In this edition of “How I will treat my next patient,” I take a look at recent studies that examined ways to predict important outcomes in two very different settings, acute leukemia and advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). They share the virtue of helping cancer specialists to increase their vigilance for clinically relevant complications and situations and to educate patients and families.

VTE risk in acute leukemia

The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients depends upon multiple patient-, tumor-, anatomic-, and treatment-related factors. The Khorana score has become an accepted standard for predicting the risks of VTE and assessing the relative value of various anticoagulants in cancer patients. However, the only hematologic malignancy that is specifically listed among the primary cancer sites in the Khorana score is “lymphoma.” VTE can develop during treatment for acute leukemia, especially among patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

At the 2019 annual congress of the European Hematology Association, Alejandro Lazo-Langer, MD, and his colleagues proposed a scoring system to quantify the risks of VTE based on a retrospective cohort study of more than 500 acute leukemia patients, diagnosed from 2006-2017. They identified 77 patients with a VTE event, with a median time from diagnosis to VTE of 64 days. Among 20 possible predictive factors, 3 emerged in the final multivariate model – platelet count greater than 50,000 (1 point), ALL (2 points), and prior history of VTE (3 points).

Over a period of 12 months, patients with a score of more than 3 points had a cumulative incidence of VTE of 44%, in comparison with 10.5% among patients with lower scores. They were unable to discern whether particular antineoplastic regimens or drugs enhanced the risk.

The authors proposed that, if verified in a validation cohort study, the scoring system could lead to better patient education about signs and symptoms, more intensive surveillance for high-risk patients, and preventive interventions.

What this means in practice

Although a large number of patient records were reviewed for Dr. Lazo-Langer’s study, there were just 74 ALL patients, and it is unclear whether particular treatment regimens or drugs (such as L-asparaginase in ALL) enhance risk. Further study with a validation cohort (as was performed for the Khorana score for patients with other malignancies), is warranted. The study is thought provoking, but for now, in my opinion, standard clinical vigilance, surveillance, and education regarding VTE in leukemia patients remain appropriate.

Steroid impact in NSCLC with ICI therapy

Patients with autoimmune disease and individuals requiring active treatment with steroids (prednisone at 10 mg/day or more or the equivalent) were excluded from clinical trials that led to Food and Drug Administration approval of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) agents. Recently published data indicate that treatment with 10 mg or more of daily prednisone correlates with poor outcome in NSCLC patients receiving ICI therapy (J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:2872-8; J Thoracic Oncol. 2018;13:1771-5). However, at the 2019 annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, analyses of the CancerLinQ database showed that, among NSCLC patients, autoimmune disease and treatment for autoimmune disease are surprisingly prevalent. Should oncologists refuse to treat these patients with ICI agents, alone and in combination with chemotherapy or CTLA4 inhibitors?

Biagio Ricciuti, MD, and colleagues published a retrospective, single-institution record review of 650 advanced NSCLC patients who were treated with ICI plus or minus CTLA-4 inhibition on a correlative intramural research study. Patients who received ICI with concurrent cytotoxic chemotherapy were excluded. They gathered clinical-pathologic information about whether patients received concurrent corticosteroids (10 mg/day or more vs. less than 10 mg/day of prednisone or the equivalent) and the reason for steroid use (oncologic vs. cancer-unrelated indications).

Importantly, they gathered information about programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion scores and tumor mutational burden.

Among the 14.3% patients receiving prednisone 10 mg/day or more at the start of ICI therapy, progression-free survival and overall survival were significantly worse – but only among the 66 patients who needed steroids for oncologic reasons (pain, brain metastases, anorexia, cancer-associated dyspnea). Among the 27 patients who received steroids for cancer-unrelated reasons (autoimmune disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypersensitivity pneumonitis), progression-free and overall survival were no different than for patients on prednisone 0-9 mg/day. Imbalances in PD-L1 tumor proportion scores among the groups analyzed did not clearly account for the differences in survival.

What this means in practice

The potential for great treatment outcomes with single-agent ICIs in a subset of advanced NSCLC patients, coupled with the lack of an air-tight biomarker for benefit, has changed the timing of discussions between oncologists and patients about stopping antineoplastic treatment. Since we cannot identify the patients for whom ICI use is futile, the default position has been lenient on using these expensive and potentially toxic therapies.

If verified in a multi-institutional setting, with larger numbers of NSCLC patients receiving steroids for cancer-unrelated reasons, the observations of Dr. Ricciuti and colleagues could help clinicians confidently identify the time to focus discussions on supportive care only. In patients with short survival and strong rationale for maximizing supportive care, analyses like this one could help us deliver more appropriate treatment, instead of more treatment, thereby furthering the goals of personalized cancer patient management.
 

Dr. Lyss has been a community-based medical oncologist and clinical researcher for more than 35 years, practicing in St. Louis. His clinical and research interests are in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of breast and lung cancers and in expanding access to clinical trials to medically underserved populations.

In this edition of “How I will treat my next patient,” I take a look at recent studies that examined ways to predict important outcomes in two very different settings, acute leukemia and advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). They share the virtue of helping cancer specialists to increase their vigilance for clinically relevant complications and situations and to educate patients and families.

VTE risk in acute leukemia

The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients depends upon multiple patient-, tumor-, anatomic-, and treatment-related factors. The Khorana score has become an accepted standard for predicting the risks of VTE and assessing the relative value of various anticoagulants in cancer patients. However, the only hematologic malignancy that is specifically listed among the primary cancer sites in the Khorana score is “lymphoma.” VTE can develop during treatment for acute leukemia, especially among patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

At the 2019 annual congress of the European Hematology Association, Alejandro Lazo-Langer, MD, and his colleagues proposed a scoring system to quantify the risks of VTE based on a retrospective cohort study of more than 500 acute leukemia patients, diagnosed from 2006-2017. They identified 77 patients with a VTE event, with a median time from diagnosis to VTE of 64 days. Among 20 possible predictive factors, 3 emerged in the final multivariate model – platelet count greater than 50,000 (1 point), ALL (2 points), and prior history of VTE (3 points).

Over a period of 12 months, patients with a score of more than 3 points had a cumulative incidence of VTE of 44%, in comparison with 10.5% among patients with lower scores. They were unable to discern whether particular antineoplastic regimens or drugs enhanced the risk.

The authors proposed that, if verified in a validation cohort study, the scoring system could lead to better patient education about signs and symptoms, more intensive surveillance for high-risk patients, and preventive interventions.

What this means in practice

Although a large number of patient records were reviewed for Dr. Lazo-Langer’s study, there were just 74 ALL patients, and it is unclear whether particular treatment regimens or drugs (such as L-asparaginase in ALL) enhance risk. Further study with a validation cohort (as was performed for the Khorana score for patients with other malignancies), is warranted. The study is thought provoking, but for now, in my opinion, standard clinical vigilance, surveillance, and education regarding VTE in leukemia patients remain appropriate.

Steroid impact in NSCLC with ICI therapy

Patients with autoimmune disease and individuals requiring active treatment with steroids (prednisone at 10 mg/day or more or the equivalent) were excluded from clinical trials that led to Food and Drug Administration approval of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) agents. Recently published data indicate that treatment with 10 mg or more of daily prednisone correlates with poor outcome in NSCLC patients receiving ICI therapy (J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:2872-8; J Thoracic Oncol. 2018;13:1771-5). However, at the 2019 annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, analyses of the CancerLinQ database showed that, among NSCLC patients, autoimmune disease and treatment for autoimmune disease are surprisingly prevalent. Should oncologists refuse to treat these patients with ICI agents, alone and in combination with chemotherapy or CTLA4 inhibitors?

Biagio Ricciuti, MD, and colleagues published a retrospective, single-institution record review of 650 advanced NSCLC patients who were treated with ICI plus or minus CTLA-4 inhibition on a correlative intramural research study. Patients who received ICI with concurrent cytotoxic chemotherapy were excluded. They gathered clinical-pathologic information about whether patients received concurrent corticosteroids (10 mg/day or more vs. less than 10 mg/day of prednisone or the equivalent) and the reason for steroid use (oncologic vs. cancer-unrelated indications).

Importantly, they gathered information about programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion scores and tumor mutational burden.

Among the 14.3% patients receiving prednisone 10 mg/day or more at the start of ICI therapy, progression-free survival and overall survival were significantly worse – but only among the 66 patients who needed steroids for oncologic reasons (pain, brain metastases, anorexia, cancer-associated dyspnea). Among the 27 patients who received steroids for cancer-unrelated reasons (autoimmune disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypersensitivity pneumonitis), progression-free and overall survival were no different than for patients on prednisone 0-9 mg/day. Imbalances in PD-L1 tumor proportion scores among the groups analyzed did not clearly account for the differences in survival.

What this means in practice

The potential for great treatment outcomes with single-agent ICIs in a subset of advanced NSCLC patients, coupled with the lack of an air-tight biomarker for benefit, has changed the timing of discussions between oncologists and patients about stopping antineoplastic treatment. Since we cannot identify the patients for whom ICI use is futile, the default position has been lenient on using these expensive and potentially toxic therapies.

If verified in a multi-institutional setting, with larger numbers of NSCLC patients receiving steroids for cancer-unrelated reasons, the observations of Dr. Ricciuti and colleagues could help clinicians confidently identify the time to focus discussions on supportive care only. In patients with short survival and strong rationale for maximizing supportive care, analyses like this one could help us deliver more appropriate treatment, instead of more treatment, thereby furthering the goals of personalized cancer patient management.
 

Dr. Lyss has been a community-based medical oncologist and clinical researcher for more than 35 years, practicing in St. Louis. His clinical and research interests are in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of breast and lung cancers and in expanding access to clinical trials to medically underserved populations.

In this edition of “How I will treat my next patient,” I take a look at recent studies that examined ways to predict important outcomes in two very different settings, acute leukemia and advanced non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). They share the virtue of helping cancer specialists to increase their vigilance for clinically relevant complications and situations and to educate patients and families.

VTE risk in acute leukemia

The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients depends upon multiple patient-, tumor-, anatomic-, and treatment-related factors. The Khorana score has become an accepted standard for predicting the risks of VTE and assessing the relative value of various anticoagulants in cancer patients. However, the only hematologic malignancy that is specifically listed among the primary cancer sites in the Khorana score is “lymphoma.” VTE can develop during treatment for acute leukemia, especially among patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

At the 2019 annual congress of the European Hematology Association, Alejandro Lazo-Langer, MD, and his colleagues proposed a scoring system to quantify the risks of VTE based on a retrospective cohort study of more than 500 acute leukemia patients, diagnosed from 2006-2017. They identified 77 patients with a VTE event, with a median time from diagnosis to VTE of 64 days. Among 20 possible predictive factors, 3 emerged in the final multivariate model – platelet count greater than 50,000 (1 point), ALL (2 points), and prior history of VTE (3 points).

Over a period of 12 months, patients with a score of more than 3 points had a cumulative incidence of VTE of 44%, in comparison with 10.5% among patients with lower scores. They were unable to discern whether particular antineoplastic regimens or drugs enhanced the risk.

The authors proposed that, if verified in a validation cohort study, the scoring system could lead to better patient education about signs and symptoms, more intensive surveillance for high-risk patients, and preventive interventions.

What this means in practice

Although a large number of patient records were reviewed for Dr. Lazo-Langer’s study, there were just 74 ALL patients, and it is unclear whether particular treatment regimens or drugs (such as L-asparaginase in ALL) enhance risk. Further study with a validation cohort (as was performed for the Khorana score for patients with other malignancies), is warranted. The study is thought provoking, but for now, in my opinion, standard clinical vigilance, surveillance, and education regarding VTE in leukemia patients remain appropriate.

