Journal of Clinical Outcomes Management

A novel endovascular brain-computer interface is safe and effective, allowing paralyzed patients to use their thoughts to perform daily tasks, results of a small, first-in-human study show.

A potential life changer for patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), the minimally invasive device enables patients to carry out important activities of daily living.

“Our participants are able to use the device to perform tasks like sending email, texting loved ones and caregivers, browsing the web, and doing personal finances such as online banking,” study investigator Douglas J. Weber, PhD, professor of mechanical engineering and neuroscience, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, told a press briefing.

The technology allowed one patient to write a book (due out later this year) and another patient to maintain communication despite losing his ability to speak, said the study’s lead investigator, Bruce Campbell, MBBS, PhD, professor of neurology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne.

“In addition to providing patients with communicative capabilities not possible as a result of their disease, it is our goal to enable patients to be more independently involved in their care going forward, by enabling effective and faster communication directly with their caregiver and physician,” said Dr. Campbell.

The findings were presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.
 

Minimally invasive

ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease, is a progressive neurodegenerative disease that affects nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord. Patients with ALS eventually lose the ability to control muscle movement, often leading to total paralysis.

“Extending the period in which patients are able to communicate with loved ones and caregivers could provide a very meaningful benefit to patients with ALS,” said Dr. Weber.

Brain-computer interfaces measure and translate brain signals, with some functioning as motor neuro-prostheses. These devices provide direct communication between the brain and an external device by recording and decoding signals from the precentral gyrus as the result of movement intention.

“The technology has potential to empower the more than five million people in the U.S. who are severely paralyzed to once again perform important activities of daily living independently,” said Dr. Weber.

Until now, motor neuro-prostheses required surgery to remove a portion of the skull and place electrodes on to the brain. However, the new minimally invasive motor neuro-prostheses reach the brain by vascular access, dispensing with the need for a craniotomy.

“The brain-computer interface device used in our study is unique in that it does not require invasive open surgery to implant,” said Dr. Weber. “Instead this is an endovascular brain-computer interface.”

Using a catheter, surgeons feed the BCI through one of two jugular veins in the neck. They position an array of 16 sensors or electrodes on a stent-like scaffold that deploys against the walls of the superior sagittal sinus.
 

No adverse events

Describing the device, Dr. Weber said the electrodes or sensing elements are tiny and the body of the stent, which serves as a scaffold to support the electrodes, resembles a standard endovascular stent.

“It’s very small at the time of delivery because it’s held within the body of a catheter, but then when deployed it expands to contact the wall of the vein.”

The device transmits brain signals from the motor cortex to an electronics unit, located in a subcutaneous pocket that decodes movement signals. The machine-learning decoder is programmed as follows: When a trainer asked participants to attempt certain movements, like tapping their foot or extending their knee, the decoder analyzes nerve cell signals from those movement attempts. The decoder is able to translate movement signals into computer navigation.

The study included four patients with ALS who were paralyzed because of the disease and were trained to use the device.

A key safety endpoint was device-related serious adverse events resulting in death or increased disability during the post-implant evaluation period. Results showed all four participants successfully completed the 12-month follow-up with no serious adverse events.

Researchers also assessed target vessel patency and incidence of device migration at 3 and 12 months. Postoperative imaging showed that in all participants, the blood vessel that held the implanted device remained open and stayed in place.

Addressing the potential for blood clots, Dr. Weber said that so far there has been no sign of clotting or vascular occlusion.

“The device itself integrates well into the walls of the blood vessel over time,” he said. “Within the acute period after implantation, there’s time where the device is exposed to the blood stream, but once it becomes encapsulated and fully integrated into the blood vessel wall, the risks of thrombosis diminish.”
 

Greater independence

Researchers also recorded signal fidelity and stability over 12 months and use of the brain-computer interface to perform routine tasks. All participants learned to use the motor neuro-prostheses with eye tracking for computer use. Eye tracking technology helps a computer determine what a person is looking at.

Using the system, patients were able to complete tasks without help. These included text messaging and managing finances. “Since the device is fully implanted and easy for patients to use, they can use the technology independently and in their own home,” said Dr. Weber.

Although the study started with patients with ALS, those paralyzed from other causes, such as an upper spinal cord injury or brain-stem stroke could also benefit from this technology, Dr. Weber said. In addition, the technology could be expanded to broaden brain communication capabilities potentially to include robotic limbs, he said.

There’s even the potential to use this minimally invasive brain interface technology to deliver therapies like deep brain stimulation, which Dr. Weber noted is a growing field. “It’s [the] early days, but it’s a very exciting new direction for brain interface technology,” he said.

Researchers are now recruiting patients for the first U.S.-based feasibility trial of the device that will be funded by the NIH, said Dr. Weber. A limitation of the research was the study’s small size.
 

Advancing the field

Reached for a comment, Kevin C. Davis, an MD and PhD student in the department of biomedical engineering, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, said this new work moves the field forward in an important way.

Dr. Davis and colleagues have shown the effectiveness of another technology used to overcome paralysis – a small portable system that facilitates hand grasp of a patient with a spinal cord injury. He reported on this DBS-based BCI system at the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) 2021 Annual Meeting.

Developing effective brain-computer interfaces, and motor neural prosthetics that avoid surgery, as the team did in this new study, is “worth exploring,” said Dr. Davis.

However, although the device used in this new study avoids cranial surgery, “sole vascular access may limit the device’s ability to reach other areas of the brain more suitable for upper-limb motor prosthetics,” he said.

“Determining how much function such a device could provide to individuals with locked-in syndrome or paralysis will be important in determining its viability as an eventual clinical tool for patients.”

The study was supported by Synchron, the maker of the device, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Office of Naval Research, the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, the Australian Federal Government Foundation, and the Motor Neuron Disease Research Institute of Australia.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A novel endovascular brain-computer interface is safe and effective, allowing paralyzed patients to use their thoughts to perform daily tasks, results of a small, first-in-human study show.

A potential life changer for patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), the minimally invasive device enables patients to carry out important activities of daily living.

“Our participants are able to use the device to perform tasks like sending email, texting loved ones and caregivers, browsing the web, and doing personal finances such as online banking,” study investigator Douglas J. Weber, PhD, professor of mechanical engineering and neuroscience, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, told a press briefing.

The technology allowed one patient to write a book (due out later this year) and another patient to maintain communication despite losing his ability to speak, said the study’s lead investigator, Bruce Campbell, MBBS, PhD, professor of neurology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne.

“In addition to providing patients with communicative capabilities not possible as a result of their disease, it is our goal to enable patients to be more independently involved in their care going forward, by enabling effective and faster communication directly with their caregiver and physician,” said Dr. Campbell.

The findings were presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.
 

Minimally invasive

ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease, is a progressive neurodegenerative disease that affects nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord. Patients with ALS eventually lose the ability to control muscle movement, often leading to total paralysis.

“Extending the period in which patients are able to communicate with loved ones and caregivers could provide a very meaningful benefit to patients with ALS,” said Dr. Weber.

Brain-computer interfaces measure and translate brain signals, with some functioning as motor neuro-prostheses. These devices provide direct communication between the brain and an external device by recording and decoding signals from the precentral gyrus as the result of movement intention.

“The technology has potential to empower the more than five million people in the U.S. who are severely paralyzed to once again perform important activities of daily living independently,” said Dr. Weber.

Until now, motor neuro-prostheses required surgery to remove a portion of the skull and place electrodes on to the brain. However, the new minimally invasive motor neuro-prostheses reach the brain by vascular access, dispensing with the need for a craniotomy.

“The brain-computer interface device used in our study is unique in that it does not require invasive open surgery to implant,” said Dr. Weber. “Instead this is an endovascular brain-computer interface.”

Using a catheter, surgeons feed the BCI through one of two jugular veins in the neck. They position an array of 16 sensors or electrodes on a stent-like scaffold that deploys against the walls of the superior sagittal sinus.
 

No adverse events

Describing the device, Dr. Weber said the electrodes or sensing elements are tiny and the body of the stent, which serves as a scaffold to support the electrodes, resembles a standard endovascular stent.

“It’s very small at the time of delivery because it’s held within the body of a catheter, but then when deployed it expands to contact the wall of the vein.”

The device transmits brain signals from the motor cortex to an electronics unit, located in a subcutaneous pocket that decodes movement signals. The machine-learning decoder is programmed as follows: When a trainer asked participants to attempt certain movements, like tapping their foot or extending their knee, the decoder analyzes nerve cell signals from those movement attempts. The decoder is able to translate movement signals into computer navigation.

The study included four patients with ALS who were paralyzed because of the disease and were trained to use the device.

A key safety endpoint was device-related serious adverse events resulting in death or increased disability during the post-implant evaluation period. Results showed all four participants successfully completed the 12-month follow-up with no serious adverse events.

Researchers also assessed target vessel patency and incidence of device migration at 3 and 12 months. Postoperative imaging showed that in all participants, the blood vessel that held the implanted device remained open and stayed in place.

Addressing the potential for blood clots, Dr. Weber said that so far there has been no sign of clotting or vascular occlusion.

“The device itself integrates well into the walls of the blood vessel over time,” he said. “Within the acute period after implantation, there’s time where the device is exposed to the blood stream, but once it becomes encapsulated and fully integrated into the blood vessel wall, the risks of thrombosis diminish.”
 

Greater independence

Researchers also recorded signal fidelity and stability over 12 months and use of the brain-computer interface to perform routine tasks. All participants learned to use the motor neuro-prostheses with eye tracking for computer use. Eye tracking technology helps a computer determine what a person is looking at.

Using the system, patients were able to complete tasks without help. These included text messaging and managing finances. “Since the device is fully implanted and easy for patients to use, they can use the technology independently and in their own home,” said Dr. Weber.

Although the study started with patients with ALS, those paralyzed from other causes, such as an upper spinal cord injury or brain-stem stroke could also benefit from this technology, Dr. Weber said. In addition, the technology could be expanded to broaden brain communication capabilities potentially to include robotic limbs, he said.

There’s even the potential to use this minimally invasive brain interface technology to deliver therapies like deep brain stimulation, which Dr. Weber noted is a growing field. “It’s [the] early days, but it’s a very exciting new direction for brain interface technology,” he said.

Researchers are now recruiting patients for the first U.S.-based feasibility trial of the device that will be funded by the NIH, said Dr. Weber. A limitation of the research was the study’s small size.
 

Advancing the field

Reached for a comment, Kevin C. Davis, an MD and PhD student in the department of biomedical engineering, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, said this new work moves the field forward in an important way.

Dr. Davis and colleagues have shown the effectiveness of another technology used to overcome paralysis – a small portable system that facilitates hand grasp of a patient with a spinal cord injury. He reported on this DBS-based BCI system at the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) 2021 Annual Meeting.

Developing effective brain-computer interfaces, and motor neural prosthetics that avoid surgery, as the team did in this new study, is “worth exploring,” said Dr. Davis.

However, although the device used in this new study avoids cranial surgery, “sole vascular access may limit the device’s ability to reach other areas of the brain more suitable for upper-limb motor prosthetics,” he said.

“Determining how much function such a device could provide to individuals with locked-in syndrome or paralysis will be important in determining its viability as an eventual clinical tool for patients.”

The study was supported by Synchron, the maker of the device, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Office of Naval Research, the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, the Australian Federal Government Foundation, and the Motor Neuron Disease Research Institute of Australia.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A novel endovascular brain-computer interface is safe and effective, allowing paralyzed patients to use their thoughts to perform daily tasks, results of a small, first-in-human study show.

A potential life changer for patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), the minimally invasive device enables patients to carry out important activities of daily living.

“Our participants are able to use the device to perform tasks like sending email, texting loved ones and caregivers, browsing the web, and doing personal finances such as online banking,” study investigator Douglas J. Weber, PhD, professor of mechanical engineering and neuroscience, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, told a press briefing.

The technology allowed one patient to write a book (due out later this year) and another patient to maintain communication despite losing his ability to speak, said the study’s lead investigator, Bruce Campbell, MBBS, PhD, professor of neurology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, University of Melbourne.

“In addition to providing patients with communicative capabilities not possible as a result of their disease, it is our goal to enable patients to be more independently involved in their care going forward, by enabling effective and faster communication directly with their caregiver and physician,” said Dr. Campbell.

The findings were presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.
 

Minimally invasive

ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease, is a progressive neurodegenerative disease that affects nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord. Patients with ALS eventually lose the ability to control muscle movement, often leading to total paralysis.

“Extending the period in which patients are able to communicate with loved ones and caregivers could provide a very meaningful benefit to patients with ALS,” said Dr. Weber.

Brain-computer interfaces measure and translate brain signals, with some functioning as motor neuro-prostheses. These devices provide direct communication between the brain and an external device by recording and decoding signals from the precentral gyrus as the result of movement intention.

“The technology has potential to empower the more than five million people in the U.S. who are severely paralyzed to once again perform important activities of daily living independently,” said Dr. Weber.

Until now, motor neuro-prostheses required surgery to remove a portion of the skull and place electrodes on to the brain. However, the new minimally invasive motor neuro-prostheses reach the brain by vascular access, dispensing with the need for a craniotomy.

