Women's Health

Timely postpartum care for Medicaid enrollees varies considerably, ranging from 17% to 74% among the states, according to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

A national median of 60% of women saw a health care provider within 21-56 days of their delivery, CMS reported in its Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program Scorecard.

“Medicaid is the largest payer for maternity care in the United States. The program has an important role to play in improving maternal and perinatal health outcomes,” the CMS noted.

New Hampshire’s rate of 74% was the highest of any state, just edging out Maryland and Rhode Island, each at 73%. The only other states over 70% were Connecticut and New York, which both reported rates of 71%, scorecard data show.

In Wyoming, the state with the lowest rate, 17% of Medicaid enrollees received timely postpartum care. The other four states with rates below 40% were Oklahoma (22%), Colorado (35%), Iowa (37%), and Missouri (38%), the CMS said after a recent refresh of data in the scorecard.


“The included populations … can vary by state. For example, some states report data on certain populations such as those covered under managed care but not those covered under fee for service. This variation in data and calculation methods can affect measure performance and comparisons between states,” the CMS said.

The scorecard is based on Mathematica analysis of Medicaid and CHIP Program System reports for the 2017 Adult Core Set, and the measurement period was Nov. 6, 2015, to Nov. 5, 2016. Twelve states did not report data on postpartum care to the CMS.

“More and more states are voluntarily reporting their health outcomes in the scorecard, and the new data is leading us into an era of increased transparency and accountability, so that together we can improve the quality of care we give to the vulnerable Americans that depend on this vital program,” CMS Administrator Seema Verma said in a written statement.

[email protected]

Timely postpartum care for Medicaid enrollees varies considerably, ranging from 17% to 74% among the states, according to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

A national median of 60% of women saw a health care provider within 21-56 days of their delivery, CMS reported in its Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program Scorecard.

“Medicaid is the largest payer for maternity care in the United States. The program has an important role to play in improving maternal and perinatal health outcomes,” the CMS noted.

New Hampshire’s rate of 74% was the highest of any state, just edging out Maryland and Rhode Island, each at 73%. The only other states over 70% were Connecticut and New York, which both reported rates of 71%, scorecard data show.

In Wyoming, the state with the lowest rate, 17% of Medicaid enrollees received timely postpartum care. The other four states with rates below 40% were Oklahoma (22%), Colorado (35%), Iowa (37%), and Missouri (38%), the CMS said after a recent refresh of data in the scorecard.


“The included populations … can vary by state. For example, some states report data on certain populations such as those covered under managed care but not those covered under fee for service. This variation in data and calculation methods can affect measure performance and comparisons between states,” the CMS said.

The scorecard is based on Mathematica analysis of Medicaid and CHIP Program System reports for the 2017 Adult Core Set, and the measurement period was Nov. 6, 2015, to Nov. 5, 2016. Twelve states did not report data on postpartum care to the CMS.

“More and more states are voluntarily reporting their health outcomes in the scorecard, and the new data is leading us into an era of increased transparency and accountability, so that together we can improve the quality of care we give to the vulnerable Americans that depend on this vital program,” CMS Administrator Seema Verma said in a written statement.

[email protected]

Timely postpartum care for Medicaid enrollees varies considerably, ranging from 17% to 74% among the states, according to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

A national median of 60% of women saw a health care provider within 21-56 days of their delivery, CMS reported in its Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program Scorecard.

“Medicaid is the largest payer for maternity care in the United States. The program has an important role to play in improving maternal and perinatal health outcomes,” the CMS noted.

New Hampshire’s rate of 74% was the highest of any state, just edging out Maryland and Rhode Island, each at 73%. The only other states over 70% were Connecticut and New York, which both reported rates of 71%, scorecard data show.

In Wyoming, the state with the lowest rate, 17% of Medicaid enrollees received timely postpartum care. The other four states with rates below 40% were Oklahoma (22%), Colorado (35%), Iowa (37%), and Missouri (38%), the CMS said after a recent refresh of data in the scorecard.


“The included populations … can vary by state. For example, some states report data on certain populations such as those covered under managed care but not those covered under fee for service. This variation in data and calculation methods can affect measure performance and comparisons between states,” the CMS said.

The scorecard is based on Mathematica analysis of Medicaid and CHIP Program System reports for the 2017 Adult Core Set, and the measurement period was Nov. 6, 2015, to Nov. 5, 2016. Twelve states did not report data on postpartum care to the CMS.

“More and more states are voluntarily reporting their health outcomes in the scorecard, and the new data is leading us into an era of increased transparency and accountability, so that together we can improve the quality of care we give to the vulnerable Americans that depend on this vital program,” CMS Administrator Seema Verma said in a written statement.

[email protected]

Mental health comorbidities increase the rates of opioid use and mortality among breast cancer survivors on endocrine therapy, based on a retrospective study of more than 10,000 patients in a Medicare-linked database.

Screen for mental health conditions in the early stages of cancer care and lean toward opioid alternatives for pain management, advised lead author Raj Desai, MS, of the University of Florida, Gainesville, and colleagues.

“The complex relationship among breast cancer, mental health problems, and the use of opioids is not well understood, despite the high prevalence of mental health comorbidities like depression and anxiety in breast cancer survivors, and the high rate of opioid use in those on AET [adjuvant endocrine therapy],” the investigators wrote in the Journal of Oncology Practice.

“Therefore, this study aimed to determine whether breast cancer survivors with varying levels of mental health comorbidities, such as depression and anxiety, are more likely to use opioids for AET-related pain,” they added.

The study involved 10,452 breast cancer survivors who first filled an AET prescription from 2006 to 2012 and had follow-up records available for at least 2 years. All patients had a diagnosis of incident, primary, hormone receptor–positive, stage I-III breast cancer. Data were drawn from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–Medicare linked database. Records were evaluated for diagnoses of mental health conditions such as depression and anxiety, opioid use, and survival.

Analysis showed that the most common mental health conditions were depression and anxiety, diagnosed in 554 and 246 women, respectively. Patients with mental health comorbidities were compared with patients who did not have such problems, using both unmatched and matched cohorts. While unmatched comparison for opioid use was not statistically significant, matched comparison showed that survivors with mental health comorbidities were 33% more likely to use opioids than those without mental health comorbidities (95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.68). Similarly, greater adjusted probabilities of opioid use were reported in the mental health comorbidity cohort (72.5% vs. 66.9%; P = .01).

Concerning survival, unmatched comparison revealed a 44% higher risk of death among women with depression and a 32% increase associated with anxiety. Matched comparison showed an even higher increased risk of mortality among women with any mental health comorbidity (49%; P less than .05).

The investigators concluded that opioid use among breast cancer survivors with mental health comorbidities “remains a significant problem.”

“A need exists for collaborative care in the management of mental health comorbidities in women with breast cancer, which could improve symptoms, adherence to treatment, and recovery from these mental conditions,” the investigators wrote. “Mental health treatments also are recommended to be offered in primary care, which not only would be convenient for patients, but also would reduce the stigma associated with treatments for mental health comorbidities and improve the patient-provider relationship.”

The investigators reported financial relationships with Merck.

SOURCE: Desai R et al. J Oncol Pract. 2019 Jul 19. doi: 10.1200/JOP.18.00781.

Mental health comorbidities increase the rates of opioid use and mortality among breast cancer survivors on endocrine therapy, based on a retrospective study of more than 10,000 patients in a Medicare-linked database.

Screen for mental health conditions in the early stages of cancer care and lean toward opioid alternatives for pain management, advised lead author Raj Desai, MS, of the University of Florida, Gainesville, and colleagues.

“The complex relationship among breast cancer, mental health problems, and the use of opioids is not well understood, despite the high prevalence of mental health comorbidities like depression and anxiety in breast cancer survivors, and the high rate of opioid use in those on AET [adjuvant endocrine therapy],” the investigators wrote in the Journal of Oncology Practice.

“Therefore, this study aimed to determine whether breast cancer survivors with varying levels of mental health comorbidities, such as depression and anxiety, are more likely to use opioids for AET-related pain,” they added.

The study involved 10,452 breast cancer survivors who first filled an AET prescription from 2006 to 2012 and had follow-up records available for at least 2 years. All patients had a diagnosis of incident, primary, hormone receptor–positive, stage I-III breast cancer. Data were drawn from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–Medicare linked database. Records were evaluated for diagnoses of mental health conditions such as depression and anxiety, opioid use, and survival.

Analysis showed that the most common mental health conditions were depression and anxiety, diagnosed in 554 and 246 women, respectively. Patients with mental health comorbidities were compared with patients who did not have such problems, using both unmatched and matched cohorts. While unmatched comparison for opioid use was not statistically significant, matched comparison showed that survivors with mental health comorbidities were 33% more likely to use opioids than those without mental health comorbidities (95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.68). Similarly, greater adjusted probabilities of opioid use were reported in the mental health comorbidity cohort (72.5% vs. 66.9%; P = .01).

Concerning survival, unmatched comparison revealed a 44% higher risk of death among women with depression and a 32% increase associated with anxiety. Matched comparison showed an even higher increased risk of mortality among women with any mental health comorbidity (49%; P less than .05).

The investigators concluded that opioid use among breast cancer survivors with mental health comorbidities “remains a significant problem.”

“A need exists for collaborative care in the management of mental health comorbidities in women with breast cancer, which could improve symptoms, adherence to treatment, and recovery from these mental conditions,” the investigators wrote. “Mental health treatments also are recommended to be offered in primary care, which not only would be convenient for patients, but also would reduce the stigma associated with treatments for mental health comorbidities and improve the patient-provider relationship.”

The investigators reported financial relationships with Merck.

SOURCE: Desai R et al. J Oncol Pract. 2019 Jul 19. doi: 10.1200/JOP.18.00781.

Mental health comorbidities increase the rates of opioid use and mortality among breast cancer survivors on endocrine therapy, based on a retrospective study of more than 10,000 patients in a Medicare-linked database.

Screen for mental health conditions in the early stages of cancer care and lean toward opioid alternatives for pain management, advised lead author Raj Desai, MS, of the University of Florida, Gainesville, and colleagues.

“The complex relationship among breast cancer, mental health problems, and the use of opioids is not well understood, despite the high prevalence of mental health comorbidities like depression and anxiety in breast cancer survivors, and the high rate of opioid use in those on AET [adjuvant endocrine therapy],” the investigators wrote in the Journal of Oncology Practice.

“Therefore, this study aimed to determine whether breast cancer survivors with varying levels of mental health comorbidities, such as depression and anxiety, are more likely to use opioids for AET-related pain,” they added.

