test whether vitamin D or marine-derived long-chain n-3 FA supplementation could protect against autoimmune disease over time, Dr. Costenbader and colleagues piggybacked an ancillary study onto the VITAL trial, which had primary outcomes of cancer and cardiovascular disease incidence.
A total of 25,871 participants were enrolled, including 12,786 men aged 50 and older and 13,085 women aged 55 and older. The study had a 2 × 2 factorial design, with patients randomly assigned to vitamin D 2000 IU/d or placebo and then further randomized to either 1 g/d n-3 FAs or placebo in both the vitamin D and placebo primary randomization arms.
In multivariate analysis adjusted for age, sex, race, and other supplement arm, vitamin D alone was associated with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.68 (P = .02) for incident autoimmune disease, n-3 alone was associated with a nonsignificant HR of 0.74, and the combination was associated with an HR of 0.69 (P = .03). However, when probable incident autoimmune disease cases were included, the effect of n-3 became significant, with an HR of 0.82.
VITAL Now
In the current analysis, Dr. Costenbader and colleagues reported observational data on 21,592 VITAL participants, a sample representing 83.5% of those who were initially randomized, and 87.9% of those who were alive and could be contacted at the end of the study.
As in the initial trial, the investigators used annual questionnaires to assess incident autoimmune diseases during the randomized follow-up. Participants were asked about new-onset, doctor-diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis, polymyalgia rheumatica, psoriasis, autoimmune thyroid disease, and inflammatory bowel disease. Participants could also write in any other new autoimmune disease diagnoses.
There were 236 new cases of confirmed autoimmune disease that occurred since the initial publication of the trial results, as well as 65 probable cases identified during the median 5.3 years of the randomized portion, and 42 probable cases diagnosed during the 2-year observational phase.
The investigators found that after the 2-year observation period, 255 participants initially randomized to receive vitamin D had a newly developed confirmed autoimmune disease, compared with 259 of those initially randomized to a vitamin D placebo. This translated into a nonsignificant HR of 0.98.
Adding probable autoimmune cases to the confirmed cases made little difference, resulting in a nonsignificant adjusted HR of 0.95.
In contrast, there were 234 confirmed autoimmune disease cases among patients initially assigned to n-3, compared with 280 among patients randomized to the n-3 placebo, translating into a statistically significant HR of 0.83 for new-onset autoimmune disease with n-3.
Dr. Costenbader and colleagues acknowledged that the study was limited by the use of doses intended to prevent cancer or cardiovascular disease and that higher doses intended for high-risk or nutritionally deficient populations might reveal larger effects of supplementation. In addition, they noted the difficulty of identifying the timing and onset of incident disease, and that the small number of cases that occurred during the 2-year observational period precluded detailed analyses of individual autoimmune diseases.
The study was funded by grants from the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Costenbader, Dr. Funk, and Dr. Kremer reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Two years after the end of a randomized trial that showed a benefit of daily vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acid (n-3 FA) supplementation for reducing risk for autoimmune diseases, the salubrious effects of daily vitamin D appear to have waned after the supplement was discontinued, while the protection from n-3 lived on for at least 2 additional years.
As previously reported, the randomized VITAL, which was designed primarily to study the effects of vitamin D and n-3 supplementation on incident cancer and cardiovascular disease, also showed that 5 years of vitamin D supplementation was associated with a 22% reduction in risk for confirmed autoimmune diseases, and 5 years of n-3 FA supplementation was associated with an 18% reduction in confirmed and probable incident autoimmune diseases.
Now, investigators Karen H. Costenbader, MD, MPH, of Brigham & Women’s Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts, and colleagues reported that among 21,592 participants in VITAL who agreed to be followed for an additional 2 years after discontinuation, the protection against autoimmune diseases from daily vitamin D (cholecalciferol; 2000 IU/d) was no longer statistically significant, but the benefits of daily marine n-3 FAs (1 g/d as a fish-oil capsule containing 460 mg of eicosapentaenoic acid and 380 mg of docosahexaenoic acid) remained significant.
“VITAL observational extension results suggest that vitamin D supplementation should be given on a continuous basis for long-term prevention of [autoimmune diseases]. The beneficial effects of n-3 fatty acids, however, may be prolonged for at least 2 years after discontinuation,” they wrote in an article published in Arthritis & Rheumatology.
Dr. Costenbader told this news organization that the results of the observational extension study suggest that the benefits of vitamin D “wear off more quickly, and it should be continued for a longer period of time or indefinitely, rather than only for 5 years.”
In addition to the disparity in the duration of the protective effect, the investigators also saw differences in the effects across different autoimmune diseases.
“The protective effect of vitamin D seemed strongest for psoriasis, while for omega-3 fatty acids, the protective effects were strongest for rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease,” she said.
Mixed Effects
In an interview with this news organization, Janet Funk, MD, MS, vice chair of research in the Department of Medicine and professor in the School of Nutritional Science and Wellness at the University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, who was not involved in the study, saidthat the results suggest that while each supplement may offer protection against autoimmune diseases, the effects are inconsistent and may not apply to all patients.
“I think the VITAL extension results suggest that either supplement (or both together) may have benefits in reducing risk of autoimmune diseases, including possible persistent effects posttreatment, but that these effects are nuanced (ie, only in normal weight post-vitamin D treatment) and possibly not uniform across all autoimmune diseases (including possible adverse effects for some — eg, inverse association between prior omega-3 and psoriasis and tendency for increased autoimmune thyroid disease for vitamin D), although the study was not powered sufficiently to draw disease-specific conclusions,” she said.
In an editorial accompanying the study, rheumatologist Joel M. Kremer, MD, of Albany Medical College and the Corrona Research Foundation in Delray Beach, Florida, wrote that “[T]he studies by Dr. Costenbader, et al. have shed new light on the possibility that dietary supplements of n-3 FA [fatty acid] may prevent the onset of [autoimmune disease]. The sustained benefits they describe for as long as 2 years after the supplements are discontinued are consistent with the chronicity of FA species in cellular plasma membranes where they serve as substrates for a diverse array of salient metabolic and inflammatory pathways.”
VITAL Then
To test whether vitamin D or marine-derived long-chain n-3 FA supplementation could protect against autoimmune disease over time, Dr. Costenbader and colleagues piggybacked an ancillary study onto the VITAL trial, which had primary outcomes of cancer and cardiovascular disease incidence.
A total of 25,871 participants were enrolled, including 12,786 men aged 50 and older and 13,085 women aged 55 and older. The study had a 2 × 2 factorial design, with patients randomly assigned to vitamin D 2000 IU/d or placebo and then further randomized to either 1 g/d n-3 FAs or placebo in both the vitamin D and placebo primary randomization arms.
In multivariate analysis adjusted for age, sex, race, and other supplement arm, vitamin D alone was associated with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.68 (P = .02) for incident autoimmune disease, n-3 alone was associated with a nonsignificant HR of 0.74, and the combination was associated with an HR of 0.69 (P = .03). However, when probable incident autoimmune disease cases were included, the effect of n-3 became significant, with an HR of 0.82.
VITAL Now
In the current analysis, Dr. Costenbader and colleagues reported observational data on 21,592 VITAL participants, a sample representing 83.5% of those who were initially randomized, and 87.9% of those who were alive and could be contacted at the end of the study.
As in the initial trial, the investigators used annual questionnaires to assess incident autoimmune diseases during the randomized follow-up. Participants were asked about new-onset, doctor-diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis, polymyalgia rheumatica, psoriasis, autoimmune thyroid disease, and inflammatory bowel disease. Participants could also write in any other new autoimmune disease diagnoses.
There were 236 new cases of confirmed autoimmune disease that occurred since the initial publication of the trial results, as well as 65 probable cases identified during the median 5.3 years of the randomized portion, and 42 probable cases diagnosed during the 2-year observational phase.
The investigators found that after the 2-year observation period, 255 participants initially randomized to receive vitamin D had a newly developed confirmed autoimmune disease, compared with 259 of those initially randomized to a vitamin D placebo. This translated into a nonsignificant HR of 0.98.
Adding probable autoimmune cases to the confirmed cases made little difference, resulting in a nonsignificant adjusted HR of 0.95.
In contrast, there were 234 confirmed autoimmune disease cases among patients initially assigned to n-3, compared with 280 among patients randomized to the n-3 placebo, translating into a statistically significant HR of 0.83 for new-onset autoimmune disease with n-3.
Dr. Costenbader and colleagues acknowledged that the study was limited by the use of doses intended to prevent cancer or cardiovascular disease and that higher doses intended for high-risk or nutritionally deficient populations might reveal larger effects of supplementation. In addition, they noted the difficulty of identifying the timing and onset of incident disease, and that the small number of cases that occurred during the 2-year observational period precluded detailed analyses of individual autoimmune diseases.
The study was funded by grants from the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Costenbader, Dr. Funk, and Dr. Kremer reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Two years after the end of a randomized trial that showed a benefit of daily vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acid (n-3 FA) supplementation for reducing risk for autoimmune diseases, the salubrious effects of daily vitamin D appear to have waned after the supplement was discontinued, while the protection from n-3 lived on for at least 2 additional years.
As previously reported, the randomized VITAL, which was designed primarily to study the effects of vitamin D and n-3 supplementation on incident cancer and cardiovascular disease, also showed that 5 years of vitamin D supplementation was associated with a 22% reduction in risk for confirmed autoimmune diseases, and 5 years of n-3 FA supplementation was associated with an 18% reduction in confirmed and probable incident autoimmune diseases.
Now, investigators Karen H. Costenbader, MD, MPH, of Brigham & Women’s Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts, and colleagues reported that among 21,592 participants in VITAL who agreed to be followed for an additional 2 years after discontinuation, the protection against autoimmune diseases from daily vitamin D (cholecalciferol; 2000 IU/d) was no longer statistically significant, but the benefits of daily marine n-3 FAs (1 g/d as a fish-oil capsule containing 460 mg of eicosapentaenoic acid and 380 mg of docosahexaenoic acid) remained significant.
“VITAL observational extension results suggest that vitamin D supplementation should be given on a continuous basis for long-term prevention of [autoimmune diseases]. The beneficial effects of n-3 fatty acids, however, may be prolonged for at least 2 years after discontinuation,” they wrote in an article published in Arthritis & Rheumatology.
Dr. Costenbader told this news organization that the results of the observational extension study suggest that the benefits of vitamin D “wear off more quickly, and it should be continued for a longer period of time or indefinitely, rather than only for 5 years.”
In addition to the disparity in the duration of the protective effect, the investigators also saw differences in the effects across different autoimmune diseases.
“The protective effect of vitamin D seemed strongest for psoriasis, while for omega-3 fatty acids, the protective effects were strongest for rheumatoid arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease,” she said.
Mixed Effects
In an interview with this news organization, Janet Funk, MD, MS, vice chair of research in the Department of Medicine and professor in the School of Nutritional Science and Wellness at the University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, who was not involved in the study, saidthat the results suggest that while each supplement may offer protection against autoimmune diseases, the effects are inconsistent and may not apply to all patients.
“I think the VITAL extension results suggest that either supplement (or both together) may have benefits in reducing risk of autoimmune diseases, including possible persistent effects posttreatment, but that these effects are nuanced (ie, only in normal weight post-vitamin D treatment) and possibly not uniform across all autoimmune diseases (including possible adverse effects for some — eg, inverse association between prior omega-3 and psoriasis and tendency for increased autoimmune thyroid disease for vitamin D), although the study was not powered sufficiently to draw disease-specific conclusions,” she said.
In an editorial accompanying the study, rheumatologist Joel M. Kremer, MD, of Albany Medical College and the Corrona Research Foundation in Delray Beach, Florida, wrote that “[T]he studies by Dr. Costenbader, et al. have shed new light on the possibility that dietary supplements of n-3 FA [fatty acid] may prevent the onset of [autoimmune disease]. The sustained benefits they describe for as long as 2 years after the supplements are discontinued are consistent with the chronicity of FA species in cellular plasma membranes where they serve as substrates for a diverse array of salient metabolic and inflammatory pathways.”
VITAL Then
To test whether vitamin D or marine-derived long-chain n-3 FA supplementation could protect against autoimmune disease over time, Dr. Costenbader and colleagues piggybacked an ancillary study onto the VITAL trial, which had primary outcomes of cancer and cardiovascular disease incidence.
A total of 25,871 participants were enrolled, including 12,786 men aged 50 and older and 13,085 women aged 55 and older. The study had a 2 × 2 factorial design, with patients randomly assigned to vitamin D 2000 IU/d or placebo and then further randomized to either 1 g/d n-3 FAs or placebo in both the vitamin D and placebo primary randomization arms.
In multivariate analysis adjusted for age, sex, race, and other supplement arm, vitamin D alone was associated with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.68 (P = .02) for incident autoimmune disease, n-3 alone was associated with a nonsignificant HR of 0.74, and the combination was associated with an HR of 0.69 (P = .03). However, when probable incident autoimmune disease cases were included, the effect of n-3 became significant, with an HR of 0.82.
VITAL Now
In the current analysis, Dr. Costenbader and colleagues reported observational data on 21,592 VITAL participants, a sample representing 83.5% of those who were initially randomized, and 87.9% of those who were alive and could be contacted at the end of the study.
As in the initial trial, the investigators used annual questionnaires to assess incident autoimmune diseases during the randomized follow-up. Participants were asked about new-onset, doctor-diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis, polymyalgia rheumatica, psoriasis, autoimmune thyroid disease, and inflammatory bowel disease. Participants could also write in any other new autoimmune disease diagnoses.
There were 236 new cases of confirmed autoimmune disease that occurred since the initial publication of the trial results, as well as 65 probable cases identified during the median 5.3 years of the randomized portion, and 42 probable cases diagnosed during the 2-year observational phase.