“The brain-computer interface device used in our study is unique in that it does not require invasive open surgery to implant,” said Dr. Weber. “Instead this is an endovascular brain-computer interface.”

Using a catheter, surgeons feed the BCI through one of two jugular veins in the neck. They position an array of 16 sensors or electrodes on a stent-like scaffold that deploys against the walls of the superior sagittal sinus.
 

No adverse events

Describing the device, Dr. Weber said the electrodes or sensing elements are tiny and the body of the stent, which serves as a scaffold to support the electrodes, resembles a standard endovascular stent.

“It’s very small at the time of delivery because it’s held within the body of a catheter, but then when deployed it expands to contact the wall of the vein.”

The device transmits brain signals from the motor cortex to an electronics unit, located in a subcutaneous pocket that decodes movement signals. The machine-learning decoder is programmed as follows: When a trainer asked participants to attempt certain movements, like tapping their foot or extending their knee, the decoder analyzes nerve cell signals from those movement attempts. The decoder is able to translate movement signals into computer navigation.

The study included four patients with ALS who were paralyzed because of the disease and were trained to use the device.

A key safety endpoint was device-related serious adverse events resulting in death or increased disability during the post-implant evaluation period. Results showed all four participants successfully completed the 12-month follow-up with no serious adverse events.

Researchers also assessed target vessel patency and incidence of device migration at 3 and 12 months. Postoperative imaging showed that in all participants, the blood vessel that held the implanted device remained open and stayed in place.

Addressing the potential for blood clots, Dr. Weber said that so far there has been no sign of clotting or vascular occlusion.

“The device itself integrates well into the walls of the blood vessel over time,” he said. “Within the acute period after implantation, there’s time where the device is exposed to the blood stream, but once it becomes encapsulated and fully integrated into the blood vessel wall, the risks of thrombosis diminish.”
 

Greater independence

Researchers also recorded signal fidelity and stability over 12 months and use of the brain-computer interface to perform routine tasks. All participants learned to use the motor neuro-prostheses with eye tracking for computer use. Eye tracking technology helps a computer determine what a person is looking at.

Using the system, patients were able to complete tasks without help. These included text messaging and managing finances. “Since the device is fully implanted and easy for patients to use, they can use the technology independently and in their own home,” said Dr. Weber.

Although the study started with patients with ALS, those paralyzed from other causes, such as an upper spinal cord injury or brain-stem stroke could also benefit from this technology, Dr. Weber said. In addition, the technology could be expanded to broaden brain communication capabilities potentially to include robotic limbs, he said.

There’s even the potential to use this minimally invasive brain interface technology to deliver therapies like deep brain stimulation, which Dr. Weber noted is a growing field. “It’s [the] early days, but it’s a very exciting new direction for brain interface technology,” he said.

Researchers are now recruiting patients for the first U.S.-based feasibility trial of the device that will be funded by the NIH, said Dr. Weber. A limitation of the research was the study’s small size.
 

Advancing the field

Reached for a comment, Kevin C. Davis, an MD and PhD student in the department of biomedical engineering, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, said this new work moves the field forward in an important way.

Dr. Davis and colleagues have shown the effectiveness of another technology used to overcome paralysis – a small portable system that facilitates hand grasp of a patient with a spinal cord injury. He reported on this DBS-based BCI system at the American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) 2021 Annual Meeting.

Developing effective brain-computer interfaces, and motor neural prosthetics that avoid surgery, as the team did in this new study, is “worth exploring,” said Dr. Davis.

However, although the device used in this new study avoids cranial surgery, “sole vascular access may limit the device’s ability to reach other areas of the brain more suitable for upper-limb motor prosthetics,” he said.

“Determining how much function such a device could provide to individuals with locked-in syndrome or paralysis will be important in determining its viability as an eventual clinical tool for patients.”

The study was supported by Synchron, the maker of the device, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Office of Naval Research, the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, the Australian Federal Government Foundation, and the Motor Neuron Disease Research Institute of Australia.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The Biden administration has announced a massive federal effort to better understand, diagnose, and treat the crippling effects of long COVID.

The National Research Action Plan on Long COVID will gather experts from various agencies, including the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs, to expand existing long-COVID clinics and broaden research on symptoms of the virus that persist long after infection.

“We’ll collaborate with academic, industry, state and local partners to better understand long COVID,” Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra said at a White House briefing April 5. “We need to work as aggressively as we can to make sure no American is left behind.”

The plan will build on the RECOVER Initiative, a $1.15 billion effort announced last year that will study long COVID.

The COVID-19 Response Team also announced that the United States will donate tens of millions of pediatric coronavirus vaccines to other countries. More than 20 countries have asked for the donations, the team said.

The United States has delivered more than 500 million vaccine doses to 114 countries.

Meanwhile, national COVID-19 numbers continue to fall. CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, MD, reported that average daily cases are down 4% this week to 25,000; hospitalizations have dropped 17% to 1,400 per day; and daily deaths are down to 570 a day, which is a decrease of about 17%.

New national estimates show that Omicron’s subvariant BA.2 now accounts for 72% of circulating variants nationally, she said.

Top infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci, MD, reported that recent data supports the need for a second booster among certain people 50 and older – a move authorized by the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention last week.

“The effectiveness of the first booster dose we know wanes over time, and growing evidence shows a second dose can restore vaccine effectiveness for certain populations,” he said.

Dr. Fauci reported findings from an Israeli study of more than 1 million people 60 and older, which showed that an additional booster dose after 4 months lowered the rate of infection by two times and lowered the rate of severe infection by more than four times.

Another study from Israeli scientists showed that out of half a million people 60 and older, a second booster after 4 months brought a 78% reduction in death, compared to those who received only the first boost.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

The Biden administration has announced a massive federal effort to better understand, diagnose, and treat the crippling effects of long COVID.

The National Research Action Plan on Long COVID will gather experts from various agencies, including the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs, to expand existing long-COVID clinics and broaden research on symptoms of the virus that persist long after infection.

“We’ll collaborate with academic, industry, state and local partners to better understand long COVID,” Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra said at a White House briefing April 5. “We need to work as aggressively as we can to make sure no American is left behind.”

The plan will build on the RECOVER Initiative, a $1.15 billion effort announced last year that will study long COVID.

The COVID-19 Response Team also announced that the United States will donate tens of millions of pediatric coronavirus vaccines to other countries. More than 20 countries have asked for the donations, the team said.

The United States has delivered more than 500 million vaccine doses to 114 countries.

Meanwhile, national COVID-19 numbers continue to fall. CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, MD, reported that average daily cases are down 4% this week to 25,000; hospitalizations have dropped 17% to 1,400 per day; and daily deaths are down to 570 a day, which is a decrease of about 17%.

New national estimates show that Omicron’s subvariant BA.2 now accounts for 72% of circulating variants nationally, she said.

Top infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci, MD, reported that recent data supports the need for a second booster among certain people 50 and older – a move authorized by the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention last week.

“The effectiveness of the first booster dose we know wanes over time, and growing evidence shows a second dose can restore vaccine effectiveness for certain populations,” he said.

Dr. Fauci reported findings from an Israeli study of more than 1 million people 60 and older, which showed that an additional booster dose after 4 months lowered the rate of infection by two times and lowered the rate of severe infection by more than four times.

Another study from Israeli scientists showed that out of half a million people 60 and older, a second booster after 4 months brought a 78% reduction in death, compared to those who received only the first boost.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

The Biden administration has announced a massive federal effort to better understand, diagnose, and treat the crippling effects of long COVID.

The National Research Action Plan on Long COVID will gather experts from various agencies, including the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs, to expand existing long-COVID clinics and broaden research on symptoms of the virus that persist long after infection.

“We’ll collaborate with academic, industry, state and local partners to better understand long COVID,” Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra said at a White House briefing April 5. “We need to work as aggressively as we can to make sure no American is left behind.”

The plan will build on the RECOVER Initiative, a $1.15 billion effort announced last year that will study long COVID.

The COVID-19 Response Team also announced that the United States will donate tens of millions of pediatric coronavirus vaccines to other countries. More than 20 countries have asked for the donations, the team said.

The United States has delivered more than 500 million vaccine doses to 114 countries.

Meanwhile, national COVID-19 numbers continue to fall. CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, MD, reported that average daily cases are down 4% this week to 25,000; hospitalizations have dropped 17% to 1,400 per day; and daily deaths are down to 570 a day, which is a decrease of about 17%.

New national estimates show that Omicron’s subvariant BA.2 now accounts for 72% of circulating variants nationally, she said.

Top infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci, MD, reported that recent data supports the need for a second booster among certain people 50 and older – a move authorized by the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention last week.

“The effectiveness of the first booster dose we know wanes over time, and growing evidence shows a second dose can restore vaccine effectiveness for certain populations,” he said.

Dr. Fauci reported findings from an Israeli study of more than 1 million people 60 and older, which showed that an additional booster dose after 4 months lowered the rate of infection by two times and lowered the rate of severe infection by more than four times.

Another study from Israeli scientists showed that out of half a million people 60 and older, a second booster after 4 months brought a 78% reduction in death, compared to those who received only the first boost.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

SEATTLE – Use of antiseizure medications while breastfeeding is not associated with differences in child cognitive outcomes at age 3, according to new results from the Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (MONEAD) study.

The study follows results from the Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (NEAD) study, which found no evidence of cognitive harm in children who were exposed in utero to antiepileptic drugs. “[In the NEAD study] we followed our cohort to age 6 and found them to have actually an improvement in cognition by about 4 IQ points by the time they got to age 6,” Kimford J. Meador, MD, said during a presentation of the results of the MONEAD study at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.

Breastfeeding has health benefits for both mothers and children, including reduced risk of respiratory tract infections, atopic dermatitis, asthma, and diabetes in children, and reduced risk of diabetes, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and postpartum depression in mothers. Despite those benefits, concerns about harms from exposure to antiepileptic drugs may prompt some women to avoid breastfeeding.

The results of NEAD and MONEAD should reassure patients, according to Dr. Meador, professor of neurology at Stanford (Calif.) University. “Given the known multiple benefits of breastfeeding … women with epilepsy should be encouraged to breastfeed,” he said.
 

A responsibility to ‘engage and educate’ patients

Jennifer Hopp, MD, who served as a discussant for the presentation, underscored the need for neurologists to address pregnancy with female patients of childbearing agents. “The issues may include fertility, peripartum management, and outcomes that really go through the lifespan to also include issues of menopause,” Dr. Hopp, associate professor of neurology at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, said during her presentation.

Dr. Hopp noted one study showing lower rates of breastfeeding among mothers with epilepsy. “Breastfeeding rates in women with epilepsy are strikingly lower than in women who do not have epilepsy,” said Dr. Hopp. Another study showed that women with epilepsy were less likely to sustain breastfeeding after 6 weeks.

Dr. Hopp implored neurologists to address this. “It’s our responsibility to engage and educate our patients. These data provide us messaging to our patients that the newer drugs do not adversely affect outcome independently of their other exposure, and really support well-informed choices in breastfeeding,” said Dr. Hopp.
 

Outdated attitudes still persist

Dr. Meador referred to the stigma that surrounds epilepsy, including some state laws that called for sterilization of women with epilepsy that lasted until the 1960s. One might think that such attitudes are gone, “but it’s still there,” said Dr. Meador, who recounted a story a colleague told him about a woman on antiseizure medication. In the hospital, the nurse told her not to breastfeed. The neurological consult told her not to breastfeed. She breastfed anyway. “Then they reported her for child neglect, and that was just a few years ago. So I think the message needs to be loud and clear that we encourage [women with epilepsy] to breastfeed because we have the known benefits, and now several studies showing clearly no adverse effects of breastfeeding while taking antiseizure medications,” said Dr. Meador.

MONEAD findings

The MONEAD study included women from 20 different sites, with 145 participating investigators. The researchers compared outcomes in 284 women with epilepsy and 87 healthy women. The maternal mean IQ was 98 among women with epilepsy (95% confidence interval [CI], 96-99), and 105 (95% CI, 102-107) among healthy women. Seventy-six percent of women with epilepsy breastfed, versus 89% of controls.

Among the study cohort, 79% of women with epilepsy were on monotherapy, and 21% were on polytherapy. Thirty-five percent received lamotrigine, 28% levetiracetam, 16% were on another monotherapy, 10% received a combination of lamotrigine and levetiracetam, and 11% received a different combination.

At age 3, there was no association between the verbal index score of the child and whether the mother had epilepsy or not (difference, 0.4; P = .770). The researchers did find associations with the mother’s IQ (0.3; P < .001), male versus female child sex (–4.9; P < .001), Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (vs. Non-Hispanic, –5.5; P < .001), mother without college degree (–7.0; P < .001), average Beck Anxiety Inventory score after birth (–0.4; P < .001), and weeks of gestational age at enrollment.

