A federal appeals court ruled Dec. 18 that the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is unconstitutional, but the panel sent the case back to a lower court to decide how much of the remainder of the law could topple along with it.

The three-judge panel of the New Orleans-based U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals said, “The individual mandate is unconstitutional because, under [a previous ruling, National Federation of Independent Business v Sebelius], it finds no constitutional footing in either the Interstate Commerce Clause or the Necessary and Proper Clause.”

The ruling upholds a December 2018 US District Court decision in which Judge Reed O’Connor found that the individual mandate that most Americans must have health insurance or pay a fine was unconstitutional and that without it the ACA itself was invalid.

In sending the case back to a Texas district court, however, the federal panel is asking for a central question to be resolved: Whether the individual mandate is “severable” from the rest of the law, while the rest of the law can be left intact.

If the district court eventually decides that the individual mandate cannot be severed from the rest of the ACA, the entire law will likely be ruled invalid, and some 24 million Americans could lose health coverage.

“Today’s ruling is the result of the Trump administration and congressional Republicans attempting to make dangerous health policy using the courts since they failed to succeed in Congress,” House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard E. Neal (D-Mass.) said in a statement. “This is a blow to our nation’s health care system and the millions of Americans who have gained coverage and protections under the Affordable Care Act. Democrats will continue to fight to protect Americans’ access to quality, affordable care.”

Some groups are applauding the decision, though. The Citizens’ Council for Health Freedom (CCHF), which filed an amicus brief with the Fifth Circuit arguing against the ACA, said it wants more.

“We are pleased with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, but it didn’t go far enough,” said Twila Brase, president and cofounder of CCHF, in a statement. “The individual mandate cannot be severed from the rest of the 2,700-page Affordable Care Act, thus the court should have ruled that the entire law is invalid, as the lower district court found.

“As the Court notes in the first paragraph of the ruling, we argued in our Amicus Brief, filed jointly with the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, that the Act ‘has deprived patients nationwide of a competitive market for affordable high-deductible health insurance,’ leaving ‘patients with no alternative to ... skyrocketing premiums,’ “ Ms. Brase added. “Sending it back to the lower court, which already ruled the right way, continues to deprive citizens and patients of the affordable coverage that freedom from Obamacare would bring.”
 

Future uncertain

The ruling in Texas v Azar is not a surprise because, during oral arguments in July, as reported by Medscape Medical News, at least two of the three judges – Jennifer Walker Elrod, appointed by President George W. Bush in 2007, and Kurt Engelhardt, appointed by President Donald J. Trump in 2018 – appeared to be more receptive to the arguments of a group of 18 Republican states and two individuals seeking to invalidate the ACA.

Judge Carolyn Dineen King, appointed by President Jimmy Carter in 1979, did not comment during the hearing.

The Trump administration chose not to defend the ACA, but it does not seem entirely prepared for what might happen if the law is overturned. In a briefing before the Fifth Circuit hearing, the administration argued that, if ultimately the law is ruled unconstitutional, it should be struck down only in the states seeking to overturn the law.

“A lot of this has to get sorted out – it’s complicated,” said August E. Flentje, a U.S. Department of Justice lawyer, at the oral arguments in July.

For now, though, the ACA remains.

“In 2012, the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare, despite serious constitutional issues with the federal government forcing Americans to purchase a product from a private company. Until an ultimate decision is made by the Supreme Court or Congress decides otherwise, the Affordable Care Act will remain the law of the land,” Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), said in a statement.

And those who have led the court battle to keep the ACA intact plan to keep fighting. “For now, the President got the gift he wanted – uncertainty in the health care system and a pathway to repeal – so that the health care that seniors, workers, and families secured under the Affordable Care Act can be yanked from under them. This decision could take us to a dangerous and irresponsible place, not just for the 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions, but for our seniors who use Medicare, our children under the age of 26, and the 20 million additional Americans covered directly through the ACA marketplace. California will move swiftly to challenge this decision because this could mean the difference between life and death for so many Americans and their families,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement.

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

A federal appeals court ruled Dec. 18 that the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is unconstitutional, but the panel sent the case back to a lower court to decide how much of the remainder of the law could topple along with it.

The three-judge panel of the New Orleans-based U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals said, “The individual mandate is unconstitutional because, under [a previous ruling, National Federation of Independent Business v Sebelius], it finds no constitutional footing in either the Interstate Commerce Clause or the Necessary and Proper Clause.”

The ruling upholds a December 2018 US District Court decision in which Judge Reed O’Connor found that the individual mandate that most Americans must have health insurance or pay a fine was unconstitutional and that without it the ACA itself was invalid.

In sending the case back to a Texas district court, however, the federal panel is asking for a central question to be resolved: Whether the individual mandate is “severable” from the rest of the law, while the rest of the law can be left intact.

If the district court eventually decides that the individual mandate cannot be severed from the rest of the ACA, the entire law will likely be ruled invalid, and some 24 million Americans could lose health coverage.

“Today’s ruling is the result of the Trump administration and congressional Republicans attempting to make dangerous health policy using the courts since they failed to succeed in Congress,” House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard E. Neal (D-Mass.) said in a statement. “This is a blow to our nation’s health care system and the millions of Americans who have gained coverage and protections under the Affordable Care Act. Democrats will continue to fight to protect Americans’ access to quality, affordable care.”

Some groups are applauding the decision, though. The Citizens’ Council for Health Freedom (CCHF), which filed an amicus brief with the Fifth Circuit arguing against the ACA, said it wants more.

“We are pleased with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, but it didn’t go far enough,” said Twila Brase, president and cofounder of CCHF, in a statement. “The individual mandate cannot be severed from the rest of the 2,700-page Affordable Care Act, thus the court should have ruled that the entire law is invalid, as the lower district court found.

“As the Court notes in the first paragraph of the ruling, we argued in our Amicus Brief, filed jointly with the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, that the Act ‘has deprived patients nationwide of a competitive market for affordable high-deductible health insurance,’ leaving ‘patients with no alternative to ... skyrocketing premiums,’ “ Ms. Brase added. “Sending it back to the lower court, which already ruled the right way, continues to deprive citizens and patients of the affordable coverage that freedom from Obamacare would bring.”
 

Future uncertain

The ruling in Texas v Azar is not a surprise because, during oral arguments in July, as reported by Medscape Medical News, at least two of the three judges – Jennifer Walker Elrod, appointed by President George W. Bush in 2007, and Kurt Engelhardt, appointed by President Donald J. Trump in 2018 – appeared to be more receptive to the arguments of a group of 18 Republican states and two individuals seeking to invalidate the ACA.

Judge Carolyn Dineen King, appointed by President Jimmy Carter in 1979, did not comment during the hearing.

The Trump administration chose not to defend the ACA, but it does not seem entirely prepared for what might happen if the law is overturned. In a briefing before the Fifth Circuit hearing, the administration argued that, if ultimately the law is ruled unconstitutional, it should be struck down only in the states seeking to overturn the law.

“A lot of this has to get sorted out – it’s complicated,” said August E. Flentje, a U.S. Department of Justice lawyer, at the oral arguments in July.

For now, though, the ACA remains.

“In 2012, the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare, despite serious constitutional issues with the federal government forcing Americans to purchase a product from a private company. Until an ultimate decision is made by the Supreme Court or Congress decides otherwise, the Affordable Care Act will remain the law of the land,” Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), said in a statement.

And those who have led the court battle to keep the ACA intact plan to keep fighting. “For now, the President got the gift he wanted – uncertainty in the health care system and a pathway to repeal – so that the health care that seniors, workers, and families secured under the Affordable Care Act can be yanked from under them. This decision could take us to a dangerous and irresponsible place, not just for the 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions, but for our seniors who use Medicare, our children under the age of 26, and the 20 million additional Americans covered directly through the ACA marketplace. California will move swiftly to challenge this decision because this could mean the difference between life and death for so many Americans and their families,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement.

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

A federal appeals court ruled Dec. 18 that the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is unconstitutional, but the panel sent the case back to a lower court to decide how much of the remainder of the law could topple along with it.

The three-judge panel of the New Orleans-based U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals said, “The individual mandate is unconstitutional because, under [a previous ruling, National Federation of Independent Business v Sebelius], it finds no constitutional footing in either the Interstate Commerce Clause or the Necessary and Proper Clause.”

The ruling upholds a December 2018 US District Court decision in which Judge Reed O’Connor found that the individual mandate that most Americans must have health insurance or pay a fine was unconstitutional and that without it the ACA itself was invalid.

In sending the case back to a Texas district court, however, the federal panel is asking for a central question to be resolved: Whether the individual mandate is “severable” from the rest of the law, while the rest of the law can be left intact.

If the district court eventually decides that the individual mandate cannot be severed from the rest of the ACA, the entire law will likely be ruled invalid, and some 24 million Americans could lose health coverage.

“Today’s ruling is the result of the Trump administration and congressional Republicans attempting to make dangerous health policy using the courts since they failed to succeed in Congress,” House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard E. Neal (D-Mass.) said in a statement. “This is a blow to our nation’s health care system and the millions of Americans who have gained coverage and protections under the Affordable Care Act. Democrats will continue to fight to protect Americans’ access to quality, affordable care.”

Some groups are applauding the decision, though. The Citizens’ Council for Health Freedom (CCHF), which filed an amicus brief with the Fifth Circuit arguing against the ACA, said it wants more.

“We are pleased with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling, but it didn’t go far enough,” said Twila Brase, president and cofounder of CCHF, in a statement. “The individual mandate cannot be severed from the rest of the 2,700-page Affordable Care Act, thus the court should have ruled that the entire law is invalid, as the lower district court found.

“As the Court notes in the first paragraph of the ruling, we argued in our Amicus Brief, filed jointly with the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, that the Act ‘has deprived patients nationwide of a competitive market for affordable high-deductible health insurance,’ leaving ‘patients with no alternative to ... skyrocketing premiums,’ “ Ms. Brase added. “Sending it back to the lower court, which already ruled the right way, continues to deprive citizens and patients of the affordable coverage that freedom from Obamacare would bring.”
 

Future uncertain

The ruling in Texas v Azar is not a surprise because, during oral arguments in July, as reported by Medscape Medical News, at least two of the three judges – Jennifer Walker Elrod, appointed by President George W. Bush in 2007, and Kurt Engelhardt, appointed by President Donald J. Trump in 2018 – appeared to be more receptive to the arguments of a group of 18 Republican states and two individuals seeking to invalidate the ACA.

Judge Carolyn Dineen King, appointed by President Jimmy Carter in 1979, did not comment during the hearing.

The Trump administration chose not to defend the ACA, but it does not seem entirely prepared for what might happen if the law is overturned. In a briefing before the Fifth Circuit hearing, the administration argued that, if ultimately the law is ruled unconstitutional, it should be struck down only in the states seeking to overturn the law.

“A lot of this has to get sorted out – it’s complicated,” said August E. Flentje, a U.S. Department of Justice lawyer, at the oral arguments in July.

For now, though, the ACA remains.

“In 2012, the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare, despite serious constitutional issues with the federal government forcing Americans to purchase a product from a private company. Until an ultimate decision is made by the Supreme Court or Congress decides otherwise, the Affordable Care Act will remain the law of the land,” Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), said in a statement.

And those who have led the court battle to keep the ACA intact plan to keep fighting. “For now, the President got the gift he wanted – uncertainty in the health care system and a pathway to repeal – so that the health care that seniors, workers, and families secured under the Affordable Care Act can be yanked from under them. This decision could take us to a dangerous and irresponsible place, not just for the 133 million Americans with pre-existing conditions, but for our seniors who use Medicare, our children under the age of 26, and the 20 million additional Americans covered directly through the ACA marketplace. California will move swiftly to challenge this decision because this could mean the difference between life and death for so many Americans and their families,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement.

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

To the Editor:

Port-wine stains (PWSs) are the most common type of vascular malformations. Patients rarely develop cancers in the overlying skin. However, we describe a case of melanoma in situ occurring within a long-standing facial PWS.

A 60-year-old white man with a history of a large unilateral facial PWS covering the right ear, lateral cheek, jaw, and neck presented to clinic with a new dark lesion on the right ear that had been growing for a few weeks or more. His PWS had been previously treated intermittently with a pulsed dye laser (PDL) for decades with variable improvement. He had not undergone any laser procedures in the last 8 months but wanted to restart treatment with the PDL. Upon further discussion, he reported a new darker area on the right earlobe that was growing. He had no personal or family history of skin cancer and was otherwise healthy. Physical examination revealed a large red vascular patch encompassing the ear, cheek, chin, and lateral neck. Within the PWS there was a black and dark brown patch with irregular borders on the right earlobe (Figure 1A). A shave biopsy was performed for histopathologic examination. The biopsy showed a confluent proliferation of atypical melanocytes along the dermoepidermal junction extending down adnexal structures (Figure 2A) that stained positive for MART-1/Melan-A (Figure 2B). In the dermis, solar elastosis and prominent dilated and thin-walled vessels were present. These findings were consistent with a melanoma in situ, lentigo maligna type, overlying a capillary malformation.