Steroid impact in NSCLC with ICI therapy

Patients with autoimmune disease and individuals requiring active treatment with steroids (prednisone at 10 mg/day or more or the equivalent) were excluded from clinical trials that led to Food and Drug Administration approval of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) agents. Recently published data indicate that treatment with 10 mg or more of daily prednisone correlates with poor outcome in NSCLC patients receiving ICI therapy (J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:2872-8; J Thoracic Oncol. 2018;13:1771-5). However, at the 2019 annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, analyses of the CancerLinQ database showed that, among NSCLC patients, autoimmune disease and treatment for autoimmune disease are surprisingly prevalent. Should oncologists refuse to treat these patients with ICI agents, alone and in combination with chemotherapy or CTLA4 inhibitors?

Biagio Ricciuti, MD, and colleagues published a retrospective, single-institution record review of 650 advanced NSCLC patients who were treated with ICI plus or minus CTLA-4 inhibition on a correlative intramural research study. Patients who received ICI with concurrent cytotoxic chemotherapy were excluded. They gathered clinical-pathologic information about whether patients received concurrent corticosteroids (10 mg/day or more vs. less than 10 mg/day of prednisone or the equivalent) and the reason for steroid use (oncologic vs. cancer-unrelated indications).

Importantly, they gathered information about programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion scores and tumor mutational burden.

Among the 14.3% patients receiving prednisone 10 mg/day or more at the start of ICI therapy, progression-free survival and overall survival were significantly worse – but only among the 66 patients who needed steroids for oncologic reasons (pain, brain metastases, anorexia, cancer-associated dyspnea). Among the 27 patients who received steroids for cancer-unrelated reasons (autoimmune disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypersensitivity pneumonitis), progression-free and overall survival were no different than for patients on prednisone 0-9 mg/day. Imbalances in PD-L1 tumor proportion scores among the groups analyzed did not clearly account for the differences in survival.

What this means in practice

The potential for great treatment outcomes with single-agent ICIs in a subset of advanced NSCLC patients, coupled with the lack of an air-tight biomarker for benefit, has changed the timing of discussions between oncologists and patients about stopping antineoplastic treatment. Since we cannot identify the patients for whom ICI use is futile, the default position has been lenient on using these expensive and potentially toxic therapies.

If verified in a multi-institutional setting, with larger numbers of NSCLC patients receiving steroids for cancer-unrelated reasons, the observations of Dr. Ricciuti and colleagues could help clinicians confidently identify the time to focus discussions on supportive care only. In patients with short survival and strong rationale for maximizing supportive care, analyses like this one could help us deliver more appropriate treatment, instead of more treatment, thereby furthering the goals of personalized cancer patient management.
 

Dr. Lyss has been a community-based medical oncologist and clinical researcher for more than 35 years, practicing in St. Louis. His clinical and research interests are in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of breast and lung cancers and in expanding access to clinical trials to medically underserved populations.

SAN ANTONIO – A mindfulness-based relapse prevention program resulted in significantly greater declines in anxiety and depressive symptoms among participants in an opioid addiction treatment program than those seen in patients who received treatment as usual, suggest results of a small nonrandomized controlled trial. Relapse rates trended downward with mindfulness but were not significantly different from the treatment-as-usual (TAU) group.

“Mindfulness-based relapse prevention (MBRP) can be successfully implemented in an outpatient setting with as good as or better results as treatment as usual,” Keith J. Zullig, PhD, MSPH, chair and professor in the department of social and behavioral sciences at the West Virginia University School of Public Health in Morgantown, said at the annual meeting of the College on Problems of Drug Dependence.

Though relapse rates did not show a statistically significant drop with mindfulness treatment compared with treatment as usual, the downward trend suggests that it is worthwhile to conduct a larger scale study, Dr. Zullig said.

The significant reductions in anxiety and depression scores among those practicing mindfulness suggest that MBRP particularly benefits patients with co-occurring mood disorders, he added.

The researchers recruited 60 participants from a Comprehensive Opioid Addiction Treatment program who had been substance free for at least 90 consecutive days. Participants chose whether to enter the MBRP group or the treatment-as-usual group.

The treatment-as-usual group attended biweekly 60-minute sessions with a cognitive-based therapy process group led by a licensed therapist for 36 weeks. The MBRP group involved 24 weeks of biweekly attendance at 60-minute sessions, also led by a licensed therapist, followed by 12 weeks in the treatment-as-usual group.

The MBRP instruction involved the following:

• Mindful skill building
• Breathing
• Meditation
• Mindful movement (“gentle yoga practiced with mindful awareness of the body”)
• Using all the senses
• Increasing awareness of breath, body sensations, thoughts, and emotional energy
• Mindfulness in everyday life
• Daily home practice of formal mindfulness meditation for 30 minutes per day, 5-6 days a week
• Discussing practice/exercises both in and outside class

Researchers tracked retention rates, any prohibited substance relapse, and four self-reported measures at 12, 24, and 36 weeks’ follow-up. The self-reported measures looked at craving, with the Desire for Drug Questionnaire; anxiety, with the Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale, range 0-20); depression, with the Overall Depression Severity and Impairment Scale, range 0-20; and mindfulness, with the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire.

Participants in both groups were statistically similar in gender, employment, education, insurance, and marital status at baseline.

Of the 24 patients who entered the MBRP program, 14 completed the full 24 weeks of intervention and 12 subsequent weeks. Among the 36 participants who entered the treatment-as-usual group, 20 completed the 36 weeks.

Retention was 75% in both groups at 24 weeks, but retention from 24 to 36 weeks was nonsignificantly greater in the mindfulness group (93% vs. 91% treatment as usual).

Relapse at both 24 and 36 weeks was lower among those using mindfulness but without a statistically significant difference. At 24 weeks, 44% of the treatment-as-usual participants had relapsed at least once, compared with 33% of the MBRP participants (intent to treat).

At 36 weeks (n = 37), 45% of the 22 remaining in the treatment-as-usual group had relapsed, compared with 40% of the 15 in the MBRP group. However, 20% of those in MBRP (3 of 15) relapsed between the 24 and 36 week follow-ups, compared with 5% (1 of 22) in the treatment-as-usual group, still a nonsignificant difference.

Anxiety scores were higher at baseline in the MBRP group (11 MBRP vs. 7.25 TAU) but were similar in both groups at 36 weeks (5.79 MBRP vs. 5.6 TAU). Depression scores also were higher at baseline in the MBRP (8 vs. 6.3) but ended slightly lower than the treatment-as-usual group at 36 weeks (3.71 MBRP vs. 4.35 TAU). The reductions in depression and anxiety scores for the MBRP group were significantly greater than in the treatment-as-usual group.

Mindfulness scores were not significantly different at baseline between the groups but were significantly higher at 36 weeks in the mindfulness groups (3.47 vs. 3.3, range 1-5).

“Relapse rates were trending lower in the MBRP group although not statistically significant,” Dr. Zullig said. “Significant decreases occurred in craving in both MBRP and treatment-as-usual groups.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funded the research. The authors had no disclosures.

SAN ANTONIO – A mindfulness-based relapse prevention program resulted in significantly greater declines in anxiety and depressive symptoms among participants in an opioid addiction treatment program than those seen in patients who received treatment as usual, suggest results of a small nonrandomized controlled trial. Relapse rates trended downward with mindfulness but were not significantly different from the treatment-as-usual (TAU) group.

“Mindfulness-based relapse prevention (MBRP) can be successfully implemented in an outpatient setting with as good as or better results as treatment as usual,” Keith J. Zullig, PhD, MSPH, chair and professor in the department of social and behavioral sciences at the West Virginia University School of Public Health in Morgantown, said at the annual meeting of the College on Problems of Drug Dependence.

Though relapse rates did not show a statistically significant drop with mindfulness treatment compared with treatment as usual, the downward trend suggests that it is worthwhile to conduct a larger scale study, Dr. Zullig said.

The significant reductions in anxiety and depression scores among those practicing mindfulness suggest that MBRP particularly benefits patients with co-occurring mood disorders, he added.

The researchers recruited 60 participants from a Comprehensive Opioid Addiction Treatment program who had been substance free for at least 90 consecutive days. Participants chose whether to enter the MBRP group or the treatment-as-usual group.

The treatment-as-usual group attended biweekly 60-minute sessions with a cognitive-based therapy process group led by a licensed therapist for 36 weeks. The MBRP group involved 24 weeks of biweekly attendance at 60-minute sessions, also led by a licensed therapist, followed by 12 weeks in the treatment-as-usual group.

The MBRP instruction involved the following:

• Mindful skill building
• Breathing
• Meditation
• Mindful movement (“gentle yoga practiced with mindful awareness of the body”)
• Using all the senses
• Increasing awareness of breath, body sensations, thoughts, and emotional energy
• Mindfulness in everyday life
• Daily home practice of formal mindfulness meditation for 30 minutes per day, 5-6 days a week
• Discussing practice/exercises both in and outside class

Researchers tracked retention rates, any prohibited substance relapse, and four self-reported measures at 12, 24, and 36 weeks’ follow-up. The self-reported measures looked at craving, with the Desire for Drug Questionnaire; anxiety, with the Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale, range 0-20); depression, with the Overall Depression Severity and Impairment Scale, range 0-20; and mindfulness, with the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire.

Participants in both groups were statistically similar in gender, employment, education, insurance, and marital status at baseline.

Of the 24 patients who entered the MBRP program, 14 completed the full 24 weeks of intervention and 12 subsequent weeks. Among the 36 participants who entered the treatment-as-usual group, 20 completed the 36 weeks.

Retention was 75% in both groups at 24 weeks, but retention from 24 to 36 weeks was nonsignificantly greater in the mindfulness group (93% vs. 91% treatment as usual).

Relapse at both 24 and 36 weeks was lower among those using mindfulness but without a statistically significant difference. At 24 weeks, 44% of the treatment-as-usual participants had relapsed at least once, compared with 33% of the MBRP participants (intent to treat).

At 36 weeks (n = 37), 45% of the 22 remaining in the treatment-as-usual group had relapsed, compared with 40% of the 15 in the MBRP group. However, 20% of those in MBRP (3 of 15) relapsed between the 24 and 36 week follow-ups, compared with 5% (1 of 22) in the treatment-as-usual group, still a nonsignificant difference.

Anxiety scores were higher at baseline in the MBRP group (11 MBRP vs. 7.25 TAU) but were similar in both groups at 36 weeks (5.79 MBRP vs. 5.6 TAU). Depression scores also were higher at baseline in the MBRP (8 vs. 6.3) but ended slightly lower than the treatment-as-usual group at 36 weeks (3.71 MBRP vs. 4.35 TAU). The reductions in depression and anxiety scores for the MBRP group were significantly greater than in the treatment-as-usual group.

Mindfulness scores were not significantly different at baseline between the groups but were significantly higher at 36 weeks in the mindfulness groups (3.47 vs. 3.3, range 1-5).

“Relapse rates were trending lower in the MBRP group although not statistically significant,” Dr. Zullig said. “Significant decreases occurred in craving in both MBRP and treatment-as-usual groups.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funded the research. The authors had no disclosures.

SAN ANTONIO – A mindfulness-based relapse prevention program resulted in significantly greater declines in anxiety and depressive symptoms among participants in an opioid addiction treatment program than those seen in patients who received treatment as usual, suggest results of a small nonrandomized controlled trial. Relapse rates trended downward with mindfulness but were not significantly different from the treatment-as-usual (TAU) group.

“Mindfulness-based relapse prevention (MBRP) can be successfully implemented in an outpatient setting with as good as or better results as treatment as usual,” Keith J. Zullig, PhD, MSPH, chair and professor in the department of social and behavioral sciences at the West Virginia University School of Public Health in Morgantown, said at the annual meeting of the College on Problems of Drug Dependence.

