Rapidly progressive pleural effusion

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
Rapidly progressive pleural effusion

A 33-year-old male nonsmoker with no significant medical history presented to the pulmonary clinic with severe left-sided pleuritic chest pain and mild breathlessness for the past 5 days. He denied fever, chills, cough, phlegm, runny nose, or congestion.

Five days before this visit, he had been seen in the emergency department with mild left-sided pleuritic chest pain. His vital signs at that time had been as follows:

  • Blood pressure 141/77 mm Hg
  • Heart rate 77 beats/minute
  • Respiratory rate 17 breaths/minute
  • Temperature 36.8°C (98.2°F)
  • Oxygen saturation 98% on room air.

Figure 1. Chest radiography in the emergency department (A) showed a mild left-sided pleural reaction (arrow). Computed tomography (B) showed a mild pleural reaction (arrow) and parenchymal atelectatic and fibrotic changes.
No abnormal findings on physical examination were noted at that time. Radiography and computed tomography (CT) (Figure 1) showed inflammatory and atelectatic changes in the left lower lobe, with mild pleural reaction, and results of laboratory testing were:
  • White blood cell count 6.89 × 109/L (reference range 3.70–11.00)
  • Neutrophils 58% (40%–70%)
  • Lymphocytes 29.6% (22%–44%)
  • Monocytes 10.7% (0–11%)
  • Eosinophils 1% (0–4%)
  • Basophils 0.6% (0–1%)
  • Troponin T and D-dimer levels normal.

DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS OF PLEURITIC CHEST PAIN

1. What is the most likely cause of his pleuritic chest pain?

  • Pleuritis
  • Pneumonia
  • Pulmonary embolism
  • Malignancy

The differential diagnosis of pleuritic chest pain is broad.

The patient’s symptoms at presentation to the emergency department did not suggest an infectious process. There was no fever, cough, or phlegm, and his white blood cell count was normal. Nonetheless, pneumonia could not be ruled out, as the lung parenchyma was not normal on radiography, and the findings could have been consistent with an early or resolving infectious process.

Pulmonary embolism was a possibility, but his normal D-dimer level argued against it. Further, the patient subsequently underwent CT angiography, which ruled out pulmonary embolism.

Malignancy was unlikely in a young nonsmoker, but follow-up imaging would be needed to ensure resolution and rule this out.

The emergency department physician diagnosed inflammatory pleuritis and discharged him home on a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug.

CLINIC VISIT 5 DAYS LATER

At his pulmonary clinic visit 5 days later, the patient reported persistent but stable left-sided pleuritic chest pain and mild breathlessness on exertion. His blood pressure was 137/81 mm Hg, heart rate 109 beats per minute, temperature 37.1°C (98.8°F), and oxygen saturation 97% on room air.

Auscultation of the lungs revealed rales and slightly decreased breath sounds at the left base. No dullness to percussion could be detected.

Because the patient had developed mild tachycardia and breathlessness along with clinical signs that suggested worsening infiltrates, consolidation, or the development of pleural effusion, he underwent further investigation with chest radiography, a complete blood cell count, and measurement of serum inflammatory markers.

Figure 2. Chest radiography 5 days after the emergency department presentation showed development of a left-sided pleural effusion.
Radiography revealed a left-sided pleural effusion (Figure 2). Laboratory testing results:
  • White blood cell count 13.08 × 109/L
  • Neutrophils 81%
  • Lymphocytes 7.4%
  • Monocytes 7.2%
  • Eeosinophils 0.2%
  • Basophils 0.2%
  • Procalcitonin 0.34 µg/L (reference range < 0.09).

Bedside ultrasonography to assess the effusion’s size and characteristics and the need for thoracentesis indicated that the effusion was too small to tap, and there were no fibrinous strands or loculations to suggest empyema.

 

 

FURTHER TREATMENT

2. What was the best management strategy for this patient at this time?

  • Admit to the hospital for thoracentesis and intravenous antibiotics
  • Give oral antibiotics with close follow-up
  • Perform thoracentesis on an outpatient basis and give oral antibiotics
  • Repeat chest CT

The patient had worsening pleuritic pain with development of a small left pleural effusion. His symptoms had not improved on a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug. He now had an elevated white blood cell count with a “left shift” (ie, an increase in neutrophils, indicating more immature cells in circulation) and elevated procalcitonin. The most likely diagnosis was pneumonia with a resulting pleural effusion, ie, parapneumonic effusion, requiring appropriate antibiotic therapy. Ideally, the pleural effusion should be sampled by thoracentesis, with management on an outpatient or inpatient basis.

Suspected parapneumonic effusion can be classified to help prognostication based on anatomic, bacteriologic, and chemical characteristics of the fluid, as described in the American College of Chest Physicians classification system (Table 1).1 Although our patient’s effusion was deemed to pose a low risk for a poor outcome, admission to the hospital was advised for intravenous antibiotics and close monitoring of the effusion with or without thoracentesis or drainage. However, the patient declined, preferring outpatient treatment. Levofloxacin was started, and he was scheduled to be seen in follow-up in the clinic a few days later.

5 DAYS LATER, THE EFFUSION HAD BECOME MASSIVE

On follow-up 5 days later, the patient’s chest pain was better, but he was significantly more short of breath. His blood pressure was 137/90 mm Hg, heart rate 117 beats/minute, respiratory rate 16 breaths/minute, oxygen saturation 97% on room air, and temperature 36.9°C (98.4°F). Chest auscultation revealed decreased breath sounds over the left hemithorax, with dullness to percussion and decreased fremitus.

Figure 3. Complete opacification of the left hemothorax on chest radiography (A) and massive pleural effusion causing mediastinal shift to the right on computed tomography (B).
Repeat chest radiography showed complete opacification of the left hemithorax, and CT showed a massive pleural effusion causing mediastinal shift to the right (Figure 3).

RAPIDLY PROGRESSIVE PLEURAL EFFUSIONS

A rapidly progressive pleural effusion in a healthy patient suggests parapneumonic effusion. The most likely organism is streptococcal.2

Explosive pleuritis is defined as a pleural effusion that increases in size in less than 24 hours. It was first described by Braman and Donat3 in 1986 as an effusion that develops within hours of admission. In 2001, Sharma and Marrie4 refined the definition as rapid development of pleural effusion involving more than 90% of the hemithorax within 24 hours, causing compression of pulmonary tissue and a mediastinal shift. It is a medical emergency that requires prompt investigation and treatment with drainage and antibiotics. All reported cases of explosive pleuritis have been parapneumonic effusion.

The organisms implicated in explosive pleuritis include gram-positive cocci such as Streptococcus pneumoniae, S pyogenes, other streptococci, staphylococci, and gram-negative cocci such as Neisseria meningitidis and Moraxella catarrhalis. Gram-negative bacilli include Haemophilus influenzae, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas species, Escherichia coli, Proteus species, Enterobacter species, Bacteroides species, and Legionella species.4,5 However, malignancy is the most common cause of massive pleural effusion, accounting for 54% of cases; 17% of cases are idiopathic, 13% are parapneumonic, and 12% are hydrothorax related to liver cirrhosis.6

CASE CONTINUED

Our patient’s massive effusion needed drainage, and he was admitted to the hospital for further management. Samples of blood and sputum were sent for culture. Intravenous piperacillin-tazobactam was started, and an intercostal chest tube was inserted into the pleural cavity under ultrasonographic guidance to drain turbid fluid.