Port-wine stains are congenital vascular malformations that affect approximately 0.3% of individuals.¹ Most are located on the head and neck along the distribution of the trigeminal nerve. Cases are thought to occur sporadically, with recent evidence for somatic GNAQ mutations in both nonsyndromic cases and in Sturge-Weber syndrome.² These lesions become progressively larger with time due to dilation of the capillary proliferation.³ Melanoma in situ, lentigo maligna type, usually affects white men in the sixth and seventh decades of life. It commonly arises on skin with chronic sun damage, particularly on the head and neck.⁴

Although uncommon, skin cancers have been known to arise in PWSs. Reports of basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) and squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs) have been published, but to date, there are no reports of melanoma or melanoma in situ arising in a PWS. According to a PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE using the terms melanoma and port wine stain, squamous cell carcinoma and port wine stain, and basal cell carcinoma and port wine stain, fewer than 30 cases of BCCs in a PWS and only 4 cases of SCCs in a PWS have been documented, with 1 patient developing multiple BCCs and SCCs.^1,5 Most BCCs (approximately 75%) and SCCs have been associated with historical treatments used to treat PWS before the development of laser therapy, such as grenz rays, topical thorium X, and other radiotherapy techniques.^5,6 Interestingly, our patient’s PWS had only been treated with a PDL. Other risk factors for skin cancer in a PWS include sun exposure and smoking.⁵ There is no evidence that a PDL contributes to the development of skin cancer, but radiotherapy is a major factor.⁷

Treatment of these skin cancers is no different, with both Mohs micrographic surgery and standard excision used when appropriate. Despite the vascular nature of the lesion, there is only a minimal increase in bleeding risk.³ Most reports indicate no increase in perioperative bleeding.^5,7 One case documented a hematoma developing postoperatively.⁶

This case of melanoma in situ arising in a PWS expands the range of skin cancer types known to arise in these malformations. Because of the potential for skin cancer to develop in a PWS, it is important to routinely examine these vascular proliferations.

To the Editor:

Port-wine stains (PWSs) are the most common type of vascular malformations. Patients rarely develop cancers in the overlying skin. However, we describe a case of melanoma in situ occurring within a long-standing facial PWS.

A 60-year-old white man with a history of a large unilateral facial PWS covering the right ear, lateral cheek, jaw, and neck presented to clinic with a new dark lesion on the right ear that had been growing for a few weeks or more. His PWS had been previously treated intermittently with a pulsed dye laser (PDL) for decades with variable improvement. He had not undergone any laser procedures in the last 8 months but wanted to restart treatment with the PDL. Upon further discussion, he reported a new darker area on the right earlobe that was growing. He had no personal or family history of skin cancer and was otherwise healthy. Physical examination revealed a large red vascular patch encompassing the ear, cheek, chin, and lateral neck. Within the PWS there was a black and dark brown patch with irregular borders on the right earlobe (Figure 1A). A shave biopsy was performed for histopathologic examination. The biopsy showed a confluent proliferation of atypical melanocytes along the dermoepidermal junction extending down adnexal structures (Figure 2A) that stained positive for MART-1/Melan-A (Figure 2B). In the dermis, solar elastosis and prominent dilated and thin-walled vessels were present. These findings were consistent with a melanoma in situ, lentigo maligna type, overlying a capillary malformation.

Port-wine stains are congenital vascular malformations that affect approximately 0.3% of individuals.¹ Most are located on the head and neck along the distribution of the trigeminal nerve. Cases are thought to occur sporadically, with recent evidence for somatic GNAQ mutations in both nonsyndromic cases and in Sturge-Weber syndrome.² These lesions become progressively larger with time due to dilation of the capillary proliferation.³ Melanoma in situ, lentigo maligna type, usually affects white men in the sixth and seventh decades of life. It commonly arises on skin with chronic sun damage, particularly on the head and neck.⁴

Although uncommon, skin cancers have been known to arise in PWSs. Reports of basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) and squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs) have been published, but to date, there are no reports of melanoma or melanoma in situ arising in a PWS. According to a PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE using the terms melanoma and port wine stain, squamous cell carcinoma and port wine stain, and basal cell carcinoma and port wine stain, fewer than 30 cases of BCCs in a PWS and only 4 cases of SCCs in a PWS have been documented, with 1 patient developing multiple BCCs and SCCs.^1,5 Most BCCs (approximately 75%) and SCCs have been associated with historical treatments used to treat PWS before the development of laser therapy, such as grenz rays, topical thorium X, and other radiotherapy techniques.^5,6 Interestingly, our patient’s PWS had only been treated with a PDL. Other risk factors for skin cancer in a PWS include sun exposure and smoking.⁵ There is no evidence that a PDL contributes to the development of skin cancer, but radiotherapy is a major factor.⁷

Treatment of these skin cancers is no different, with both Mohs micrographic surgery and standard excision used when appropriate. Despite the vascular nature of the lesion, there is only a minimal increase in bleeding risk.³ Most reports indicate no increase in perioperative bleeding.^5,7 One case documented a hematoma developing postoperatively.⁶

This case of melanoma in situ arising in a PWS expands the range of skin cancer types known to arise in these malformations. Because of the potential for skin cancer to develop in a PWS, it is important to routinely examine these vascular proliferations.

To the Editor:

Port-wine stains (PWSs) are the most common type of vascular malformations. Patients rarely develop cancers in the overlying skin. However, we describe a case of melanoma in situ occurring within a long-standing facial PWS.

A 60-year-old white man with a history of a large unilateral facial PWS covering the right ear, lateral cheek, jaw, and neck presented to clinic with a new dark lesion on the right ear that had been growing for a few weeks or more. His PWS had been previously treated intermittently with a pulsed dye laser (PDL) for decades with variable improvement. He had not undergone any laser procedures in the last 8 months but wanted to restart treatment with the PDL. Upon further discussion, he reported a new darker area on the right earlobe that was growing. He had no personal or family history of skin cancer and was otherwise healthy. Physical examination revealed a large red vascular patch encompassing the ear, cheek, chin, and lateral neck. Within the PWS there was a black and dark brown patch with irregular borders on the right earlobe (Figure 1A). A shave biopsy was performed for histopathologic examination. The biopsy showed a confluent proliferation of atypical melanocytes along the dermoepidermal junction extending down adnexal structures (Figure 2A) that stained positive for MART-1/Melan-A (Figure 2B). In the dermis, solar elastosis and prominent dilated and thin-walled vessels were present. These findings were consistent with a melanoma in situ, lentigo maligna type, overlying a capillary malformation.

Port-wine stains are congenital vascular malformations that affect approximately 0.3% of individuals.¹ Most are located on the head and neck along the distribution of the trigeminal nerve. Cases are thought to occur sporadically, with recent evidence for somatic GNAQ mutations in both nonsyndromic cases and in Sturge-Weber syndrome.² These lesions become progressively larger with time due to dilation of the capillary proliferation.³ Melanoma in situ, lentigo maligna type, usually affects white men in the sixth and seventh decades of life. It commonly arises on skin with chronic sun damage, particularly on the head and neck.⁴

Although uncommon, skin cancers have been known to arise in PWSs. Reports of basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) and squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs) have been published, but to date, there are no reports of melanoma or melanoma in situ arising in a PWS. According to a PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE using the terms melanoma and port wine stain, squamous cell carcinoma and port wine stain, and basal cell carcinoma and port wine stain, fewer than 30 cases of BCCs in a PWS and only 4 cases of SCCs in a PWS have been documented, with 1 patient developing multiple BCCs and SCCs.^1,5 Most BCCs (approximately 75%) and SCCs have been associated with historical treatments used to treat PWS before the development of laser therapy, such as grenz rays, topical thorium X, and other radiotherapy techniques.^5,6 Interestingly, our patient’s PWS had only been treated with a PDL. Other risk factors for skin cancer in a PWS include sun exposure and smoking.⁵ There is no evidence that a PDL contributes to the development of skin cancer, but radiotherapy is a major factor.⁷

Treatment of these skin cancers is no different, with both Mohs micrographic surgery and standard excision used when appropriate. Despite the vascular nature of the lesion, there is only a minimal increase in bleeding risk.³ Most reports indicate no increase in perioperative bleeding.^5,7 One case documented a hematoma developing postoperatively.⁶

This case of melanoma in situ arising in a PWS expands the range of skin cancer types known to arise in these malformations. Because of the potential for skin cancer to develop in a PWS, it is important to routinely examine these vascular proliferations.

A skin biopsy of one of the lesions showed granulomatous inflammation composed of lymphocytes, macrophages, and giant cells around hair follicles with negative mycobacterium stains and fungal stains, consistent with granulomatous periorificial dermatitis. Tissue cultures from a skin biopsy for aerobic bacteria, mycobacteria, and fungus all were negative.

The patient initially was treated with erythromycin, but after 2 weeks, he reported abdominal pain and nausea and was unable to tolerate the medication. He was switched to clarithromycin, which he took for 6 weeks with clearance of the lesions.

A year later, some of the lesions recurred. He was treated again with clarithromycin and the lesions resolved.

Childhood granulomatous periorificial dermatitis (CGPD) is a benign skin eruption that occurs in prepubertal children. It also has been called facial Afro-Caribbean childhood eruption (FACE), and it tends to occur most commonly in children of darker skin types.¹CGPD is characterized by dome shape, monomorphous papules ranging from skin color to pink around the eyes, nose, and mouth, but there are some cases reported of extra facial involvement.² The lesions usually are not symptomatic, and they are more common in boys. The cause of this condition is not known, but possible triggers could include prior exposure to topical and systemic corticosteroids, as well as exposure to certain allergens such as formaldehyde.¹

In histopathology, the lesions are characterized by granulomatous infiltrates around the hair follicles and the upper dermis. The granulomas are formed of macrophages, lymphocytes, and giant cell, as were seen in our patient.³

Several conditions can look very similar to CGPD; these include sarcoidosis, lupus miliaris disseminatus faciei (LMDF), and granulomatous rosacea.

Sarcoidosis is a rare condition in children, and the lesions can be similar to the ones seen in our patient. Patients with sarcoidosis usually present with other systemic symptoms including fever, weight loss, respiratory symptoms, and fatigue; none of these were seen in our patient. Under the microscope, the lesions are characterized by “naked granulomas” instead of the inflammatory granulomas seen on our patient.

Lupus miliaris disseminatus faciei is a rare inflammatory skin condition commonly seen in young adults and is thought to be a variant of rosacea. It is characterized by skin-color to pink to yellow dome-shaped papules on the central face. Histologically, the lesions present as dermal epithelioid cell granulomas with central necrosis and surrounding lymphocytic infiltrate with multinucleate giant cells.⁴

Granulomatous rosacea and CGPD are considered two separate entities. Granulomatous rosacea tends to have a more chronic course, is not that common in children, and clinically presents with pustules, papules, and cysts around the eyes and cheeks.

Infectious processes like tuberculosis and fungal infections were ruled out in our patient with cultures and histopathology. Allergic contact dermatitis on the face can present with skin-color to pink papules, but they usually are very pruritic and improve with topical corticosteroids, while these medications can worsen CGPD.

CGPD can be a self-limiting condition. When mild, it can be treated with topical metronidazole, topical erythromycin, topical clindamycin solution, or pimecrolimus. Our patient failed treatment with pimecrolimus. For severe presentations, oral tetracyclines, erythromycin, and other macrolides, metronidazole, and oral isotretinoin can help clear the lesions.⁵
 

Dr. Matiz is a pediatric dermatologist at Southern California Permanente Medical Group, San Diego. She said she had no relevant financial disclosures. Email her at [email protected].

References

1. Ann Dermatol. 2011 Aug;23(3):386-8.

2. Int J Dermatol. 2007 Feb;46(2):143-5.

3. J Cutan Med Surg. 2009 Feb 28;13(2):115-8.

4. An Bras Dermatol. 2017 Nov-Dec;92(6):851-3.

5. Indian Dermatol Online J. 2018 Jan-Feb; 9(1):68-70.

A skin biopsy of one of the lesions showed granulomatous inflammation composed of lymphocytes, macrophages, and giant cells around hair follicles with negative mycobacterium stains and fungal stains, consistent with granulomatous periorificial dermatitis. Tissue cultures from a skin biopsy for aerobic bacteria, mycobacteria, and fungus all were negative.