The study involved 10,452 breast cancer survivors who first filled an AET prescription from 2006 to 2012 and had follow-up records available for at least 2 years. All patients had a diagnosis of incident, primary, hormone receptor–positive, stage I-III breast cancer. Data were drawn from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–Medicare linked database. Records were evaluated for diagnoses of mental health conditions such as depression and anxiety, opioid use, and survival.

Analysis showed that the most common mental health conditions were depression and anxiety, diagnosed in 554 and 246 women, respectively. Patients with mental health comorbidities were compared with patients who did not have such problems, using both unmatched and matched cohorts. While unmatched comparison for opioid use was not statistically significant, matched comparison showed that survivors with mental health comorbidities were 33% more likely to use opioids than those without mental health comorbidities (95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.68). Similarly, greater adjusted probabilities of opioid use were reported in the mental health comorbidity cohort (72.5% vs. 66.9%; P = .01).

Concerning survival, unmatched comparison revealed a 44% higher risk of death among women with depression and a 32% increase associated with anxiety. Matched comparison showed an even higher increased risk of mortality among women with any mental health comorbidity (49%; P less than .05).

The investigators concluded that opioid use among breast cancer survivors with mental health comorbidities “remains a significant problem.”

“A need exists for collaborative care in the management of mental health comorbidities in women with breast cancer, which could improve symptoms, adherence to treatment, and recovery from these mental conditions,” the investigators wrote. “Mental health treatments also are recommended to be offered in primary care, which not only would be convenient for patients, but also would reduce the stigma associated with treatments for mental health comorbidities and improve the patient-provider relationship.”

The investigators reported financial relationships with Merck.

SOURCE: Desai R et al. J Oncol Pract. 2019 Jul 19. doi: 10.1200/JOP.18.00781.

The Food and Drug Administration requested on July 24 that Allergan pull six brands of textured breast implants and breast expanders from the U.S. market, an action the agency took because of new data that substantially increased the number of women who developed a rare cancer – anaplastic large-cell lymphoma – in association with receiving these textured breast devices.

gorodenkoff/iStock/Getty Images Plus

This is the first product recall the FDA has made to address the issue of breast implant–associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), a complication that first came to national attention with a 2011 FDA report that had tallied 60 identified BIA-ALCL cases worldwide. By the end of September 2018, the number of reported worldwide BIA-ALCL cases had jumped to 457 cases reported to the agency via medical device reporting. In July 2019, the FDA cited a total of 573 unique, global case reports for BIA-ALCL sent to the agency through July 6, including 33 episodes that led to death.

It was inclusion of these additional 116 cases since September 2018 and 24 additional deaths that led FDA researchers to conclude that “the risk of BIA-ALCL with Allergan BIOCELL textured implants is approximately six-times the risk of BIA-ALCL with textured implants from other manufacturers marketing in the U.S.,” according to a statement from the agency.

The FDA is not recommending that patients who received one of the six products covered by the recall have the material removed if symptoms have not appeared because of the potential risk from explantation.

The agency also stressed that its investigation of the risk posed by placement of other brands of textured breast implants is ongoing and that overall less than 5% of all breast implants performed in current U.S. practice involve the macrotextured implants of the type specified in the Allergan recall.

This U.S. recall follows similar actions taken in France (and the rest of the European Union), Canada, and Australia, and it contrasts with the agency’s prior decision in May 2019 not to start a recall or ban of textured implants following a advisory committee meeting that discussed BIA-ALCL.

The six products that Allergan agreed to recall from marketing at the FDA’s request are four textured breast implants (Natrelle Saline-Filled Breast Implants, Natrelle Silicone-Filled Breast Implants, Natrelle Inspira Silicone-Filled breast Implants, and Natrelle 410 Highly Cohesive Anatomically Shaped Silicone-Filled Breast Implants) and two tissue expanders used prior to a breast implant (Natrelle 133 Plus Tissue Expander and the Natrelle 133 Tissue Expander with Suture Tabs).

FDA officials said they are considering recommendations for changes to the labeling of breast implant products, including a possible boxed warning and beefed up patient information.

“The recall of these textured implants is a big deal in protecting women from the potential risks of developing, and dying from, this rare type of aggressive lymphoma,” Joshua Brody, MD, a medical oncologist and director of the lymphoma immunotherapy program at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York said in a statement. “While case reports have suggested a potential link between some types of breast implants and this disease – anaplastic lymphoma – for over 20 years, it has taken time to gain sufficient evidence to suggest, and understand, the causality. Some types of implants induce inflammation, which can both increase the chance of developing cancer, and also help to ‘hide’ developing cancers from the immune system. By preventing further use of these implants, the FDA is helping women to protect themselves from the medically serious and emotionally exhausting effects of these risks.”

Dr. Brody reported having no relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

The Food and Drug Administration requested on July 24 that Allergan pull six brands of textured breast implants and breast expanders from the U.S. market, an action the agency took because of new data that substantially increased the number of women who developed a rare cancer – anaplastic large-cell lymphoma – in association with receiving these textured breast devices.

gorodenkoff/iStock/Getty Images Plus

This is the first product recall the FDA has made to address the issue of breast implant–associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), a complication that first came to national attention with a 2011 FDA report that had tallied 60 identified BIA-ALCL cases worldwide. By the end of September 2018, the number of reported worldwide BIA-ALCL cases had jumped to 457 cases reported to the agency via medical device reporting. In July 2019, the FDA cited a total of 573 unique, global case reports for BIA-ALCL sent to the agency through July 6, including 33 episodes that led to death.

It was inclusion of these additional 116 cases since September 2018 and 24 additional deaths that led FDA researchers to conclude that “the risk of BIA-ALCL with Allergan BIOCELL textured implants is approximately six-times the risk of BIA-ALCL with textured implants from other manufacturers marketing in the U.S.,” according to a statement from the agency.

The FDA is not recommending that patients who received one of the six products covered by the recall have the material removed if symptoms have not appeared because of the potential risk from explantation.

The agency also stressed that its investigation of the risk posed by placement of other brands of textured breast implants is ongoing and that overall less than 5% of all breast implants performed in current U.S. practice involve the macrotextured implants of the type specified in the Allergan recall.

This U.S. recall follows similar actions taken in France (and the rest of the European Union), Canada, and Australia, and it contrasts with the agency’s prior decision in May 2019 not to start a recall or ban of textured implants following a advisory committee meeting that discussed BIA-ALCL.

The six products that Allergan agreed to recall from marketing at the FDA’s request are four textured breast implants (Natrelle Saline-Filled Breast Implants, Natrelle Silicone-Filled Breast Implants, Natrelle Inspira Silicone-Filled breast Implants, and Natrelle 410 Highly Cohesive Anatomically Shaped Silicone-Filled Breast Implants) and two tissue expanders used prior to a breast implant (Natrelle 133 Plus Tissue Expander and the Natrelle 133 Tissue Expander with Suture Tabs).

FDA officials said they are considering recommendations for changes to the labeling of breast implant products, including a possible boxed warning and beefed up patient information.

“The recall of these textured implants is a big deal in protecting women from the potential risks of developing, and dying from, this rare type of aggressive lymphoma,” Joshua Brody, MD, a medical oncologist and director of the lymphoma immunotherapy program at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York said in a statement. “While case reports have suggested a potential link between some types of breast implants and this disease – anaplastic lymphoma – for over 20 years, it has taken time to gain sufficient evidence to suggest, and understand, the causality. Some types of implants induce inflammation, which can both increase the chance of developing cancer, and also help to ‘hide’ developing cancers from the immune system. By preventing further use of these implants, the FDA is helping women to protect themselves from the medically serious and emotionally exhausting effects of these risks.”

Dr. Brody reported having no relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

The Food and Drug Administration requested on July 24 that Allergan pull six brands of textured breast implants and breast expanders from the U.S. market, an action the agency took because of new data that substantially increased the number of women who developed a rare cancer – anaplastic large-cell lymphoma – in association with receiving these textured breast devices.

gorodenkoff/iStock/Getty Images Plus

This is the first product recall the FDA has made to address the issue of breast implant–associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), a complication that first came to national attention with a 2011 FDA report that had tallied 60 identified BIA-ALCL cases worldwide. By the end of September 2018, the number of reported worldwide BIA-ALCL cases had jumped to 457 cases reported to the agency via medical device reporting. In July 2019, the FDA cited a total of 573 unique, global case reports for BIA-ALCL sent to the agency through July 6, including 33 episodes that led to death.

It was inclusion of these additional 116 cases since September 2018 and 24 additional deaths that led FDA researchers to conclude that “the risk of BIA-ALCL with Allergan BIOCELL textured implants is approximately six-times the risk of BIA-ALCL with textured implants from other manufacturers marketing in the U.S.,” according to a statement from the agency.

The FDA is not recommending that patients who received one of the six products covered by the recall have the material removed if symptoms have not appeared because of the potential risk from explantation.

The agency also stressed that its investigation of the risk posed by placement of other brands of textured breast implants is ongoing and that overall less than 5% of all breast implants performed in current U.S. practice involve the macrotextured implants of the type specified in the Allergan recall.

This U.S. recall follows similar actions taken in France (and the rest of the European Union), Canada, and Australia, and it contrasts with the agency’s prior decision in May 2019 not to start a recall or ban of textured implants following a advisory committee meeting that discussed BIA-ALCL.

The six products that Allergan agreed to recall from marketing at the FDA’s request are four textured breast implants (Natrelle Saline-Filled Breast Implants, Natrelle Silicone-Filled Breast Implants, Natrelle Inspira Silicone-Filled breast Implants, and Natrelle 410 Highly Cohesive Anatomically Shaped Silicone-Filled Breast Implants) and two tissue expanders used prior to a breast implant (Natrelle 133 Plus Tissue Expander and the Natrelle 133 Tissue Expander with Suture Tabs).

FDA officials said they are considering recommendations for changes to the labeling of breast implant products, including a possible boxed warning and beefed up patient information.

“The recall of these textured implants is a big deal in protecting women from the potential risks of developing, and dying from, this rare type of aggressive lymphoma,” Joshua Brody, MD, a medical oncologist and director of the lymphoma immunotherapy program at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York said in a statement. “While case reports have suggested a potential link between some types of breast implants and this disease – anaplastic lymphoma – for over 20 years, it has taken time to gain sufficient evidence to suggest, and understand, the causality. Some types of implants induce inflammation, which can both increase the chance of developing cancer, and also help to ‘hide’ developing cancers from the immune system. By preventing further use of these implants, the FDA is helping women to protect themselves from the medically serious and emotionally exhausting effects of these risks.”