The effusion was noted to be loculated on ultrasonography, strongly suggesting conversion from parapneumonic effusion to empyema.

Results of pleural fluid analysis and blood tests (Table 2) were consistent with an exudate based on the criteria of Light et al (Table 3).7 The pH of the pleural fluid was 7, confirming empyema. (A pleural fluid pH < 7.2 indicates empyema requiring intervention, whereas a pH between 7.2 and 7.3 indicates parapneumonic effusion that can be either observed or drained, depending on the clinical picture, size, and prognostic features.)

Multiple pleural fluid samples sent for bacterial, fungal, and acid-fast bacilli culture were negative. Blood and sputum cultures also showed no growth. The administration of oral antibiotics for 5 days on an outpatient basis before pleural fluid culture could have led to sterility of all cultures.

Figure 4. Computed tomography 2 days after initial chest tube placement showed a noncommunicating apical pocket.
Follow-up CT 2 days after the chest tube was inserted revealed a residual apical locule, which did not appear to be communicating with the pleural area where the existing drain sat (Figure 4).

Our patient had inadequate pleural fluid output through his chest tube, and radiography showed that the pleural collections failed to clear. In fact, an apical locule did not appear to be connecting with the lower aspect of the pleural collection. In such cases, instillation of intrapleural agents through the chest tube has become common practice in an attempt to lyse adhesions, to connect various locules or pockets of pleural fluid, and to improve drainage.

 

 

LOCULATED EMPYEMA: MANAGEMENT

3. What was the best management strategy for this loculated empyema?

  • Continue intravenous antibiotics and existing chest tube drainage for 5 to 7 days, then reassess
  • Continue intravenous antibiotics and instill intrapleural fibrinolytics (eg, tissue plasminogen activator [tPA]) through the existing chest tube
  • Continue intravenous antibiotics and instill intrapleural fibrinolytics with deoxyribonuclease (DNase) into the existing chest tube
  • Continue intravenous antibiotics, insert a second chest tube into the apical pocket under imaging guidance, and instill tPA and DNase
  • Surgical decortication

Continuing antibiotics with existing chest tube drainage and the two options of using single-agent intrapleural fibrinolytics have been shown to be less effective than combining tPA and DNase when managing a loculated empyema. As such, surgical decortication, attempting intrapleural instillation of fibrinolytics and DNase (with or without further chest tube insertion into noncommunicating locules), or both were the most appropriate options at this stage.

MANAGEMENT OF PARAPNEUMONIC PLEURAL EFFUSION IN ADULTS

There are several options for managing parapneumonic effusion, and clinicians can use the classification system in Table 1 to assess the risk of a poor outcome and to plan the management. Based on radiographic findings and pleural fluid sampling, a pleural effusion can be either observed or drained.

Options for drainage of the pleural space include repeat thoracentesis, surgical insertion of a chest tube, or image-guided insertion of a small-bore catheter. Although no randomized trial has been done to compare tube sizes, a large retrospective series showed that small-bore tubes (< 14 F) perform similarly to standard large-bore tubes.8 However, in another study, Keeling et al9 reported higher failure rates when tubes smaller than 12 F were used. Regular flushing of the chest tube (ideally twice a day) is recommended to keep it patent, particularly with small-bore tubes. Multiloculated empyema may require multiple intercostal chest tubes to drain completely, and therefore small-bore tubes are recommended.

In cases that do not improve radiographically and clinically, one must consider whether the antibiotic choice is adequate, review the position of the chest tube, and assess for loculations. As such, repeating chest CT within 24 to 48 hours of tube insertion and drainage is recommended to confirm adequate tube positioning, assess effective drainage, look for different locules and pockets, and determine the degree of communication between them.

The largest well-powered randomized controlled trials of intrapleural agents in the management of pleural infection, the Multicentre Intrapleural Sepsis Trial (MIST1)10 and MIST2,11 clearly demonstrated that intrapleural fibrinolytics were not beneficial when used alone compared with placebo. However, in MIST2, the combination of tPA and DNase led to clinically significant benefits including radiologic improvement, shorter hospital stay, and less need for surgical decortication.

At our hospital, we follow the MIST2 protocol using a combination of tPA and DNase given intrapleurally twice daily for 3 days. In our patient, we inserted a chest tube into the apical pocket under ultrasonographic guidance, as 2 instillations of intrapleural tPA and DNase did not result in drainage of the apical locule.

Success rates with intrapleural tPA-DNase for complicated pleural effusion and empyema range from 68% to 92%.12–15 Pleural thickening and necrotizing pneumonia and abscess are important predictors of failure of tPA-DNase therapy and of the need for surgery.13,14

Early surgical intervention was another reasonable option in this case. The decision to proceed with surgery is based on need to debride multiloculated empyemas or uniloculated empyemas that fail to resolve with antibiotics and tube thoracostomy drainage. Nonetheless, the decision must be individualized and based on factors such as the patient’s risks vs possible benefit from a surgical procedure under general anesthesia, the patient’s ability to tolerate multiple thoracentesis procedures and chest tubes for a potentially lengthy period, the patient’s pain threshold, the patient’s wishes to avoid a surgical procedure balanced against a longer hospital stay, and cultural norms and beliefs.

Surgical options include video-assisted thoracoscopy, thoracotomy, and open drainage. Decortication can be considered early to control pleural sepsis, or late (after 3 to 6 months) if the lung does not expand. Debate continues on the optimal timing for video-assisted thoracoscopy, with data suggesting that when the procedure is performed later in the course of the disease there is a greater chance of complications and of the need to convert to thoracotomy.

A 2017 Cochrane review16 of surgical vs nonsurgical management of empyema identified 8 randomized trials, 6 in children and 2 in adults, with a total of 391 patients. The authors compared video-assisted thoracoscopy vs tube thoracotomy, with and without intrapleural fibrinolytics. They noted no difference in rates of mortality or procedural complications. However, the mean length of hospital stay was shorter with video-assisted thoracoscopy than with tube thoracotomy (5.9 vs 15.4 days). They could not assess the impact of fibrinolytic therapy on total cost of treatment in the 2 groups.

A randomized trial is planned to compare early video-assisted thoracoscopy vs treatment with chest tube drainage and t-PA-DNase.17

At our institution, we use a multidisciplinary approach, discussing cases at weekly meetings with thoracic surgeons, pulmonologists, infectious disease specialists, and interventional radiologists. We generally try conservative management first, with chest tube drainage and intrapleural agents for 5 to 7 days, before considering surgery if the response is unsatisfactory.

THE PATIENT RECOVERED

In our patient, the multiloculated empyema was successfully cleared after intrapleural instillation of 4 doses of tPA and DNAse over 3 days and insertion of a second intercostal chest tube into the noncommunicating apical locule. He completed 14 days of intravenous piperacillin-tazobactam treatment and, after discharge home, completed another 4 weeks of oral amoxicillin-clavulanate. He made a full recovery and was back at work 2 weeks after discharge. Chest radiography 10 weeks after discharge showed normal results.