The investigators found that after the 2-year observation period, 255 participants initially randomized to receive vitamin D had a newly developed confirmed autoimmune disease, compared with 259 of those initially randomized to a vitamin D placebo. This translated into a nonsignificant HR of 0.98.
Adding probable autoimmune cases to the confirmed cases made little difference, resulting in a nonsignificant adjusted HR of 0.95.
In contrast, there were 234 confirmed autoimmune disease cases among patients initially assigned to n-3, compared with 280 among patients randomized to the n-3 placebo, translating into a statistically significant HR of 0.83 for new-onset autoimmune disease with n-3.
Dr. Costenbader and colleagues acknowledged that the study was limited by the use of doses intended to prevent cancer or cardiovascular disease and that higher doses intended for high-risk or nutritionally deficient populations might reveal larger effects of supplementation. In addition, they noted the difficulty of identifying the timing and onset of incident disease, and that the small number of cases that occurred during the 2-year observational period precluded detailed analyses of individual autoimmune diseases.
The study was funded by grants from the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Costenbader, Dr. Funk, and Dr. Kremer reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATOLOGY
Near-Death Experiences During CPR: An Impetus for Better Care
If someone has been in cardiac arrest for 10 minutes, the brain is permanently damaged and there’s nothing to do, right?
Not so according to emerging evidence that suggests that the brain shows signs of electrical recovery for as long as an hour into ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). This time between cardiac arrest and awakening can be a period of vivid experiences for the dying patient before they return to life — a phenomenon known as “recalled death.”
This should be an impetus to increase the use of devices that measure the quality of CPR and to find new treatments to restart the heart or prevent brain injury, experts advised. Cardiologists and critical care clinicians are among those who will need to manage patients in the aftermath.
said Jasmeet Soar, MD, consultant in Anesthetics & Intensive Care Medicine, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, England, and an editor of the journal Resuscitation.
“We know that because if chest compressions are stopped, the person becomes unconscious again,” he said. “This CPR-induced consciousness has become more common when professionals do the CPR because resuscitation guidelines now place a much bigger focus on high-quality CPR — ‘push hard, push fast.’ ”
“People are giving up too soon on trying to revive individuals, and they should be trying more modern strategies, such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation,” said Sam Parnia, MD, PhD, associate professor in the Department of Medicine at NYU Langone Health and director of critical care and resuscitation research at NYU Langone, New York City.
Brain Activity, Heightened Experiences
Two types of brain activity may occur when CPR works. The first, called CPR-induced consciousness, is when an individual recovers consciousness while in cardiac arrest. Signs of consciousness include combativeness, groaning, and eye-opening, Soar explained.
The second type is a perception of lucidity with recall of events, he said. “Patients who experience this may form memories that they can recall. We’re not sure whether that happens during CPR or while the patient is waking up during intensive care, or how the brain creates these memories, or if they’re real memories or coincidental, but it’s clear the brain does form them during the dying and recovery process.”
This latter phenomenon was explored in detail in a recent study led by Dr. Parnia.
In that study of 567 in-hospital patients with cardiac arrest from 25 centers in the United States and United Kingdom, 53 survived, 28 of those survivors were interviewed, and 11 reported memories or perceptions suggestive of consciousness.
Four types of experiences occurred:
- Recalled experiences of death: “I thought I heard my grandma [who had passed] saying ‘you need to go back.’”
- Emergence from coma during CPR/CPR-induced consciousness: “I remember when I came back and they were putting those two electrodes to my chest, and I remember the shock.”
- Emergence from coma in the post-resuscitation period: “I heard my partner saying [patient’s name] and my son saying ‘mom.’”
- Dreams and dream-like experiences: “[I] felt as though someone was holding my hand. It was very black; I couldn’t see anything.”
In a complementary cross-sectional study, 126 community cardiac arrest survivors reported similar experiences plus a fifth type, “delusions,” or “misattribution of medical events,” for example, “I heard my name, over and over again. All around me were things like demons and monsters. It felt like they were trying to tear off my body parts.”
“Many people label recalled experiences of death as ‘near-death’ experiences, but they’re not,” Dr. Parnia said. “Medically speaking, being near to death means your heart is about to stop. But the whole point is that these people are not near death. They actually died and came back from it.”
One of the big implications of the study, he said, is that “a lot of physicians are taught that somehow after, say, 3-5 minutes of oxygen deprivation, the brain dies. Our study showed this is not true. It showed that the brain may not be functioning, which is why they flatline. But if you’re able to resuscitate them appropriately, you can restore activity up to an hour later.”
Because some clinicians questioned or dismissed previous work in this area by Dr. Parnia and others, the latest study used EEG monitoring in a subset of 53 patients. Among those with evaluable EEG data, brain activity returned to normal or near-normal after flatlining in about 40% of images; spikes were seen in the delta (22%), theta (12%), alpha (6%), and beta (1%) waves associated with higher mental function.
“The team recorded what was happening in the brain during real-time CPR using various tests of consciousness, including EEG measurements and tests of visual and auditory awareness using a tablet with a special app and a Bluetooth headphone.”
“Incredibly, we found that even though the brain flatlines, which is what we expect when the heart stops, with professionally given CPR even up to about an hour after this, the brainwaves changed into normal to near-normal patterns,” Dr. Parnia said. “We were able to identify these brain waves in patients while they were being resuscitated, which confirms the fact that people can have lucid consciousness even though they appear to be unconscious.”
Asked what implications, if any, his work has for current definitions of brain death and cardiac death, Dr. Parnia said that the problem is that these are based on the concept of “a permanent irreversible loss of function,” but “that’s only relative to what medical treatments are developed at a given time.”
Potential Mechanism
Dr. Parnia and his team proposed a potential mechanism for recalled experiences of death. Essentially, when the brain flatlines, the dying brain removes natural inhibitory (braking) systems that are needed to support daily functioning. This disinhibition may open access to “new dimensions of reality, including lucid recall of stored memories from early childhood to death,” he said.
From a clinical perspective, he noted, “although the brain stops working when it flatlines, it does not die within 5 or 10 minutes of oxygen deprivation.”
This is contrary to what many doctors believe, and because of that, he said, “nobody has tried to find treatments or new ways to restart the heart or prevent brain injury. They think it’s futile. So, with this work, we’ve opened up the window to developing cocktails of drugs that could be given to patients who have technically gone through death to bring them back to life again.”
Probe Patients or Leave Well Enough Alone?
The findings have ramifications for clinicians who may be caring for patients who survive cardiac arrest, said Lance B. Becker, MD, professor and chair, Department of Emergency Medicine, Donald & Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Manhasset, New York, and chair, Department of Emergency Medicine at North Shore University Hospital, Manhasset, and Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Queens, New York.
“I’ve talked with a lot of patients who have had some kind of recalled experience around cardiac arrest and some who have had zero recall, as well, like in the paper,” he told this news organization. “The ones who do have an experience are sometimes mystified by it and have questions. And very often, clinicians don’t want to listen, don’t think it’s important, and downplay it.”
“I think it is important, and when people have important things happen to them, it’s really imperative that doctors listen, learn, and respond,” he said. “When I started in this field a long time ago, there were so few survivors that there wasn’t even a concept of survivorship,” he said.
Dr. Becker noted that it’s not uncommon for cardiac arrest survivors to have depression, problems with executive function, or a small brain injury they need to recover from. “Now survivorship organizations are springing up that these people can turn to, but clinicians still need to become more aware and sensitive to this.”
Not all are. “I had a number of patients who said I was the only doctor who ever asked them about what they experienced,” he recalled. “I was a young doctor at the time and didn’t exactly know what to say to them, but they were just happy to have a doctor who would listen to them and not be afraid to hear what they had to say.”
Recognizing that support is an issue, the American Heart Association released a scientific statement in 2020 on sudden cardiac arrest survivorship, which “expands the cardiac arrest resuscitation system of care to include patients, caregivers, and rehabilitative healthcare partnerships, which are central to cardiac survivorship.”
Soar has a more nuanced view of survivorship support, however. “I suspect some people are very glad to be alive, and that trying to dig deep and bring things out may actually be harmful,” he said. “It’s not as clear cut as everybody thinks.”
He noted that follow-up and rehabilitation should be an option for people who specifically need it who would need to be identified. “But human beings are resilient, and while some people will require help, not everybody will,” he said.
Better CPR, New Treatments
Experts in emergency and intensive care medicine studying survival after cardiac arrest hope to find ways to save patients before too much damage is done to the brain and other organs from loss of oxygen, Dr. Parnia said. He is the lead author in a recent multidisciplinary consensus statement on guidelines and standards for the study of death and recalled experiences of death.
“One of my bugbears is that our survival outcomes from cardiac arrest resuscitation have not changed very much for 60 years because we haven’t developed new treatments and innovative methods,” he said. “Unlike the rest of medicine, we’re living in the past.”
Currently, his team is developing cocktails of treatments. These include hypothermic circulatory arrest — cooling the body to stop blood circulation and brain function for up to 40 minutes — and giving magnesium, a brain-protective treatment, to people whose hearts stop.
Dr. Becker would like to see optimal care of patients with cardiac arrest. “The first step is to increase blood flow with good CPR and then measure whether CPR is working,” he said. Adding that despite the availability of devices that provide feedback on the quality of CPR, they’re rarely used. He cited ultrasound devices that measure the blood flow generated during CPR, compression meter devices that go between the patient’s chest and the rescuer’s hands that gauge the rate and depth of compression, and invasive devices that measure blood pressure during CPR.
His group is trying to design even better devices, he said. “An example would be a little probe that you could pop on the neck that would study blood flow to the brain with ultrasound, so that while you were pumping on the person, you could see if you’re making them better or not.”
“We also have some preliminary data showing that the American Heart Association recommended position on the chest for doing CPR is not the perfect place for everybody,” he said. The 2020 AHA guidelines recommended the center of the lower half of the sternum. At the 2023 American College of Emergency Physicians meeting, Dr. Becker›s team at Hofstra/Northwell presented data on 175 video-recorded adult cardiac arrests in their emergency department over more than 2 years, 22 of which involved at least one change of compression location (for a total of 29 location changes). They found that 41% of compression location changes were associated with return of spontaneous circulation.
For about a third of people, the hands need to be repositioned slightly. “This is not anything that is taught to the public because you can only figure it out if you have some kind of sensor that will let you know how you’re doing. That’s very achievable. We could have that in the future on every ambulance and even in people’s homes.”
When the person arrives at the hospital, he said, “we can make it easier and more likely that they can be put on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). We do that on selected patients in our hospital, even though it’s very difficult to do, because we know that when it’s done properly, it can change survival rates dramatically, from maybe 10%-50%.”
Dr. Dr. Becker, like Dr. Parnia, also favors the development of drug cocktails, and his team has been experimenting with various combinations in animal models. “We think those two things together — ECMO and a drug cocktail — would be a very powerful one to two knock out for cardiac arrest,” he said. “We have a long way to go — 10 or 20 years. But most people around the world working in this area believe that will be the future.”
Dr. Parnia’s study on recalled death was supported by The John Templeton Foundation, Resuscitation Council (UK), and New York University Grossman School of Medicine, with research support staff provided by the UK’s National Institutes for Health Research. Soar is the editor of the journal Resuscitation and receives payment from the publisher Elsevier. Dr. Becker’s institute has received grants from Philips Medical Systems, NIH, Zoll Medical Corp, Nihon Kohden, PCORI, BrainCool, and United Therapeutics. He has received advisory/consultancy honoraria from NIH, Nihon Kohden, HP, and Philips, and he holds several patents in hypothermia induction and reperfusion therapies and several pending patents involving the use of medical slurries as human coolant devices to create reperfusion cocktails and measurement of respiratory quotient.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
If someone has been in cardiac arrest for 10 minutes, the brain is permanently damaged and there’s nothing to do, right?
Not so according to emerging evidence that suggests that the brain shows signs of electrical recovery for as long as an hour into ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). This time between cardiac arrest and awakening can be a period of vivid experiences for the dying patient before they return to life — a phenomenon known as “recalled death.”
This should be an impetus to increase the use of devices that measure the quality of CPR and to find new treatments to restart the heart or prevent brain injury, experts advised. Cardiologists and critical care clinicians are among those who will need to manage patients in the aftermath.
said Jasmeet Soar, MD, consultant in Anesthetics & Intensive Care Medicine, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, England, and an editor of the journal Resuscitation.
“We know that because if chest compressions are stopped, the person becomes unconscious again,” he said. “This CPR-induced consciousness has become more common when professionals do the CPR because resuscitation guidelines now place a much bigger focus on high-quality CPR — ‘push hard, push fast.’ ”
“People are giving up too soon on trying to revive individuals, and they should be trying more modern strategies, such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation,” said Sam Parnia, MD, PhD, associate professor in the Department of Medicine at NYU Langone Health and director of critical care and resuscitation research at NYU Langone, New York City.
Brain Activity, Heightened Experiences
Two types of brain activity may occur when CPR works. The first, called CPR-induced consciousness, is when an individual recovers consciousness while in cardiac arrest. Signs of consciousness include combativeness, groaning, and eye-opening, Soar explained.
The second type is a perception of lucidity with recall of events, he said. “Patients who experience this may form memories that they can recall. We’re not sure whether that happens during CPR or while the patient is waking up during intensive care, or how the brain creates these memories, or if they’re real memories or coincidental, but it’s clear the brain does form them during the dying and recovery process.”
This latter phenomenon was explored in detail in a recent study led by Dr. Parnia.
In that study of 567 in-hospital patients with cardiac arrest from 25 centers in the United States and United Kingdom, 53 survived, 28 of those survivors were interviewed, and 11 reported memories or perceptions suggestive of consciousness.
Four types of experiences occurred:
- Recalled experiences of death: “I thought I heard my grandma [who had passed] saying ‘you need to go back.’”