The patient initially was treated with erythromycin, but after 2 weeks, he reported abdominal pain and nausea and was unable to tolerate the medication. He was switched to clarithromycin, which he took for 6 weeks with clearance of the lesions.

A year later, some of the lesions recurred. He was treated again with clarithromycin and the lesions resolved.

Childhood granulomatous periorificial dermatitis (CGPD) is a benign skin eruption that occurs in prepubertal children. It also has been called facial Afro-Caribbean childhood eruption (FACE), and it tends to occur most commonly in children of darker skin types.¹CGPD is characterized by dome shape, monomorphous papules ranging from skin color to pink around the eyes, nose, and mouth, but there are some cases reported of extra facial involvement.² The lesions usually are not symptomatic, and they are more common in boys. The cause of this condition is not known, but possible triggers could include prior exposure to topical and systemic corticosteroids, as well as exposure to certain allergens such as formaldehyde.¹

In histopathology, the lesions are characterized by granulomatous infiltrates around the hair follicles and the upper dermis. The granulomas are formed of macrophages, lymphocytes, and giant cell, as were seen in our patient.³

Several conditions can look very similar to CGPD; these include sarcoidosis, lupus miliaris disseminatus faciei (LMDF), and granulomatous rosacea.

Sarcoidosis is a rare condition in children, and the lesions can be similar to the ones seen in our patient. Patients with sarcoidosis usually present with other systemic symptoms including fever, weight loss, respiratory symptoms, and fatigue; none of these were seen in our patient. Under the microscope, the lesions are characterized by “naked granulomas” instead of the inflammatory granulomas seen on our patient.

Lupus miliaris disseminatus faciei is a rare inflammatory skin condition commonly seen in young adults and is thought to be a variant of rosacea. It is characterized by skin-color to pink to yellow dome-shaped papules on the central face. Histologically, the lesions present as dermal epithelioid cell granulomas with central necrosis and surrounding lymphocytic infiltrate with multinucleate giant cells.⁴

Granulomatous rosacea and CGPD are considered two separate entities. Granulomatous rosacea tends to have a more chronic course, is not that common in children, and clinically presents with pustules, papules, and cysts around the eyes and cheeks.

Infectious processes like tuberculosis and fungal infections were ruled out in our patient with cultures and histopathology. Allergic contact dermatitis on the face can present with skin-color to pink papules, but they usually are very pruritic and improve with topical corticosteroids, while these medications can worsen CGPD.

CGPD can be a self-limiting condition. When mild, it can be treated with topical metronidazole, topical erythromycin, topical clindamycin solution, or pimecrolimus. Our patient failed treatment with pimecrolimus. For severe presentations, oral tetracyclines, erythromycin, and other macrolides, metronidazole, and oral isotretinoin can help clear the lesions.⁵
 

Dr. Matiz is a pediatric dermatologist at Southern California Permanente Medical Group, San Diego. She said she had no relevant financial disclosures. Email her at [email protected].

References

1. Ann Dermatol. 2011 Aug;23(3):386-8.

2. Int J Dermatol. 2007 Feb;46(2):143-5.

3. J Cutan Med Surg. 2009 Feb 28;13(2):115-8.

4. An Bras Dermatol. 2017 Nov-Dec;92(6):851-3.

5. Indian Dermatol Online J. 2018 Jan-Feb; 9(1):68-70.

A skin biopsy of one of the lesions showed granulomatous inflammation composed of lymphocytes, macrophages, and giant cells around hair follicles with negative mycobacterium stains and fungal stains, consistent with granulomatous periorificial dermatitis. Tissue cultures from a skin biopsy for aerobic bacteria, mycobacteria, and fungus all were negative.

The patient initially was treated with erythromycin, but after 2 weeks, he reported abdominal pain and nausea and was unable to tolerate the medication. He was switched to clarithromycin, which he took for 6 weeks with clearance of the lesions.

A year later, some of the lesions recurred. He was treated again with clarithromycin and the lesions resolved.

Childhood granulomatous periorificial dermatitis (CGPD) is a benign skin eruption that occurs in prepubertal children. It also has been called facial Afro-Caribbean childhood eruption (FACE), and it tends to occur most commonly in children of darker skin types.¹CGPD is characterized by dome shape, monomorphous papules ranging from skin color to pink around the eyes, nose, and mouth, but there are some cases reported of extra facial involvement.² The lesions usually are not symptomatic, and they are more common in boys. The cause of this condition is not known, but possible triggers could include prior exposure to topical and systemic corticosteroids, as well as exposure to certain allergens such as formaldehyde.¹

In histopathology, the lesions are characterized by granulomatous infiltrates around the hair follicles and the upper dermis. The granulomas are formed of macrophages, lymphocytes, and giant cell, as were seen in our patient.³

Several conditions can look very similar to CGPD; these include sarcoidosis, lupus miliaris disseminatus faciei (LMDF), and granulomatous rosacea.

Sarcoidosis is a rare condition in children, and the lesions can be similar to the ones seen in our patient. Patients with sarcoidosis usually present with other systemic symptoms including fever, weight loss, respiratory symptoms, and fatigue; none of these were seen in our patient. Under the microscope, the lesions are characterized by “naked granulomas” instead of the inflammatory granulomas seen on our patient.

Lupus miliaris disseminatus faciei is a rare inflammatory skin condition commonly seen in young adults and is thought to be a variant of rosacea. It is characterized by skin-color to pink to yellow dome-shaped papules on the central face. Histologically, the lesions present as dermal epithelioid cell granulomas with central necrosis and surrounding lymphocytic infiltrate with multinucleate giant cells.⁴

Granulomatous rosacea and CGPD are considered two separate entities. Granulomatous rosacea tends to have a more chronic course, is not that common in children, and clinically presents with pustules, papules, and cysts around the eyes and cheeks.

Infectious processes like tuberculosis and fungal infections were ruled out in our patient with cultures and histopathology. Allergic contact dermatitis on the face can present with skin-color to pink papules, but they usually are very pruritic and improve with topical corticosteroids, while these medications can worsen CGPD.

CGPD can be a self-limiting condition. When mild, it can be treated with topical metronidazole, topical erythromycin, topical clindamycin solution, or pimecrolimus. Our patient failed treatment with pimecrolimus. For severe presentations, oral tetracyclines, erythromycin, and other macrolides, metronidazole, and oral isotretinoin can help clear the lesions.⁵
 

Dr. Matiz is a pediatric dermatologist at Southern California Permanente Medical Group, San Diego. She said she had no relevant financial disclosures. Email her at [email protected].

References

1. Ann Dermatol. 2011 Aug;23(3):386-8.

2. Int J Dermatol. 2007 Feb;46(2):143-5.

3. J Cutan Med Surg. 2009 Feb 28;13(2):115-8.

4. An Bras Dermatol. 2017 Nov-Dec;92(6):851-3.

5. Indian Dermatol Online J. 2018 Jan-Feb; 9(1):68-70.

Dermoscopy was performed, which confirmed that this was a cherry angioma, also called a cherry hemangioma or Campbell de Morgan spot.

Cherry angiomas are benign proliferations that typically appear after age 30 as tiny bright erythematous macules that, over time, enlarge into papules. In their early, and smaller, stages they are typically maraschino cherry red, hence the name cherry angiomas. As they enlarge or become thrombosed, some lesions become darker red or even black in color. (The dermoscopy image shown here demonstrates the bright red globular red pattern that is classically seen with cherry angiomas.)

Cherry angiomas do not require treatment. If treatment is desired for cosmetic purposes, they can be treated with electrocautery, cryosurgery, or laser. The patient in this case was not worried about the appearance of the lesion and opted to leave it alone unless he developed symptoms.

‌

Images and text courtesy of Daniel Stulberg, MD, FAAFP, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque.

Dermoscopy was performed, which confirmed that this was a cherry angioma, also called a cherry hemangioma or Campbell de Morgan spot.

Cherry angiomas are benign proliferations that typically appear after age 30 as tiny bright erythematous macules that, over time, enlarge into papules. In their early, and smaller, stages they are typically maraschino cherry red, hence the name cherry angiomas. As they enlarge or become thrombosed, some lesions become darker red or even black in color. (The dermoscopy image shown here demonstrates the bright red globular red pattern that is classically seen with cherry angiomas.)

Cherry angiomas do not require treatment. If treatment is desired for cosmetic purposes, they can be treated with electrocautery, cryosurgery, or laser. The patient in this case was not worried about the appearance of the lesion and opted to leave it alone unless he developed symptoms.

‌

Images and text courtesy of Daniel Stulberg, MD, FAAFP, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque.

Dermoscopy was performed, which confirmed that this was a cherry angioma, also called a cherry hemangioma or Campbell de Morgan spot.

Cherry angiomas are benign proliferations that typically appear after age 30 as tiny bright erythematous macules that, over time, enlarge into papules. In their early, and smaller, stages they are typically maraschino cherry red, hence the name cherry angiomas. As they enlarge or become thrombosed, some lesions become darker red or even black in color. (The dermoscopy image shown here demonstrates the bright red globular red pattern that is classically seen with cherry angiomas.)

Cherry angiomas do not require treatment. If treatment is desired for cosmetic purposes, they can be treated with electrocautery, cryosurgery, or laser. The patient in this case was not worried about the appearance of the lesion and opted to leave it alone unless he developed symptoms.

‌

Images and text courtesy of Daniel Stulberg, MD, FAAFP, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque.

Vaping has expanded as a popular method of drug delivery for U.S. teenagers, and one in five students in grades 10 and 12 reported vaping marijuana in the past year, according to results of the 2019 Monitoring the Future survey conducted by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA).

licsiren/iStock/Getty Images

This year’s findings, announced Dec. 18, continue to illustrate “a clear shift in the pattern of drug taking among teenagers,” said NIDA Director Nora D. Volkow, MD, in a teleconference held to review the results.

Use of alcohol and drugs – including opioids and stimulants – continues to decline among teens, but vaping continues its significant rise, with a surge in marijuana vaping this year.

The increase in past-month marijuana vaping among 12th graders, from 7.5% in 2018 to 14% in 2019, represents the second-largest 1-year jump tracked for any substance in the survey’s history, Dr. Volkow said. The largest jump was the increase in past-month nicotine vaping among 12th-graders from 2017-2018.

Past-year marijuana vaping has more than doubled in the past 2 years, with rates this year of 20.8% among 12th-graders, 19.4% among 10th-graders, and 7.0% among 8th-graders.

“It is very unfortunate that we are seeing the steep rise in the use of vaping devices” because the devices deliver drugs in very high concentration, Dr. Volkow said. The growing popularity of vaping “threatens to undo years of progress protecting the health of adolescents in the U.S.,” Dr. Volkow said in a statement. The Monitoring the Future survey began including vaping questions in 2017.

Monitoring the Future is a national tool to assess drug and alcohol use and related attitudes among adolescent students across the United States. This year’s self-reported survey included 42,531 in grades 8, 10, and 12 from 396 public and private schools.

Nicotine vaping increased from 2018 to 2019 across all three grades; past-month nicotine use equated to 1 in 4, 1 in 5, and 1 in 10 (26%, 20%, and 10%) among 12th, 10th, and 8th graders, respectively, according to the survey. Daily nicotine vaping, measured for the first time this year because of public health concerns, was approximately 12% for 12th graders, 7% for 10th graders, and 2% for 8th graders. Daily marijuana vaping, also measured for the first time this year, was approximately 4%, 3%, and 1% among 12th, 10th, and 8th graders, respectively. Additional findings on the rise of vaping by U.S. teenagers were released Dec. 17 in a research letter published online in JAMA (doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.20185).

Meanwhile, positive trends in this year’s survey included a reduction in the misuse of prescription drugs, including OxyContin, Vicodin, and Adderall, and in the use of traditional cigarettes and other tobacco products, as well as alcohol, noted Richard A. Miech, PhD, MPH, of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, principal investigator for Monitoring the Future. However, the challenge of preventing and reducing vaping in teens remains “a whole new uncharted territory,” in part because the design of the vaping devices facilitates discreet use at home and at school, he said.

Physicians and parents have important roles to play in screening for vaping among teens, Dr. Volkow said in a question and answer session. Health care clinicians, including pediatricians and family physicians, “are in a unique position to communicate with their young patients” by educating them about the dangers of vaping, encouraging them to stop if they have started using these devices, and referring them for further treatment if they are showing signs of addiction, she said.

Monitoring the Future was funded by NIDA. The researchers had no disclosures.

Vaping has expanded as a popular method of drug delivery for U.S. teenagers, and one in five students in grades 10 and 12 reported vaping marijuana in the past year, according to results of the 2019 Monitoring the Future survey conducted by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA).

licsiren/iStock/Getty Images

This year’s findings, announced Dec. 18, continue to illustrate “a clear shift in the pattern of drug taking among teenagers,” said NIDA Director Nora D. Volkow, MD, in a teleconference held to review the results.