Though relapse rates did not show a statistically significant drop with mindfulness treatment compared with treatment as usual, the downward trend suggests that it is worthwhile to conduct a larger scale study, Dr. Zullig said.

The significant reductions in anxiety and depression scores among those practicing mindfulness suggest that MBRP particularly benefits patients with co-occurring mood disorders, he added.

The researchers recruited 60 participants from a Comprehensive Opioid Addiction Treatment program who had been substance free for at least 90 consecutive days. Participants chose whether to enter the MBRP group or the treatment-as-usual group.

The treatment-as-usual group attended biweekly 60-minute sessions with a cognitive-based therapy process group led by a licensed therapist for 36 weeks. The MBRP group involved 24 weeks of biweekly attendance at 60-minute sessions, also led by a licensed therapist, followed by 12 weeks in the treatment-as-usual group.

The MBRP instruction involved the following:

• Mindful skill building
• Breathing
• Meditation
• Mindful movement (“gentle yoga practiced with mindful awareness of the body”)
• Using all the senses
• Increasing awareness of breath, body sensations, thoughts, and emotional energy
• Mindfulness in everyday life
• Daily home practice of formal mindfulness meditation for 30 minutes per day, 5-6 days a week
• Discussing practice/exercises both in and outside class

Researchers tracked retention rates, any prohibited substance relapse, and four self-reported measures at 12, 24, and 36 weeks’ follow-up. The self-reported measures looked at craving, with the Desire for Drug Questionnaire; anxiety, with the Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale, range 0-20); depression, with the Overall Depression Severity and Impairment Scale, range 0-20; and mindfulness, with the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire.

Participants in both groups were statistically similar in gender, employment, education, insurance, and marital status at baseline.

Of the 24 patients who entered the MBRP program, 14 completed the full 24 weeks of intervention and 12 subsequent weeks. Among the 36 participants who entered the treatment-as-usual group, 20 completed the 36 weeks.

Retention was 75% in both groups at 24 weeks, but retention from 24 to 36 weeks was nonsignificantly greater in the mindfulness group (93% vs. 91% treatment as usual).

Relapse at both 24 and 36 weeks was lower among those using mindfulness but without a statistically significant difference. At 24 weeks, 44% of the treatment-as-usual participants had relapsed at least once, compared with 33% of the MBRP participants (intent to treat).

At 36 weeks (n = 37), 45% of the 22 remaining in the treatment-as-usual group had relapsed, compared with 40% of the 15 in the MBRP group. However, 20% of those in MBRP (3 of 15) relapsed between the 24 and 36 week follow-ups, compared with 5% (1 of 22) in the treatment-as-usual group, still a nonsignificant difference.

Anxiety scores were higher at baseline in the MBRP group (11 MBRP vs. 7.25 TAU) but were similar in both groups at 36 weeks (5.79 MBRP vs. 5.6 TAU). Depression scores also were higher at baseline in the MBRP (8 vs. 6.3) but ended slightly lower than the treatment-as-usual group at 36 weeks (3.71 MBRP vs. 4.35 TAU). The reductions in depression and anxiety scores for the MBRP group were significantly greater than in the treatment-as-usual group.

Mindfulness scores were not significantly different at baseline between the groups but were significantly higher at 36 weeks in the mindfulness groups (3.47 vs. 3.3, range 1-5).

“Relapse rates were trending lower in the MBRP group although not statistically significant,” Dr. Zullig said. “Significant decreases occurred in craving in both MBRP and treatment-as-usual groups.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funded the research. The authors had no disclosures.

For patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV)–related cirrhosis (F4), but not those with advanced fibrosis (F3), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance after a sustained virologic response (SVR) is cost effective, according to investigators.

Current international guidelines call for HCC surveillance among all patients with advanced fibrosis (F3) or cirrhosis (F4) who have achieved SVR, but this is “very unlikely to be cost effective,” reported lead author Hooman Farhang Zangneh, MD, of Toronto General Hospital and colleagues. “HCV-related HCC rarely occurs in patients without cirrhosis,” the investigators explained in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. “With cirrhosis present, HCC incidence is 1.4% to 4.9% per year. If found early, options for curative therapy include radiofrequency ablation (RFA), surgical resection, and liver transplantation.”

The investigators developed a Markov model to determine which at-risk patients could undergo surveillance while remaining below willingness-to-pay thresholds. Specifically, cost-effectiveness was assessed for ultrasound screenings annually (every year) or biannually (twice a year) among patients with advanced fibrosis (F3) or compensated cirrhosis (F4) who were aged 50 years and had an SVR. Relevant data were drawn from expert opinions, medical literature, and Canada Life Tables. Various HCC incidence rates were tested, including a constant annual rate, rates based on type of antiviral treatment (direct-acting and interferon-based therapies), others based on stage of fibrosis, and another that increased with age. The model was validated by applying it to patients with F3 or F4 fibrosis who had not yet achieved an SVR. All monetary values were reported in 2015 Canadian dollars.

Representative of current guidelines, the investigators first tested costs when conducting surveillance among all patients with F3 or F4 fibrosis with an assumed constant HCC annual incidence rate of 0.5%. Biannual ultrasound surveillance after SVR caught more cases of HCC still in a curable stage (78%) than no surveillance (29%); however, false-positives were relatively common at 21.8% and 15.7% for biannual and annual surveillance, respectively. The investigators noted that in the real world, some of these false-positives are not detected by more advanced imaging, so patients go on to receive unnecessary RFA, which incurs additional costs. Partly for this reason, while biannual surveillance was more effective, it was also more expensive, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $106,792 per quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), compared with $72,105 per QALY for annual surveillance.

Including only patients with F3 fibrosis after interferon-based therapy, using an HCC incidence of 0.23%, biannual and annual ICERs rose to $484,160 and $204,708 per QALY, respectively, both of which exceed standard willingness-to-pay thresholds. In comparison, annual and biannual ICERs were at most $55,850 and $42,305 per QALY, respectively, among patients with cirrhosis before interferon-induced SVR, using an HCC incidence rate of up to 1.39% per year.

“These results suggest that biannual (or annual) HCC surveillance is likely to be cost effective for patients with cirrhosis, but not for patients with F3 fibrosis before SVR,” the investigators wrote.

Costs for HCC surveillance among cirrhosis patients after direct-acting antiviral-induced SVR were still lower, at $43,229 and $34,307 per QALY, which were far lower than costs for patients with F3 fibrosis, which were $188,157 and $111,667 per QALY.

Focusing on the evident savings associated with surveillance of patients with cirrhosis, the investigators tested two diagnostic thresholds within this population with the aim of reducing costs further. They found that surveillance of patients with a pretreatment aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index (APRI) greater than 2.0 (HCC incidence, 0.89%) was associated with biannual and annual ICERs of $48,729 and $37,806 per QALY, respectively, but when APRI was less than 2.0 (HCC incidence, 0.093%), surveillance was less effective and more expensive than no surveillance at all. A similar trend was found for an FIB-4 threshold of 3.25.

Employment of age-stratified risk of HCC also reduced costs of screening for patients with cirrhosis. With this strategy, ICER was $48,432 per QALY for biannual surveillance and $37,201 per QALY for annual surveillance.

“These data suggest that, if we assume HCC incidence increases with age, biannual or annual surveillance will be cost effective for the vast majority, if not all, patients with cirrhosis before SVR,” the investigators wrote.

“Our analysis suggests that HCC surveillance is very unlikely to be cost effective in patients with F3 fibrosis, whereas both annual and biannual modalities are likely to be cost effective at standard willingness-to-pay thresholds for patients with cirrhosis compared with no surveillance,” the investigators wrote.

“Additional long-term follow-up data are required to help identify patients at highest risk of HCC after SVR to tailor surveillance guidelines,” the investigators concluded.

The study was funded by the Toronto Centre for Liver Disease. The investigators declared no conflicts of interest.

This story was updated on 7/12/2019.

SOURCE: Zangneh et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Dec 20. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2018.12.018.

For patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV)–related cirrhosis (F4), but not those with advanced fibrosis (F3), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance after a sustained virologic response (SVR) is cost effective, according to investigators.

Current international guidelines call for HCC surveillance among all patients with advanced fibrosis (F3) or cirrhosis (F4) who have achieved SVR, but this is “very unlikely to be cost effective,” reported lead author Hooman Farhang Zangneh, MD, of Toronto General Hospital and colleagues. “HCV-related HCC rarely occurs in patients without cirrhosis,” the investigators explained in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. “With cirrhosis present, HCC incidence is 1.4% to 4.9% per year. If found early, options for curative therapy include radiofrequency ablation (RFA), surgical resection, and liver transplantation.”

The investigators developed a Markov model to determine which at-risk patients could undergo surveillance while remaining below willingness-to-pay thresholds. Specifically, cost-effectiveness was assessed for ultrasound screenings annually (every year) or biannually (twice a year) among patients with advanced fibrosis (F3) or compensated cirrhosis (F4) who were aged 50 years and had an SVR. Relevant data were drawn from expert opinions, medical literature, and Canada Life Tables. Various HCC incidence rates were tested, including a constant annual rate, rates based on type of antiviral treatment (direct-acting and interferon-based therapies), others based on stage of fibrosis, and another that increased with age. The model was validated by applying it to patients with F3 or F4 fibrosis who had not yet achieved an SVR. All monetary values were reported in 2015 Canadian dollars.

Representative of current guidelines, the investigators first tested costs when conducting surveillance among all patients with F3 or F4 fibrosis with an assumed constant HCC annual incidence rate of 0.5%. Biannual ultrasound surveillance after SVR caught more cases of HCC still in a curable stage (78%) than no surveillance (29%); however, false-positives were relatively common at 21.8% and 15.7% for biannual and annual surveillance, respectively. The investigators noted that in the real world, some of these false-positives are not detected by more advanced imaging, so patients go on to receive unnecessary RFA, which incurs additional costs. Partly for this reason, while biannual surveillance was more effective, it was also more expensive, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $106,792 per quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), compared with $72,105 per QALY for annual surveillance.

Including only patients with F3 fibrosis after interferon-based therapy, using an HCC incidence of 0.23%, biannual and annual ICERs rose to $484,160 and $204,708 per QALY, respectively, both of which exceed standard willingness-to-pay thresholds. In comparison, annual and biannual ICERs were at most $55,850 and $42,305 per QALY, respectively, among patients with cirrhosis before interferon-induced SVR, using an HCC incidence rate of up to 1.39% per year.

“These results suggest that biannual (or annual) HCC surveillance is likely to be cost effective for patients with cirrhosis, but not for patients with F3 fibrosis before SVR,” the investigators wrote.

Costs for HCC surveillance among cirrhosis patients after direct-acting antiviral-induced SVR were still lower, at $43,229 and $34,307 per QALY, which were far lower than costs for patients with F3 fibrosis, which were $188,157 and $111,667 per QALY.

Focusing on the evident savings associated with surveillance of patients with cirrhosis, the investigators tested two diagnostic thresholds within this population with the aim of reducing costs further. They found that surveillance of patients with a pretreatment aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index (APRI) greater than 2.0 (HCC incidence, 0.89%) was associated with biannual and annual ICERs of $48,729 and $37,806 per QALY, respectively, but when APRI was less than 2.0 (HCC incidence, 0.093%), surveillance was less effective and more expensive than no surveillance at all. A similar trend was found for an FIB-4 threshold of 3.25.

Employment of age-stratified risk of HCC also reduced costs of screening for patients with cirrhosis. With this strategy, ICER was $48,432 per QALY for biannual surveillance and $37,201 per QALY for annual surveillance.

“These data suggest that, if we assume HCC incidence increases with age, biannual or annual surveillance will be cost effective for the vast majority, if not all, patients with cirrhosis before SVR,” the investigators wrote.