References
  1. Colice GL, Curtis A, Deslauriers J, et al. Medical and surgical treatment of parapneumonic effusions: an evidence-based guideline. Chest 2000; 118(4):1158–1171. pmid:11035692
  2. Bryant RE, Salmon CJ. Pleural empyema. Clin Infect Dis 1996; 22(5):747–762. pmid:8722927
  3. Braman SS, Donat WE. Explosive pleuritis. Manifestation of group A beta-hemolytic streptococcal infection. Am J Med 1986; 81(4):723–726. pmid:3532794
  4. Sharma JK, Marrie TJ. Explosive pleuritis. Can J Infect Dis 2001; 12(2):104–107. pmid:18159325
  5. Johnson JL. Pleurisy, fever, and rapidly progressive pleural effusion in a healthy, 29-year-old physician. Chest 2001; 119(4):1266–1269. pmid:11296198
  6. Jimenez D, Diaz G, Gil D, et al. Etiology and prognostic significance of massive pleural effusions. Respir Med 2005; 99(9):1183–1187. doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2005.02.022
  7. Light RW, MacGregor MI, Luchsinger PC, Ball WC Jr. Pleural effusions: the diagnostic separation of transudates and exudates. Ann Intern Med 1972; 77:507–513. pmid:4642731
  8. Rahman NM, Maskell NA, Davies CW, et al. The relationship between chest tube size and clinical outcome in pleural infection. Chest 2010; 137(3):536–543. doi:10.1378/chest.09-1044
  9. Keeling AN, Leong S, Logan PM, Lee MJ. Empyema and effusion: outcome of image-guided small-bore catheter drainage. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2008; 31(1):135–141. doi:10.1007/s00270-007-9197-0
  10. Maskell NA, Davies CW, Nunn AJ, et al. UK controlled trial of intrapleural streptokinase for pleural infection. N Engl J Med 2005; 352(9):865–874. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa042473
  11. Rahman NM, Maskell NA, West A, et al. Intrapleural use of tissue plasminogen activator and DNase in pleural infection. N Engl J Med 2011; 365(6):518–526. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1012740
  12. Piccolo F, Pitman N, Bhatnagar R, et al. Intrapleural tissue plasminogen activator and deoxyribonuclease for pleural infection. An effective and safe alternative to surgery. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2014; 11(9):1419–1425. doi:10.1513/AnnalsATS.201407-329OC
  13. Khemasuwan D, Sorensen J, Griffin DC. Predictive variables for failure in administration of intrapleural tissue plasminogen activator/deoxyribonuclease in patients with complicated parapneumonic effusions/empyema. Chest 2018; 154(3):550–556. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2018.01.037
  14. Abu-Daff S, Maziak DE, Alshehab D, et al. Intrapleural fibrinolytic therapy (IPFT) in loculated pleural effusions—analysis of predictors for failure of therapy and bleeding: a cohort study. BMJ Open 2013; 3(2):e001887. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001887
  15. Bishwakarma R, Shah S, Frank L, Zhang W, Sharma G, Nishi SP. Mixing it up: coadministration of tPA/DNase in complicated parapneumonic pleural effusions and empyema. J Bronchology Interv Pulmonol 2017; 24(1):40–47. doi:10.1097/LBR.0000000000000334
  16. Redden MD, Chin TY, van Driel ML. Surgical versus non-surgical management for pleural empyema. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 3:CD010651. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010651.pub2
  17. Feller-Kopman D, Light R. Pleural disease. N Engl J Med 2018; 378(8):740–751. doi:10.1056/NEJMra1403503
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Zaid Zoumot, MBBS
Respiratory and Critical Care Institute, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE

Ali S. Wahla, MBBS
Respiratory and Critical Care Institute, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE

Samar Farha, MD
Respiratory and Critical Care Institute, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE

Address: Samar Farha, MD, Respiratory and Critical Care Institute, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE; [email protected]

Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 86(1)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
21-27
Legacy Keywords
pleural effusion, rapidly progressive pleural effusion, parapneumonic, pleuritic, pneumonia, chest tube, transudate, exudate, Light criteria, empyema, Zaid Zoumot, Ali Wahla, Samar Farha
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Zaid Zoumot, MBBS
Respiratory and Critical Care Institute, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE

Ali S. Wahla, MBBS
Respiratory and Critical Care Institute, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE

Samar Farha, MD
Respiratory and Critical Care Institute, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE

Address: Samar Farha, MD, Respiratory and Critical Care Institute, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE; [email protected]

Author and Disclosure Information

Zaid Zoumot, MBBS
Respiratory and Critical Care Institute, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE

Ali S. Wahla, MBBS
Respiratory and Critical Care Institute, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE

Samar Farha, MD
Respiratory and Critical Care Institute, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE

Address: Samar Farha, MD, Respiratory and Critical Care Institute, Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi, UAE; [email protected]

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

A 33-year-old male nonsmoker with no significant medical history presented to the pulmonary clinic with severe left-sided pleuritic chest pain and mild breathlessness for the past 5 days. He denied fever, chills, cough, phlegm, runny nose, or congestion.

Five days before this visit, he had been seen in the emergency department with mild left-sided pleuritic chest pain. His vital signs at that time had been as follows:

  • Blood pressure 141/77 mm Hg
  • Heart rate 77 beats/minute
  • Respiratory rate 17 breaths/minute
  • Temperature 36.8°C (98.2°F)
  • Oxygen saturation 98% on room air.

Figure 1. Chest radiography in the emergency department (A) showed a mild left-sided pleural reaction (arrow). Computed tomography (B) showed a mild pleural reaction (arrow) and parenchymal atelectatic and fibrotic changes.
No abnormal findings on physical examination were noted at that time. Radiography and computed tomography (CT) (Figure 1) showed inflammatory and atelectatic changes in the left lower lobe, with mild pleural reaction, and results of laboratory testing were:
  • White blood cell count 6.89 × 109/L (reference range 3.70–11.00)
  • Neutrophils 58% (40%–70%)
  • Lymphocytes 29.6% (22%–44%)
  • Monocytes 10.7% (0–11%)
  • Eosinophils 1% (0–4%)
  • Basophils 0.6% (0–1%)
  • Troponin T and D-dimer levels normal.

DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS OF PLEURITIC CHEST PAIN

1. What is the most likely cause of his pleuritic chest pain?

  • Pleuritis
  • Pneumonia
  • Pulmonary embolism
  • Malignancy

The differential diagnosis of pleuritic chest pain is broad.

The patient’s symptoms at presentation to the emergency department did not suggest an infectious process. There was no fever, cough, or phlegm, and his white blood cell count was normal. Nonetheless, pneumonia could not be ruled out, as the lung parenchyma was not normal on radiography, and the findings could have been consistent with an early or resolving infectious process.

Pulmonary embolism was a possibility, but his normal D-dimer level argued against it. Further, the patient subsequently underwent CT angiography, which ruled out pulmonary embolism.

Malignancy was unlikely in a young nonsmoker, but follow-up imaging would be needed to ensure resolution and rule this out.

The emergency department physician diagnosed inflammatory pleuritis and discharged him home on a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug.

CLINIC VISIT 5 DAYS LATER

At his pulmonary clinic visit 5 days later, the patient reported persistent but stable left-sided pleuritic chest pain and mild breathlessness on exertion. His blood pressure was 137/81 mm Hg, heart rate 109 beats per minute, temperature 37.1°C (98.8°F), and oxygen saturation 97% on room air.