Use of alcohol and drugs – including opioids and stimulants – continues to decline among teens, but vaping continues its significant rise, with a surge in marijuana vaping this year.

The increase in past-month marijuana vaping among 12th graders, from 7.5% in 2018 to 14% in 2019, represents the second-largest 1-year jump tracked for any substance in the survey’s history, Dr. Volkow said. The largest jump was the increase in past-month nicotine vaping among 12th-graders from 2017-2018.

Past-year marijuana vaping has more than doubled in the past 2 years, with rates this year of 20.8% among 12th-graders, 19.4% among 10th-graders, and 7.0% among 8th-graders.

“It is very unfortunate that we are seeing the steep rise in the use of vaping devices” because the devices deliver drugs in very high concentration, Dr. Volkow said. The growing popularity of vaping “threatens to undo years of progress protecting the health of adolescents in the U.S.,” Dr. Volkow said in a statement. The Monitoring the Future survey began including vaping questions in 2017.

Monitoring the Future is a national tool to assess drug and alcohol use and related attitudes among adolescent students across the United States. This year’s self-reported survey included 42,531 in grades 8, 10, and 12 from 396 public and private schools.

Nicotine vaping increased from 2018 to 2019 across all three grades; past-month nicotine use equated to 1 in 4, 1 in 5, and 1 in 10 (26%, 20%, and 10%) among 12th, 10th, and 8th graders, respectively, according to the survey. Daily nicotine vaping, measured for the first time this year because of public health concerns, was approximately 12% for 12th graders, 7% for 10th graders, and 2% for 8th graders. Daily marijuana vaping, also measured for the first time this year, was approximately 4%, 3%, and 1% among 12th, 10th, and 8th graders, respectively. Additional findings on the rise of vaping by U.S. teenagers were released Dec. 17 in a research letter published online in JAMA (doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.20185).

Meanwhile, positive trends in this year’s survey included a reduction in the misuse of prescription drugs, including OxyContin, Vicodin, and Adderall, and in the use of traditional cigarettes and other tobacco products, as well as alcohol, noted Richard A. Miech, PhD, MPH, of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, principal investigator for Monitoring the Future. However, the challenge of preventing and reducing vaping in teens remains “a whole new uncharted territory,” in part because the design of the vaping devices facilitates discreet use at home and at school, he said.

Physicians and parents have important roles to play in screening for vaping among teens, Dr. Volkow said in a question and answer session. Health care clinicians, including pediatricians and family physicians, “are in a unique position to communicate with their young patients” by educating them about the dangers of vaping, encouraging them to stop if they have started using these devices, and referring them for further treatment if they are showing signs of addiction, she said.

Monitoring the Future was funded by NIDA. The researchers had no disclosures.

Vaping has expanded as a popular method of drug delivery for U.S. teenagers, and one in five students in grades 10 and 12 reported vaping marijuana in the past year, according to results of the 2019 Monitoring the Future survey conducted by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA).

licsiren/iStock/Getty Images

This year’s findings, announced Dec. 18, continue to illustrate “a clear shift in the pattern of drug taking among teenagers,” said NIDA Director Nora D. Volkow, MD, in a teleconference held to review the results.

Use of alcohol and drugs – including opioids and stimulants – continues to decline among teens, but vaping continues its significant rise, with a surge in marijuana vaping this year.

The increase in past-month marijuana vaping among 12th graders, from 7.5% in 2018 to 14% in 2019, represents the second-largest 1-year jump tracked for any substance in the survey’s history, Dr. Volkow said. The largest jump was the increase in past-month nicotine vaping among 12th-graders from 2017-2018.

Past-year marijuana vaping has more than doubled in the past 2 years, with rates this year of 20.8% among 12th-graders, 19.4% among 10th-graders, and 7.0% among 8th-graders.

“It is very unfortunate that we are seeing the steep rise in the use of vaping devices” because the devices deliver drugs in very high concentration, Dr. Volkow said. The growing popularity of vaping “threatens to undo years of progress protecting the health of adolescents in the U.S.,” Dr. Volkow said in a statement. The Monitoring the Future survey began including vaping questions in 2017.

Monitoring the Future is a national tool to assess drug and alcohol use and related attitudes among adolescent students across the United States. This year’s self-reported survey included 42,531 in grades 8, 10, and 12 from 396 public and private schools.

Nicotine vaping increased from 2018 to 2019 across all three grades; past-month nicotine use equated to 1 in 4, 1 in 5, and 1 in 10 (26%, 20%, and 10%) among 12th, 10th, and 8th graders, respectively, according to the survey. Daily nicotine vaping, measured for the first time this year because of public health concerns, was approximately 12% for 12th graders, 7% for 10th graders, and 2% for 8th graders. Daily marijuana vaping, also measured for the first time this year, was approximately 4%, 3%, and 1% among 12th, 10th, and 8th graders, respectively. Additional findings on the rise of vaping by U.S. teenagers were released Dec. 17 in a research letter published online in JAMA (doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.20185).

Meanwhile, positive trends in this year’s survey included a reduction in the misuse of prescription drugs, including OxyContin, Vicodin, and Adderall, and in the use of traditional cigarettes and other tobacco products, as well as alcohol, noted Richard A. Miech, PhD, MPH, of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, principal investigator for Monitoring the Future. However, the challenge of preventing and reducing vaping in teens remains “a whole new uncharted territory,” in part because the design of the vaping devices facilitates discreet use at home and at school, he said.

Physicians and parents have important roles to play in screening for vaping among teens, Dr. Volkow said in a question and answer session. Health care clinicians, including pediatricians and family physicians, “are in a unique position to communicate with their young patients” by educating them about the dangers of vaping, encouraging them to stop if they have started using these devices, and referring them for further treatment if they are showing signs of addiction, she said.

Monitoring the Future was funded by NIDA. The researchers had no disclosures.

SAN ANTONIO – For postmenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative breast cancer that has progressed on aromatase inhibitor therapy, the combination of palbociclib with either exemestane or fulvestrant was not better than capecitabine at delaying progression or inducing clinical responses, results of the phase 3 PEARL trial showed.

At a median follow-up of 13.45 months there was no significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS) for patients treated with either fulvestrant (Faslodex) or exemestane (Aromasin) plus palbociclib (Ibrance) or with capecitabine (Xeloda) alone, nor was there a difference in PFS between patients with mutated or wild-type ESR1, reported Miguel Martin, MD, PhD, from the Gregorio Marañón Health Research Institute in Madrid.

“Palbociclib plus endocrine therapy is one of the standards of care today for patients with prior aromatase inhibitor [therapy] in the metastatic setting, and capecitabine as well is another option for this population, since it produces significant activity and a significant proportion of responses in patients with metastatic breast cancer. But we don’t know actually the relative efficacy of each therapy versus the other,” he said at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium.

The phase 3 PEARL study was a head-to-head comparison of the two regimens in women with hormone receptor (HR)–positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer that had progressed on aromatase inhibitors (AIs).

The study was originally designed to test the combination of palbociclib and exemestane versus capecitabine, and 296 patients were enrolled (cohort 1).

The study was modified in 2016, however, following evidence that mutations in ESR1 are a major mechanism of resistance to AIs in patients with metastatic disease, and that fulvestrant, a selective estrogen receptor down-regulator, did not appear to have cross-resistance to either tamoxifen or AIs, and may be active against tumors with ESR1 mutations. Therefore, a second cohort of 305 patients was enrolled to test palbociclib plus fulvestrant versus capecitabine.

Each cohort included patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer that had recurred within 1 year of completed adjuvant therapy with nonsteroidal AIs, or progression within 1 month of completing adjuvant AIs for advanced disease. Patients could have received one prior line of chemotherapy for metastatic disease, but no prior capecitabine, exemestane (in cohort 1), or fulvestrant (in cohort 2)

In each cohort, patients were stratified by visceral or nonvisceral metastases, prior sensitivity to hormonal therapy (yes or no), and prior chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer, and then randomized on a 1:1 basis to capecitabine 1,250 mg/m² (1,000 mg/m² for patients older than 70 years) twice daily 2 weeks on, 1 week off every 21 days; to palbociclib 125 mg 3 weeks on, 1 week off every 28 days plus exemestane 25 mg daily in cohort 1; or to fulvestrant 500 mg on days 1 and 15 of cycle 1 and then once every 28 days.

The trial did not meet its coprimary endpoints of superior PFS with palbociclib/fulvestrant regardless of ESR1 mutational status, or superior PFS with palbociclib and either partners in patients with ESR1 wild-type tumors.

In cohort 2, after a median follow-up of 13.47 months, the median PFS with palbociclib/fulvestrant was 7.5 months versus 10 months with capecitabine, with a nonsignificant hazard ratio.

Similarly, in cohort 1 (patients with wild-type ESR1), the median PFS at a median follow-up of 18.89 months was 8.0 months with palbociclib plus endocrine therapy versus 10.6 months with capecitabine.

For the secondary endpoint of PFS in the combined cohorts, the median overall PFS after a median 17.64 months of follow-up was 7.4 versus 9.4 months, respectively.

There were no significant differences by intrinsic breast cancer subtypes expect for nonluminal breast cancer, for which capecitabine had a significantly better benefit (P = .008 in cohort 2, and .002 for patients with ESR1 wild type).

Objective response rates in both cohorts trended in favor of capecitabine, but neither trend was statistically significant.

The palbociclib-containing regimens were, however, generally better tolerated than capecitabine, with a lower frequency of treatment discontinuations (3.7% with palbociclib plus endocrine therapy vs. 12.8% with capecitabine) and a smaller proportion of patients with serious adverse events (3.7% vs. 10.4%, respectively).

In the question and response following his presentation, perennial SABCS provocateur Steven “Vogl New York” Vogl, MD, of Montefiore Medical Center asked Dr. Martin: “Did you really give the capecitabine for a median of 18 months because that was the time to progression?”

Dr. Vogl commented that 18 months “is a very long time to keep a patient on drugs that make their palms sore, give them diarrhea, give them rashes, and sore mouths. So were the Spanish doctors particularly smart about reducing the doses?”

Dr. Martin replied that in his experience patients could be maintained on capecitabine for more than 4 years, with dose adjustments for those who develop palmar or plantar problems or other side effects, but “many patients prefer that to alopecia, to vomiting, to IV injections, so in my view capecitabine is a great drug for luminal metastatic breast cancer cases, and we can keep the drug going for many, many months in most patients.”

The study was funded by Pfizer. Dr. Martin disclosed speaker honoraria and consulting fees from Pfizer and others.

SOURCE: Martin M et al. SABCS 2019. Abstract GS2-07

SAN ANTONIO – For postmenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative breast cancer that has progressed on aromatase inhibitor therapy, the combination of palbociclib with either exemestane or fulvestrant was not better than capecitabine at delaying progression or inducing clinical responses, results of the phase 3 PEARL trial showed.

At a median follow-up of 13.45 months there was no significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS) for patients treated with either fulvestrant (Faslodex) or exemestane (Aromasin) plus palbociclib (Ibrance) or with capecitabine (Xeloda) alone, nor was there a difference in PFS between patients with mutated or wild-type ESR1, reported Miguel Martin, MD, PhD, from the Gregorio Marañón Health Research Institute in Madrid.

“Palbociclib plus endocrine therapy is one of the standards of care today for patients with prior aromatase inhibitor [therapy] in the metastatic setting, and capecitabine as well is another option for this population, since it produces significant activity and a significant proportion of responses in patients with metastatic breast cancer. But we don’t know actually the relative efficacy of each therapy versus the other,” he said at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium.

The phase 3 PEARL study was a head-to-head comparison of the two regimens in women with hormone receptor (HR)–positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer that had progressed on aromatase inhibitors (AIs).

The study was originally designed to test the combination of palbociclib and exemestane versus capecitabine, and 296 patients were enrolled (cohort 1).

The study was modified in 2016, however, following evidence that mutations in ESR1 are a major mechanism of resistance to AIs in patients with metastatic disease, and that fulvestrant, a selective estrogen receptor down-regulator, did not appear to have cross-resistance to either tamoxifen or AIs, and may be active against tumors with ESR1 mutations. Therefore, a second cohort of 305 patients was enrolled to test palbociclib plus fulvestrant versus capecitabine.

