Jeff Craven

Young Native Americans had increased left ventricular thickness and left ventricular hypertrophy after being exposed to arsenic, and had a greater risk if they showed signs of prehypertension or hypertension, according to recent research.

“The stronger association in subjects with elevated blood pressure suggests that individuals with preclinical heart disease might be more prone to the toxic effects of arsenic on the heart,” Gernot Pichler, MD, PhD, a cardiologist at Hospital Hietzing/Heart Center Clinic Floridsdorf in Vienna, stated in a press release.

Dr. Pichler and colleagues evaluated 1,337 individuals (mean age, 31 years; 61% female) in the Strong Heart Family Study, an extension of the Strong Heart Study that was designed to study cardiovascular disease in Native Americans. The researchers noted that, while the studies were not originally intended to evaluate arsenic exposure in these populations, “the importance of studying arsenic was recognized overtime as increasing evidence supported the role of arsenic in cardiovascular disease and the relatively high arsenic exposure in tribal communities, compared to other general populations in the United States.”

Arsenic exposure was determined through the sum of inorganic and methylated arsenic concentrations in urine, and researchers used transthoracic ECG at baseline and follow-up to compare left ventricular geometry and function. The mean follow-up was 5.6 years and baseline median sum of inorganic and methylated arsenic concentrations in urine was 4.24 (interquartile range, 2.82-6.90) mcg/g creatinine.

Prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy was 4.6% overall, and the odds ratio of left ventricular hypertrophy per 100% increase in arsenic in the urine was 1.47 (95% confidence interval, 1.05-2.08) overall and 1.58 for individuals with prehypertension or hypertension (95% CI, 1.04-2.41).

“People drinking water from private wells, which are not regulated, need to be aware that arsenic may increase the risk for cardiovascular disease,” said Dr. Pichler. “Testing those wells is a critical first step to take action and prevent exposure.”

Prospective and cross-sectional analyses both showed changes in left ventricular geometry – such as in the left atrial systolic diameter, interventricular septum, and left ventricular posterior wall thickness and mass index – were associated with exposure to arsenic. In addition, left ventricular function factors such as isovolumic relaxation time and stroke volume were also affected by arsenic exposure. However, the researchers noted that their study was limited by a single method of arsenic exposure and having no long-term follow-up for participants.

“The study raises the question of whether the changes in heart structure are reversible if exposure is reduced. Some changes have occurred in water sources in the study communities, and it will be important to check the potential health impact of reducing arsenic exposure,” said Dr. Pichler.

This study was funded by the National Institute of Health Sciences and grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Pichler G et al. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019 May 1. doi: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.119.009018.

Young Native Americans had increased left ventricular thickness and left ventricular hypertrophy after being exposed to arsenic, and had a greater risk if they showed signs of prehypertension or hypertension, according to recent research.

“The stronger association in subjects with elevated blood pressure suggests that individuals with preclinical heart disease might be more prone to the toxic effects of arsenic on the heart,” Gernot Pichler, MD, PhD, a cardiologist at Hospital Hietzing/Heart Center Clinic Floridsdorf in Vienna, stated in a press release.

Dr. Pichler and colleagues evaluated 1,337 individuals (mean age, 31 years; 61% female) in the Strong Heart Family Study, an extension of the Strong Heart Study that was designed to study cardiovascular disease in Native Americans. The researchers noted that, while the studies were not originally intended to evaluate arsenic exposure in these populations, “the importance of studying arsenic was recognized overtime as increasing evidence supported the role of arsenic in cardiovascular disease and the relatively high arsenic exposure in tribal communities, compared to other general populations in the United States.”

Arsenic exposure was determined through the sum of inorganic and methylated arsenic concentrations in urine, and researchers used transthoracic ECG at baseline and follow-up to compare left ventricular geometry and function. The mean follow-up was 5.6 years and baseline median sum of inorganic and methylated arsenic concentrations in urine was 4.24 (interquartile range, 2.82-6.90) mcg/g creatinine.

Prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy was 4.6% overall, and the odds ratio of left ventricular hypertrophy per 100% increase in arsenic in the urine was 1.47 (95% confidence interval, 1.05-2.08) overall and 1.58 for individuals with prehypertension or hypertension (95% CI, 1.04-2.41).

“People drinking water from private wells, which are not regulated, need to be aware that arsenic may increase the risk for cardiovascular disease,” said Dr. Pichler. “Testing those wells is a critical first step to take action and prevent exposure.”

Prospective and cross-sectional analyses both showed changes in left ventricular geometry – such as in the left atrial systolic diameter, interventricular septum, and left ventricular posterior wall thickness and mass index – were associated with exposure to arsenic. In addition, left ventricular function factors such as isovolumic relaxation time and stroke volume were also affected by arsenic exposure. However, the researchers noted that their study was limited by a single method of arsenic exposure and having no long-term follow-up for participants.

“The study raises the question of whether the changes in heart structure are reversible if exposure is reduced. Some changes have occurred in water sources in the study communities, and it will be important to check the potential health impact of reducing arsenic exposure,” said Dr. Pichler.

This study was funded by the National Institute of Health Sciences and grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Pichler G et al. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019 May 1. doi: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.119.009018.

Young Native Americans had increased left ventricular thickness and left ventricular hypertrophy after being exposed to arsenic, and had a greater risk if they showed signs of prehypertension or hypertension, according to recent research.

“The stronger association in subjects with elevated blood pressure suggests that individuals with preclinical heart disease might be more prone to the toxic effects of arsenic on the heart,” Gernot Pichler, MD, PhD, a cardiologist at Hospital Hietzing/Heart Center Clinic Floridsdorf in Vienna, stated in a press release.

Dr. Pichler and colleagues evaluated 1,337 individuals (mean age, 31 years; 61% female) in the Strong Heart Family Study, an extension of the Strong Heart Study that was designed to study cardiovascular disease in Native Americans. The researchers noted that, while the studies were not originally intended to evaluate arsenic exposure in these populations, “the importance of studying arsenic was recognized overtime as increasing evidence supported the role of arsenic in cardiovascular disease and the relatively high arsenic exposure in tribal communities, compared to other general populations in the United States.”

Arsenic exposure was determined through the sum of inorganic and methylated arsenic concentrations in urine, and researchers used transthoracic ECG at baseline and follow-up to compare left ventricular geometry and function. The mean follow-up was 5.6 years and baseline median sum of inorganic and methylated arsenic concentrations in urine was 4.24 (interquartile range, 2.82-6.90) mcg/g creatinine.

Prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy was 4.6% overall, and the odds ratio of left ventricular hypertrophy per 100% increase in arsenic in the urine was 1.47 (95% confidence interval, 1.05-2.08) overall and 1.58 for individuals with prehypertension or hypertension (95% CI, 1.04-2.41).

“People drinking water from private wells, which are not regulated, need to be aware that arsenic may increase the risk for cardiovascular disease,” said Dr. Pichler. “Testing those wells is a critical first step to take action and prevent exposure.”

Prospective and cross-sectional analyses both showed changes in left ventricular geometry – such as in the left atrial systolic diameter, interventricular septum, and left ventricular posterior wall thickness and mass index – were associated with exposure to arsenic. In addition, left ventricular function factors such as isovolumic relaxation time and stroke volume were also affected by arsenic exposure. However, the researchers noted that their study was limited by a single method of arsenic exposure and having no long-term follow-up for participants.

“The study raises the question of whether the changes in heart structure are reversible if exposure is reduced. Some changes have occurred in water sources in the study communities, and it will be important to check the potential health impact of reducing arsenic exposure,” said Dr. Pichler.

This study was funded by the National Institute of Health Sciences and grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Pichler G et al. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019 May 1. doi: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.119.009018.

Two studies published in Pediatrics add new information on potential therapies as adjuncts to intravenous immunoglobulin to treat coronary artery abnormalities in pediatric Kawasaki disease patients.

Marija Stepanovic/iStock/Getty Images Plus

In the phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled EATAK (Etanercept as Adjunctive Treatment for Acute Kawasaki Disease) trial, Michael A. Portman, MD, and his colleagues examine the effects of adding etanercept to intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) to study IVIg resistance in children with Kawasaki disease.

The researchers enrolled 201 participants from eight pediatric centers who received an IVIg infusion followed immediately by either subcutaneous etanercept (0.8 mg/kg; n = 100) or placebo (n = 101) and then received two more weekly doses. They performed a subgroup analysis based on age, gender, and race. The participants were between 2 months and 18 years old with incomplete (10 etanercept, 12 placebo) or complete Kawasaki disease as determined by American Heart Association criteria and American Academy of Pediatrics 2004 criteria.

Of the 35 patients who showed IVIg resistance and received a second dose, the IVIg resistance rate for participants receiving etanercept was 13%, compared with 22% in the placebo group. The overall odds ratio for IVIg resistance was 0.54. While etanercept did not lower the rate of IVIg resistance in participants younger than 1 year old, it significantly reduced IVIg resistance in those older than 1 year.

IVIg fever response significantly differed by race, which ranged from Asian participants having a 7% resistance rate to African Americans having a resistance rate of 57%.

Forty-five of all participants had greater than 2.5 baseline coronary z scores, 23 in the etanercept group and 22 in the placebo group. While etanercept reduced change in coronary z score among participants with baseline dilation (P = .04) and without baseline dilation (P = .001), there was no improvement among participants in the placebo group. Etanercept additionally reduced progression of dilation, compared with the placebo group (P = .03). The researchers noted etanercept had a good safety profile, and there were no differences between the groups receiving the intervention or placebo.

“With these considerations, EATAK results reveal a reasonable risk/benefit profile for etanercept,” Dr. Portman of Seattle Children’s Research Institute, and his colleagues concluded. “Future clinical trials, conducted in these subgroups or stratified according to patient demographics or genotypes, will be necessary to validate our findings before wide clinical adoption.”

In a second study, Audrey Dionne, MD, of Boston Children’s Hospital, and her colleagues explored how corticosteroids or infliximab together with IVIg can reduce the progression of coronary artery aneurysms (CAA). They performed a retrospective study of 121 children (73% boys; median age, 3 years) with Kawasaki disease and CAA at three different centers who received corticosteroid and IVIg therapy (n = 30), infliximab and IVIg therapy (n = 58), or IVIg alone (n = 33). The children had a coronary z score greater than or equal to 2.5 and less than 10, and there were no significant differences between median z scores among the treatment groups (P = .39).

The researchers found that patients who received corticosteroids with IVIg therapy were protected against coronary size progression (coefficient, −1.31); in addition, those patients who received infliximab and IVIg therapy were protected against coronary size progression at follow-up (coefficient, −1.07), the researchers said. Those on placebo were not.

“Our data suggest that adjunctive treatment at the time of diagnosis may be beneficial in patients with CAA,” Dr. Dionne and colleagues concluded. “Future adequately powered, prospective randomized trials are needed to determine the best adjunctive treatment of patients with KD [Kawasaki disease] who present with coronary changes.”

The EATAK trial was funded by the Food and Drug Administration Office of Orphan Product Development, Amgen, and the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Portman and colleagues reported no relevant financial disclosures. The study from Dionne et al. received funding from the McCance Family Foundation and the Vella Fund. One of the authors reported being a paid expert witness for missed diagnoses of Kawasaki disease, which was unrelated to the study. The other authors said they had no conflicts of interest.

SOURCES: Portman MA et al. Pediatrics. 2019. doi: 10.1542/peds.2018-3675; Dionne A et al. Pediatrics. 2019. doi: 10.1542/peds.2018-3341.

Two studies published in Pediatrics add new information on potential therapies as adjuncts to intravenous immunoglobulin to treat coronary artery abnormalities in pediatric Kawasaki disease patients.

Marija Stepanovic/iStock/Getty Images Plus

In the phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled EATAK (Etanercept as Adjunctive Treatment for Acute Kawasaki Disease) trial, Michael A. Portman, MD, and his colleagues examine the effects of adding etanercept to intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) to study IVIg resistance in children with Kawasaki disease.

The researchers enrolled 201 participants from eight pediatric centers who received an IVIg infusion followed immediately by either subcutaneous etanercept (0.8 mg/kg; n = 100) or placebo (n = 101) and then received two more weekly doses. They performed a subgroup analysis based on age, gender, and race. The participants were between 2 months and 18 years old with incomplete (10 etanercept, 12 placebo) or complete Kawasaki disease as determined by American Heart Association criteria and American Academy of Pediatrics 2004 criteria.

