Breast Cancer ICYMI

To the Editor:

A 50-year old man with Fitzpatrick skin type IV, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), fatty liver disease, and moderate psoriasis (10% body surface area [BSA] affected) currently treated with clobetasol spray and calcitriol ointment presented with persistent psoriatic lesions on the trunk, arms, legs, and buttocks. His CD4 count was 460 and his HIV RNA count was 48 copies/mL on polymerase chain reaction 2 months prior to the current presentation. He had been undergoing phototherapy 3 times weekly for the last 5 months for treatment of psoriasis.

At the current presentation, he was started on an apremilast starter pack with the dosage titrated from 10 mg to 30 mg over the course of 1 week. He was maintained on a dose of 30 mg twice daily after 1 week and continued clobetasol spray, calcitriol ointment, and phototherapy 3 times weekly with the intent to reduce the frequency after adequate control of psoriasis was achieved. After 3 months of treatment, the affected BSA was 0%. He continued apremilast, and phototherapy was reduced to once weekly. Phototherapy was discontinued after 7 months of concomitant treatment with apremilast after clearance was maintained. It was reinitiated twice weekly after a mild flare (3% BSA affected). After 20 total months of treatment, the patient was no longer able to afford apremilast treatment and presented with a severe psoriasis flare (40% BSA affected). He was switched to acitretin with a plan to apply for apremilast financial assistance programs.

Psoriasis treatment in the HIV population poses a challenge given the immunosuppressed state of these patients, the risk of reactivation of latent infections, and the refractory nature of psoriasis in the setting of HIV. Two of the authors (S.P.R. and J.J.W.) previously reported a case of moderate to severe psoriasis in a patient with HIV and hepatitis C who demonstrated treatment success with apremilast until it was discontinued due to financial implications.¹ Currently, apremilast is not widely used to treat psoriasis in the HIV population. The National Psoriasis Foundation 2010 guidelines recommended UV light therapy for treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis in HIV-positive patients, with oral retinoids as the second-line treatment.² There remains a need for updated guidelines on the use of systemic agents for psoriasis treatment in the HIV population.

Apremilast, a phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor, is an oral therapy that restores the balance of proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines by inhibiting inflammatory cytokine (eg, tumor necrosis factor α, IFN-γ, IL-2, IL-12, IL-23) secretion and stimulating anti-inflammatory cytokine (eg, IL-6, IL-10) production. In 2015, the phase 3 ESTEEM 1³ and ESTEEM 2⁴ trials demonstrated the efficacy of apremilast 30 mg twice daily for treatment of psoriasis. In both trials, the psoriasis area and severity index 75 response rate at week 16 was significantly higher with apremilast compared to placebo alone (33.1% and 28.8% vs 5.2% and 5.8%, respectively; P<.001 for both trials). Apremilast also was noted to improve difficult-to-treat nail, scalp, and palmoplantar psoriasis.^3,4

Use of other systemic agents such as tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors and ustekinumab has been reported in HIV-positive patients.^5-7 There is no current data on IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors. Acitretin generally is recommended as a second-line agent in HIV patients given its lack of immunosuppression²; however, methotrexate and cyclosporine should be avoided given the risk of opportunistic infections.⁸

Apremilast is a promising therapy with a favorable safety profile that should be considered as an adjuvant treatment to first-line agents such as phototherapy in HIV-positive patients. Apremilast has been successfully used in an HIV patient with a concomitant chronic hepatitis C infection.¹ Systemic medications such as apremilast should be managed in coordination with infectious disease specialists with close monitoring of CD4 levels and viral loads as well as prophylactic agents.

To the Editor:

A 50-year old man with Fitzpatrick skin type IV, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), fatty liver disease, and moderate psoriasis (10% body surface area [BSA] affected) currently treated with clobetasol spray and calcitriol ointment presented with persistent psoriatic lesions on the trunk, arms, legs, and buttocks. His CD4 count was 460 and his HIV RNA count was 48 copies/mL on polymerase chain reaction 2 months prior to the current presentation. He had been undergoing phototherapy 3 times weekly for the last 5 months for treatment of psoriasis.

At the current presentation, he was started on an apremilast starter pack with the dosage titrated from 10 mg to 30 mg over the course of 1 week. He was maintained on a dose of 30 mg twice daily after 1 week and continued clobetasol spray, calcitriol ointment, and phototherapy 3 times weekly with the intent to reduce the frequency after adequate control of psoriasis was achieved. After 3 months of treatment, the affected BSA was 0%. He continued apremilast, and phototherapy was reduced to once weekly. Phototherapy was discontinued after 7 months of concomitant treatment with apremilast after clearance was maintained. It was reinitiated twice weekly after a mild flare (3% BSA affected). After 20 total months of treatment, the patient was no longer able to afford apremilast treatment and presented with a severe psoriasis flare (40% BSA affected). He was switched to acitretin with a plan to apply for apremilast financial assistance programs.

Psoriasis treatment in the HIV population poses a challenge given the immunosuppressed state of these patients, the risk of reactivation of latent infections, and the refractory nature of psoriasis in the setting of HIV. Two of the authors (S.P.R. and J.J.W.) previously reported a case of moderate to severe psoriasis in a patient with HIV and hepatitis C who demonstrated treatment success with apremilast until it was discontinued due to financial implications.¹ Currently, apremilast is not widely used to treat psoriasis in the HIV population. The National Psoriasis Foundation 2010 guidelines recommended UV light therapy for treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis in HIV-positive patients, with oral retinoids as the second-line treatment.² There remains a need for updated guidelines on the use of systemic agents for psoriasis treatment in the HIV population.

Apremilast, a phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor, is an oral therapy that restores the balance of proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines by inhibiting inflammatory cytokine (eg, tumor necrosis factor α, IFN-γ, IL-2, IL-12, IL-23) secretion and stimulating anti-inflammatory cytokine (eg, IL-6, IL-10) production. In 2015, the phase 3 ESTEEM 1³ and ESTEEM 2⁴ trials demonstrated the efficacy of apremilast 30 mg twice daily for treatment of psoriasis. In both trials, the psoriasis area and severity index 75 response rate at week 16 was significantly higher with apremilast compared to placebo alone (33.1% and 28.8% vs 5.2% and 5.8%, respectively; P<.001 for both trials). Apremilast also was noted to improve difficult-to-treat nail, scalp, and palmoplantar psoriasis.^3,4

Use of other systemic agents such as tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors and ustekinumab has been reported in HIV-positive patients.^5-7 There is no current data on IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors. Acitretin generally is recommended as a second-line agent in HIV patients given its lack of immunosuppression²; however, methotrexate and cyclosporine should be avoided given the risk of opportunistic infections.⁸

Apremilast is a promising therapy with a favorable safety profile that should be considered as an adjuvant treatment to first-line agents such as phototherapy in HIV-positive patients. Apremilast has been successfully used in an HIV patient with a concomitant chronic hepatitis C infection.¹ Systemic medications such as apremilast should be managed in coordination with infectious disease specialists with close monitoring of CD4 levels and viral loads as well as prophylactic agents.

To the Editor:

A 50-year old man with Fitzpatrick skin type IV, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), fatty liver disease, and moderate psoriasis (10% body surface area [BSA] affected) currently treated with clobetasol spray and calcitriol ointment presented with persistent psoriatic lesions on the trunk, arms, legs, and buttocks. His CD4 count was 460 and his HIV RNA count was 48 copies/mL on polymerase chain reaction 2 months prior to the current presentation. He had been undergoing phototherapy 3 times weekly for the last 5 months for treatment of psoriasis.

At the current presentation, he was started on an apremilast starter pack with the dosage titrated from 10 mg to 30 mg over the course of 1 week. He was maintained on a dose of 30 mg twice daily after 1 week and continued clobetasol spray, calcitriol ointment, and phototherapy 3 times weekly with the intent to reduce the frequency after adequate control of psoriasis was achieved. After 3 months of treatment, the affected BSA was 0%. He continued apremilast, and phototherapy was reduced to once weekly. Phototherapy was discontinued after 7 months of concomitant treatment with apremilast after clearance was maintained. It was reinitiated twice weekly after a mild flare (3% BSA affected). After 20 total months of treatment, the patient was no longer able to afford apremilast treatment and presented with a severe psoriasis flare (40% BSA affected). He was switched to acitretin with a plan to apply for apremilast financial assistance programs.