Dr. Brody reported having no relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

A 37-year-old woman presents to her primary care clinic with a chief complaint of depression. She was diagnosed with relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS) at age 29 and is currently taking an injectable preventive therapy. Over the past 6 months, she has had increased marital strain secondary to losing her job because “I couldn’t mentally keep up with the work anymore.” This has caused financial difficulties for her family. In addition, she tires easily and has been napping in the afternoon. She and her husband are experiencing intimacy difficulties, and she confirms problems with vaginal dryness and a general loss of her sexual drive.

Sexual dysfunction in MS is common, affecting 40% to 80% of women and 50% to 90% of men with MS. It is an “invisible” symptom, similar to fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, and pain.^1-3

There are three ways that MS patients can be affected by sexual dysfunction, and they are categorized as primary, secondary, and tertiary. Primary sexual dysfunction results from demyelination/axonal destruction of the central nervous system, which potentially leads to altered genital sensation or paresthesia. Secondary sexual dysfunction stems from nonsexual MS symptoms, such as fatigue, spasticity, tremor, impairments in concentration/attention, and iatrogenic causes (eg, adverse effects of medication). Tertiary sexual dysfunction involves the psychosocial/cultural aspects of the disease that can impact a patient’s sexual drive.

SYMPTOMS

Like many other symptoms associated with MS, the symptoms of sexual dysfunction are highly variable. In women, the most common complaints are fatigue, decrease in genital sensation (27%-47%), decrease in libido (31%-74%) and vaginal lubrication (36%-48%), and difficulty with orgasm.⁴ In men with MS, in addition to erectile problems, surveys have identified decreased genital sensation, fatigue (75%), difficulty with ejaculation (18%-50%), decreased interest or arousal (39%), and anorgasmia (37%) as fairly common complaints.²

TREATMENT

Managing sexual dysfunction in a patient with MS is dependent on the underlying problem. Some examples include

• For many patients, their disease causes significant anxiety and worry about current and potentially future disability—which can make intimacy more difficult. Sometimes, referral to a mental health professional may be required to help the patient with individual and/or couples counseling to further elucidate underlying intimacy issues.
• For patients experiencing MS-associated fatigue, suggest planning for sexual activity in the morning, since fatigue is known to worsen throughout the day.
• For those who qualify for antidepressant medications, remember that some (eg, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) can further decrease libido and therefore should be avoided if possible.
• For women who have difficulty with lubrication, a nonpetroleum-based lubricant may reduce vaginal dryness, while use of a vibrator may assist with genital stimulation.
• For men who cannot maintain erection, phosphodiesterase inhibitor drugs (eg, sildenafil) can be helpful; other options include alprostadil urethral suppositories and intracavernous injections.

The patient is screened for depression using the Patient Health Questionnaire, which yields a score of 17 (moderately severe). You discuss the need for active treatment with her, and she agrees to start an antidepressant medication. Bupropion is chosen, given its effectiveness and lack of adverse effects (including sexual dysfunction). The patient also is encouraged to use nonpetroleum-based lubricants. Finally, a referral is made for couples counseling, and a 6-week follow-up appointment is scheduled.

CONCLUSION

Sexual dysfunction in MS is quite common in both women and men, and the related symptoms are often multifactorial. Strategies to address sexual dysfunction in MS require a tailored approach. Fortunately, any treatments for sexual dysfunction initiated by the patient’s primary care provider will not have an adverse effect on the patient’s outcome with MS. For more complicated cases of MS-associated sexual dysfunction, urology referral is recommended.

A 37-year-old woman presents to her primary care clinic with a chief complaint of depression. She was diagnosed with relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS) at age 29 and is currently taking an injectable preventive therapy. Over the past 6 months, she has had increased marital strain secondary to losing her job because “I couldn’t mentally keep up with the work anymore.” This has caused financial difficulties for her family. In addition, she tires easily and has been napping in the afternoon. She and her husband are experiencing intimacy difficulties, and she confirms problems with vaginal dryness and a general loss of her sexual drive.

Sexual dysfunction in MS is common, affecting 40% to 80% of women and 50% to 90% of men with MS. It is an “invisible” symptom, similar to fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, and pain.^1-3

There are three ways that MS patients can be affected by sexual dysfunction, and they are categorized as primary, secondary, and tertiary. Primary sexual dysfunction results from demyelination/axonal destruction of the central nervous system, which potentially leads to altered genital sensation or paresthesia. Secondary sexual dysfunction stems from nonsexual MS symptoms, such as fatigue, spasticity, tremor, impairments in concentration/attention, and iatrogenic causes (eg, adverse effects of medication). Tertiary sexual dysfunction involves the psychosocial/cultural aspects of the disease that can impact a patient’s sexual drive.

SYMPTOMS

Like many other symptoms associated with MS, the symptoms of sexual dysfunction are highly variable. In women, the most common complaints are fatigue, decrease in genital sensation (27%-47%), decrease in libido (31%-74%) and vaginal lubrication (36%-48%), and difficulty with orgasm.⁴ In men with MS, in addition to erectile problems, surveys have identified decreased genital sensation, fatigue (75%), difficulty with ejaculation (18%-50%), decreased interest or arousal (39%), and anorgasmia (37%) as fairly common complaints.²

TREATMENT

Managing sexual dysfunction in a patient with MS is dependent on the underlying problem. Some examples include

• For many patients, their disease causes significant anxiety and worry about current and potentially future disability—which can make intimacy more difficult. Sometimes, referral to a mental health professional may be required to help the patient with individual and/or couples counseling to further elucidate underlying intimacy issues.
• For patients experiencing MS-associated fatigue, suggest planning for sexual activity in the morning, since fatigue is known to worsen throughout the day.
• For those who qualify for antidepressant medications, remember that some (eg, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) can further decrease libido and therefore should be avoided if possible.
• For women who have difficulty with lubrication, a nonpetroleum-based lubricant may reduce vaginal dryness, while use of a vibrator may assist with genital stimulation.
• For men who cannot maintain erection, phosphodiesterase inhibitor drugs (eg, sildenafil) can be helpful; other options include alprostadil urethral suppositories and intracavernous injections.

The patient is screened for depression using the Patient Health Questionnaire, which yields a score of 17 (moderately severe). You discuss the need for active treatment with her, and she agrees to start an antidepressant medication. Bupropion is chosen, given its effectiveness and lack of adverse effects (including sexual dysfunction). The patient also is encouraged to use nonpetroleum-based lubricants. Finally, a referral is made for couples counseling, and a 6-week follow-up appointment is scheduled.

CONCLUSION

Sexual dysfunction in MS is quite common in both women and men, and the related symptoms are often multifactorial. Strategies to address sexual dysfunction in MS require a tailored approach. Fortunately, any treatments for sexual dysfunction initiated by the patient’s primary care provider will not have an adverse effect on the patient’s outcome with MS. For more complicated cases of MS-associated sexual dysfunction, urology referral is recommended.

A 37-year-old woman presents to her primary care clinic with a chief complaint of depression. She was diagnosed with relapsing multiple sclerosis (MS) at age 29 and is currently taking an injectable preventive therapy. Over the past 6 months, she has had increased marital strain secondary to losing her job because “I couldn’t mentally keep up with the work anymore.” This has caused financial difficulties for her family. In addition, she tires easily and has been napping in the afternoon. She and her husband are experiencing intimacy difficulties, and she confirms problems with vaginal dryness and a general loss of her sexual drive.

Sexual dysfunction in MS is common, affecting 40% to 80% of women and 50% to 90% of men with MS. It is an “invisible” symptom, similar to fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, and pain.^1-3

There are three ways that MS patients can be affected by sexual dysfunction, and they are categorized as primary, secondary, and tertiary. Primary sexual dysfunction results from demyelination/axonal destruction of the central nervous system, which potentially leads to altered genital sensation or paresthesia. Secondary sexual dysfunction stems from nonsexual MS symptoms, such as fatigue, spasticity, tremor, impairments in concentration/attention, and iatrogenic causes (eg, adverse effects of medication). Tertiary sexual dysfunction involves the psychosocial/cultural aspects of the disease that can impact a patient’s sexual drive.

SYMPTOMS

Like many other symptoms associated with MS, the symptoms of sexual dysfunction are highly variable. In women, the most common complaints are fatigue, decrease in genital sensation (27%-47%), decrease in libido (31%-74%) and vaginal lubrication (36%-48%), and difficulty with orgasm.⁴ In men with MS, in addition to erectile problems, surveys have identified decreased genital sensation, fatigue (75%), difficulty with ejaculation (18%-50%), decreased interest or arousal (39%), and anorgasmia (37%) as fairly common complaints.²

TREATMENT

Managing sexual dysfunction in a patient with MS is dependent on the underlying problem. Some examples include

• For many patients, their disease causes significant anxiety and worry about current and potentially future disability—which can make intimacy more difficult. Sometimes, referral to a mental health professional may be required to help the patient with individual and/or couples counseling to further elucidate underlying intimacy issues.
• For patients experiencing MS-associated fatigue, suggest planning for sexual activity in the morning, since fatigue is known to worsen throughout the day.
• For those who qualify for antidepressant medications, remember that some (eg, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) can further decrease libido and therefore should be avoided if possible.
• For women who have difficulty with lubrication, a nonpetroleum-based lubricant may reduce vaginal dryness, while use of a vibrator may assist with genital stimulation.
• For men who cannot maintain erection, phosphodiesterase inhibitor drugs (eg, sildenafil) can be helpful; other options include alprostadil urethral suppositories and intracavernous injections.

The patient is screened for depression using the Patient Health Questionnaire, which yields a score of 17 (moderately severe). You discuss the need for active treatment with her, and she agrees to start an antidepressant medication. Bupropion is chosen, given its effectiveness and lack of adverse effects (including sexual dysfunction). The patient also is encouraged to use nonpetroleum-based lubricants. Finally, a referral is made for couples counseling, and a 6-week follow-up appointment is scheduled.

CONCLUSION

Sexual dysfunction in MS is quite common in both women and men, and the related symptoms are often multifactorial. Strategies to address sexual dysfunction in MS require a tailored approach. Fortunately, any treatments for sexual dysfunction initiated by the patient’s primary care provider will not have an adverse effect on the patient’s outcome with MS. For more complicated cases of MS-associated sexual dysfunction, urology referral is recommended.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has updated and reaffirmed its 2009 recommendation for screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in pregnant women, according to task force member Douglas K. Owens, MD, of the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto (Calif.) Health Care System and other members of the task force.