Of the 35 patients who showed IVIg resistance and received a second dose, the IVIg resistance rate for participants receiving etanercept was 13%, compared with 22% in the placebo group. The overall odds ratio for IVIg resistance was 0.54. While etanercept did not lower the rate of IVIg resistance in participants younger than 1 year old, it significantly reduced IVIg resistance in those older than 1 year.

IVIg fever response significantly differed by race, which ranged from Asian participants having a 7% resistance rate to African Americans having a resistance rate of 57%.

Forty-five of all participants had greater than 2.5 baseline coronary z scores, 23 in the etanercept group and 22 in the placebo group. While etanercept reduced change in coronary z score among participants with baseline dilation (P = .04) and without baseline dilation (P = .001), there was no improvement among participants in the placebo group. Etanercept additionally reduced progression of dilation, compared with the placebo group (P = .03). The researchers noted etanercept had a good safety profile, and there were no differences between the groups receiving the intervention or placebo.

“With these considerations, EATAK results reveal a reasonable risk/benefit profile for etanercept,” Dr. Portman of Seattle Children’s Research Institute, and his colleagues concluded. “Future clinical trials, conducted in these subgroups or stratified according to patient demographics or genotypes, will be necessary to validate our findings before wide clinical adoption.”

In a second study, Audrey Dionne, MD, of Boston Children’s Hospital, and her colleagues explored how corticosteroids or infliximab together with IVIg can reduce the progression of coronary artery aneurysms (CAA). They performed a retrospective study of 121 children (73% boys; median age, 3 years) with Kawasaki disease and CAA at three different centers who received corticosteroid and IVIg therapy (n = 30), infliximab and IVIg therapy (n = 58), or IVIg alone (n = 33). The children had a coronary z score greater than or equal to 2.5 and less than 10, and there were no significant differences between median z scores among the treatment groups (P = .39).

The researchers found that patients who received corticosteroids with IVIg therapy were protected against coronary size progression (coefficient, −1.31); in addition, those patients who received infliximab and IVIg therapy were protected against coronary size progression at follow-up (coefficient, −1.07), the researchers said. Those on placebo were not.

“Our data suggest that adjunctive treatment at the time of diagnosis may be beneficial in patients with CAA,” Dr. Dionne and colleagues concluded. “Future adequately powered, prospective randomized trials are needed to determine the best adjunctive treatment of patients with KD [Kawasaki disease] who present with coronary changes.”

The EATAK trial was funded by the Food and Drug Administration Office of Orphan Product Development, Amgen, and the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Portman and colleagues reported no relevant financial disclosures. The study from Dionne et al. received funding from the McCance Family Foundation and the Vella Fund. One of the authors reported being a paid expert witness for missed diagnoses of Kawasaki disease, which was unrelated to the study. The other authors said they had no conflicts of interest.

SOURCES: Portman MA et al. Pediatrics. 2019. doi: 10.1542/peds.2018-3675; Dionne A et al. Pediatrics. 2019. doi: 10.1542/peds.2018-3341.

Two studies published in Pediatrics add new information on potential therapies as adjuncts to intravenous immunoglobulin to treat coronary artery abnormalities in pediatric Kawasaki disease patients.

Marija Stepanovic/iStock/Getty Images Plus

In the phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled EATAK (Etanercept as Adjunctive Treatment for Acute Kawasaki Disease) trial, Michael A. Portman, MD, and his colleagues examine the effects of adding etanercept to intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) to study IVIg resistance in children with Kawasaki disease.

The researchers enrolled 201 participants from eight pediatric centers who received an IVIg infusion followed immediately by either subcutaneous etanercept (0.8 mg/kg; n = 100) or placebo (n = 101) and then received two more weekly doses. They performed a subgroup analysis based on age, gender, and race. The participants were between 2 months and 18 years old with incomplete (10 etanercept, 12 placebo) or complete Kawasaki disease as determined by American Heart Association criteria and American Academy of Pediatrics 2004 criteria.

Of the 35 patients who showed IVIg resistance and received a second dose, the IVIg resistance rate for participants receiving etanercept was 13%, compared with 22% in the placebo group. The overall odds ratio for IVIg resistance was 0.54. While etanercept did not lower the rate of IVIg resistance in participants younger than 1 year old, it significantly reduced IVIg resistance in those older than 1 year.

IVIg fever response significantly differed by race, which ranged from Asian participants having a 7% resistance rate to African Americans having a resistance rate of 57%.

Forty-five of all participants had greater than 2.5 baseline coronary z scores, 23 in the etanercept group and 22 in the placebo group. While etanercept reduced change in coronary z score among participants with baseline dilation (P = .04) and without baseline dilation (P = .001), there was no improvement among participants in the placebo group. Etanercept additionally reduced progression of dilation, compared with the placebo group (P = .03). The researchers noted etanercept had a good safety profile, and there were no differences between the groups receiving the intervention or placebo.

“With these considerations, EATAK results reveal a reasonable risk/benefit profile for etanercept,” Dr. Portman of Seattle Children’s Research Institute, and his colleagues concluded. “Future clinical trials, conducted in these subgroups or stratified according to patient demographics or genotypes, will be necessary to validate our findings before wide clinical adoption.”

In a second study, Audrey Dionne, MD, of Boston Children’s Hospital, and her colleagues explored how corticosteroids or infliximab together with IVIg can reduce the progression of coronary artery aneurysms (CAA). They performed a retrospective study of 121 children (73% boys; median age, 3 years) with Kawasaki disease and CAA at three different centers who received corticosteroid and IVIg therapy (n = 30), infliximab and IVIg therapy (n = 58), or IVIg alone (n = 33). The children had a coronary z score greater than or equal to 2.5 and less than 10, and there were no significant differences between median z scores among the treatment groups (P = .39).

The researchers found that patients who received corticosteroids with IVIg therapy were protected against coronary size progression (coefficient, −1.31); in addition, those patients who received infliximab and IVIg therapy were protected against coronary size progression at follow-up (coefficient, −1.07), the researchers said. Those on placebo were not.

“Our data suggest that adjunctive treatment at the time of diagnosis may be beneficial in patients with CAA,” Dr. Dionne and colleagues concluded. “Future adequately powered, prospective randomized trials are needed to determine the best adjunctive treatment of patients with KD [Kawasaki disease] who present with coronary changes.”

The EATAK trial was funded by the Food and Drug Administration Office of Orphan Product Development, Amgen, and the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Portman and colleagues reported no relevant financial disclosures. The study from Dionne et al. received funding from the McCance Family Foundation and the Vella Fund. One of the authors reported being a paid expert witness for missed diagnoses of Kawasaki disease, which was unrelated to the study. The other authors said they had no conflicts of interest.

SOURCES: Portman MA et al. Pediatrics. 2019. doi: 10.1542/peds.2018-3675; Dionne A et al. Pediatrics. 2019. doi: 10.1542/peds.2018-3341.

A method of apheresis using vascular endothelial growth factor functionalized magnetic beads reduced levels of the soluble form of the vascular endothelial growth factor 1 in blood from women with preeclampsia, according to recent research published in the journal Hypertension.

The approach both reduces levels of the soluble form of the vascular endothelial growth factor 1 (sFlt-1) and releases placental growth factor (PlGF), which could help restore endothelial function in women with preeclampsia. The researchers said they chose sFlt-1 as a target because of “mounting evidence of its involvement in the pathogenesis of preeclampsia.” sFlt-1 has been suspected of inhibiting angiogenic signaling through “direct sequestration of angiogenic ligands” vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and PlGF as well as “dominant-negative heterodimerization with surface VEGFRs.”

“During normal pregnancy, massive amounts of PlGF are produced by the placenta, reaching concentrations of free PlGF around 400 pg/mL, whereas during preeclampsia, free PlGF is extremely low due to the release of sFlt-1 into the maternal circulation,” the researchers said.

Using VEGF-functionalized magnetic beads, the researchers performed static and dynamic experiments using phosphate buffered saline (PBS), conditioned media, and plasma from women with preeclampsia. Under static conditions, there was a decrease of 33% for sFlt-1 and an increase of 27% for PlGF, while in dynamic conditions, there was a 40% decrease in sFlt-1 and a twofold increase in freed PlGF. When tested with plasma from women with preeclampsia, the ratio of sFlt-1/PlGF decreased by 63%, and VEGF release was associated with apheresis.

“This was a proof of concept study and our approach aims to restore physiologic levels of angiogenic factors,” Vassilis Tsatsaris, MD, PhD, of Cochin Hospital, Paris, said in a press release. “The reduction of sFlt-1 and the release of angiogenic factors is very significant and promising.”

Dr. Tsatsaris and his colleagues noted their next steps are to optimize the process of reducing sFlt-1 and examining how the approach works in an animal model.

“During normal pregnancy, circulating free VEGF levels are very low, almost undetectable with noncompetitive [enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay] ELISA. Whether these extremely low levels of VEGF have a physiological role during pregnancy is not known,” they wrote.

This study was funded by Agence Nationale pour la recherche, Institut Pierre Gilles de Gennes and the PremUP Foundation. One author reported receiving a grant from the Ecole Normale Supérieure and a second author reported receiving a grant from the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale. The other authors report no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Trapiella-Alfonso L et al. Hypertension. 2019. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.118.12380.

A method of apheresis using vascular endothelial growth factor functionalized magnetic beads reduced levels of the soluble form of the vascular endothelial growth factor 1 in blood from women with preeclampsia, according to recent research published in the journal Hypertension.

The approach both reduces levels of the soluble form of the vascular endothelial growth factor 1 (sFlt-1) and releases placental growth factor (PlGF), which could help restore endothelial function in women with preeclampsia. The researchers said they chose sFlt-1 as a target because of “mounting evidence of its involvement in the pathogenesis of preeclampsia.” sFlt-1 has been suspected of inhibiting angiogenic signaling through “direct sequestration of angiogenic ligands” vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and PlGF as well as “dominant-negative heterodimerization with surface VEGFRs.”

“During normal pregnancy, massive amounts of PlGF are produced by the placenta, reaching concentrations of free PlGF around 400 pg/mL, whereas during preeclampsia, free PlGF is extremely low due to the release of sFlt-1 into the maternal circulation,” the researchers said.

Using VEGF-functionalized magnetic beads, the researchers performed static and dynamic experiments using phosphate buffered saline (PBS), conditioned media, and plasma from women with preeclampsia. Under static conditions, there was a decrease of 33% for sFlt-1 and an increase of 27% for PlGF, while in dynamic conditions, there was a 40% decrease in sFlt-1 and a twofold increase in freed PlGF. When tested with plasma from women with preeclampsia, the ratio of sFlt-1/PlGF decreased by 63%, and VEGF release was associated with apheresis.

“This was a proof of concept study and our approach aims to restore physiologic levels of angiogenic factors,” Vassilis Tsatsaris, MD, PhD, of Cochin Hospital, Paris, said in a press release. “The reduction of sFlt-1 and the release of angiogenic factors is very significant and promising.”

Dr. Tsatsaris and his colleagues noted their next steps are to optimize the process of reducing sFlt-1 and examining how the approach works in an animal model.

“During normal pregnancy, circulating free VEGF levels are very low, almost undetectable with noncompetitive [enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay] ELISA. Whether these extremely low levels of VEGF have a physiological role during pregnancy is not known,” they wrote.

This study was funded by Agence Nationale pour la recherche, Institut Pierre Gilles de Gennes and the PremUP Foundation. One author reported receiving a grant from the Ecole Normale Supérieure and a second author reported receiving a grant from the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale. The other authors report no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Trapiella-Alfonso L et al. Hypertension. 2019. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.118.12380.

A method of apheresis using vascular endothelial growth factor functionalized magnetic beads reduced levels of the soluble form of the vascular endothelial growth factor 1 in blood from women with preeclampsia, according to recent research published in the journal Hypertension.

The approach both reduces levels of the soluble form of the vascular endothelial growth factor 1 (sFlt-1) and releases placental growth factor (PlGF), which could help restore endothelial function in women with preeclampsia. The researchers said they chose sFlt-1 as a target because of “mounting evidence of its involvement in the pathogenesis of preeclampsia.” sFlt-1 has been suspected of inhibiting angiogenic signaling through “direct sequestration of angiogenic ligands” vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and PlGF as well as “dominant-negative heterodimerization with surface VEGFRs.”