Auscultation of the lungs revealed rales and slightly decreased breath sounds at the left base. No dullness to percussion could be detected.

Because the patient had developed mild tachycardia and breathlessness along with clinical signs that suggested worsening infiltrates, consolidation, or the development of pleural effusion, he underwent further investigation with chest radiography, a complete blood cell count, and measurement of serum inflammatory markers.

Figure 2. Chest radiography 5 days after the emergency department presentation showed development of a left-sided pleural effusion.
Radiography revealed a left-sided pleural effusion (Figure 2). Laboratory testing results:
  • White blood cell count 13.08 × 109/L
  • Neutrophils 81%
  • Lymphocytes 7.4%
  • Monocytes 7.2%
  • Eeosinophils 0.2%
  • Basophils 0.2%
  • Procalcitonin 0.34 µg/L (reference range < 0.09).

Bedside ultrasonography to assess the effusion’s size and characteristics and the need for thoracentesis indicated that the effusion was too small to tap, and there were no fibrinous strands or loculations to suggest empyema.

 

 

FURTHER TREATMENT

2. What was the best management strategy for this patient at this time?

  • Admit to the hospital for thoracentesis and intravenous antibiotics
  • Give oral antibiotics with close follow-up
  • Perform thoracentesis on an outpatient basis and give oral antibiotics
  • Repeat chest CT

The patient had worsening pleuritic pain with development of a small left pleural effusion. His symptoms had not improved on a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug. He now had an elevated white blood cell count with a “left shift” (ie, an increase in neutrophils, indicating more immature cells in circulation) and elevated procalcitonin. The most likely diagnosis was pneumonia with a resulting pleural effusion, ie, parapneumonic effusion, requiring appropriate antibiotic therapy. Ideally, the pleural effusion should be sampled by thoracentesis, with management on an outpatient or inpatient basis.

Suspected parapneumonic effusion can be classified to help prognostication based on anatomic, bacteriologic, and chemical characteristics of the fluid, as described in the American College of Chest Physicians classification system (Table 1).1 Although our patient’s effusion was deemed to pose a low risk for a poor outcome, admission to the hospital was advised for intravenous antibiotics and close monitoring of the effusion with or without thoracentesis or drainage. However, the patient declined, preferring outpatient treatment. Levofloxacin was started, and he was scheduled to be seen in follow-up in the clinic a few days later.

5 DAYS LATER, THE EFFUSION HAD BECOME MASSIVE

On follow-up 5 days later, the patient’s chest pain was better, but he was significantly more short of breath. His blood pressure was 137/90 mm Hg, heart rate 117 beats/minute, respiratory rate 16 breaths/minute, oxygen saturation 97% on room air, and temperature 36.9°C (98.4°F). Chest auscultation revealed decreased breath sounds over the left hemithorax, with dullness to percussion and decreased fremitus.

Figure 3. Complete opacification of the left hemothorax on chest radiography (A) and massive pleural effusion causing mediastinal shift to the right on computed tomography (B).
Repeat chest radiography showed complete opacification of the left hemithorax, and CT showed a massive pleural effusion causing mediastinal shift to the right (Figure 3).

RAPIDLY PROGRESSIVE PLEURAL EFFUSIONS

A rapidly progressive pleural effusion in a healthy patient suggests parapneumonic effusion. The most likely organism is streptococcal.2

Explosive pleuritis is defined as a pleural effusion that increases in size in less than 24 hours. It was first described by Braman and Donat3 in 1986 as an effusion that develops within hours of admission. In 2001, Sharma and Marrie4 refined the definition as rapid development of pleural effusion involving more than 90% of the hemithorax within 24 hours, causing compression of pulmonary tissue and a mediastinal shift. It is a medical emergency that requires prompt investigation and treatment with drainage and antibiotics. All reported cases of explosive pleuritis have been parapneumonic effusion.

The organisms implicated in explosive pleuritis include gram-positive cocci such as Streptococcus pneumoniae, S pyogenes, other streptococci, staphylococci, and gram-negative cocci such as Neisseria meningitidis and Moraxella catarrhalis. Gram-negative bacilli include Haemophilus influenzae, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas species, Escherichia coli, Proteus species, Enterobacter species, Bacteroides species, and Legionella species.4,5 However, malignancy is the most common cause of massive pleural effusion, accounting for 54% of cases; 17% of cases are idiopathic, 13% are parapneumonic, and 12% are hydrothorax related to liver cirrhosis.6

CASE CONTINUED

Our patient’s massive effusion needed drainage, and he was admitted to the hospital for further management. Samples of blood and sputum were sent for culture. Intravenous piperacillin-tazobactam was started, and an intercostal chest tube was inserted into the pleural cavity under ultrasonographic guidance to drain turbid fluid.

The effusion was noted to be loculated on ultrasonography, strongly suggesting conversion from parapneumonic effusion to empyema.

Results of pleural fluid analysis and blood tests (Table 2) were consistent with an exudate based on the criteria of Light et al (Table 3).7 The pH of the pleural fluid was 7, confirming empyema. (A pleural fluid pH < 7.2 indicates empyema requiring intervention, whereas a pH between 7.2 and 7.3 indicates parapneumonic effusion that can be either observed or drained, depending on the clinical picture, size, and prognostic features.)

Multiple pleural fluid samples sent for bacterial, fungal, and acid-fast bacilli culture were negative. Blood and sputum cultures also showed no growth. The administration of oral antibiotics for 5 days on an outpatient basis before pleural fluid culture could have led to sterility of all cultures.

Figure 4. Computed tomography 2 days after initial chest tube placement showed a noncommunicating apical pocket.
Follow-up CT 2 days after the chest tube was inserted revealed a residual apical locule, which did not appear to be communicating with the pleural area where the existing drain sat (Figure 4).

Our patient had inadequate pleural fluid output through his chest tube, and radiography showed that the pleural collections failed to clear. In fact, an apical locule did not appear to be connecting with the lower aspect of the pleural collection. In such cases, instillation of intrapleural agents through the chest tube has become common practice in an attempt to lyse adhesions, to connect various locules or pockets of pleural fluid, and to improve drainage.

 

 

LOCULATED EMPYEMA: MANAGEMENT

3. What was the best management strategy for this loculated empyema?

  • Continue intravenous antibiotics and existing chest tube drainage for 5 to 7 days, then reassess
  • Continue intravenous antibiotics and instill intrapleural fibrinolytics (eg, tissue plasminogen activator [tPA]) through the existing chest tube
  • Continue intravenous antibiotics and instill intrapleural fibrinolytics with deoxyribonuclease (DNase) into the existing chest tube
  • Continue intravenous antibiotics, insert a second chest tube into the apical pocket under imaging guidance, and instill tPA and DNase
  • Surgical decortication

Continuing antibiotics with existing chest tube drainage and the two options of using single-agent intrapleural fibrinolytics have been shown to be less effective than combining tPA and DNase when managing a loculated empyema. As such, surgical decortication, attempting intrapleural instillation of fibrinolytics and DNase (with or without further chest tube insertion into noncommunicating locules), or both were the most appropriate options at this stage.