CDC/Dr. Erskine Palmer

The recommendation statement, published in JAMA, was based on an evidence report and systematic review also published in JAMA. In that review, two studies of fair quality were identified; one included 155,081 infants born to HBV-positive women identified for case management through the national Perinatal Hepatitis B Prevention Program from 1994 to 2008, and the other included 4,446 infants born in a large, regional health care organization in the United States between 1997 and 2010. In both, low rates of perinatal transmission were reported for those periods – between 0.5% and 1.9% – with the rate falling over time.

In the 2009 recommendation, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that serologic testing for hepatitis B surface antigen accurately identifies HBV infection, and that interventions were effective in preventing perinatal transmission. That recommendation has been reaffirmed in the current update, with HBV screening receiving a grade of A, which is the strongest the USPSTF offers.

In a related editorial, Neil S. Silverman, MD, of the Center for Fetal Medicine and Women’s Ultrasound in Los Angeles noted several improvements in maternal HBV therapy since the publication of the original 2009 recommendation, including maternal HBV-targeted antiviral therapy during pregnancy as an adjunct to neonatal immunoprophylaxis and the ability to refer women for chronic treatment of their HBV disease to prevent long-term infection complications. The task forces also noted that HBV screening of all pregnant women is mandated by law in 26 states.

One member of the task force reported receiving grants and/or personal fees from Healthwise, another member reported receiving personal fees from UpToDate; a third reported participating in the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases’ Hepatitis B Guidance and Hepatitis B Systematic Review Group. The evidence and review study was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Dr. Silverman reported no disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCes: Owens DK et al. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.9365; Henderson JT et al. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23;32(4):360-2; Silverman NS. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23;32(4):312-14.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has updated and reaffirmed its 2009 recommendation for screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in pregnant women, according to task force member Douglas K. Owens, MD, of the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto (Calif.) Health Care System and other members of the task force.

CDC/Dr. Erskine Palmer

The recommendation statement, published in JAMA, was based on an evidence report and systematic review also published in JAMA. In that review, two studies of fair quality were identified; one included 155,081 infants born to HBV-positive women identified for case management through the national Perinatal Hepatitis B Prevention Program from 1994 to 2008, and the other included 4,446 infants born in a large, regional health care organization in the United States between 1997 and 2010. In both, low rates of perinatal transmission were reported for those periods – between 0.5% and 1.9% – with the rate falling over time.

In the 2009 recommendation, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that serologic testing for hepatitis B surface antigen accurately identifies HBV infection, and that interventions were effective in preventing perinatal transmission. That recommendation has been reaffirmed in the current update, with HBV screening receiving a grade of A, which is the strongest the USPSTF offers.

In a related editorial, Neil S. Silverman, MD, of the Center for Fetal Medicine and Women’s Ultrasound in Los Angeles noted several improvements in maternal HBV therapy since the publication of the original 2009 recommendation, including maternal HBV-targeted antiviral therapy during pregnancy as an adjunct to neonatal immunoprophylaxis and the ability to refer women for chronic treatment of their HBV disease to prevent long-term infection complications. The task forces also noted that HBV screening of all pregnant women is mandated by law in 26 states.

One member of the task force reported receiving grants and/or personal fees from Healthwise, another member reported receiving personal fees from UpToDate; a third reported participating in the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases’ Hepatitis B Guidance and Hepatitis B Systematic Review Group. The evidence and review study was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Dr. Silverman reported no disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCes: Owens DK et al. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.9365; Henderson JT et al. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23;32(4):360-2; Silverman NS. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23;32(4):312-14.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has updated and reaffirmed its 2009 recommendation for screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in pregnant women, according to task force member Douglas K. Owens, MD, of the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto (Calif.) Health Care System and other members of the task force.

CDC/Dr. Erskine Palmer

The recommendation statement, published in JAMA, was based on an evidence report and systematic review also published in JAMA. In that review, two studies of fair quality were identified; one included 155,081 infants born to HBV-positive women identified for case management through the national Perinatal Hepatitis B Prevention Program from 1994 to 2008, and the other included 4,446 infants born in a large, regional health care organization in the United States between 1997 and 2010. In both, low rates of perinatal transmission were reported for those periods – between 0.5% and 1.9% – with the rate falling over time.

In the 2009 recommendation, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that serologic testing for hepatitis B surface antigen accurately identifies HBV infection, and that interventions were effective in preventing perinatal transmission. That recommendation has been reaffirmed in the current update, with HBV screening receiving a grade of A, which is the strongest the USPSTF offers.

In a related editorial, Neil S. Silverman, MD, of the Center for Fetal Medicine and Women’s Ultrasound in Los Angeles noted several improvements in maternal HBV therapy since the publication of the original 2009 recommendation, including maternal HBV-targeted antiviral therapy during pregnancy as an adjunct to neonatal immunoprophylaxis and the ability to refer women for chronic treatment of their HBV disease to prevent long-term infection complications. The task forces also noted that HBV screening of all pregnant women is mandated by law in 26 states.

One member of the task force reported receiving grants and/or personal fees from Healthwise, another member reported receiving personal fees from UpToDate; a third reported participating in the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases’ Hepatitis B Guidance and Hepatitis B Systematic Review Group. The evidence and review study was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Dr. Silverman reported no disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCes: Owens DK et al. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23. doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.9365; Henderson JT et al. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23;32(4):360-2; Silverman NS. JAMA. 2019 Jul 23;32(4):312-14.

Family planning clinics will have more time to comply with a Trump administration rule that prohibits physicians from counseling patients about abortion and bars them from referring women for the procedures.

The Department of Health & Human Services does not intend to bring enforcement actions against taxpayer-funded clinics if they are making good-faith efforts to comply with the new rules, according to a memo issued July 20. Such good faith efforts include a written assurance by Aug. 19 that clinics are not providing abortions nor including abortion in their family planning methods, according to the emailed guidance sent by Diane Foley, MD, HHS Deputy Assistant Secretary at the Office of Population Affairs (OPA). Clinics must also detail an action plan describing the steps they will take to comply with the Title X changes and start those actions immediately, according to the memo, obtained by this news organization.

“In the past, the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Office of Population Affairs, has exercised enforcement discretion in appropriate circumstances,” according to the memo. “Given the circumstances surrounding the implementation of the final rule, OPA does not intend to bring enforcement actions against Title X recipients that are making, and continue to make, good-faith efforts to comply with the final rule. OPA is committed to working with grantees to assist them in coming into compliance with the requirements of the final rule.”

The decision comes a week after HHS warned family planning clinics that receive federal money to immediately stop providing referrals and counseling on abortion or face revocation of funding. An email from HHS on July 15 stated that the agency was requiring immediate compliance of the Title X changes consistent with recent court rulings. The warning came just before the start of a national Title X grantee meeting held in Washington.

The changes to the Title X program make health clinics ineligible for funding if they offer, promote, or support abortion as a method of family planning. Title X grants generally go to health centers that provide reproductive health care – such as STD testing, cancer screenings, and contraception – to low-income individuals. Under the rule, the government will withdraw financial assistance to clinics if they allow counseling or referrals associated with abortion, regardless of whether the money is used for other health care services. The rule also imposes physical separation requirements for health centers that offer abortions.

More than 20 states and several abortion rights organizations sued over the rules in four separate states. District judges in Oregon, Washington, and California temporarily blocked the rules from taking effect. In a June 20 decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the federal government may go forward with its plan to restrict Title X funding from clinics that provide abortion counseling or that refer patients for abortion services. The decision overturned the lower court injunctions.

In the July 20 memo, Dr. Foley wrote that, in addition to the Aug. 19 requirements, clinics must send written confirmation by Sep. 18 outlining the steps taken to comply with the Title X changes and provide any relevant documentation needed for HHS to verify the compliance. By March 4, 2020, a written statement must be submitted affirming the clinic is in compliance with the requirement for physical separation between Title X services and abortion services.

The National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association, a plaintiff in one of the challenges, called the administration’s July 20 memo “wholly insufficient” and said the clinics need more guidance about how to move forward with the rule changes.

“It’s just absurd to think that a few bullet points amount to guidance,” association officials said in a July 21 statement. “We urge [the agency] to take the time to properly expand on and better describe how it will interpret aspects of the rule – using examples that reflect the wide range of provider settings and administrative structures present in Title X. Once again, [the agency] falls far short of linking the rule to day-to-day practice, leaving the entire family planning network in the dark on how they need to operate to stay in the program.”

At presstime, HHS had not responded to a message seeking comment on the requirements. In her note, Dr. Foley wrote that more guidance on the changes were forthcoming and that grantees unable to meet the required time line may request a deadline extension from the agency.

HHS has previously said that the Title X changes ensure that grants and contracts awarded under the program fully comply with the statutory program integrity requirements, “thereby fulfilling the purpose of Title X, so that more women and men can receive services that help them consider and achieve both their short-term and long-term family planning needs.”

[email protected]

Family planning clinics will have more time to comply with a Trump administration rule that prohibits physicians from counseling patients about abortion and bars them from referring women for the procedures.

The Department of Health & Human Services does not intend to bring enforcement actions against taxpayer-funded clinics if they are making good-faith efforts to comply with the new rules, according to a memo issued July 20. Such good faith efforts include a written assurance by Aug. 19 that clinics are not providing abortions nor including abortion in their family planning methods, according to the emailed guidance sent by Diane Foley, MD, HHS Deputy Assistant Secretary at the Office of Population Affairs (OPA). Clinics must also detail an action plan describing the steps they will take to comply with the Title X changes and start those actions immediately, according to the memo, obtained by this news organization.

“In the past, the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Office of Population Affairs, has exercised enforcement discretion in appropriate circumstances,” according to the memo. “Given the circumstances surrounding the implementation of the final rule, OPA does not intend to bring enforcement actions against Title X recipients that are making, and continue to make, good-faith efforts to comply with the final rule. OPA is committed to working with grantees to assist them in coming into compliance with the requirements of the final rule.”

The decision comes a week after HHS warned family planning clinics that receive federal money to immediately stop providing referrals and counseling on abortion or face revocation of funding. An email from HHS on July 15 stated that the agency was requiring immediate compliance of the Title X changes consistent with recent court rulings. The warning came just before the start of a national Title X grantee meeting held in Washington.