- Emergence from coma during CPR/CPR-induced consciousness: “I remember when I came back and they were putting those two electrodes to my chest, and I remember the shock.”
- Emergence from coma in the post-resuscitation period: “I heard my partner saying [patient’s name] and my son saying ‘mom.’”
- Dreams and dream-like experiences: “[I] felt as though someone was holding my hand. It was very black; I couldn’t see anything.”
In a complementary cross-sectional study, 126 community cardiac arrest survivors reported similar experiences plus a fifth type, “delusions,” or “misattribution of medical events,” for example, “I heard my name, over and over again. All around me were things like demons and monsters. It felt like they were trying to tear off my body parts.”
“Many people label recalled experiences of death as ‘near-death’ experiences, but they’re not,” Dr. Parnia said. “Medically speaking, being near to death means your heart is about to stop. But the whole point is that these people are not near death. They actually died and came back from it.”
One of the big implications of the study, he said, is that “a lot of physicians are taught that somehow after, say, 3-5 minutes of oxygen deprivation, the brain dies. Our study showed this is not true. It showed that the brain may not be functioning, which is why they flatline. But if you’re able to resuscitate them appropriately, you can restore activity up to an hour later.”
Because some clinicians questioned or dismissed previous work in this area by Dr. Parnia and others, the latest study used EEG monitoring in a subset of 53 patients. Among those with evaluable EEG data, brain activity returned to normal or near-normal after flatlining in about 40% of images; spikes were seen in the delta (22%), theta (12%), alpha (6%), and beta (1%) waves associated with higher mental function.
“The team recorded what was happening in the brain during real-time CPR using various tests of consciousness, including EEG measurements and tests of visual and auditory awareness using a tablet with a special app and a Bluetooth headphone.”
“Incredibly, we found that even though the brain flatlines, which is what we expect when the heart stops, with professionally given CPR even up to about an hour after this, the brainwaves changed into normal to near-normal patterns,” Dr. Parnia said. “We were able to identify these brain waves in patients while they were being resuscitated, which confirms the fact that people can have lucid consciousness even though they appear to be unconscious.”
Asked what implications, if any, his work has for current definitions of brain death and cardiac death, Dr. Parnia said that the problem is that these are based on the concept of “a permanent irreversible loss of function,” but “that’s only relative to what medical treatments are developed at a given time.”
Potential Mechanism
Dr. Parnia and his team proposed a potential mechanism for recalled experiences of death. Essentially, when the brain flatlines, the dying brain removes natural inhibitory (braking) systems that are needed to support daily functioning. This disinhibition may open access to “new dimensions of reality, including lucid recall of stored memories from early childhood to death,” he said.
From a clinical perspective, he noted, “although the brain stops working when it flatlines, it does not die within 5 or 10 minutes of oxygen deprivation.”
This is contrary to what many doctors believe, and because of that, he said, “nobody has tried to find treatments or new ways to restart the heart or prevent brain injury. They think it’s futile. So, with this work, we’ve opened up the window to developing cocktails of drugs that could be given to patients who have technically gone through death to bring them back to life again.”
Probe Patients or Leave Well Enough Alone?
The findings have ramifications for clinicians who may be caring for patients who survive cardiac arrest, said Lance B. Becker, MD, professor and chair, Department of Emergency Medicine, Donald & Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Manhasset, New York, and chair, Department of Emergency Medicine at North Shore University Hospital, Manhasset, and Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Queens, New York.
“I’ve talked with a lot of patients who have had some kind of recalled experience around cardiac arrest and some who have had zero recall, as well, like in the paper,” he told this news organization. “The ones who do have an experience are sometimes mystified by it and have questions. And very often, clinicians don’t want to listen, don’t think it’s important, and downplay it.”
“I think it is important, and when people have important things happen to them, it’s really imperative that doctors listen, learn, and respond,” he said. “When I started in this field a long time ago, there were so few survivors that there wasn’t even a concept of survivorship,” he said.
Dr. Becker noted that it’s not uncommon for cardiac arrest survivors to have depression, problems with executive function, or a small brain injury they need to recover from. “Now survivorship organizations are springing up that these people can turn to, but clinicians still need to become more aware and sensitive to this.”
Not all are. “I had a number of patients who said I was the only doctor who ever asked them about what they experienced,” he recalled. “I was a young doctor at the time and didn’t exactly know what to say to them, but they were just happy to have a doctor who would listen to them and not be afraid to hear what they had to say.”
Recognizing that support is an issue, the American Heart Association released a scientific statement in 2020 on sudden cardiac arrest survivorship, which “expands the cardiac arrest resuscitation system of care to include patients, caregivers, and rehabilitative healthcare partnerships, which are central to cardiac survivorship.”
Soar has a more nuanced view of survivorship support, however. “I suspect some people are very glad to be alive, and that trying to dig deep and bring things out may actually be harmful,” he said. “It’s not as clear cut as everybody thinks.”
He noted that follow-up and rehabilitation should be an option for people who specifically need it who would need to be identified. “But human beings are resilient, and while some people will require help, not everybody will,” he said.
Better CPR, New Treatments
Experts in emergency and intensive care medicine studying survival after cardiac arrest hope to find ways to save patients before too much damage is done to the brain and other organs from loss of oxygen, Dr. Parnia said. He is the lead author in a recent multidisciplinary consensus statement on guidelines and standards for the study of death and recalled experiences of death.
“One of my bugbears is that our survival outcomes from cardiac arrest resuscitation have not changed very much for 60 years because we haven’t developed new treatments and innovative methods,” he said. “Unlike the rest of medicine, we’re living in the past.”
Currently, his team is developing cocktails of treatments. These include hypothermic circulatory arrest — cooling the body to stop blood circulation and brain function for up to 40 minutes — and giving magnesium, a brain-protective treatment, to people whose hearts stop.
Dr. Becker would like to see optimal care of patients with cardiac arrest. “The first step is to increase blood flow with good CPR and then measure whether CPR is working,” he said. Adding that despite the availability of devices that provide feedback on the quality of CPR, they’re rarely used. He cited ultrasound devices that measure the blood flow generated during CPR, compression meter devices that go between the patient’s chest and the rescuer’s hands that gauge the rate and depth of compression, and invasive devices that measure blood pressure during CPR.
His group is trying to design even better devices, he said. “An example would be a little probe that you could pop on the neck that would study blood flow to the brain with ultrasound, so that while you were pumping on the person, you could see if you’re making them better or not.”
“We also have some preliminary data showing that the American Heart Association recommended position on the chest for doing CPR is not the perfect place for everybody,” he said. The 2020 AHA guidelines recommended the center of the lower half of the sternum. At the 2023 American College of Emergency Physicians meeting, Dr. Becker›s team at Hofstra/Northwell presented data on 175 video-recorded adult cardiac arrests in their emergency department over more than 2 years, 22 of which involved at least one change of compression location (for a total of 29 location changes). They found that 41% of compression location changes were associated with return of spontaneous circulation.
For about a third of people, the hands need to be repositioned slightly. “This is not anything that is taught to the public because you can only figure it out if you have some kind of sensor that will let you know how you’re doing. That’s very achievable. We could have that in the future on every ambulance and even in people’s homes.”
When the person arrives at the hospital, he said, “we can make it easier and more likely that they can be put on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). We do that on selected patients in our hospital, even though it’s very difficult to do, because we know that when it’s done properly, it can change survival rates dramatically, from maybe 10%-50%.”
Dr. Dr. Becker, like Dr. Parnia, also favors the development of drug cocktails, and his team has been experimenting with various combinations in animal models. “We think those two things together — ECMO and a drug cocktail — would be a very powerful one to two knock out for cardiac arrest,” he said. “We have a long way to go — 10 or 20 years. But most people around the world working in this area believe that will be the future.”
Dr. Parnia’s study on recalled death was supported by The John Templeton Foundation, Resuscitation Council (UK), and New York University Grossman School of Medicine, with research support staff provided by the UK’s National Institutes for Health Research. Soar is the editor of the journal Resuscitation and receives payment from the publisher Elsevier. Dr. Becker’s institute has received grants from Philips Medical Systems, NIH, Zoll Medical Corp, Nihon Kohden, PCORI, BrainCool, and United Therapeutics. He has received advisory/consultancy honoraria from NIH, Nihon Kohden, HP, and Philips, and he holds several patents in hypothermia induction and reperfusion therapies and several pending patents involving the use of medical slurries as human coolant devices to create reperfusion cocktails and measurement of respiratory quotient.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
If someone has been in cardiac arrest for 10 minutes, the brain is permanently damaged and there’s nothing to do, right?
Not so according to emerging evidence that suggests that the brain shows signs of electrical recovery for as long as an hour into ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). This time between cardiac arrest and awakening can be a period of vivid experiences for the dying patient before they return to life — a phenomenon known as “recalled death.”
This should be an impetus to increase the use of devices that measure the quality of CPR and to find new treatments to restart the heart or prevent brain injury, experts advised. Cardiologists and critical care clinicians are among those who will need to manage patients in the aftermath.
said Jasmeet Soar, MD, consultant in Anesthetics & Intensive Care Medicine, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, England, and an editor of the journal Resuscitation.
“We know that because if chest compressions are stopped, the person becomes unconscious again,” he said. “This CPR-induced consciousness has become more common when professionals do the CPR because resuscitation guidelines now place a much bigger focus on high-quality CPR — ‘push hard, push fast.’ ”
“People are giving up too soon on trying to revive individuals, and they should be trying more modern strategies, such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation,” said Sam Parnia, MD, PhD, associate professor in the Department of Medicine at NYU Langone Health and director of critical care and resuscitation research at NYU Langone, New York City.
Brain Activity, Heightened Experiences
Two types of brain activity may occur when CPR works. The first, called CPR-induced consciousness, is when an individual recovers consciousness while in cardiac arrest. Signs of consciousness include combativeness, groaning, and eye-opening, Soar explained.
The second type is a perception of lucidity with recall of events, he said. “Patients who experience this may form memories that they can recall. We’re not sure whether that happens during CPR or while the patient is waking up during intensive care, or how the brain creates these memories, or if they’re real memories or coincidental, but it’s clear the brain does form them during the dying and recovery process.”
This latter phenomenon was explored in detail in a recent study led by Dr. Parnia.
In that study of 567 in-hospital patients with cardiac arrest from 25 centers in the United States and United Kingdom, 53 survived, 28 of those survivors were interviewed, and 11 reported memories or perceptions suggestive of consciousness.
Four types of experiences occurred:
- Recalled experiences of death: “I thought I heard my grandma [who had passed] saying ‘you need to go back.’”
- Emergence from coma during CPR/CPR-induced consciousness: “I remember when I came back and they were putting those two electrodes to my chest, and I remember the shock.”
- Emergence from coma in the post-resuscitation period: “I heard my partner saying [patient’s name] and my son saying ‘mom.’”
- Dreams and dream-like experiences: “[I] felt as though someone was holding my hand. It was very black; I couldn’t see anything.”
In a complementary cross-sectional study, 126 community cardiac arrest survivors reported similar experiences plus a fifth type, “delusions,” or “misattribution of medical events,” for example, “I heard my name, over and over again. All around me were things like demons and monsters. It felt like they were trying to tear off my body parts.”
“Many people label recalled experiences of death as ‘near-death’ experiences, but they’re not,” Dr. Parnia said. “Medically speaking, being near to death means your heart is about to stop. But the whole point is that these people are not near death. They actually died and came back from it.”
One of the big implications of the study, he said, is that “a lot of physicians are taught that somehow after, say, 3-5 minutes of oxygen deprivation, the brain dies. Our study showed this is not true. It showed that the brain may not be functioning, which is why they flatline. But if you’re able to resuscitate them appropriately, you can restore activity up to an hour later.”
Because some clinicians questioned or dismissed previous work in this area by Dr. Parnia and others, the latest study used EEG monitoring in a subset of 53 patients. Among those with evaluable EEG data, brain activity returned to normal or near-normal after flatlining in about 40% of images; spikes were seen in the delta (22%), theta (12%), alpha (6%), and beta (1%) waves associated with higher mental function.
“The team recorded what was happening in the brain during real-time CPR using various tests of consciousness, including EEG measurements and tests of visual and auditory awareness using a tablet with a special app and a Bluetooth headphone.”
“Incredibly, we found that even though the brain flatlines, which is what we expect when the heart stops, with professionally given CPR even up to about an hour after this, the brainwaves changed into normal to near-normal patterns,” Dr. Parnia said. “We were able to identify these brain waves in patients while they were being resuscitated, which confirms the fact that people can have lucid consciousness even though they appear to be unconscious.”
Asked what implications, if any, his work has for current definitions of brain death and cardiac death, Dr. Parnia said that the problem is that these are based on the concept of “a permanent irreversible loss of function,” but “that’s only relative to what medical treatments are developed at a given time.”
Potential Mechanism
Dr. Parnia and his team proposed a potential mechanism for recalled experiences of death. Essentially, when the brain flatlines, the dying brain removes natural inhibitory (braking) systems that are needed to support daily functioning. This disinhibition may open access to “new dimensions of reality, including lucid recall of stored memories from early childhood to death,” he said.
From a clinical perspective, he noted, “although the brain stops working when it flatlines, it does not die within 5 or 10 minutes of oxygen deprivation.”
This is contrary to what many doctors believe, and because of that, he said, “nobody has tried to find treatments or new ways to restart the heart or prevent brain injury. They think it’s futile. So, with this work, we’ve opened up the window to developing cocktails of drugs that could be given to patients who have technically gone through death to bring them back to life again.”
Probe Patients or Leave Well Enough Alone?