Each cohort included patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer that had recurred within 1 year of completed adjuvant therapy with nonsteroidal AIs, or progression within 1 month of completing adjuvant AIs for advanced disease. Patients could have received one prior line of chemotherapy for metastatic disease, but no prior capecitabine, exemestane (in cohort 1), or fulvestrant (in cohort 2)

In each cohort, patients were stratified by visceral or nonvisceral metastases, prior sensitivity to hormonal therapy (yes or no), and prior chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer, and then randomized on a 1:1 basis to capecitabine 1,250 mg/m² (1,000 mg/m² for patients older than 70 years) twice daily 2 weeks on, 1 week off every 21 days; to palbociclib 125 mg 3 weeks on, 1 week off every 28 days plus exemestane 25 mg daily in cohort 1; or to fulvestrant 500 mg on days 1 and 15 of cycle 1 and then once every 28 days.

The trial did not meet its coprimary endpoints of superior PFS with palbociclib/fulvestrant regardless of ESR1 mutational status, or superior PFS with palbociclib and either partners in patients with ESR1 wild-type tumors.

In cohort 2, after a median follow-up of 13.47 months, the median PFS with palbociclib/fulvestrant was 7.5 months versus 10 months with capecitabine, with a nonsignificant hazard ratio.

Similarly, in cohort 1 (patients with wild-type ESR1), the median PFS at a median follow-up of 18.89 months was 8.0 months with palbociclib plus endocrine therapy versus 10.6 months with capecitabine.

For the secondary endpoint of PFS in the combined cohorts, the median overall PFS after a median 17.64 months of follow-up was 7.4 versus 9.4 months, respectively.

There were no significant differences by intrinsic breast cancer subtypes expect for nonluminal breast cancer, for which capecitabine had a significantly better benefit (P = .008 in cohort 2, and .002 for patients with ESR1 wild type).

Objective response rates in both cohorts trended in favor of capecitabine, but neither trend was statistically significant.

The palbociclib-containing regimens were, however, generally better tolerated than capecitabine, with a lower frequency of treatment discontinuations (3.7% with palbociclib plus endocrine therapy vs. 12.8% with capecitabine) and a smaller proportion of patients with serious adverse events (3.7% vs. 10.4%, respectively).

In the question and response following his presentation, perennial SABCS provocateur Steven “Vogl New York” Vogl, MD, of Montefiore Medical Center asked Dr. Martin: “Did you really give the capecitabine for a median of 18 months because that was the time to progression?”

Dr. Vogl commented that 18 months “is a very long time to keep a patient on drugs that make their palms sore, give them diarrhea, give them rashes, and sore mouths. So were the Spanish doctors particularly smart about reducing the doses?”

Dr. Martin replied that in his experience patients could be maintained on capecitabine for more than 4 years, with dose adjustments for those who develop palmar or plantar problems or other side effects, but “many patients prefer that to alopecia, to vomiting, to IV injections, so in my view capecitabine is a great drug for luminal metastatic breast cancer cases, and we can keep the drug going for many, many months in most patients.”

The study was funded by Pfizer. Dr. Martin disclosed speaker honoraria and consulting fees from Pfizer and others.

SOURCE: Martin M et al. SABCS 2019. Abstract GS2-07

SAN ANTONIO – For postmenopausal women with hormone receptor–positive, HER2-negative breast cancer that has progressed on aromatase inhibitor therapy, the combination of palbociclib with either exemestane or fulvestrant was not better than capecitabine at delaying progression or inducing clinical responses, results of the phase 3 PEARL trial showed.

At a median follow-up of 13.45 months there was no significant difference in progression-free survival (PFS) for patients treated with either fulvestrant (Faslodex) or exemestane (Aromasin) plus palbociclib (Ibrance) or with capecitabine (Xeloda) alone, nor was there a difference in PFS between patients with mutated or wild-type ESR1, reported Miguel Martin, MD, PhD, from the Gregorio Marañón Health Research Institute in Madrid.

“Palbociclib plus endocrine therapy is one of the standards of care today for patients with prior aromatase inhibitor [therapy] in the metastatic setting, and capecitabine as well is another option for this population, since it produces significant activity and a significant proportion of responses in patients with metastatic breast cancer. But we don’t know actually the relative efficacy of each therapy versus the other,” he said at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium.

The phase 3 PEARL study was a head-to-head comparison of the two regimens in women with hormone receptor (HR)–positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer that had progressed on aromatase inhibitors (AIs).

The study was originally designed to test the combination of palbociclib and exemestane versus capecitabine, and 296 patients were enrolled (cohort 1).

The study was modified in 2016, however, following evidence that mutations in ESR1 are a major mechanism of resistance to AIs in patients with metastatic disease, and that fulvestrant, a selective estrogen receptor down-regulator, did not appear to have cross-resistance to either tamoxifen or AIs, and may be active against tumors with ESR1 mutations. Therefore, a second cohort of 305 patients was enrolled to test palbociclib plus fulvestrant versus capecitabine.

Each cohort included patients with HR-positive, HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer that had recurred within 1 year of completed adjuvant therapy with nonsteroidal AIs, or progression within 1 month of completing adjuvant AIs for advanced disease. Patients could have received one prior line of chemotherapy for metastatic disease, but no prior capecitabine, exemestane (in cohort 1), or fulvestrant (in cohort 2)

In each cohort, patients were stratified by visceral or nonvisceral metastases, prior sensitivity to hormonal therapy (yes or no), and prior chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer, and then randomized on a 1:1 basis to capecitabine 1,250 mg/m² (1,000 mg/m² for patients older than 70 years) twice daily 2 weeks on, 1 week off every 21 days; to palbociclib 125 mg 3 weeks on, 1 week off every 28 days plus exemestane 25 mg daily in cohort 1; or to fulvestrant 500 mg on days 1 and 15 of cycle 1 and then once every 28 days.

The trial did not meet its coprimary endpoints of superior PFS with palbociclib/fulvestrant regardless of ESR1 mutational status, or superior PFS with palbociclib and either partners in patients with ESR1 wild-type tumors.

In cohort 2, after a median follow-up of 13.47 months, the median PFS with palbociclib/fulvestrant was 7.5 months versus 10 months with capecitabine, with a nonsignificant hazard ratio.

Similarly, in cohort 1 (patients with wild-type ESR1), the median PFS at a median follow-up of 18.89 months was 8.0 months with palbociclib plus endocrine therapy versus 10.6 months with capecitabine.

For the secondary endpoint of PFS in the combined cohorts, the median overall PFS after a median 17.64 months of follow-up was 7.4 versus 9.4 months, respectively.

There were no significant differences by intrinsic breast cancer subtypes expect for nonluminal breast cancer, for which capecitabine had a significantly better benefit (P = .008 in cohort 2, and .002 for patients with ESR1 wild type).

Objective response rates in both cohorts trended in favor of capecitabine, but neither trend was statistically significant.

The palbociclib-containing regimens were, however, generally better tolerated than capecitabine, with a lower frequency of treatment discontinuations (3.7% with palbociclib plus endocrine therapy vs. 12.8% with capecitabine) and a smaller proportion of patients with serious adverse events (3.7% vs. 10.4%, respectively).

In the question and response following his presentation, perennial SABCS provocateur Steven “Vogl New York” Vogl, MD, of Montefiore Medical Center asked Dr. Martin: “Did you really give the capecitabine for a median of 18 months because that was the time to progression?”

Dr. Vogl commented that 18 months “is a very long time to keep a patient on drugs that make their palms sore, give them diarrhea, give them rashes, and sore mouths. So were the Spanish doctors particularly smart about reducing the doses?”

Dr. Martin replied that in his experience patients could be maintained on capecitabine for more than 4 years, with dose adjustments for those who develop palmar or plantar problems or other side effects, but “many patients prefer that to alopecia, to vomiting, to IV injections, so in my view capecitabine is a great drug for luminal metastatic breast cancer cases, and we can keep the drug going for many, many months in most patients.”

The study was funded by Pfizer. Dr. Martin disclosed speaker honoraria and consulting fees from Pfizer and others.

SOURCE: Martin M et al. SABCS 2019. Abstract GS2-07

The first time I was sure I was witnessing someone vaping occurred when I saw an alarming cloud of smoke billowing from driver’s side window of the car in front of me. My initial concern was that vehicle was on fire. But none of the other drivers around me seemed concerned and as I pulled up next to the car I could see the driver ostentatiously inhaling deeply in preparation for releasing another monstrous cloud of vapor.

However, you probably have learned, as have I, that most vaping is done furtively. In fact, the pocketability of vaping devices is part of their appeal to teenagers. Hiding a lit cigarette in one’s pocket is something even the most risk-loving adolescent usually won’t attempt. I suspect that regardless of what is in the vapor, the high one can get by putting one over on the school administration by vaping in the school restroom or in the middle of history class is a temptation that many teenagers can’t resist.

Listening to educators, substance abuse counselors, and police officers who have first hand knowledge, it’s clear that vaping is an activity that’s very difficult to detect and police. Where there’s smoke there’s fire, but if it’s just a vapor it is easy to hide.

Part of the problem seems to be that vaping was flying under the radar and expanding rapidly long before educators, parents, and I fear physicians woke up to the severity and magnitude of the problem. And now everybody is playing catchup.

Of course the initial, and as yet unconfirmed, notion that e-cigarettes might provide a viable strategy for tobacco withdrawal has added confusion to the mix. It turns out that vaping can provide many orders of magnitude more nicotine in a small volume than cigarettes, which creates an outsized addiction potential for those more vulnerable users – even with a very short history of use. My experts tell me that this level of addiction has forced them to consider strategies and dosages far beyond those they are accustomed to using with patients whose addiction stems from standard cigarette use.

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].

The first time I was sure I was witnessing someone vaping occurred when I saw an alarming cloud of smoke billowing from driver’s side window of the car in front of me. My initial concern was that vehicle was on fire. But none of the other drivers around me seemed concerned and as I pulled up next to the car I could see the driver ostentatiously inhaling deeply in preparation for releasing another monstrous cloud of vapor.

However, you probably have learned, as have I, that most vaping is done furtively. In fact, the pocketability of vaping devices is part of their appeal to teenagers. Hiding a lit cigarette in one’s pocket is something even the most risk-loving adolescent usually won’t attempt. I suspect that regardless of what is in the vapor, the high one can get by putting one over on the school administration by vaping in the school restroom or in the middle of history class is a temptation that many teenagers can’t resist.

Listening to educators, substance abuse counselors, and police officers who have first hand knowledge, it’s clear that vaping is an activity that’s very difficult to detect and police. Where there’s smoke there’s fire, but if it’s just a vapor it is easy to hide.

Part of the problem seems to be that vaping was flying under the radar and expanding rapidly long before educators, parents, and I fear physicians woke up to the severity and magnitude of the problem. And now everybody is playing catchup.

Of course the initial, and as yet unconfirmed, notion that e-cigarettes might provide a viable strategy for tobacco withdrawal has added confusion to the mix. It turns out that vaping can provide many orders of magnitude more nicotine in a small volume than cigarettes, which creates an outsized addiction potential for those more vulnerable users – even with a very short history of use. My experts tell me that this level of addiction has forced them to consider strategies and dosages far beyond those they are accustomed to using with patients whose addiction stems from standard cigarette use.

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].

The first time I was sure I was witnessing someone vaping occurred when I saw an alarming cloud of smoke billowing from driver’s side window of the car in front of me. My initial concern was that vehicle was on fire. But none of the other drivers around me seemed concerned and as I pulled up next to the car I could see the driver ostentatiously inhaling deeply in preparation for releasing another monstrous cloud of vapor.

However, you probably have learned, as have I, that most vaping is done furtively. In fact, the pocketability of vaping devices is part of their appeal to teenagers. Hiding a lit cigarette in one’s pocket is something even the most risk-loving adolescent usually won’t attempt. I suspect that regardless of what is in the vapor, the high one can get by putting one over on the school administration by vaping in the school restroom or in the middle of history class is a temptation that many teenagers can’t resist.

Listening to educators, substance abuse counselors, and police officers who have first hand knowledge, it’s clear that vaping is an activity that’s very difficult to detect and police. Where there’s smoke there’s fire, but if it’s just a vapor it is easy to hide.

Part of the problem seems to be that vaping was flying under the radar and expanding rapidly long before educators, parents, and I fear physicians woke up to the severity and magnitude of the problem. And now everybody is playing catchup.

Of course the initial, and as yet unconfirmed, notion that e-cigarettes might provide a viable strategy for tobacco withdrawal has added confusion to the mix. It turns out that vaping can provide many orders of magnitude more nicotine in a small volume than cigarettes, which creates an outsized addiction potential for those more vulnerable users – even with a very short history of use. My experts tell me that this level of addiction has forced them to consider strategies and dosages far beyond those they are accustomed to using with patients whose addiction stems from standard cigarette use.

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].

I have written frequently over the last few years on topics related to the sustainability of the hospital medicine practice model. I continue to be concerned by what I see as a confluence of significant trends that are conspiring to challenge hospital medicine’s status quo.