MANAGEMENT OF PARAPNEUMONIC PLEURAL EFFUSION IN ADULTS

There are several options for managing parapneumonic effusion, and clinicians can use the classification system in Table 1 to assess the risk of a poor outcome and to plan the management. Based on radiographic findings and pleural fluid sampling, a pleural effusion can be either observed or drained.

Options for drainage of the pleural space include repeat thoracentesis, surgical insertion of a chest tube, or image-guided insertion of a small-bore catheter. Although no randomized trial has been done to compare tube sizes, a large retrospective series showed that small-bore tubes (< 14 F) perform similarly to standard large-bore tubes.8 However, in another study, Keeling et al9 reported higher failure rates when tubes smaller than 12 F were used. Regular flushing of the chest tube (ideally twice a day) is recommended to keep it patent, particularly with small-bore tubes. Multiloculated empyema may require multiple intercostal chest tubes to drain completely, and therefore small-bore tubes are recommended.

In cases that do not improve radiographically and clinically, one must consider whether the antibiotic choice is adequate, review the position of the chest tube, and assess for loculations. As such, repeating chest CT within 24 to 48 hours of tube insertion and drainage is recommended to confirm adequate tube positioning, assess effective drainage, look for different locules and pockets, and determine the degree of communication between them.

The largest well-powered randomized controlled trials of intrapleural agents in the management of pleural infection, the Multicentre Intrapleural Sepsis Trial (MIST1)10 and MIST2,11 clearly demonstrated that intrapleural fibrinolytics were not beneficial when used alone compared with placebo. However, in MIST2, the combination of tPA and DNase led to clinically significant benefits including radiologic improvement, shorter hospital stay, and less need for surgical decortication.

At our hospital, we follow the MIST2 protocol using a combination of tPA and DNase given intrapleurally twice daily for 3 days. In our patient, we inserted a chest tube into the apical pocket under ultrasonographic guidance, as 2 instillations of intrapleural tPA and DNase did not result in drainage of the apical locule.

Success rates with intrapleural tPA-DNase for complicated pleural effusion and empyema range from 68% to 92%.12–15 Pleural thickening and necrotizing pneumonia and abscess are important predictors of failure of tPA-DNase therapy and of the need for surgery.13,14

Early surgical intervention was another reasonable option in this case. The decision to proceed with surgery is based on need to debride multiloculated empyemas or uniloculated empyemas that fail to resolve with antibiotics and tube thoracostomy drainage. Nonetheless, the decision must be individualized and based on factors such as the patient’s risks vs possible benefit from a surgical procedure under general anesthesia, the patient’s ability to tolerate multiple thoracentesis procedures and chest tubes for a potentially lengthy period, the patient’s pain threshold, the patient’s wishes to avoid a surgical procedure balanced against a longer hospital stay, and cultural norms and beliefs.

Surgical options include video-assisted thoracoscopy, thoracotomy, and open drainage. Decortication can be considered early to control pleural sepsis, or late (after 3 to 6 months) if the lung does not expand. Debate continues on the optimal timing for video-assisted thoracoscopy, with data suggesting that when the procedure is performed later in the course of the disease there is a greater chance of complications and of the need to convert to thoracotomy.

A 2017 Cochrane review16 of surgical vs nonsurgical management of empyema identified 8 randomized trials, 6 in children and 2 in adults, with a total of 391 patients. The authors compared video-assisted thoracoscopy vs tube thoracotomy, with and without intrapleural fibrinolytics. They noted no difference in rates of mortality or procedural complications. However, the mean length of hospital stay was shorter with video-assisted thoracoscopy than with tube thoracotomy (5.9 vs 15.4 days). They could not assess the impact of fibrinolytic therapy on total cost of treatment in the 2 groups.

A randomized trial is planned to compare early video-assisted thoracoscopy vs treatment with chest tube drainage and t-PA-DNase.17

At our institution, we use a multidisciplinary approach, discussing cases at weekly meetings with thoracic surgeons, pulmonologists, infectious disease specialists, and interventional radiologists. We generally try conservative management first, with chest tube drainage and intrapleural agents for 5 to 7 days, before considering surgery if the response is unsatisfactory.

THE PATIENT RECOVERED

In our patient, the multiloculated empyema was successfully cleared after intrapleural instillation of 4 doses of tPA and DNAse over 3 days and insertion of a second intercostal chest tube into the noncommunicating apical locule. He completed 14 days of intravenous piperacillin-tazobactam treatment and, after discharge home, completed another 4 weeks of oral amoxicillin-clavulanate. He made a full recovery and was back at work 2 weeks after discharge. Chest radiography 10 weeks after discharge showed normal results.

A 33-year-old male nonsmoker with no significant medical history presented to the pulmonary clinic with severe left-sided pleuritic chest pain and mild breathlessness for the past 5 days. He denied fever, chills, cough, phlegm, runny nose, or congestion.

Five days before this visit, he had been seen in the emergency department with mild left-sided pleuritic chest pain. His vital signs at that time had been as follows:

  • Blood pressure 141/77 mm Hg
  • Heart rate 77 beats/minute
  • Respiratory rate 17 breaths/minute
  • Temperature 36.8°C (98.2°F)
  • Oxygen saturation 98% on room air.

Figure 1. Chest radiography in the emergency department (A) showed a mild left-sided pleural reaction (arrow). Computed tomography (B) showed a mild pleural reaction (arrow) and parenchymal atelectatic and fibrotic changes.
No abnormal findings on physical examination were noted at that time. Radiography and computed tomography (CT) (Figure 1) showed inflammatory and atelectatic changes in the left lower lobe, with mild pleural reaction, and results of laboratory testing were:
  • White blood cell count 6.89 × 109/L (reference range 3.70–11.00)
  • Neutrophils 58% (40%–70%)
  • Lymphocytes 29.6% (22%–44%)
  • Monocytes 10.7% (0–11%)
  • Eosinophils 1% (0–4%)
  • Basophils 0.6% (0–1%)
  • Troponin T and D-dimer levels normal.

DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS OF PLEURITIC CHEST PAIN

1. What is the most likely cause of his pleuritic chest pain?

  • Pleuritis
  • Pneumonia
  • Pulmonary embolism
  • Malignancy

The differential diagnosis of pleuritic chest pain is broad.

The patient’s symptoms at presentation to the emergency department did not suggest an infectious process. There was no fever, cough, or phlegm, and his white blood cell count was normal. Nonetheless, pneumonia could not be ruled out, as the lung parenchyma was not normal on radiography, and the findings could have been consistent with an early or resolving infectious process.

Pulmonary embolism was a possibility, but his normal D-dimer level argued against it. Further, the patient subsequently underwent CT angiography, which ruled out pulmonary embolism.

Malignancy was unlikely in a young nonsmoker, but follow-up imaging would be needed to ensure resolution and rule this out.

The emergency department physician diagnosed inflammatory pleuritis and discharged him home on a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug.

CLINIC VISIT 5 DAYS LATER

At his pulmonary clinic visit 5 days later, the patient reported persistent but stable left-sided pleuritic chest pain and mild breathlessness on exertion. His blood pressure was 137/81 mm Hg, heart rate 109 beats per minute, temperature 37.1°C (98.8°F), and oxygen saturation 97% on room air.

Auscultation of the lungs revealed rales and slightly decreased breath sounds at the left base. No dullness to percussion could be detected.