The findings have ramifications for clinicians who may be caring for patients who survive cardiac arrest, said Lance B. Becker, MD, professor and chair, Department of Emergency Medicine, Donald & Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Manhasset, New York, and chair, Department of Emergency Medicine at North Shore University Hospital, Manhasset, and Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Queens, New York.
“I’ve talked with a lot of patients who have had some kind of recalled experience around cardiac arrest and some who have had zero recall, as well, like in the paper,” he told this news organization. “The ones who do have an experience are sometimes mystified by it and have questions. And very often, clinicians don’t want to listen, don’t think it’s important, and downplay it.”
“I think it is important, and when people have important things happen to them, it’s really imperative that doctors listen, learn, and respond,” he said. “When I started in this field a long time ago, there were so few survivors that there wasn’t even a concept of survivorship,” he said.
Dr. Becker noted that it’s not uncommon for cardiac arrest survivors to have depression, problems with executive function, or a small brain injury they need to recover from. “Now survivorship organizations are springing up that these people can turn to, but clinicians still need to become more aware and sensitive to this.”
Not all are. “I had a number of patients who said I was the only doctor who ever asked them about what they experienced,” he recalled. “I was a young doctor at the time and didn’t exactly know what to say to them, but they were just happy to have a doctor who would listen to them and not be afraid to hear what they had to say.”
Recognizing that support is an issue, the American Heart Association released a scientific statement in 2020 on sudden cardiac arrest survivorship, which “expands the cardiac arrest resuscitation system of care to include patients, caregivers, and rehabilitative healthcare partnerships, which are central to cardiac survivorship.”
Soar has a more nuanced view of survivorship support, however. “I suspect some people are very glad to be alive, and that trying to dig deep and bring things out may actually be harmful,” he said. “It’s not as clear cut as everybody thinks.”
He noted that follow-up and rehabilitation should be an option for people who specifically need it who would need to be identified. “But human beings are resilient, and while some people will require help, not everybody will,” he said.
Better CPR, New Treatments
Experts in emergency and intensive care medicine studying survival after cardiac arrest hope to find ways to save patients before too much damage is done to the brain and other organs from loss of oxygen, Dr. Parnia said. He is the lead author in a recent multidisciplinary consensus statement on guidelines and standards for the study of death and recalled experiences of death.
“One of my bugbears is that our survival outcomes from cardiac arrest resuscitation have not changed very much for 60 years because we haven’t developed new treatments and innovative methods,” he said. “Unlike the rest of medicine, we’re living in the past.”
Currently, his team is developing cocktails of treatments. These include hypothermic circulatory arrest — cooling the body to stop blood circulation and brain function for up to 40 minutes — and giving magnesium, a brain-protective treatment, to people whose hearts stop.
Dr. Becker would like to see optimal care of patients with cardiac arrest. “The first step is to increase blood flow with good CPR and then measure whether CPR is working,” he said. Adding that despite the availability of devices that provide feedback on the quality of CPR, they’re rarely used. He cited ultrasound devices that measure the blood flow generated during CPR, compression meter devices that go between the patient’s chest and the rescuer’s hands that gauge the rate and depth of compression, and invasive devices that measure blood pressure during CPR.
His group is trying to design even better devices, he said. “An example would be a little probe that you could pop on the neck that would study blood flow to the brain with ultrasound, so that while you were pumping on the person, you could see if you’re making them better or not.”
“We also have some preliminary data showing that the American Heart Association recommended position on the chest for doing CPR is not the perfect place for everybody,” he said. The 2020 AHA guidelines recommended the center of the lower half of the sternum. At the 2023 American College of Emergency Physicians meeting, Dr. Becker›s team at Hofstra/Northwell presented data on 175 video-recorded adult cardiac arrests in their emergency department over more than 2 years, 22 of which involved at least one change of compression location (for a total of 29 location changes). They found that 41% of compression location changes were associated with return of spontaneous circulation.
For about a third of people, the hands need to be repositioned slightly. “This is not anything that is taught to the public because you can only figure it out if you have some kind of sensor that will let you know how you’re doing. That’s very achievable. We could have that in the future on every ambulance and even in people’s homes.”
When the person arrives at the hospital, he said, “we can make it easier and more likely that they can be put on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). We do that on selected patients in our hospital, even though it’s very difficult to do, because we know that when it’s done properly, it can change survival rates dramatically, from maybe 10%-50%.”
Dr. Dr. Becker, like Dr. Parnia, also favors the development of drug cocktails, and his team has been experimenting with various combinations in animal models. “We think those two things together — ECMO and a drug cocktail — would be a very powerful one to two knock out for cardiac arrest,” he said. “We have a long way to go — 10 or 20 years. But most people around the world working in this area believe that will be the future.”
Dr. Parnia’s study on recalled death was supported by The John Templeton Foundation, Resuscitation Council (UK), and New York University Grossman School of Medicine, with research support staff provided by the UK’s National Institutes for Health Research. Soar is the editor of the journal Resuscitation and receives payment from the publisher Elsevier. Dr. Becker’s institute has received grants from Philips Medical Systems, NIH, Zoll Medical Corp, Nihon Kohden, PCORI, BrainCool, and United Therapeutics. He has received advisory/consultancy honoraria from NIH, Nihon Kohden, HP, and Philips, and he holds several patents in hypothermia induction and reperfusion therapies and several pending patents involving the use of medical slurries as human coolant devices to create reperfusion cocktails and measurement of respiratory quotient.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
How Do Anogenital Injuries Relate to Rape Accusations?
Violence against women by partners is a serious human rights violation and a significant global public health issue. Overall, an estimated 27% of women aged 15-49 years who have been in a relationship have experienced physical or sexual violence (SV) at the hands of a partner. According to 2019 data from the US Department of Justice, SV in the United States occurs every 73 seconds, with child victims every 9 minutes. Lifetime rates of SV are around 17%-18% for women and 3% for men.
The emergency department remains the most common place where patients who have experienced SV seek comprehensive care, including emergency contraception, prophylaxis against sexually transmitted infections, forensic evidence collection for rape cases, and treatment for injuries.
Physical injuries from SV are not always detectable. Studies report variable percentages, ranging from 30%-80% of patients with traumatic SV injuries. Evidence regarding their severity is conflicting.
The presence or absence of anogenital injuries following SV is a factor that can influence both victims’ willingness to report a crime and the judicial decision-making process regarding accusations and convictions.
Rape Myths
The mythology of rape has been under discussion for more than 50 years, encompassing concerns that rape myths reinforce ideas about what does and does not constitute SV and who is a credible victim.
Rape myths, classically defined in the 1980s, are “prejudiced, stereotyped, and false beliefs about rape, rape victims, and rapists,” designed to “deny or minimize perceived harm or blame victims for their victimization.” The concept remains relevant to contemporary societal beliefs and concerns.
A systematic review analyzed elements of rape myths related to victim characteristics and their impact on credibility and blame attribution in the investigative process. Victims who knew the (male) perpetrator and were deemed provocative based on attire were assigned greater blame. In addition, detail and consistency in victims› statements and the presence of physical evidence and injuries increased credibility. However, in certain situations, rape myths may lead to blaming victims who do not fit the “real victim” stereotype, thus resulting in secondary victimization or revictimization.
Anogenital Injuries
Anogenital injuries can occur in relation to consensual sexual activity (CSA), and SV may not be associated with injuries. Therefore, the presence of anogenital injuries does not “prove” SV nor does their absence exclude rape.
This statement is supported by a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the prevalence of anogenital injuries in women following SV and CSA, using consistent examination techniques for better forensic evidence evaluation in criminal proceedings.
The following two groups were defined for comparison: SV, indicating any nonconsensual sexual contact with the survivor’s anogenital area, and CSA, representing the same type of sexual contact with participants’ consent.
The outcome measure was the presence of anogenital injury (defined as any genital, anal, or perineal injury detected using described techniques in each study). With no universal definition of genital trauma, the result assessment was dichotomous: The presence or absence of injury.
The systematic search yielded 1401 results, and 10 cohort studies published from 1997 to 2022 met the inclusion criteria. The study participants were 3165 women, with 59% (1874/3165) surviving SV.
Anogenital injuries were found in 48% of women who experienced SV (901/1874) and in 31% of those with CSA (394/1291). Anogenital injuries were significantly more likely in women who had experienced SV, compared with those with CSA (risk ratio, 1.59; P < .001). However, both groups had cases where anogenital injuries were either detected or not.
Some SV survivors had no identified anogenital injuries, and women examined after CSA had detectable anogenital injuries. Subgroup analysis for high-quality studies showed no significant differences between groups. These data support the hypothesis that the presence of anogenital injuries does not prove SV, and the absence of injuries does not disprove it.
Point for Practice
Numerous myths reinforce cultural attitudes toward reporting SV. One myth suggests that physical violence, and thus injuries, are inevitable accompaniments to rape. If the victim does not react physically, it might be argued that it was not really rape, or without physical trauma, one might be less inclined to believe that a rape occurred.
Physicians and healthcare professionals involved in the care and support of SV survivors must explicitly reassure them that the lack of anogenital injury evidence does not diminish the credibility of their account.
This article was translated from Univadis Italy, which is part of the Medscape Professional Network. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Violence against women by partners is a serious human rights violation and a significant global public health issue. Overall, an estimated 27% of women aged 15-49 years who have been in a relationship have experienced physical or sexual violence (SV) at the hands of a partner. According to 2019 data from the US Department of Justice, SV in the United States occurs every 73 seconds, with child victims every 9 minutes. Lifetime rates of SV are around 17%-18% for women and 3% for men.
The emergency department remains the most common place where patients who have experienced SV seek comprehensive care, including emergency contraception, prophylaxis against sexually transmitted infections, forensic evidence collection for rape cases, and treatment for injuries.
Physical injuries from SV are not always detectable. Studies report variable percentages, ranging from 30%-80% of patients with traumatic SV injuries. Evidence regarding their severity is conflicting.
The presence or absence of anogenital injuries following SV is a factor that can influence both victims’ willingness to report a crime and the judicial decision-making process regarding accusations and convictions.
Rape Myths
The mythology of rape has been under discussion for more than 50 years, encompassing concerns that rape myths reinforce ideas about what does and does not constitute SV and who is a credible victim.
Rape myths, classically defined in the 1980s, are “prejudiced, stereotyped, and false beliefs about rape, rape victims, and rapists,” designed to “deny or minimize perceived harm or blame victims for their victimization.” The concept remains relevant to contemporary societal beliefs and concerns.
A systematic review analyzed elements of rape myths related to victim characteristics and their impact on credibility and blame attribution in the investigative process. Victims who knew the (male) perpetrator and were deemed provocative based on attire were assigned greater blame. In addition, detail and consistency in victims› statements and the presence of physical evidence and injuries increased credibility. However, in certain situations, rape myths may lead to blaming victims who do not fit the “real victim” stereotype, thus resulting in secondary victimization or revictimization.
Anogenital Injuries
Anogenital injuries can occur in relation to consensual sexual activity (CSA), and SV may not be associated with injuries. Therefore, the presence of anogenital injuries does not “prove” SV nor does their absence exclude rape.
This statement is supported by a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the prevalence of anogenital injuries in women following SV and CSA, using consistent examination techniques for better forensic evidence evaluation in criminal proceedings.
The following two groups were defined for comparison: SV, indicating any nonconsensual sexual contact with the survivor’s anogenital area, and CSA, representing the same type of sexual contact with participants’ consent.
The outcome measure was the presence of anogenital injury (defined as any genital, anal, or perineal injury detected using described techniques in each study). With no universal definition of genital trauma, the result assessment was dichotomous: The presence or absence of injury.
The systematic search yielded 1401 results, and 10 cohort studies published from 1997 to 2022 met the inclusion criteria. The study participants were 3165 women, with 59% (1874/3165) surviving SV.
Anogenital injuries were found in 48% of women who experienced SV (901/1874) and in 31% of those with CSA (394/1291). Anogenital injuries were significantly more likely in women who had experienced SV, compared with those with CSA (risk ratio, 1.59; P < .001). However, both groups had cases where anogenital injuries were either detected or not.
Some SV survivors had no identified anogenital injuries, and women examined after CSA had detectable anogenital injuries. Subgroup analysis for high-quality studies showed no significant differences between groups. These data support the hypothesis that the presence of anogenital injuries does not prove SV, and the absence of injuries does not disprove it.
Point for Practice
Numerous myths reinforce cultural attitudes toward reporting SV. One myth suggests that physical violence, and thus injuries, are inevitable accompaniments to rape. If the victim does not react physically, it might be argued that it was not really rape, or without physical trauma, one might be less inclined to believe that a rape occurred.
Physicians and healthcare professionals involved in the care and support of SV survivors must explicitly reassure them that the lack of anogenital injury evidence does not diminish the credibility of their account.
This article was translated from Univadis Italy, which is part of the Medscape Professional Network. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Violence against women by partners is a serious human rights violation and a significant global public health issue. Overall, an estimated 27% of women aged 15-49 years who have been in a relationship have experienced physical or sexual violence (SV) at the hands of a partner. According to 2019 data from the US Department of Justice, SV in the United States occurs every 73 seconds, with child victims every 9 minutes. Lifetime rates of SV are around 17%-18% for women and 3% for men.
The emergency department remains the most common place where patients who have experienced SV seek comprehensive care, including emergency contraception, prophylaxis against sexually transmitted infections, forensic evidence collection for rape cases, and treatment for injuries.
Physical injuries from SV are not always detectable. Studies report variable percentages, ranging from 30%-80% of patients with traumatic SV injuries. Evidence regarding their severity is conflicting.
The presence or absence of anogenital injuries following SV is a factor that can influence both victims’ willingness to report a crime and the judicial decision-making process regarding accusations and convictions.
Rape Myths
The mythology of rape has been under discussion for more than 50 years, encompassing concerns that rape myths reinforce ideas about what does and does not constitute SV and who is a credible victim.