“During normal pregnancy, massive amounts of PlGF are produced by the placenta, reaching concentrations of free PlGF around 400 pg/mL, whereas during preeclampsia, free PlGF is extremely low due to the release of sFlt-1 into the maternal circulation,” the researchers said.

Using VEGF-functionalized magnetic beads, the researchers performed static and dynamic experiments using phosphate buffered saline (PBS), conditioned media, and plasma from women with preeclampsia. Under static conditions, there was a decrease of 33% for sFlt-1 and an increase of 27% for PlGF, while in dynamic conditions, there was a 40% decrease in sFlt-1 and a twofold increase in freed PlGF. When tested with plasma from women with preeclampsia, the ratio of sFlt-1/PlGF decreased by 63%, and VEGF release was associated with apheresis.

“This was a proof of concept study and our approach aims to restore physiologic levels of angiogenic factors,” Vassilis Tsatsaris, MD, PhD, of Cochin Hospital, Paris, said in a press release. “The reduction of sFlt-1 and the release of angiogenic factors is very significant and promising.”

Dr. Tsatsaris and his colleagues noted their next steps are to optimize the process of reducing sFlt-1 and examining how the approach works in an animal model.

“During normal pregnancy, circulating free VEGF levels are very low, almost undetectable with noncompetitive [enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay] ELISA. Whether these extremely low levels of VEGF have a physiological role during pregnancy is not known,” they wrote.

This study was funded by Agence Nationale pour la recherche, Institut Pierre Gilles de Gennes and the PremUP Foundation. One author reported receiving a grant from the Ecole Normale Supérieure and a second author reported receiving a grant from the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale. The other authors report no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Trapiella-Alfonso L et al. Hypertension. 2019. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.118.12380.

Breast cancer patients with HER2-positive disease are more likely to be nonsurgical candidates for clinical trials after neoadjuvant systemic therapy if they have eradicated both invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) disease, according to research presented in a recent webcast from the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

While there is a high rate of pathologic complete response (pCR) in HER2-postive breast cancer after neoadjuvant systemic therapy, it is difficult to determine which patients have achieved pCR because standard imaging generates a high rate of false negatives, noted Susie Sun, MD, from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.

“Although radiological imaging such as mammograms, ultrasounds, and MRIs have been shown to be unreliable in identifying patients with pCR, we have previously determined that patients with clinically significant residual disease can be accurately identified using a combination of multimodality imaging and image-guided, vacuum-assisted biopsy to the tumor bed,” Dr. Sun said in her presentation.

In the Multicenter Trial for Eliminating Breast Cancer Surgery in Exceptional Responders With Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy, Dr. Sun and colleagues enrolled 280 patients with T1-T2, N0-N1 HER2-positive breast cancer who had undergone HER2-targeted therapy, followed by surgical resection and axillary surgery. The researchers studied both the effects of neoadjuvant therapy patients with pCR and the clinicopathologic characteristics of residual disease to determine how patients with pCR differed from those with residual disease.

After neoadjuvant systemic therapy, 55.4% of pCR invasive cancer was eradicated in patients, 37.5% of both pCR invasive and DCIS cancer was eradicated in patients, and 17.9% of patients had eradication of only residual DCIS. Compared with patients where DCIS was not identified at initial biopsy, DCIS identification was associated with a higher likelihood of residual disease (69% vs. 57%; P = .04). The researchers found patients having hormone receptor–positive/HER2-positive disease was associated with a higher rate of predictive residual disease (26.6%), compared with patients who had hormone receptor–negative/HER2-positive disease (49.2%; odds ratio, 2.7; 95% confidence interval, P less than .0001).

“For the currently occurring trial, evaluating the safety of eliminating surgery for patients who are exceptional responders to neoadjuvant systemic therapy, eradication of both the invasive and DCIS components are necessary because DCIS may serve as a nidus for carcinoma in the future,” said Dr. Sun.

The researchers also studied the effectiveness of multimodality imaging on identifying pathologic response. The multimodality imaging consisted of a mammogram and ultrasound for all patients, and approximately 13% of patients had MRI in addition to mammogram and ultrasound. The multimodality imaging response after neoadjuvant systemic therapy had a sensitivity of 97.1% and a negative predictive value of 70.6% for detecting residual disease in the breast and lymph nodes.

“[O]ur study found that multimodality imaging was not reliable in assessing for pathologic response within the breast or lymph nodes,” said Dr. Sun. “Therefore, imaging alone cannot be used to select patients for no surgery. This requires patients who have image-guided percutaneous biopsy to safely select patients for inclusion and elimination of surgery trial.”

In a discussion session, Dr. Sun clarified the combination of multimodality imaging and image-guided percutaneous biopsy was used to select HER2-positive patients for a clinical trial, and is not standard of practice to determine pCR at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

Dr. Sun reported no relevant financial disclosures.

Breast cancer patients with HER2-positive disease are more likely to be nonsurgical candidates for clinical trials after neoadjuvant systemic therapy if they have eradicated both invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) disease, according to research presented in a recent webcast from the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

While there is a high rate of pathologic complete response (pCR) in HER2-postive breast cancer after neoadjuvant systemic therapy, it is difficult to determine which patients have achieved pCR because standard imaging generates a high rate of false negatives, noted Susie Sun, MD, from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.

“Although radiological imaging such as mammograms, ultrasounds, and MRIs have been shown to be unreliable in identifying patients with pCR, we have previously determined that patients with clinically significant residual disease can be accurately identified using a combination of multimodality imaging and image-guided, vacuum-assisted biopsy to the tumor bed,” Dr. Sun said in her presentation.

In the Multicenter Trial for Eliminating Breast Cancer Surgery in Exceptional Responders With Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy, Dr. Sun and colleagues enrolled 280 patients with T1-T2, N0-N1 HER2-positive breast cancer who had undergone HER2-targeted therapy, followed by surgical resection and axillary surgery. The researchers studied both the effects of neoadjuvant therapy patients with pCR and the clinicopathologic characteristics of residual disease to determine how patients with pCR differed from those with residual disease.

After neoadjuvant systemic therapy, 55.4% of pCR invasive cancer was eradicated in patients, 37.5% of both pCR invasive and DCIS cancer was eradicated in patients, and 17.9% of patients had eradication of only residual DCIS. Compared with patients where DCIS was not identified at initial biopsy, DCIS identification was associated with a higher likelihood of residual disease (69% vs. 57%; P = .04). The researchers found patients having hormone receptor–positive/HER2-positive disease was associated with a higher rate of predictive residual disease (26.6%), compared with patients who had hormone receptor–negative/HER2-positive disease (49.2%; odds ratio, 2.7; 95% confidence interval, P less than .0001).

“For the currently occurring trial, evaluating the safety of eliminating surgery for patients who are exceptional responders to neoadjuvant systemic therapy, eradication of both the invasive and DCIS components are necessary because DCIS may serve as a nidus for carcinoma in the future,” said Dr. Sun.

The researchers also studied the effectiveness of multimodality imaging on identifying pathologic response. The multimodality imaging consisted of a mammogram and ultrasound for all patients, and approximately 13% of patients had MRI in addition to mammogram and ultrasound. The multimodality imaging response after neoadjuvant systemic therapy had a sensitivity of 97.1% and a negative predictive value of 70.6% for detecting residual disease in the breast and lymph nodes.

“[O]ur study found that multimodality imaging was not reliable in assessing for pathologic response within the breast or lymph nodes,” said Dr. Sun. “Therefore, imaging alone cannot be used to select patients for no surgery. This requires patients who have image-guided percutaneous biopsy to safely select patients for inclusion and elimination of surgery trial.”

In a discussion session, Dr. Sun clarified the combination of multimodality imaging and image-guided percutaneous biopsy was used to select HER2-positive patients for a clinical trial, and is not standard of practice to determine pCR at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

Dr. Sun reported no relevant financial disclosures.

Breast cancer patients with HER2-positive disease are more likely to be nonsurgical candidates for clinical trials after neoadjuvant systemic therapy if they have eradicated both invasive and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) disease, according to research presented in a recent webcast from the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

While there is a high rate of pathologic complete response (pCR) in HER2-postive breast cancer after neoadjuvant systemic therapy, it is difficult to determine which patients have achieved pCR because standard imaging generates a high rate of false negatives, noted Susie Sun, MD, from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.

“Although radiological imaging such as mammograms, ultrasounds, and MRIs have been shown to be unreliable in identifying patients with pCR, we have previously determined that patients with clinically significant residual disease can be accurately identified using a combination of multimodality imaging and image-guided, vacuum-assisted biopsy to the tumor bed,” Dr. Sun said in her presentation.

In the Multicenter Trial for Eliminating Breast Cancer Surgery in Exceptional Responders With Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy, Dr. Sun and colleagues enrolled 280 patients with T1-T2, N0-N1 HER2-positive breast cancer who had undergone HER2-targeted therapy, followed by surgical resection and axillary surgery. The researchers studied both the effects of neoadjuvant therapy patients with pCR and the clinicopathologic characteristics of residual disease to determine how patients with pCR differed from those with residual disease.

After neoadjuvant systemic therapy, 55.4% of pCR invasive cancer was eradicated in patients, 37.5% of both pCR invasive and DCIS cancer was eradicated in patients, and 17.9% of patients had eradication of only residual DCIS. Compared with patients where DCIS was not identified at initial biopsy, DCIS identification was associated with a higher likelihood of residual disease (69% vs. 57%; P = .04). The researchers found patients having hormone receptor–positive/HER2-positive disease was associated with a higher rate of predictive residual disease (26.6%), compared with patients who had hormone receptor–negative/HER2-positive disease (49.2%; odds ratio, 2.7; 95% confidence interval, P less than .0001).

“For the currently occurring trial, evaluating the safety of eliminating surgery for patients who are exceptional responders to neoadjuvant systemic therapy, eradication of both the invasive and DCIS components are necessary because DCIS may serve as a nidus for carcinoma in the future,” said Dr. Sun.

The researchers also studied the effectiveness of multimodality imaging on identifying pathologic response. The multimodality imaging consisted of a mammogram and ultrasound for all patients, and approximately 13% of patients had MRI in addition to mammogram and ultrasound. The multimodality imaging response after neoadjuvant systemic therapy had a sensitivity of 97.1% and a negative predictive value of 70.6% for detecting residual disease in the breast and lymph nodes.

“[O]ur study found that multimodality imaging was not reliable in assessing for pathologic response within the breast or lymph nodes,” said Dr. Sun. “Therefore, imaging alone cannot be used to select patients for no surgery. This requires patients who have image-guided percutaneous biopsy to safely select patients for inclusion and elimination of surgery trial.”

In a discussion session, Dr. Sun clarified the combination of multimodality imaging and image-guided percutaneous biopsy was used to select HER2-positive patients for a clinical trial, and is not standard of practice to determine pCR at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center.

Dr. Sun reported no relevant financial disclosures.

Bioimpedance spectroscopy may better identify lymphedema progression in women at risk for breast cancer–related lymphedema over the traditionally used method of monitoring arm circumference with a tape measure, according to results from an interim analysis of the PREVENT trial presented in a recent webcast from the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

“Despite advances in breast-conserving surgery, improved radiation protocol, the advent of sentinel [node] biopsies and recent improvement in chemotherapy regimens, breast cancer–related lymphedema ... remains a major source of morbidity and concern in this patient population,” Sheila Ridner, PhD, RN, FAAN, professor of nursing at the Vanderbilt University School of Nursing in Nashville, Tenn., said in her presentation. “Because it is thought that early identification of swelling in the limbs coupled with a compression intervention may reduce the risk of patients developing full-blown clinical lymphedema, clinicians are proposing to use a prospective surveillance model to follow breast cancer survivors post surgery in order to assess limbs in a routine fashion and perhaps instigate preventative mechanisms early.”

The larger randomized controlled Prevention of Lymphedema Following Locoregional Treatment for Breast Cancer (PREVENT) trial enrolled 1,201 patients, and 200 patients overall have completed the full protocol. The researchers plan to follow patients for 3 years after surgery. In this interim analysis, Dr. Ridner and colleagues analyzed data from 508 patients at eight sites in the United States and four sites in Sydney who had stage I through stage III or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) breast cancer and underwent mastectomy, taxane-based chemotherapy, or an axillary treatment such as axillary radiation, axillary lymph node dissection, or sentinel lymph nose biopsy with more than 6 nodes.