“Our analysis suggests that HCC surveillance is very unlikely to be cost effective in patients with F3 fibrosis, whereas both annual and biannual modalities are likely to be cost effective at standard willingness-to-pay thresholds for patients with cirrhosis compared with no surveillance,” the investigators wrote.

“Additional long-term follow-up data are required to help identify patients at highest risk of HCC after SVR to tailor surveillance guidelines,” the investigators concluded.

The study was funded by the Toronto Centre for Liver Disease. The investigators declared no conflicts of interest.

This story was updated on 7/12/2019.

SOURCE: Zangneh et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Dec 20. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2018.12.018.

For patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV)–related cirrhosis (F4), but not those with advanced fibrosis (F3), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance after a sustained virologic response (SVR) is cost effective, according to investigators.

Current international guidelines call for HCC surveillance among all patients with advanced fibrosis (F3) or cirrhosis (F4) who have achieved SVR, but this is “very unlikely to be cost effective,” reported lead author Hooman Farhang Zangneh, MD, of Toronto General Hospital and colleagues. “HCV-related HCC rarely occurs in patients without cirrhosis,” the investigators explained in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. “With cirrhosis present, HCC incidence is 1.4% to 4.9% per year. If found early, options for curative therapy include radiofrequency ablation (RFA), surgical resection, and liver transplantation.”

The investigators developed a Markov model to determine which at-risk patients could undergo surveillance while remaining below willingness-to-pay thresholds. Specifically, cost-effectiveness was assessed for ultrasound screenings annually (every year) or biannually (twice a year) among patients with advanced fibrosis (F3) or compensated cirrhosis (F4) who were aged 50 years and had an SVR. Relevant data were drawn from expert opinions, medical literature, and Canada Life Tables. Various HCC incidence rates were tested, including a constant annual rate, rates based on type of antiviral treatment (direct-acting and interferon-based therapies), others based on stage of fibrosis, and another that increased with age. The model was validated by applying it to patients with F3 or F4 fibrosis who had not yet achieved an SVR. All monetary values were reported in 2015 Canadian dollars.

Representative of current guidelines, the investigators first tested costs when conducting surveillance among all patients with F3 or F4 fibrosis with an assumed constant HCC annual incidence rate of 0.5%. Biannual ultrasound surveillance after SVR caught more cases of HCC still in a curable stage (78%) than no surveillance (29%); however, false-positives were relatively common at 21.8% and 15.7% for biannual and annual surveillance, respectively. The investigators noted that in the real world, some of these false-positives are not detected by more advanced imaging, so patients go on to receive unnecessary RFA, which incurs additional costs. Partly for this reason, while biannual surveillance was more effective, it was also more expensive, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $106,792 per quality-adjusted life-years (QALY), compared with $72,105 per QALY for annual surveillance.

Including only patients with F3 fibrosis after interferon-based therapy, using an HCC incidence of 0.23%, biannual and annual ICERs rose to $484,160 and $204,708 per QALY, respectively, both of which exceed standard willingness-to-pay thresholds. In comparison, annual and biannual ICERs were at most $55,850 and $42,305 per QALY, respectively, among patients with cirrhosis before interferon-induced SVR, using an HCC incidence rate of up to 1.39% per year.

“These results suggest that biannual (or annual) HCC surveillance is likely to be cost effective for patients with cirrhosis, but not for patients with F3 fibrosis before SVR,” the investigators wrote.

Costs for HCC surveillance among cirrhosis patients after direct-acting antiviral-induced SVR were still lower, at $43,229 and $34,307 per QALY, which were far lower than costs for patients with F3 fibrosis, which were $188,157 and $111,667 per QALY.

Focusing on the evident savings associated with surveillance of patients with cirrhosis, the investigators tested two diagnostic thresholds within this population with the aim of reducing costs further. They found that surveillance of patients with a pretreatment aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index (APRI) greater than 2.0 (HCC incidence, 0.89%) was associated with biannual and annual ICERs of $48,729 and $37,806 per QALY, respectively, but when APRI was less than 2.0 (HCC incidence, 0.093%), surveillance was less effective and more expensive than no surveillance at all. A similar trend was found for an FIB-4 threshold of 3.25.

Employment of age-stratified risk of HCC also reduced costs of screening for patients with cirrhosis. With this strategy, ICER was $48,432 per QALY for biannual surveillance and $37,201 per QALY for annual surveillance.

“These data suggest that, if we assume HCC incidence increases with age, biannual or annual surveillance will be cost effective for the vast majority, if not all, patients with cirrhosis before SVR,” the investigators wrote.

“Our analysis suggests that HCC surveillance is very unlikely to be cost effective in patients with F3 fibrosis, whereas both annual and biannual modalities are likely to be cost effective at standard willingness-to-pay thresholds for patients with cirrhosis compared with no surveillance,” the investigators wrote.

“Additional long-term follow-up data are required to help identify patients at highest risk of HCC after SVR to tailor surveillance guidelines,” the investigators concluded.

The study was funded by the Toronto Centre for Liver Disease. The investigators declared no conflicts of interest.

This story was updated on 7/12/2019.

SOURCE: Zangneh et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Dec 20. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2018.12.018.

ANSWER

The correct interpretation of this ECG includes normal sinus rhythm with a right bundle branch block (RBBB) and a left anterior fascicular block (LAFB). The patient also has T-wave inversions in the inferior leads.

Normal sinus rhythm is evidenced by a ventricular rate ≥ 60 beats/min and < 100 beats/min, as well as a P wave for every QRS complex, a QRS complex for every P wave, and a consistent PR interval.

Criteria for a RBBB include a QRS > 120 ms with a ­biphasic RSR’ seen in leads V₁–V₃ and slurred S waves in leads I, aVL, V₅, and V₆. An LAFB is defined by left-axis deviation (–48° on this ECG), small Q waves with tall R waves in leads I and aVL, and small R waves and deep S waves in leads II, III, and aVF.

An RBBB plus an LAFB constitutes bifascicular block. In such cases, the ventricles are depolarized from one remaining fascicle: the left posterior. Af­fected patients are susceptible to complete heart block, particularly in the presence of congestive heart failure.

For those inexperienced with ECG interpretation, fascicular blocks may be confusing. Recall that evidence of Q waves in leads II, III, and aVF is associated with inferior myocardial infarction; by substituting the Q waves with S waves in the same leads, you won’t miss an LAFB.

ANSWER

The correct interpretation of this ECG includes normal sinus rhythm with a right bundle branch block (RBBB) and a left anterior fascicular block (LAFB). The patient also has T-wave inversions in the inferior leads.

Normal sinus rhythm is evidenced by a ventricular rate ≥ 60 beats/min and < 100 beats/min, as well as a P wave for every QRS complex, a QRS complex for every P wave, and a consistent PR interval.

Criteria for a RBBB include a QRS > 120 ms with a ­biphasic RSR’ seen in leads V₁–V₃ and slurred S waves in leads I, aVL, V₅, and V₆. An LAFB is defined by left-axis deviation (–48° on this ECG), small Q waves with tall R waves in leads I and aVL, and small R waves and deep S waves in leads II, III, and aVF.

An RBBB plus an LAFB constitutes bifascicular block. In such cases, the ventricles are depolarized from one remaining fascicle: the left posterior. Af­fected patients are susceptible to complete heart block, particularly in the presence of congestive heart failure.

For those inexperienced with ECG interpretation, fascicular blocks may be confusing. Recall that evidence of Q waves in leads II, III, and aVF is associated with inferior myocardial infarction; by substituting the Q waves with S waves in the same leads, you won’t miss an LAFB.

ANSWER

The correct interpretation of this ECG includes normal sinus rhythm with a right bundle branch block (RBBB) and a left anterior fascicular block (LAFB). The patient also has T-wave inversions in the inferior leads.

Normal sinus rhythm is evidenced by a ventricular rate ≥ 60 beats/min and < 100 beats/min, as well as a P wave for every QRS complex, a QRS complex for every P wave, and a consistent PR interval.

Criteria for a RBBB include a QRS > 120 ms with a ­biphasic RSR’ seen in leads V₁–V₃ and slurred S waves in leads I, aVL, V₅, and V₆. An LAFB is defined by left-axis deviation (–48° on this ECG), small Q waves with tall R waves in leads I and aVL, and small R waves and deep S waves in leads II, III, and aVF.

An RBBB plus an LAFB constitutes bifascicular block. In such cases, the ventricles are depolarized from one remaining fascicle: the left posterior. Af­fected patients are susceptible to complete heart block, particularly in the presence of congestive heart failure.

For those inexperienced with ECG interpretation, fascicular blocks may be confusing. Recall that evidence of Q waves in leads II, III, and aVF is associated with inferior myocardial infarction; by substituting the Q waves with S waves in the same leads, you won’t miss an LAFB.

In their article, "Uterine aspiration: From OR to office" (February 2019), Lauren Thaxton, MD, MBA, and Bri Tristan, MD, made the case for why, in appropriate clinical situations, office-based uterine aspiration, compared with uterine aspiration in the OR, should be the standard surgical management of early pregnancy failure. Their reasons included an equivalent safety profile, reduced costs, and patient-centered characteristics. 

OBG Management posed this query to readers in a website poll: "Should the standard location for uterine apiration be in the office?" See how readers responded, below.

Poll results

A total of 73 readers cast their vote:

• 86.3% (63 readers) said yes, in appropriate clinical situations
• 13.7% (10 readers) said no

Reader comments

"Yes, in appropriate clinical situations."

-Yardlie Toussaint-Foster, DO, Downingtown, Pennsylvania

"I have been doing it this way (in the office) for years, up to 11 to 12 weeks without complication."

-John Lane, MD, Raleigh, North Carolina 

In their article, "Uterine aspiration: From OR to office" (February 2019), Lauren Thaxton, MD, MBA, and Bri Tristan, MD, made the case for why, in appropriate clinical situations, office-based uterine aspiration, compared with uterine aspiration in the OR, should be the standard surgical management of early pregnancy failure. Their reasons included an equivalent safety profile, reduced costs, and patient-centered characteristics. 

OBG Management posed this query to readers in a website poll: "Should the standard location for uterine apiration be in the office?" See how readers responded, below.

Poll results

A total of 73 readers cast their vote:

• 86.3% (63 readers) said yes, in appropriate clinical situations
• 13.7% (10 readers) said no

Reader comments

"Yes, in appropriate clinical situations."

-Yardlie Toussaint-Foster, DO, Downingtown, Pennsylvania

"I have been doing it this way (in the office) for years, up to 11 to 12 weeks without complication."

-John Lane, MD, Raleigh, North Carolina 

In their article, "Uterine aspiration: From OR to office" (February 2019), Lauren Thaxton, MD, MBA, and Bri Tristan, MD, made the case for why, in appropriate clinical situations, office-based uterine aspiration, compared with uterine aspiration in the OR, should be the standard surgical management of early pregnancy failure. Their reasons included an equivalent safety profile, reduced costs, and patient-centered characteristics. 

OBG Management posed this query to readers in a website poll: "Should the standard location for uterine apiration be in the office?" See how readers responded, below.

Poll results

A total of 73 readers cast their vote:

• 86.3% (63 readers) said yes, in appropriate clinical situations
• 13.7% (10 readers) said no

Reader comments

"Yes, in appropriate clinical situations."

-Yardlie Toussaint-Foster, DO, Downingtown, Pennsylvania

"I have been doing it this way (in the office) for years, up to 11 to 12 weeks without complication."

-John Lane, MD, Raleigh, North Carolina 

Using a split dose of oral oxycodone after cesarean delivery could more than halve opioid use, according to a study published in Obstetrics & Gynecology.