On one hand, the financial pressures on U.S. hospitals are unrelenting, and their willingness or even ability to continue providing significant funding to support their hospital medicine groups is in question. Combine this with hospitalists’ rapidly evolving clinical scope and the ever-increasing demands of physicians in other specialties for hospitalist support, and the result is hospital medicine groups that will continue to grow in size, complexity, and the demand for ever more financial support.

On the other hand, the hospitalists I interact with in my work all over the country seem more stressed out than ever, and many are questioning whether this is a job that can be satisfying and sustainable for a career. Increasing patient complexity, productivity pressures, a lack of resources to address patients’ social issues, a systole-diastole schedule, the frustration of EHRs and other documentation responsibilities, and feeling “dumped on” by physicians in other specialties all contribute to hospitalist job stress.

A quick look at the literature confirms that in 2019 hospitalist burnout is definitely “a thing.” Interestingly, it’s been a thing for a while; the risk of hospitalist burnout was first identified by Hoff, et al., in 2002 (doi: 10.2307/30902462002). My colleague, John Nelson, MD, MHM, has written a number of times about strategies for preventing or mitigating hospitalist burnout.

As these trends converge, the hospital medicine practice model as we know it may be facing an existential crisis. If that sounds overly dramatic, let me say instead that the hospital medicine practice model will need to evolve significantly over the next decade in order to continue to meet patient and institutional needs while remaining both affordable and sustainable for the clinicians who work in it.

In September 2019, SHM’s Multi-Site Leaders Special Interest Group met in Chicago for their second annual Multi-Site Leaders Summit to explore the theme of sustainability in hospital medicine. The participants held robust discussions about coping with our changing practice environment, issues relating to hospitalist burnout and resiliency, innovative staffing models, the role of technology in HM sustainability, and financial sustainability

At the end of the meeting, the group engaged in a visioning exercise designed to move beyond what we are doing today by envisioning what the future of hospital medicine will look like and what interventions will be necessary for us to get from here to there. I’d like to share this visioning exercise with you and encourage you to “play along” by thinking seriously about the questions it poses.
 

Visioning exercise

Feel free to jot down some thoughts as we go through this exercise. But otherwise, just close your eyes and come along for the ride. Imagine yourself sitting at your desk looking at a desk calendar showing today’s date. Watch the pages flip from today, to tomorrow, to the next day, then to next month, and the next, and then to the next year and so on, until we arrive at December 2029.

Imagine that you look up from your desk, and suddenly realize that you aren’t in your office at all, but instead in a huge auditorium where someone is speaking about an award that is going to be announced. It’s crowded and a little stuffy in the auditorium, but people around you are whispering to each other with an air of eager anticipation, their eyes glued to the stage. You realize that the person being introduced up on the podium is the President of the United States, and the award is the Presidential Medal of Freedom, which is only awarded to people or groups who have made “an especially meritorious contribution to the security or national interests of the United States, world peace, cultural, or other significant public or private endeavors.”

Today, the Medal is being awarded to the Society of Hospital Medicine on behalf of all hospital medicine leaders nationally, for their collective accomplishments in saving the specialty of hospital medicine and, by doing so, ensuring that sick people are able to continue receiving the care they need in our nation’s hospitals – and that the hospitals themselves have become reliably safe, efficient, and effective in achieving high quality outcomes.

The President says, “At no time in the history of this award until now have we given this, the highest civilian award in the land, to a whole group of physician leaders across an entire specialty. But the achievements of this group of people in preserving and even enhancing the presence of highly energized, dedicated, capable clinicians in our nation’s hospitals against the significant odds they have faced over the last 10 years is nothing short of extraordinary.” There is a standing ovation, as people jump up out of their chairs to cheer and applaud. When the applause finally dies down, the President goes on to list all the accomplishments that made this group of leaders deserving. Listen to what she is saying. Fill it in in your own mind. What is it that this group has accomplished?

[Brief silence]

Up on a huge screen beside the stage, a video starts. In it, there are several hospital and physician executives in a focus group, and one exec says, “The thing that is great about what these leaders have accomplished in the field of hospital medicine is…” Fill it in – what did that executive say? Another leader jumps in: “That’s all fine and wonderful, but the thing that really makes hospital medicine stand out today compared to where they were 10 years ago is…” Listen to what these executives are saying. What accomplishments are they praising?

The video then moves on to show a focus group of recent hospital patients. One patient says, “10 years ago when my mom was in the hospital, the poor hospitalists caring for her seemed completely overwhelmed and burnt out, and the whole care system seemed fragmented and inefficient; but my own recent hospital experience was so different because…” Additional patients chime in, talking about how confident they felt about the care they received in the hospital and the reasons for that. What is it these patients are describing?

SHM’s CEO gets up to accept the award and explains that 10 years ago, a group of multi-site hospital medicine leaders from across the country came together to begin addressing the issue of sustainability; this led to a formal process for developing a vision and a plan for the future of hospital medicine, and the execution of that plan eventually resulted in the outcomes recognized by this award. She acknowledges that over the years many people questioned whether the hospital medicine model should even continue to exist or whether some other model for inpatient care should be adopted. She talks about all the compelling reasons that supported the continued existence of the specialty of hospital medicine. What are some of the reasons she listed? The SHM CEO goes on to describe some of the key things that were done to address the issues associated with sustainability of the hospital medicine practice model. Listen to what she says; what was it that SHM and the hospital leaders it represents did?

As you are leaving the auditorium, you overhear a group of mid-career staff hospitalists talking. They are saying that they didn’t originally believe the specialty would actually change, and they weren’t sure if they could do this job for a career – but that it did change. They begin talking about what it feels like to work as a hospitalist now, and how these changes have improved their lives. Listen to what they are saying. How does it feel to work as a hospitalist?

As you leave the auditorium and go back to your desk, you sit down to record some of the things you heard. What was it the President of the US said as she presented the Presidential Medal of Freedom? Why did SHM and the hospital medicine leaders it represents deserve the award? What was it that the SHM CEO said was done to bring about the successful changes? What did the staff hospitalists say about working in the specialty?

Whenever you are ready, take a minute to jot down the specifics that came to mind as you read through this exercise. If you are willing to share your thoughts about sustainability in hospital medicine, I’d love to hear from you. Feel free to email me directly at [email protected].

Let’s build the foundation for a sustainable future for our specialty.

Ms. Flores is a partner at Nelson Flores Hospital Medicine Consultants, La Quinta, Calif. She serves on SHM’s Practice Analysis Committee, and helps to coordinate SHM’s bi-annual State of Hospital Medicine Survey. This article appeared originally in SHM’s official blog The Hospital Leader.

I have written frequently over the last few years on topics related to the sustainability of the hospital medicine practice model. I continue to be concerned by what I see as a confluence of significant trends that are conspiring to challenge hospital medicine’s status quo.

On one hand, the financial pressures on U.S. hospitals are unrelenting, and their willingness or even ability to continue providing significant funding to support their hospital medicine groups is in question. Combine this with hospitalists’ rapidly evolving clinical scope and the ever-increasing demands of physicians in other specialties for hospitalist support, and the result is hospital medicine groups that will continue to grow in size, complexity, and the demand for ever more financial support.

On the other hand, the hospitalists I interact with in my work all over the country seem more stressed out than ever, and many are questioning whether this is a job that can be satisfying and sustainable for a career. Increasing patient complexity, productivity pressures, a lack of resources to address patients’ social issues, a systole-diastole schedule, the frustration of EHRs and other documentation responsibilities, and feeling “dumped on” by physicians in other specialties all contribute to hospitalist job stress.

A quick look at the literature confirms that in 2019 hospitalist burnout is definitely “a thing.” Interestingly, it’s been a thing for a while; the risk of hospitalist burnout was first identified by Hoff, et al., in 2002 (doi: 10.2307/30902462002). My colleague, John Nelson, MD, MHM, has written a number of times about strategies for preventing or mitigating hospitalist burnout.

As these trends converge, the hospital medicine practice model as we know it may be facing an existential crisis. If that sounds overly dramatic, let me say instead that the hospital medicine practice model will need to evolve significantly over the next decade in order to continue to meet patient and institutional needs while remaining both affordable and sustainable for the clinicians who work in it.

In September 2019, SHM’s Multi-Site Leaders Special Interest Group met in Chicago for their second annual Multi-Site Leaders Summit to explore the theme of sustainability in hospital medicine. The participants held robust discussions about coping with our changing practice environment, issues relating to hospitalist burnout and resiliency, innovative staffing models, the role of technology in HM sustainability, and financial sustainability

At the end of the meeting, the group engaged in a visioning exercise designed to move beyond what we are doing today by envisioning what the future of hospital medicine will look like and what interventions will be necessary for us to get from here to there. I’d like to share this visioning exercise with you and encourage you to “play along” by thinking seriously about the questions it poses.
 

Visioning exercise

Feel free to jot down some thoughts as we go through this exercise. But otherwise, just close your eyes and come along for the ride. Imagine yourself sitting at your desk looking at a desk calendar showing today’s date. Watch the pages flip from today, to tomorrow, to the next day, then to next month, and the next, and then to the next year and so on, until we arrive at December 2029.

Imagine that you look up from your desk, and suddenly realize that you aren’t in your office at all, but instead in a huge auditorium where someone is speaking about an award that is going to be announced. It’s crowded and a little stuffy in the auditorium, but people around you are whispering to each other with an air of eager anticipation, their eyes glued to the stage. You realize that the person being introduced up on the podium is the President of the United States, and the award is the Presidential Medal of Freedom, which is only awarded to people or groups who have made “an especially meritorious contribution to the security or national interests of the United States, world peace, cultural, or other significant public or private endeavors.”

Today, the Medal is being awarded to the Society of Hospital Medicine on behalf of all hospital medicine leaders nationally, for their collective accomplishments in saving the specialty of hospital medicine and, by doing so, ensuring that sick people are able to continue receiving the care they need in our nation’s hospitals – and that the hospitals themselves have become reliably safe, efficient, and effective in achieving high quality outcomes.

The President says, “At no time in the history of this award until now have we given this, the highest civilian award in the land, to a whole group of physician leaders across an entire specialty. But the achievements of this group of people in preserving and even enhancing the presence of highly energized, dedicated, capable clinicians in our nation’s hospitals against the significant odds they have faced over the last 10 years is nothing short of extraordinary.” There is a standing ovation, as people jump up out of their chairs to cheer and applaud. When the applause finally dies down, the President goes on to list all the accomplishments that made this group of leaders deserving. Listen to what she is saying. Fill it in in your own mind. What is it that this group has accomplished?

[Brief silence]

Up on a huge screen beside the stage, a video starts. In it, there are several hospital and physician executives in a focus group, and one exec says, “The thing that is great about what these leaders have accomplished in the field of hospital medicine is…” Fill it in – what did that executive say? Another leader jumps in: “That’s all fine and wonderful, but the thing that really makes hospital medicine stand out today compared to where they were 10 years ago is…” Listen to what these executives are saying. What accomplishments are they praising?

The video then moves on to show a focus group of recent hospital patients. One patient says, “10 years ago when my mom was in the hospital, the poor hospitalists caring for her seemed completely overwhelmed and burnt out, and the whole care system seemed fragmented and inefficient; but my own recent hospital experience was so different because…” Additional patients chime in, talking about how confident they felt about the care they received in the hospital and the reasons for that. What is it these patients are describing?

SHM’s CEO gets up to accept the award and explains that 10 years ago, a group of multi-site hospital medicine leaders from across the country came together to begin addressing the issue of sustainability; this led to a formal process for developing a vision and a plan for the future of hospital medicine, and the execution of that plan eventually resulted in the outcomes recognized by this award. She acknowledges that over the years many people questioned whether the hospital medicine model should even continue to exist or whether some other model for inpatient care should be adopted. She talks about all the compelling reasons that supported the continued existence of the specialty of hospital medicine. What are some of the reasons she listed? The SHM CEO goes on to describe some of the key things that were done to address the issues associated with sustainability of the hospital medicine practice model. Listen to what she says; what was it that SHM and the hospital leaders it represents did?

As you are leaving the auditorium, you overhear a group of mid-career staff hospitalists talking. They are saying that they didn’t originally believe the specialty would actually change, and they weren’t sure if they could do this job for a career – but that it did change. They begin talking about what it feels like to work as a hospitalist now, and how these changes have improved their lives. Listen to what they are saying. How does it feel to work as a hospitalist?

As you leave the auditorium and go back to your desk, you sit down to record some of the things you heard. What was it the President of the US said as she presented the Presidential Medal of Freedom? Why did SHM and the hospital medicine leaders it represents deserve the award? What was it that the SHM CEO said was done to bring about the successful changes? What did the staff hospitalists say about working in the specialty?