Psoriasis treatment in the HIV population poses a challenge given the immunosuppressed state of these patients, the risk of reactivation of latent infections, and the refractory nature of psoriasis in the setting of HIV. Two of the authors (S.P.R. and J.J.W.) previously reported a case of moderate to severe psoriasis in a patient with HIV and hepatitis C who demonstrated treatment success with apremilast until it was discontinued due to financial implications.¹ Currently, apremilast is not widely used to treat psoriasis in the HIV population. The National Psoriasis Foundation 2010 guidelines recommended UV light therapy for treatment of moderate to severe psoriasis in HIV-positive patients, with oral retinoids as the second-line treatment.² There remains a need for updated guidelines on the use of systemic agents for psoriasis treatment in the HIV population.

Apremilast, a phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor, is an oral therapy that restores the balance of proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines by inhibiting inflammatory cytokine (eg, tumor necrosis factor α, IFN-γ, IL-2, IL-12, IL-23) secretion and stimulating anti-inflammatory cytokine (eg, IL-6, IL-10) production. In 2015, the phase 3 ESTEEM 1³ and ESTEEM 2⁴ trials demonstrated the efficacy of apremilast 30 mg twice daily for treatment of psoriasis. In both trials, the psoriasis area and severity index 75 response rate at week 16 was significantly higher with apremilast compared to placebo alone (33.1% and 28.8% vs 5.2% and 5.8%, respectively; P<.001 for both trials). Apremilast also was noted to improve difficult-to-treat nail, scalp, and palmoplantar psoriasis.^3,4

Use of other systemic agents such as tumor necrosis factor α inhibitors and ustekinumab has been reported in HIV-positive patients.^5-7 There is no current data on IL-17 and IL-23 inhibitors. Acitretin generally is recommended as a second-line agent in HIV patients given its lack of immunosuppression²; however, methotrexate and cyclosporine should be avoided given the risk of opportunistic infections.⁸

Apremilast is a promising therapy with a favorable safety profile that should be considered as an adjuvant treatment to first-line agents such as phototherapy in HIV-positive patients. Apremilast has been successfully used in an HIV patient with a concomitant chronic hepatitis C infection.¹ Systemic medications such as apremilast should be managed in coordination with infectious disease specialists with close monitoring of CD4 levels and viral loads as well as prophylactic agents.

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.

The prognostic influence of estrogen receptor-beta (ESR2) expression in breast cancer – favorable versus unfavorable – appears to hinge on tumor TP53 mutational status, an interaction that may have therapeutic implications for triple-negative disease, a new study suggests.

Up to 80% of triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs) express ESR2, but its role has been hard to pin down because of conflicting data, according to the investigators, who were led by senior author Gokul M. Das, PhD, of the department of pharmacology and therapeutics, Center for Genetics and Pharmacology, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, N.Y. Expression has been found to have both antiproliferative activity and proproliferative activity, depending on the experimental conditions.

Dr. Das and colleagues performed a series of in vitro assays in breast cancer cell lines and a clinical study of patients with basal-like TNBC from the Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium (METABRIC) cohort (308 patients with TP53 mutational status determined by sequencing) and a Roswell cohort (46 patients with TP53 mutational status determined by immunohistochemistry).

Results showed that in vitro, ESR2 interaction with wild-type TP53 had proproliferative effects, whereas interaction of ESR2 with mutant TP53 had antiproliferative effects. The report is in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

In luminal breast cancer cell lines with wild-type TP53, compared with control, depleting ESR2 increased expression of the TP53 target genes CDKN1A and BBC3 (P = .003 and P = .003, respectively); in contrast, in those with mutant TP53, depleting ESR2 decreased their expression (P = .02 and P = .008). Opposite results were seen when ESR2 was instead overexpressed.

In cells with mutant TP53, tamoxifen treatment increased interaction of ESR2 with the mutant protein, ultimately leading to reactivation of TP73 and apoptosis.

Finally, among women with basal-like TNBC in the METABRIC cohort, high ESR2 expression was associated with better overall survival for those with mutant TP53 tumors (hazard ratio for death, 0.26) but a trend toward poorer overall survival for those with wild-type TP53 tumors (P = .05). Results were similar in the Roswell cohort.

SOURCE: Mukhopadhyay UK et al. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2019 Apr 16. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djz051.

The prognostic influence of estrogen receptor-beta (ESR2) expression in breast cancer – favorable versus unfavorable – appears to hinge on tumor TP53 mutational status, an interaction that may have therapeutic implications for triple-negative disease, a new study suggests.

Up to 80% of triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs) express ESR2, but its role has been hard to pin down because of conflicting data, according to the investigators, who were led by senior author Gokul M. Das, PhD, of the department of pharmacology and therapeutics, Center for Genetics and Pharmacology, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, N.Y. Expression has been found to have both antiproliferative activity and proproliferative activity, depending on the experimental conditions.

Dr. Das and colleagues performed a series of in vitro assays in breast cancer cell lines and a clinical study of patients with basal-like TNBC from the Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium (METABRIC) cohort (308 patients with TP53 mutational status determined by sequencing) and a Roswell cohort (46 patients with TP53 mutational status determined by immunohistochemistry).

Results showed that in vitro, ESR2 interaction with wild-type TP53 had proproliferative effects, whereas interaction of ESR2 with mutant TP53 had antiproliferative effects. The report is in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

In luminal breast cancer cell lines with wild-type TP53, compared with control, depleting ESR2 increased expression of the TP53 target genes CDKN1A and BBC3 (P = .003 and P = .003, respectively); in contrast, in those with mutant TP53, depleting ESR2 decreased their expression (P = .02 and P = .008). Opposite results were seen when ESR2 was instead overexpressed.

In cells with mutant TP53, tamoxifen treatment increased interaction of ESR2 with the mutant protein, ultimately leading to reactivation of TP73 and apoptosis.

Finally, among women with basal-like TNBC in the METABRIC cohort, high ESR2 expression was associated with better overall survival for those with mutant TP53 tumors (hazard ratio for death, 0.26) but a trend toward poorer overall survival for those with wild-type TP53 tumors (P = .05). Results were similar in the Roswell cohort.

SOURCE: Mukhopadhyay UK et al. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2019 Apr 16. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djz051.

The prognostic influence of estrogen receptor-beta (ESR2) expression in breast cancer – favorable versus unfavorable – appears to hinge on tumor TP53 mutational status, an interaction that may have therapeutic implications for triple-negative disease, a new study suggests.

Up to 80% of triple-negative breast cancers (TNBCs) express ESR2, but its role has been hard to pin down because of conflicting data, according to the investigators, who were led by senior author Gokul M. Das, PhD, of the department of pharmacology and therapeutics, Center for Genetics and Pharmacology, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, N.Y. Expression has been found to have both antiproliferative activity and proproliferative activity, depending on the experimental conditions.

Dr. Das and colleagues performed a series of in vitro assays in breast cancer cell lines and a clinical study of patients with basal-like TNBC from the Molecular Taxonomy of Breast Cancer International Consortium (METABRIC) cohort (308 patients with TP53 mutational status determined by sequencing) and a Roswell cohort (46 patients with TP53 mutational status determined by immunohistochemistry).

Results showed that in vitro, ESR2 interaction with wild-type TP53 had proproliferative effects, whereas interaction of ESR2 with mutant TP53 had antiproliferative effects. The report is in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

In luminal breast cancer cell lines with wild-type TP53, compared with control, depleting ESR2 increased expression of the TP53 target genes CDKN1A and BBC3 (P = .003 and P = .003, respectively); in contrast, in those with mutant TP53, depleting ESR2 decreased their expression (P = .02 and P = .008). Opposite results were seen when ESR2 was instead overexpressed.

In cells with mutant TP53, tamoxifen treatment increased interaction of ESR2 with the mutant protein, ultimately leading to reactivation of TP73 and apoptosis.

Finally, among women with basal-like TNBC in the METABRIC cohort, high ESR2 expression was associated with better overall survival for those with mutant TP53 tumors (hazard ratio for death, 0.26) but a trend toward poorer overall survival for those with wild-type TP53 tumors (P = .05). Results were similar in the Roswell cohort.

SOURCE: Mukhopadhyay UK et al. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2019 Apr 16. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djz051.

Levels of tau in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma are significantly associated with survival time in patients with sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, according to research published online ahead of print May 6 in JAMA Neurology. Levels of total tau in plasma and CSF are correlated, and plasma total tau is associated with survival time. These findings suggest that plasma total tau level could be a valid biomarker that guides clinical care for patients with sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, said the investigators.

The accurate prediction of disease duration can assist clinicians and caregivers in clinical management, as well as influence the design of clinical trials. Previous studies have found that baseline protein levels in CSF and plasma are associated with disease duration in patients with sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. To replicate these findings, Adam M. Staffaroni, PhD, of the department of neurology at the University of California, San Francisco, and colleagues conducted a longitudinal cohort study.
 