©joruba/Thinkstock

A retrospective study reviewed medical records of 1,050 women undergoing cesarean delivery, 508 of whom were treated after a change in protocol for postdelivery oxycodone orders. Instead of a 5-mg oral dose given for a verbal pain score of 4/10 or below and 10 mg for a pain score of 5-10/10, patients were given 2.5-mg or 5-mg dose respectively, with a nurse check after 1 hour to see if more of the same dosage was needed.

The split-dose approach was associated with a 56% reduction in median opioid consumption in the first 48 hours after cesarean delivery; 10 mg before the change in practice to 4.4 mg after it. There was also a 6.9-percentage-point decrease in the number of patients needing any postoperative opioids.

While the study did show a slight increase in average verbal pain scores in the first 58 hours after surgery – from a mean of 1.8 before the split-dose protocol was introduced to 2 after it was introduced – there was no increase in the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, or gabapentin, and no difference in peak verbal pain scores.

“Our goal with the introduction of this new order set was to use a patient-centered, response-feedback approach to postcesarean delivery analgesia in the form of split doses of oxycodone rather than the traditional standard dose model,” wrote Jalal A. Nanji, MD, of the department of anesthesiology and pain medicine at the University of Alberta, Edmonton, and coauthors. “Involving patients in the decision for how much postcesarean delivery analgesia they will receive has been found to reduce opioid use and improve maternal satisfaction.”

The number of patients reporting postoperative nausea or vomiting was halved in those treated with the split-dose regimen, with no difference in mean overall patient satisfaction score.

Dr. Nanji and associates wrote that women viewed avoiding nausea or vomiting after a cesarean as a high priority, and targeting the root cause – excessive opioid use – was preferable to treating nausea and vomiting with antiemetics.

They also noted that input from nursing staff was vital in developing the new split-order set, not only because it directly affected nursing work flow but also to optimize the process.

“With the opioid epidemic on the rise and the increase in efforts by physicians to decrease outpatient opioid prescriptions, this study is extremely relevant and timely,” commented Marissa Platner, MD, an assistant professor in maternal-fetal medicine at Emory University, Atlanta.

“Although this study is retrospective and, therefore, there are inherent biases and an inability to control all contributing factors, it clearly demonstrates that, overall, there seem to be improved outcomes with split-dose protocol of opioid administration during the postoperative period in terms of overall patient satisfaction, opioid consumption, and postoperative nausea and vomiting. The patient-centered nature and response-feedback design of this study also contributes to its strength and improves its generalizability. In order to encourage others to considering adapting protocol in other institutions, it should be evaluated via a randomized controlled trial," Dr. Platner said in an interview.* 

"The premise and execution of this study were novel and interesting," commented Katrina Mark, MD, associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology & reproductive sciences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine. "The authors found that by decreasing the standard doses of oxycodone ordered after a cesarean section and asking women if they desired better pain control, rather than reacting only to a pain score, patients’ overall postoperative usage of opiates also decreased. In decreasing the amount of opiates used, the authors also observed a decrease some of the side effects associated with opiate use, which is promising.

"This study, among other recent studies, highlights the fact that postoperative prescribing standards are not evidence-based and may lead to overprescribing of opiates. Improving prescribing practices is a noble and important goal. In this study, a change in clinical practice among both nurses and prescribers is likely what caused the greatest change. The use of a protocol which prescribed oxycodone based on asking if a woman desired improved pain control, rather than prescribing only based on her pain score response, makes a lot of intuitive sense. Decreasing opioid consumption requires education of healthcare providers and patients, and protocols like this one will help to encourage that conversation," she noted in an interview.

"Before the findings of this study can be widely adopted, however, there are two major points that will need to be addressed," Dr. Mark emphasized. "The first is patient satisfaction. The peak pain scores were not different between the groups, but the mean pain scores were. The authors deemed this clinically insignificant, which it may be. However, without the patients’ perspective on this new protocol, it is difficult to tell if the opioid usage decreased because women actually needed less opiates or if it decreased because the system discouraged opioid use and made it more challenging for them to obtain the medicine they needed to achieve adequate pain control. The desire to decrease opioid prescribing is warranted, and likely completely appropriate, but there is certainly a role for opioids in pain management. We should not be so motivated to decrease use that we cause unnecessary suffering. The second point that will need to be addressed is the effect on nursing practice. There was no standardized evaluation of the impact that this protocol had on the nursing staff, and it is unclear if this protocol would require greater resources than may be readily available at all hospitals."**

The study was supported by the department of anesthesiology, perioperative, and pain medicine at Stanford (Calif.) University. One author declared travel funding from a university. No other conflicts of interest were declared. Dr. Platner and Dr. Mark also had no relevant financial disclosures.*

SOURCE: Nanji J et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2019. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003305.

*This article was updated on 7/15/2019.

**It was updated again on 7/17/2019.

Using a split dose of oral oxycodone after cesarean delivery could more than halve opioid use, according to a study published in Obstetrics & Gynecology.

©joruba/Thinkstock

A retrospective study reviewed medical records of 1,050 women undergoing cesarean delivery, 508 of whom were treated after a change in protocol for postdelivery oxycodone orders. Instead of a 5-mg oral dose given for a verbal pain score of 4/10 or below and 10 mg for a pain score of 5-10/10, patients were given 2.5-mg or 5-mg dose respectively, with a nurse check after 1 hour to see if more of the same dosage was needed.

The split-dose approach was associated with a 56% reduction in median opioid consumption in the first 48 hours after cesarean delivery; 10 mg before the change in practice to 4.4 mg after it. There was also a 6.9-percentage-point decrease in the number of patients needing any postoperative opioids.

While the study did show a slight increase in average verbal pain scores in the first 58 hours after surgery – from a mean of 1.8 before the split-dose protocol was introduced to 2 after it was introduced – there was no increase in the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, or gabapentin, and no difference in peak verbal pain scores.

“Our goal with the introduction of this new order set was to use a patient-centered, response-feedback approach to postcesarean delivery analgesia in the form of split doses of oxycodone rather than the traditional standard dose model,” wrote Jalal A. Nanji, MD, of the department of anesthesiology and pain medicine at the University of Alberta, Edmonton, and coauthors. “Involving patients in the decision for how much postcesarean delivery analgesia they will receive has been found to reduce opioid use and improve maternal satisfaction.”

The number of patients reporting postoperative nausea or vomiting was halved in those treated with the split-dose regimen, with no difference in mean overall patient satisfaction score.

Dr. Nanji and associates wrote that women viewed avoiding nausea or vomiting after a cesarean as a high priority, and targeting the root cause – excessive opioid use – was preferable to treating nausea and vomiting with antiemetics.

They also noted that input from nursing staff was vital in developing the new split-order set, not only because it directly affected nursing work flow but also to optimize the process.

“With the opioid epidemic on the rise and the increase in efforts by physicians to decrease outpatient opioid prescriptions, this study is extremely relevant and timely,” commented Marissa Platner, MD, an assistant professor in maternal-fetal medicine at Emory University, Atlanta.

“Although this study is retrospective and, therefore, there are inherent biases and an inability to control all contributing factors, it clearly demonstrates that, overall, there seem to be improved outcomes with split-dose protocol of opioid administration during the postoperative period in terms of overall patient satisfaction, opioid consumption, and postoperative nausea and vomiting. The patient-centered nature and response-feedback design of this study also contributes to its strength and improves its generalizability. In order to encourage others to considering adapting protocol in other institutions, it should be evaluated via a randomized controlled trial," Dr. Platner said in an interview.* 

"The premise and execution of this study were novel and interesting," commented Katrina Mark, MD, associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology & reproductive sciences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine. "The authors found that by decreasing the standard doses of oxycodone ordered after a cesarean section and asking women if they desired better pain control, rather than reacting only to a pain score, patients’ overall postoperative usage of opiates also decreased. In decreasing the amount of opiates used, the authors also observed a decrease some of the side effects associated with opiate use, which is promising.

"This study, among other recent studies, highlights the fact that postoperative prescribing standards are not evidence-based and may lead to overprescribing of opiates. Improving prescribing practices is a noble and important goal. In this study, a change in clinical practice among both nurses and prescribers is likely what caused the greatest change. The use of a protocol which prescribed oxycodone based on asking if a woman desired improved pain control, rather than prescribing only based on her pain score response, makes a lot of intuitive sense. Decreasing opioid consumption requires education of healthcare providers and patients, and protocols like this one will help to encourage that conversation," she noted in an interview.

"Before the findings of this study can be widely adopted, however, there are two major points that will need to be addressed," Dr. Mark emphasized. "The first is patient satisfaction. The peak pain scores were not different between the groups, but the mean pain scores were. The authors deemed this clinically insignificant, which it may be. However, without the patients’ perspective on this new protocol, it is difficult to tell if the opioid usage decreased because women actually needed less opiates or if it decreased because the system discouraged opioid use and made it more challenging for them to obtain the medicine they needed to achieve adequate pain control. The desire to decrease opioid prescribing is warranted, and likely completely appropriate, but there is certainly a role for opioids in pain management. We should not be so motivated to decrease use that we cause unnecessary suffering. The second point that will need to be addressed is the effect on nursing practice. There was no standardized evaluation of the impact that this protocol had on the nursing staff, and it is unclear if this protocol would require greater resources than may be readily available at all hospitals."**

The study was supported by the department of anesthesiology, perioperative, and pain medicine at Stanford (Calif.) University. One author declared travel funding from a university. No other conflicts of interest were declared. Dr. Platner and Dr. Mark also had no relevant financial disclosures.*

SOURCE: Nanji J et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2019. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003305.

*This article was updated on 7/15/2019.

**It was updated again on 7/17/2019.

Using a split dose of oral oxycodone after cesarean delivery could more than halve opioid use, according to a study published in Obstetrics & Gynecology.

©joruba/Thinkstock

A retrospective study reviewed medical records of 1,050 women undergoing cesarean delivery, 508 of whom were treated after a change in protocol for postdelivery oxycodone orders. Instead of a 5-mg oral dose given for a verbal pain score of 4/10 or below and 10 mg for a pain score of 5-10/10, patients were given 2.5-mg or 5-mg dose respectively, with a nurse check after 1 hour to see if more of the same dosage was needed.

The split-dose approach was associated with a 56% reduction in median opioid consumption in the first 48 hours after cesarean delivery; 10 mg before the change in practice to 4.4 mg after it. There was also a 6.9-percentage-point decrease in the number of patients needing any postoperative opioids.

While the study did show a slight increase in average verbal pain scores in the first 58 hours after surgery – from a mean of 1.8 before the split-dose protocol was introduced to 2 after it was introduced – there was no increase in the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, or gabapentin, and no difference in peak verbal pain scores.

“Our goal with the introduction of this new order set was to use a patient-centered, response-feedback approach to postcesarean delivery analgesia in the form of split doses of oxycodone rather than the traditional standard dose model,” wrote Jalal A. Nanji, MD, of the department of anesthesiology and pain medicine at the University of Alberta, Edmonton, and coauthors. “Involving patients in the decision for how much postcesarean delivery analgesia they will receive has been found to reduce opioid use and improve maternal satisfaction.”

The number of patients reporting postoperative nausea or vomiting was halved in those treated with the split-dose regimen, with no difference in mean overall patient satisfaction score.

Dr. Nanji and associates wrote that women viewed avoiding nausea or vomiting after a cesarean as a high priority, and targeting the root cause – excessive opioid use – was preferable to treating nausea and vomiting with antiemetics.

They also noted that input from nursing staff was vital in developing the new split-order set, not only because it directly affected nursing work flow but also to optimize the process.

“With the opioid epidemic on the rise and the increase in efforts by physicians to decrease outpatient opioid prescriptions, this study is extremely relevant and timely,” commented Marissa Platner, MD, an assistant professor in maternal-fetal medicine at Emory University, Atlanta.