The patients were randomized to be measured using either traditional tape measurement or bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS). Patients were moved to a prevention intervention if there was a change in baseline volume of 5% or greater but less than 10% in the tape measure group and change from baseline L-Dex measurement of 6.5 or greater in the BIS group, which consisted of wearing an arm compression sleeve and chest gauntlet for 12 hours a day over 4 weeks. After surgery, the patients were followed up at 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, and 24 months, with optional follow-up visits at 15 months and 21 months. Progression to full lymphedema was defined as a 10% or greater change in pretreatment baseline measurements in the tape measure group.

Of the 508 patients analyzed, 10 patients had already progressed to full lymphedema, leaving 498 patients available for the interim analysis. There were 68 patients in the tape measure group (28.5%) and 41 patients in the BIS group (15.8%) who received the prevention intervention, and 10 patients in the tape measure group (14.7%) and 2 patients in the BIS group (4.9%) eventually progressed to full lymphedema. In the BIS group, there was a 10% absolute reduction and 67% relative reduction in lymphedema progression, compared with the tape measure group.

“We believe that the 10% absolute reduction is clinically significant for this patient population,” said Dr. Ridner. “We also believe that our interim results may support the concept of posttreatment surveillance using BIS for early detection of subclinical lymphedema coupled with early intervention as our preliminary data suggest this does have clinical advantages to the patient.”

The study was funded by ImpediMed. Dr. Ridner reports being the principal investigator for ImpediMed and Tactile Medical through work agreements contracted between the companies and her institution.

Bioimpedance spectroscopy may better identify lymphedema progression in women at risk for breast cancer–related lymphedema over the traditionally used method of monitoring arm circumference with a tape measure, according to results from an interim analysis of the PREVENT trial presented in a recent webcast from the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

“Despite advances in breast-conserving surgery, improved radiation protocol, the advent of sentinel [node] biopsies and recent improvement in chemotherapy regimens, breast cancer–related lymphedema ... remains a major source of morbidity and concern in this patient population,” Sheila Ridner, PhD, RN, FAAN, professor of nursing at the Vanderbilt University School of Nursing in Nashville, Tenn., said in her presentation. “Because it is thought that early identification of swelling in the limbs coupled with a compression intervention may reduce the risk of patients developing full-blown clinical lymphedema, clinicians are proposing to use a prospective surveillance model to follow breast cancer survivors post surgery in order to assess limbs in a routine fashion and perhaps instigate preventative mechanisms early.”

The larger randomized controlled Prevention of Lymphedema Following Locoregional Treatment for Breast Cancer (PREVENT) trial enrolled 1,201 patients, and 200 patients overall have completed the full protocol. The researchers plan to follow patients for 3 years after surgery. In this interim analysis, Dr. Ridner and colleagues analyzed data from 508 patients at eight sites in the United States and four sites in Sydney who had stage I through stage III or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) breast cancer and underwent mastectomy, taxane-based chemotherapy, or an axillary treatment such as axillary radiation, axillary lymph node dissection, or sentinel lymph nose biopsy with more than 6 nodes.

The patients were randomized to be measured using either traditional tape measurement or bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS). Patients were moved to a prevention intervention if there was a change in baseline volume of 5% or greater but less than 10% in the tape measure group and change from baseline L-Dex measurement of 6.5 or greater in the BIS group, which consisted of wearing an arm compression sleeve and chest gauntlet for 12 hours a day over 4 weeks. After surgery, the patients were followed up at 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, and 24 months, with optional follow-up visits at 15 months and 21 months. Progression to full lymphedema was defined as a 10% or greater change in pretreatment baseline measurements in the tape measure group.

Of the 508 patients analyzed, 10 patients had already progressed to full lymphedema, leaving 498 patients available for the interim analysis. There were 68 patients in the tape measure group (28.5%) and 41 patients in the BIS group (15.8%) who received the prevention intervention, and 10 patients in the tape measure group (14.7%) and 2 patients in the BIS group (4.9%) eventually progressed to full lymphedema. In the BIS group, there was a 10% absolute reduction and 67% relative reduction in lymphedema progression, compared with the tape measure group.

“We believe that the 10% absolute reduction is clinically significant for this patient population,” said Dr. Ridner. “We also believe that our interim results may support the concept of posttreatment surveillance using BIS for early detection of subclinical lymphedema coupled with early intervention as our preliminary data suggest this does have clinical advantages to the patient.”

The study was funded by ImpediMed. Dr. Ridner reports being the principal investigator for ImpediMed and Tactile Medical through work agreements contracted between the companies and her institution.

Bioimpedance spectroscopy may better identify lymphedema progression in women at risk for breast cancer–related lymphedema over the traditionally used method of monitoring arm circumference with a tape measure, according to results from an interim analysis of the PREVENT trial presented in a recent webcast from the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

“Despite advances in breast-conserving surgery, improved radiation protocol, the advent of sentinel [node] biopsies and recent improvement in chemotherapy regimens, breast cancer–related lymphedema ... remains a major source of morbidity and concern in this patient population,” Sheila Ridner, PhD, RN, FAAN, professor of nursing at the Vanderbilt University School of Nursing in Nashville, Tenn., said in her presentation. “Because it is thought that early identification of swelling in the limbs coupled with a compression intervention may reduce the risk of patients developing full-blown clinical lymphedema, clinicians are proposing to use a prospective surveillance model to follow breast cancer survivors post surgery in order to assess limbs in a routine fashion and perhaps instigate preventative mechanisms early.”

The larger randomized controlled Prevention of Lymphedema Following Locoregional Treatment for Breast Cancer (PREVENT) trial enrolled 1,201 patients, and 200 patients overall have completed the full protocol. The researchers plan to follow patients for 3 years after surgery. In this interim analysis, Dr. Ridner and colleagues analyzed data from 508 patients at eight sites in the United States and four sites in Sydney who had stage I through stage III or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) breast cancer and underwent mastectomy, taxane-based chemotherapy, or an axillary treatment such as axillary radiation, axillary lymph node dissection, or sentinel lymph nose biopsy with more than 6 nodes.

The patients were randomized to be measured using either traditional tape measurement or bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS). Patients were moved to a prevention intervention if there was a change in baseline volume of 5% or greater but less than 10% in the tape measure group and change from baseline L-Dex measurement of 6.5 or greater in the BIS group, which consisted of wearing an arm compression sleeve and chest gauntlet for 12 hours a day over 4 weeks. After surgery, the patients were followed up at 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, and 24 months, with optional follow-up visits at 15 months and 21 months. Progression to full lymphedema was defined as a 10% or greater change in pretreatment baseline measurements in the tape measure group.

Of the 508 patients analyzed, 10 patients had already progressed to full lymphedema, leaving 498 patients available for the interim analysis. There were 68 patients in the tape measure group (28.5%) and 41 patients in the BIS group (15.8%) who received the prevention intervention, and 10 patients in the tape measure group (14.7%) and 2 patients in the BIS group (4.9%) eventually progressed to full lymphedema. In the BIS group, there was a 10% absolute reduction and 67% relative reduction in lymphedema progression, compared with the tape measure group.

“We believe that the 10% absolute reduction is clinically significant for this patient population,” said Dr. Ridner. “We also believe that our interim results may support the concept of posttreatment surveillance using BIS for early detection of subclinical lymphedema coupled with early intervention as our preliminary data suggest this does have clinical advantages to the patient.”

The study was funded by ImpediMed. Dr. Ridner reports being the principal investigator for ImpediMed and Tactile Medical through work agreements contracted between the companies and her institution.

An opioid prescription management program implemented at the Cleveland Clinic has led to a reduction in the number of narcotics prescribed to patients after breast surgery, according to research presented in a recent webcast from the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

sdominick/iStock/Getty Images

“The opioid epidemic has become a critical issue, and narcotic abuse has continued to rise,” Stephanie Valente, DO, FACS, from the Cleveland Clinic, said in her presentation. “Excess narcotic prescriptions may be contributing to this opioid epidemic,” and there are no current narcotic prescribing guidelines for patients after breast surgery, she said. In addition, studies have shown surgeons can overestimate the number of opioid pills a patient needs after surgery for pain control, and any excess pills are at risk of being stolen or inappropriately used, she added.

Dr. Valente and colleagues performed a baseline evaluation of narcotic pills prescribed by surgeons at the Cleveland Clinic for patients who have undergone excisional biopsy or lumpectomy, mastectomy, and mastectomy with reconstruction. They found the median number of narcotics prescribed were 15 pills for excisional biopsy or lumpectomy patients, 20 pills for mastectomy patients and 28 pills for mastectomy with reconstruction patients.

The researchers sought to lower those numbers, and created a departmental change in which they decreased the median number of pills prescribed at discharge from 15 pills to 10 pills for excisional biopsy or lumpectomy patients and from 28 pills to 25 pills for patients who undergo mastectomy with reconstruction. They then examined 100 consecutive patients after a 3-month implementation period to determine whether prescribing numbers had changed and found the surgeons adhered to the prescribing guidelines, which resulted in a statistically significant reduction in median opioid pills prescribed for excisional biopsy or lumpectomy (P less than .01) and mastectomy with reconstruction patients (P less than .01).

“After their departmental plan change, we observed that, as planned, a statistically significant decrease in prescribing practices amongst surgeons was able to be performed, showing that surgeons were able to adhere to these new prescribing practices,” said Dr. Valente.

When they examined the number of pills patients reported they used after surgery, they found excisional biopsy or lumpectomy patients took an average of 1 pill, mastectomy patients took an average of 3 pills, and mastectomy with reconstruction patients took an average of 18 pills. “These were all statistically much less than what was being prescribed even after our purposeful reduction,” said Dr. Valente.

In the study, 40% of patients who underwent breast surgery overall reported that they did not have any postoperative narcotic use at all, with the least narcotic use seen among patients who underwent excisional biopsy or lumpectomy.

“Further directions for opiate reduction can include evaluation of the impact of type and amount of local anesthetic given intraoperatively, and the amount of narcotics used postoperatively … to identify patient factors that contribute to the low narcotic usage postoperatively, and finally, to figure out how to maximize the benefit of adding a formal ERAS [enhanced recovery after surgery] protocol to further reduce patient needs for as many narcotic pills,” said Dr. Valente.

Dr. Valente had no disclosures.

An opioid prescription management program implemented at the Cleveland Clinic has led to a reduction in the number of narcotics prescribed to patients after breast surgery, according to research presented in a recent webcast from the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

sdominick/iStock/Getty Images

“The opioid epidemic has become a critical issue, and narcotic abuse has continued to rise,” Stephanie Valente, DO, FACS, from the Cleveland Clinic, said in her presentation. “Excess narcotic prescriptions may be contributing to this opioid epidemic,” and there are no current narcotic prescribing guidelines for patients after breast surgery, she said. In addition, studies have shown surgeons can overestimate the number of opioid pills a patient needs after surgery for pain control, and any excess pills are at risk of being stolen or inappropriately used, she added.

Dr. Valente and colleagues performed a baseline evaluation of narcotic pills prescribed by surgeons at the Cleveland Clinic for patients who have undergone excisional biopsy or lumpectomy, mastectomy, and mastectomy with reconstruction. They found the median number of narcotics prescribed were 15 pills for excisional biopsy or lumpectomy patients, 20 pills for mastectomy patients and 28 pills for mastectomy with reconstruction patients.

The researchers sought to lower those numbers, and created a departmental change in which they decreased the median number of pills prescribed at discharge from 15 pills to 10 pills for excisional biopsy or lumpectomy patients and from 28 pills to 25 pills for patients who undergo mastectomy with reconstruction. They then examined 100 consecutive patients after a 3-month implementation period to determine whether prescribing numbers had changed and found the surgeons adhered to the prescribing guidelines, which resulted in a statistically significant reduction in median opioid pills prescribed for excisional biopsy or lumpectomy (P less than .01) and mastectomy with reconstruction patients (P less than .01).

“After their departmental plan change, we observed that, as planned, a statistically significant decrease in prescribing practices amongst surgeons was able to be performed, showing that surgeons were able to adhere to these new prescribing practices,” said Dr. Valente.