The researchers found no association between third trimester antiseizure medication blood levels and verbal index score after adjustment (–2.9; P = .149), with the exception of levetiracetam (–9.0; P = .033). “This is interesting (but) not to be overblown, because overall the children on levetiracetam did well. But it must be remembered that teratogens act in an exposure dependent manner, so we’re constantly in this balancing act of trying to make sure you get enough medication on board to stop the seizures and protect the mother and the child, and at the same time, not too much on board where we increase the risk of teratogenicity in the child,” said Dr. Meador.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Meador and Dr. Hopp have no relevant financial disclosures.

SEATTLE – Use of antiseizure medications while breastfeeding is not associated with differences in child cognitive outcomes at age 3, according to new results from the Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (MONEAD) study.

The study follows results from the Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (NEAD) study, which found no evidence of cognitive harm in children who were exposed in utero to antiepileptic drugs. “[In the NEAD study] we followed our cohort to age 6 and found them to have actually an improvement in cognition by about 4 IQ points by the time they got to age 6,” Kimford J. Meador, MD, said during a presentation of the results of the MONEAD study at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.

Breastfeeding has health benefits for both mothers and children, including reduced risk of respiratory tract infections, atopic dermatitis, asthma, and diabetes in children, and reduced risk of diabetes, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and postpartum depression in mothers. Despite those benefits, concerns about harms from exposure to antiepileptic drugs may prompt some women to avoid breastfeeding.

The results of NEAD and MONEAD should reassure patients, according to Dr. Meador, professor of neurology at Stanford (Calif.) University. “Given the known multiple benefits of breastfeeding … women with epilepsy should be encouraged to breastfeed,” he said.
 

A responsibility to ‘engage and educate’ patients

Jennifer Hopp, MD, who served as a discussant for the presentation, underscored the need for neurologists to address pregnancy with female patients of childbearing agents. “The issues may include fertility, peripartum management, and outcomes that really go through the lifespan to also include issues of menopause,” Dr. Hopp, associate professor of neurology at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, said during her presentation.

Dr. Hopp noted one study showing lower rates of breastfeeding among mothers with epilepsy. “Breastfeeding rates in women with epilepsy are strikingly lower than in women who do not have epilepsy,” said Dr. Hopp. Another study showed that women with epilepsy were less likely to sustain breastfeeding after 6 weeks.

Dr. Hopp implored neurologists to address this. “It’s our responsibility to engage and educate our patients. These data provide us messaging to our patients that the newer drugs do not adversely affect outcome independently of their other exposure, and really support well-informed choices in breastfeeding,” said Dr. Hopp.
 

Outdated attitudes still persist

Dr. Meador referred to the stigma that surrounds epilepsy, including some state laws that called for sterilization of women with epilepsy that lasted until the 1960s. One might think that such attitudes are gone, “but it’s still there,” said Dr. Meador, who recounted a story a colleague told him about a woman on antiseizure medication. In the hospital, the nurse told her not to breastfeed. The neurological consult told her not to breastfeed. She breastfed anyway. “Then they reported her for child neglect, and that was just a few years ago. So I think the message needs to be loud and clear that we encourage [women with epilepsy] to breastfeed because we have the known benefits, and now several studies showing clearly no adverse effects of breastfeeding while taking antiseizure medications,” said Dr. Meador.

MONEAD findings

The MONEAD study included women from 20 different sites, with 145 participating investigators. The researchers compared outcomes in 284 women with epilepsy and 87 healthy women. The maternal mean IQ was 98 among women with epilepsy (95% confidence interval [CI], 96-99), and 105 (95% CI, 102-107) among healthy women. Seventy-six percent of women with epilepsy breastfed, versus 89% of controls.

Among the study cohort, 79% of women with epilepsy were on monotherapy, and 21% were on polytherapy. Thirty-five percent received lamotrigine, 28% levetiracetam, 16% were on another monotherapy, 10% received a combination of lamotrigine and levetiracetam, and 11% received a different combination.

At age 3, there was no association between the verbal index score of the child and whether the mother had epilepsy or not (difference, 0.4; P = .770). The researchers did find associations with the mother’s IQ (0.3; P < .001), male versus female child sex (–4.9; P < .001), Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (vs. Non-Hispanic, –5.5; P < .001), mother without college degree (–7.0; P < .001), average Beck Anxiety Inventory score after birth (–0.4; P < .001), and weeks of gestational age at enrollment.

The researchers found no association between third trimester antiseizure medication blood levels and verbal index score after adjustment (–2.9; P = .149), with the exception of levetiracetam (–9.0; P = .033). “This is interesting (but) not to be overblown, because overall the children on levetiracetam did well. But it must be remembered that teratogens act in an exposure dependent manner, so we’re constantly in this balancing act of trying to make sure you get enough medication on board to stop the seizures and protect the mother and the child, and at the same time, not too much on board where we increase the risk of teratogenicity in the child,” said Dr. Meador.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Meador and Dr. Hopp have no relevant financial disclosures.

SEATTLE – Use of antiseizure medications while breastfeeding is not associated with differences in child cognitive outcomes at age 3, according to new results from the Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (MONEAD) study.

The study follows results from the Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (NEAD) study, which found no evidence of cognitive harm in children who were exposed in utero to antiepileptic drugs. “[In the NEAD study] we followed our cohort to age 6 and found them to have actually an improvement in cognition by about 4 IQ points by the time they got to age 6,” Kimford J. Meador, MD, said during a presentation of the results of the MONEAD study at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.

Breastfeeding has health benefits for both mothers and children, including reduced risk of respiratory tract infections, atopic dermatitis, asthma, and diabetes in children, and reduced risk of diabetes, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and postpartum depression in mothers. Despite those benefits, concerns about harms from exposure to antiepileptic drugs may prompt some women to avoid breastfeeding.

The results of NEAD and MONEAD should reassure patients, according to Dr. Meador, professor of neurology at Stanford (Calif.) University. “Given the known multiple benefits of breastfeeding … women with epilepsy should be encouraged to breastfeed,” he said.
 

A responsibility to ‘engage and educate’ patients

Jennifer Hopp, MD, who served as a discussant for the presentation, underscored the need for neurologists to address pregnancy with female patients of childbearing agents. “The issues may include fertility, peripartum management, and outcomes that really go through the lifespan to also include issues of menopause,” Dr. Hopp, associate professor of neurology at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, said during her presentation.

Dr. Hopp noted one study showing lower rates of breastfeeding among mothers with epilepsy. “Breastfeeding rates in women with epilepsy are strikingly lower than in women who do not have epilepsy,” said Dr. Hopp. Another study showed that women with epilepsy were less likely to sustain breastfeeding after 6 weeks.

Dr. Hopp implored neurologists to address this. “It’s our responsibility to engage and educate our patients. These data provide us messaging to our patients that the newer drugs do not adversely affect outcome independently of their other exposure, and really support well-informed choices in breastfeeding,” said Dr. Hopp.
 

Outdated attitudes still persist

Dr. Meador referred to the stigma that surrounds epilepsy, including some state laws that called for sterilization of women with epilepsy that lasted until the 1960s. One might think that such attitudes are gone, “but it’s still there,” said Dr. Meador, who recounted a story a colleague told him about a woman on antiseizure medication. In the hospital, the nurse told her not to breastfeed. The neurological consult told her not to breastfeed. She breastfed anyway. “Then they reported her for child neglect, and that was just a few years ago. So I think the message needs to be loud and clear that we encourage [women with epilepsy] to breastfeed because we have the known benefits, and now several studies showing clearly no adverse effects of breastfeeding while taking antiseizure medications,” said Dr. Meador.

MONEAD findings

The MONEAD study included women from 20 different sites, with 145 participating investigators. The researchers compared outcomes in 284 women with epilepsy and 87 healthy women. The maternal mean IQ was 98 among women with epilepsy (95% confidence interval [CI], 96-99), and 105 (95% CI, 102-107) among healthy women. Seventy-six percent of women with epilepsy breastfed, versus 89% of controls.

Among the study cohort, 79% of women with epilepsy were on monotherapy, and 21% were on polytherapy. Thirty-five percent received lamotrigine, 28% levetiracetam, 16% were on another monotherapy, 10% received a combination of lamotrigine and levetiracetam, and 11% received a different combination.

At age 3, there was no association between the verbal index score of the child and whether the mother had epilepsy or not (difference, 0.4; P = .770). The researchers did find associations with the mother’s IQ (0.3; P < .001), male versus female child sex (–4.9; P < .001), Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (vs. Non-Hispanic, –5.5; P < .001), mother without college degree (–7.0; P < .001), average Beck Anxiety Inventory score after birth (–0.4; P < .001), and weeks of gestational age at enrollment.

The researchers found no association between third trimester antiseizure medication blood levels and verbal index score after adjustment (–2.9; P = .149), with the exception of levetiracetam (–9.0; P = .033). “This is interesting (but) not to be overblown, because overall the children on levetiracetam did well. But it must be remembered that teratogens act in an exposure dependent manner, so we’re constantly in this balancing act of trying to make sure you get enough medication on board to stop the seizures and protect the mother and the child, and at the same time, not too much on board where we increase the risk of teratogenicity in the child,” said Dr. Meador.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Meador and Dr. Hopp have no relevant financial disclosures.

A ketogenic diet may reduce disability and improve quality of life, fatigue, and depression in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), new research suggests.

High-fat, low-carbohydrate ketogenic diets mimic a fasting state and promote a more efficient use of energy – and have previously been shown to affect immune regulation. The diet helps lower blood sugar in individuals with type 2 diabetes and has been used for years to improve seizure control in patients with epilepsy, researchers note.

However, “there is a paucity of literature on the ketogenic diet in MS currently,” said principal investigator J. Nicholas Brenton, MD, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.

“The current study demonstrates the safety, tolerability, and potential clinical benefits of a ketogenic diet over 6 months in patients with relapsing MS,” Dr. Brenton said.

The were presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.
 

Palatable, beneficial

The open-label, uncontrolled study included 65 patients with relapsing MS who followed a ketogenic diet for 6 months. Investigators monitored adherence by daily urine ketone testing.

Patient-reported fatigue, depression, and quality-of-life scores were obtained at baseline, in addition to fasting adipokines and pertinent MS-related clinical outcome metrics. Baseline study metrics were repeated at 3 and/or 6 months while on the ketogenic diet.

Of the patient group, 83% adhered to the ketogenic diet for the full 6-month study period.

The ketogenic diet was associated with reductions in fat mass from baseline to 6 months (41.3 vs. 32.0 kg; P < .001) and a significant decline in fatigue and depression scores, the investigators reported.

MS quality-of-life physical and mental composite scores also improved while on the ketogenic diet (P < .001 for both).

A significant decrease from baseline to 6 months in Expanded Disability Status Scale scores, signifying improvement, was observed (2.3 vs. 1.9; P < .001).

Improvements were also shown on the 6-minute walk (1,631 vs. 1,733 feet; P < .001) and the nine-hole peg test (21.5 vs. 20.3 seconds; P < .001).

At 6 months on the diet, fasting serum leptin was significantly lower (25.5 vs. 14 ng/mL; P <.001), and adiponectin was higher (11.4 vs. 13.5 μg/mL, P = .002).
 

Justifies further research

The current study builds on an earlier one that Dr. Brenton and colleagues conducted in 2019 that showed that the ketogenic diet was feasible in patients with MS. “Our data justify the need for future studies of ketogenic diets as a complementary therapeutic approach to the treatment of MS,” Dr. Brenton said.

He noted that there may be multiple mechanisms of benefit when considering the ketogenic diet. “One avenue is via reduction in total body fat. This is an important aspect as we continue to learn more about the role of obesity and fat-derived inflammation in MS,” Dr. Brenton said.

“Ketogenic diets also have immunomodulatory properties,” such as the capacity to reduce oxidative damage from metabolic stress, increase mitochondrial biogenesis, and reduce systemic inflammation, he added. “These intrinsic properties of the ketogenic diet make it appealing to study in immune-mediated diseases, such as MS.”

Dr. Brenton cautioned that the data demonstrate the diet’s safety over 6 months but that the study was not designed to assess its long-term implications in MS. “Thus, while our results support the rationale for a larger-scale study of ketogenic diets as a complementary treatment for MS, our data does not support its widespread adoption outside of a clinical trial,” he said.
 

Remarkable adherence

Commenting on the study, Shaheen E. Lakhan, MD, PhD, a neurologist in Boston, noted that “variations of the ketogenic diet have been popularized in the general population for weight loss and further studied for other medical conditions [that are] largely immune-related, including MS.”

He noted that it was “remarkable” that the vast majority of study participants with MS adhered to the very regimented ketogenic diet for 6 months.

Seeing this translate into the real world “will be the next milestone, in addition to its impact on relapses and brain lesions as seen on MRI,” which are the classic markers of MS, said Dr. Lakhan, who was not involved with the research.

He cautioned that “even if one can follow the ketogenic diet, certain conditions can be made worse. This includes kidney stones, liver disease, reflux, constipation, and other metabolic disorders.”

The study was funded by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health and by the ZiMS Foundation. Dr. Brenton and Dr. Lakhan have reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A ketogenic diet may reduce disability and improve quality of life, fatigue, and depression in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), new research suggests.

High-fat, low-carbohydrate ketogenic diets mimic a fasting state and promote a more efficient use of energy – and have previously been shown to affect immune regulation. The diet helps lower blood sugar in individuals with type 2 diabetes and has been used for years to improve seizure control in patients with epilepsy, researchers note.