Whenever you are ready, take a minute to jot down the specifics that came to mind as you read through this exercise. If you are willing to share your thoughts about sustainability in hospital medicine, I’d love to hear from you. Feel free to email me directly at [email protected].

Let’s build the foundation for a sustainable future for our specialty.

Ms. Flores is a partner at Nelson Flores Hospital Medicine Consultants, La Quinta, Calif. She serves on SHM’s Practice Analysis Committee, and helps to coordinate SHM’s bi-annual State of Hospital Medicine Survey. This article appeared originally in SHM’s official blog The Hospital Leader.

I have written frequently over the last few years on topics related to the sustainability of the hospital medicine practice model. I continue to be concerned by what I see as a confluence of significant trends that are conspiring to challenge hospital medicine’s status quo.

On one hand, the financial pressures on U.S. hospitals are unrelenting, and their willingness or even ability to continue providing significant funding to support their hospital medicine groups is in question. Combine this with hospitalists’ rapidly evolving clinical scope and the ever-increasing demands of physicians in other specialties for hospitalist support, and the result is hospital medicine groups that will continue to grow in size, complexity, and the demand for ever more financial support.

On the other hand, the hospitalists I interact with in my work all over the country seem more stressed out than ever, and many are questioning whether this is a job that can be satisfying and sustainable for a career. Increasing patient complexity, productivity pressures, a lack of resources to address patients’ social issues, a systole-diastole schedule, the frustration of EHRs and other documentation responsibilities, and feeling “dumped on” by physicians in other specialties all contribute to hospitalist job stress.

A quick look at the literature confirms that in 2019 hospitalist burnout is definitely “a thing.” Interestingly, it’s been a thing for a while; the risk of hospitalist burnout was first identified by Hoff, et al., in 2002 (doi: 10.2307/30902462002). My colleague, John Nelson, MD, MHM, has written a number of times about strategies for preventing or mitigating hospitalist burnout.

As these trends converge, the hospital medicine practice model as we know it may be facing an existential crisis. If that sounds overly dramatic, let me say instead that the hospital medicine practice model will need to evolve significantly over the next decade in order to continue to meet patient and institutional needs while remaining both affordable and sustainable for the clinicians who work in it.

In September 2019, SHM’s Multi-Site Leaders Special Interest Group met in Chicago for their second annual Multi-Site Leaders Summit to explore the theme of sustainability in hospital medicine. The participants held robust discussions about coping with our changing practice environment, issues relating to hospitalist burnout and resiliency, innovative staffing models, the role of technology in HM sustainability, and financial sustainability

At the end of the meeting, the group engaged in a visioning exercise designed to move beyond what we are doing today by envisioning what the future of hospital medicine will look like and what interventions will be necessary for us to get from here to there. I’d like to share this visioning exercise with you and encourage you to “play along” by thinking seriously about the questions it poses.
 

Visioning exercise

Feel free to jot down some thoughts as we go through this exercise. But otherwise, just close your eyes and come along for the ride. Imagine yourself sitting at your desk looking at a desk calendar showing today’s date. Watch the pages flip from today, to tomorrow, to the next day, then to next month, and the next, and then to the next year and so on, until we arrive at December 2029.

Imagine that you look up from your desk, and suddenly realize that you aren’t in your office at all, but instead in a huge auditorium where someone is speaking about an award that is going to be announced. It’s crowded and a little stuffy in the auditorium, but people around you are whispering to each other with an air of eager anticipation, their eyes glued to the stage. You realize that the person being introduced up on the podium is the President of the United States, and the award is the Presidential Medal of Freedom, which is only awarded to people or groups who have made “an especially meritorious contribution to the security or national interests of the United States, world peace, cultural, or other significant public or private endeavors.”

Today, the Medal is being awarded to the Society of Hospital Medicine on behalf of all hospital medicine leaders nationally, for their collective accomplishments in saving the specialty of hospital medicine and, by doing so, ensuring that sick people are able to continue receiving the care they need in our nation’s hospitals – and that the hospitals themselves have become reliably safe, efficient, and effective in achieving high quality outcomes.

The President says, “At no time in the history of this award until now have we given this, the highest civilian award in the land, to a whole group of physician leaders across an entire specialty. But the achievements of this group of people in preserving and even enhancing the presence of highly energized, dedicated, capable clinicians in our nation’s hospitals against the significant odds they have faced over the last 10 years is nothing short of extraordinary.” There is a standing ovation, as people jump up out of their chairs to cheer and applaud. When the applause finally dies down, the President goes on to list all the accomplishments that made this group of leaders deserving. Listen to what she is saying. Fill it in in your own mind. What is it that this group has accomplished?

[Brief silence]

Up on a huge screen beside the stage, a video starts. In it, there are several hospital and physician executives in a focus group, and one exec says, “The thing that is great about what these leaders have accomplished in the field of hospital medicine is…” Fill it in – what did that executive say? Another leader jumps in: “That’s all fine and wonderful, but the thing that really makes hospital medicine stand out today compared to where they were 10 years ago is…” Listen to what these executives are saying. What accomplishments are they praising?

The video then moves on to show a focus group of recent hospital patients. One patient says, “10 years ago when my mom was in the hospital, the poor hospitalists caring for her seemed completely overwhelmed and burnt out, and the whole care system seemed fragmented and inefficient; but my own recent hospital experience was so different because…” Additional patients chime in, talking about how confident they felt about the care they received in the hospital and the reasons for that. What is it these patients are describing?

SHM’s CEO gets up to accept the award and explains that 10 years ago, a group of multi-site hospital medicine leaders from across the country came together to begin addressing the issue of sustainability; this led to a formal process for developing a vision and a plan for the future of hospital medicine, and the execution of that plan eventually resulted in the outcomes recognized by this award. She acknowledges that over the years many people questioned whether the hospital medicine model should even continue to exist or whether some other model for inpatient care should be adopted. She talks about all the compelling reasons that supported the continued existence of the specialty of hospital medicine. What are some of the reasons she listed? The SHM CEO goes on to describe some of the key things that were done to address the issues associated with sustainability of the hospital medicine practice model. Listen to what she says; what was it that SHM and the hospital leaders it represents did?

As you are leaving the auditorium, you overhear a group of mid-career staff hospitalists talking. They are saying that they didn’t originally believe the specialty would actually change, and they weren’t sure if they could do this job for a career – but that it did change. They begin talking about what it feels like to work as a hospitalist now, and how these changes have improved their lives. Listen to what they are saying. How does it feel to work as a hospitalist?

As you leave the auditorium and go back to your desk, you sit down to record some of the things you heard. What was it the President of the US said as she presented the Presidential Medal of Freedom? Why did SHM and the hospital medicine leaders it represents deserve the award? What was it that the SHM CEO said was done to bring about the successful changes? What did the staff hospitalists say about working in the specialty?

Whenever you are ready, take a minute to jot down the specifics that came to mind as you read through this exercise. If you are willing to share your thoughts about sustainability in hospital medicine, I’d love to hear from you. Feel free to email me directly at [email protected].

Let’s build the foundation for a sustainable future for our specialty.

Ms. Flores is a partner at Nelson Flores Hospital Medicine Consultants, La Quinta, Calif. She serves on SHM’s Practice Analysis Committee, and helps to coordinate SHM’s bi-annual State of Hospital Medicine Survey. This article appeared originally in SHM’s official blog The Hospital Leader.

In North America, breakfast is the most personal of all the traditional daily meals and usually the one at which people show the least amount of day-to-day variation.

FluxFactory/E+

For example, since retiring from active practice I eat three scrambled eggs and bowl of fresh fruit every morning (yes, I have my lipid screen done annually and it’s fine). When I was a child there were stretches measuring in years during which I would eat the same cold cereal and drink a glass of orange juice. As an adolescent trying to bulk up for football, there was a breakfast-in-a-glass that I drank along with the cereal every morning. There was the frozen waffle decade.

When I was a busy general pediatrician, the meals were short on preparation and equally short on variety. But I always had something to eat before heading out for the day. That’s what my folks did, and that’s the pattern my wife and I programmed into our children. I think my dietary history is not unique. Most people don’t have time for a complex breakfast, and in many cases, they aren’t feeling terribly adventuresome when it comes to food at 6 or 7 in the morning. Breakfast is more of a habit than an event to satisfy one’s hunger. Several generations ago, breakfast was a big deal. Men (and occasionally women) were headed out for a day of demanding physical labor and stoking the furnace at the beginning of the day made sense. In farm families, breakfast was a major meal after the morning chores were completed. Those Norman Rockwellesque days are behind us, and breakfast has receded into a minor nutritional role.

For many adults, it’s just something to chew on with a cup of a stimulant liquid. In some families, breakfast has disappeared completely. For as long as there have been dietitians and nutritionists, we have been told that breakfast can be the most important meal of the day. And for a child, the failure to eat breakfast could jeopardize his or her ability to perform in school. I guess at face value this dictum makes sense, but I’ve never been terribly impressed with the evidence supporting it. A recent study from England has gotten me thinking about the whole issue of breakfast and school performance again (“associations between habitual school-day breakfast consumption frequency and academic performance in British adolescents.” Front Public Health. 2019 Nov 20. doi. 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00283). A trio of researchers at the Human Appetite Research Unit of the School of Psychology, University of Leeds (England), found that in the study group of nearly 300 adolescents aged 16-18 years, the students who frequently skipped breakfast performed more poorly on a battery of standardized national tests. Well, I guess we have to chalk another one up for the dietitians and nutritionists. But let’s think this through again. The authors observe in the discussion of their results that “breakfast quality was not considered in the analysis and therefore conclusions regarding what aspects of breakfast are correlated with academic performance cannot be drawn.”

Maybe it’s not the food consumed at breakfast but merely taking part in the event itself that is associated with better school performance. Could it be that families who don’t give breakfast a priority also don’t prioritize school work? Maybe teenagers with poor sleep hygiene who are habitually difficult to awaken in the morning don’t have time to eat breakfast. It is likely their sleep deprivation is more of a factor in their school performance than the small nutritional deficit that they have incurred by not eating breakfast. The study that might answer these questions hasn’t been done yet. And maybe it doesn’t need to be done. We don’t need to be asking children what they have for breakfast. But we should be entering into a dialogue that begins with “Why don’t you have breakfast?” The answers may lead into a productive discussion with the family about more important contributors to poor school performance.
 

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].

In North America, breakfast is the most personal of all the traditional daily meals and usually the one at which people show the least amount of day-to-day variation.

FluxFactory/E+

For example, since retiring from active practice I eat three scrambled eggs and bowl of fresh fruit every morning (yes, I have my lipid screen done annually and it’s fine). When I was a child there were stretches measuring in years during which I would eat the same cold cereal and drink a glass of orange juice. As an adolescent trying to bulk up for football, there was a breakfast-in-a-glass that I drank along with the cereal every morning. There was the frozen waffle decade.

When I was a busy general pediatrician, the meals were short on preparation and equally short on variety. But I always had something to eat before heading out for the day. That’s what my folks did, and that’s the pattern my wife and I programmed into our children. I think my dietary history is not unique. Most people don’t have time for a complex breakfast, and in many cases, they aren’t feeling terribly adventuresome when it comes to food at 6 or 7 in the morning. Breakfast is more of a habit than an event to satisfy one’s hunger. Several generations ago, breakfast was a big deal. Men (and occasionally women) were headed out for a day of demanding physical labor and stoking the furnace at the beginning of the day made sense. In farm families, breakfast was a major meal after the morning chores were completed. Those Norman Rockwellesque days are behind us, and breakfast has receded into a minor nutritional role.

For many adults, it’s just something to chew on with a cup of a stimulant liquid. In some families, breakfast has disappeared completely. For as long as there have been dietitians and nutritionists, we have been told that breakfast can be the most important meal of the day. And for a child, the failure to eat breakfast could jeopardize his or her ability to perform in school. I guess at face value this dictum makes sense, but I’ve never been terribly impressed with the evidence supporting it. A recent study from England has gotten me thinking about the whole issue of breakfast and school performance again (“associations between habitual school-day breakfast consumption frequency and academic performance in British adolescents.” Front Public Health. 2019 Nov 20. doi. 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00283). A trio of researchers at the Human Appetite Research Unit of the School of Psychology, University of Leeds (England), found that in the study group of nearly 300 adolescents aged 16-18 years, the students who frequently skipped breakfast performed more poorly on a battery of standardized national tests. Well, I guess we have to chalk another one up for the dietitians and nutritionists. But let’s think this through again. The authors observe in the discussion of their results that “breakfast quality was not considered in the analysis and therefore conclusions regarding what aspects of breakfast are correlated with academic performance cannot be drawn.”