Evaluating fluid and nonfluid biomarkers

Dr. Staffaroni and colleagues recruited 193 participants with probable or definite sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease who had codon 129 genotyping and were referred to the UCSF Memory and Aging Center from March 2004 to January 2018. All participants underwent cognitive testing, informant measures, a neurologic examination, and CSF and blood sample collection. The researchers excluded from analysis five participants who had been placed on life-extending treatments. Participants were evaluated until death or censored at the time of statistical analysis.

Dr. Staffaroni and colleagues examined the following nonfluid biomarkers of survival: sex, age, codon 129 genotype, Barthel Index, and Medical Research Council (MRC) Prion Disease Rating Scale. In addition, they examined total tau level, phosphorylated tau level, total tau:phosphorylated tau ratio, neurofilament light (NfL) level, beta-amyloid 42 level, neuron-specific enolase level, 14-3-3 test result, and real-time quaking-induced conversion test in CSF as fluid biomarkers of survival. Finally, Dr. Staffaroni’s group analyzed total tau level, NfL level, and glial fibrillary acidic protein level in plasma as additional fluid biomarkers of survival.

The researchers fitted Cox proportional hazard models with time to event as the outcome. They log-transformed fluid biomarkers and ran models with and without nonfluid biomarkers of survival.

Plasma total tau was associated with survival

In all, 188 patients were included in the analysis. The population’s mean age was 63.8 years. Approximately 45% of participants were women. The diagnosis of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease was pathologically confirmed for 78.2% of participants and probable for 21.8% of participants.

Dr. Staffaroni’s group observed strong correlations between plasma and CSF NfL concentrations and between plasma and CSF total tau concentrations. CSF total tau and CSF NfL concentrations were also correlated.

Among the nonfluid biomarkers, Barthel Index, MRC Scale, and codon 129 genotype were significantly associated with survival time. Lower level of function at baseline predicted a faster disease course.

Among the fluid biomarkers, greater levels of plasma total tau and NfL levels at baseline were associated with shorter survival. After the investigators controlled for Barthel Index and codon 129 genotype, the association of plasma total tau level with survival time remained significant. Plasma total tau level and Barthel Index (hazard ratio, 0.98) each independently predicted survival. Dr. Staffaroni and colleagues found that the hazard ratios for all CSF biomarkers were in the expected direction, and that those for total tau level, total tau:phosphorylated tau ratio, NfL level, and neuron-specific enolase level were statistically significant. Furthermore, positive results for 14-3-3 protein, neuron-specific enolase level, and total tau level were associated with a shorter time until death. Like the plasma biomarkers, CSF total tau level remained associated with survival after the investigators controlled for Barthel Index and codon 129 genotype. The same was true of CSF total tau:phosphorylated tau ratio, neuron-specific enolase level, and 14-3-3 result.
 

Plasma tau could be a diagnostic biomarker

“The hazard ratio associated with plasma total tau level was more than 40% higher than other fluid biomarkers of interest,” said the authors. “These findings further bolster the value of blood-based biomarkers, based on their minimally invasive and relatively inexpensive nature, and build on prior studies that suggested patients with sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and controls can be discriminated with relatively high accuracy using blood-based assays.” When Dr. Staffaroni and colleagues modeled baseline functional status and plasma total tau levels together, they found that both were independent predictors of survival time. “This [finding] suggests that clinical measures and plasma total tau level could be combined to further improve prediction accuracy.”

Among the study’s limitations was its comparatively small subsample of patients for whom all plasma and CSF biomarkers were available. Disease duration and survival were longer in the study population than in the literature. “Another limitation is that the plasma biomarkers in this study, one of which showed great promise for predicting survival, were assayed using a research protocol,” said the researchers. “Widespread clinical use of these biomarkers will require well-validated commercial assays, development of which is underway.”

Before these biomarkers can be used in the clinic, these results will need to be replicated, and neurologists will need to develop consensus cutoffs for the biomarker levels. The researchers did not analyze plasma tau level as a diagnostic biomarker, but future studies should examine this potential, Dr. Staffaroni and colleagues concluded.

Grants from the National Institute on Aging and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases supported the study.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Staffaroni AM et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 May 6. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.1071.

Levels of tau in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma are significantly associated with survival time in patients with sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, according to research published online ahead of print May 6 in JAMA Neurology. Levels of total tau in plasma and CSF are correlated, and plasma total tau is associated with survival time. These findings suggest that plasma total tau level could be a valid biomarker that guides clinical care for patients with sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, said the investigators.

The accurate prediction of disease duration can assist clinicians and caregivers in clinical management, as well as influence the design of clinical trials. Previous studies have found that baseline protein levels in CSF and plasma are associated with disease duration in patients with sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. To replicate these findings, Adam M. Staffaroni, PhD, of the department of neurology at the University of California, San Francisco, and colleagues conducted a longitudinal cohort study.
 

Evaluating fluid and nonfluid biomarkers

Dr. Staffaroni and colleagues recruited 193 participants with probable or definite sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease who had codon 129 genotyping and were referred to the UCSF Memory and Aging Center from March 2004 to January 2018. All participants underwent cognitive testing, informant measures, a neurologic examination, and CSF and blood sample collection. The researchers excluded from analysis five participants who had been placed on life-extending treatments. Participants were evaluated until death or censored at the time of statistical analysis.

Dr. Staffaroni and colleagues examined the following nonfluid biomarkers of survival: sex, age, codon 129 genotype, Barthel Index, and Medical Research Council (MRC) Prion Disease Rating Scale. In addition, they examined total tau level, phosphorylated tau level, total tau:phosphorylated tau ratio, neurofilament light (NfL) level, beta-amyloid 42 level, neuron-specific enolase level, 14-3-3 test result, and real-time quaking-induced conversion test in CSF as fluid biomarkers of survival. Finally, Dr. Staffaroni’s group analyzed total tau level, NfL level, and glial fibrillary acidic protein level in plasma as additional fluid biomarkers of survival.

The researchers fitted Cox proportional hazard models with time to event as the outcome. They log-transformed fluid biomarkers and ran models with and without nonfluid biomarkers of survival.

Plasma total tau was associated with survival

In all, 188 patients were included in the analysis. The population’s mean age was 63.8 years. Approximately 45% of participants were women. The diagnosis of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease was pathologically confirmed for 78.2% of participants and probable for 21.8% of participants.

Dr. Staffaroni’s group observed strong correlations between plasma and CSF NfL concentrations and between plasma and CSF total tau concentrations. CSF total tau and CSF NfL concentrations were also correlated.

Among the nonfluid biomarkers, Barthel Index, MRC Scale, and codon 129 genotype were significantly associated with survival time. Lower level of function at baseline predicted a faster disease course.

Among the fluid biomarkers, greater levels of plasma total tau and NfL levels at baseline were associated with shorter survival. After the investigators controlled for Barthel Index and codon 129 genotype, the association of plasma total tau level with survival time remained significant. Plasma total tau level and Barthel Index (hazard ratio, 0.98) each independently predicted survival. Dr. Staffaroni and colleagues found that the hazard ratios for all CSF biomarkers were in the expected direction, and that those for total tau level, total tau:phosphorylated tau ratio, NfL level, and neuron-specific enolase level were statistically significant. Furthermore, positive results for 14-3-3 protein, neuron-specific enolase level, and total tau level were associated with a shorter time until death. Like the plasma biomarkers, CSF total tau level remained associated with survival after the investigators controlled for Barthel Index and codon 129 genotype. The same was true of CSF total tau:phosphorylated tau ratio, neuron-specific enolase level, and 14-3-3 result.
 

Plasma tau could be a diagnostic biomarker

“The hazard ratio associated with plasma total tau level was more than 40% higher than other fluid biomarkers of interest,” said the authors. “These findings further bolster the value of blood-based biomarkers, based on their minimally invasive and relatively inexpensive nature, and build on prior studies that suggested patients with sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and controls can be discriminated with relatively high accuracy using blood-based assays.” When Dr. Staffaroni and colleagues modeled baseline functional status and plasma total tau levels together, they found that both were independent predictors of survival time. “This [finding] suggests that clinical measures and plasma total tau level could be combined to further improve prediction accuracy.”

Among the study’s limitations was its comparatively small subsample of patients for whom all plasma and CSF biomarkers were available. Disease duration and survival were longer in the study population than in the literature. “Another limitation is that the plasma biomarkers in this study, one of which showed great promise for predicting survival, were assayed using a research protocol,” said the researchers. “Widespread clinical use of these biomarkers will require well-validated commercial assays, development of which is underway.”

Before these biomarkers can be used in the clinic, these results will need to be replicated, and neurologists will need to develop consensus cutoffs for the biomarker levels. The researchers did not analyze plasma tau level as a diagnostic biomarker, but future studies should examine this potential, Dr. Staffaroni and colleagues concluded.