However, “there is a paucity of literature on the ketogenic diet in MS currently,” said principal investigator J. Nicholas Brenton, MD, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.

“The current study demonstrates the safety, tolerability, and potential clinical benefits of a ketogenic diet over 6 months in patients with relapsing MS,” Dr. Brenton said.

The were presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.
 

Palatable, beneficial

The open-label, uncontrolled study included 65 patients with relapsing MS who followed a ketogenic diet for 6 months. Investigators monitored adherence by daily urine ketone testing.

Patient-reported fatigue, depression, and quality-of-life scores were obtained at baseline, in addition to fasting adipokines and pertinent MS-related clinical outcome metrics. Baseline study metrics were repeated at 3 and/or 6 months while on the ketogenic diet.

Of the patient group, 83% adhered to the ketogenic diet for the full 6-month study period.

The ketogenic diet was associated with reductions in fat mass from baseline to 6 months (41.3 vs. 32.0 kg; P < .001) and a significant decline in fatigue and depression scores, the investigators reported.

MS quality-of-life physical and mental composite scores also improved while on the ketogenic diet (P < .001 for both).

A significant decrease from baseline to 6 months in Expanded Disability Status Scale scores, signifying improvement, was observed (2.3 vs. 1.9; P < .001).

Improvements were also shown on the 6-minute walk (1,631 vs. 1,733 feet; P < .001) and the nine-hole peg test (21.5 vs. 20.3 seconds; P < .001).

At 6 months on the diet, fasting serum leptin was significantly lower (25.5 vs. 14 ng/mL; P <.001), and adiponectin was higher (11.4 vs. 13.5 μg/mL, P = .002).
 

Justifies further research

The current study builds on an earlier one that Dr. Brenton and colleagues conducted in 2019 that showed that the ketogenic diet was feasible in patients with MS. “Our data justify the need for future studies of ketogenic diets as a complementary therapeutic approach to the treatment of MS,” Dr. Brenton said.

He noted that there may be multiple mechanisms of benefit when considering the ketogenic diet. “One avenue is via reduction in total body fat. This is an important aspect as we continue to learn more about the role of obesity and fat-derived inflammation in MS,” Dr. Brenton said.

“Ketogenic diets also have immunomodulatory properties,” such as the capacity to reduce oxidative damage from metabolic stress, increase mitochondrial biogenesis, and reduce systemic inflammation, he added. “These intrinsic properties of the ketogenic diet make it appealing to study in immune-mediated diseases, such as MS.”

Dr. Brenton cautioned that the data demonstrate the diet’s safety over 6 months but that the study was not designed to assess its long-term implications in MS. “Thus, while our results support the rationale for a larger-scale study of ketogenic diets as a complementary treatment for MS, our data does not support its widespread adoption outside of a clinical trial,” he said.
 

Remarkable adherence

Commenting on the study, Shaheen E. Lakhan, MD, PhD, a neurologist in Boston, noted that “variations of the ketogenic diet have been popularized in the general population for weight loss and further studied for other medical conditions [that are] largely immune-related, including MS.”

He noted that it was “remarkable” that the vast majority of study participants with MS adhered to the very regimented ketogenic diet for 6 months.

Seeing this translate into the real world “will be the next milestone, in addition to its impact on relapses and brain lesions as seen on MRI,” which are the classic markers of MS, said Dr. Lakhan, who was not involved with the research.

He cautioned that “even if one can follow the ketogenic diet, certain conditions can be made worse. This includes kidney stones, liver disease, reflux, constipation, and other metabolic disorders.”

The study was funded by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health and by the ZiMS Foundation. Dr. Brenton and Dr. Lakhan have reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A ketogenic diet may reduce disability and improve quality of life, fatigue, and depression in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), new research suggests.

High-fat, low-carbohydrate ketogenic diets mimic a fasting state and promote a more efficient use of energy – and have previously been shown to affect immune regulation. The diet helps lower blood sugar in individuals with type 2 diabetes and has been used for years to improve seizure control in patients with epilepsy, researchers note.

However, “there is a paucity of literature on the ketogenic diet in MS currently,” said principal investigator J. Nicholas Brenton, MD, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.

“The current study demonstrates the safety, tolerability, and potential clinical benefits of a ketogenic diet over 6 months in patients with relapsing MS,” Dr. Brenton said.

The were presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.
 

Palatable, beneficial

The open-label, uncontrolled study included 65 patients with relapsing MS who followed a ketogenic diet for 6 months. Investigators monitored adherence by daily urine ketone testing.

Patient-reported fatigue, depression, and quality-of-life scores were obtained at baseline, in addition to fasting adipokines and pertinent MS-related clinical outcome metrics. Baseline study metrics were repeated at 3 and/or 6 months while on the ketogenic diet.

Of the patient group, 83% adhered to the ketogenic diet for the full 6-month study period.

The ketogenic diet was associated with reductions in fat mass from baseline to 6 months (41.3 vs. 32.0 kg; P < .001) and a significant decline in fatigue and depression scores, the investigators reported.

MS quality-of-life physical and mental composite scores also improved while on the ketogenic diet (P < .001 for both).

A significant decrease from baseline to 6 months in Expanded Disability Status Scale scores, signifying improvement, was observed (2.3 vs. 1.9; P < .001).

Improvements were also shown on the 6-minute walk (1,631 vs. 1,733 feet; P < .001) and the nine-hole peg test (21.5 vs. 20.3 seconds; P < .001).

At 6 months on the diet, fasting serum leptin was significantly lower (25.5 vs. 14 ng/mL; P <.001), and adiponectin was higher (11.4 vs. 13.5 μg/mL, P = .002).
 

Justifies further research

The current study builds on an earlier one that Dr. Brenton and colleagues conducted in 2019 that showed that the ketogenic diet was feasible in patients with MS. “Our data justify the need for future studies of ketogenic diets as a complementary therapeutic approach to the treatment of MS,” Dr. Brenton said.

He noted that there may be multiple mechanisms of benefit when considering the ketogenic diet. “One avenue is via reduction in total body fat. This is an important aspect as we continue to learn more about the role of obesity and fat-derived inflammation in MS,” Dr. Brenton said.

“Ketogenic diets also have immunomodulatory properties,” such as the capacity to reduce oxidative damage from metabolic stress, increase mitochondrial biogenesis, and reduce systemic inflammation, he added. “These intrinsic properties of the ketogenic diet make it appealing to study in immune-mediated diseases, such as MS.”

Dr. Brenton cautioned that the data demonstrate the diet’s safety over 6 months but that the study was not designed to assess its long-term implications in MS. “Thus, while our results support the rationale for a larger-scale study of ketogenic diets as a complementary treatment for MS, our data does not support its widespread adoption outside of a clinical trial,” he said.
 

Remarkable adherence

Commenting on the study, Shaheen E. Lakhan, MD, PhD, a neurologist in Boston, noted that “variations of the ketogenic diet have been popularized in the general population for weight loss and further studied for other medical conditions [that are] largely immune-related, including MS.”

He noted that it was “remarkable” that the vast majority of study participants with MS adhered to the very regimented ketogenic diet for 6 months.

Seeing this translate into the real world “will be the next milestone, in addition to its impact on relapses and brain lesions as seen on MRI,” which are the classic markers of MS, said Dr. Lakhan, who was not involved with the research.

He cautioned that “even if one can follow the ketogenic diet, certain conditions can be made worse. This includes kidney stones, liver disease, reflux, constipation, and other metabolic disorders.”

The study was funded by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health and by the ZiMS Foundation. Dr. Brenton and Dr. Lakhan have reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A new COVID-19 variant has cropped up in the United Kingdom – a combination of the original Omicron strain and its subvariant BA.2 that may be more contagious than BA.2, ABC News reported.

As of last week, the U.K. Health Security Agency had found 637 cases of the variant, known as XE. The earliest case was found Jan. 19.

The new strain is known as a recombinant, which means it is a combination of two variants or viruses.

XE makes up less than 1% of sequenced cases in the United Kingdom so far, and there is no evidence yet that the strain leads to more severe disease or less vaccine protection.

“Right now, there’s really no public health concern,” John Brownstein, PhD, an epidemiologist and chief innovation officer at Boston Children’s Hospital, told ABC. “Recombinant variants happen over and over. In fact, the reason that this is the XE variant recombinant is that we’ve had XA, XB, XC, XD already, and none of those have turned out to be any real concern.”

A World Health Organization update published March 29 notes XE’s high transmissibility and says it may have a growth advantage of 10% over the BA.2 subvariant that now makes up more than 70% of cases in the United States.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

A new COVID-19 variant has cropped up in the United Kingdom – a combination of the original Omicron strain and its subvariant BA.2 that may be more contagious than BA.2, ABC News reported.

As of last week, the U.K. Health Security Agency had found 637 cases of the variant, known as XE. The earliest case was found Jan. 19.

The new strain is known as a recombinant, which means it is a combination of two variants or viruses.

XE makes up less than 1% of sequenced cases in the United Kingdom so far, and there is no evidence yet that the strain leads to more severe disease or less vaccine protection.

“Right now, there’s really no public health concern,” John Brownstein, PhD, an epidemiologist and chief innovation officer at Boston Children’s Hospital, told ABC. “Recombinant variants happen over and over. In fact, the reason that this is the XE variant recombinant is that we’ve had XA, XB, XC, XD already, and none of those have turned out to be any real concern.”

A World Health Organization update published March 29 notes XE’s high transmissibility and says it may have a growth advantage of 10% over the BA.2 subvariant that now makes up more than 70% of cases in the United States.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

A new COVID-19 variant has cropped up in the United Kingdom – a combination of the original Omicron strain and its subvariant BA.2 that may be more contagious than BA.2, ABC News reported.

As of last week, the U.K. Health Security Agency had found 637 cases of the variant, known as XE. The earliest case was found Jan. 19.

The new strain is known as a recombinant, which means it is a combination of two variants or viruses.

XE makes up less than 1% of sequenced cases in the United Kingdom so far, and there is no evidence yet that the strain leads to more severe disease or less vaccine protection.

“Right now, there’s really no public health concern,” John Brownstein, PhD, an epidemiologist and chief innovation officer at Boston Children’s Hospital, told ABC. “Recombinant variants happen over and over. In fact, the reason that this is the XE variant recombinant is that we’ve had XA, XB, XC, XD already, and none of those have turned out to be any real concern.”

A World Health Organization update published March 29 notes XE’s high transmissibility and says it may have a growth advantage of 10% over the BA.2 subvariant that now makes up more than 70% of cases in the United States.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

Even as a number of states see increases in new COVID-19 cases among all ages, the trend remains downward for children, albeit at a slower pace than in recent weeks, based on data from the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children’s Hospital Association.

New pediatric cases in the United States totaled 27,521 for the most recent week, March 25-31, down by 5.2% from the previous week. Earlier weekly declines, going backward through March and into late February, were 9.3%, 23%, 39.5%, and 46%, according to data collected by the AAP and CHA from state and territorial health agencies. The lowest weekly total recorded since the initial wave in 2020 was just under 8,500 during the week of June 18-24, 2021.

Reported COVID-19 cases in children now total over 12.8 million since the beginning of the pandemic in March 2020, and those infections represent 19.0% of all cases. That share of new cases has not increased in the last 7 weeks, the AAP and CHA noted in their weekly COVID report, suggesting that children have not been bearing a disproportionate share of the declining Omicron burden.

As for Omicron, the BA.2 subvariant now makes up about 55% of COVID-19 infections, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in its COVID Data Tracker Weekly Review, and New York, Massachusetts, and New Jersey are among the states reporting BA.2-driven increases in new cases of as much as 30%, the New York Times said.

Rates of new cases for the latest week available (March 27 to April 2) and at their Omicron peaks in January were 11.3 per 100,000 and 1,011 per 100,000 (ages 0-4 years), 12.5 and 1,505 per 100,000 (5-11 years), 12.7 and 1,779 per 100,000 (12-15 years), and 13.1 and 1,982 per 100,000 (16-17 years), the CDC said on its COVID Data Tracker.

Hospitalization rates, however, were a bit of a mixed bag. The last 2 weeks (March 13-19 and March 20-26) of data available from the CDC’s COVID-NET show that hospitalizations were up slightly in children aged 0-4 years (1.3 per 100,000 to 1.4 per 100,000), down for 5- to 11-year-olds (0.6 to 0.2), and steady for those aged 12-17 (0.4 to 0.4). COVID-NET collects data from nearly 100 counties in 10 states and from a separate four-state network.

Vaccinations got a small boost in the last week, the first one since early February. Initial doses and completions climbed slightly in the 12- to 17-year-olds, while just first doses were up a bit among the 5- to 11-year-olds during the week of March 24-30, compared with the previous week, although both groups are still well below the highest counts recorded so far in 2022, which are, in turn, far short of 2021’s peaks, according to CDC data analyzed by the AAP.

Even as a number of states see increases in new COVID-19 cases among all ages, the trend remains downward for children, albeit at a slower pace than in recent weeks, based on data from the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children’s Hospital Association.