The changes to the Title X program make health clinics ineligible for funding if they offer, promote, or support abortion as a method of family planning. Title X grants generally go to health centers that provide reproductive health care – such as STD testing, cancer screenings, and contraception – to low-income individuals. Under the rule, the government will withdraw financial assistance to clinics if they allow counseling or referrals associated with abortion, regardless of whether the money is used for other health care services. The rule also imposes physical separation requirements for health centers that offer abortions.

More than 20 states and several abortion rights organizations sued over the rules in four separate states. District judges in Oregon, Washington, and California temporarily blocked the rules from taking effect. In a June 20 decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the federal government may go forward with its plan to restrict Title X funding from clinics that provide abortion counseling or that refer patients for abortion services. The decision overturned the lower court injunctions.

In the July 20 memo, Dr. Foley wrote that, in addition to the Aug. 19 requirements, clinics must send written confirmation by Sep. 18 outlining the steps taken to comply with the Title X changes and provide any relevant documentation needed for HHS to verify the compliance. By March 4, 2020, a written statement must be submitted affirming the clinic is in compliance with the requirement for physical separation between Title X services and abortion services.

The National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association, a plaintiff in one of the challenges, called the administration’s July 20 memo “wholly insufficient” and said the clinics need more guidance about how to move forward with the rule changes.

“It’s just absurd to think that a few bullet points amount to guidance,” association officials said in a July 21 statement. “We urge [the agency] to take the time to properly expand on and better describe how it will interpret aspects of the rule – using examples that reflect the wide range of provider settings and administrative structures present in Title X. Once again, [the agency] falls far short of linking the rule to day-to-day practice, leaving the entire family planning network in the dark on how they need to operate to stay in the program.”

At presstime, HHS had not responded to a message seeking comment on the requirements. In her note, Dr. Foley wrote that more guidance on the changes were forthcoming and that grantees unable to meet the required time line may request a deadline extension from the agency.

HHS has previously said that the Title X changes ensure that grants and contracts awarded under the program fully comply with the statutory program integrity requirements, “thereby fulfilling the purpose of Title X, so that more women and men can receive services that help them consider and achieve both their short-term and long-term family planning needs.”

[email protected]

Family planning clinics will have more time to comply with a Trump administration rule that prohibits physicians from counseling patients about abortion and bars them from referring women for the procedures.

The Department of Health & Human Services does not intend to bring enforcement actions against taxpayer-funded clinics if they are making good-faith efforts to comply with the new rules, according to a memo issued July 20. Such good faith efforts include a written assurance by Aug. 19 that clinics are not providing abortions nor including abortion in their family planning methods, according to the emailed guidance sent by Diane Foley, MD, HHS Deputy Assistant Secretary at the Office of Population Affairs (OPA). Clinics must also detail an action plan describing the steps they will take to comply with the Title X changes and start those actions immediately, according to the memo, obtained by this news organization.

“In the past, the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Office of Population Affairs, has exercised enforcement discretion in appropriate circumstances,” according to the memo. “Given the circumstances surrounding the implementation of the final rule, OPA does not intend to bring enforcement actions against Title X recipients that are making, and continue to make, good-faith efforts to comply with the final rule. OPA is committed to working with grantees to assist them in coming into compliance with the requirements of the final rule.”

The decision comes a week after HHS warned family planning clinics that receive federal money to immediately stop providing referrals and counseling on abortion or face revocation of funding. An email from HHS on July 15 stated that the agency was requiring immediate compliance of the Title X changes consistent with recent court rulings. The warning came just before the start of a national Title X grantee meeting held in Washington.

The changes to the Title X program make health clinics ineligible for funding if they offer, promote, or support abortion as a method of family planning. Title X grants generally go to health centers that provide reproductive health care – such as STD testing, cancer screenings, and contraception – to low-income individuals. Under the rule, the government will withdraw financial assistance to clinics if they allow counseling or referrals associated with abortion, regardless of whether the money is used for other health care services. The rule also imposes physical separation requirements for health centers that offer abortions.

More than 20 states and several abortion rights organizations sued over the rules in four separate states. District judges in Oregon, Washington, and California temporarily blocked the rules from taking effect. In a June 20 decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the federal government may go forward with its plan to restrict Title X funding from clinics that provide abortion counseling or that refer patients for abortion services. The decision overturned the lower court injunctions.

In the July 20 memo, Dr. Foley wrote that, in addition to the Aug. 19 requirements, clinics must send written confirmation by Sep. 18 outlining the steps taken to comply with the Title X changes and provide any relevant documentation needed for HHS to verify the compliance. By March 4, 2020, a written statement must be submitted affirming the clinic is in compliance with the requirement for physical separation between Title X services and abortion services.

The National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association, a plaintiff in one of the challenges, called the administration’s July 20 memo “wholly insufficient” and said the clinics need more guidance about how to move forward with the rule changes.

“It’s just absurd to think that a few bullet points amount to guidance,” association officials said in a July 21 statement. “We urge [the agency] to take the time to properly expand on and better describe how it will interpret aspects of the rule – using examples that reflect the wide range of provider settings and administrative structures present in Title X. Once again, [the agency] falls far short of linking the rule to day-to-day practice, leaving the entire family planning network in the dark on how they need to operate to stay in the program.”

At presstime, HHS had not responded to a message seeking comment on the requirements. In her note, Dr. Foley wrote that more guidance on the changes were forthcoming and that grantees unable to meet the required time line may request a deadline extension from the agency.

HHS has previously said that the Title X changes ensure that grants and contracts awarded under the program fully comply with the statutory program integrity requirements, “thereby fulfilling the purpose of Title X, so that more women and men can receive services that help them consider and achieve both their short-term and long-term family planning needs.”

[email protected]

The risk of neural tube defects linked to dolutegravir exposure during pregnancy is lower than previously signaled, according to new reports that have prompted the World Health Organization (WHO) to confirm that this antiviral medication should be the preferred option across all populations.

alexskopje/Thinkstock

The use of dolutegravir (DTG) during pregnancy has been a pressing global health question since May 2018, when an unplanned interim analysis of the Tsepamo surveillance study of birth outcomes in Botswana showed four neural tube defects associated with dolutegravir exposure among 426 infants born to HIV-positive women (0.94%).

With follow-up for additional births, however, just one more neural tube defect was identified out of 1,683 deliveries among women who had taken DTG around the time of conception (0.30%), according to a report just presented here at the at the International AIDS Society Conference on HIV Science.

By comparison, prevalence rates of neural tube defects were 0.10% for mothers taking other antiretroviral therapies at conception, 0.04% for those specifically taking efavirenz at conception, and 0.08% in HIV-uninfected mothers, according to the report, which was simultaneously published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

“While there may be a risk for neural tube defects, this risk is small, and really importantly, needs to be weighed against the large potential benefits of dolutegravir,” investigator Rebecca M. Zash, MD, of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, said here in Mexico City during an IAS 2019 video press conference.

The WHO had previously sounded a note of caution, saying that DTG could be “considered” in women of childbearing age if other first‐line antiretroviral agents such as efavirenz could not be used.

However, following release of new evidence, including the study by Dr. Zash and colleagues, the WHO has come out with a clear recommendation for HIV drug as “the preferred first-line and second-line treatment for all populations, including pregnant women and those of childbearing potential.”

The updated scientific reports and guidelines have important implications for global health. “Many countries have been working to make dolutegravir-based treatment their preferred first-line regimen, as it’s got several advantages over efavirenz, which people have been using for many years now, including its tolerability and resistance profiles, and its impact on morbidity and mortality,” IAS president Anton Pozniak, MD, said in the press conference.

Some countries paused their plans to roll out dolutegravir-based regimens after the preliminary safety signal from the Tsepamo study was reported, Dr. Pozniak added.

In another study presented at IAS looking at dolutegravir use at conception, investigators described an additional surveillance study in Botswana, conducted independently from the Tsepamo study. One neural tube defect was found among 152 deliveries in mothers who had been taking DTG at conception (0.66%), and two neural tube defects among 2,326 deliveries to HIV-negative mothers (0.09%).

Although the number of deliveries are small in this study, the results suggest a risk of neural tube defects with DTG exposure at conception of less than 1%, said Mmakgomo Mimi Raesima, MD, MPH, public health specialist, Ministry of Health and Wellness, Botswana.

Because neural-tube defects might be related to low folate levels, Dr. Raesima said “conversations are continuing” with regard to folate food fortification in Botswana, a country that does not mandate folate-fortified grains.

“We want to capitalize on the momentum from these results,” Dr. Raesima said in the press conference.

The Tsepamo study was funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Zash reported grants during the conduct of the study from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

SOURCE: Zash R et al. N Engl J Med. 2019 Jul 22. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1905230.

The risk of neural tube defects linked to dolutegravir exposure during pregnancy is lower than previously signaled, according to new reports that have prompted the World Health Organization (WHO) to confirm that this antiviral medication should be the preferred option across all populations.

alexskopje/Thinkstock

The use of dolutegravir (DTG) during pregnancy has been a pressing global health question since May 2018, when an unplanned interim analysis of the Tsepamo surveillance study of birth outcomes in Botswana showed four neural tube defects associated with dolutegravir exposure among 426 infants born to HIV-positive women (0.94%).

With follow-up for additional births, however, just one more neural tube defect was identified out of 1,683 deliveries among women who had taken DTG around the time of conception (0.30%), according to a report just presented here at the at the International AIDS Society Conference on HIV Science.

By comparison, prevalence rates of neural tube defects were 0.10% for mothers taking other antiretroviral therapies at conception, 0.04% for those specifically taking efavirenz at conception, and 0.08% in HIV-uninfected mothers, according to the report, which was simultaneously published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

“While there may be a risk for neural tube defects, this risk is small, and really importantly, needs to be weighed against the large potential benefits of dolutegravir,” investigator Rebecca M. Zash, MD, of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, said here in Mexico City during an IAS 2019 video press conference.

The WHO had previously sounded a note of caution, saying that DTG could be “considered” in women of childbearing age if other first‐line antiretroviral agents such as efavirenz could not be used.

However, following release of new evidence, including the study by Dr. Zash and colleagues, the WHO has come out with a clear recommendation for HIV drug as “the preferred first-line and second-line treatment for all populations, including pregnant women and those of childbearing potential.”

The updated scientific reports and guidelines have important implications for global health. “Many countries have been working to make dolutegravir-based treatment their preferred first-line regimen, as it’s got several advantages over efavirenz, which people have been using for many years now, including its tolerability and resistance profiles, and its impact on morbidity and mortality,” IAS president Anton Pozniak, MD, said in the press conference.