Rape myths, classically defined in the 1980s, are “prejudiced, stereotyped, and false beliefs about rape, rape victims, and rapists,” designed to “deny or minimize perceived harm or blame victims for their victimization.” The concept remains relevant to contemporary societal beliefs and concerns.
A systematic review analyzed elements of rape myths related to victim characteristics and their impact on credibility and blame attribution in the investigative process. Victims who knew the (male) perpetrator and were deemed provocative based on attire were assigned greater blame. In addition, detail and consistency in victims› statements and the presence of physical evidence and injuries increased credibility. However, in certain situations, rape myths may lead to blaming victims who do not fit the “real victim” stereotype, thus resulting in secondary victimization or revictimization.
Anogenital Injuries
Anogenital injuries can occur in relation to consensual sexual activity (CSA), and SV may not be associated with injuries. Therefore, the presence of anogenital injuries does not “prove” SV nor does their absence exclude rape.
This statement is supported by a systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the prevalence of anogenital injuries in women following SV and CSA, using consistent examination techniques for better forensic evidence evaluation in criminal proceedings.
The following two groups were defined for comparison: SV, indicating any nonconsensual sexual contact with the survivor’s anogenital area, and CSA, representing the same type of sexual contact with participants’ consent.
The outcome measure was the presence of anogenital injury (defined as any genital, anal, or perineal injury detected using described techniques in each study). With no universal definition of genital trauma, the result assessment was dichotomous: The presence or absence of injury.
The systematic search yielded 1401 results, and 10 cohort studies published from 1997 to 2022 met the inclusion criteria. The study participants were 3165 women, with 59% (1874/3165) surviving SV.
Anogenital injuries were found in 48% of women who experienced SV (901/1874) and in 31% of those with CSA (394/1291). Anogenital injuries were significantly more likely in women who had experienced SV, compared with those with CSA (risk ratio, 1.59; P < .001). However, both groups had cases where anogenital injuries were either detected or not.
Some SV survivors had no identified anogenital injuries, and women examined after CSA had detectable anogenital injuries. Subgroup analysis for high-quality studies showed no significant differences between groups. These data support the hypothesis that the presence of anogenital injuries does not prove SV, and the absence of injuries does not disprove it.
Point for Practice
Numerous myths reinforce cultural attitudes toward reporting SV. One myth suggests that physical violence, and thus injuries, are inevitable accompaniments to rape. If the victim does not react physically, it might be argued that it was not really rape, or without physical trauma, one might be less inclined to believe that a rape occurred.
Physicians and healthcare professionals involved in the care and support of SV survivors must explicitly reassure them that the lack of anogenital injury evidence does not diminish the credibility of their account.
This article was translated from Univadis Italy, which is part of the Medscape Professional Network. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Review Finds No Short-term MACE, VTE risk with JAK Inhibitors For Dermatoses
, at least in the short term, say the authors of a new meta-analysis published in JAMA Dermatology.
Considering data on over 17,000 patients with different dermatoses from 45 placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials with an average follow up of 16 weeks, they found there was no significant increase in the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) or venous thromboembolism (VTE) in people with dermatoses treated with JAK-STAT inhibitors, compared with placebo.
The I² statistic was 0.00% for both MACE and VTE comparing the two arms, indicating that the results were unlikely to be due to chance. There was no increased risk in MACE between those on placebo and those on JAK-STAT inhibitors, with a risk ratio (RR) of 0.47; or for VTE risk, with an RR of 0.46.
Similar findings were obtained when data were analyzed according to the dermatological condition being treated, mechanism of action of the medication, or whether the medication carried a boxed warning.
These data “suggest inconsistency with established sentiments,” that JAK-STAT inhibitors increase the risk for cardiovascular events, Patrick Ireland, MD, of the University of New South Wales, Randwick, Australia, and coauthors wrote in the article. “This may be owing to the limited time frames in which these rare events could be adequately captured, or the ages of enrolled patients being too young to realize the well established heightened risks of developing MACE and VTE,” they suggested.
However, the findings challenge the notion that the cardiovascular complications of these drugs are the same in all patients; dermatological use may not be associated with the same risks as with use for rheumatologic indications.
Class-Wide Boxed Warning
“JAK-STAT [inhibitors] have had some pretty indemnifying data against their use, with the ORAL [Surveillance] study demonstrating increased all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events, venous thromboembolism, and malignancy,” Dr. Ireland said in an interview.
ORAL Surveillance was an open-label, postmarketing trial conducted in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with tofacitinib or a tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor. The results led the US Food and Drug Administration to require information about the risks of serious heart-related events, cancer, blood clots, and death in a boxed warning for JAK-STAT inhibitors in 2022.
“I think it’s important to recognize that these [ORAL Surveillance participants] are very different patients to the typical dermatological patient being treated with a JAK-STAT [inhibitors], with newer studies demonstrating a much safer profile than initially thought,” Dr. Ireland said.
Examining Risk in Dermatological Conditions
The meta-analysis performed by Dr. Ireland and associates focused specifically on the risk for MACE and VTE in patients being treated for dermatological conditions, and included trials published up until June 2023. Only trials that had included a placebo arm were considered; pooled analyses, long-term extension trial data, post hoc analyses, and pediatric-specific trials were excluded.
Most (25) of the trials were phase 2b or phase 3 trials, 18 were phase 2 to 2b, and two were phase 1 trials. The studies included 12,996 participants, mostly with atopic dermatitis or psoriasis, who were treated with JAK-STAT inhibitors, which included baricitinib (2846 patients), tofacitinib (2470), upadacitinib (2218), abrocitinib (1904), and deucravacitinib (1492), among others. There were 4925 patients on placebo.
Overall, MACE — defined as a combined endpoint of acute myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiovascular mortality, heart failure, and unstable angina, as well as arterial embolism — occurred in 13 of the JAK-STAT inhibitor-treated patients and in four of those on placebo. VTE — defined as deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and any unusual site thrombosis — was reported in eight JAK-STAT inhibitor-treated patients and in one patient on placebo.
The pooled incidence ratios for MACE and VTE were calculated as 0.20 per 100 person exposure years (PEY) for JAK-STAT inhibitor treatment and 0.13 PEY for placebo. The pooled RRs comparing the two treatment groups were a respective 1.13 for MACE and 2.79 for VTE, but neither RR reached statistical significance.
No difference was seen between the treatment arms in terms of treatment emergent adverse events (RR, 1.05), serious adverse events (RR, 0.92), or study discontinuation because of adverse events (RR, 0.94).
Reassuring Results?
Dr. Ireland and coauthors said the finding should help to reassure clinicians that the short-term use of JAK-STAT inhibitors in patients with dermatological conditions with low cardiovascular risk profiles “appears to be both safe and well tolerated.” They cautioned, however, that “clinicians must remain judicious” when using these medications for longer periods and in high-risk patient populations.
This was a pragmatic meta-analysis that provides useful information for dermatologists, Adam Friedman, MD, professor and chair of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington, DC, said in an interview.
“When there are safety concerns, I think that’s where data like this are so important to not just allay the fears of practitioners, but also to arm the practitioner with information for when they discuss a possible treatment with a patient,” said Dr. Friedman, who was not involved in the study.
“What’s unique here is that they’re looking at any possible use of JAK inhibitors for dermatological disease,” so this represents patients that dermatologists would be seeing, he added.
“The limitation here is time, we only can say so much about the safety of the medication with the data that we have,” Dr. Friedman said. Almost 4 months is “a good amount of time” to know about the cardiovascular risks, he said, but added, what happens then? Will the risk increase and will patients need to be switched to another medication?
“There’s no line in the sand,” with regard to using a JAK-STAT inhibitor. “If you look at the label, they’re not meant to be used incrementally,” but as ongoing treatment, while considering the needs of the patient and the relative risks and benefits, he said.
With that in mind, “the open label extension studies for all these [JAK-STAT inhibitors] are really, really important to get a sense of ‘do new signals emerge down the road.’ ”
The meta-analysis received no commercial funding. One author of the work reported personal fees from several pharmaceutical companies which were done outside of analysis. Dr. Friedman has received research funding from or acted as a consultant for several pharmaceutical companies including, Incyte, Pfizer, Eli Lily, and AbbVie.
, at least in the short term, say the authors of a new meta-analysis published in JAMA Dermatology.
Considering data on over 17,000 patients with different dermatoses from 45 placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials with an average follow up of 16 weeks, they found there was no significant increase in the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) or venous thromboembolism (VTE) in people with dermatoses treated with JAK-STAT inhibitors, compared with placebo.
The I² statistic was 0.00% for both MACE and VTE comparing the two arms, indicating that the results were unlikely to be due to chance. There was no increased risk in MACE between those on placebo and those on JAK-STAT inhibitors, with a risk ratio (RR) of 0.47; or for VTE risk, with an RR of 0.46.
Similar findings were obtained when data were analyzed according to the dermatological condition being treated, mechanism of action of the medication, or whether the medication carried a boxed warning.
These data “suggest inconsistency with established sentiments,” that JAK-STAT inhibitors increase the risk for cardiovascular events, Patrick Ireland, MD, of the University of New South Wales, Randwick, Australia, and coauthors wrote in the article. “This may be owing to the limited time frames in which these rare events could be adequately captured, or the ages of enrolled patients being too young to realize the well established heightened risks of developing MACE and VTE,” they suggested.
However, the findings challenge the notion that the cardiovascular complications of these drugs are the same in all patients; dermatological use may not be associated with the same risks as with use for rheumatologic indications.
Class-Wide Boxed Warning
“JAK-STAT [inhibitors] have had some pretty indemnifying data against their use, with the ORAL [Surveillance] study demonstrating increased all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events, venous thromboembolism, and malignancy,” Dr. Ireland said in an interview.
ORAL Surveillance was an open-label, postmarketing trial conducted in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with tofacitinib or a tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor. The results led the US Food and Drug Administration to require information about the risks of serious heart-related events, cancer, blood clots, and death in a boxed warning for JAK-STAT inhibitors in 2022.
“I think it’s important to recognize that these [ORAL Surveillance participants] are very different patients to the typical dermatological patient being treated with a JAK-STAT [inhibitors], with newer studies demonstrating a much safer profile than initially thought,” Dr. Ireland said.
Examining Risk in Dermatological Conditions
The meta-analysis performed by Dr. Ireland and associates focused specifically on the risk for MACE and VTE in patients being treated for dermatological conditions, and included trials published up until June 2023. Only trials that had included a placebo arm were considered; pooled analyses, long-term extension trial data, post hoc analyses, and pediatric-specific trials were excluded.
Most (25) of the trials were phase 2b or phase 3 trials, 18 were phase 2 to 2b, and two were phase 1 trials. The studies included 12,996 participants, mostly with atopic dermatitis or psoriasis, who were treated with JAK-STAT inhibitors, which included baricitinib (2846 patients), tofacitinib (2470), upadacitinib (2218), abrocitinib (1904), and deucravacitinib (1492), among others. There were 4925 patients on placebo.
Overall, MACE — defined as a combined endpoint of acute myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiovascular mortality, heart failure, and unstable angina, as well as arterial embolism — occurred in 13 of the JAK-STAT inhibitor-treated patients and in four of those on placebo. VTE — defined as deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and any unusual site thrombosis — was reported in eight JAK-STAT inhibitor-treated patients and in one patient on placebo.
The pooled incidence ratios for MACE and VTE were calculated as 0.20 per 100 person exposure years (PEY) for JAK-STAT inhibitor treatment and 0.13 PEY for placebo. The pooled RRs comparing the two treatment groups were a respective 1.13 for MACE and 2.79 for VTE, but neither RR reached statistical significance.
No difference was seen between the treatment arms in terms of treatment emergent adverse events (RR, 1.05), serious adverse events (RR, 0.92), or study discontinuation because of adverse events (RR, 0.94).
Reassuring Results?
Dr. Ireland and coauthors said the finding should help to reassure clinicians that the short-term use of JAK-STAT inhibitors in patients with dermatological conditions with low cardiovascular risk profiles “appears to be both safe and well tolerated.” They cautioned, however, that “clinicians must remain judicious” when using these medications for longer periods and in high-risk patient populations.
This was a pragmatic meta-analysis that provides useful information for dermatologists, Adam Friedman, MD, professor and chair of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington, DC, said in an interview.
“When there are safety concerns, I think that’s where data like this are so important to not just allay the fears of practitioners, but also to arm the practitioner with information for when they discuss a possible treatment with a patient,” said Dr. Friedman, who was not involved in the study.
“What’s unique here is that they’re looking at any possible use of JAK inhibitors for dermatological disease,” so this represents patients that dermatologists would be seeing, he added.
“The limitation here is time, we only can say so much about the safety of the medication with the data that we have,” Dr. Friedman said. Almost 4 months is “a good amount of time” to know about the cardiovascular risks, he said, but added, what happens then? Will the risk increase and will patients need to be switched to another medication?
“There’s no line in the sand,” with regard to using a JAK-STAT inhibitor. “If you look at the label, they’re not meant to be used incrementally,” but as ongoing treatment, while considering the needs of the patient and the relative risks and benefits, he said.
With that in mind, “the open label extension studies for all these [JAK-STAT inhibitors] are really, really important to get a sense of ‘do new signals emerge down the road.’ ”
The meta-analysis received no commercial funding. One author of the work reported personal fees from several pharmaceutical companies which were done outside of analysis. Dr. Friedman has received research funding from or acted as a consultant for several pharmaceutical companies including, Incyte, Pfizer, Eli Lily, and AbbVie.
, at least in the short term, say the authors of a new meta-analysis published in JAMA Dermatology.
Considering data on over 17,000 patients with different dermatoses from 45 placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials with an average follow up of 16 weeks, they found there was no significant increase in the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) or venous thromboembolism (VTE) in people with dermatoses treated with JAK-STAT inhibitors, compared with placebo.