“Although this study is retrospective and, therefore, there are inherent biases and an inability to control all contributing factors, it clearly demonstrates that, overall, there seem to be improved outcomes with split-dose protocol of opioid administration during the postoperative period in terms of overall patient satisfaction, opioid consumption, and postoperative nausea and vomiting. The patient-centered nature and response-feedback design of this study also contributes to its strength and improves its generalizability. In order to encourage others to considering adapting protocol in other institutions, it should be evaluated via a randomized controlled trial," Dr. Platner said in an interview.* 

"The premise and execution of this study were novel and interesting," commented Katrina Mark, MD, associate professor of obstetrics, gynecology & reproductive sciences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine. "The authors found that by decreasing the standard doses of oxycodone ordered after a cesarean section and asking women if they desired better pain control, rather than reacting only to a pain score, patients’ overall postoperative usage of opiates also decreased. In decreasing the amount of opiates used, the authors also observed a decrease some of the side effects associated with opiate use, which is promising.

"This study, among other recent studies, highlights the fact that postoperative prescribing standards are not evidence-based and may lead to overprescribing of opiates. Improving prescribing practices is a noble and important goal. In this study, a change in clinical practice among both nurses and prescribers is likely what caused the greatest change. The use of a protocol which prescribed oxycodone based on asking if a woman desired improved pain control, rather than prescribing only based on her pain score response, makes a lot of intuitive sense. Decreasing opioid consumption requires education of healthcare providers and patients, and protocols like this one will help to encourage that conversation," she noted in an interview.

"Before the findings of this study can be widely adopted, however, there are two major points that will need to be addressed," Dr. Mark emphasized. "The first is patient satisfaction. The peak pain scores were not different between the groups, but the mean pain scores were. The authors deemed this clinically insignificant, which it may be. However, without the patients’ perspective on this new protocol, it is difficult to tell if the opioid usage decreased because women actually needed less opiates or if it decreased because the system discouraged opioid use and made it more challenging for them to obtain the medicine they needed to achieve adequate pain control. The desire to decrease opioid prescribing is warranted, and likely completely appropriate, but there is certainly a role for opioids in pain management. We should not be so motivated to decrease use that we cause unnecessary suffering. The second point that will need to be addressed is the effect on nursing practice. There was no standardized evaluation of the impact that this protocol had on the nursing staff, and it is unclear if this protocol would require greater resources than may be readily available at all hospitals."**

The study was supported by the department of anesthesiology, perioperative, and pain medicine at Stanford (Calif.) University. One author declared travel funding from a university. No other conflicts of interest were declared. Dr. Platner and Dr. Mark also had no relevant financial disclosures.*

SOURCE: Nanji J et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2019. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003305.

*This article was updated on 7/15/2019.

**It was updated again on 7/17/2019.

The SVS Foundation’s patient fliers project is completed, and fliers are available free to members on the SVS website. Nine vascular topics are addressed in updated fliers, including Carotid Artery Disease, Diabetes, Peripheral Arterial Disease, and more. These were redesigned to be useful in a patient waiting room, or to hand to a patient during an office visit. They are available in both English and Spanish, and can be found on the SVS website here.

The SVS Foundation’s patient fliers project is completed, and fliers are available free to members on the SVS website. Nine vascular topics are addressed in updated fliers, including Carotid Artery Disease, Diabetes, Peripheral Arterial Disease, and more. These were redesigned to be useful in a patient waiting room, or to hand to a patient during an office visit. They are available in both English and Spanish, and can be found on the SVS website here.

The SVS Foundation’s patient fliers project is completed, and fliers are available free to members on the SVS website. Nine vascular topics are addressed in updated fliers, including Carotid Artery Disease, Diabetes, Peripheral Arterial Disease, and more. These were redesigned to be useful in a patient waiting room, or to hand to a patient during an office visit. They are available in both English and Spanish, and can be found on the SVS website here.

The SVS Foundation developed the Research Career Development Travel Awards program to develop strong leaders in vascular surgery research. Recipients of the award will be assigned SVS research mentors who will provide guidance and discuss academic career advancement. They’ll also receive financial support to be used for travel, hotel accommodations and registration expenses for a research course. Applicants must be an SVS Candidate or Active Member who’s completed postgraduate clinical training in vascular surgery and has been in practice no more than seven years. Apply before August 15 to be considered.

The SVS Foundation developed the Research Career Development Travel Awards program to develop strong leaders in vascular surgery research. Recipients of the award will be assigned SVS research mentors who will provide guidance and discuss academic career advancement. They’ll also receive financial support to be used for travel, hotel accommodations and registration expenses for a research course. Applicants must be an SVS Candidate or Active Member who’s completed postgraduate clinical training in vascular surgery and has been in practice no more than seven years. Apply before August 15 to be considered.

The SVS Foundation developed the Research Career Development Travel Awards program to develop strong leaders in vascular surgery research. Recipients of the award will be assigned SVS research mentors who will provide guidance and discuss academic career advancement. They’ll also receive financial support to be used for travel, hotel accommodations and registration expenses for a research course. Applicants must be an SVS Candidate or Active Member who’s completed postgraduate clinical training in vascular surgery and has been in practice no more than seven years. Apply before August 15 to be considered.

If you attended the 2019 Vascular Annual Meeting in National Harbor, Md., be sure to check out the many photos now available on the SVS Flickr account. Relive the education sessions, the exhibit hall, the alumni receptions and the marvelous “Vascular Spectacular” gala. View, download and share these as much as you’d like. If you had your headshot taken at the SVS Booth, you can find that photo here.

If you attended the 2019 Vascular Annual Meeting in National Harbor, Md., be sure to check out the many photos now available on the SVS Flickr account. Relive the education sessions, the exhibit hall, the alumni receptions and the marvelous “Vascular Spectacular” gala. View, download and share these as much as you’d like. If you had your headshot taken at the SVS Booth, you can find that photo here.

If you attended the 2019 Vascular Annual Meeting in National Harbor, Md., be sure to check out the many photos now available on the SVS Flickr account. Relive the education sessions, the exhibit hall, the alumni receptions and the marvelous “Vascular Spectacular” gala. View, download and share these as much as you’d like. If you had your headshot taken at the SVS Booth, you can find that photo here.

Bakuchiol [(1E,3S)-3-ethenyl-3,7-dimethyl-1,6-octadien-1-yl]phenol, a prenylated phenolic monoterpene found in the seeds and leaves of various plants, particularly Psoralea corylifolia, has been used to treat a broad array of disorders, including skin conditions, in the traditional medical practices of China, Japan, and Korea, as well as Ayurvedic medicine in India.^1-6 Specifically, the seeds of Psoralea corylifolia have also been used in traditional Chinese medicine to treat leukoderma, psoriasis, vitiligo, chronic graft-versus-host disease, and other skin disorders, as well as cardiovascular diseases, nephritis, osteoporosis, and cancer.^7-9

Anna Gorbacheva / iStock / Getty Images Plus

This primary active ingredient is reputed to exert antioxidant, antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, antiaging, and estrogen-like functions, and recent data suggest anticancer activity, including activity against skin cancer. Its antiaging properties manifest via preservation of cutaneous collagen.⁴ The plant itself has displayed a wide range of biological functions, such as antibacterial, anticancer, cytotoxic, cardiac, diaphoretic, diuretic, stimulant, aphrodisiac, and tonifying activities.^8,9 A 2016 quantitative analysis of Psoralea corylifolia and seven of its standard constituents (psoralen, angelicin, neobavaisoflavone, psoralidin, isobavachalcone, bavachinin, and bakuchiol) using high-performance liquid chromatography revealed that bakuchiol is the strongest phytochemical ingredient in the plant, which the investigators found also confers neuroprotective and antineuroinflammatory benefits.³

Other species contain bakuchiol, and its biological activities have been harnessed in other folk medical traditions. The monoterpene is an important constituent found in Ulmus davidiana var. japonica, which is used for its anti-inflammatory properties in traditional Korean medicine.¹⁰ Further, bakuchiol and 3-hydroxy-bakuchiol have been identified as key components isolated from Psoralea glandulosa, which is a shrub used in Chilean folk medicine to treat cutaneous disorders engendered by bacteria and fungus.¹¹ Topical applications of bakuchiol have been demonstrated to confer antiaging benefits.¹² This column briefly identifies some of the various uses emerging for this compelling botanical agent.
 

Antiaging activities

In 2014, Yu et al. found that bakuchiol may impart antiaging benefits by supporting the cellular activity of the expression level of human skin fibroblasts (ESF-1), as well as production of collagen types I and III, while reducing the matrix metalloproteinase-1 mRNA expression.¹³

The same year, Chaudhuri et al. compared the skin care–related activities of retinol and bakuchiol, finding their gene expression profiles very similar. In addition, they observed that bakuchiol up-regulated collagen types I and IV in a DNA microarray study and stimulated type III collagen production in a model of mature fibroblasts. Further, the investigators formulated bakuchiol into a skin care product and tested it clinically, with twice daily applications over 12 weeks yielding significant amelioration in lines and wrinkles, pigmentation, elasticity, and firmness, as well as overall diminished photodamage without provoking redness. They concluded that bakuchiol can act as an antiaging agent through regulation of gene expression comparable to retinol.¹

Retinoids without reactions?

In 2017, Ma et al. set out to synthesize and test in psoriatic cytokine–treated cultures of keratinocytes and organotypic skin substitutes a new substance created by combining two skin-active compounds (bakuchiol and salicylic acid) into bakuchiol salicylate (bakusylan), with the intention of rendering a novel functional retinoid. The researchers reported that the gene expression profile showed elimination of various retinoid-like proinflammatory responses, without a loss of normalizing activity. They concluded that their work may result in a new class of functional retinoids.¹⁴

Early this year, Dhaliwal et al. reported on a randomized, double-blind, 12-week study of 44 patients who applied either bakuchiol 0.5% cream twice daily or retinol 0.5% cream daily. Facial photographs were evaluated at baseline, 4, 8, and 12 weeks, and a blinded dermatologist rated pigmentation and erythema. Side effects were also noted by subjects in tolerability assessment questionnaires. Both compounds significantly reduced wrinkles and hyperpigmentation, with no statistical variance found between the two. More facial skin scaling and stinging was experienced by the retinol group. The investigators concluded that bakuchiol exhibits photoaging activity comparable with retinol and appears to be an emerging alternative to retinol because it is better tolerated.¹² Notably, there is one report to date of an allergic reaction to topical bakuchiol.¹⁵
 

Topical combination therapies for hyperpigmentation, photodamage, and acne

Bakuchiol was a key ingredient incorporated into a 0.5% retinol treatment evaluated in a 12-week, open-label, single-center clinical-usage trial of 44 women with mild to moderate hyperpigmentation and photodamaged facial skin who took a dual product regimen. This 2016 study showed that the retinol and vitamin C facial regimen yielded a statistically significant amelioration in clinical grading of all parameters.¹⁶

A 2015 randomized controlled clinical trial in 111 subjects evaluated the use of adapalene 0.1% gel and a formulation containing bakuchiol, Ginkgo biloba extract, and mannitol in patients with acne. Patients were randomized to the adapalene and botanical formulation or adapalene and vehicle cream for 2 months. Both treatment groups experienced improvements according to all measured outcomes. The botanical formulation was associated with a statistically significant edge over the vehicle combination in reducing inflammatory lesions, investigator global assessment, and intensity of seborrhea. Quality of life was also perceived to be better with the combination of adapalene and the bakuchiol-containing product, which was deemed to be safe with good local tolerability.¹⁷