Some countries paused their plans to roll out dolutegravir-based regimens after the preliminary safety signal from the Tsepamo study was reported, Dr. Pozniak added.

In another study presented at IAS looking at dolutegravir use at conception, investigators described an additional surveillance study in Botswana, conducted independently from the Tsepamo study. One neural tube defect was found among 152 deliveries in mothers who had been taking DTG at conception (0.66%), and two neural tube defects among 2,326 deliveries to HIV-negative mothers (0.09%).

Although the number of deliveries are small in this study, the results suggest a risk of neural tube defects with DTG exposure at conception of less than 1%, said Mmakgomo Mimi Raesima, MD, MPH, public health specialist, Ministry of Health and Wellness, Botswana.

Because neural-tube defects might be related to low folate levels, Dr. Raesima said “conversations are continuing” with regard to folate food fortification in Botswana, a country that does not mandate folate-fortified grains.

“We want to capitalize on the momentum from these results,” Dr. Raesima said in the press conference.

The Tsepamo study was funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Zash reported grants during the conduct of the study from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

SOURCE: Zash R et al. N Engl J Med. 2019 Jul 22. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1905230.

The risk of neural tube defects linked to dolutegravir exposure during pregnancy is lower than previously signaled, according to new reports that have prompted the World Health Organization (WHO) to confirm that this antiviral medication should be the preferred option across all populations.

alexskopje/Thinkstock

The use of dolutegravir (DTG) during pregnancy has been a pressing global health question since May 2018, when an unplanned interim analysis of the Tsepamo surveillance study of birth outcomes in Botswana showed four neural tube defects associated with dolutegravir exposure among 426 infants born to HIV-positive women (0.94%).

With follow-up for additional births, however, just one more neural tube defect was identified out of 1,683 deliveries among women who had taken DTG around the time of conception (0.30%), according to a report just presented here at the at the International AIDS Society Conference on HIV Science.

By comparison, prevalence rates of neural tube defects were 0.10% for mothers taking other antiretroviral therapies at conception, 0.04% for those specifically taking efavirenz at conception, and 0.08% in HIV-uninfected mothers, according to the report, which was simultaneously published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

“While there may be a risk for neural tube defects, this risk is small, and really importantly, needs to be weighed against the large potential benefits of dolutegravir,” investigator Rebecca M. Zash, MD, of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, said here in Mexico City during an IAS 2019 video press conference.

The WHO had previously sounded a note of caution, saying that DTG could be “considered” in women of childbearing age if other first‐line antiretroviral agents such as efavirenz could not be used.

However, following release of new evidence, including the study by Dr. Zash and colleagues, the WHO has come out with a clear recommendation for HIV drug as “the preferred first-line and second-line treatment for all populations, including pregnant women and those of childbearing potential.”

The updated scientific reports and guidelines have important implications for global health. “Many countries have been working to make dolutegravir-based treatment their preferred first-line regimen, as it’s got several advantages over efavirenz, which people have been using for many years now, including its tolerability and resistance profiles, and its impact on morbidity and mortality,” IAS president Anton Pozniak, MD, said in the press conference.

Some countries paused their plans to roll out dolutegravir-based regimens after the preliminary safety signal from the Tsepamo study was reported, Dr. Pozniak added.

In another study presented at IAS looking at dolutegravir use at conception, investigators described an additional surveillance study in Botswana, conducted independently from the Tsepamo study. One neural tube defect was found among 152 deliveries in mothers who had been taking DTG at conception (0.66%), and two neural tube defects among 2,326 deliveries to HIV-negative mothers (0.09%).

Although the number of deliveries are small in this study, the results suggest a risk of neural tube defects with DTG exposure at conception of less than 1%, said Mmakgomo Mimi Raesima, MD, MPH, public health specialist, Ministry of Health and Wellness, Botswana.

Because neural-tube defects might be related to low folate levels, Dr. Raesima said “conversations are continuing” with regard to folate food fortification in Botswana, a country that does not mandate folate-fortified grains.

“We want to capitalize on the momentum from these results,” Dr. Raesima said in the press conference.

The Tsepamo study was funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Zash reported grants during the conduct of the study from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

SOURCE: Zash R et al. N Engl J Med. 2019 Jul 22. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1905230.

LOS ANGELES – Estrogen therapy may have scored another goal in its comeback game, as a 7-year prospective study shows that a transdermal formulation preserves some measures of cognitive function and brain architecture in postmenopausal women.

JackF/thinkstockphotos.com

In addition to performing better on subjective tests of memory, women using the estrogen patch experienced less cortical atrophy and were less likely to show amyloid on brain imaging. The observations were moderately associated with the improved sleep these women reported, Burcu Zeydan, MD, said at the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference.

“By 7 years, among the cognitive domains studied ... [less brain and cognitive change] correlated with lower global sleep score, meaning better sleep quality in the estradiol group,” said Dr. Zeydan, assistant professor of radiology at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. “We previously found that preservation of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex over 7 years was associated with lower cortical beta-amyloid deposition on PET only in the estradiol group, pointing out the potential role of estrogen receptors in modulating this relationship.”

Dysregulated sleep is more common among women than men, particularly as menopause approaches and estrogen levels fluctuate, then decline, Dr. Zeydan said.

Dr. Zeydan reported the sleep substudy of KEEPS (the Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study), a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multisite trial that compared oral conjugated equine estrogen with transdermal estradiol. A control group received oral placebo and a placebo patch.*

Brain architecture was similar between the placebo and transdermal groups, but it was actually worse in some measures in the oral-estrogen group, compared with the placebo group. Women taking oral estrogen had more white matter hyperintensities, greater ventricle enlargement, and more cortical thinning. Those differences resolved after they stopped taking the oral formulation, bringing them into line with the transdermal and placebo groups.

The investigation also found that the transdermal group showed lower cerebral amyloid binding on PET scans relative to both placebo and oral estrogen.

“The relative preservation of dorsolateral prefrontal cortical volume in the [transdermal estradiol] group over 7 years indicates that hormone therapy may have long-term effects on the brain,” the team concluded. They noted that the original KEEPS study didn’t find any cognitive correlation with these changes.

The subanalysis looked at 69 women of the KEEPS cohort who had been followed for the full 7 years (4 years on treatment and 3 years off treatment). They were randomized to oral placebo and a placebo patch,* oral conjugated equine estrogen (0.45 mg/day), or transdermal estradiol (50 mcg/day). Participants in the active treatment groups received oral micronized progesterone 12 days each month. All had complete data on cognitive testing and brain imaging. Sleep quality was measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. Dr. Zeydan compared cognition and brain architecture findings in relation to the sleep score; lower scores mean better sleep.

The women were aged 42-58 years at baseline, and within 36 months from menopause. They had no history of menopausal hormone therapy or cardiovascular disease.

The investigators were particularly interested in how estrogen might have modulated the disturbed sleep patterns that often accompany perimenopause and early menopause, and whether the observed brain and cognitive changes tracked with sleep quality.

“During this time, 40% to 60% of women report problems sleeping, and estrogen decline seems to play an important role in sleep disturbances during this phase,” Dr. Zeydan said. “Although poor sleep quality is common in recently menopausal women, sleep quality improves with hormone therapy, as was previously demonstrated in KEEPS hormone therapy trial in recently menopausal women.”

By year 7, the cohort’s mean age was 61 years. The majority had at least some college education. The percentage who carried an apolipoprotein E epsilon-4 allele varied by group, with 15% positivity in the oral group, 48% in the transdermal group, and 16% in the placebo group.


Cognitive function was estimated with a global cognitive measure and four cognitive domain scores: verbal learning and memory, auditory attention and working memory, visual attention and executive function, and mental flexibility.

Higher attention and executive function scores were moderately correlated with a lower sleep score in the transdermal group (r = –0.54, a significant difference compared with the oral formulation). Lower sleep scores also showed a moderate correlation with preserved cortical volume of the dorsolateral prefrontal region (r = –0.47, also significantly different from the oral group).

Lower brain amyloid also positively correlated with better sleep. The correlation between sleep and global amyloid burden in the transdermal group was also moderate (r = 0.45), while the correlation in the oral group was significantly weaker (r = 0.18).

“We can say that sleep quality and transdermal estradiol during early postmenopausal years somehow interact to influence beta-amyloid deposition, preservation of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex volume, and attention and executive function,” Dr. Zeydan said.

Dr. Zeydan had no financial disclosures.

[email protected]

*Correction, 8/7/2019: An earlier version of this story did not make clear that participants in the control group received oral placebo and a placebo patch.

LOS ANGELES – Estrogen therapy may have scored another goal in its comeback game, as a 7-year prospective study shows that a transdermal formulation preserves some measures of cognitive function and brain architecture in postmenopausal women.

JackF/thinkstockphotos.com

In addition to performing better on subjective tests of memory, women using the estrogen patch experienced less cortical atrophy and were less likely to show amyloid on brain imaging. The observations were moderately associated with the improved sleep these women reported, Burcu Zeydan, MD, said at the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference.

“By 7 years, among the cognitive domains studied ... [less brain and cognitive change] correlated with lower global sleep score, meaning better sleep quality in the estradiol group,” said Dr. Zeydan, assistant professor of radiology at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. “We previously found that preservation of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex over 7 years was associated with lower cortical beta-amyloid deposition on PET only in the estradiol group, pointing out the potential role of estrogen receptors in modulating this relationship.”

Dysregulated sleep is more common among women than men, particularly as menopause approaches and estrogen levels fluctuate, then decline, Dr. Zeydan said.

Dr. Zeydan reported the sleep substudy of KEEPS (the Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study), a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multisite trial that compared oral conjugated equine estrogen with transdermal estradiol. A control group received oral placebo and a placebo patch.*

Brain architecture was similar between the placebo and transdermal groups, but it was actually worse in some measures in the oral-estrogen group, compared with the placebo group. Women taking oral estrogen had more white matter hyperintensities, greater ventricle enlargement, and more cortical thinning. Those differences resolved after they stopped taking the oral formulation, bringing them into line with the transdermal and placebo groups.

The investigation also found that the transdermal group showed lower cerebral amyloid binding on PET scans relative to both placebo and oral estrogen.

“The relative preservation of dorsolateral prefrontal cortical volume in the [transdermal estradiol] group over 7 years indicates that hormone therapy may have long-term effects on the brain,” the team concluded. They noted that the original KEEPS study didn’t find any cognitive correlation with these changes.