Grants from the National Institute on Aging and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases supported the study.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Staffaroni AM et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 May 6. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.1071.

Levels of tau in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma are significantly associated with survival time in patients with sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, according to research published online ahead of print May 6 in JAMA Neurology. Levels of total tau in plasma and CSF are correlated, and plasma total tau is associated with survival time. These findings suggest that plasma total tau level could be a valid biomarker that guides clinical care for patients with sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, said the investigators.

The accurate prediction of disease duration can assist clinicians and caregivers in clinical management, as well as influence the design of clinical trials. Previous studies have found that baseline protein levels in CSF and plasma are associated with disease duration in patients with sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. To replicate these findings, Adam M. Staffaroni, PhD, of the department of neurology at the University of California, San Francisco, and colleagues conducted a longitudinal cohort study.
 

Evaluating fluid and nonfluid biomarkers

Dr. Staffaroni and colleagues recruited 193 participants with probable or definite sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease who had codon 129 genotyping and were referred to the UCSF Memory and Aging Center from March 2004 to January 2018. All participants underwent cognitive testing, informant measures, a neurologic examination, and CSF and blood sample collection. The researchers excluded from analysis five participants who had been placed on life-extending treatments. Participants were evaluated until death or censored at the time of statistical analysis.

Dr. Staffaroni and colleagues examined the following nonfluid biomarkers of survival: sex, age, codon 129 genotype, Barthel Index, and Medical Research Council (MRC) Prion Disease Rating Scale. In addition, they examined total tau level, phosphorylated tau level, total tau:phosphorylated tau ratio, neurofilament light (NfL) level, beta-amyloid 42 level, neuron-specific enolase level, 14-3-3 test result, and real-time quaking-induced conversion test in CSF as fluid biomarkers of survival. Finally, Dr. Staffaroni’s group analyzed total tau level, NfL level, and glial fibrillary acidic protein level in plasma as additional fluid biomarkers of survival.

The researchers fitted Cox proportional hazard models with time to event as the outcome. They log-transformed fluid biomarkers and ran models with and without nonfluid biomarkers of survival.

Plasma total tau was associated with survival

In all, 188 patients were included in the analysis. The population’s mean age was 63.8 years. Approximately 45% of participants were women. The diagnosis of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease was pathologically confirmed for 78.2% of participants and probable for 21.8% of participants.

Dr. Staffaroni’s group observed strong correlations between plasma and CSF NfL concentrations and between plasma and CSF total tau concentrations. CSF total tau and CSF NfL concentrations were also correlated.

Among the nonfluid biomarkers, Barthel Index, MRC Scale, and codon 129 genotype were significantly associated with survival time. Lower level of function at baseline predicted a faster disease course.

Among the fluid biomarkers, greater levels of plasma total tau and NfL levels at baseline were associated with shorter survival. After the investigators controlled for Barthel Index and codon 129 genotype, the association of plasma total tau level with survival time remained significant. Plasma total tau level and Barthel Index (hazard ratio, 0.98) each independently predicted survival. Dr. Staffaroni and colleagues found that the hazard ratios for all CSF biomarkers were in the expected direction, and that those for total tau level, total tau:phosphorylated tau ratio, NfL level, and neuron-specific enolase level were statistically significant. Furthermore, positive results for 14-3-3 protein, neuron-specific enolase level, and total tau level were associated with a shorter time until death. Like the plasma biomarkers, CSF total tau level remained associated with survival after the investigators controlled for Barthel Index and codon 129 genotype. The same was true of CSF total tau:phosphorylated tau ratio, neuron-specific enolase level, and 14-3-3 result.
 

Plasma tau could be a diagnostic biomarker

“The hazard ratio associated with plasma total tau level was more than 40% higher than other fluid biomarkers of interest,” said the authors. “These findings further bolster the value of blood-based biomarkers, based on their minimally invasive and relatively inexpensive nature, and build on prior studies that suggested patients with sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and controls can be discriminated with relatively high accuracy using blood-based assays.” When Dr. Staffaroni and colleagues modeled baseline functional status and plasma total tau levels together, they found that both were independent predictors of survival time. “This [finding] suggests that clinical measures and plasma total tau level could be combined to further improve prediction accuracy.”

Among the study’s limitations was its comparatively small subsample of patients for whom all plasma and CSF biomarkers were available. Disease duration and survival were longer in the study population than in the literature. “Another limitation is that the plasma biomarkers in this study, one of which showed great promise for predicting survival, were assayed using a research protocol,” said the researchers. “Widespread clinical use of these biomarkers will require well-validated commercial assays, development of which is underway.”

Before these biomarkers can be used in the clinic, these results will need to be replicated, and neurologists will need to develop consensus cutoffs for the biomarker levels. The researchers did not analyze plasma tau level as a diagnostic biomarker, but future studies should examine this potential, Dr. Staffaroni and colleagues concluded.

Grants from the National Institute on Aging and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases supported the study.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Staffaroni AM et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 May 6. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.1071.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved the antibody-drug conjugate trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) for adjuvant treatment of patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer who have residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant treatment with a taxane and trastuzumab (Herceptin).

Approval of adjuvant T-DM1, marketed as Kadcyla, was based on a reduced risk of breast cancer recurrence or death in the phase 3 KATHERINE trial. In KATHERINE, over 1,400 patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer who had residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant taxane and trastuzumab-based treatment were randomized to adjuvant therapy with T-DM1 or trastuzumab. The 3-year invasive disease-free survival rate was 88.3% for those taking T-DM1, compared with 77.0% for patients assigned to adjuvant trastuzumab (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.64; P less than .0001). Results of KATHERINE were presented at the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium and simultaneously published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The most common grade 3 or greater adverse events for those in the T-DM1 arm included decreased platelet count in 5.7% and hypertension in 2.0%. The most common side effects with T-DM1 were fatigue, nausea, increased blood levels of liver enzymes, musculoskeletal pain, bleeding, decreased platelet count, headache, numbness in the hands or feet, and joint pain.

T-DM1 was previously approved to treat metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer after prior treatment with trastuzumab and a taxane.

“This approval is a significant treatment advance for HER2-positive early breast cancer. By working closely with the FDA and participating in the Real-Time Oncology Review pilot program, we are able to make Kadcyla available for people with residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant therapy much sooner than anticipated,” said Sandra Horning, MD, chief medical officer and head of global product development at Genentech (Roche), the developer of T-DM1, in a press release announcing the current approval.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved the antibody-drug conjugate trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) for adjuvant treatment of patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer who have residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant treatment with a taxane and trastuzumab (Herceptin).

Approval of adjuvant T-DM1, marketed as Kadcyla, was based on a reduced risk of breast cancer recurrence or death in the phase 3 KATHERINE trial. In KATHERINE, over 1,400 patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer who had residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant taxane and trastuzumab-based treatment were randomized to adjuvant therapy with T-DM1 or trastuzumab. The 3-year invasive disease-free survival rate was 88.3% for those taking T-DM1, compared with 77.0% for patients assigned to adjuvant trastuzumab (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.64; P less than .0001). Results of KATHERINE were presented at the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium and simultaneously published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The most common grade 3 or greater adverse events for those in the T-DM1 arm included decreased platelet count in 5.7% and hypertension in 2.0%. The most common side effects with T-DM1 were fatigue, nausea, increased blood levels of liver enzymes, musculoskeletal pain, bleeding, decreased platelet count, headache, numbness in the hands or feet, and joint pain.

T-DM1 was previously approved to treat metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer after prior treatment with trastuzumab and a taxane.

“This approval is a significant treatment advance for HER2-positive early breast cancer. By working closely with the FDA and participating in the Real-Time Oncology Review pilot program, we are able to make Kadcyla available for people with residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant therapy much sooner than anticipated,” said Sandra Horning, MD, chief medical officer and head of global product development at Genentech (Roche), the developer of T-DM1, in a press release announcing the current approval.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved the antibody-drug conjugate trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) for adjuvant treatment of patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer who have residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant treatment with a taxane and trastuzumab (Herceptin).

Approval of adjuvant T-DM1, marketed as Kadcyla, was based on a reduced risk of breast cancer recurrence or death in the phase 3 KATHERINE trial. In KATHERINE, over 1,400 patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer who had residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant taxane and trastuzumab-based treatment were randomized to adjuvant therapy with T-DM1 or trastuzumab. The 3-year invasive disease-free survival rate was 88.3% for those taking T-DM1, compared with 77.0% for patients assigned to adjuvant trastuzumab (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.64; P less than .0001). Results of KATHERINE were presented at the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium and simultaneously published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The most common grade 3 or greater adverse events for those in the T-DM1 arm included decreased platelet count in 5.7% and hypertension in 2.0%. The most common side effects with T-DM1 were fatigue, nausea, increased blood levels of liver enzymes, musculoskeletal pain, bleeding, decreased platelet count, headache, numbness in the hands or feet, and joint pain.