When they examined the number of pills patients reported they used after surgery, they found excisional biopsy or lumpectomy patients took an average of 1 pill, mastectomy patients took an average of 3 pills, and mastectomy with reconstruction patients took an average of 18 pills. “These were all statistically much less than what was being prescribed even after our purposeful reduction,” said Dr. Valente.

In the study, 40% of patients who underwent breast surgery overall reported that they did not have any postoperative narcotic use at all, with the least narcotic use seen among patients who underwent excisional biopsy or lumpectomy.

“Further directions for opiate reduction can include evaluation of the impact of type and amount of local anesthetic given intraoperatively, and the amount of narcotics used postoperatively … to identify patient factors that contribute to the low narcotic usage postoperatively, and finally, to figure out how to maximize the benefit of adding a formal ERAS [enhanced recovery after surgery] protocol to further reduce patient needs for as many narcotic pills,” said Dr. Valente.

Dr. Valente had no disclosures.

An opioid prescription management program implemented at the Cleveland Clinic has led to a reduction in the number of narcotics prescribed to patients after breast surgery, according to research presented in a recent webcast from the annual meeting of the American Society of Breast Surgeons.

sdominick/iStock/Getty Images

“The opioid epidemic has become a critical issue, and narcotic abuse has continued to rise,” Stephanie Valente, DO, FACS, from the Cleveland Clinic, said in her presentation. “Excess narcotic prescriptions may be contributing to this opioid epidemic,” and there are no current narcotic prescribing guidelines for patients after breast surgery, she said. In addition, studies have shown surgeons can overestimate the number of opioid pills a patient needs after surgery for pain control, and any excess pills are at risk of being stolen or inappropriately used, she added.

Dr. Valente and colleagues performed a baseline evaluation of narcotic pills prescribed by surgeons at the Cleveland Clinic for patients who have undergone excisional biopsy or lumpectomy, mastectomy, and mastectomy with reconstruction. They found the median number of narcotics prescribed were 15 pills for excisional biopsy or lumpectomy patients, 20 pills for mastectomy patients and 28 pills for mastectomy with reconstruction patients.

The researchers sought to lower those numbers, and created a departmental change in which they decreased the median number of pills prescribed at discharge from 15 pills to 10 pills for excisional biopsy or lumpectomy patients and from 28 pills to 25 pills for patients who undergo mastectomy with reconstruction. They then examined 100 consecutive patients after a 3-month implementation period to determine whether prescribing numbers had changed and found the surgeons adhered to the prescribing guidelines, which resulted in a statistically significant reduction in median opioid pills prescribed for excisional biopsy or lumpectomy (P less than .01) and mastectomy with reconstruction patients (P less than .01).

“After their departmental plan change, we observed that, as planned, a statistically significant decrease in prescribing practices amongst surgeons was able to be performed, showing that surgeons were able to adhere to these new prescribing practices,” said Dr. Valente.

When they examined the number of pills patients reported they used after surgery, they found excisional biopsy or lumpectomy patients took an average of 1 pill, mastectomy patients took an average of 3 pills, and mastectomy with reconstruction patients took an average of 18 pills. “These were all statistically much less than what was being prescribed even after our purposeful reduction,” said Dr. Valente.

In the study, 40% of patients who underwent breast surgery overall reported that they did not have any postoperative narcotic use at all, with the least narcotic use seen among patients who underwent excisional biopsy or lumpectomy.

“Further directions for opiate reduction can include evaluation of the impact of type and amount of local anesthetic given intraoperatively, and the amount of narcotics used postoperatively … to identify patient factors that contribute to the low narcotic usage postoperatively, and finally, to figure out how to maximize the benefit of adding a formal ERAS [enhanced recovery after surgery] protocol to further reduce patient needs for as many narcotic pills,” said Dr. Valente.

Dr. Valente had no disclosures.

Long-term use of alendronate and zoledronic acid for more than 3 years reduces the rate of vertebral fracture in treatment-naive postmenopausal women with notable, yet rare, adverse events, but too little evidence exists to make determinations on the long-term benefit/risk profile of other bisphosphonates or other osteoporosis drugs besides raloxifene and oral hormone therapy, according to a report coming out of a recent National Institutes of Health workshop.

This situation leaves a large research gap that authors of an accompanying position paper hope to bridge with recommendations for studying therapy discontinuation and drug holidays during long-term osteoporosis drug treatment.

The NIH’s Pathways to Prevention (P2P) Workshop: Appropriate Use of Drug Therapies for Osteoporotic Fracture Prevention outlined the findings of the systematic review of long-term osteoporosis drug treatment (ODT), which was commissioned by the NIH Office of Disease Prevention. The systematic review and a position paper summarizing the workshop were published April 23 in Annals of Internal Medicine.

“Clinicians and patients need increased information on benefits and risks to inform shared decision making about the use of these treatments, taking into account patients’ values and preferences,” Albert Siu, MD, of the Brookdale Department of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, and his colleagues wrote in the position paper (Ann Intern Med. 2019 Apr 23. doi: 10.7326/M19-0961). “The research ... is urgently needed to advance prevention of osteoporosis-related mortality and morbidity.”

In the systematic review, by a group of researchers separate from the workshop, 48 studies were identified (35 trials, 13 observational studies) that compared men and postmenopausal women 50 years or older who used treatments such as alendronate, raloxifene, zoledronic acid, and hormone therapy. The researchers found that use of alendronate for 4 years reduced the rate of clinical fractures (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.82) and radiographic vertebral fractures (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.31-0.82) in women with osteoporosis. Raloxifene use for 4 years reduced the rate of clinical vertebral fractures (relative risk, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43-0.79) and radiographic vertebral fractures (RR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53-0.76) but not nonvertebral fractures. Zoledronic acid use for 6 years was associated with a lower rate of nonvertebral fractures (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.51-0.85) and clinical vertebral fractures (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22-0.75) in women with both osteoporosis and osteopenia. Estrogen-progestin use for 5.6 years and unopposed estrogen for 7 years was associated with clinical fracture reduction in women with unspecified osteoporosis and osteopenia when compared with placebo (Ann Intern Med. 2019 April 23. doi: 10.7326/M19-0533).

Controlled observational studies collectively show that long-term use of alendronate and of bisphosphonates as a class increased risk for radiologically confirmed atypical femoral fracture but by a small absolute amount, with less evidence for risks of subtrochanteric or femoral shaft fractures without radiologically confirmed atypical femoral fracture features and osteonecrosis of the jaw. However, there were no eligible observational studies with long-term use of zoledronic acid that evaluated risk for these adverse events.

Long-term raloxifene therapy was associated with a threefold increased risk for deep venous thrombosis and a three- to fourfold increased risk for pulmonary embolism, although not all results were statistically significant, the researchers said. In two long-term trials, both estrogen and estrogen-progestin compared with placebo increased risk for cardiovascular disease and cognitive impairment. Estrogen-progestin also increased risk for invasive breast cancer.

The researchers also studied abaloparatide, denosumab, ibandronate, risedronate, and teriparatide, but noted there were insufficient data to show the long-term effects of their use on fractures and other harms.

Dr. Siu and coauthors on the position paper made the following recommendations with regard to future research on long-term ODT:

• Using “innovative designs and approaches” for new research such as modeling studies, clinical trials, and observational studies of existing and potential treatments.

• Evaluating new agents or multicomponent interventions, such as fracture liaison services and oral care, that do not carry the downsides of antiresorptive therapies.

• Researching and preventing atypical femoral fracture and osteonecrosis of the jaw, particularly when associated with long-term denosumab or bisphosphonate use.

• Determining which patients are indicated for drug holidays, sequential therapies, and strategies for avoiding serious adverse events.

• Studying barriers to ODT.

“When we have information on these outcomes, such as how medication use after a fragility fracture is linked to future fractures or survival rates, we need to understand how to convey that information to patients so they can make more informed decisions about their care,” noted Dr. Siu and colleagues.

In an editorial related to both the position paper and the systematic review, Carolyn J. Crandall, MD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, agreed that clinical trial data do not answer questions about shared decision making for women with multiple comorbid conditions, the long-term effects of ODT with regard to rare fracture risk, and which patients are well-suited for drug holidays.

“The National Institutes of Health should support research to answer these high-impact clinical questions, in addition to encouraging approaches for clinicians to determine which individual patients are at greater risk for harms related to long-term bisphosphonate use,” she said. “The need to rigorously study patient preferences in the context of ODT is pressing because of the complex dosing instructions of oral bisphosphonates and the dramatic underutilization of ODT among persons who have already had a vertebral or hip fracture.”

The systematic review was funded by the National Institutes of Health and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The authors of the position paper and Dr. Crandall reported no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Siu A et al. Ann Intern Med. 2019 April 23. doi: 10.7326/M19-0961.

Long-term use of alendronate and zoledronic acid for more than 3 years reduces the rate of vertebral fracture in treatment-naive postmenopausal women with notable, yet rare, adverse events, but too little evidence exists to make determinations on the long-term benefit/risk profile of other bisphosphonates or other osteoporosis drugs besides raloxifene and oral hormone therapy, according to a report coming out of a recent National Institutes of Health workshop.

This situation leaves a large research gap that authors of an accompanying position paper hope to bridge with recommendations for studying therapy discontinuation and drug holidays during long-term osteoporosis drug treatment.

The NIH’s Pathways to Prevention (P2P) Workshop: Appropriate Use of Drug Therapies for Osteoporotic Fracture Prevention outlined the findings of the systematic review of long-term osteoporosis drug treatment (ODT), which was commissioned by the NIH Office of Disease Prevention. The systematic review and a position paper summarizing the workshop were published April 23 in Annals of Internal Medicine.

“Clinicians and patients need increased information on benefits and risks to inform shared decision making about the use of these treatments, taking into account patients’ values and preferences,” Albert Siu, MD, of the Brookdale Department of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, and his colleagues wrote in the position paper (Ann Intern Med. 2019 Apr 23. doi: 10.7326/M19-0961). “The research ... is urgently needed to advance prevention of osteoporosis-related mortality and morbidity.”

In the systematic review, by a group of researchers separate from the workshop, 48 studies were identified (35 trials, 13 observational studies) that compared men and postmenopausal women 50 years or older who used treatments such as alendronate, raloxifene, zoledronic acid, and hormone therapy. The researchers found that use of alendronate for 4 years reduced the rate of clinical fractures (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.82) and radiographic vertebral fractures (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.31-0.82) in women with osteoporosis. Raloxifene use for 4 years reduced the rate of clinical vertebral fractures (relative risk, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43-0.79) and radiographic vertebral fractures (RR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53-0.76) but not nonvertebral fractures. Zoledronic acid use for 6 years was associated with a lower rate of nonvertebral fractures (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.51-0.85) and clinical vertebral fractures (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22-0.75) in women with both osteoporosis and osteopenia. Estrogen-progestin use for 5.6 years and unopposed estrogen for 7 years was associated with clinical fracture reduction in women with unspecified osteoporosis and osteopenia when compared with placebo (Ann Intern Med. 2019 April 23. doi: 10.7326/M19-0533).

Controlled observational studies collectively show that long-term use of alendronate and of bisphosphonates as a class increased risk for radiologically confirmed atypical femoral fracture but by a small absolute amount, with less evidence for risks of subtrochanteric or femoral shaft fractures without radiologically confirmed atypical femoral fracture features and osteonecrosis of the jaw. However, there were no eligible observational studies with long-term use of zoledronic acid that evaluated risk for these adverse events.

Long-term raloxifene therapy was associated with a threefold increased risk for deep venous thrombosis and a three- to fourfold increased risk for pulmonary embolism, although not all results were statistically significant, the researchers said. In two long-term trials, both estrogen and estrogen-progestin compared with placebo increased risk for cardiovascular disease and cognitive impairment. Estrogen-progestin also increased risk for invasive breast cancer.

The researchers also studied abaloparatide, denosumab, ibandronate, risedronate, and teriparatide, but noted there were insufficient data to show the long-term effects of their use on fractures and other harms.

Dr. Siu and coauthors on the position paper made the following recommendations with regard to future research on long-term ODT:

• Using “innovative designs and approaches” for new research such as modeling studies, clinical trials, and observational studies of existing and potential treatments.