New pediatric cases in the United States totaled 27,521 for the most recent week, March 25-31, down by 5.2% from the previous week. Earlier weekly declines, going backward through March and into late February, were 9.3%, 23%, 39.5%, and 46%, according to data collected by the AAP and CHA from state and territorial health agencies. The lowest weekly total recorded since the initial wave in 2020 was just under 8,500 during the week of June 18-24, 2021.

Reported COVID-19 cases in children now total over 12.8 million since the beginning of the pandemic in March 2020, and those infections represent 19.0% of all cases. That share of new cases has not increased in the last 7 weeks, the AAP and CHA noted in their weekly COVID report, suggesting that children have not been bearing a disproportionate share of the declining Omicron burden.

As for Omicron, the BA.2 subvariant now makes up about 55% of COVID-19 infections, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in its COVID Data Tracker Weekly Review, and New York, Massachusetts, and New Jersey are among the states reporting BA.2-driven increases in new cases of as much as 30%, the New York Times said.

Rates of new cases for the latest week available (March 27 to April 2) and at their Omicron peaks in January were 11.3 per 100,000 and 1,011 per 100,000 (ages 0-4 years), 12.5 and 1,505 per 100,000 (5-11 years), 12.7 and 1,779 per 100,000 (12-15 years), and 13.1 and 1,982 per 100,000 (16-17 years), the CDC said on its COVID Data Tracker.

Hospitalization rates, however, were a bit of a mixed bag. The last 2 weeks (March 13-19 and March 20-26) of data available from the CDC’s COVID-NET show that hospitalizations were up slightly in children aged 0-4 years (1.3 per 100,000 to 1.4 per 100,000), down for 5- to 11-year-olds (0.6 to 0.2), and steady for those aged 12-17 (0.4 to 0.4). COVID-NET collects data from nearly 100 counties in 10 states and from a separate four-state network.

Vaccinations got a small boost in the last week, the first one since early February. Initial doses and completions climbed slightly in the 12- to 17-year-olds, while just first doses were up a bit among the 5- to 11-year-olds during the week of March 24-30, compared with the previous week, although both groups are still well below the highest counts recorded so far in 2022, which are, in turn, far short of 2021’s peaks, according to CDC data analyzed by the AAP.

Even as a number of states see increases in new COVID-19 cases among all ages, the trend remains downward for children, albeit at a slower pace than in recent weeks, based on data from the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children’s Hospital Association.

New pediatric cases in the United States totaled 27,521 for the most recent week, March 25-31, down by 5.2% from the previous week. Earlier weekly declines, going backward through March and into late February, were 9.3%, 23%, 39.5%, and 46%, according to data collected by the AAP and CHA from state and territorial health agencies. The lowest weekly total recorded since the initial wave in 2020 was just under 8,500 during the week of June 18-24, 2021.

Reported COVID-19 cases in children now total over 12.8 million since the beginning of the pandemic in March 2020, and those infections represent 19.0% of all cases. That share of new cases has not increased in the last 7 weeks, the AAP and CHA noted in their weekly COVID report, suggesting that children have not been bearing a disproportionate share of the declining Omicron burden.

As for Omicron, the BA.2 subvariant now makes up about 55% of COVID-19 infections, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in its COVID Data Tracker Weekly Review, and New York, Massachusetts, and New Jersey are among the states reporting BA.2-driven increases in new cases of as much as 30%, the New York Times said.

Rates of new cases for the latest week available (March 27 to April 2) and at their Omicron peaks in January were 11.3 per 100,000 and 1,011 per 100,000 (ages 0-4 years), 12.5 and 1,505 per 100,000 (5-11 years), 12.7 and 1,779 per 100,000 (12-15 years), and 13.1 and 1,982 per 100,000 (16-17 years), the CDC said on its COVID Data Tracker.

Hospitalization rates, however, were a bit of a mixed bag. The last 2 weeks (March 13-19 and March 20-26) of data available from the CDC’s COVID-NET show that hospitalizations were up slightly in children aged 0-4 years (1.3 per 100,000 to 1.4 per 100,000), down for 5- to 11-year-olds (0.6 to 0.2), and steady for those aged 12-17 (0.4 to 0.4). COVID-NET collects data from nearly 100 counties in 10 states and from a separate four-state network.

Vaccinations got a small boost in the last week, the first one since early February. Initial doses and completions climbed slightly in the 12- to 17-year-olds, while just first doses were up a bit among the 5- to 11-year-olds during the week of March 24-30, compared with the previous week, although both groups are still well below the highest counts recorded so far in 2022, which are, in turn, far short of 2021’s peaks, according to CDC data analyzed by the AAP.

The 5 days that she spent at her mother’s bedside were eye-opening for an oncologist used to being on the other side of the clinician–patient relationship.

“As a physician, I thought I had a unique perspective of things that were done well – and things that were not,” commented Pamela Kunz, MD.

Dr. Kunz, who was named the 2021 Woman Oncologist of the Year, is director of the Center for Gastrointestinal Cancers at Smilow Cancer Hospital and of the Yale Cancer Center, New Haven, Conn.

But she was propelled into quite a different role when her mother was admitted to the hospital.

Her mom, who has trouble hearing, was easily confused by jargon and by “all of the people coming in and out with no introductions,” she explained.

“She needed someone to translate what was going on because she didn’t feel well,” she added.

Seeing inpatient care through her mother’s eyes was enlightening, and at times it was “shocking to be on the other side.”

Physicians get used to “checking boxes, getting through the day,” she said. “It’s easy to forget the human side.”

“Seeing a loved one sick, [struggling] through this – I just wished I had seen things done differently,” added Dr. Kunz.

The experience prompted Dr. Kunz to share several “communication pearls” via Twitter. Her thread has since garnered thousands of “likes” and scores of comments and retweets.

She began the Twitter thread explaining what prompted her comments:

“I spent many hours last week observing the practice of medicine while sitting at my mom’s hospital bedside and was reminded of some important communication pearls. Some musings ...”

“1. Introduce yourself by full name, role, and team and have ID badges visible. It can get very confusing for [patients] and family members with the number of people in and out of rooms. E.g. ‘My name is Dr. X. I’m the intern on the primary internal medicine team.’

2.  End your patient visit with a summary of the plan for the day.

3. Avoid medical jargon & speak slowly, clearly, and logically. Remember you are a teacher for your [patients] and their family.

4. Masks make it harder to hear, especially for [patients] with hearing loss (and they no longer have the aid of lip reading).

5. Many older [patients] get confused in the hospital. Repetition is a good thing.

6. Speak to a family member at least once per day to relay the plan.

7. Try to avoid last minute or surprise discharges – they make [patients] and family members anxious. Talk about discharge planning from day 1 and what milestones must occur prior to a safe discharge. ‘In order for you to leave the hospital, X, Y, X must happen.’

8. Talk with your [patients] about something other than what brought them to the hospital (a tip I once learned from a wise mentor).

9.  When possible, sit at eye level with your patient (I love these stools from @YNHH).

10. Take time to listen.”

Dr. Kunz closed with her golden rule: “Lastly, treat your patients how you would want your own family member treated.”

Twitter user @BrunaPellini replied: “I love this, especially ‘Treat your patients how you would want your own family member treated.’ My mom and grandma always said that to me since I was a med student, and this is definitely one of my core values.”

Other clinicians shared similar experiences, and some added to Dr. Kunz’s list.

“Agree entirely, love the list – and while none of us can always practice perfectly, my experiences with my own mother’s illness taught me an enormous amount about communication,” @hoperugo responded.

Twitter user @mariejacork added: “Everyone in health care please read ... if you are lucky enough to not have had a loved one unwell in hospital, these may get forgotten. Having sat with my dad for a few days before he died a few years ago, I felt a lot of these, and it changed my practice forever.”

@bjcohenmd provided additional advice: “And use the dry erase board that should be in every room. Never start a medication without explaining it. Many docs will see the patient and then go to the computer, decide to order a med, but never go back to explain it.”

Patients also shared experiences and offered suggestions.

“As a chronic pain patient I’d add – we know it’s frustrating you can’t cure us but PLEASE do not SIGH if we say something didn’t work or [tell] us to be more positive. Just say ‘I know this is very hard, I’m here to listen.’ We don’t expect a cure, we do expect to be believed,” said @ppenguinsmt. “It makes me feel like I’m causing distress to you if I say the pain has been unrelenting. I leave feeling worse. ...You may have heard 10 [people] in pain before me but this is MY only [appointment].”

Twitter user @KatieCahoots added: “These are perfect. I wish doctors would do this not only in the hospital but in the doctor’s office, as well. I would add one caveat: When you try not to use medical jargon, don’t dumb it down as though I don’t know anything about science or haven’t done any of my own research.”

Dr. Kunz said she was taken aback but pleased by the response to her Tweet.

“It’s an example of the human side of medicine, so it resonates with physicians and with patients,” she commented. Seeing through her mom’s eyes how care was provided made her realize that medical training should include more emphasis on communication, including “real-time feedback to interns, residents, fellows, and students.”

Yes, it takes time, and “we don’t all have a lot of extra time,” she acknowledged.

“But some of these elements don’t take that much more time to do. They can help build trust and can, in the long run, actually save time if patients understand and family members feel engaged and like they are participants,” she said. “I think a little time investment will go a long way.”

In her case, she very much appreciated the one trainee who tried to call her and update her about her mother’s care each afternoon. “I really valued that,” she said.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The 5 days that she spent at her mother’s bedside were eye-opening for an oncologist used to being on the other side of the clinician–patient relationship.

“As a physician, I thought I had a unique perspective of things that were done well – and things that were not,” commented Pamela Kunz, MD.

Dr. Kunz, who was named the 2021 Woman Oncologist of the Year, is director of the Center for Gastrointestinal Cancers at Smilow Cancer Hospital and of the Yale Cancer Center, New Haven, Conn.

But she was propelled into quite a different role when her mother was admitted to the hospital.

Her mom, who has trouble hearing, was easily confused by jargon and by “all of the people coming in and out with no introductions,” she explained.

“She needed someone to translate what was going on because she didn’t feel well,” she added.

Seeing inpatient care through her mother’s eyes was enlightening, and at times it was “shocking to be on the other side.”

Physicians get used to “checking boxes, getting through the day,” she said. “It’s easy to forget the human side.”

“Seeing a loved one sick, [struggling] through this – I just wished I had seen things done differently,” added Dr. Kunz.

The experience prompted Dr. Kunz to share several “communication pearls” via Twitter. Her thread has since garnered thousands of “likes” and scores of comments and retweets.

She began the Twitter thread explaining what prompted her comments:

“I spent many hours last week observing the practice of medicine while sitting at my mom’s hospital bedside and was reminded of some important communication pearls. Some musings ...”

“1. Introduce yourself by full name, role, and team and have ID badges visible. It can get very confusing for [patients] and family members with the number of people in and out of rooms. E.g. ‘My name is Dr. X. I’m the intern on the primary internal medicine team.’

2.  End your patient visit with a summary of the plan for the day.

3. Avoid medical jargon & speak slowly, clearly, and logically. Remember you are a teacher for your [patients] and their family.

4. Masks make it harder to hear, especially for [patients] with hearing loss (and they no longer have the aid of lip reading).

5. Many older [patients] get confused in the hospital. Repetition is a good thing.

6. Speak to a family member at least once per day to relay the plan.

7. Try to avoid last minute or surprise discharges – they make [patients] and family members anxious. Talk about discharge planning from day 1 and what milestones must occur prior to a safe discharge. ‘In order for you to leave the hospital, X, Y, X must happen.’

8. Talk with your [patients] about something other than what brought them to the hospital (a tip I once learned from a wise mentor).

9.  When possible, sit at eye level with your patient (I love these stools from @YNHH).

10. Take time to listen.”

Dr. Kunz closed with her golden rule: “Lastly, treat your patients how you would want your own family member treated.”

Twitter user @BrunaPellini replied: “I love this, especially ‘Treat your patients how you would want your own family member treated.’ My mom and grandma always said that to me since I was a med student, and this is definitely one of my core values.”

Other clinicians shared similar experiences, and some added to Dr. Kunz’s list.

“Agree entirely, love the list – and while none of us can always practice perfectly, my experiences with my own mother’s illness taught me an enormous amount about communication,” @hoperugo responded.

Twitter user @mariejacork added: “Everyone in health care please read ... if you are lucky enough to not have had a loved one unwell in hospital, these may get forgotten. Having sat with my dad for a few days before he died a few years ago, I felt a lot of these, and it changed my practice forever.”

@bjcohenmd provided additional advice: “And use the dry erase board that should be in every room. Never start a medication without explaining it. Many docs will see the patient and then go to the computer, decide to order a med, but never go back to explain it.”

Patients also shared experiences and offered suggestions.

“As a chronic pain patient I’d add – we know it’s frustrating you can’t cure us but PLEASE do not SIGH if we say something didn’t work or [tell] us to be more positive. Just say ‘I know this is very hard, I’m here to listen.’ We don’t expect a cure, we do expect to be believed,” said @ppenguinsmt. “It makes me feel like I’m causing distress to you if I say the pain has been unrelenting. I leave feeling worse. ...You may have heard 10 [people] in pain before me but this is MY only [appointment].”