Because the patient had developed mild tachycardia and breathlessness along with clinical signs that suggested worsening infiltrates, consolidation, or the development of pleural effusion, he underwent further investigation with chest radiography, a complete blood cell count, and measurement of serum inflammatory markers.

Figure 2. Chest radiography 5 days after the emergency department presentation showed development of a left-sided pleural effusion.
Radiography revealed a left-sided pleural effusion (Figure 2). Laboratory testing results:
  • White blood cell count 13.08 × 109/L
  • Neutrophils 81%
  • Lymphocytes 7.4%
  • Monocytes 7.2%
  • Eeosinophils 0.2%
  • Basophils 0.2%
  • Procalcitonin 0.34 µg/L (reference range < 0.09).

Bedside ultrasonography to assess the effusion’s size and characteristics and the need for thoracentesis indicated that the effusion was too small to tap, and there were no fibrinous strands or loculations to suggest empyema.

 

 

FURTHER TREATMENT

2. What was the best management strategy for this patient at this time?

  • Admit to the hospital for thoracentesis and intravenous antibiotics
  • Give oral antibiotics with close follow-up
  • Perform thoracentesis on an outpatient basis and give oral antibiotics
  • Repeat chest CT

The patient had worsening pleuritic pain with development of a small left pleural effusion. His symptoms had not improved on a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug. He now had an elevated white blood cell count with a “left shift” (ie, an increase in neutrophils, indicating more immature cells in circulation) and elevated procalcitonin. The most likely diagnosis was pneumonia with a resulting pleural effusion, ie, parapneumonic effusion, requiring appropriate antibiotic therapy. Ideally, the pleural effusion should be sampled by thoracentesis, with management on an outpatient or inpatient basis.

Suspected parapneumonic effusion can be classified to help prognostication based on anatomic, bacteriologic, and chemical characteristics of the fluid, as described in the American College of Chest Physicians classification system (Table 1).1 Although our patient’s effusion was deemed to pose a low risk for a poor outcome, admission to the hospital was advised for intravenous antibiotics and close monitoring of the effusion with or without thoracentesis or drainage. However, the patient declined, preferring outpatient treatment. Levofloxacin was started, and he was scheduled to be seen in follow-up in the clinic a few days later.

5 DAYS LATER, THE EFFUSION HAD BECOME MASSIVE

On follow-up 5 days later, the patient’s chest pain was better, but he was significantly more short of breath. His blood pressure was 137/90 mm Hg, heart rate 117 beats/minute, respiratory rate 16 breaths/minute, oxygen saturation 97% on room air, and temperature 36.9°C (98.4°F). Chest auscultation revealed decreased breath sounds over the left hemithorax, with dullness to percussion and decreased fremitus.

Figure 3. Complete opacification of the left hemothorax on chest radiography (A) and massive pleural effusion causing mediastinal shift to the right on computed tomography (B).
Repeat chest radiography showed complete opacification of the left hemithorax, and CT showed a massive pleural effusion causing mediastinal shift to the right (Figure 3).

RAPIDLY PROGRESSIVE PLEURAL EFFUSIONS

A rapidly progressive pleural effusion in a healthy patient suggests parapneumonic effusion. The most likely organism is streptococcal.2

Explosive pleuritis is defined as a pleural effusion that increases in size in less than 24 hours. It was first described by Braman and Donat3 in 1986 as an effusion that develops within hours of admission. In 2001, Sharma and Marrie4 refined the definition as rapid development of pleural effusion involving more than 90% of the hemithorax within 24 hours, causing compression of pulmonary tissue and a mediastinal shift. It is a medical emergency that requires prompt investigation and treatment with drainage and antibiotics. All reported cases of explosive pleuritis have been parapneumonic effusion.

The organisms implicated in explosive pleuritis include gram-positive cocci such as Streptococcus pneumoniae, S pyogenes, other streptococci, staphylococci, and gram-negative cocci such as Neisseria meningitidis and Moraxella catarrhalis. Gram-negative bacilli include Haemophilus influenzae, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas species, Escherichia coli, Proteus species, Enterobacter species, Bacteroides species, and Legionella species.4,5 However, malignancy is the most common cause of massive pleural effusion, accounting for 54% of cases; 17% of cases are idiopathic, 13% are parapneumonic, and 12% are hydrothorax related to liver cirrhosis.6

CASE CONTINUED

Our patient’s massive effusion needed drainage, and he was admitted to the hospital for further management. Samples of blood and sputum were sent for culture. Intravenous piperacillin-tazobactam was started, and an intercostal chest tube was inserted into the pleural cavity under ultrasonographic guidance to drain turbid fluid.

The effusion was noted to be loculated on ultrasonography, strongly suggesting conversion from parapneumonic effusion to empyema.

Results of pleural fluid analysis and blood tests (Table 2) were consistent with an exudate based on the criteria of Light et al (Table 3).7 The pH of the pleural fluid was 7, confirming empyema. (A pleural fluid pH < 7.2 indicates empyema requiring intervention, whereas a pH between 7.2 and 7.3 indicates parapneumonic effusion that can be either observed or drained, depending on the clinical picture, size, and prognostic features.)

Multiple pleural fluid samples sent for bacterial, fungal, and acid-fast bacilli culture were negative. Blood and sputum cultures also showed no growth. The administration of oral antibiotics for 5 days on an outpatient basis before pleural fluid culture could have led to sterility of all cultures.

Figure 4. Computed tomography 2 days after initial chest tube placement showed a noncommunicating apical pocket.
Follow-up CT 2 days after the chest tube was inserted revealed a residual apical locule, which did not appear to be communicating with the pleural area where the existing drain sat (Figure 4).

Our patient had inadequate pleural fluid output through his chest tube, and radiography showed that the pleural collections failed to clear. In fact, an apical locule did not appear to be connecting with the lower aspect of the pleural collection. In such cases, instillation of intrapleural agents through the chest tube has become common practice in an attempt to lyse adhesions, to connect various locules or pockets of pleural fluid, and to improve drainage.

 

 

LOCULATED EMPYEMA: MANAGEMENT

3. What was the best management strategy for this loculated empyema?

  • Continue intravenous antibiotics and existing chest tube drainage for 5 to 7 days, then reassess
  • Continue intravenous antibiotics and instill intrapleural fibrinolytics (eg, tissue plasminogen activator [tPA]) through the existing chest tube
  • Continue intravenous antibiotics and instill intrapleural fibrinolytics with deoxyribonuclease (DNase) into the existing chest tube
  • Continue intravenous antibiotics, insert a second chest tube into the apical pocket under imaging guidance, and instill tPA and DNase
  • Surgical decortication

Continuing antibiotics with existing chest tube drainage and the two options of using single-agent intrapleural fibrinolytics have been shown to be less effective than combining tPA and DNase when managing a loculated empyema. As such, surgical decortication, attempting intrapleural instillation of fibrinolytics and DNase (with or without further chest tube insertion into noncommunicating locules), or both were the most appropriate options at this stage.

MANAGEMENT OF PARAPNEUMONIC PLEURAL EFFUSION IN ADULTS

There are several options for managing parapneumonic effusion, and clinicians can use the classification system in Table 1 to assess the risk of a poor outcome and to plan the management. Based on radiographic findings and pleural fluid sampling, a pleural effusion can be either observed or drained.