T-DM1 was previously approved to treat metastatic HER2-positive breast cancer after prior treatment with trastuzumab and a taxane.

“This approval is a significant treatment advance for HER2-positive early breast cancer. By working closely with the FDA and participating in the Real-Time Oncology Review pilot program, we are able to make Kadcyla available for people with residual invasive disease after neoadjuvant therapy much sooner than anticipated,” said Sandra Horning, MD, chief medical officer and head of global product development at Genentech (Roche), the developer of T-DM1, in a press release announcing the current approval.

A migraine preventive with improved efficacy and adverse event profile and a favorable mode of administration would be valuable to patients with migraine, according to the results of a study published in Headache. When offered hypothetical preventive migraine medicines with a wide array of attributes, patients leaned toward those with a reduction in migraine days and an avoidance of weight gain, according to an analysis of responses to a discrete-choice experiment survey.

“We found that respondents had a significant willingness to pay for medicines with higher efficacy and less-severe adverse events,” wrote Carol Mansfield, PhD, of RTI Health Solutions in North Carolina, and coauthors.

To evaluate patient preferences for theoretical migraine medicine, the researchers conducted a discrete-choice experiment via a web-based survey. Respondents met eligibility criteria if they were adults aged 18 years or older who self-reported 6 or more migraine days per month and completed the survey in full. They were asked to choose between options defined by six attributes: reduction in headache days per month, frequency of limitations with physical activities, cognition problems, weight gain, how the medicine is taken, and monthly out-of-pocket cost.

Of the 300 respondents included in the analysis, 72% indicated that migraines make physical activities difficult all or most of the time, and 81% had taken a prescription migraine preventive in the last 6 months. Respondents reported, on average, approximately 16 headache days per month. Among noncost attributes, respondents valued a change from a 10% reduction in migraine days to a 50% reduction more highly than avoiding the worst levels of adverse events – defined as memory problems and 10% weight gain – but were willing to trade off efficacy for less-severe adverse events. Avoiding memory problems was more important than avoiding thinking problems. Avoiding a 10% weight gain was more important than avoiding thinking and memory problems. Respondents preferred a once-monthly injection or daily pill to twice-monthly injections. Respondents, on average, were willing to pay $116 per month for an improvement from 10% to 50% in reduced headache days (95% confidence interval [CI], $91-$141) and $43 for an improvement from 10% to 25% (95% CI, $34-$53). They were also willing to pay $84 per month to avoid a 10% weight gain (95% CI, $64-$103), $59 per month to avoid memory problems (95% CI, $42-$76), and $32 per month to avoid thinking problems (95% CI, $18-$46).

The coauthors acknowledged their study’s limitations, including all migraine diagnoses being self-reported and the study sample not necessarily being representative of patients with migraine overall. In addition, though the potential medicinal attributes used were prominent in clinical literature and focus groups, they could choose only a limited amount and so their analysis “did not address other attributes that may be important to patients.”

Given their findings, the researchers recommended that “clinicians should work with patients to select treatments that meet each patient’s needs.”

Amgen and Novartis funded the study. The authors reported numerous conflicts of interest, including receiving grants, consulting fees, and royalties from pharmaceutical companies and organizations. During the study, three of the authors were employed at RTI Health Solutions, a non-for-profit organization that conducts research with pharmaceutical companies such as the study’s sponsor.

SOURCE: Mansfield C et al. Headache. 2019 May;59(5):715-26. doi: 10.1111/head.13498.

A migraine preventive with improved efficacy and adverse event profile and a favorable mode of administration would be valuable to patients with migraine, according to the results of a study published in Headache. When offered hypothetical preventive migraine medicines with a wide array of attributes, patients leaned toward those with a reduction in migraine days and an avoidance of weight gain, according to an analysis of responses to a discrete-choice experiment survey.

“We found that respondents had a significant willingness to pay for medicines with higher efficacy and less-severe adverse events,” wrote Carol Mansfield, PhD, of RTI Health Solutions in North Carolina, and coauthors.

To evaluate patient preferences for theoretical migraine medicine, the researchers conducted a discrete-choice experiment via a web-based survey. Respondents met eligibility criteria if they were adults aged 18 years or older who self-reported 6 or more migraine days per month and completed the survey in full. They were asked to choose between options defined by six attributes: reduction in headache days per month, frequency of limitations with physical activities, cognition problems, weight gain, how the medicine is taken, and monthly out-of-pocket cost.

Of the 300 respondents included in the analysis, 72% indicated that migraines make physical activities difficult all or most of the time, and 81% had taken a prescription migraine preventive in the last 6 months. Respondents reported, on average, approximately 16 headache days per month. Among noncost attributes, respondents valued a change from a 10% reduction in migraine days to a 50% reduction more highly than avoiding the worst levels of adverse events – defined as memory problems and 10% weight gain – but were willing to trade off efficacy for less-severe adverse events. Avoiding memory problems was more important than avoiding thinking problems. Avoiding a 10% weight gain was more important than avoiding thinking and memory problems. Respondents preferred a once-monthly injection or daily pill to twice-monthly injections. Respondents, on average, were willing to pay $116 per month for an improvement from 10% to 50% in reduced headache days (95% confidence interval [CI], $91-$141) and $43 for an improvement from 10% to 25% (95% CI, $34-$53). They were also willing to pay $84 per month to avoid a 10% weight gain (95% CI, $64-$103), $59 per month to avoid memory problems (95% CI, $42-$76), and $32 per month to avoid thinking problems (95% CI, $18-$46).

The coauthors acknowledged their study’s limitations, including all migraine diagnoses being self-reported and the study sample not necessarily being representative of patients with migraine overall. In addition, though the potential medicinal attributes used were prominent in clinical literature and focus groups, they could choose only a limited amount and so their analysis “did not address other attributes that may be important to patients.”

Given their findings, the researchers recommended that “clinicians should work with patients to select treatments that meet each patient’s needs.”

Amgen and Novartis funded the study. The authors reported numerous conflicts of interest, including receiving grants, consulting fees, and royalties from pharmaceutical companies and organizations. During the study, three of the authors were employed at RTI Health Solutions, a non-for-profit organization that conducts research with pharmaceutical companies such as the study’s sponsor.

SOURCE: Mansfield C et al. Headache. 2019 May;59(5):715-26. doi: 10.1111/head.13498.

A migraine preventive with improved efficacy and adverse event profile and a favorable mode of administration would be valuable to patients with migraine, according to the results of a study published in Headache. When offered hypothetical preventive migraine medicines with a wide array of attributes, patients leaned toward those with a reduction in migraine days and an avoidance of weight gain, according to an analysis of responses to a discrete-choice experiment survey.

“We found that respondents had a significant willingness to pay for medicines with higher efficacy and less-severe adverse events,” wrote Carol Mansfield, PhD, of RTI Health Solutions in North Carolina, and coauthors.

To evaluate patient preferences for theoretical migraine medicine, the researchers conducted a discrete-choice experiment via a web-based survey. Respondents met eligibility criteria if they were adults aged 18 years or older who self-reported 6 or more migraine days per month and completed the survey in full. They were asked to choose between options defined by six attributes: reduction in headache days per month, frequency of limitations with physical activities, cognition problems, weight gain, how the medicine is taken, and monthly out-of-pocket cost.

Of the 300 respondents included in the analysis, 72% indicated that migraines make physical activities difficult all or most of the time, and 81% had taken a prescription migraine preventive in the last 6 months. Respondents reported, on average, approximately 16 headache days per month. Among noncost attributes, respondents valued a change from a 10% reduction in migraine days to a 50% reduction more highly than avoiding the worst levels of adverse events – defined as memory problems and 10% weight gain – but were willing to trade off efficacy for less-severe adverse events. Avoiding memory problems was more important than avoiding thinking problems. Avoiding a 10% weight gain was more important than avoiding thinking and memory problems. Respondents preferred a once-monthly injection or daily pill to twice-monthly injections. Respondents, on average, were willing to pay $116 per month for an improvement from 10% to 50% in reduced headache days (95% confidence interval [CI], $91-$141) and $43 for an improvement from 10% to 25% (95% CI, $34-$53). They were also willing to pay $84 per month to avoid a 10% weight gain (95% CI, $64-$103), $59 per month to avoid memory problems (95% CI, $42-$76), and $32 per month to avoid thinking problems (95% CI, $18-$46).