Twitter user @KatieCahoots added: “These are perfect. I wish doctors would do this not only in the hospital but in the doctor’s office, as well. I would add one caveat: When you try not to use medical jargon, don’t dumb it down as though I don’t know anything about science or haven’t done any of my own research.”

Dr. Kunz said she was taken aback but pleased by the response to her Tweet.

“It’s an example of the human side of medicine, so it resonates with physicians and with patients,” she commented. Seeing through her mom’s eyes how care was provided made her realize that medical training should include more emphasis on communication, including “real-time feedback to interns, residents, fellows, and students.”

Yes, it takes time, and “we don’t all have a lot of extra time,” she acknowledged.

“But some of these elements don’t take that much more time to do. They can help build trust and can, in the long run, actually save time if patients understand and family members feel engaged and like they are participants,” she said. “I think a little time investment will go a long way.”

In her case, she very much appreciated the one trainee who tried to call her and update her about her mother’s care each afternoon. “I really valued that,” she said.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The 5 days that she spent at her mother’s bedside were eye-opening for an oncologist used to being on the other side of the clinician–patient relationship.

“As a physician, I thought I had a unique perspective of things that were done well – and things that were not,” commented Pamela Kunz, MD.

Dr. Kunz, who was named the 2021 Woman Oncologist of the Year, is director of the Center for Gastrointestinal Cancers at Smilow Cancer Hospital and of the Yale Cancer Center, New Haven, Conn.

But she was propelled into quite a different role when her mother was admitted to the hospital.

Her mom, who has trouble hearing, was easily confused by jargon and by “all of the people coming in and out with no introductions,” she explained.

“She needed someone to translate what was going on because she didn’t feel well,” she added.

Seeing inpatient care through her mother’s eyes was enlightening, and at times it was “shocking to be on the other side.”

Physicians get used to “checking boxes, getting through the day,” she said. “It’s easy to forget the human side.”

“Seeing a loved one sick, [struggling] through this – I just wished I had seen things done differently,” added Dr. Kunz.

The experience prompted Dr. Kunz to share several “communication pearls” via Twitter. Her thread has since garnered thousands of “likes” and scores of comments and retweets.

She began the Twitter thread explaining what prompted her comments:

“I spent many hours last week observing the practice of medicine while sitting at my mom’s hospital bedside and was reminded of some important communication pearls. Some musings ...”

“1. Introduce yourself by full name, role, and team and have ID badges visible. It can get very confusing for [patients] and family members with the number of people in and out of rooms. E.g. ‘My name is Dr. X. I’m the intern on the primary internal medicine team.’

2.  End your patient visit with a summary of the plan for the day.

3. Avoid medical jargon & speak slowly, clearly, and logically. Remember you are a teacher for your [patients] and their family.

4. Masks make it harder to hear, especially for [patients] with hearing loss (and they no longer have the aid of lip reading).

5. Many older [patients] get confused in the hospital. Repetition is a good thing.

6. Speak to a family member at least once per day to relay the plan.

7. Try to avoid last minute or surprise discharges – they make [patients] and family members anxious. Talk about discharge planning from day 1 and what milestones must occur prior to a safe discharge. ‘In order for you to leave the hospital, X, Y, X must happen.’

8. Talk with your [patients] about something other than what brought them to the hospital (a tip I once learned from a wise mentor).

9.  When possible, sit at eye level with your patient (I love these stools from @YNHH).

10. Take time to listen.”

Dr. Kunz closed with her golden rule: “Lastly, treat your patients how you would want your own family member treated.”

Twitter user @BrunaPellini replied: “I love this, especially ‘Treat your patients how you would want your own family member treated.’ My mom and grandma always said that to me since I was a med student, and this is definitely one of my core values.”

Other clinicians shared similar experiences, and some added to Dr. Kunz’s list.

“Agree entirely, love the list – and while none of us can always practice perfectly, my experiences with my own mother’s illness taught me an enormous amount about communication,” @hoperugo responded.

Twitter user @mariejacork added: “Everyone in health care please read ... if you are lucky enough to not have had a loved one unwell in hospital, these may get forgotten. Having sat with my dad for a few days before he died a few years ago, I felt a lot of these, and it changed my practice forever.”

@bjcohenmd provided additional advice: “And use the dry erase board that should be in every room. Never start a medication without explaining it. Many docs will see the patient and then go to the computer, decide to order a med, but never go back to explain it.”

Patients also shared experiences and offered suggestions.

“As a chronic pain patient I’d add – we know it’s frustrating you can’t cure us but PLEASE do not SIGH if we say something didn’t work or [tell] us to be more positive. Just say ‘I know this is very hard, I’m here to listen.’ We don’t expect a cure, we do expect to be believed,” said @ppenguinsmt. “It makes me feel like I’m causing distress to you if I say the pain has been unrelenting. I leave feeling worse. ...You may have heard 10 [people] in pain before me but this is MY only [appointment].”

Twitter user @KatieCahoots added: “These are perfect. I wish doctors would do this not only in the hospital but in the doctor’s office, as well. I would add one caveat: When you try not to use medical jargon, don’t dumb it down as though I don’t know anything about science or haven’t done any of my own research.”

Dr. Kunz said she was taken aback but pleased by the response to her Tweet.

“It’s an example of the human side of medicine, so it resonates with physicians and with patients,” she commented. Seeing through her mom’s eyes how care was provided made her realize that medical training should include more emphasis on communication, including “real-time feedback to interns, residents, fellows, and students.”

Yes, it takes time, and “we don’t all have a lot of extra time,” she acknowledged.

“But some of these elements don’t take that much more time to do. They can help build trust and can, in the long run, actually save time if patients understand and family members feel engaged and like they are participants,” she said. “I think a little time investment will go a long way.”

In her case, she very much appreciated the one trainee who tried to call her and update her about her mother’s care each afternoon. “I really valued that,” she said.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

WASHINGTON – Patients with heart failure who received an annual influenza vaccine for 3 years running had significantly fewer all-cause hospitalizations and significantly fewer cases of pneumonia during that time, compared with placebo-treated patients with heart failure, in a prospective, randomized, global trial with 5,129 participants.

Although the results failed to show a significant reduction in all-cause deaths linked to influenza vaccination, compared with controls during the entire 3 years of the study, the results did show a significant 21% relative mortality-risk reduction by vaccination during periods of peak influenza circulation, and a significant 23% reduction in cardiovascular deaths, compared with controls during peak seasons.

courtesy Dr. Mark Loeb

“This is the first randomized, controlled trial of influenza vaccine in patients with heart failure, and we showed that vaccination reduces deaths” during peak influenza seasons, Mark Loeb, MD, said during a press briefing at the annual scientific sessions of the American College of Cardiology. The results send “an important global message that patients with heart failure should receive the influenza vaccine,” said Dr. Loeb, a professor at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont., who specializes in clinical epidemiology and infectious diseases.

Dr. Loeb admitted that he and his associates erred when they picked the time window to assess the two primary endpoints for the trial: the combined rate of cardiovascular death, nonfatal MI, and nonfatal stroke, and this combined endpoint plus hospitalizations for heart failure.

The time window they selected was the entirety of all 3 years following three annual immunizations. That was a mistake.
 

No flu vaccine benefit outside flu season

“We know that the influenza vaccine will not have any effect outside of when influenza is circulating. In retrospect, we should have done that,” Dr. Loeb bemoaned during his talk. He chalked up the bad choice to concern over collecting enough endpoints to see a significant between-group difference when the researchers designed the study.

For the entire 3 years of follow-up, influenza vaccination was tied to a nonsignificant 7% relative risk reduction for the first primary endpoint, and a nonsignificant 9% relative risk reduction for the second primary endpoint, he reported.

But Dr. Loeb lobbied for the relevance of several significant secondary endpoints that collectively showed a compelling pattern of benefit during his talk. These included, for the full 3-years of follow-up, important, significant reductions relative to placebo of 16% for first all-cause hospitalizations (P = .01), and a 42% relative risk reduction in first cases of pneumonia (P = .0006).

Then there were the benefits that appeared during influenza season. In that analysis, first events for the first primary endpoint fell after vaccination by a significant 18% relative to placebo. The in-season analysis also showed the significant cuts in both all-cause and cardiovascular deaths.

Despite the neutral primary endpoints, “if you look at these data as a whole I think they speak to the importance of vaccinating patients with heart failure against influenza,” Dr. Loeb maintained.



‘Totality of evidence supports vaccination’

“I agree that the totality of evidence supports influenza vaccination,” commented Mark H. Drazner, MD, professor and clinical chief of cardiology at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, who was designated discussant for the report.

“The message should be to offer influenza vaccine to patients with heart failure,” Dr. Drazner said in an interview. “Previous data on influenza vaccine in patients with heart failure were largely observational. This was a randomized, prospective, placebo-controlled trial. That’s a step forward. Proving efficacy in a randomized trial is important.”

Dr Drazner added that his institution already promotes a “strong mandate” to vaccinate patients with heart failure against influenza.

“The influenza vaccine is a very effective and cost-efficient public health measure. Preventing hospitalizations of patients with heart failure has so many benefits,” commented Craig Beavers, PharmD, vice president of professional services at Baptist Health in Paducah, Ky., and a discussant during the press briefing.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

The Influenza Vaccine To Prevent Adverse Vascular Events (IVVE) trial enrolled people with heart failure in New York Heart Association functional class II, III, or IV from any of 10 low- and middle-income countries including China, India, the Philippines, and multiple countries from Africa and the Middle East. They averaged 57 years of age, and slightly more than half were women.

IVVE was sponsored by McMaster University; the only commercial support that IVVE received was a free supply of influenza vaccine from Sanofi Pasteur. Dr. Loeb, Dr. Drazner, and Dr. Beavers had no disclosures.

WASHINGTON – Patients with heart failure who received an annual influenza vaccine for 3 years running had significantly fewer all-cause hospitalizations and significantly fewer cases of pneumonia during that time, compared with placebo-treated patients with heart failure, in a prospective, randomized, global trial with 5,129 participants.

Although the results failed to show a significant reduction in all-cause deaths linked to influenza vaccination, compared with controls during the entire 3 years of the study, the results did show a significant 21% relative mortality-risk reduction by vaccination during periods of peak influenza circulation, and a significant 23% reduction in cardiovascular deaths, compared with controls during peak seasons.

courtesy Dr. Mark Loeb

“This is the first randomized, controlled trial of influenza vaccine in patients with heart failure, and we showed that vaccination reduces deaths” during peak influenza seasons, Mark Loeb, MD, said during a press briefing at the annual scientific sessions of the American College of Cardiology. The results send “an important global message that patients with heart failure should receive the influenza vaccine,” said Dr. Loeb, a professor at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont., who specializes in clinical epidemiology and infectious diseases.

Dr. Loeb admitted that he and his associates erred when they picked the time window to assess the two primary endpoints for the trial: the combined rate of cardiovascular death, nonfatal MI, and nonfatal stroke, and this combined endpoint plus hospitalizations for heart failure.

The time window they selected was the entirety of all 3 years following three annual immunizations. That was a mistake.
 

No flu vaccine benefit outside flu season

“We know that the influenza vaccine will not have any effect outside of when influenza is circulating. In retrospect, we should have done that,” Dr. Loeb bemoaned during his talk. He chalked up the bad choice to concern over collecting enough endpoints to see a significant between-group difference when the researchers designed the study.

For the entire 3 years of follow-up, influenza vaccination was tied to a nonsignificant 7% relative risk reduction for the first primary endpoint, and a nonsignificant 9% relative risk reduction for the second primary endpoint, he reported.

But Dr. Loeb lobbied for the relevance of several significant secondary endpoints that collectively showed a compelling pattern of benefit during his talk. These included, for the full 3-years of follow-up, important, significant reductions relative to placebo of 16% for first all-cause hospitalizations (P = .01), and a 42% relative risk reduction in first cases of pneumonia (P = .0006).

Then there were the benefits that appeared during influenza season. In that analysis, first events for the first primary endpoint fell after vaccination by a significant 18% relative to placebo. The in-season analysis also showed the significant cuts in both all-cause and cardiovascular deaths.

Despite the neutral primary endpoints, “if you look at these data as a whole I think they speak to the importance of vaccinating patients with heart failure against influenza,” Dr. Loeb maintained.



‘Totality of evidence supports vaccination’

“I agree that the totality of evidence supports influenza vaccination,” commented Mark H. Drazner, MD, professor and clinical chief of cardiology at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, who was designated discussant for the report.

“The message should be to offer influenza vaccine to patients with heart failure,” Dr. Drazner said in an interview. “Previous data on influenza vaccine in patients with heart failure were largely observational. This was a randomized, prospective, placebo-controlled trial. That’s a step forward. Proving efficacy in a randomized trial is important.”

Dr Drazner added that his institution already promotes a “strong mandate” to vaccinate patients with heart failure against influenza.