A subsequent evaluation by a different team also considered the antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, and antioxidative potential of this combination product via in vitro, ex vivo, and clinical studies. The work by Trompezinski et al. revealed that bakuchiol displays nearly twice the antioxidative potential asthat of vitamin E. The bakuchiol-containing cream was shown in acne patients to successfully regulate sebum composition by raising linolenic and sapienic acid levels while lowering oleic acid levels. Its efficacy against Propionibacterium acnes was also suggested by a decrease in the number of skin surface porphyrins. The investigators concluded that the formulation serves as an effective adjuvant acne treatment by attacking inflammation, dysseborrhea, and proliferation of Propionibacterium acnes.¹⁸
 

Anticancer activity

In 2016, Kim et al. demonstrated that bakuchiol exhibits chemopreventive activity by hindering epidermal growth factor (EGF)–induced neoplastic cell transformation. In what was the first mechanistic study to reveal molecular targets for the anticancer activity of this substance, the investigators found that bakuchiol also reduced the viability and suppressed anchorage-independent growth of A431 human epithelial carcinoma cells. They identified Hck, Blk, and p38 MAPK as the molecular targets of what they identified as a potent anticancer compound.²

Skin-whitening potential

In 2010, Ohno et al. found that bakuchiol, along with other ingredients, isolated from Piper longum demonstrated strong suppressive activity against melanin production in B16 mouse melanoma cells and may have potential to affect melanin synthesis in human skin.¹⁹ Further, with use of a new method for screening tyrosinase, Cheng et al. found in 2017 that four substances used in traditional Chinese medicine (quercetin, kaempferol, bavachinin, and bakuchiol) displayed the potential for inhibiting tyrosinase.²⁰

Conclusion

A compound that acts like a retinoid – yielding antiacne and antiaging effects – without provoking irritation? Most dermatologists and their patients would say, sign me up. Bakuchiol, an active ingredient in various plants, especially Psoralea corylifolia, seems to present that kind of profile. While more research is necessary, experience with this herbal ingredient in traditional medicine and an increasing body of research, including clinical results, provides reasons for optimism that this ingredient may have a versatile role to play in topical skin care, particularly in its retinoid-like functions.

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author, and entrepreneur who practices in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote two textbooks: “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002) and “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2014), as well as a New York Times Best Sellers book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Evolus, Galderma, and Revance. She is the founder and CEO of Skin Type Solutions Franchise Systems. Write to her at [email protected].

References

1. Chaudhuri RK et al. Int J Cosmet Sci. 2014 Jun;36(3):221-30.

2. Kim JE et al. Oncotarget. 2016 Mar 22;7(12):14616-27.

3. Kim YJ et al. Molecules. 2016 Aug 17. doi: 10.3390/molecules21081076.

4. Xin Z et al. Pharmacol Res. 2019 Mar;141:208-13.

5. Lev-Tov H. Br J Dermatol. 2019 Feb;180(2):253-4.

6. Shrestha S et al. J Ayurveda Integr Med. 2018 Jul - Sep; 9(3):209-12.

7. Li CC et al. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2016. doi: 10.1155/2016/8108643.

8. Hu C et al. Fitoterapia. 2015 Oct;106:129-34.

9. Yan DM et al. J Ethnopharmacol. 2010 Apr 21;128(3):697-702.

10. Choi SY et al. J Med Food. 2010 Aug;13(4):1019-23.

11. Madrid A et al. J Ethnopharmacol. 2012 Dec 18;144(3):809-11.

12. Dhaliwal S et al. Br J Dermatol. 2019 Feb;180(2):289-96.

13. Yu Q et al. Zhong Yao Cai. 2014 Apr;37(4):632-5.

14. Ma S et al. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2017 Apr;42(3):251-60.

15. Malinauskiene L et al. Contact Dermatitis. 2019 Jun;80(6):398-9.

16. Herndon JH Jr, et al. J Drugs Dermatol. 2016 Apr;15(4):476-82.

17. Poláková K et al. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2015 Apr 10;8:187-91.

18. Trompezinski S et al. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2016 Aug 31;9:233-9.

19. Ohno O et al. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2010;74(7):1504-6.

20. Cheng M et al. Electrophoresis. 2017 Feb;38(3-4):486-93.

Bakuchiol [(1E,3S)-3-ethenyl-3,7-dimethyl-1,6-octadien-1-yl]phenol, a prenylated phenolic monoterpene found in the seeds and leaves of various plants, particularly Psoralea corylifolia, has been used to treat a broad array of disorders, including skin conditions, in the traditional medical practices of China, Japan, and Korea, as well as Ayurvedic medicine in India.^1-6 Specifically, the seeds of Psoralea corylifolia have also been used in traditional Chinese medicine to treat leukoderma, psoriasis, vitiligo, chronic graft-versus-host disease, and other skin disorders, as well as cardiovascular diseases, nephritis, osteoporosis, and cancer.^7-9

Anna Gorbacheva / iStock / Getty Images Plus

This primary active ingredient is reputed to exert antioxidant, antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, antiaging, and estrogen-like functions, and recent data suggest anticancer activity, including activity against skin cancer. Its antiaging properties manifest via preservation of cutaneous collagen.⁴ The plant itself has displayed a wide range of biological functions, such as antibacterial, anticancer, cytotoxic, cardiac, diaphoretic, diuretic, stimulant, aphrodisiac, and tonifying activities.^8,9 A 2016 quantitative analysis of Psoralea corylifolia and seven of its standard constituents (psoralen, angelicin, neobavaisoflavone, psoralidin, isobavachalcone, bavachinin, and bakuchiol) using high-performance liquid chromatography revealed that bakuchiol is the strongest phytochemical ingredient in the plant, which the investigators found also confers neuroprotective and antineuroinflammatory benefits.³

Other species contain bakuchiol, and its biological activities have been harnessed in other folk medical traditions. The monoterpene is an important constituent found in Ulmus davidiana var. japonica, which is used for its anti-inflammatory properties in traditional Korean medicine.¹⁰ Further, bakuchiol and 3-hydroxy-bakuchiol have been identified as key components isolated from Psoralea glandulosa, which is a shrub used in Chilean folk medicine to treat cutaneous disorders engendered by bacteria and fungus.¹¹ Topical applications of bakuchiol have been demonstrated to confer antiaging benefits.¹² This column briefly identifies some of the various uses emerging for this compelling botanical agent.
 

Antiaging activities

In 2014, Yu et al. found that bakuchiol may impart antiaging benefits by supporting the cellular activity of the expression level of human skin fibroblasts (ESF-1), as well as production of collagen types I and III, while reducing the matrix metalloproteinase-1 mRNA expression.¹³

The same year, Chaudhuri et al. compared the skin care–related activities of retinol and bakuchiol, finding their gene expression profiles very similar. In addition, they observed that bakuchiol up-regulated collagen types I and IV in a DNA microarray study and stimulated type III collagen production in a model of mature fibroblasts. Further, the investigators formulated bakuchiol into a skin care product and tested it clinically, with twice daily applications over 12 weeks yielding significant amelioration in lines and wrinkles, pigmentation, elasticity, and firmness, as well as overall diminished photodamage without provoking redness. They concluded that bakuchiol can act as an antiaging agent through regulation of gene expression comparable to retinol.¹

Retinoids without reactions?

In 2017, Ma et al. set out to synthesize and test in psoriatic cytokine–treated cultures of keratinocytes and organotypic skin substitutes a new substance created by combining two skin-active compounds (bakuchiol and salicylic acid) into bakuchiol salicylate (bakusylan), with the intention of rendering a novel functional retinoid. The researchers reported that the gene expression profile showed elimination of various retinoid-like proinflammatory responses, without a loss of normalizing activity. They concluded that their work may result in a new class of functional retinoids.¹⁴

Early this year, Dhaliwal et al. reported on a randomized, double-blind, 12-week study of 44 patients who applied either bakuchiol 0.5% cream twice daily or retinol 0.5% cream daily. Facial photographs were evaluated at baseline, 4, 8, and 12 weeks, and a blinded dermatologist rated pigmentation and erythema. Side effects were also noted by subjects in tolerability assessment questionnaires. Both compounds significantly reduced wrinkles and hyperpigmentation, with no statistical variance found between the two. More facial skin scaling and stinging was experienced by the retinol group. The investigators concluded that bakuchiol exhibits photoaging activity comparable with retinol and appears to be an emerging alternative to retinol because it is better tolerated.¹² Notably, there is one report to date of an allergic reaction to topical bakuchiol.¹⁵
 

Topical combination therapies for hyperpigmentation, photodamage, and acne

Bakuchiol was a key ingredient incorporated into a 0.5% retinol treatment evaluated in a 12-week, open-label, single-center clinical-usage trial of 44 women with mild to moderate hyperpigmentation and photodamaged facial skin who took a dual product regimen. This 2016 study showed that the retinol and vitamin C facial regimen yielded a statistically significant amelioration in clinical grading of all parameters.¹⁶

A 2015 randomized controlled clinical trial in 111 subjects evaluated the use of adapalene 0.1% gel and a formulation containing bakuchiol, Ginkgo biloba extract, and mannitol in patients with acne. Patients were randomized to the adapalene and botanical formulation or adapalene and vehicle cream for 2 months. Both treatment groups experienced improvements according to all measured outcomes. The botanical formulation was associated with a statistically significant edge over the vehicle combination in reducing inflammatory lesions, investigator global assessment, and intensity of seborrhea. Quality of life was also perceived to be better with the combination of adapalene and the bakuchiol-containing product, which was deemed to be safe with good local tolerability.¹⁷

A subsequent evaluation by a different team also considered the antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, and antioxidative potential of this combination product via in vitro, ex vivo, and clinical studies. The work by Trompezinski et al. revealed that bakuchiol displays nearly twice the antioxidative potential asthat of vitamin E. The bakuchiol-containing cream was shown in acne patients to successfully regulate sebum composition by raising linolenic and sapienic acid levels while lowering oleic acid levels. Its efficacy against Propionibacterium acnes was also suggested by a decrease in the number of skin surface porphyrins. The investigators concluded that the formulation serves as an effective adjuvant acne treatment by attacking inflammation, dysseborrhea, and proliferation of Propionibacterium acnes.¹⁸
 

Anticancer activity

In 2016, Kim et al. demonstrated that bakuchiol exhibits chemopreventive activity by hindering epidermal growth factor (EGF)–induced neoplastic cell transformation. In what was the first mechanistic study to reveal molecular targets for the anticancer activity of this substance, the investigators found that bakuchiol also reduced the viability and suppressed anchorage-independent growth of A431 human epithelial carcinoma cells. They identified Hck, Blk, and p38 MAPK as the molecular targets of what they identified as a potent anticancer compound.²

Skin-whitening potential

In 2010, Ohno et al. found that bakuchiol, along with other ingredients, isolated from Piper longum demonstrated strong suppressive activity against melanin production in B16 mouse melanoma cells and may have potential to affect melanin synthesis in human skin.¹⁹ Further, with use of a new method for screening tyrosinase, Cheng et al. found in 2017 that four substances used in traditional Chinese medicine (quercetin, kaempferol, bavachinin, and bakuchiol) displayed the potential for inhibiting tyrosinase.²⁰

Conclusion

A compound that acts like a retinoid – yielding antiacne and antiaging effects – without provoking irritation? Most dermatologists and their patients would say, sign me up. Bakuchiol, an active ingredient in various plants, especially Psoralea corylifolia, seems to present that kind of profile. While more research is necessary, experience with this herbal ingredient in traditional medicine and an increasing body of research, including clinical results, provides reasons for optimism that this ingredient may have a versatile role to play in topical skin care, particularly in its retinoid-like functions.

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author, and entrepreneur who practices in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote two textbooks: “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002) and “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2014), as well as a New York Times Best Sellers book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Evolus, Galderma, and Revance. She is the founder and CEO of Skin Type Solutions Franchise Systems. Write to her at [email protected].