The coauthors acknowledged their study’s limitations, including all migraine diagnoses being self-reported and the study sample not necessarily being representative of patients with migraine overall. In addition, though the potential medicinal attributes used were prominent in clinical literature and focus groups, they could choose only a limited amount and so their analysis “did not address other attributes that may be important to patients.”

Given their findings, the researchers recommended that “clinicians should work with patients to select treatments that meet each patient’s needs.”

Amgen and Novartis funded the study. The authors reported numerous conflicts of interest, including receiving grants, consulting fees, and royalties from pharmaceutical companies and organizations. During the study, three of the authors were employed at RTI Health Solutions, a non-for-profit organization that conducts research with pharmaceutical companies such as the study’s sponsor.

SOURCE: Mansfield C et al. Headache. 2019 May;59(5):715-26. doi: 10.1111/head.13498.

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.

Cluster headache is associated with increased suicidality during the ictal and interictal periods, compared with the periods between bouts. Short- and long-term cluster headache disease burden, as well as depressive symptoms, contributes to suicidality, according to research published online Cephalalgia. Development of treatments that reduce the headache-related burden and prevent future bouts could reduce suicidality, said the researchers.

Although cluster headache has been called the “suicide headache,” few studies have examined suicidality in patients with cluster headache. Research by Rozen et al. found that the rate of suicidal attempt among patients was similar to that among the general population. The results have not been replicated, however, and the investigators did not examine whether suicidality varied according to the phases of the disorder.
 

A prospective, multicenter study

Mi Ji Lee, MD, PhD, clinical assistant professor of neurology at Samsung Medical Center in Seoul, South Korea, and colleagues conducted a prospective study to investigate the suicidality associated with cluster headache and the factors associated with increased suicidality in that disorder. The researchers enrolled 193 consecutive patients with cluster headache between September 2016 and August 2018 at 15 hospitals. They examined the patients and used the Patient Health Questionnaire–9 (PHQ-9) and the General Anxiety Disorder–7 item scale (GAD-7) screening tools. During the ictal and interictal phases, the researchers asked the patients whether they had had passive suicidal ideation, active suicidal ideation, suicidal planning, or suicidal attempt. Dr. Ji Lee and colleagues performed univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses to evaluate the factors associated with high ictal suicidality, which was defined as two or more positive responses during the ictal phase. Participants were followed up during the between-bout phase.

The researchers excluded 18 patients from analysis because they were between bouts at enrollment. The mean age of the remaining 175 patients was 38.4 years. Mean age at onset was 29.9 years. About 85% of the patients were male. The diagnosis was definite cluster headache for 87.4% of the sample and probable cluster headache for 12.6%. In addition, 88% of the population had episodic cluster headache.
 

Suicidal ideation increased during the ictal phase

During the ictal phase, 64.2% of participants reported passive suicidal ideation, and 35.8% reported active suicidal ideation. Furthermore, 5.8% of patients had a suicidal plan, and 2.3% attempted suicide. In the interictal phase, 4.0% of patients reported passive suicidal ideation, and 3.5% reported active suicidal ideation. Interictal suicidal planning was reported by 2.9% of participants, and 1.2% of participants attempted suicide interictally. The results were similar between patients with definite and probable cluster headache.

The ictal phase increased the odds of passive suicidal ideation (odds ratio [OR], 42.46), active suicidal ideation (OR, 15.55), suicidal planning (OR, 2.06), and suicidal attempt (OR, 2.02), compared with the interictal phase. The differences in suicidal planning and suicidal attempt between the ictal and interictal phases, however, were not statistically significant.

Longer disease duration, higher attack intensity, higher Headache Impact Test–6 (HIT-6) score, GAD-7 score, and PHQ-9 score were associated with high ictal suicidality. Disease duration, HIT-6, and PHQ-9 remained significantly associated with high ictal suicidality in the multivariate analysis. Younger age at onset, longer disease duration, total number of lifetime bouts, and higher GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores were significantly associated with interictal suicidality in the univariable analysis. The total number of lifetime bouts and the PHQ-9 scores remained significant in the multivariable analysis.

In all, 54 patients were followed up between bouts. None reported passive suicidal ideation, 1.9% reported active suicidal ideation, 1.9% reported suicidal planning, and none reported suicidal attempt. Compared with the between-bouts period, the ictal phase was associated with significantly higher odds of active suicidal ideation (OR, 37.32) and nonsignificantly increased suicidal planning (OR, 3.20).
 

Patients need a disease-modifying treatment

Taken together, the study results underscore the importance of proper management of cluster headache to reduce its burden, said the authors. “Given that greater headache-related impact was independently associated with ictal suicidality, an intensive treatment to reduce the headache-related impact might be beneficial to prevent suicide in cluster headache patients,” they said. In addition to reducing headache-related impact and headache intensity, “a disease-modifying treatment to prevent further bouts is warranted to decrease suicidality in cluster headache patients.”

Although patients with cluster headache had increased suicidality in the ictal and interictal phases, they had lower suicidality between bouts, compared with the general population. This result suggests that patients remain mentally healthy when the bouts are over, and that “a strategy to shorten the length of bout is warranted,” said Dr. Ji Lee and colleagues. Furthermore, the fact that suicidality did not differ significantly between patients with definite cluster headache and those with probable cluster headache “prompts clinicians for an increased identification and intensive treatment strategy for probable cluster headache.”

The current study is the first prospective investigation of suicidality in the various phases of cluster headache, according to the investigators. It nevertheless has several limitations. The prevalence of chronic cluster headache was low in the study population, and not all patients presented for follow-up during the period between bouts. In addition, the data were obtained from recall, and consequently may be less accurate than those gained from prospective recording. Finally, Dr. Ji Lee and colleagues did not gather information on personality disorders, insomnia, substance abuse, or addiction, even though these factors can influence suicidality in patients with chronic pain.

The investigators reported no conflicts of interest related to their research. The study was supported by a grant from the Korean Neurological Association.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Ji Lee M et al. Cephalalgia. 2019 Apr 24. doi: 10.1177/0333102419845660.

Cluster headache is associated with increased suicidality during the ictal and interictal periods, compared with the periods between bouts. Short- and long-term cluster headache disease burden, as well as depressive symptoms, contributes to suicidality, according to research published online Cephalalgia. Development of treatments that reduce the headache-related burden and prevent future bouts could reduce suicidality, said the researchers.

Although cluster headache has been called the “suicide headache,” few studies have examined suicidality in patients with cluster headache. Research by Rozen et al. found that the rate of suicidal attempt among patients was similar to that among the general population. The results have not been replicated, however, and the investigators did not examine whether suicidality varied according to the phases of the disorder.
 

A prospective, multicenter study

Mi Ji Lee, MD, PhD, clinical assistant professor of neurology at Samsung Medical Center in Seoul, South Korea, and colleagues conducted a prospective study to investigate the suicidality associated with cluster headache and the factors associated with increased suicidality in that disorder. The researchers enrolled 193 consecutive patients with cluster headache between September 2016 and August 2018 at 15 hospitals. They examined the patients and used the Patient Health Questionnaire–9 (PHQ-9) and the General Anxiety Disorder–7 item scale (GAD-7) screening tools. During the ictal and interictal phases, the researchers asked the patients whether they had had passive suicidal ideation, active suicidal ideation, suicidal planning, or suicidal attempt. Dr. Ji Lee and colleagues performed univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses to evaluate the factors associated with high ictal suicidality, which was defined as two or more positive responses during the ictal phase. Participants were followed up during the between-bout phase.

The researchers excluded 18 patients from analysis because they were between bouts at enrollment. The mean age of the remaining 175 patients was 38.4 years. Mean age at onset was 29.9 years. About 85% of the patients were male. The diagnosis was definite cluster headache for 87.4% of the sample and probable cluster headache for 12.6%. In addition, 88% of the population had episodic cluster headache.
 

Suicidal ideation increased during the ictal phase

During the ictal phase, 64.2% of participants reported passive suicidal ideation, and 35.8% reported active suicidal ideation. Furthermore, 5.8% of patients had a suicidal plan, and 2.3% attempted suicide. In the interictal phase, 4.0% of patients reported passive suicidal ideation, and 3.5% reported active suicidal ideation. Interictal suicidal planning was reported by 2.9% of participants, and 1.2% of participants attempted suicide interictally. The results were similar between patients with definite and probable cluster headache.

The ictal phase increased the odds of passive suicidal ideation (odds ratio [OR], 42.46), active suicidal ideation (OR, 15.55), suicidal planning (OR, 2.06), and suicidal attempt (OR, 2.02), compared with the interictal phase. The differences in suicidal planning and suicidal attempt between the ictal and interictal phases, however, were not statistically significant.