Options for drainage of the pleural space include repeat thoracentesis, surgical insertion of a chest tube, or image-guided insertion of a small-bore catheter. Although no randomized trial has been done to compare tube sizes, a large retrospective series showed that small-bore tubes (< 14 F) perform similarly to standard large-bore tubes.8 However, in another study, Keeling et al9 reported higher failure rates when tubes smaller than 12 F were used. Regular flushing of the chest tube (ideally twice a day) is recommended to keep it patent, particularly with small-bore tubes. Multiloculated empyema may require multiple intercostal chest tubes to drain completely, and therefore small-bore tubes are recommended.

In cases that do not improve radiographically and clinically, one must consider whether the antibiotic choice is adequate, review the position of the chest tube, and assess for loculations. As such, repeating chest CT within 24 to 48 hours of tube insertion and drainage is recommended to confirm adequate tube positioning, assess effective drainage, look for different locules and pockets, and determine the degree of communication between them.

The largest well-powered randomized controlled trials of intrapleural agents in the management of pleural infection, the Multicentre Intrapleural Sepsis Trial (MIST1)10 and MIST2,11 clearly demonstrated that intrapleural fibrinolytics were not beneficial when used alone compared with placebo. However, in MIST2, the combination of tPA and DNase led to clinically significant benefits including radiologic improvement, shorter hospital stay, and less need for surgical decortication.

At our hospital, we follow the MIST2 protocol using a combination of tPA and DNase given intrapleurally twice daily for 3 days. In our patient, we inserted a chest tube into the apical pocket under ultrasonographic guidance, as 2 instillations of intrapleural tPA and DNase did not result in drainage of the apical locule.

Success rates with intrapleural tPA-DNase for complicated pleural effusion and empyema range from 68% to 92%.12–15 Pleural thickening and necrotizing pneumonia and abscess are important predictors of failure of tPA-DNase therapy and of the need for surgery.13,14

Early surgical intervention was another reasonable option in this case. The decision to proceed with surgery is based on need to debride multiloculated empyemas or uniloculated empyemas that fail to resolve with antibiotics and tube thoracostomy drainage. Nonetheless, the decision must be individualized and based on factors such as the patient’s risks vs possible benefit from a surgical procedure under general anesthesia, the patient’s ability to tolerate multiple thoracentesis procedures and chest tubes for a potentially lengthy period, the patient’s pain threshold, the patient’s wishes to avoid a surgical procedure balanced against a longer hospital stay, and cultural norms and beliefs.

Surgical options include video-assisted thoracoscopy, thoracotomy, and open drainage. Decortication can be considered early to control pleural sepsis, or late (after 3 to 6 months) if the lung does not expand. Debate continues on the optimal timing for video-assisted thoracoscopy, with data suggesting that when the procedure is performed later in the course of the disease there is a greater chance of complications and of the need to convert to thoracotomy.

A 2017 Cochrane review16 of surgical vs nonsurgical management of empyema identified 8 randomized trials, 6 in children and 2 in adults, with a total of 391 patients. The authors compared video-assisted thoracoscopy vs tube thoracotomy, with and without intrapleural fibrinolytics. They noted no difference in rates of mortality or procedural complications. However, the mean length of hospital stay was shorter with video-assisted thoracoscopy than with tube thoracotomy (5.9 vs 15.4 days). They could not assess the impact of fibrinolytic therapy on total cost of treatment in the 2 groups.

A randomized trial is planned to compare early video-assisted thoracoscopy vs treatment with chest tube drainage and t-PA-DNase.17

At our institution, we use a multidisciplinary approach, discussing cases at weekly meetings with thoracic surgeons, pulmonologists, infectious disease specialists, and interventional radiologists. We generally try conservative management first, with chest tube drainage and intrapleural agents for 5 to 7 days, before considering surgery if the response is unsatisfactory.

THE PATIENT RECOVERED

In our patient, the multiloculated empyema was successfully cleared after intrapleural instillation of 4 doses of tPA and DNAse over 3 days and insertion of a second intercostal chest tube into the noncommunicating apical locule. He completed 14 days of intravenous piperacillin-tazobactam treatment and, after discharge home, completed another 4 weeks of oral amoxicillin-clavulanate. He made a full recovery and was back at work 2 weeks after discharge. Chest radiography 10 weeks after discharge showed normal results.