The subanalysis looked at 69 women of the KEEPS cohort who had been followed for the full 7 years (4 years on treatment and 3 years off treatment). They were randomized to oral placebo and a placebo patch,* oral conjugated equine estrogen (0.45 mg/day), or transdermal estradiol (50 mcg/day). Participants in the active treatment groups received oral micronized progesterone 12 days each month. All had complete data on cognitive testing and brain imaging. Sleep quality was measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. Dr. Zeydan compared cognition and brain architecture findings in relation to the sleep score; lower scores mean better sleep.

The women were aged 42-58 years at baseline, and within 36 months from menopause. They had no history of menopausal hormone therapy or cardiovascular disease.

The investigators were particularly interested in how estrogen might have modulated the disturbed sleep patterns that often accompany perimenopause and early menopause, and whether the observed brain and cognitive changes tracked with sleep quality.

“During this time, 40% to 60% of women report problems sleeping, and estrogen decline seems to play an important role in sleep disturbances during this phase,” Dr. Zeydan said. “Although poor sleep quality is common in recently menopausal women, sleep quality improves with hormone therapy, as was previously demonstrated in KEEPS hormone therapy trial in recently menopausal women.”

By year 7, the cohort’s mean age was 61 years. The majority had at least some college education. The percentage who carried an apolipoprotein E epsilon-4 allele varied by group, with 15% positivity in the oral group, 48% in the transdermal group, and 16% in the placebo group.


Cognitive function was estimated with a global cognitive measure and four cognitive domain scores: verbal learning and memory, auditory attention and working memory, visual attention and executive function, and mental flexibility.

Higher attention and executive function scores were moderately correlated with a lower sleep score in the transdermal group (r = –0.54, a significant difference compared with the oral formulation). Lower sleep scores also showed a moderate correlation with preserved cortical volume of the dorsolateral prefrontal region (r = –0.47, also significantly different from the oral group).

Lower brain amyloid also positively correlated with better sleep. The correlation between sleep and global amyloid burden in the transdermal group was also moderate (r = 0.45), while the correlation in the oral group was significantly weaker (r = 0.18).

“We can say that sleep quality and transdermal estradiol during early postmenopausal years somehow interact to influence beta-amyloid deposition, preservation of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex volume, and attention and executive function,” Dr. Zeydan said.

Dr. Zeydan had no financial disclosures.

[email protected]

*Correction, 8/7/2019: An earlier version of this story did not make clear that participants in the control group received oral placebo and a placebo patch.

LOS ANGELES – Estrogen therapy may have scored another goal in its comeback game, as a 7-year prospective study shows that a transdermal formulation preserves some measures of cognitive function and brain architecture in postmenopausal women.

JackF/thinkstockphotos.com

In addition to performing better on subjective tests of memory, women using the estrogen patch experienced less cortical atrophy and were less likely to show amyloid on brain imaging. The observations were moderately associated with the improved sleep these women reported, Burcu Zeydan, MD, said at the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference.

“By 7 years, among the cognitive domains studied ... [less brain and cognitive change] correlated with lower global sleep score, meaning better sleep quality in the estradiol group,” said Dr. Zeydan, assistant professor of radiology at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. “We previously found that preservation of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex over 7 years was associated with lower cortical beta-amyloid deposition on PET only in the estradiol group, pointing out the potential role of estrogen receptors in modulating this relationship.”

Dysregulated sleep is more common among women than men, particularly as menopause approaches and estrogen levels fluctuate, then decline, Dr. Zeydan said.

Dr. Zeydan reported the sleep substudy of KEEPS (the Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study), a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multisite trial that compared oral conjugated equine estrogen with transdermal estradiol. A control group received oral placebo and a placebo patch.*

Brain architecture was similar between the placebo and transdermal groups, but it was actually worse in some measures in the oral-estrogen group, compared with the placebo group. Women taking oral estrogen had more white matter hyperintensities, greater ventricle enlargement, and more cortical thinning. Those differences resolved after they stopped taking the oral formulation, bringing them into line with the transdermal and placebo groups.

The investigation also found that the transdermal group showed lower cerebral amyloid binding on PET scans relative to both placebo and oral estrogen.

“The relative preservation of dorsolateral prefrontal cortical volume in the [transdermal estradiol] group over 7 years indicates that hormone therapy may have long-term effects on the brain,” the team concluded. They noted that the original KEEPS study didn’t find any cognitive correlation with these changes.

The subanalysis looked at 69 women of the KEEPS cohort who had been followed for the full 7 years (4 years on treatment and 3 years off treatment). They were randomized to oral placebo and a placebo patch,* oral conjugated equine estrogen (0.45 mg/day), or transdermal estradiol (50 mcg/day). Participants in the active treatment groups received oral micronized progesterone 12 days each month. All had complete data on cognitive testing and brain imaging. Sleep quality was measured by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. Dr. Zeydan compared cognition and brain architecture findings in relation to the sleep score; lower scores mean better sleep.

The women were aged 42-58 years at baseline, and within 36 months from menopause. They had no history of menopausal hormone therapy or cardiovascular disease.

The investigators were particularly interested in how estrogen might have modulated the disturbed sleep patterns that often accompany perimenopause and early menopause, and whether the observed brain and cognitive changes tracked with sleep quality.

“During this time, 40% to 60% of women report problems sleeping, and estrogen decline seems to play an important role in sleep disturbances during this phase,” Dr. Zeydan said. “Although poor sleep quality is common in recently menopausal women, sleep quality improves with hormone therapy, as was previously demonstrated in KEEPS hormone therapy trial in recently menopausal women.”

By year 7, the cohort’s mean age was 61 years. The majority had at least some college education. The percentage who carried an apolipoprotein E epsilon-4 allele varied by group, with 15% positivity in the oral group, 48% in the transdermal group, and 16% in the placebo group.


Cognitive function was estimated with a global cognitive measure and four cognitive domain scores: verbal learning and memory, auditory attention and working memory, visual attention and executive function, and mental flexibility.

Higher attention and executive function scores were moderately correlated with a lower sleep score in the transdermal group (r = –0.54, a significant difference compared with the oral formulation). Lower sleep scores also showed a moderate correlation with preserved cortical volume of the dorsolateral prefrontal region (r = –0.47, also significantly different from the oral group).

Lower brain amyloid also positively correlated with better sleep. The correlation between sleep and global amyloid burden in the transdermal group was also moderate (r = 0.45), while the correlation in the oral group was significantly weaker (r = 0.18).

“We can say that sleep quality and transdermal estradiol during early postmenopausal years somehow interact to influence beta-amyloid deposition, preservation of dorsolateral prefrontal cortex volume, and attention and executive function,” Dr. Zeydan said.

Dr. Zeydan had no financial disclosures.

[email protected]

*Correction, 8/7/2019: An earlier version of this story did not make clear that participants in the control group received oral placebo and a placebo patch.

The number of pregnancies among women taking isotretinoin has decreased since the introduction of the iPledge program, but pregnancy, abortions, and fetal defects associated with isotretinoin exposure are still occurring in women of reproductive age, according to a retrospective study published in JAMA Dermatology.

In 2006, the Food and Drug Administration implemented the iPledge program, with requirements that include women of childbearing age having a negative pregnancy test and evidence of using two forms of contraception monthly to use isotretinoin, a teratogen. “Although the number of pregnancy-related adverse events for patients taking isotretinoin has decreased since 2006, pregnancies, abortions, and fetal defects associated with isotretinoin exposure continue to be a problem,” Elizabeth Tkachenko, BS, from the University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, and coauthors concluded. “Further research is required to determine the most efficacious system to reduce complications for patients and administrative requirements for physicians while at the same time maintaining access to this important drug.” (iPledge followed other Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy systems for isotretinoin.)

She and her colleagues performed a retrospective evaluation of pregnancy-related adverse events related to isotretinoin that had occurred between January 1997 and December 2017 using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), which receives reports from prescribers, consumers, and pharmaceutical manufacturers. While there could be many different classification terms for each individual, any number of adverse events reported by an individual was counted as one pregnancy. Ms. Tkachenko and colleagues classified abortions, pregnancies during contraception use, and pregnancy-related defects into separate subgroups for analysis.

From 1997 to 2017, there were 6,740 pregnancies among women (mean age, 24.6 years) during treatment with isotretinoin reported to FAERS, with 7 reports in 1997, and a peak of 768 pregnancies in 2006. Almost 70% (4,647) of the pregnancies were reported after iPledge was introduced. Between 2011 and 2017, there were 218-310 pregnancy reports each year.

Of the total number of pregnancy reports during the study period, 1,896 were abortions (28.1% of the total); 10.9% of the total number of pregnancy reports were spontaneous abortions (733). The number of abortions peaked in 2008, with 291 reports, of which 85% were therapeutic abortions. Also peaking in 2008 was the number of reports of pregnancies while taking a contraceptive (64). After 2008, pregnancies and abortions dropped.

Fetal defects peaked in 2000, with 34 cases reported, and dropped to four or fewer reports annually after 2008.

“Our findings demonstrate that reports of pregnancy among women taking isotretinoin are concentrated among those aged 20 to 29 years, peaked in 2006, and have been consistent since 2011,” the authors wrote.

Limitations of the study, they noted, include limitations of FAERS data and possible reporting fatigue among doctors and patients. The total number of isotretinoin courses prescribed to this patient population is also unknown, which affected their ability to determine the true rate of pregnancy-related adverse events, they noted.

The other authors for this study were from Harvard Medical School and the departments of dermatology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, both in Boston, as well as the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. One author reported support from an award by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases of the National Institutes of Health and salary support from a Pfizer Fellowship in Dermatology Patient Oriented Research grant to the trustees of the University of Pennsylvania. The other authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Tkachenko E et al. JAMA Dermatol. 2019. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2019.1388.

The number of pregnancies among women taking isotretinoin has decreased since the introduction of the iPledge program, but pregnancy, abortions, and fetal defects associated with isotretinoin exposure are still occurring in women of reproductive age, according to a retrospective study published in JAMA Dermatology.

In 2006, the Food and Drug Administration implemented the iPledge program, with requirements that include women of childbearing age having a negative pregnancy test and evidence of using two forms of contraception monthly to use isotretinoin, a teratogen. “Although the number of pregnancy-related adverse events for patients taking isotretinoin has decreased since 2006, pregnancies, abortions, and fetal defects associated with isotretinoin exposure continue to be a problem,” Elizabeth Tkachenko, BS, from the University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, and coauthors concluded. “Further research is required to determine the most efficacious system to reduce complications for patients and administrative requirements for physicians while at the same time maintaining access to this important drug.” (iPledge followed other Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy systems for isotretinoin.)