“The influenza vaccine is a very effective and cost-efficient public health measure. Preventing hospitalizations of patients with heart failure has so many benefits,” commented Craig Beavers, PharmD, vice president of professional services at Baptist Health in Paducah, Ky., and a discussant during the press briefing.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

The Influenza Vaccine To Prevent Adverse Vascular Events (IVVE) trial enrolled people with heart failure in New York Heart Association functional class II, III, or IV from any of 10 low- and middle-income countries including China, India, the Philippines, and multiple countries from Africa and the Middle East. They averaged 57 years of age, and slightly more than half were women.

IVVE was sponsored by McMaster University; the only commercial support that IVVE received was a free supply of influenza vaccine from Sanofi Pasteur. Dr. Loeb, Dr. Drazner, and Dr. Beavers had no disclosures.

WASHINGTON – Patients with heart failure who received an annual influenza vaccine for 3 years running had significantly fewer all-cause hospitalizations and significantly fewer cases of pneumonia during that time, compared with placebo-treated patients with heart failure, in a prospective, randomized, global trial with 5,129 participants.

Although the results failed to show a significant reduction in all-cause deaths linked to influenza vaccination, compared with controls during the entire 3 years of the study, the results did show a significant 21% relative mortality-risk reduction by vaccination during periods of peak influenza circulation, and a significant 23% reduction in cardiovascular deaths, compared with controls during peak seasons.

courtesy Dr. Mark Loeb

“This is the first randomized, controlled trial of influenza vaccine in patients with heart failure, and we showed that vaccination reduces deaths” during peak influenza seasons, Mark Loeb, MD, said during a press briefing at the annual scientific sessions of the American College of Cardiology. The results send “an important global message that patients with heart failure should receive the influenza vaccine,” said Dr. Loeb, a professor at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont., who specializes in clinical epidemiology and infectious diseases.

Dr. Loeb admitted that he and his associates erred when they picked the time window to assess the two primary endpoints for the trial: the combined rate of cardiovascular death, nonfatal MI, and nonfatal stroke, and this combined endpoint plus hospitalizations for heart failure.

The time window they selected was the entirety of all 3 years following three annual immunizations. That was a mistake.
 

No flu vaccine benefit outside flu season

“We know that the influenza vaccine will not have any effect outside of when influenza is circulating. In retrospect, we should have done that,” Dr. Loeb bemoaned during his talk. He chalked up the bad choice to concern over collecting enough endpoints to see a significant between-group difference when the researchers designed the study.

For the entire 3 years of follow-up, influenza vaccination was tied to a nonsignificant 7% relative risk reduction for the first primary endpoint, and a nonsignificant 9% relative risk reduction for the second primary endpoint, he reported.

But Dr. Loeb lobbied for the relevance of several significant secondary endpoints that collectively showed a compelling pattern of benefit during his talk. These included, for the full 3-years of follow-up, important, significant reductions relative to placebo of 16% for first all-cause hospitalizations (P = .01), and a 42% relative risk reduction in first cases of pneumonia (P = .0006).

Then there were the benefits that appeared during influenza season. In that analysis, first events for the first primary endpoint fell after vaccination by a significant 18% relative to placebo. The in-season analysis also showed the significant cuts in both all-cause and cardiovascular deaths.

Despite the neutral primary endpoints, “if you look at these data as a whole I think they speak to the importance of vaccinating patients with heart failure against influenza,” Dr. Loeb maintained.



‘Totality of evidence supports vaccination’

“I agree that the totality of evidence supports influenza vaccination,” commented Mark H. Drazner, MD, professor and clinical chief of cardiology at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, who was designated discussant for the report.

“The message should be to offer influenza vaccine to patients with heart failure,” Dr. Drazner said in an interview. “Previous data on influenza vaccine in patients with heart failure were largely observational. This was a randomized, prospective, placebo-controlled trial. That’s a step forward. Proving efficacy in a randomized trial is important.”

Dr Drazner added that his institution already promotes a “strong mandate” to vaccinate patients with heart failure against influenza.

“The influenza vaccine is a very effective and cost-efficient public health measure. Preventing hospitalizations of patients with heart failure has so many benefits,” commented Craig Beavers, PharmD, vice president of professional services at Baptist Health in Paducah, Ky., and a discussant during the press briefing.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

The Influenza Vaccine To Prevent Adverse Vascular Events (IVVE) trial enrolled people with heart failure in New York Heart Association functional class II, III, or IV from any of 10 low- and middle-income countries including China, India, the Philippines, and multiple countries from Africa and the Middle East. They averaged 57 years of age, and slightly more than half were women.

IVVE was sponsored by McMaster University; the only commercial support that IVVE received was a free supply of influenza vaccine from Sanofi Pasteur. Dr. Loeb, Dr. Drazner, and Dr. Beavers had no disclosures.

Early results from a small trial of an investigative drug suggests it is safe and may improve executive function in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and mild dementia associated with Alzheimer’s disease. Patients performed better in cognitive testing after just 2 weeks, especially in areas of executive functioning. Clinicians involved in the study also reported improvements in patients’ ability to complete daily activities, especially in complex tasks such as using a computer, carrying out household chores, and managing their medications.

“It’s pretty incredible to see improvement over the course of a week to a week and a half,” said study investigator Aaron Koenig, MD, vice president of Early Clinical Development at Sage Therapeutics in Cambridge, Mass. “Not only are we seeing objective improvement, we’re also seeing a subjective benefit.”

The drug, SAGE-718, is also under study for MCI in patients with Huntington’s disease, the drug’s primary indication, and Parkinson’s disease.

The findings will be presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.
 

Improved executive function

SAGE-718 is in a new class of drugs called positive allosteric modulator of N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, which are thought to improve neuroplasticity.

For the phase 2a open-label LUMINARY trial, researchers enrolled 26 patients ages 50-80 years with Alzheimer’s disease who had MCI. Patients completed a battery of cognitive tests at the study outset, again at the end of treatment, and again after 28 days.

Participants received SAGE-718 daily for 2 weeks and were followed for another 2 weeks.

The study’s primary outcome was safety. Seven patients (26.9%) reported mild or moderate treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), and there were no serious AEs or deaths.

However, after 14 days, researchers also noted improvements from baseline on multiple tests of executive functioning, learning, and memory. And at 28 days, participants demonstrated significantly better Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores, compared with baseline (+2.3 points; P < .05), suggesting improvement in global cognition.

“We know that in Alzheimer’s and other neurodegenerative conditions there is a change in cognition, the ability to think, the ability to do things,” Dr. Koenig said. “What we’ve seen with SAGE-718 to date, all the way back to our phase 1 studies, is a cognitively beneficial effect, but more specifically an improvement in executive functioning.”
 

Intentional small study design

Commenting on the findings, Percy Griffin, PhD, MSc, director of scientific engagement for the Alzheimer’s Association, said that because of the small study size, short follow-up, and limited data available in the conference abstract, “we cannot speculate about the efficacy of this investigational therapy.”

“Bigger picture, the real-world clinical meaningfulness of research results that are generated in highly controlled circumstances is an important question that is being discussed right now throughout the Alzheimer’s field,” he added.

However, Dr. Koenig countered that the small study design was intentional. “Over the course of a year, we can get to the answer in different patient populations rather than running these rather large and arduous trials that may pan out to not be positive,” he said.

“The purpose here is to say, directionally, are we seeing improvement that warrants further investigation? If you don’t see an effect in a small number of patients, if you don’t see that effect rather quickly, and if you don’t see an effect that should translate into something meaningful, we at SAGE believe that you may not have a drug there,” he added.

Sage Therapeutics plans to launch a phase 2b placebo-controlled trial later this year to study SAGE-718 in more Alzheimer’s patients over a longer period of time.

The study was funded by SAGE Therapeutics. Dr. Koenig is an employee of SAGE and reports no other conflicts. Dr. Griffin has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.  

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Early results from a small trial of an investigative drug suggests it is safe and may improve executive function in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and mild dementia associated with Alzheimer’s disease. Patients performed better in cognitive testing after just 2 weeks, especially in areas of executive functioning. Clinicians involved in the study also reported improvements in patients’ ability to complete daily activities, especially in complex tasks such as using a computer, carrying out household chores, and managing their medications.

“It’s pretty incredible to see improvement over the course of a week to a week and a half,” said study investigator Aaron Koenig, MD, vice president of Early Clinical Development at Sage Therapeutics in Cambridge, Mass. “Not only are we seeing objective improvement, we’re also seeing a subjective benefit.”

The drug, SAGE-718, is also under study for MCI in patients with Huntington’s disease, the drug’s primary indication, and Parkinson’s disease.

The findings will be presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.
 

Improved executive function

SAGE-718 is in a new class of drugs called positive allosteric modulator of N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, which are thought to improve neuroplasticity.

For the phase 2a open-label LUMINARY trial, researchers enrolled 26 patients ages 50-80 years with Alzheimer’s disease who had MCI. Patients completed a battery of cognitive tests at the study outset, again at the end of treatment, and again after 28 days.

Participants received SAGE-718 daily for 2 weeks and were followed for another 2 weeks.

The study’s primary outcome was safety. Seven patients (26.9%) reported mild or moderate treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), and there were no serious AEs or deaths.

However, after 14 days, researchers also noted improvements from baseline on multiple tests of executive functioning, learning, and memory. And at 28 days, participants demonstrated significantly better Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores, compared with baseline (+2.3 points; P < .05), suggesting improvement in global cognition.

“We know that in Alzheimer’s and other neurodegenerative conditions there is a change in cognition, the ability to think, the ability to do things,” Dr. Koenig said. “What we’ve seen with SAGE-718 to date, all the way back to our phase 1 studies, is a cognitively beneficial effect, but more specifically an improvement in executive functioning.”
 

Intentional small study design

Commenting on the findings, Percy Griffin, PhD, MSc, director of scientific engagement for the Alzheimer’s Association, said that because of the small study size, short follow-up, and limited data available in the conference abstract, “we cannot speculate about the efficacy of this investigational therapy.”

“Bigger picture, the real-world clinical meaningfulness of research results that are generated in highly controlled circumstances is an important question that is being discussed right now throughout the Alzheimer’s field,” he added.

However, Dr. Koenig countered that the small study design was intentional. “Over the course of a year, we can get to the answer in different patient populations rather than running these rather large and arduous trials that may pan out to not be positive,” he said.

“The purpose here is to say, directionally, are we seeing improvement that warrants further investigation? If you don’t see an effect in a small number of patients, if you don’t see that effect rather quickly, and if you don’t see an effect that should translate into something meaningful, we at SAGE believe that you may not have a drug there,” he added.

Sage Therapeutics plans to launch a phase 2b placebo-controlled trial later this year to study SAGE-718 in more Alzheimer’s patients over a longer period of time.

The study was funded by SAGE Therapeutics. Dr. Koenig is an employee of SAGE and reports no other conflicts. Dr. Griffin has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.  

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Early results from a small trial of an investigative drug suggests it is safe and may improve executive function in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and mild dementia associated with Alzheimer’s disease. Patients performed better in cognitive testing after just 2 weeks, especially in areas of executive functioning. Clinicians involved in the study also reported improvements in patients’ ability to complete daily activities, especially in complex tasks such as using a computer, carrying out household chores, and managing their medications.

“It’s pretty incredible to see improvement over the course of a week to a week and a half,” said study investigator Aaron Koenig, MD, vice president of Early Clinical Development at Sage Therapeutics in Cambridge, Mass. “Not only are we seeing objective improvement, we’re also seeing a subjective benefit.”

The drug, SAGE-718, is also under study for MCI in patients with Huntington’s disease, the drug’s primary indication, and Parkinson’s disease.

The findings will be presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.
 

Improved executive function

SAGE-718 is in a new class of drugs called positive allosteric modulator of N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, which are thought to improve neuroplasticity.

For the phase 2a open-label LUMINARY trial, researchers enrolled 26 patients ages 50-80 years with Alzheimer’s disease who had MCI. Patients completed a battery of cognitive tests at the study outset, again at the end of treatment, and again after 28 days.

Participants received SAGE-718 daily for 2 weeks and were followed for another 2 weeks.

The study’s primary outcome was safety. Seven patients (26.9%) reported mild or moderate treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), and there were no serious AEs or deaths.

However, after 14 days, researchers also noted improvements from baseline on multiple tests of executive functioning, learning, and memory. And at 28 days, participants demonstrated significantly better Montreal Cognitive Assessment scores, compared with baseline (+2.3 points; P < .05), suggesting improvement in global cognition.

“We know that in Alzheimer’s and other neurodegenerative conditions there is a change in cognition, the ability to think, the ability to do things,” Dr. Koenig said. “What we’ve seen with SAGE-718 to date, all the way back to our phase 1 studies, is a cognitively beneficial effect, but more specifically an improvement in executive functioning.”
 

Intentional small study design

Commenting on the findings, Percy Griffin, PhD, MSc, director of scientific engagement for the Alzheimer’s Association, said that because of the small study size, short follow-up, and limited data available in the conference abstract, “we cannot speculate about the efficacy of this investigational therapy.”

“Bigger picture, the real-world clinical meaningfulness of research results that are generated in highly controlled circumstances is an important question that is being discussed right now throughout the Alzheimer’s field,” he added.

However, Dr. Koenig countered that the small study design was intentional. “Over the course of a year, we can get to the answer in different patient populations rather than running these rather large and arduous trials that may pan out to not be positive,” he said.