Longer disease duration, higher attack intensity, higher Headache Impact Test–6 (HIT-6) score, GAD-7 score, and PHQ-9 score were associated with high ictal suicidality. Disease duration, HIT-6, and PHQ-9 remained significantly associated with high ictal suicidality in the multivariate analysis. Younger age at onset, longer disease duration, total number of lifetime bouts, and higher GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores were significantly associated with interictal suicidality in the univariable analysis. The total number of lifetime bouts and the PHQ-9 scores remained significant in the multivariable analysis.

In all, 54 patients were followed up between bouts. None reported passive suicidal ideation, 1.9% reported active suicidal ideation, 1.9% reported suicidal planning, and none reported suicidal attempt. Compared with the between-bouts period, the ictal phase was associated with significantly higher odds of active suicidal ideation (OR, 37.32) and nonsignificantly increased suicidal planning (OR, 3.20).
 

Patients need a disease-modifying treatment

Taken together, the study results underscore the importance of proper management of cluster headache to reduce its burden, said the authors. “Given that greater headache-related impact was independently associated with ictal suicidality, an intensive treatment to reduce the headache-related impact might be beneficial to prevent suicide in cluster headache patients,” they said. In addition to reducing headache-related impact and headache intensity, “a disease-modifying treatment to prevent further bouts is warranted to decrease suicidality in cluster headache patients.”

Although patients with cluster headache had increased suicidality in the ictal and interictal phases, they had lower suicidality between bouts, compared with the general population. This result suggests that patients remain mentally healthy when the bouts are over, and that “a strategy to shorten the length of bout is warranted,” said Dr. Ji Lee and colleagues. Furthermore, the fact that suicidality did not differ significantly between patients with definite cluster headache and those with probable cluster headache “prompts clinicians for an increased identification and intensive treatment strategy for probable cluster headache.”

The current study is the first prospective investigation of suicidality in the various phases of cluster headache, according to the investigators. It nevertheless has several limitations. The prevalence of chronic cluster headache was low in the study population, and not all patients presented for follow-up during the period between bouts. In addition, the data were obtained from recall, and consequently may be less accurate than those gained from prospective recording. Finally, Dr. Ji Lee and colleagues did not gather information on personality disorders, insomnia, substance abuse, or addiction, even though these factors can influence suicidality in patients with chronic pain.

The investigators reported no conflicts of interest related to their research. The study was supported by a grant from the Korean Neurological Association.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Ji Lee M et al. Cephalalgia. 2019 Apr 24. doi: 10.1177/0333102419845660.

Cluster headache is associated with increased suicidality during the ictal and interictal periods, compared with the periods between bouts. Short- and long-term cluster headache disease burden, as well as depressive symptoms, contributes to suicidality, according to research published online Cephalalgia. Development of treatments that reduce the headache-related burden and prevent future bouts could reduce suicidality, said the researchers.

Although cluster headache has been called the “suicide headache,” few studies have examined suicidality in patients with cluster headache. Research by Rozen et al. found that the rate of suicidal attempt among patients was similar to that among the general population. The results have not been replicated, however, and the investigators did not examine whether suicidality varied according to the phases of the disorder.
 

A prospective, multicenter study

Mi Ji Lee, MD, PhD, clinical assistant professor of neurology at Samsung Medical Center in Seoul, South Korea, and colleagues conducted a prospective study to investigate the suicidality associated with cluster headache and the factors associated with increased suicidality in that disorder. The researchers enrolled 193 consecutive patients with cluster headache between September 2016 and August 2018 at 15 hospitals. They examined the patients and used the Patient Health Questionnaire–9 (PHQ-9) and the General Anxiety Disorder–7 item scale (GAD-7) screening tools. During the ictal and interictal phases, the researchers asked the patients whether they had had passive suicidal ideation, active suicidal ideation, suicidal planning, or suicidal attempt. Dr. Ji Lee and colleagues performed univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses to evaluate the factors associated with high ictal suicidality, which was defined as two or more positive responses during the ictal phase. Participants were followed up during the between-bout phase.

The researchers excluded 18 patients from analysis because they were between bouts at enrollment. The mean age of the remaining 175 patients was 38.4 years. Mean age at onset was 29.9 years. About 85% of the patients were male. The diagnosis was definite cluster headache for 87.4% of the sample and probable cluster headache for 12.6%. In addition, 88% of the population had episodic cluster headache.
 

Suicidal ideation increased during the ictal phase

During the ictal phase, 64.2% of participants reported passive suicidal ideation, and 35.8% reported active suicidal ideation. Furthermore, 5.8% of patients had a suicidal plan, and 2.3% attempted suicide. In the interictal phase, 4.0% of patients reported passive suicidal ideation, and 3.5% reported active suicidal ideation. Interictal suicidal planning was reported by 2.9% of participants, and 1.2% of participants attempted suicide interictally. The results were similar between patients with definite and probable cluster headache.

The ictal phase increased the odds of passive suicidal ideation (odds ratio [OR], 42.46), active suicidal ideation (OR, 15.55), suicidal planning (OR, 2.06), and suicidal attempt (OR, 2.02), compared with the interictal phase. The differences in suicidal planning and suicidal attempt between the ictal and interictal phases, however, were not statistically significant.

Longer disease duration, higher attack intensity, higher Headache Impact Test–6 (HIT-6) score, GAD-7 score, and PHQ-9 score were associated with high ictal suicidality. Disease duration, HIT-6, and PHQ-9 remained significantly associated with high ictal suicidality in the multivariate analysis. Younger age at onset, longer disease duration, total number of lifetime bouts, and higher GAD-7 and PHQ-9 scores were significantly associated with interictal suicidality in the univariable analysis. The total number of lifetime bouts and the PHQ-9 scores remained significant in the multivariable analysis.

In all, 54 patients were followed up between bouts. None reported passive suicidal ideation, 1.9% reported active suicidal ideation, 1.9% reported suicidal planning, and none reported suicidal attempt. Compared with the between-bouts period, the ictal phase was associated with significantly higher odds of active suicidal ideation (OR, 37.32) and nonsignificantly increased suicidal planning (OR, 3.20).
 

Patients need a disease-modifying treatment

Taken together, the study results underscore the importance of proper management of cluster headache to reduce its burden, said the authors. “Given that greater headache-related impact was independently associated with ictal suicidality, an intensive treatment to reduce the headache-related impact might be beneficial to prevent suicide in cluster headache patients,” they said. In addition to reducing headache-related impact and headache intensity, “a disease-modifying treatment to prevent further bouts is warranted to decrease suicidality in cluster headache patients.”

Although patients with cluster headache had increased suicidality in the ictal and interictal phases, they had lower suicidality between bouts, compared with the general population. This result suggests that patients remain mentally healthy when the bouts are over, and that “a strategy to shorten the length of bout is warranted,” said Dr. Ji Lee and colleagues. Furthermore, the fact that suicidality did not differ significantly between patients with definite cluster headache and those with probable cluster headache “prompts clinicians for an increased identification and intensive treatment strategy for probable cluster headache.”

The current study is the first prospective investigation of suicidality in the various phases of cluster headache, according to the investigators. It nevertheless has several limitations. The prevalence of chronic cluster headache was low in the study population, and not all patients presented for follow-up during the period between bouts. In addition, the data were obtained from recall, and consequently may be less accurate than those gained from prospective recording. Finally, Dr. Ji Lee and colleagues did not gather information on personality disorders, insomnia, substance abuse, or addiction, even though these factors can influence suicidality in patients with chronic pain.

The investigators reported no conflicts of interest related to their research. The study was supported by a grant from the Korean Neurological Association.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Ji Lee M et al. Cephalalgia. 2019 Apr 24. doi: 10.1177/0333102419845660.

Out-of-pocket costs for medications to treat neurologic conditions increased sharply between 2004 and 2016, according to a study in Neurology. The out-of-pocket cost of multiple sclerosis (MS) treatments increased the most, with a 20-fold increase during that time. The average out-of-pocket cost for MS therapy was $15/month in 2004, compared with $309/month in 2016. Patients also had to pay more for brand name medications for peripheral neuropathy, dementia, and Parkinson’s disease, researchers said.

“Out-of-pocket costs vary widely both across and within conditions,” said study author Brian C. Callaghan, MD, an assistant professor of neurology at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, and research colleagues. “To minimize patient financial burden, neurologists require access to precise cost information when making treatment decisions.”

Prior studies have found that high drug costs “can create burdens such as medical debt, skipping food or other essentials, or even not taking drugs as often as necessary,” Dr. Callaghan said in a news release.

To assess how out-of-pocket costs affect patients with neurologic conditions, the investigators analyzed data from a large, privately insured health care claims database. They determined medication costs for patients with MS, peripheral neuropathy, epilepsy, dementia, and Parkinson’s disease who were seen by outpatient neurologists. They also compared costs for high-deductible and traditional plans and explored cumulative out-of-pocket costs during the first 2 years after diagnosis.