Maybe it’s not the food consumed at breakfast but merely taking part in the event itself that is associated with better school performance. Could it be that families who don’t give breakfast a priority also don’t prioritize school work? Maybe teenagers with poor sleep hygiene who are habitually difficult to awaken in the morning don’t have time to eat breakfast. It is likely their sleep deprivation is more of a factor in their school performance than the small nutritional deficit that they have incurred by not eating breakfast. The study that might answer these questions hasn’t been done yet. And maybe it doesn’t need to be done. We don’t need to be asking children what they have for breakfast. But we should be entering into a dialogue that begins with “Why don’t you have breakfast?” The answers may lead into a productive discussion with the family about more important contributors to poor school performance.
 

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].

In North America, breakfast is the most personal of all the traditional daily meals and usually the one at which people show the least amount of day-to-day variation.

FluxFactory/E+

For example, since retiring from active practice I eat three scrambled eggs and bowl of fresh fruit every morning (yes, I have my lipid screen done annually and it’s fine). When I was a child there were stretches measuring in years during which I would eat the same cold cereal and drink a glass of orange juice. As an adolescent trying to bulk up for football, there was a breakfast-in-a-glass that I drank along with the cereal every morning. There was the frozen waffle decade.

When I was a busy general pediatrician, the meals were short on preparation and equally short on variety. But I always had something to eat before heading out for the day. That’s what my folks did, and that’s the pattern my wife and I programmed into our children. I think my dietary history is not unique. Most people don’t have time for a complex breakfast, and in many cases, they aren’t feeling terribly adventuresome when it comes to food at 6 or 7 in the morning. Breakfast is more of a habit than an event to satisfy one’s hunger. Several generations ago, breakfast was a big deal. Men (and occasionally women) were headed out for a day of demanding physical labor and stoking the furnace at the beginning of the day made sense. In farm families, breakfast was a major meal after the morning chores were completed. Those Norman Rockwellesque days are behind us, and breakfast has receded into a minor nutritional role.

For many adults, it’s just something to chew on with a cup of a stimulant liquid. In some families, breakfast has disappeared completely. For as long as there have been dietitians and nutritionists, we have been told that breakfast can be the most important meal of the day. And for a child, the failure to eat breakfast could jeopardize his or her ability to perform in school. I guess at face value this dictum makes sense, but I’ve never been terribly impressed with the evidence supporting it. A recent study from England has gotten me thinking about the whole issue of breakfast and school performance again (“associations between habitual school-day breakfast consumption frequency and academic performance in British adolescents.” Front Public Health. 2019 Nov 20. doi. 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00283). A trio of researchers at the Human Appetite Research Unit of the School of Psychology, University of Leeds (England), found that in the study group of nearly 300 adolescents aged 16-18 years, the students who frequently skipped breakfast performed more poorly on a battery of standardized national tests. Well, I guess we have to chalk another one up for the dietitians and nutritionists. But let’s think this through again. The authors observe in the discussion of their results that “breakfast quality was not considered in the analysis and therefore conclusions regarding what aspects of breakfast are correlated with academic performance cannot be drawn.”

Maybe it’s not the food consumed at breakfast but merely taking part in the event itself that is associated with better school performance. Could it be that families who don’t give breakfast a priority also don’t prioritize school work? Maybe teenagers with poor sleep hygiene who are habitually difficult to awaken in the morning don’t have time to eat breakfast. It is likely their sleep deprivation is more of a factor in their school performance than the small nutritional deficit that they have incurred by not eating breakfast. The study that might answer these questions hasn’t been done yet. And maybe it doesn’t need to be done. We don’t need to be asking children what they have for breakfast. But we should be entering into a dialogue that begins with “Why don’t you have breakfast?” The answers may lead into a productive discussion with the family about more important contributors to poor school performance.
 

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at [email protected].

It’s almost a New Year and a good time to look back and reflect on the past year. Here are seven things I am grateful for.

The wildlife in my backyard provides endless entertainment. Not only the birds, rabbits, squirrels, raccoons, and skunks, but turkey, red fox, coyote, hawk, and even a mink. At some point, I quit buying koi for the pond and substituted dime gold fish. Of course, we cannot overlook the deer, who trash my shrubs, eat and grind the bark off my baby trees, consume my garden (don’t they know tomato plants are related to deadly nightshade?), and shed ticks. They watch me with calm indifference, even when I shout at them.

Most folks hate cold weather, but it kills the mosquitoes and stink bugs, and allows me to build mesmerizing fires. It is time to clean the yard, turn over the garden, plant new things, all without breaking much of a sweat. It is almost time to empty the compost pile onto the garden mixed with the ashes from the fire pit.

Last year’s tomato crop started late but was a blockbuster. I plant heirlooms grafted onto resistant rootstock (territorial seed company) placed under walls of water in April. I cage them up high. I like to stand in the tomato jungle in high summer, invisible for a few minutes, and eat the little cherry tomatoes and think about nothing but how perfectly the sweetness and tartness is balanced. I still have a few on the kitchen counter making that crucial, very late, decision on whether to ripen or rot.

The U.S. Navy cannot be thanked enough for taking my defiant teenage boy and molding him into what is starting to resemble a fine young man. The Navy is what he needed.

I give much professional credit to my office staff and my patients. I really haven’t run the office for years; it has its own rhythm and knowledge. You spend more waking hours there than at home, so being fun and entertaining is important. That said, the hiring and management of employees is the most difficult part of running a small office. The patients generally know to come in sooner rather than later if they start growing something ugly. And I have also been blessed with good health, mandatory for maintaining a small office. It’s been a good ride.

My wife is quiet when I am loud, reserved when I am bombastic, an only child matched with a middle. She wears a child’s size bicycle helmet, but her head is packed with brains. She knows millions of things I don’t. She is terribly organized. I float my crazy ideas past her daily and leave with punctured remnants to patch together into a better weave. We spend all our free time together, which is the way it ought to be.

Finally, of course, I am grateful for my specialty of dermatology. I kind of wandered into dermatology after internal medicine, and after seriously considering cardiology. It is a happy and joyous specialty with enough cures and successes to keep gloom and hopelessness at bay. I look forward to going to work and get great satisfaction from my work. I have continued to improve in this field, which gives so much more than it takes.

So enjoy the New Year! Take time to build a roaring fire, buy quirky gifts for your staff, get your spouses or significant others whatever they want, and enjoy your specialty as a dermatologist. You are in one of the best places in the world.
 

Dr. Coldiron is in private practice but maintains a clinical assistant professorship at the University of Cincinnati. He cares for patients, teaches medical students and residents, and has several active clinical research projects. Dr. Coldiron is the author of more than 80 scientific letters, papers, and several book chapters, and he speaks frequently on a variety of topics. He is a past president of the American Academy of Dermatology. Write to him at [email protected].

It’s almost a New Year and a good time to look back and reflect on the past year. Here are seven things I am grateful for.

The wildlife in my backyard provides endless entertainment. Not only the birds, rabbits, squirrels, raccoons, and skunks, but turkey, red fox, coyote, hawk, and even a mink. At some point, I quit buying koi for the pond and substituted dime gold fish. Of course, we cannot overlook the deer, who trash my shrubs, eat and grind the bark off my baby trees, consume my garden (don’t they know tomato plants are related to deadly nightshade?), and shed ticks. They watch me with calm indifference, even when I shout at them.

Most folks hate cold weather, but it kills the mosquitoes and stink bugs, and allows me to build mesmerizing fires. It is time to clean the yard, turn over the garden, plant new things, all without breaking much of a sweat. It is almost time to empty the compost pile onto the garden mixed with the ashes from the fire pit.

Last year’s tomato crop started late but was a blockbuster. I plant heirlooms grafted onto resistant rootstock (territorial seed company) placed under walls of water in April. I cage them up high. I like to stand in the tomato jungle in high summer, invisible for a few minutes, and eat the little cherry tomatoes and think about nothing but how perfectly the sweetness and tartness is balanced. I still have a few on the kitchen counter making that crucial, very late, decision on whether to ripen or rot.

The U.S. Navy cannot be thanked enough for taking my defiant teenage boy and molding him into what is starting to resemble a fine young man. The Navy is what he needed.

I give much professional credit to my office staff and my patients. I really haven’t run the office for years; it has its own rhythm and knowledge. You spend more waking hours there than at home, so being fun and entertaining is important. That said, the hiring and management of employees is the most difficult part of running a small office. The patients generally know to come in sooner rather than later if they start growing something ugly. And I have also been blessed with good health, mandatory for maintaining a small office. It’s been a good ride.

My wife is quiet when I am loud, reserved when I am bombastic, an only child matched with a middle. She wears a child’s size bicycle helmet, but her head is packed with brains. She knows millions of things I don’t. She is terribly organized. I float my crazy ideas past her daily and leave with punctured remnants to patch together into a better weave. We spend all our free time together, which is the way it ought to be.

Finally, of course, I am grateful for my specialty of dermatology. I kind of wandered into dermatology after internal medicine, and after seriously considering cardiology. It is a happy and joyous specialty with enough cures and successes to keep gloom and hopelessness at bay. I look forward to going to work and get great satisfaction from my work. I have continued to improve in this field, which gives so much more than it takes.

So enjoy the New Year! Take time to build a roaring fire, buy quirky gifts for your staff, get your spouses or significant others whatever they want, and enjoy your specialty as a dermatologist. You are in one of the best places in the world.
 

Dr. Coldiron is in private practice but maintains a clinical assistant professorship at the University of Cincinnati. He cares for patients, teaches medical students and residents, and has several active clinical research projects. Dr. Coldiron is the author of more than 80 scientific letters, papers, and several book chapters, and he speaks frequently on a variety of topics. He is a past president of the American Academy of Dermatology. Write to him at [email protected].

It’s almost a New Year and a good time to look back and reflect on the past year. Here are seven things I am grateful for.

The wildlife in my backyard provides endless entertainment. Not only the birds, rabbits, squirrels, raccoons, and skunks, but turkey, red fox, coyote, hawk, and even a mink. At some point, I quit buying koi for the pond and substituted dime gold fish. Of course, we cannot overlook the deer, who trash my shrubs, eat and grind the bark off my baby trees, consume my garden (don’t they know tomato plants are related to deadly nightshade?), and shed ticks. They watch me with calm indifference, even when I shout at them.

Most folks hate cold weather, but it kills the mosquitoes and stink bugs, and allows me to build mesmerizing fires. It is time to clean the yard, turn over the garden, plant new things, all without breaking much of a sweat. It is almost time to empty the compost pile onto the garden mixed with the ashes from the fire pit.

Last year’s tomato crop started late but was a blockbuster. I plant heirlooms grafted onto resistant rootstock (territorial seed company) placed under walls of water in April. I cage them up high. I like to stand in the tomato jungle in high summer, invisible for a few minutes, and eat the little cherry tomatoes and think about nothing but how perfectly the sweetness and tartness is balanced. I still have a few on the kitchen counter making that crucial, very late, decision on whether to ripen or rot.

The U.S. Navy cannot be thanked enough for taking my defiant teenage boy and molding him into what is starting to resemble a fine young man. The Navy is what he needed.

I give much professional credit to my office staff and my patients. I really haven’t run the office for years; it has its own rhythm and knowledge. You spend more waking hours there than at home, so being fun and entertaining is important. That said, the hiring and management of employees is the most difficult part of running a small office. The patients generally know to come in sooner rather than later if they start growing something ugly. And I have also been blessed with good health, mandatory for maintaining a small office. It’s been a good ride.

My wife is quiet when I am loud, reserved when I am bombastic, an only child matched with a middle. She wears a child’s size bicycle helmet, but her head is packed with brains. She knows millions of things I don’t. She is terribly organized. I float my crazy ideas past her daily and leave with punctured remnants to patch together into a better weave. We spend all our free time together, which is the way it ought to be.

Finally, of course, I am grateful for my specialty of dermatology. I kind of wandered into dermatology after internal medicine, and after seriously considering cardiology. It is a happy and joyous specialty with enough cures and successes to keep gloom and hopelessness at bay. I look forward to going to work and get great satisfaction from my work. I have continued to improve in this field, which gives so much more than it takes.

So enjoy the New Year! Take time to build a roaring fire, buy quirky gifts for your staff, get your spouses or significant others whatever they want, and enjoy your specialty as a dermatologist. You are in one of the best places in the world.
 

Dr. Coldiron is in private practice but maintains a clinical assistant professorship at the University of Cincinnati. He cares for patients, teaches medical students and residents, and has several active clinical research projects. Dr. Coldiron is the author of more than 80 scientific letters, papers, and several book chapters, and he speaks frequently on a variety of topics. He is a past president of the American Academy of Dermatology. Write to him at [email protected].