• Evaluating new agents or multicomponent interventions, such as fracture liaison services and oral care, that do not carry the downsides of antiresorptive therapies.

• Researching and preventing atypical femoral fracture and osteonecrosis of the jaw, particularly when associated with long-term denosumab or bisphosphonate use.

• Determining which patients are indicated for drug holidays, sequential therapies, and strategies for avoiding serious adverse events.

• Studying barriers to ODT.

“When we have information on these outcomes, such as how medication use after a fragility fracture is linked to future fractures or survival rates, we need to understand how to convey that information to patients so they can make more informed decisions about their care,” noted Dr. Siu and colleagues.

In an editorial related to both the position paper and the systematic review, Carolyn J. Crandall, MD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, agreed that clinical trial data do not answer questions about shared decision making for women with multiple comorbid conditions, the long-term effects of ODT with regard to rare fracture risk, and which patients are well-suited for drug holidays.

“The National Institutes of Health should support research to answer these high-impact clinical questions, in addition to encouraging approaches for clinicians to determine which individual patients are at greater risk for harms related to long-term bisphosphonate use,” she said. “The need to rigorously study patient preferences in the context of ODT is pressing because of the complex dosing instructions of oral bisphosphonates and the dramatic underutilization of ODT among persons who have already had a vertebral or hip fracture.”

The systematic review was funded by the National Institutes of Health and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The authors of the position paper and Dr. Crandall reported no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Siu A et al. Ann Intern Med. 2019 April 23. doi: 10.7326/M19-0961.

Long-term use of alendronate and zoledronic acid for more than 3 years reduces the rate of vertebral fracture in treatment-naive postmenopausal women with notable, yet rare, adverse events, but too little evidence exists to make determinations on the long-term benefit/risk profile of other bisphosphonates or other osteoporosis drugs besides raloxifene and oral hormone therapy, according to a report coming out of a recent National Institutes of Health workshop.

This situation leaves a large research gap that authors of an accompanying position paper hope to bridge with recommendations for studying therapy discontinuation and drug holidays during long-term osteoporosis drug treatment.

The NIH’s Pathways to Prevention (P2P) Workshop: Appropriate Use of Drug Therapies for Osteoporotic Fracture Prevention outlined the findings of the systematic review of long-term osteoporosis drug treatment (ODT), which was commissioned by the NIH Office of Disease Prevention. The systematic review and a position paper summarizing the workshop were published April 23 in Annals of Internal Medicine.

“Clinicians and patients need increased information on benefits and risks to inform shared decision making about the use of these treatments, taking into account patients’ values and preferences,” Albert Siu, MD, of the Brookdale Department of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, and his colleagues wrote in the position paper (Ann Intern Med. 2019 Apr 23. doi: 10.7326/M19-0961). “The research ... is urgently needed to advance prevention of osteoporosis-related mortality and morbidity.”

In the systematic review, by a group of researchers separate from the workshop, 48 studies were identified (35 trials, 13 observational studies) that compared men and postmenopausal women 50 years or older who used treatments such as alendronate, raloxifene, zoledronic acid, and hormone therapy. The researchers found that use of alendronate for 4 years reduced the rate of clinical fractures (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.82) and radiographic vertebral fractures (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.31-0.82) in women with osteoporosis. Raloxifene use for 4 years reduced the rate of clinical vertebral fractures (relative risk, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43-0.79) and radiographic vertebral fractures (RR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53-0.76) but not nonvertebral fractures. Zoledronic acid use for 6 years was associated with a lower rate of nonvertebral fractures (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.51-0.85) and clinical vertebral fractures (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22-0.75) in women with both osteoporosis and osteopenia. Estrogen-progestin use for 5.6 years and unopposed estrogen for 7 years was associated with clinical fracture reduction in women with unspecified osteoporosis and osteopenia when compared with placebo (Ann Intern Med. 2019 April 23. doi: 10.7326/M19-0533).

Controlled observational studies collectively show that long-term use of alendronate and of bisphosphonates as a class increased risk for radiologically confirmed atypical femoral fracture but by a small absolute amount, with less evidence for risks of subtrochanteric or femoral shaft fractures without radiologically confirmed atypical femoral fracture features and osteonecrosis of the jaw. However, there were no eligible observational studies with long-term use of zoledronic acid that evaluated risk for these adverse events.

Long-term raloxifene therapy was associated with a threefold increased risk for deep venous thrombosis and a three- to fourfold increased risk for pulmonary embolism, although not all results were statistically significant, the researchers said. In two long-term trials, both estrogen and estrogen-progestin compared with placebo increased risk for cardiovascular disease and cognitive impairment. Estrogen-progestin also increased risk for invasive breast cancer.

The researchers also studied abaloparatide, denosumab, ibandronate, risedronate, and teriparatide, but noted there were insufficient data to show the long-term effects of their use on fractures and other harms.

Dr. Siu and coauthors on the position paper made the following recommendations with regard to future research on long-term ODT:

• Using “innovative designs and approaches” for new research such as modeling studies, clinical trials, and observational studies of existing and potential treatments.

• Evaluating new agents or multicomponent interventions, such as fracture liaison services and oral care, that do not carry the downsides of antiresorptive therapies.

• Researching and preventing atypical femoral fracture and osteonecrosis of the jaw, particularly when associated with long-term denosumab or bisphosphonate use.

• Determining which patients are indicated for drug holidays, sequential therapies, and strategies for avoiding serious adverse events.

• Studying barriers to ODT.

“When we have information on these outcomes, such as how medication use after a fragility fracture is linked to future fractures or survival rates, we need to understand how to convey that information to patients so they can make more informed decisions about their care,” noted Dr. Siu and colleagues.

In an editorial related to both the position paper and the systematic review, Carolyn J. Crandall, MD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, agreed that clinical trial data do not answer questions about shared decision making for women with multiple comorbid conditions, the long-term effects of ODT with regard to rare fracture risk, and which patients are well-suited for drug holidays.

“The National Institutes of Health should support research to answer these high-impact clinical questions, in addition to encouraging approaches for clinicians to determine which individual patients are at greater risk for harms related to long-term bisphosphonate use,” she said. “The need to rigorously study patient preferences in the context of ODT is pressing because of the complex dosing instructions of oral bisphosphonates and the dramatic underutilization of ODT among persons who have already had a vertebral or hip fracture.”

The systematic review was funded by the National Institutes of Health and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The authors of the position paper and Dr. Crandall reported no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Siu A et al. Ann Intern Med. 2019 April 23. doi: 10.7326/M19-0961.

WASHINGTON – Smartphone applications that provide advice to people about their skin lesions may provide misleading information that could result in not seeking care from a dermatologist, Suephy C. Chen, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology.

Jeff Craven/MDedge News

Even with disclaimers, there are people who want a “quick and easy answer,” and these apps can provide misleading information that “can lead them down a wrong diagnostic pathway,” said Dr. Chen, professor of dermatology and director of the teledermatology service at Emory University, Atlanta. Users not only include lower income or uninsured patients, but busy, high-powered executives.

Apps focused on photo storage are used to help patients track lesions for changes, with some apps dedicated to total body mole mapping. However, while these apps may empower patients to perform regular self skin checks, there is a question of whether they are HIPAA secure, Dr. Chen said. Another issue is that the many different app choices on the market may make it difficult for providers to keep up with which app a particular patient is using, she added. “If you have 10 different patients coming in with 10 different apps, it’s going to be really hard for you to learn all of those and be able to manipulate that easily, especially in the 15-minute slot.”

Smartphone and tablet apps that offer reminders to perform monthly skin checks or apply sunscreen when outdoors are plentiful. Dr. Chen noted that, while the efficacy of these apps are not known, they are similar to less high-tech technology like alarms or calendar reminders. “[They] are really kind of neat and fun. It’s kind of boring to just get a reminder, and you tune it out if you get a reminder on your calendars, so this may be a new way to help people,” she said.


Wearables also track users’ sun exposure, and range from a UV sensor on the thumb that measures sun exposure over a period of months to clip-on wearables and temporary tattoos that tell users when to apply or reapply sunscreen. Some devices allow entry of an individual’s Fitzpatrick skin type and can detect temperature and humidity, she noted.

Risk-calculating apps use images taken from smartphone cameras to determine the risk of melanoma, using algorithms that consider color and pattern recognition, but these apps are not as accurate as dermatologists, she said. In a study published in 2013, the app that sent images directly to a dermatologist was the most effective, compared with apps that relied on an automated algorithm to analyze the images (JAMA Dermatol. 2013 Apr;149[4]:422-6).

One of the conclusions the authors made was that feedback was slow for the one that required the image be sent to a dermatologist. “As opposed to just a minute and spitting out the result, it took 24 hours. My argument is 24 hours is still a lot faster than if you tried to call and get an appointment with a dermatologist,” Dr. Chen commented.

One step above teledermatology is teledermoscopy, or using a mobile, smartphone-attached device to send images to a dermatologist over a secure cloud service for review. “Most of us would agree that it would just take too long to do a live video with a patient,” Dr. Chen pointed out. “They may as well just come in anyway. It’ll take you 40 minutes to be able to take a look at that mole on the video, but to do it in a store-and-forward format can be quite efficient.”

However, she noted that one barrier to entry for teledermoscopy is defining the type of service, such as whether apps will offer provider-to-provider or patient-to-provider services. “That is fraught with its own details and issues, especially with photo quality.”


Another barrier, reimbursement from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for teledermatology, is “the real sticking point,” Dr. Chen continued. Under a 2019 CMS Final Rule, telemedicine is only covered if the patient is already established within the practice, and reimbursement for Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes G2010 and G2012 relating to telemedicine ranges between $12 and $14.

Based on her back-of-the-envelope calculation, she added, “I would have to see 180 patients in a half-day session by this method in order to generate my salary, and that would just be impossible.”

Dr. Chen said that teledermatology is the “way of the future” and hopes the CMS Final Rule is reconsidered so the technology can be used to help solve some of the growing issues in the dermatology field. “There’s no way we can meet the demands of an increasingly aging population by an in-person brick and mortar sort of paradigm,” she said, noting that, even in an urban setting, it can be difficult to see a dermatologist.

Dr. Chen reports relationships with BioPharmX, Dermecular Therapeutics, Leo Pharma, Phoenix Tissue Repair, Trevi Therapeutics, and Unilever.

WASHINGTON – Smartphone applications that provide advice to people about their skin lesions may provide misleading information that could result in not seeking care from a dermatologist, Suephy C. Chen, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology.

Jeff Craven/MDedge News

Even with disclaimers, there are people who want a “quick and easy answer,” and these apps can provide misleading information that “can lead them down a wrong diagnostic pathway,” said Dr. Chen, professor of dermatology and director of the teledermatology service at Emory University, Atlanta. Users not only include lower income or uninsured patients, but busy, high-powered executives.

Apps focused on photo storage are used to help patients track lesions for changes, with some apps dedicated to total body mole mapping. However, while these apps may empower patients to perform regular self skin checks, there is a question of whether they are HIPAA secure, Dr. Chen said. Another issue is that the many different app choices on the market may make it difficult for providers to keep up with which app a particular patient is using, she added. “If you have 10 different patients coming in with 10 different apps, it’s going to be really hard for you to learn all of those and be able to manipulate that easily, especially in the 15-minute slot.”

Smartphone and tablet apps that offer reminders to perform monthly skin checks or apply sunscreen when outdoors are plentiful. Dr. Chen noted that, while the efficacy of these apps are not known, they are similar to less high-tech technology like alarms or calendar reminders. “[They] are really kind of neat and fun. It’s kind of boring to just get a reminder, and you tune it out if you get a reminder on your calendars, so this may be a new way to help people,” she said.


Wearables also track users’ sun exposure, and range from a UV sensor on the thumb that measures sun exposure over a period of months to clip-on wearables and temporary tattoos that tell users when to apply or reapply sunscreen. Some devices allow entry of an individual’s Fitzpatrick skin type and can detect temperature and humidity, she noted.

Risk-calculating apps use images taken from smartphone cameras to determine the risk of melanoma, using algorithms that consider color and pattern recognition, but these apps are not as accurate as dermatologists, she said. In a study published in 2013, the app that sent images directly to a dermatologist was the most effective, compared with apps that relied on an automated algorithm to analyze the images (JAMA Dermatol. 2013 Apr;149[4]:422-6).