The I² statistic was 0.00% for both MACE and VTE comparing the two arms, indicating that the results were unlikely to be due to chance. There was no increased risk in MACE between those on placebo and those on JAK-STAT inhibitors, with a risk ratio (RR) of 0.47; or for VTE risk, with an RR of 0.46.
Similar findings were obtained when data were analyzed according to the dermatological condition being treated, mechanism of action of the medication, or whether the medication carried a boxed warning.
These data “suggest inconsistency with established sentiments,” that JAK-STAT inhibitors increase the risk for cardiovascular events, Patrick Ireland, MD, of the University of New South Wales, Randwick, Australia, and coauthors wrote in the article. “This may be owing to the limited time frames in which these rare events could be adequately captured, or the ages of enrolled patients being too young to realize the well established heightened risks of developing MACE and VTE,” they suggested.
However, the findings challenge the notion that the cardiovascular complications of these drugs are the same in all patients; dermatological use may not be associated with the same risks as with use for rheumatologic indications.
Class-Wide Boxed Warning
“JAK-STAT [inhibitors] have had some pretty indemnifying data against their use, with the ORAL [Surveillance] study demonstrating increased all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events, venous thromboembolism, and malignancy,” Dr. Ireland said in an interview.
ORAL Surveillance was an open-label, postmarketing trial conducted in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with tofacitinib or a tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor. The results led the US Food and Drug Administration to require information about the risks of serious heart-related events, cancer, blood clots, and death in a boxed warning for JAK-STAT inhibitors in 2022.
“I think it’s important to recognize that these [ORAL Surveillance participants] are very different patients to the typical dermatological patient being treated with a JAK-STAT [inhibitors], with newer studies demonstrating a much safer profile than initially thought,” Dr. Ireland said.
Examining Risk in Dermatological Conditions
The meta-analysis performed by Dr. Ireland and associates focused specifically on the risk for MACE and VTE in patients being treated for dermatological conditions, and included trials published up until June 2023. Only trials that had included a placebo arm were considered; pooled analyses, long-term extension trial data, post hoc analyses, and pediatric-specific trials were excluded.
Most (25) of the trials were phase 2b or phase 3 trials, 18 were phase 2 to 2b, and two were phase 1 trials. The studies included 12,996 participants, mostly with atopic dermatitis or psoriasis, who were treated with JAK-STAT inhibitors, which included baricitinib (2846 patients), tofacitinib (2470), upadacitinib (2218), abrocitinib (1904), and deucravacitinib (1492), among others. There were 4925 patients on placebo.
Overall, MACE — defined as a combined endpoint of acute myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiovascular mortality, heart failure, and unstable angina, as well as arterial embolism — occurred in 13 of the JAK-STAT inhibitor-treated patients and in four of those on placebo. VTE — defined as deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, and any unusual site thrombosis — was reported in eight JAK-STAT inhibitor-treated patients and in one patient on placebo.
The pooled incidence ratios for MACE and VTE were calculated as 0.20 per 100 person exposure years (PEY) for JAK-STAT inhibitor treatment and 0.13 PEY for placebo. The pooled RRs comparing the two treatment groups were a respective 1.13 for MACE and 2.79 for VTE, but neither RR reached statistical significance.
No difference was seen between the treatment arms in terms of treatment emergent adverse events (RR, 1.05), serious adverse events (RR, 0.92), or study discontinuation because of adverse events (RR, 0.94).
Reassuring Results?
Dr. Ireland and coauthors said the finding should help to reassure clinicians that the short-term use of JAK-STAT inhibitors in patients with dermatological conditions with low cardiovascular risk profiles “appears to be both safe and well tolerated.” They cautioned, however, that “clinicians must remain judicious” when using these medications for longer periods and in high-risk patient populations.
This was a pragmatic meta-analysis that provides useful information for dermatologists, Adam Friedman, MD, professor and chair of dermatology at George Washington University, Washington, DC, said in an interview.
“When there are safety concerns, I think that’s where data like this are so important to not just allay the fears of practitioners, but also to arm the practitioner with information for when they discuss a possible treatment with a patient,” said Dr. Friedman, who was not involved in the study.
“What’s unique here is that they’re looking at any possible use of JAK inhibitors for dermatological disease,” so this represents patients that dermatologists would be seeing, he added.
“The limitation here is time, we only can say so much about the safety of the medication with the data that we have,” Dr. Friedman said. Almost 4 months is “a good amount of time” to know about the cardiovascular risks, he said, but added, what happens then? Will the risk increase and will patients need to be switched to another medication?
“There’s no line in the sand,” with regard to using a JAK-STAT inhibitor. “If you look at the label, they’re not meant to be used incrementally,” but as ongoing treatment, while considering the needs of the patient and the relative risks and benefits, he said.
With that in mind, “the open label extension studies for all these [JAK-STAT inhibitors] are really, really important to get a sense of ‘do new signals emerge down the road.’ ”
The meta-analysis received no commercial funding. One author of the work reported personal fees from several pharmaceutical companies which were done outside of analysis. Dr. Friedman has received research funding from or acted as a consultant for several pharmaceutical companies including, Incyte, Pfizer, Eli Lily, and AbbVie.
FROM JAMA DERMATOLOGY
Top US Oncology Regulator Seeks Changes in Drug Studies
Richard Pazdur, MD, who leads the cancer division at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), said there’s a need to simplify the paperwork involved in clinical trials. Before joining the FDA in 1999, Dr. Pazdur participated in and published cancer research. He says the informed consent forms used for studies have grown too elaborate over the years, such that they can intimidate even experts.
“When I read informed consents now in clinical trials, folks, it gives me a headache. Okay, I can’t follow them,” Dr. Pazdur said.
Dr. Pazdur said informed consent forms can be “mind-boggling” these days.
“They’re so damn complicated with so many damn questions being answered,” he said. “So our point is what’s the essential question that you need answered and what’s the quickest way of answering that question with the least amount of data that can be collected?”
Dr. Pazdur made these comments during a joint meeting of the FDA and the European Medicines Agency (EMA).
The meeting was a broad discussion about how to build on the successes seen in treatment of blood cancers in the past two decades. No formal recommendations were introduced or considered at the meeting. Instead, the meeting served as a chance for oncologists and patients to discuss ways to more quickly and efficiently address the key questions in drug research: Do medicines deliver a significant benefit to patients?
Dr. Pazdur also said at the meeting that there needs to be a way to attract more people to enroll in clinical trials.
“When I started in oncology, it was about 5%. When I’m sitting here now, 40 years later, it’s 5%. Basically it hasn’t moved,” he said at the discussion, held on February 1.
Ellin Berman, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, spoke at the meeting about the changes she has witnessed in her career in oncology. Until 2001, there were limited drug options, and physicians tried to get patients to transplant teams as possible. Then the FDA in 2001 approved imatinib to treat patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) that has the Philadelphia chromosome. That set the stage, Dr. Berman said, for a sea change in treatment of CML.
“The fellows now have no idea what it is like to talk to a CML patient about transplant and the question is which among the treasures we have of drugs do we start people on? And that’s always a conversation,” Dr. Berman said.
She noted that advances in treatment have also let some female patients get pregnant and have children.
“We have at least half a dozen women who bring their kids to clinic. And boy, if that doesn’t bring tears to our eyes, our collective eyes, I don’t know what does,” she said.
Dr. Pazdur also recalled his experience treating patients in the 1970s and 1980s for cancers for which “you had nothing so to speak” in terms of effective treatment.
“So then ask yourself the question, what would their stories be now?” with the many options available, Dr. Pazdur said.
Seeking clinician feedback
To try to improve the development and testing of cancer drugs, the FDA is seeking to get more feedback from clinicians about which questions trials should address, Dr. Pazdur said.
The agency is considering a way to poll clinicians on what their most crucial questions are about the medicines, he said. Better design of trial questions might serve to improve enrollment in studies.
“What we’re thinking of doing is taking the common disease areas and asking clinicians what are the five basic questions that you want answered in the next 5 years,” he said.
He cited PD-1 drugs as a possible example of a class where regulators could consider new approaches. There could be a discussion about the safety data collection for this class of drugs, which has been used by millions of patients.
Dr. Pazdur said he has been discussing these kinds of themes with his European and Japanese counterparts, who also are interested in simplifying clinical trials.
The goal is to have trials better represent real-world experiences rather than “artificial” ones created when patients must meet extensive eligibility requirements. Improved use of emerging technologies could aid in the needed streamlining, Dr. Pazdur said.
“As an oncology community, we have made our lives somewhat too complicated and need to draw back and ask the basic questions,” Dr. Pazdur said.
Richard Pazdur, MD, who leads the cancer division at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), said there’s a need to simplify the paperwork involved in clinical trials. Before joining the FDA in 1999, Dr. Pazdur participated in and published cancer research. He says the informed consent forms used for studies have grown too elaborate over the years, such that they can intimidate even experts.
“When I read informed consents now in clinical trials, folks, it gives me a headache. Okay, I can’t follow them,” Dr. Pazdur said.
Dr. Pazdur said informed consent forms can be “mind-boggling” these days.
“They’re so damn complicated with so many damn questions being answered,” he said. “So our point is what’s the essential question that you need answered and what’s the quickest way of answering that question with the least amount of data that can be collected?”
Dr. Pazdur made these comments during a joint meeting of the FDA and the European Medicines Agency (EMA).
The meeting was a broad discussion about how to build on the successes seen in treatment of blood cancers in the past two decades. No formal recommendations were introduced or considered at the meeting. Instead, the meeting served as a chance for oncologists and patients to discuss ways to more quickly and efficiently address the key questions in drug research: Do medicines deliver a significant benefit to patients?
Dr. Pazdur also said at the meeting that there needs to be a way to attract more people to enroll in clinical trials.
“When I started in oncology, it was about 5%. When I’m sitting here now, 40 years later, it’s 5%. Basically it hasn’t moved,” he said at the discussion, held on February 1.
Ellin Berman, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, spoke at the meeting about the changes she has witnessed in her career in oncology. Until 2001, there were limited drug options, and physicians tried to get patients to transplant teams as possible. Then the FDA in 2001 approved imatinib to treat patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) that has the Philadelphia chromosome. That set the stage, Dr. Berman said, for a sea change in treatment of CML.
“The fellows now have no idea what it is like to talk to a CML patient about transplant and the question is which among the treasures we have of drugs do we start people on? And that’s always a conversation,” Dr. Berman said.
She noted that advances in treatment have also let some female patients get pregnant and have children.
“We have at least half a dozen women who bring their kids to clinic. And boy, if that doesn’t bring tears to our eyes, our collective eyes, I don’t know what does,” she said.
Dr. Pazdur also recalled his experience treating patients in the 1970s and 1980s for cancers for which “you had nothing so to speak” in terms of effective treatment.
“So then ask yourself the question, what would their stories be now?” with the many options available, Dr. Pazdur said.
Seeking clinician feedback
To try to improve the development and testing of cancer drugs, the FDA is seeking to get more feedback from clinicians about which questions trials should address, Dr. Pazdur said.
The agency is considering a way to poll clinicians on what their most crucial questions are about the medicines, he said. Better design of trial questions might serve to improve enrollment in studies.
“What we’re thinking of doing is taking the common disease areas and asking clinicians what are the five basic questions that you want answered in the next 5 years,” he said.
He cited PD-1 drugs as a possible example of a class where regulators could consider new approaches. There could be a discussion about the safety data collection for this class of drugs, which has been used by millions of patients.
Dr. Pazdur said he has been discussing these kinds of themes with his European and Japanese counterparts, who also are interested in simplifying clinical trials.
The goal is to have trials better represent real-world experiences rather than “artificial” ones created when patients must meet extensive eligibility requirements. Improved use of emerging technologies could aid in the needed streamlining, Dr. Pazdur said.
“As an oncology community, we have made our lives somewhat too complicated and need to draw back and ask the basic questions,” Dr. Pazdur said.
Richard Pazdur, MD, who leads the cancer division at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), said there’s a need to simplify the paperwork involved in clinical trials. Before joining the FDA in 1999, Dr. Pazdur participated in and published cancer research. He says the informed consent forms used for studies have grown too elaborate over the years, such that they can intimidate even experts.
“When I read informed consents now in clinical trials, folks, it gives me a headache. Okay, I can’t follow them,” Dr. Pazdur said.
Dr. Pazdur said informed consent forms can be “mind-boggling” these days.
“They’re so damn complicated with so many damn questions being answered,” he said. “So our point is what’s the essential question that you need answered and what’s the quickest way of answering that question with the least amount of data that can be collected?”
Dr. Pazdur made these comments during a joint meeting of the FDA and the European Medicines Agency (EMA).
The meeting was a broad discussion about how to build on the successes seen in treatment of blood cancers in the past two decades. No formal recommendations were introduced or considered at the meeting. Instead, the meeting served as a chance for oncologists and patients to discuss ways to more quickly and efficiently address the key questions in drug research: Do medicines deliver a significant benefit to patients?
Dr. Pazdur also said at the meeting that there needs to be a way to attract more people to enroll in clinical trials.
“When I started in oncology, it was about 5%. When I’m sitting here now, 40 years later, it’s 5%. Basically it hasn’t moved,” he said at the discussion, held on February 1.
Ellin Berman, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, spoke at the meeting about the changes she has witnessed in her career in oncology. Until 2001, there were limited drug options, and physicians tried to get patients to transplant teams as possible. Then the FDA in 2001 approved imatinib to treat patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) that has the Philadelphia chromosome. That set the stage, Dr. Berman said, for a sea change in treatment of CML.
“The fellows now have no idea what it is like to talk to a CML patient about transplant and the question is which among the treasures we have of drugs do we start people on? And that’s always a conversation,” Dr. Berman said.