She and her colleagues performed a retrospective evaluation of pregnancy-related adverse events related to isotretinoin that had occurred between January 1997 and December 2017 using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), which receives reports from prescribers, consumers, and pharmaceutical manufacturers. While there could be many different classification terms for each individual, any number of adverse events reported by an individual was counted as one pregnancy. Ms. Tkachenko and colleagues classified abortions, pregnancies during contraception use, and pregnancy-related defects into separate subgroups for analysis.

From 1997 to 2017, there were 6,740 pregnancies among women (mean age, 24.6 years) during treatment with isotretinoin reported to FAERS, with 7 reports in 1997, and a peak of 768 pregnancies in 2006. Almost 70% (4,647) of the pregnancies were reported after iPledge was introduced. Between 2011 and 2017, there were 218-310 pregnancy reports each year.

Of the total number of pregnancy reports during the study period, 1,896 were abortions (28.1% of the total); 10.9% of the total number of pregnancy reports were spontaneous abortions (733). The number of abortions peaked in 2008, with 291 reports, of which 85% were therapeutic abortions. Also peaking in 2008 was the number of reports of pregnancies while taking a contraceptive (64). After 2008, pregnancies and abortions dropped.

Fetal defects peaked in 2000, with 34 cases reported, and dropped to four or fewer reports annually after 2008.

“Our findings demonstrate that reports of pregnancy among women taking isotretinoin are concentrated among those aged 20 to 29 years, peaked in 2006, and have been consistent since 2011,” the authors wrote.

Limitations of the study, they noted, include limitations of FAERS data and possible reporting fatigue among doctors and patients. The total number of isotretinoin courses prescribed to this patient population is also unknown, which affected their ability to determine the true rate of pregnancy-related adverse events, they noted.

The other authors for this study were from Harvard Medical School and the departments of dermatology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, both in Boston, as well as the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. One author reported support from an award by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases of the National Institutes of Health and salary support from a Pfizer Fellowship in Dermatology Patient Oriented Research grant to the trustees of the University of Pennsylvania. The other authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Tkachenko E et al. JAMA Dermatol. 2019. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2019.1388.

The number of pregnancies among women taking isotretinoin has decreased since the introduction of the iPledge program, but pregnancy, abortions, and fetal defects associated with isotretinoin exposure are still occurring in women of reproductive age, according to a retrospective study published in JAMA Dermatology.

In 2006, the Food and Drug Administration implemented the iPledge program, with requirements that include women of childbearing age having a negative pregnancy test and evidence of using two forms of contraception monthly to use isotretinoin, a teratogen. “Although the number of pregnancy-related adverse events for patients taking isotretinoin has decreased since 2006, pregnancies, abortions, and fetal defects associated with isotretinoin exposure continue to be a problem,” Elizabeth Tkachenko, BS, from the University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, and coauthors concluded. “Further research is required to determine the most efficacious system to reduce complications for patients and administrative requirements for physicians while at the same time maintaining access to this important drug.” (iPledge followed other Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy systems for isotretinoin.)

She and her colleagues performed a retrospective evaluation of pregnancy-related adverse events related to isotretinoin that had occurred between January 1997 and December 2017 using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), which receives reports from prescribers, consumers, and pharmaceutical manufacturers. While there could be many different classification terms for each individual, any number of adverse events reported by an individual was counted as one pregnancy. Ms. Tkachenko and colleagues classified abortions, pregnancies during contraception use, and pregnancy-related defects into separate subgroups for analysis.

From 1997 to 2017, there were 6,740 pregnancies among women (mean age, 24.6 years) during treatment with isotretinoin reported to FAERS, with 7 reports in 1997, and a peak of 768 pregnancies in 2006. Almost 70% (4,647) of the pregnancies were reported after iPledge was introduced. Between 2011 and 2017, there were 218-310 pregnancy reports each year.

Of the total number of pregnancy reports during the study period, 1,896 were abortions (28.1% of the total); 10.9% of the total number of pregnancy reports were spontaneous abortions (733). The number of abortions peaked in 2008, with 291 reports, of which 85% were therapeutic abortions. Also peaking in 2008 was the number of reports of pregnancies while taking a contraceptive (64). After 2008, pregnancies and abortions dropped.

Fetal defects peaked in 2000, with 34 cases reported, and dropped to four or fewer reports annually after 2008.

“Our findings demonstrate that reports of pregnancy among women taking isotretinoin are concentrated among those aged 20 to 29 years, peaked in 2006, and have been consistent since 2011,” the authors wrote.

Limitations of the study, they noted, include limitations of FAERS data and possible reporting fatigue among doctors and patients. The total number of isotretinoin courses prescribed to this patient population is also unknown, which affected their ability to determine the true rate of pregnancy-related adverse events, they noted.

The other authors for this study were from Harvard Medical School and the departments of dermatology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, both in Boston, as well as the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. One author reported support from an award by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases of the National Institutes of Health and salary support from a Pfizer Fellowship in Dermatology Patient Oriented Research grant to the trustees of the University of Pennsylvania. The other authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Tkachenko E et al. JAMA Dermatol. 2019. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2019.1388.

Children whose mothers were exposed to the pandemic H1N1 influenza vaccine during pregnancy do not have notably different health outcomes at the age of 5 years, according to Laura K. Walsh of the University of Ottawa and associates.

Piotr Marcinski/Thinkstock

The investigators conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study from November 2009 to October 2010 of all live births within the province of Ontario. Of the 104,249 eligible live births reported to the Ontario birth registry, 31,295 were exposed to the H1N1 vaccine in utero. After adjustment, there were no significant differences in the women who did and did not receive vaccines during pregnancy, according to the study, published in the BMJ.

After a median follow-up of 5 years, 14% of children received an asthma diagnosis, with a median age at diagnosis of 1.8 years. Children were more likely to receive an asthma diagnosis if their mothers had a preexisting condition or if they were born preterm. At follow-up, 34% of children had at least one upper respiratory tract infection. Sensory disorder, neoplasm, and pediatric complex chronic condition were rare, each occurring in less than 1% of the study cohort (BMJ. 2019 Jul 10. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4151).

No significant association was found between prenatal exposure to the H1N1 vaccine and upper or lower respiratory infections, otitis media, all infections, neoplasms, sensory disorders, rates of urgent and inpatient health services use, pediatric complex chronic conditions, or mortality. A weak but significant association was observed for asthma (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.09), and a weak inverse association was found for gastrointestinal infections (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.91-0.98).

“Although we observed a small, but statistically significant, increase in pediatric asthma and a reduction in gastrointestinal infections, we are not aware of any biologic mechanisms to explain these findings. Future studies in different settings and with different influenza vaccine formulations will be important for developing the evidence base on longer-term pediatric outcomes following influenza vaccination during pregnancy,” the investigators concluded.

The study was funded by grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences.
 

[email protected]

Children whose mothers were exposed to the pandemic H1N1 influenza vaccine during pregnancy do not have notably different health outcomes at the age of 5 years, according to Laura K. Walsh of the University of Ottawa and associates.

Piotr Marcinski/Thinkstock

The investigators conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study from November 2009 to October 2010 of all live births within the province of Ontario. Of the 104,249 eligible live births reported to the Ontario birth registry, 31,295 were exposed to the H1N1 vaccine in utero. After adjustment, there were no significant differences in the women who did and did not receive vaccines during pregnancy, according to the study, published in the BMJ.

After a median follow-up of 5 years, 14% of children received an asthma diagnosis, with a median age at diagnosis of 1.8 years. Children were more likely to receive an asthma diagnosis if their mothers had a preexisting condition or if they were born preterm. At follow-up, 34% of children had at least one upper respiratory tract infection. Sensory disorder, neoplasm, and pediatric complex chronic condition were rare, each occurring in less than 1% of the study cohort (BMJ. 2019 Jul 10. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4151).

No significant association was found between prenatal exposure to the H1N1 vaccine and upper or lower respiratory infections, otitis media, all infections, neoplasms, sensory disorders, rates of urgent and inpatient health services use, pediatric complex chronic conditions, or mortality. A weak but significant association was observed for asthma (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.09), and a weak inverse association was found for gastrointestinal infections (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.91-0.98).

“Although we observed a small, but statistically significant, increase in pediatric asthma and a reduction in gastrointestinal infections, we are not aware of any biologic mechanisms to explain these findings. Future studies in different settings and with different influenza vaccine formulations will be important for developing the evidence base on longer-term pediatric outcomes following influenza vaccination during pregnancy,” the investigators concluded.

The study was funded by grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences.
 

[email protected]

Children whose mothers were exposed to the pandemic H1N1 influenza vaccine during pregnancy do not have notably different health outcomes at the age of 5 years, according to Laura K. Walsh of the University of Ottawa and associates.

Piotr Marcinski/Thinkstock

The investigators conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study from November 2009 to October 2010 of all live births within the province of Ontario. Of the 104,249 eligible live births reported to the Ontario birth registry, 31,295 were exposed to the H1N1 vaccine in utero. After adjustment, there were no significant differences in the women who did and did not receive vaccines during pregnancy, according to the study, published in the BMJ.

After a median follow-up of 5 years, 14% of children received an asthma diagnosis, with a median age at diagnosis of 1.8 years. Children were more likely to receive an asthma diagnosis if their mothers had a preexisting condition or if they were born preterm. At follow-up, 34% of children had at least one upper respiratory tract infection. Sensory disorder, neoplasm, and pediatric complex chronic condition were rare, each occurring in less than 1% of the study cohort (BMJ. 2019 Jul 10. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4151).

No significant association was found between prenatal exposure to the H1N1 vaccine and upper or lower respiratory infections, otitis media, all infections, neoplasms, sensory disorders, rates of urgent and inpatient health services use, pediatric complex chronic conditions, or mortality. A weak but significant association was observed for asthma (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.09), and a weak inverse association was found for gastrointestinal infections (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.91-0.98).

“Although we observed a small, but statistically significant, increase in pediatric asthma and a reduction in gastrointestinal infections, we are not aware of any biologic mechanisms to explain these findings. Future studies in different settings and with different influenza vaccine formulations will be important for developing the evidence base on longer-term pediatric outcomes following influenza vaccination during pregnancy,” the investigators concluded.

The study was funded by grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences.
 

[email protected]