One of the conclusions the authors made was that feedback was slow for the one that required the image be sent to a dermatologist. “As opposed to just a minute and spitting out the result, it took 24 hours. My argument is 24 hours is still a lot faster than if you tried to call and get an appointment with a dermatologist,” Dr. Chen commented.

One step above teledermatology is teledermoscopy, or using a mobile, smartphone-attached device to send images to a dermatologist over a secure cloud service for review. “Most of us would agree that it would just take too long to do a live video with a patient,” Dr. Chen pointed out. “They may as well just come in anyway. It’ll take you 40 minutes to be able to take a look at that mole on the video, but to do it in a store-and-forward format can be quite efficient.”

However, she noted that one barrier to entry for teledermoscopy is defining the type of service, such as whether apps will offer provider-to-provider or patient-to-provider services. “That is fraught with its own details and issues, especially with photo quality.”


Another barrier, reimbursement from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for teledermatology, is “the real sticking point,” Dr. Chen continued. Under a 2019 CMS Final Rule, telemedicine is only covered if the patient is already established within the practice, and reimbursement for Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes G2010 and G2012 relating to telemedicine ranges between $12 and $14.

Based on her back-of-the-envelope calculation, she added, “I would have to see 180 patients in a half-day session by this method in order to generate my salary, and that would just be impossible.”

Dr. Chen said that teledermatology is the “way of the future” and hopes the CMS Final Rule is reconsidered so the technology can be used to help solve some of the growing issues in the dermatology field. “There’s no way we can meet the demands of an increasingly aging population by an in-person brick and mortar sort of paradigm,” she said, noting that, even in an urban setting, it can be difficult to see a dermatologist.

Dr. Chen reports relationships with BioPharmX, Dermecular Therapeutics, Leo Pharma, Phoenix Tissue Repair, Trevi Therapeutics, and Unilever.

WASHINGTON – Smartphone applications that provide advice to people about their skin lesions may provide misleading information that could result in not seeking care from a dermatologist, Suephy C. Chen, MD, said at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Dermatology.

Jeff Craven/MDedge News

Even with disclaimers, there are people who want a “quick and easy answer,” and these apps can provide misleading information that “can lead them down a wrong diagnostic pathway,” said Dr. Chen, professor of dermatology and director of the teledermatology service at Emory University, Atlanta. Users not only include lower income or uninsured patients, but busy, high-powered executives.

Apps focused on photo storage are used to help patients track lesions for changes, with some apps dedicated to total body mole mapping. However, while these apps may empower patients to perform regular self skin checks, there is a question of whether they are HIPAA secure, Dr. Chen said. Another issue is that the many different app choices on the market may make it difficult for providers to keep up with which app a particular patient is using, she added. “If you have 10 different patients coming in with 10 different apps, it’s going to be really hard for you to learn all of those and be able to manipulate that easily, especially in the 15-minute slot.”

Smartphone and tablet apps that offer reminders to perform monthly skin checks or apply sunscreen when outdoors are plentiful. Dr. Chen noted that, while the efficacy of these apps are not known, they are similar to less high-tech technology like alarms or calendar reminders. “[They] are really kind of neat and fun. It’s kind of boring to just get a reminder, and you tune it out if you get a reminder on your calendars, so this may be a new way to help people,” she said.


Wearables also track users’ sun exposure, and range from a UV sensor on the thumb that measures sun exposure over a period of months to clip-on wearables and temporary tattoos that tell users when to apply or reapply sunscreen. Some devices allow entry of an individual’s Fitzpatrick skin type and can detect temperature and humidity, she noted.

Risk-calculating apps use images taken from smartphone cameras to determine the risk of melanoma, using algorithms that consider color and pattern recognition, but these apps are not as accurate as dermatologists, she said. In a study published in 2013, the app that sent images directly to a dermatologist was the most effective, compared with apps that relied on an automated algorithm to analyze the images (JAMA Dermatol. 2013 Apr;149[4]:422-6).

One of the conclusions the authors made was that feedback was slow for the one that required the image be sent to a dermatologist. “As opposed to just a minute and spitting out the result, it took 24 hours. My argument is 24 hours is still a lot faster than if you tried to call and get an appointment with a dermatologist,” Dr. Chen commented.

One step above teledermatology is teledermoscopy, or using a mobile, smartphone-attached device to send images to a dermatologist over a secure cloud service for review. “Most of us would agree that it would just take too long to do a live video with a patient,” Dr. Chen pointed out. “They may as well just come in anyway. It’ll take you 40 minutes to be able to take a look at that mole on the video, but to do it in a store-and-forward format can be quite efficient.”

However, she noted that one barrier to entry for teledermoscopy is defining the type of service, such as whether apps will offer provider-to-provider or patient-to-provider services. “That is fraught with its own details and issues, especially with photo quality.”


Another barrier, reimbursement from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for teledermatology, is “the real sticking point,” Dr. Chen continued. Under a 2019 CMS Final Rule, telemedicine is only covered if the patient is already established within the practice, and reimbursement for Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System codes G2010 and G2012 relating to telemedicine ranges between $12 and $14.

Based on her back-of-the-envelope calculation, she added, “I would have to see 180 patients in a half-day session by this method in order to generate my salary, and that would just be impossible.”

Dr. Chen said that teledermatology is the “way of the future” and hopes the CMS Final Rule is reconsidered so the technology can be used to help solve some of the growing issues in the dermatology field. “There’s no way we can meet the demands of an increasingly aging population by an in-person brick and mortar sort of paradigm,” she said, noting that, even in an urban setting, it can be difficult to see a dermatologist.

Dr. Chen reports relationships with BioPharmX, Dermecular Therapeutics, Leo Pharma, Phoenix Tissue Repair, Trevi Therapeutics, and Unilever.

Rigorous evidence is unavailable for most interventions for treating hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), so management needs to be individualized, according to the first North American guidelines from the United States and Canadian Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundations for the management and treatment of the disorder.

Christopher Sayed, MD

Adalimumab (Humira), a tumor necrosis factor blocker, was the only therapy for which level 1A evidence is available, and this is because of its study in large-scale randomized controlled trials. (The Food and Drug Administration approved adalimumab in 2015 for treating moderate to severe HS.) Other biologic therapies such as infliximab, anakinra, and ustekinumab carry level 2B recommendations, which Dr. Sayed said will likely influence the availability of these therapies.

Similarly, Nd:YAG laser carries a level 2B recommendation, as does wide excision surgical intervention.


Many of the other treatment modalities explored in the guidelines are not well supported by the literature, according to Dr. Sayed . “The vast majority ... had category C recommendations,” he said. “Some things we tried to evaluate that, really, we can’t give any recommendation on at all because there was no evidence.” He noted that changes in lifestyle and dietary practices are issues patients with HS frequently bring up, but they carry very little evidence of benefit in the literature.

“Even things we use very commonly in HS are often supported by weak evidence because we have to rely on clinical experience. ... There’s just not funding for trials of older drugs or lifestyle interventions,” he said. Treatment mainstays such as tetracycline-class antibiotics, for example, similarly have no large-scale randomized controlled trials to support their use.

Consider comorbidity screening

Treatment is frequently complicated by patient comorbidities, including type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), and impaired sexual health, said Dr. Sayed.

“The disease leads to scarring and disfigurement, and can [have a] higher impact on quality of life than almost any other dermatologic disease if you compare them side by side using quality of life measures,” he noted. “We know these patients are more likely to have depression, there are high rates of suicide among these patients. A lot of that has to do with the fact that it’s a chronic disease where there is pain and disfigurement, and patients often grow very, very frustrated in part due to the disease.”

He advised consistent follow-up to ensure patients are not frustrated because of lack of perceived progress.
 

No one-size-fits-all approach

Dr. Sayed said individualized management is one of the most important parts of taking care of a patient with HS. For example, patients with Hurley stage 1 and Hurley stage 2 variations of the disease may present very differently, and that is the reason why the guidelines do not offer a stepwise treatment algorithm for the disease.

“[The guidelines] have many treatments that may overlap different stages of disease, where those things might need to be used together,” he said. “It takes a lot of discussion with patients about their treatment preferences and listening to whether their disease is progressing or not, whether or not it’s stable, and then trying to figure out whether things like surgery fit into the treatment strategy.”


Despite these recommendations, there may be situations where the answer is not listed in the guidelines. “The guidelines are based on evidence that’s available at the time we review the literature,” he said. “For many patients, they may fail every treatment that’s recommended within the guidelines. There will be times where you have to be creative for patients and go beyond what the guidelines can currently recommend and give patients the treatment that they need even when it seems like all options have been exhausted.”

The authors report relationships with 3M, AbbVie, Adelphi Values, Amgen, BSN, Celgene, Chemocentryx, Coloplast, Galderma, Hidramed Solutions, Hollister, the HS Foundation, Incyte, InflaRx, Integra, Janssen, KCI Inc., Lenicura, Leo, Lilly, The Microdermis Corporation, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Valeant, and XBiotech both inside and outside the supported work.

[email protected]

SOURCES: Alikhan A et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.02.067; Alikhan A et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.02.068.

Rigorous evidence is unavailable for most interventions for treating hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), so management needs to be individualized, according to the first North American guidelines from the United States and Canadian Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundations for the management and treatment of the disorder.

Christopher Sayed, MD

Adalimumab (Humira), a tumor necrosis factor blocker, was the only therapy for which level 1A evidence is available, and this is because of its study in large-scale randomized controlled trials. (The Food and Drug Administration approved adalimumab in 2015 for treating moderate to severe HS.) Other biologic therapies such as infliximab, anakinra, and ustekinumab carry level 2B recommendations, which Dr. Sayed said will likely influence the availability of these therapies.

Similarly, Nd:YAG laser carries a level 2B recommendation, as does wide excision surgical intervention.


Many of the other treatment modalities explored in the guidelines are not well supported by the literature, according to Dr. Sayed . “The vast majority ... had category C recommendations,” he said. “Some things we tried to evaluate that, really, we can’t give any recommendation on at all because there was no evidence.” He noted that changes in lifestyle and dietary practices are issues patients with HS frequently bring up, but they carry very little evidence of benefit in the literature.

“Even things we use very commonly in HS are often supported by weak evidence because we have to rely on clinical experience. ... There’s just not funding for trials of older drugs or lifestyle interventions,” he said. Treatment mainstays such as tetracycline-class antibiotics, for example, similarly have no large-scale randomized controlled trials to support their use.

Consider comorbidity screening

Treatment is frequently complicated by patient comorbidities, including type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), and impaired sexual health, said Dr. Sayed.

“The disease leads to scarring and disfigurement, and can [have a] higher impact on quality of life than almost any other dermatologic disease if you compare them side by side using quality of life measures,” he noted. “We know these patients are more likely to have depression, there are high rates of suicide among these patients. A lot of that has to do with the fact that it’s a chronic disease where there is pain and disfigurement, and patients often grow very, very frustrated in part due to the disease.”

He advised consistent follow-up to ensure patients are not frustrated because of lack of perceived progress.
 

No one-size-fits-all approach

Dr. Sayed said individualized management is one of the most important parts of taking care of a patient with HS. For example, patients with Hurley stage 1 and Hurley stage 2 variations of the disease may present very differently, and that is the reason why the guidelines do not offer a stepwise treatment algorithm for the disease.

“[The guidelines] have many treatments that may overlap different stages of disease, where those things might need to be used together,” he said. “It takes a lot of discussion with patients about their treatment preferences and listening to whether their disease is progressing or not, whether or not it’s stable, and then trying to figure out whether things like surgery fit into the treatment strategy.”


Despite these recommendations, there may be situations where the answer is not listed in the guidelines. “The guidelines are based on evidence that’s available at the time we review the literature,” he said. “For many patients, they may fail every treatment that’s recommended within the guidelines. There will be times where you have to be creative for patients and go beyond what the guidelines can currently recommend and give patients the treatment that they need even when it seems like all options have been exhausted.”

The authors report relationships with 3M, AbbVie, Adelphi Values, Amgen, BSN, Celgene, Chemocentryx, Coloplast, Galderma, Hidramed Solutions, Hollister, the HS Foundation, Incyte, InflaRx, Integra, Janssen, KCI Inc., Lenicura, Leo, Lilly, The Microdermis Corporation, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Valeant, and XBiotech both inside and outside the supported work.