She noted that advances in treatment have also let some female patients get pregnant and have children.
“We have at least half a dozen women who bring their kids to clinic. And boy, if that doesn’t bring tears to our eyes, our collective eyes, I don’t know what does,” she said.
Dr. Pazdur also recalled his experience treating patients in the 1970s and 1980s for cancers for which “you had nothing so to speak” in terms of effective treatment.
“So then ask yourself the question, what would their stories be now?” with the many options available, Dr. Pazdur said.
Seeking clinician feedback
To try to improve the development and testing of cancer drugs, the FDA is seeking to get more feedback from clinicians about which questions trials should address, Dr. Pazdur said.
The agency is considering a way to poll clinicians on what their most crucial questions are about the medicines, he said. Better design of trial questions might serve to improve enrollment in studies.
“What we’re thinking of doing is taking the common disease areas and asking clinicians what are the five basic questions that you want answered in the next 5 years,” he said.
He cited PD-1 drugs as a possible example of a class where regulators could consider new approaches. There could be a discussion about the safety data collection for this class of drugs, which has been used by millions of patients.
Dr. Pazdur said he has been discussing these kinds of themes with his European and Japanese counterparts, who also are interested in simplifying clinical trials.
The goal is to have trials better represent real-world experiences rather than “artificial” ones created when patients must meet extensive eligibility requirements. Improved use of emerging technologies could aid in the needed streamlining, Dr. Pazdur said.
“As an oncology community, we have made our lives somewhat too complicated and need to draw back and ask the basic questions,” Dr. Pazdur said.
Success with Sirolimus in Treating Skin Sarcoidosis Could Spur Studies in Other Organs
Sirolimus may be an effective treatment for patients with persistent cutaneous sarcoidosis.
In a small clinical trial, 7 of 10 patients treated with sirolimus via oral solution had improvements in skin lesions after 4 months, which was sustained for up to 2 years after the study concluded.
The results suggested that mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibition is a potential therapeutic avenue for sarcoidosis, which the authors said should be explored in larger clinical trials.
In the past decade, there has been a growing amount of evidence suggesting mTOR’s role in sarcoidosis. In 2017, researchers showed that activation of mTOR in macrophages could cause progressive sarcoidosis in mice. In additional studies, high levels of mTOR activity were detected in human sarcoidosis granulomas in various organs, including the skin, lung, and heart.
Three case reports also documented using the mTOR inhibitor sirolimus to effectively treat systemic sarcoidosis.
“Although all reports observed improvement of the disease following the treatment, no clinical trial investigating the efficacy and safety of sirolimus in patients with sarcoidosis had been published” prior to this study, wrote senior author Georg Stary, MD, of the Medical University of Vienna and the Research Center for Molecular Medicine of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna, Austria, and colleagues.
The findings were published in the The Lancet Rheumatology.
For the study, researchers recruited 16 individuals with persistent and glucocorticoid-refractory cutaneous sarcoidosis between September 2019 and June 2021. A total of 14 participants were randomly assigned to the topical phase of the study, whereas two immediately received systemic treatment. All treatment was conducted at Vienna General Hospital.
In the placebo-controlled, double-blinded topical treatment arm, patients received either 0.1% topical sirolimus in Vaseline or Vaseline alone (placebo) twice daily for 2 months. After a 1-month washout period, participants were switched to the alternate treatment arm for an additional 2 months.
Following this topical phase and an additional 1-month washout period, all remaining participants received systemic sirolimus via a 1-mg/mL solution, starting with a 6-mg loading dose and continuing with 2 mg once daily for 4 months. The primary outcome was change in Cutaneous Sarcoidosis Activity and Morphology Index (CSAMI) from baseline, with decrease of more than five points representing a response to treatment.
A total of 10 patients completed the trial.
There was no change in CSAMI in either topical treatment groups. In the systemic group, 70% of patients had clinical improvement in skin lesions, with three responders in this group having complete resolution of skin lesions. The median change in CSAMI was −7.0 points (P = .018).
This improvement persisted for 2 months following study conclusion, with more pronounced improvement from baseline after 2 years of drug-free follow-up (−11.5 points).
There were no serious adverse events reported during the study, but 42% of patients treated with systemic sirolimus reported mild skin reactions, such as acne and eczema. Other related adverse events were hypertriglyceridemia (17%), hyperglycemia (17%), and proteinuria (8%).
Compared with clinical outcomes with tofacitinib and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, “the strength of our study lies in the sustained treatment effect after drug withdrawal among all responders. This prolonged effect has not yet been explored with tofacitinib, whereas with TNF inhibitors disease relapse was seen in more than 50% of patients at 3-8 months,” the authors wrote.
The researchers also analyzed participants’ skin biopsies to gain a better understanding of how mTOR inhibition affected granuloma structures. They found that, at baseline, mTOR activity was significantly lower in the fibroblasts of treatment nonresponders than in responders. They speculated that lower expression of mTOR could make these granuloma-associated cells resistant to systemic sirolimus.
These promising findings combine “clinical response with a molecular analysis,” Avrom Caplan, MD, co-director of the Sarcoidosis Program at NYU Langone in New York City, told this news organization. He was not involved with the research. Adding molecular information to clinical outcome data “helps solidify that [the mTOR] pathway has relevance in the sarcoid granuloma formation.”
The study had a limited sample size — a challenge for many clinical trials of rare diseases, Dr. Caplan said. Larger clinical trials are necessary to explore mTOR inhibition in sarcoidosis, both he and the authors agreed. A larger trial could also include greater heterogeneity of patients, including varied sarcoid presentation and demographics, Dr. Caplan noted. In this study, all but one participants were White individuals, and 63% of participants were female.
Larger studies could also address important questions on ideal length of therapy, dosing, and where this therapy “would fall within the therapeutic step ladder,” Dr. Caplan continued.
Whether mTOR inhibition could be effective at treating individuals with sarcoidosis in other organs beyond the skin is also unknown.
“If the pathogenesis of sarcoid granuloma formation does include mTOR upregulation, which they are showing here…then you could hypothesize that, yes, using this therapy could benefit other organs,” he said. “But that has to be investigated in larger trials.”
The study was funded in part by a Vienna Science and Technology Fund project. Several authors report receiving grants from the Austrian Science Fund and one from the Ann Theodore Foundation Breakthrough Sarcoidosis Initiative. Dr. Caplan reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com .
Sirolimus may be an effective treatment for patients with persistent cutaneous sarcoidosis.
In a small clinical trial, 7 of 10 patients treated with sirolimus via oral solution had improvements in skin lesions after 4 months, which was sustained for up to 2 years after the study concluded.
The results suggested that mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibition is a potential therapeutic avenue for sarcoidosis, which the authors said should be explored in larger clinical trials.
In the past decade, there has been a growing amount of evidence suggesting mTOR’s role in sarcoidosis. In 2017, researchers showed that activation of mTOR in macrophages could cause progressive sarcoidosis in mice. In additional studies, high levels of mTOR activity were detected in human sarcoidosis granulomas in various organs, including the skin, lung, and heart.
Three case reports also documented using the mTOR inhibitor sirolimus to effectively treat systemic sarcoidosis.
“Although all reports observed improvement of the disease following the treatment, no clinical trial investigating the efficacy and safety of sirolimus in patients with sarcoidosis had been published” prior to this study, wrote senior author Georg Stary, MD, of the Medical University of Vienna and the Research Center for Molecular Medicine of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna, Austria, and colleagues.
The findings were published in the The Lancet Rheumatology.
For the study, researchers recruited 16 individuals with persistent and glucocorticoid-refractory cutaneous sarcoidosis between September 2019 and June 2021. A total of 14 participants were randomly assigned to the topical phase of the study, whereas two immediately received systemic treatment. All treatment was conducted at Vienna General Hospital.
In the placebo-controlled, double-blinded topical treatment arm, patients received either 0.1% topical sirolimus in Vaseline or Vaseline alone (placebo) twice daily for 2 months. After a 1-month washout period, participants were switched to the alternate treatment arm for an additional 2 months.
Following this topical phase and an additional 1-month washout period, all remaining participants received systemic sirolimus via a 1-mg/mL solution, starting with a 6-mg loading dose and continuing with 2 mg once daily for 4 months. The primary outcome was change in Cutaneous Sarcoidosis Activity and Morphology Index (CSAMI) from baseline, with decrease of more than five points representing a response to treatment.
A total of 10 patients completed the trial.
There was no change in CSAMI in either topical treatment groups. In the systemic group, 70% of patients had clinical improvement in skin lesions, with three responders in this group having complete resolution of skin lesions. The median change in CSAMI was −7.0 points (P = .018).
This improvement persisted for 2 months following study conclusion, with more pronounced improvement from baseline after 2 years of drug-free follow-up (−11.5 points).
There were no serious adverse events reported during the study, but 42% of patients treated with systemic sirolimus reported mild skin reactions, such as acne and eczema. Other related adverse events were hypertriglyceridemia (17%), hyperglycemia (17%), and proteinuria (8%).
Compared with clinical outcomes with tofacitinib and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, “the strength of our study lies in the sustained treatment effect after drug withdrawal among all responders. This prolonged effect has not yet been explored with tofacitinib, whereas with TNF inhibitors disease relapse was seen in more than 50% of patients at 3-8 months,” the authors wrote.
The researchers also analyzed participants’ skin biopsies to gain a better understanding of how mTOR inhibition affected granuloma structures. They found that, at baseline, mTOR activity was significantly lower in the fibroblasts of treatment nonresponders than in responders. They speculated that lower expression of mTOR could make these granuloma-associated cells resistant to systemic sirolimus.
These promising findings combine “clinical response with a molecular analysis,” Avrom Caplan, MD, co-director of the Sarcoidosis Program at NYU Langone in New York City, told this news organization. He was not involved with the research. Adding molecular information to clinical outcome data “helps solidify that [the mTOR] pathway has relevance in the sarcoid granuloma formation.”
The study had a limited sample size — a challenge for many clinical trials of rare diseases, Dr. Caplan said. Larger clinical trials are necessary to explore mTOR inhibition in sarcoidosis, both he and the authors agreed. A larger trial could also include greater heterogeneity of patients, including varied sarcoid presentation and demographics, Dr. Caplan noted. In this study, all but one participants were White individuals, and 63% of participants were female.
Larger studies could also address important questions on ideal length of therapy, dosing, and where this therapy “would fall within the therapeutic step ladder,” Dr. Caplan continued.
Whether mTOR inhibition could be effective at treating individuals with sarcoidosis in other organs beyond the skin is also unknown.
“If the pathogenesis of sarcoid granuloma formation does include mTOR upregulation, which they are showing here…then you could hypothesize that, yes, using this therapy could benefit other organs,” he said. “But that has to be investigated in larger trials.”
The study was funded in part by a Vienna Science and Technology Fund project. Several authors report receiving grants from the Austrian Science Fund and one from the Ann Theodore Foundation Breakthrough Sarcoidosis Initiative. Dr. Caplan reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com .
Sirolimus may be an effective treatment for patients with persistent cutaneous sarcoidosis.
In a small clinical trial, 7 of 10 patients treated with sirolimus via oral solution had improvements in skin lesions after 4 months, which was sustained for up to 2 years after the study concluded.
The results suggested that mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibition is a potential therapeutic avenue for sarcoidosis, which the authors said should be explored in larger clinical trials.
In the past decade, there has been a growing amount of evidence suggesting mTOR’s role in sarcoidosis. In 2017, researchers showed that activation of mTOR in macrophages could cause progressive sarcoidosis in mice. In additional studies, high levels of mTOR activity were detected in human sarcoidosis granulomas in various organs, including the skin, lung, and heart.
Three case reports also documented using the mTOR inhibitor sirolimus to effectively treat systemic sarcoidosis.
“Although all reports observed improvement of the disease following the treatment, no clinical trial investigating the efficacy and safety of sirolimus in patients with sarcoidosis had been published” prior to this study, wrote senior author Georg Stary, MD, of the Medical University of Vienna and the Research Center for Molecular Medicine of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna, Austria, and colleagues.
The findings were published in the The Lancet Rheumatology.
For the study, researchers recruited 16 individuals with persistent and glucocorticoid-refractory cutaneous sarcoidosis between September 2019 and June 2021. A total of 14 participants were randomly assigned to the topical phase of the study, whereas two immediately received systemic treatment. All treatment was conducted at Vienna General Hospital.
In the placebo-controlled, double-blinded topical treatment arm, patients received either 0.1% topical sirolimus in Vaseline or Vaseline alone (placebo) twice daily for 2 months. After a 1-month washout period, participants were switched to the alternate treatment arm for an additional 2 months.
Following this topical phase and an additional 1-month washout period, all remaining participants received systemic sirolimus via a 1-mg/mL solution, starting with a 6-mg loading dose and continuing with 2 mg once daily for 4 months. The primary outcome was change in Cutaneous Sarcoidosis Activity and Morphology Index (CSAMI) from baseline, with decrease of more than five points representing a response to treatment.
A total of 10 patients completed the trial.
There was no change in CSAMI in either topical treatment groups. In the systemic group, 70% of patients had clinical improvement in skin lesions, with three responders in this group having complete resolution of skin lesions. The median change in CSAMI was −7.0 points (P = .018).
This improvement persisted for 2 months following study conclusion, with more pronounced improvement from baseline after 2 years of drug-free follow-up (−11.5 points).
There were no serious adverse events reported during the study, but 42% of patients treated with systemic sirolimus reported mild skin reactions, such as acne and eczema. Other related adverse events were hypertriglyceridemia (17%), hyperglycemia (17%), and proteinuria (8%).