“The purpose here is to say, directionally, are we seeing improvement that warrants further investigation? If you don’t see an effect in a small number of patients, if you don’t see that effect rather quickly, and if you don’t see an effect that should translate into something meaningful, we at SAGE believe that you may not have a drug there,” he added.

Sage Therapeutics plans to launch a phase 2b placebo-controlled trial later this year to study SAGE-718 in more Alzheimer’s patients over a longer period of time.

The study was funded by SAGE Therapeutics. Dr. Koenig is an employee of SAGE and reports no other conflicts. Dr. Griffin has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.  

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Patients with persistent cognitive impairment months after illness with mild COVID-19 have higher levels of inflammatory markers in their cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Researchers found elevated levels of CSF immune activation and immunovascular markers in individuals with cognitive postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC). Patients whose cognitive symptoms developed during the acute phase of COVID-19 had the highest levels of brain inflammation.

The findings add to a growing body of evidence that suggests the condition often referred to as “brain fog” has a neurologic basis, said lead author Joanna Hellmuth, MD, MHS, assistant professor of neurology at the University of California, San Francisco Weill Institute of Neurosciences and the UCSF Memory and Aging Center.

The findings will be presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.
 

Inflammatory response

There are no effective diagnostic tests or treatments for cognitive PASC, which prompted the investigators to study inflammation in patients with the condition. Initial findings were reported earlier in 2022, which showed abnormalities in the CSF in 77% of patients with cognitive impairment. Patients without cognitive impairments had normal CSF.

Extending that work in this new study, researchers studied patients from the Long-term Impact of Infection With Novel Coronavirus (LIINC) study with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who were not hospitalized. They conducted 2-hour neurocognitive interviews and identified 23 people with new, persistent cognitive symptoms (cognitive PASC) and 10 with no cognitive symptoms who served as controls.

All participants underwent additional neurologic examination and neuropsychological testing, and half agreed to a lumbar puncture to allow researchers to collect CSF samples. The CSF was collected a median of 10.2 months after initial COVID symptoms began.

Participants with cognitive PASC had higher median levels of CSF acute phase reactants C-reactive protein (0.007 mg/L vs. 0.000 mg/L; P =.004) and serum amyloid A (0.001 mg/L vs. 0.000 mg/L; P = .001), compared with COVID controls.

The PASC group also had elevated levels of CSF immune activation markers interferon gamma–inducible protein (IP-10), interleukin-8, and immunovascular markers vascular endothelial growth factor-C and VEGFR-1, although the differences with the control group were not statistically significant.

The timing of the onset of cognitive problems was also associated with higher levels of immune activation and immunovascular markers. Patients with brain fog that developed during the acute phase of COVID-19 had higher levels of CSF VEGF-C, compared with patients whose cognitive symptoms developed more than a month after initial COVID symptoms (173 pg/mL vs. 99 pg/mL; P = .048) and COVID controls (79 pg/mL; P = .048).

Acute onset cognitive PASC participants had higher CSF levels of IP-10 (P = .030), IL-8 (P = .048), placental growth factor (P = .030) and intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (P = .045), compared with COVID controls.

Researchers believe these new findings could mean that intrathecal immune activation and endothelial activation/dysfunction may contribute to cognitive PASC and that the mechanisms involved may be different in patients with acute cognitive PASC versus those with delayed onset.

“Our data suggests that perhaps in these people with more acute cognitive changes they don’t have the return to homeostasis,” Dr. Hellmuth said, while patients with delayed onset cognitive PASC had levels more in line with COVID patients who had no cognitive issues.
 

Moving the needle forward

Commenting on the findings, William Schaffner, MD, professor of infectious diseases, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn., said that, while the study doesn’t rule out a possible psychological basis for cognitive PASC, it adds more weight to the biological argument.

“When you have nonspecific symptoms for which specific tests are unavailable,” Dr. Schaffner explained, “there is a natural question that always comes up: Is this principally a biologically induced phenomenon or psychological? This moves the needle substantially in the direction of a biological phenomenon.”

Another important element to the study, Dr. Schaffner said, is that the patients involved had mild COVID.

“Not every patient with long COVID symptoms had been hospitalized with severe disease,” he said. “There are inflammatory phenomenon in various organ systems such that even if the inflammatory response in the lung was not severe enough to get you into the hospital, there were inflammatory responses in other organ systems that could persist once the acute infection resolved.”

Although the small size of the study is a limitation, Dr. Schaffner said that shouldn’t minimize the importance of these findings.

“That it’s small doesn’t diminish its value,” he said. “The next step forward might be to try to associate the markers more specifically with COVID. The more precise we can be, the more convincing the story will become.”

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Hellmuth received grant support from the National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Mental Health supporting this work and personal fees for medical-legal consultation outside of the submitted work. Dr. Schaffner disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Patients with persistent cognitive impairment months after illness with mild COVID-19 have higher levels of inflammatory markers in their cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Researchers found elevated levels of CSF immune activation and immunovascular markers in individuals with cognitive postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC). Patients whose cognitive symptoms developed during the acute phase of COVID-19 had the highest levels of brain inflammation.

The findings add to a growing body of evidence that suggests the condition often referred to as “brain fog” has a neurologic basis, said lead author Joanna Hellmuth, MD, MHS, assistant professor of neurology at the University of California, San Francisco Weill Institute of Neurosciences and the UCSF Memory and Aging Center.

The findings will be presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.
 

Inflammatory response

There are no effective diagnostic tests or treatments for cognitive PASC, which prompted the investigators to study inflammation in patients with the condition. Initial findings were reported earlier in 2022, which showed abnormalities in the CSF in 77% of patients with cognitive impairment. Patients without cognitive impairments had normal CSF.

Extending that work in this new study, researchers studied patients from the Long-term Impact of Infection With Novel Coronavirus (LIINC) study with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who were not hospitalized. They conducted 2-hour neurocognitive interviews and identified 23 people with new, persistent cognitive symptoms (cognitive PASC) and 10 with no cognitive symptoms who served as controls.

All participants underwent additional neurologic examination and neuropsychological testing, and half agreed to a lumbar puncture to allow researchers to collect CSF samples. The CSF was collected a median of 10.2 months after initial COVID symptoms began.

Participants with cognitive PASC had higher median levels of CSF acute phase reactants C-reactive protein (0.007 mg/L vs. 0.000 mg/L; P =.004) and serum amyloid A (0.001 mg/L vs. 0.000 mg/L; P = .001), compared with COVID controls.

The PASC group also had elevated levels of CSF immune activation markers interferon gamma–inducible protein (IP-10), interleukin-8, and immunovascular markers vascular endothelial growth factor-C and VEGFR-1, although the differences with the control group were not statistically significant.

The timing of the onset of cognitive problems was also associated with higher levels of immune activation and immunovascular markers. Patients with brain fog that developed during the acute phase of COVID-19 had higher levels of CSF VEGF-C, compared with patients whose cognitive symptoms developed more than a month after initial COVID symptoms (173 pg/mL vs. 99 pg/mL; P = .048) and COVID controls (79 pg/mL; P = .048).

Acute onset cognitive PASC participants had higher CSF levels of IP-10 (P = .030), IL-8 (P = .048), placental growth factor (P = .030) and intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (P = .045), compared with COVID controls.

Researchers believe these new findings could mean that intrathecal immune activation and endothelial activation/dysfunction may contribute to cognitive PASC and that the mechanisms involved may be different in patients with acute cognitive PASC versus those with delayed onset.

“Our data suggests that perhaps in these people with more acute cognitive changes they don’t have the return to homeostasis,” Dr. Hellmuth said, while patients with delayed onset cognitive PASC had levels more in line with COVID patients who had no cognitive issues.
 

Moving the needle forward

Commenting on the findings, William Schaffner, MD, professor of infectious diseases, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn., said that, while the study doesn’t rule out a possible psychological basis for cognitive PASC, it adds more weight to the biological argument.

“When you have nonspecific symptoms for which specific tests are unavailable,” Dr. Schaffner explained, “there is a natural question that always comes up: Is this principally a biologically induced phenomenon or psychological? This moves the needle substantially in the direction of a biological phenomenon.”

Another important element to the study, Dr. Schaffner said, is that the patients involved had mild COVID.

“Not every patient with long COVID symptoms had been hospitalized with severe disease,” he said. “There are inflammatory phenomenon in various organ systems such that even if the inflammatory response in the lung was not severe enough to get you into the hospital, there were inflammatory responses in other organ systems that could persist once the acute infection resolved.”

Although the small size of the study is a limitation, Dr. Schaffner said that shouldn’t minimize the importance of these findings.

“That it’s small doesn’t diminish its value,” he said. “The next step forward might be to try to associate the markers more specifically with COVID. The more precise we can be, the more convincing the story will become.”

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Hellmuth received grant support from the National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Mental Health supporting this work and personal fees for medical-legal consultation outside of the submitted work. Dr. Schaffner disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Patients with persistent cognitive impairment months after illness with mild COVID-19 have higher levels of inflammatory markers in their cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Researchers found elevated levels of CSF immune activation and immunovascular markers in individuals with cognitive postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC). Patients whose cognitive symptoms developed during the acute phase of COVID-19 had the highest levels of brain inflammation.

The findings add to a growing body of evidence that suggests the condition often referred to as “brain fog” has a neurologic basis, said lead author Joanna Hellmuth, MD, MHS, assistant professor of neurology at the University of California, San Francisco Weill Institute of Neurosciences and the UCSF Memory and Aging Center.

The findings will be presented at the 2022 annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology.
 

Inflammatory response

There are no effective diagnostic tests or treatments for cognitive PASC, which prompted the investigators to study inflammation in patients with the condition. Initial findings were reported earlier in 2022, which showed abnormalities in the CSF in 77% of patients with cognitive impairment. Patients without cognitive impairments had normal CSF.

Extending that work in this new study, researchers studied patients from the Long-term Impact of Infection With Novel Coronavirus (LIINC) study with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who were not hospitalized. They conducted 2-hour neurocognitive interviews and identified 23 people with new, persistent cognitive symptoms (cognitive PASC) and 10 with no cognitive symptoms who served as controls.

All participants underwent additional neurologic examination and neuropsychological testing, and half agreed to a lumbar puncture to allow researchers to collect CSF samples. The CSF was collected a median of 10.2 months after initial COVID symptoms began.

Participants with cognitive PASC had higher median levels of CSF acute phase reactants C-reactive protein (0.007 mg/L vs. 0.000 mg/L; P =.004) and serum amyloid A (0.001 mg/L vs. 0.000 mg/L; P = .001), compared with COVID controls.

The PASC group also had elevated levels of CSF immune activation markers interferon gamma–inducible protein (IP-10), interleukin-8, and immunovascular markers vascular endothelial growth factor-C and VEGFR-1, although the differences with the control group were not statistically significant.

The timing of the onset of cognitive problems was also associated with higher levels of immune activation and immunovascular markers. Patients with brain fog that developed during the acute phase of COVID-19 had higher levels of CSF VEGF-C, compared with patients whose cognitive symptoms developed more than a month after initial COVID symptoms (173 pg/mL vs. 99 pg/mL; P = .048) and COVID controls (79 pg/mL; P = .048).

Acute onset cognitive PASC participants had higher CSF levels of IP-10 (P = .030), IL-8 (P = .048), placental growth factor (P = .030) and intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (P = .045), compared with COVID controls.

Researchers believe these new findings could mean that intrathecal immune activation and endothelial activation/dysfunction may contribute to cognitive PASC and that the mechanisms involved may be different in patients with acute cognitive PASC versus those with delayed onset.

“Our data suggests that perhaps in these people with more acute cognitive changes they don’t have the return to homeostasis,” Dr. Hellmuth said, while patients with delayed onset cognitive PASC had levels more in line with COVID patients who had no cognitive issues.
 

Moving the needle forward

Commenting on the findings, William Schaffner, MD, professor of infectious diseases, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn., said that, while the study doesn’t rule out a possible psychological basis for cognitive PASC, it adds more weight to the biological argument.

“When you have nonspecific symptoms for which specific tests are unavailable,” Dr. Schaffner explained, “there is a natural question that always comes up: Is this principally a biologically induced phenomenon or psychological? This moves the needle substantially in the direction of a biological phenomenon.”

Another important element to the study, Dr. Schaffner said, is that the patients involved had mild COVID.

“Not every patient with long COVID symptoms had been hospitalized with severe disease,” he said. “There are inflammatory phenomenon in various organ systems such that even if the inflammatory response in the lung was not severe enough to get you into the hospital, there were inflammatory responses in other organ systems that could persist once the acute infection resolved.”

Although the small size of the study is a limitation, Dr. Schaffner said that shouldn’t minimize the importance of these findings.

“That it’s small doesn’t diminish its value,” he said. “The next step forward might be to try to associate the markers more specifically with COVID. The more precise we can be, the more convincing the story will become.”

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Hellmuth received grant support from the National Institutes of Health/National Institute of Mental Health supporting this work and personal fees for medical-legal consultation outside of the submitted work. Dr. Schaffner disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.