[email protected]

SOURCES: Alikhan A et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.02.067; Alikhan A et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.02.068.

Rigorous evidence is unavailable for most interventions for treating hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), so management needs to be individualized, according to the first North American guidelines from the United States and Canadian Hidradenitis Suppurativa Foundations for the management and treatment of the disorder.

Christopher Sayed, MD

Adalimumab (Humira), a tumor necrosis factor blocker, was the only therapy for which level 1A evidence is available, and this is because of its study in large-scale randomized controlled trials. (The Food and Drug Administration approved adalimumab in 2015 for treating moderate to severe HS.) Other biologic therapies such as infliximab, anakinra, and ustekinumab carry level 2B recommendations, which Dr. Sayed said will likely influence the availability of these therapies.

Similarly, Nd:YAG laser carries a level 2B recommendation, as does wide excision surgical intervention.


Many of the other treatment modalities explored in the guidelines are not well supported by the literature, according to Dr. Sayed . “The vast majority ... had category C recommendations,” he said. “Some things we tried to evaluate that, really, we can’t give any recommendation on at all because there was no evidence.” He noted that changes in lifestyle and dietary practices are issues patients with HS frequently bring up, but they carry very little evidence of benefit in the literature.

“Even things we use very commonly in HS are often supported by weak evidence because we have to rely on clinical experience. ... There’s just not funding for trials of older drugs or lifestyle interventions,” he said. Treatment mainstays such as tetracycline-class antibiotics, for example, similarly have no large-scale randomized controlled trials to support their use.

Consider comorbidity screening

Treatment is frequently complicated by patient comorbidities, including type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), and impaired sexual health, said Dr. Sayed.

“The disease leads to scarring and disfigurement, and can [have a] higher impact on quality of life than almost any other dermatologic disease if you compare them side by side using quality of life measures,” he noted. “We know these patients are more likely to have depression, there are high rates of suicide among these patients. A lot of that has to do with the fact that it’s a chronic disease where there is pain and disfigurement, and patients often grow very, very frustrated in part due to the disease.”

He advised consistent follow-up to ensure patients are not frustrated because of lack of perceived progress.
 

No one-size-fits-all approach

Dr. Sayed said individualized management is one of the most important parts of taking care of a patient with HS. For example, patients with Hurley stage 1 and Hurley stage 2 variations of the disease may present very differently, and that is the reason why the guidelines do not offer a stepwise treatment algorithm for the disease.

“[The guidelines] have many treatments that may overlap different stages of disease, where those things might need to be used together,” he said. “It takes a lot of discussion with patients about their treatment preferences and listening to whether their disease is progressing or not, whether or not it’s stable, and then trying to figure out whether things like surgery fit into the treatment strategy.”


Despite these recommendations, there may be situations where the answer is not listed in the guidelines. “The guidelines are based on evidence that’s available at the time we review the literature,” he said. “For many patients, they may fail every treatment that’s recommended within the guidelines. There will be times where you have to be creative for patients and go beyond what the guidelines can currently recommend and give patients the treatment that they need even when it seems like all options have been exhausted.”

The authors report relationships with 3M, AbbVie, Adelphi Values, Amgen, BSN, Celgene, Chemocentryx, Coloplast, Galderma, Hidramed Solutions, Hollister, the HS Foundation, Incyte, InflaRx, Integra, Janssen, KCI Inc., Lenicura, Leo, Lilly, The Microdermis Corporation, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Valeant, and XBiotech both inside and outside the supported work.

[email protected]

SOURCES: Alikhan A et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.02.067; Alikhan A et al. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2019.02.068.

Researchers used a machine learning algorithm to identify a molecular signature for usual interstitial pneumonia in patients with suspected idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, according to recent research published in the Lancet Respiratory Medicine.

The results of the molecular test, called the Envisia Genomic Classifier (Veracyte; San Francisco), had a high positive predictive value of proven usual interstitial pneumonia, and could be used in place of surgical lung biopsy to confirm a diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), wrote Ganesh Raghu, MD, director at the Center for Interstitial Lung Diseases and professor of medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, and his colleagues.* The Envisia Genomic Classifier recently received final Medicare local coverage determination for IPF diagnosis, according to a recent press release by Veracyte.

“IPF is often challenging to distinguish from other [interstitial lung disease], but timely and accurate diagnosis is critical so that patients with IPF can access therapies that may slow progression of the disease, while avoiding potentially harmful treatments,” Dr. Raghu stated in a press release. “Our results with molecular classification through machine learning [the Envisia classifier] are promising and, along with clinical information and radiological features in high-resolution CT imaging, physicians through multidisciplinary discussions, may be able to utilize the molecular classification as a diagnostic tool to make a more informed and confident diagnoses.”

The researchers prospectively recruited 237 patients from 29 centers in the United States and Europe who were evaluated with the Bronchial Sample Collection for a Novel Genomic Test for suspected interstitial lung disease and who underwent surgical biopsy, transbronchial biopsy, or cryobiopsy for sample collection. They used histopathology and RNA sequence data from 90 patients to create a training data set of an unusual interstitial pneumonia pattern for the machine learning algorithm.

The classifier found usual interstitial pneumonia diagnoses in 49 patients; the test had a specificity of 88% (95% confidence interval, 70%-98%) and a sensitivity of 70% (95% CI, 47%-87%). Of 42 patients with inconsistent or possible usual interstitial pneumonia identified from high-resolution CT imaging, there was a positive predictive value of 81% (95% CI, 54%-96%). When multidisciplinary teams made diagnoses with the molecular classifier data, there was a clinical agreement of 86% (95% CI, 78%-92%) with diagnoses made using histopathology data. In 18 cases of IPF, there was an improvement in diagnostic confidence using the molecular classifier data, with 89% of diagnoses designated as high confidence, compared with 56% of cases based on histopathologic data (P = .0339). In 48 patients with nondiagnostic pathology or nonclassifiable fibrosis histopathology, 63% of diagnoses with the molecular classifier data were high confidence, compared with 42% using histopathologic data (P = .0412).

This study was funded by Veracyte, creator of the Envisia Genomic Classifier. Some authors reported relationships with Veracyte and other companies.

SOURCE: Raghu G et al. Lancet Respir Med. 2019 Apr 1. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(19)300.

Correction, 4/25/19: An earlier version of this article misstated how the Envisia Genomic Classifier could be used. The Envisia test is not intended to replace high-resolution chest CT (HRCT). It is used when HRCT is inconclusive to help prevent patients from having to undergo invasive diagnostic procedures.

Researchers used a machine learning algorithm to identify a molecular signature for usual interstitial pneumonia in patients with suspected idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, according to recent research published in the Lancet Respiratory Medicine.

The results of the molecular test, called the Envisia Genomic Classifier (Veracyte; San Francisco), had a high positive predictive value of proven usual interstitial pneumonia, and could be used in place of surgical lung biopsy to confirm a diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), wrote Ganesh Raghu, MD, director at the Center for Interstitial Lung Diseases and professor of medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, and his colleagues.* The Envisia Genomic Classifier recently received final Medicare local coverage determination for IPF diagnosis, according to a recent press release by Veracyte.

“IPF is often challenging to distinguish from other [interstitial lung disease], but timely and accurate diagnosis is critical so that patients with IPF can access therapies that may slow progression of the disease, while avoiding potentially harmful treatments,” Dr. Raghu stated in a press release. “Our results with molecular classification through machine learning [the Envisia classifier] are promising and, along with clinical information and radiological features in high-resolution CT imaging, physicians through multidisciplinary discussions, may be able to utilize the molecular classification as a diagnostic tool to make a more informed and confident diagnoses.”

The researchers prospectively recruited 237 patients from 29 centers in the United States and Europe who were evaluated with the Bronchial Sample Collection for a Novel Genomic Test for suspected interstitial lung disease and who underwent surgical biopsy, transbronchial biopsy, or cryobiopsy for sample collection. They used histopathology and RNA sequence data from 90 patients to create a training data set of an unusual interstitial pneumonia pattern for the machine learning algorithm.

The classifier found usual interstitial pneumonia diagnoses in 49 patients; the test had a specificity of 88% (95% confidence interval, 70%-98%) and a sensitivity of 70% (95% CI, 47%-87%). Of 42 patients with inconsistent or possible usual interstitial pneumonia identified from high-resolution CT imaging, there was a positive predictive value of 81% (95% CI, 54%-96%). When multidisciplinary teams made diagnoses with the molecular classifier data, there was a clinical agreement of 86% (95% CI, 78%-92%) with diagnoses made using histopathology data. In 18 cases of IPF, there was an improvement in diagnostic confidence using the molecular classifier data, with 89% of diagnoses designated as high confidence, compared with 56% of cases based on histopathologic data (P = .0339). In 48 patients with nondiagnostic pathology or nonclassifiable fibrosis histopathology, 63% of diagnoses with the molecular classifier data were high confidence, compared with 42% using histopathologic data (P = .0412).

This study was funded by Veracyte, creator of the Envisia Genomic Classifier. Some authors reported relationships with Veracyte and other companies.

SOURCE: Raghu G et al. Lancet Respir Med. 2019 Apr 1. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(19)300.

Correction, 4/25/19: An earlier version of this article misstated how the Envisia Genomic Classifier could be used. The Envisia test is not intended to replace high-resolution chest CT (HRCT). It is used when HRCT is inconclusive to help prevent patients from having to undergo invasive diagnostic procedures.

Researchers used a machine learning algorithm to identify a molecular signature for usual interstitial pneumonia in patients with suspected idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, according to recent research published in the Lancet Respiratory Medicine.

The results of the molecular test, called the Envisia Genomic Classifier (Veracyte; San Francisco), had a high positive predictive value of proven usual interstitial pneumonia, and could be used in place of surgical lung biopsy to confirm a diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), wrote Ganesh Raghu, MD, director at the Center for Interstitial Lung Diseases and professor of medicine at the University of Washington, Seattle, and his colleagues.* The Envisia Genomic Classifier recently received final Medicare local coverage determination for IPF diagnosis, according to a recent press release by Veracyte.

“IPF is often challenging to distinguish from other [interstitial lung disease], but timely and accurate diagnosis is critical so that patients with IPF can access therapies that may slow progression of the disease, while avoiding potentially harmful treatments,” Dr. Raghu stated in a press release. “Our results with molecular classification through machine learning [the Envisia classifier] are promising and, along with clinical information and radiological features in high-resolution CT imaging, physicians through multidisciplinary discussions, may be able to utilize the molecular classification as a diagnostic tool to make a more informed and confident diagnoses.”

The researchers prospectively recruited 237 patients from 29 centers in the United States and Europe who were evaluated with the Bronchial Sample Collection for a Novel Genomic Test for suspected interstitial lung disease and who underwent surgical biopsy, transbronchial biopsy, or cryobiopsy for sample collection. They used histopathology and RNA sequence data from 90 patients to create a training data set of an unusual interstitial pneumonia pattern for the machine learning algorithm.

The classifier found usual interstitial pneumonia diagnoses in 49 patients; the test had a specificity of 88% (95% confidence interval, 70%-98%) and a sensitivity of 70% (95% CI, 47%-87%). Of 42 patients with inconsistent or possible usual interstitial pneumonia identified from high-resolution CT imaging, there was a positive predictive value of 81% (95% CI, 54%-96%). When multidisciplinary teams made diagnoses with the molecular classifier data, there was a clinical agreement of 86% (95% CI, 78%-92%) with diagnoses made using histopathology data. In 18 cases of IPF, there was an improvement in diagnostic confidence using the molecular classifier data, with 89% of diagnoses designated as high confidence, compared with 56% of cases based on histopathologic data (P = .0339). In 48 patients with nondiagnostic pathology or nonclassifiable fibrosis histopathology, 63% of diagnoses with the molecular classifier data were high confidence, compared with 42% using histopathologic data (P = .0412).

This study was funded by Veracyte, creator of the Envisia Genomic Classifier. Some authors reported relationships with Veracyte and other companies.

SOURCE: Raghu G et al. Lancet Respir Med. 2019 Apr 1. doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(19)300.

Correction, 4/25/19: An earlier version of this article misstated how the Envisia Genomic Classifier could be used. The Envisia test is not intended to replace high-resolution chest CT (HRCT). It is used when HRCT is inconclusive to help prevent patients from having to undergo invasive diagnostic procedures.