Compared with clinical outcomes with tofacitinib and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, “the strength of our study lies in the sustained treatment effect after drug withdrawal among all responders. This prolonged effect has not yet been explored with tofacitinib, whereas with TNF inhibitors disease relapse was seen in more than 50% of patients at 3-8 months,” the authors wrote.
The researchers also analyzed participants’ skin biopsies to gain a better understanding of how mTOR inhibition affected granuloma structures. They found that, at baseline, mTOR activity was significantly lower in the fibroblasts of treatment nonresponders than in responders. They speculated that lower expression of mTOR could make these granuloma-associated cells resistant to systemic sirolimus.
These promising findings combine “clinical response with a molecular analysis,” Avrom Caplan, MD, co-director of the Sarcoidosis Program at NYU Langone in New York City, told this news organization. He was not involved with the research. Adding molecular information to clinical outcome data “helps solidify that [the mTOR] pathway has relevance in the sarcoid granuloma formation.”
The study had a limited sample size — a challenge for many clinical trials of rare diseases, Dr. Caplan said. Larger clinical trials are necessary to explore mTOR inhibition in sarcoidosis, both he and the authors agreed. A larger trial could also include greater heterogeneity of patients, including varied sarcoid presentation and demographics, Dr. Caplan noted. In this study, all but one participants were White individuals, and 63% of participants were female.
Larger studies could also address important questions on ideal length of therapy, dosing, and where this therapy “would fall within the therapeutic step ladder,” Dr. Caplan continued.
Whether mTOR inhibition could be effective at treating individuals with sarcoidosis in other organs beyond the skin is also unknown.
“If the pathogenesis of sarcoid granuloma formation does include mTOR upregulation, which they are showing here…then you could hypothesize that, yes, using this therapy could benefit other organs,” he said. “But that has to be investigated in larger trials.”
The study was funded in part by a Vienna Science and Technology Fund project. Several authors report receiving grants from the Austrian Science Fund and one from the Ann Theodore Foundation Breakthrough Sarcoidosis Initiative. Dr. Caplan reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com .
FROM THE LANCET RHEUMATOLOGY
CHIP Tied to HFpEF and ASCVD: What’s the Link?
A new study added heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) to the growing list of cardiovascular conditions linked to clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP), which already includes atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).
But what exactly is CHIP, and what is its potential value in CVD risk and management?
CHIP is estimated to affect about 10% of people aged 70 years and older.
First described as a risk factor for hematologic, particularly myeloid, malignant neoplasms, CHIP has recently emerged as a novel CVD risk factor.
CHIP gives rise to proinflammatory immune cells, which can exacerbate ASCVD and may induce or accelerate HF.
“The association between CHIP and HFpEF may be particularly relevant, given that the prevalence of HFpEF is rising due to the progressive aging of the population,” said José J. Fuster, PhD, coordinator for the program on novel mechanisms of atherosclerosis, Spanish National Center for Cardiovascular Research, Madrid.
Yet previous studies examining CHIP and HF have either focused on overall HF without distinguishing HF subtypes of preserved vs reduced ejection fraction, or have examined its prognostic significance in the setting of established HF, rather than the development of future HF.
To help fill the gap, Boston-based researchers recently evaluated associations of CHIP and the two most common gene-specific CHIP subtypes (TET2 and DNMT3A CHIP) with incident HFpEF and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).
In two racially diverse cohorts with a total of 8090 adults, TET2 CHIP was independently associated with > twofold higher risk of incident HFpEF. By contrast, there were no significant associations of CHIP with incident HFrEF.
“Our study’s fundings suggest that previously described associations between CHIP and future development of heart failure may be driven primarily by HFpEF,” said Michael Honigberg, MD, with the Cardiovascular Research Center and Center for Genomic Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
In addition, the “clearest signal for an association with HF was observed for TET2 CHIP, the second-most common subtype of CHIP in the population. This finding aligns with a recently published study that reported relative enrichment of TET2 CHIP in a small human HFpEF cohort,” Dr. Honigberg said.
Dr. Fuster said the connection between CHIP and aging “enhances the potential clinical relevance of this study, as CHIP is frequent in elderly individuals and, therefore, may contribute to the pathophysiology of HFpEF in a high proportion of patients.”
He cautioned, however, that the findings need to be validated in other studies.
“In addition, there is a growing recognition that the effects of CHIP are heterogeneous, as mutations in different genes have different effects on cardiovascular and act through different mechanisms. Additional studies will be needed to dissect gene-specific effects in HFpEF. It will also be important to explore whether CHIP influences the clinical progression of the disease,” Dr. Fuster said.
Targeted Treatment?
Dr. Honigberg said the findings may aid in the development of new targeted-treatment strategies for at least the subset of patients with HFpEF.
Based on multiple lines of evidence, the mechanism linking TET2 CHIP to CVD appears to be heightened inflammation, he explained.
For example, in a substudy of the CANTOS trial, patients with atherosclerosis and TET2 CHIP who received canakinumab appeared to derive “outsized benefit” in preventing CV events compared with the overall trial population, Dr. Honigberg said.
“HFpEF is a particularly challenging disease with limited effective therapies. Our findings support the premise that targeted anti-inflammatory therapies may prevent and/or treat HFpEF driven by TET2 CHIP. Of course, this hypothesis will require testing in prospective randomized trials,” Dr. Honigberg said.
“The field of CHIP has developed rapidly, and it is an exciting area of research,” Dr. Fuster added. “However, I personally believe that much work lies ahead before it is ready for prime time in the clinical setting.
“Although the link between CHIP and CVD is solid, we still lack evidence-based interventions to mitigate the elevated CVD risk associated with these mutations. In the absence of effective interventions, the added value of screening for CHIP as a risk factor may be limited,” Dr. Fuster noted.
“For instance, in the setting of HFpEF, we don’t really know whether CHIP mutation carriers may respond favorably to contemporary HF medications or may require new personalized approaches. Additional research and, eventually, clinical trials, are needed,” he added.
Dr. Honigberg has disclosed relationships with Genentech, Miga Health, CRISPR Therapeutics, and Comanche Biopharma. Dr. Fuster has no relevant disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
A new study added heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) to the growing list of cardiovascular conditions linked to clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP), which already includes atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).
But what exactly is CHIP, and what is its potential value in CVD risk and management?
CHIP is estimated to affect about 10% of people aged 70 years and older.
First described as a risk factor for hematologic, particularly myeloid, malignant neoplasms, CHIP has recently emerged as a novel CVD risk factor.
CHIP gives rise to proinflammatory immune cells, which can exacerbate ASCVD and may induce or accelerate HF.
“The association between CHIP and HFpEF may be particularly relevant, given that the prevalence of HFpEF is rising due to the progressive aging of the population,” said José J. Fuster, PhD, coordinator for the program on novel mechanisms of atherosclerosis, Spanish National Center for Cardiovascular Research, Madrid.
Yet previous studies examining CHIP and HF have either focused on overall HF without distinguishing HF subtypes of preserved vs reduced ejection fraction, or have examined its prognostic significance in the setting of established HF, rather than the development of future HF.
To help fill the gap, Boston-based researchers recently evaluated associations of CHIP and the two most common gene-specific CHIP subtypes (TET2 and DNMT3A CHIP) with incident HFpEF and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).
In two racially diverse cohorts with a total of 8090 adults, TET2 CHIP was independently associated with > twofold higher risk of incident HFpEF. By contrast, there were no significant associations of CHIP with incident HFrEF.
“Our study’s fundings suggest that previously described associations between CHIP and future development of heart failure may be driven primarily by HFpEF,” said Michael Honigberg, MD, with the Cardiovascular Research Center and Center for Genomic Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
In addition, the “clearest signal for an association with HF was observed for TET2 CHIP, the second-most common subtype of CHIP in the population. This finding aligns with a recently published study that reported relative enrichment of TET2 CHIP in a small human HFpEF cohort,” Dr. Honigberg said.
Dr. Fuster said the connection between CHIP and aging “enhances the potential clinical relevance of this study, as CHIP is frequent in elderly individuals and, therefore, may contribute to the pathophysiology of HFpEF in a high proportion of patients.”
He cautioned, however, that the findings need to be validated in other studies.
“In addition, there is a growing recognition that the effects of CHIP are heterogeneous, as mutations in different genes have different effects on cardiovascular and act through different mechanisms. Additional studies will be needed to dissect gene-specific effects in HFpEF. It will also be important to explore whether CHIP influences the clinical progression of the disease,” Dr. Fuster said.
Targeted Treatment?
Dr. Honigberg said the findings may aid in the development of new targeted-treatment strategies for at least the subset of patients with HFpEF.
Based on multiple lines of evidence, the mechanism linking TET2 CHIP to CVD appears to be heightened inflammation, he explained.
For example, in a substudy of the CANTOS trial, patients with atherosclerosis and TET2 CHIP who received canakinumab appeared to derive “outsized benefit” in preventing CV events compared with the overall trial population, Dr. Honigberg said.
“HFpEF is a particularly challenging disease with limited effective therapies. Our findings support the premise that targeted anti-inflammatory therapies may prevent and/or treat HFpEF driven by TET2 CHIP. Of course, this hypothesis will require testing in prospective randomized trials,” Dr. Honigberg said.
“The field of CHIP has developed rapidly, and it is an exciting area of research,” Dr. Fuster added. “However, I personally believe that much work lies ahead before it is ready for prime time in the clinical setting.
“Although the link between CHIP and CVD is solid, we still lack evidence-based interventions to mitigate the elevated CVD risk associated with these mutations. In the absence of effective interventions, the added value of screening for CHIP as a risk factor may be limited,” Dr. Fuster noted.
“For instance, in the setting of HFpEF, we don’t really know whether CHIP mutation carriers may respond favorably to contemporary HF medications or may require new personalized approaches. Additional research and, eventually, clinical trials, are needed,” he added.
Dr. Honigberg has disclosed relationships with Genentech, Miga Health, CRISPR Therapeutics, and Comanche Biopharma. Dr. Fuster has no relevant disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
A new study added heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) to the growing list of cardiovascular conditions linked to clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP), which already includes atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).
But what exactly is CHIP, and what is its potential value in CVD risk and management?
CHIP is estimated to affect about 10% of people aged 70 years and older.
First described as a risk factor for hematologic, particularly myeloid, malignant neoplasms, CHIP has recently emerged as a novel CVD risk factor.
CHIP gives rise to proinflammatory immune cells, which can exacerbate ASCVD and may induce or accelerate HF.
“The association between CHIP and HFpEF may be particularly relevant, given that the prevalence of HFpEF is rising due to the progressive aging of the population,” said José J. Fuster, PhD, coordinator for the program on novel mechanisms of atherosclerosis, Spanish National Center for Cardiovascular Research, Madrid.
Yet previous studies examining CHIP and HF have either focused on overall HF without distinguishing HF subtypes of preserved vs reduced ejection fraction, or have examined its prognostic significance in the setting of established HF, rather than the development of future HF.
To help fill the gap, Boston-based researchers recently evaluated associations of CHIP and the two most common gene-specific CHIP subtypes (TET2 and DNMT3A CHIP) with incident HFpEF and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).
In two racially diverse cohorts with a total of 8090 adults, TET2 CHIP was independently associated with > twofold higher risk of incident HFpEF. By contrast, there were no significant associations of CHIP with incident HFrEF.
“Our study’s fundings suggest that previously described associations between CHIP and future development of heart failure may be driven primarily by HFpEF,” said Michael Honigberg, MD, with the Cardiovascular Research Center and Center for Genomic Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
In addition, the “clearest signal for an association with HF was observed for TET2 CHIP, the second-most common subtype of CHIP in the population. This finding aligns with a recently published study that reported relative enrichment of TET2 CHIP in a small human HFpEF cohort,” Dr. Honigberg said.
Dr. Fuster said the connection between CHIP and aging “enhances the potential clinical relevance of this study, as CHIP is frequent in elderly individuals and, therefore, may contribute to the pathophysiology of HFpEF in a high proportion of patients.”
He cautioned, however, that the findings need to be validated in other studies.
“In addition, there is a growing recognition that the effects of CHIP are heterogeneous, as mutations in different genes have different effects on cardiovascular and act through different mechanisms. Additional studies will be needed to dissect gene-specific effects in HFpEF. It will also be important to explore whether CHIP influences the clinical progression of the disease,” Dr. Fuster said.
Targeted Treatment?
Dr. Honigberg said the findings may aid in the development of new targeted-treatment strategies for at least the subset of patients with HFpEF.
Based on multiple lines of evidence, the mechanism linking TET2 CHIP to CVD appears to be heightened inflammation, he explained.
For example, in a substudy of the CANTOS trial, patients with atherosclerosis and TET2 CHIP who received canakinumab appeared to derive “outsized benefit” in preventing CV events compared with the overall trial population, Dr. Honigberg said.
“HFpEF is a particularly challenging disease with limited effective therapies. Our findings support the premise that targeted anti-inflammatory therapies may prevent and/or treat HFpEF driven by TET2 CHIP. Of course, this hypothesis will require testing in prospective randomized trials,” Dr. Honigberg said.
“The field of CHIP has developed rapidly, and it is an exciting area of research,” Dr. Fuster added. “However, I personally believe that much work lies ahead before it is ready for prime time in the clinical setting.
“Although the link between CHIP and CVD is solid, we still lack evidence-based interventions to mitigate the elevated CVD risk associated with these mutations. In the absence of effective interventions, the added value of screening for CHIP as a risk factor may be limited,” Dr. Fuster noted.
“For instance, in the setting of HFpEF, we don’t really know whether CHIP mutation carriers may respond favorably to contemporary HF medications or may require new personalized approaches. Additional research and, eventually, clinical trials, are needed,” he added.
Dr. Honigberg has disclosed relationships with Genentech, Miga Health, CRISPR Therapeutics, and Comanche Biopharma. Dr. Fuster has no relevant disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.