The analysis examined the five most commonly prescribed drugs by neurologists for each condition based on Medicare data. In addition, the researchers included in their analysis all approved MS medications, lacosamide as a brand name epilepsy drug, and venlafaxine, a peripheral neuropathy medication that transitioned from brand to generic.

In all, the study population included 105,355 patients with MS, 314,530 with peripheral neuropathy, 281,073 with epilepsy, 120,720 with dementia, and 90,801 with Parkinson’s disease.

In 2016, patients in high-deductible health plans had an average monthly out-of-pocket expense that was approximately twice that of patients not in those plans – $661 versus $246 among patients with MS, and $40 versus $18 among patients with epilepsy.

In the 2 years after diagnosis in 2012 or 2013, cumulative out-of-pocket costs for patients with MS were a mean of $2,238, but costs varied widely. Cumulative costs were no more than $90 for patients in the bottom 5% of expenses, whereas they exceeded $9,800 for patients in the top 5% of expenses. Among patients with epilepsy, cumulative out-of-pocket costs were $230 in the 2 years after diagnosis.

“In 2004, out-of-pocket costs were of such low magnitude that physicians could typically ignore these costs for most patients and not adversely affect the financial status of patients or their adherence to medications. However, by 2016, out-of-pockets costs have risen to the point where neurologists should consider out-of-pocket costs for most medications and for most patients,” Dr. Callaghan and colleagues wrote.

Ralph L. Sacco, MD, president of the American Academy of Neurology (AAN), said in a news release that the AAN has created a Neurology Drug Pricing Task Force and is advocating for better drug-pricing policies. “This study provides important information to help us better understand how these problems can directly affect our patients,” Dr. Sacco said.

“Everyone deserves affordable access to the medications that will be most beneficial, but if the drugs are too expensive, people may simply not take them, possibly leading to medical complications and higher costs later,” Dr. Sacco said.

The study was supported by the AAN. Several authors are supported by National Institutes of Health grants. Dr. Callaghan receives research support from Impeto Medical and performs consulting work.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Callaghan BC et al. Neurology. 2019 May 1. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000007564.

Out-of-pocket costs for medications to treat neurologic conditions increased sharply between 2004 and 2016, according to a study in Neurology. The out-of-pocket cost of multiple sclerosis (MS) treatments increased the most, with a 20-fold increase during that time. The average out-of-pocket cost for MS therapy was $15/month in 2004, compared with $309/month in 2016. Patients also had to pay more for brand name medications for peripheral neuropathy, dementia, and Parkinson’s disease, researchers said.

“Out-of-pocket costs vary widely both across and within conditions,” said study author Brian C. Callaghan, MD, an assistant professor of neurology at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, and research colleagues. “To minimize patient financial burden, neurologists require access to precise cost information when making treatment decisions.”

Prior studies have found that high drug costs “can create burdens such as medical debt, skipping food or other essentials, or even not taking drugs as often as necessary,” Dr. Callaghan said in a news release.

To assess how out-of-pocket costs affect patients with neurologic conditions, the investigators analyzed data from a large, privately insured health care claims database. They determined medication costs for patients with MS, peripheral neuropathy, epilepsy, dementia, and Parkinson’s disease who were seen by outpatient neurologists. They also compared costs for high-deductible and traditional plans and explored cumulative out-of-pocket costs during the first 2 years after diagnosis.

The analysis examined the five most commonly prescribed drugs by neurologists for each condition based on Medicare data. In addition, the researchers included in their analysis all approved MS medications, lacosamide as a brand name epilepsy drug, and venlafaxine, a peripheral neuropathy medication that transitioned from brand to generic.

In all, the study population included 105,355 patients with MS, 314,530 with peripheral neuropathy, 281,073 with epilepsy, 120,720 with dementia, and 90,801 with Parkinson’s disease.

In 2016, patients in high-deductible health plans had an average monthly out-of-pocket expense that was approximately twice that of patients not in those plans – $661 versus $246 among patients with MS, and $40 versus $18 among patients with epilepsy.

In the 2 years after diagnosis in 2012 or 2013, cumulative out-of-pocket costs for patients with MS were a mean of $2,238, but costs varied widely. Cumulative costs were no more than $90 for patients in the bottom 5% of expenses, whereas they exceeded $9,800 for patients in the top 5% of expenses. Among patients with epilepsy, cumulative out-of-pocket costs were $230 in the 2 years after diagnosis.

“In 2004, out-of-pocket costs were of such low magnitude that physicians could typically ignore these costs for most patients and not adversely affect the financial status of patients or their adherence to medications. However, by 2016, out-of-pockets costs have risen to the point where neurologists should consider out-of-pocket costs for most medications and for most patients,” Dr. Callaghan and colleagues wrote.

Ralph L. Sacco, MD, president of the American Academy of Neurology (AAN), said in a news release that the AAN has created a Neurology Drug Pricing Task Force and is advocating for better drug-pricing policies. “This study provides important information to help us better understand how these problems can directly affect our patients,” Dr. Sacco said.

“Everyone deserves affordable access to the medications that will be most beneficial, but if the drugs are too expensive, people may simply not take them, possibly leading to medical complications and higher costs later,” Dr. Sacco said.

The study was supported by the AAN. Several authors are supported by National Institutes of Health grants. Dr. Callaghan receives research support from Impeto Medical and performs consulting work.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Callaghan BC et al. Neurology. 2019 May 1. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000007564.

Out-of-pocket costs for medications to treat neurologic conditions increased sharply between 2004 and 2016, according to a study in Neurology. The out-of-pocket cost of multiple sclerosis (MS) treatments increased the most, with a 20-fold increase during that time. The average out-of-pocket cost for MS therapy was $15/month in 2004, compared with $309/month in 2016. Patients also had to pay more for brand name medications for peripheral neuropathy, dementia, and Parkinson’s disease, researchers said.

“Out-of-pocket costs vary widely both across and within conditions,” said study author Brian C. Callaghan, MD, an assistant professor of neurology at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, and research colleagues. “To minimize patient financial burden, neurologists require access to precise cost information when making treatment decisions.”

Prior studies have found that high drug costs “can create burdens such as medical debt, skipping food or other essentials, or even not taking drugs as often as necessary,” Dr. Callaghan said in a news release.

To assess how out-of-pocket costs affect patients with neurologic conditions, the investigators analyzed data from a large, privately insured health care claims database. They determined medication costs for patients with MS, peripheral neuropathy, epilepsy, dementia, and Parkinson’s disease who were seen by outpatient neurologists. They also compared costs for high-deductible and traditional plans and explored cumulative out-of-pocket costs during the first 2 years after diagnosis.

The analysis examined the five most commonly prescribed drugs by neurologists for each condition based on Medicare data. In addition, the researchers included in their analysis all approved MS medications, lacosamide as a brand name epilepsy drug, and venlafaxine, a peripheral neuropathy medication that transitioned from brand to generic.

In all, the study population included 105,355 patients with MS, 314,530 with peripheral neuropathy, 281,073 with epilepsy, 120,720 with dementia, and 90,801 with Parkinson’s disease.

In 2016, patients in high-deductible health plans had an average monthly out-of-pocket expense that was approximately twice that of patients not in those plans – $661 versus $246 among patients with MS, and $40 versus $18 among patients with epilepsy.

In the 2 years after diagnosis in 2012 or 2013, cumulative out-of-pocket costs for patients with MS were a mean of $2,238, but costs varied widely. Cumulative costs were no more than $90 for patients in the bottom 5% of expenses, whereas they exceeded $9,800 for patients in the top 5% of expenses. Among patients with epilepsy, cumulative out-of-pocket costs were $230 in the 2 years after diagnosis.

“In 2004, out-of-pocket costs were of such low magnitude that physicians could typically ignore these costs for most patients and not adversely affect the financial status of patients or their adherence to medications. However, by 2016, out-of-pockets costs have risen to the point where neurologists should consider out-of-pocket costs for most medications and for most patients,” Dr. Callaghan and colleagues wrote.

Ralph L. Sacco, MD, president of the American Academy of Neurology (AAN), said in a news release that the AAN has created a Neurology Drug Pricing Task Force and is advocating for better drug-pricing policies. “This study provides important information to help us better understand how these problems can directly affect our patients,” Dr. Sacco said.

“Everyone deserves affordable access to the medications that will be most beneficial, but if the drugs are too expensive, people may simply not take them, possibly leading to medical complications and higher costs later,” Dr. Sacco said.

The study was supported by the AAN. Several authors are supported by National Institutes of Health grants. Dr. Callaghan receives research support from Impeto Medical and performs consulting work.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Callaghan BC et al. Neurology. 2019 May 1. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000007564.