References

1. Chaudhuri RK et al. Int J Cosmet Sci. 2014 Jun;36(3):221-30.

2. Kim JE et al. Oncotarget. 2016 Mar 22;7(12):14616-27.

3. Kim YJ et al. Molecules. 2016 Aug 17. doi: 10.3390/molecules21081076.

4. Xin Z et al. Pharmacol Res. 2019 Mar;141:208-13.

5. Lev-Tov H. Br J Dermatol. 2019 Feb;180(2):253-4.

6. Shrestha S et al. J Ayurveda Integr Med. 2018 Jul - Sep; 9(3):209-12.

7. Li CC et al. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2016. doi: 10.1155/2016/8108643.

8. Hu C et al. Fitoterapia. 2015 Oct;106:129-34.

9. Yan DM et al. J Ethnopharmacol. 2010 Apr 21;128(3):697-702.

10. Choi SY et al. J Med Food. 2010 Aug;13(4):1019-23.

11. Madrid A et al. J Ethnopharmacol. 2012 Dec 18;144(3):809-11.

12. Dhaliwal S et al. Br J Dermatol. 2019 Feb;180(2):289-96.

13. Yu Q et al. Zhong Yao Cai. 2014 Apr;37(4):632-5.

14. Ma S et al. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2017 Apr;42(3):251-60.

15. Malinauskiene L et al. Contact Dermatitis. 2019 Jun;80(6):398-9.

16. Herndon JH Jr, et al. J Drugs Dermatol. 2016 Apr;15(4):476-82.

17. Poláková K et al. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2015 Apr 10;8:187-91.

18. Trompezinski S et al. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2016 Aug 31;9:233-9.

19. Ohno O et al. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2010;74(7):1504-6.

20. Cheng M et al. Electrophoresis. 2017 Feb;38(3-4):486-93.

Bakuchiol [(1E,3S)-3-ethenyl-3,7-dimethyl-1,6-octadien-1-yl]phenol, a prenylated phenolic monoterpene found in the seeds and leaves of various plants, particularly Psoralea corylifolia, has been used to treat a broad array of disorders, including skin conditions, in the traditional medical practices of China, Japan, and Korea, as well as Ayurvedic medicine in India.^1-6 Specifically, the seeds of Psoralea corylifolia have also been used in traditional Chinese medicine to treat leukoderma, psoriasis, vitiligo, chronic graft-versus-host disease, and other skin disorders, as well as cardiovascular diseases, nephritis, osteoporosis, and cancer.^7-9

Anna Gorbacheva / iStock / Getty Images Plus

This primary active ingredient is reputed to exert antioxidant, antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, antiaging, and estrogen-like functions, and recent data suggest anticancer activity, including activity against skin cancer. Its antiaging properties manifest via preservation of cutaneous collagen.⁴ The plant itself has displayed a wide range of biological functions, such as antibacterial, anticancer, cytotoxic, cardiac, diaphoretic, diuretic, stimulant, aphrodisiac, and tonifying activities.^8,9 A 2016 quantitative analysis of Psoralea corylifolia and seven of its standard constituents (psoralen, angelicin, neobavaisoflavone, psoralidin, isobavachalcone, bavachinin, and bakuchiol) using high-performance liquid chromatography revealed that bakuchiol is the strongest phytochemical ingredient in the plant, which the investigators found also confers neuroprotective and antineuroinflammatory benefits.³

Other species contain bakuchiol, and its biological activities have been harnessed in other folk medical traditions. The monoterpene is an important constituent found in Ulmus davidiana var. japonica, which is used for its anti-inflammatory properties in traditional Korean medicine.¹⁰ Further, bakuchiol and 3-hydroxy-bakuchiol have been identified as key components isolated from Psoralea glandulosa, which is a shrub used in Chilean folk medicine to treat cutaneous disorders engendered by bacteria and fungus.¹¹ Topical applications of bakuchiol have been demonstrated to confer antiaging benefits.¹² This column briefly identifies some of the various uses emerging for this compelling botanical agent.
 

Antiaging activities

In 2014, Yu et al. found that bakuchiol may impart antiaging benefits by supporting the cellular activity of the expression level of human skin fibroblasts (ESF-1), as well as production of collagen types I and III, while reducing the matrix metalloproteinase-1 mRNA expression.¹³

The same year, Chaudhuri et al. compared the skin care–related activities of retinol and bakuchiol, finding their gene expression profiles very similar. In addition, they observed that bakuchiol up-regulated collagen types I and IV in a DNA microarray study and stimulated type III collagen production in a model of mature fibroblasts. Further, the investigators formulated bakuchiol into a skin care product and tested it clinically, with twice daily applications over 12 weeks yielding significant amelioration in lines and wrinkles, pigmentation, elasticity, and firmness, as well as overall diminished photodamage without provoking redness. They concluded that bakuchiol can act as an antiaging agent through regulation of gene expression comparable to retinol.¹

Retinoids without reactions?

In 2017, Ma et al. set out to synthesize and test in psoriatic cytokine–treated cultures of keratinocytes and organotypic skin substitutes a new substance created by combining two skin-active compounds (bakuchiol and salicylic acid) into bakuchiol salicylate (bakusylan), with the intention of rendering a novel functional retinoid. The researchers reported that the gene expression profile showed elimination of various retinoid-like proinflammatory responses, without a loss of normalizing activity. They concluded that their work may result in a new class of functional retinoids.¹⁴

Early this year, Dhaliwal et al. reported on a randomized, double-blind, 12-week study of 44 patients who applied either bakuchiol 0.5% cream twice daily or retinol 0.5% cream daily. Facial photographs were evaluated at baseline, 4, 8, and 12 weeks, and a blinded dermatologist rated pigmentation and erythema. Side effects were also noted by subjects in tolerability assessment questionnaires. Both compounds significantly reduced wrinkles and hyperpigmentation, with no statistical variance found between the two. More facial skin scaling and stinging was experienced by the retinol group. The investigators concluded that bakuchiol exhibits photoaging activity comparable with retinol and appears to be an emerging alternative to retinol because it is better tolerated.¹² Notably, there is one report to date of an allergic reaction to topical bakuchiol.¹⁵
 

Topical combination therapies for hyperpigmentation, photodamage, and acne

Bakuchiol was a key ingredient incorporated into a 0.5% retinol treatment evaluated in a 12-week, open-label, single-center clinical-usage trial of 44 women with mild to moderate hyperpigmentation and photodamaged facial skin who took a dual product regimen. This 2016 study showed that the retinol and vitamin C facial regimen yielded a statistically significant amelioration in clinical grading of all parameters.¹⁶

A 2015 randomized controlled clinical trial in 111 subjects evaluated the use of adapalene 0.1% gel and a formulation containing bakuchiol, Ginkgo biloba extract, and mannitol in patients with acne. Patients were randomized to the adapalene and botanical formulation or adapalene and vehicle cream for 2 months. Both treatment groups experienced improvements according to all measured outcomes. The botanical formulation was associated with a statistically significant edge over the vehicle combination in reducing inflammatory lesions, investigator global assessment, and intensity of seborrhea. Quality of life was also perceived to be better with the combination of adapalene and the bakuchiol-containing product, which was deemed to be safe with good local tolerability.¹⁷

A subsequent evaluation by a different team also considered the antibacterial, anti-inflammatory, and antioxidative potential of this combination product via in vitro, ex vivo, and clinical studies. The work by Trompezinski et al. revealed that bakuchiol displays nearly twice the antioxidative potential asthat of vitamin E. The bakuchiol-containing cream was shown in acne patients to successfully regulate sebum composition by raising linolenic and sapienic acid levels while lowering oleic acid levels. Its efficacy against Propionibacterium acnes was also suggested by a decrease in the number of skin surface porphyrins. The investigators concluded that the formulation serves as an effective adjuvant acne treatment by attacking inflammation, dysseborrhea, and proliferation of Propionibacterium acnes.¹⁸
 

Anticancer activity

In 2016, Kim et al. demonstrated that bakuchiol exhibits chemopreventive activity by hindering epidermal growth factor (EGF)–induced neoplastic cell transformation. In what was the first mechanistic study to reveal molecular targets for the anticancer activity of this substance, the investigators found that bakuchiol also reduced the viability and suppressed anchorage-independent growth of A431 human epithelial carcinoma cells. They identified Hck, Blk, and p38 MAPK as the molecular targets of what they identified as a potent anticancer compound.²

Skin-whitening potential

In 2010, Ohno et al. found that bakuchiol, along with other ingredients, isolated from Piper longum demonstrated strong suppressive activity against melanin production in B16 mouse melanoma cells and may have potential to affect melanin synthesis in human skin.¹⁹ Further, with use of a new method for screening tyrosinase, Cheng et al. found in 2017 that four substances used in traditional Chinese medicine (quercetin, kaempferol, bavachinin, and bakuchiol) displayed the potential for inhibiting tyrosinase.²⁰

Conclusion

A compound that acts like a retinoid – yielding antiacne and antiaging effects – without provoking irritation? Most dermatologists and their patients would say, sign me up. Bakuchiol, an active ingredient in various plants, especially Psoralea corylifolia, seems to present that kind of profile. While more research is necessary, experience with this herbal ingredient in traditional medicine and an increasing body of research, including clinical results, provides reasons for optimism that this ingredient may have a versatile role to play in topical skin care, particularly in its retinoid-like functions.

Dr. Baumann is a private practice dermatologist, researcher, author, and entrepreneur who practices in Miami. She founded the Cosmetic Dermatology Center at the University of Miami in 1997. Dr. Baumann wrote two textbooks: “Cosmetic Dermatology: Principles and Practice” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002) and “Cosmeceuticals and Cosmetic Ingredients” (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2014), as well as a New York Times Best Sellers book for consumers, “The Skin Type Solution” (New York: Bantam Dell, 2006). Dr. Baumann has received funding for advisory boards and/or clinical research trials from Allergan, Evolus, Galderma, and Revance. She is the founder and CEO of Skin Type Solutions Franchise Systems. Write to her at [email protected].

References

1. Chaudhuri RK et al. Int J Cosmet Sci. 2014 Jun;36(3):221-30.

2. Kim JE et al. Oncotarget. 2016 Mar 22;7(12):14616-27.

3. Kim YJ et al. Molecules. 2016 Aug 17. doi: 10.3390/molecules21081076.

4. Xin Z et al. Pharmacol Res. 2019 Mar;141:208-13.

5. Lev-Tov H. Br J Dermatol. 2019 Feb;180(2):253-4.

6. Shrestha S et al. J Ayurveda Integr Med. 2018 Jul - Sep; 9(3):209-12.

7. Li CC et al. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2016. doi: 10.1155/2016/8108643.

8. Hu C et al. Fitoterapia. 2015 Oct;106:129-34.

9. Yan DM et al. J Ethnopharmacol. 2010 Apr 21;128(3):697-702.

10. Choi SY et al. J Med Food. 2010 Aug;13(4):1019-23.

11. Madrid A et al. J Ethnopharmacol. 2012 Dec 18;144(3):809-11.

12. Dhaliwal S et al. Br J Dermatol. 2019 Feb;180(2):289-96.

13. Yu Q et al. Zhong Yao Cai. 2014 Apr;37(4):632-5.

14. Ma S et al. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2017 Apr;42(3):251-60.

15. Malinauskiene L et al. Contact Dermatitis. 2019 Jun;80(6):398-9.

16. Herndon JH Jr, et al. J Drugs Dermatol. 2016 Apr;15(4):476-82.

17. Poláková K et al. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2015 Apr 10;8:187-91.

18. Trompezinski S et al. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol. 2016 Aug 31;9:233-9.

19. Ohno O et al. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2010;74(7):1504-6.

20. Cheng M et al. Electrophoresis. 2017 Feb;38(3-4):486-93.