References
  1. Colice GL, Curtis A, Deslauriers J, et al. Medical and surgical treatment of parapneumonic effusions: an evidence-based guideline. Chest 2000; 118(4):1158–1171. pmid:11035692
  2. Bryant RE, Salmon CJ. Pleural empyema. Clin Infect Dis 1996; 22(5):747–762. pmid:8722927
  3. Braman SS, Donat WE. Explosive pleuritis. Manifestation of group A beta-hemolytic streptococcal infection. Am J Med 1986; 81(4):723–726. pmid:3532794
  4. Sharma JK, Marrie TJ. Explosive pleuritis. Can J Infect Dis 2001; 12(2):104–107. pmid:18159325
  5. Johnson JL. Pleurisy, fever, and rapidly progressive pleural effusion in a healthy, 29-year-old physician. Chest 2001; 119(4):1266–1269. pmid:11296198
  6. Jimenez D, Diaz G, Gil D, et al. Etiology and prognostic significance of massive pleural effusions. Respir Med 2005; 99(9):1183–1187. doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2005.02.022
  7. Light RW, MacGregor MI, Luchsinger PC, Ball WC Jr. Pleural effusions: the diagnostic separation of transudates and exudates. Ann Intern Med 1972; 77:507–513. pmid:4642731
  8. Rahman NM, Maskell NA, Davies CW, et al. The relationship between chest tube size and clinical outcome in pleural infection. Chest 2010; 137(3):536–543. doi:10.1378/chest.09-1044
  9. Keeling AN, Leong S, Logan PM, Lee MJ. Empyema and effusion: outcome of image-guided small-bore catheter drainage. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2008; 31(1):135–141. doi:10.1007/s00270-007-9197-0
  10. Maskell NA, Davies CW, Nunn AJ, et al. UK controlled trial of intrapleural streptokinase for pleural infection. N Engl J Med 2005; 352(9):865–874. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa042473
  11. Rahman NM, Maskell NA, West A, et al. Intrapleural use of tissue plasminogen activator and DNase in pleural infection. N Engl J Med 2011; 365(6):518–526. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1012740
  12. Piccolo F, Pitman N, Bhatnagar R, et al. Intrapleural tissue plasminogen activator and deoxyribonuclease for pleural infection. An effective and safe alternative to surgery. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2014; 11(9):1419–1425. doi:10.1513/AnnalsATS.201407-329OC
  13. Khemasuwan D, Sorensen J, Griffin DC. Predictive variables for failure in administration of intrapleural tissue plasminogen activator/deoxyribonuclease in patients with complicated parapneumonic effusions/empyema. Chest 2018; 154(3):550–556. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2018.01.037
  14. Abu-Daff S, Maziak DE, Alshehab D, et al. Intrapleural fibrinolytic therapy (IPFT) in loculated pleural effusions—analysis of predictors for failure of therapy and bleeding: a cohort study. BMJ Open 2013; 3(2):e001887. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001887
  15. Bishwakarma R, Shah S, Frank L, Zhang W, Sharma G, Nishi SP. Mixing it up: coadministration of tPA/DNase in complicated parapneumonic pleural effusions and empyema. J Bronchology Interv Pulmonol 2017; 24(1):40–47. doi:10.1097/LBR.0000000000000334
  16. Redden MD, Chin TY, van Driel ML. Surgical versus non-surgical management for pleural empyema. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 3:CD010651. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010651.pub2
  17. Feller-Kopman D, Light R. Pleural disease. N Engl J Med 2018; 378(8):740–751. doi:10.1056/NEJMra1403503
References
  1. Colice GL, Curtis A, Deslauriers J, et al. Medical and surgical treatment of parapneumonic effusions: an evidence-based guideline. Chest 2000; 118(4):1158–1171. pmid:11035692
  2. Bryant RE, Salmon CJ. Pleural empyema. Clin Infect Dis 1996; 22(5):747–762. pmid:8722927
  3. Braman SS, Donat WE. Explosive pleuritis. Manifestation of group A beta-hemolytic streptococcal infection. Am J Med 1986; 81(4):723–726. pmid:3532794
  4. Sharma JK, Marrie TJ. Explosive pleuritis. Can J Infect Dis 2001; 12(2):104–107. pmid:18159325
  5. Johnson JL. Pleurisy, fever, and rapidly progressive pleural effusion in a healthy, 29-year-old physician. Chest 2001; 119(4):1266–1269. pmid:11296198
  6. Jimenez D, Diaz G, Gil D, et al. Etiology and prognostic significance of massive pleural effusions. Respir Med 2005; 99(9):1183–1187. doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2005.02.022
  7. Light RW, MacGregor MI, Luchsinger PC, Ball WC Jr. Pleural effusions: the diagnostic separation of transudates and exudates. Ann Intern Med 1972; 77:507–513. pmid:4642731
  8. Rahman NM, Maskell NA, Davies CW, et al. The relationship between chest tube size and clinical outcome in pleural infection. Chest 2010; 137(3):536–543. doi:10.1378/chest.09-1044
  9. Keeling AN, Leong S, Logan PM, Lee MJ. Empyema and effusion: outcome of image-guided small-bore catheter drainage. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2008; 31(1):135–141. doi:10.1007/s00270-007-9197-0
  10. Maskell NA, Davies CW, Nunn AJ, et al. UK controlled trial of intrapleural streptokinase for pleural infection. N Engl J Med 2005; 352(9):865–874. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa042473
  11. Rahman NM, Maskell NA, West A, et al. Intrapleural use of tissue plasminogen activator and DNase in pleural infection. N Engl J Med 2011; 365(6):518–526. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1012740
  12. Piccolo F, Pitman N, Bhatnagar R, et al. Intrapleural tissue plasminogen activator and deoxyribonuclease for pleural infection. An effective and safe alternative to surgery. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2014; 11(9):1419–1425. doi:10.1513/AnnalsATS.201407-329OC
  13. Khemasuwan D, Sorensen J, Griffin DC. Predictive variables for failure in administration of intrapleural tissue plasminogen activator/deoxyribonuclease in patients with complicated parapneumonic effusions/empyema. Chest 2018; 154(3):550–556. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2018.01.037
  14. Abu-Daff S, Maziak DE, Alshehab D, et al. Intrapleural fibrinolytic therapy (IPFT) in loculated pleural effusions—analysis of predictors for failure of therapy and bleeding: a cohort study. BMJ Open 2013; 3(2):e001887. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001887
  15. Bishwakarma R, Shah S, Frank L, Zhang W, Sharma G, Nishi SP. Mixing it up: coadministration of tPA/DNase in complicated parapneumonic pleural effusions and empyema. J Bronchology Interv Pulmonol 2017; 24(1):40–47. doi:10.1097/LBR.0000000000000334
  16. Redden MD, Chin TY, van Driel ML. Surgical versus non-surgical management for pleural empyema. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017; 3:CD010651. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD010651.pub2
  17. Feller-Kopman D, Light R. Pleural disease. N Engl J Med 2018; 378(8):740–751. doi:10.1056/NEJMra1403503
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 86(1)
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 86(1)
Page Number
21-27
Page Number
21-27
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Rapidly progressive pleural effusion
Display Headline
Rapidly progressive pleural effusion
Legacy Keywords
pleural effusion, rapidly progressive pleural effusion, parapneumonic, pleuritic, pneumonia, chest tube, transudate, exudate, Light criteria, empyema, Zaid Zoumot, Ali Wahla, Samar Farha
Legacy Keywords
pleural effusion, rapidly progressive pleural effusion, parapneumonic, pleuritic, pneumonia, chest tube, transudate, exudate, Light criteria, empyema, Zaid Zoumot, Ali Wahla, Samar Farha
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Un-Gate On Date
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Article PDF Media

Progress in diagnosing and managing cardiac amyloidosis

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
Progress in diagnosing and managing cardiac amyloidosis

From the Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine

This article has been removed from the website. The article was prepared by the editorial staff based on a transcript of the proceedings of a conference, and errors occurred during this process that were subsequently published. A clarification of the errors will be published in a future issue.

A review of this topic was published in the December 2017 issue of the Journal (Donnelly JP, Hanna M. Cardiac amyloidosis: An update on diagnosis and treatment. Cleve Clin J Med 2017;84[12suppl 3]:12–26). doi:10.3949/ccjm.84.s3.02

Author and Disclosure Information

Mazen Hanna, MD
Co-Director, Amyloidosis Center, Section of Heart Failure and Cardiac Transplant Medicine, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Chetan Huded, MD
Resident Fellow, Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic

E. Rene Rodriguez, MD
Director, Cardiovascular Pathology, Director, Autopsy Pathology, Department of Anatomic Pathology, Cleveland Clinic; Professor, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH

Dermot Phelan, MD
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Deborah Kwon, MD
Director of Cardiac MRI Research, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine and Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Cleveland Clinic; Assistant Professor, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH

Wael Jaber, MD
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, and Department of Nuclear Medicine, Cleveland Clinic

Jason Valent, MD
Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology Cleveland Clinic

Michael Zhen-Yu Tong, MD, MBA
Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Cleveland Clinic

Address: Mazen Hanna, MD, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, J3-4, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195; [email protected]

Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 86(1)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
29-37
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Mazen Hanna, MD
Co-Director, Amyloidosis Center, Section of Heart Failure and Cardiac Transplant Medicine, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Chetan Huded, MD
Resident Fellow, Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic

E. Rene Rodriguez, MD
Director, Cardiovascular Pathology, Director, Autopsy Pathology, Department of Anatomic Pathology, Cleveland Clinic; Professor, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH

Dermot Phelan, MD
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Deborah Kwon, MD
Director of Cardiac MRI Research, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine and Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Cleveland Clinic; Assistant Professor, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH

Wael Jaber, MD
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, and Department of Nuclear Medicine, Cleveland Clinic

Jason Valent, MD
Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology Cleveland Clinic

Michael Zhen-Yu Tong, MD, MBA
Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Cleveland Clinic

Address: Mazen Hanna, MD, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, J3-4, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195; [email protected]

Author and Disclosure Information

Mazen Hanna, MD
Co-Director, Amyloidosis Center, Section of Heart Failure and Cardiac Transplant Medicine, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Chetan Huded, MD
Resident Fellow, Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic

E. Rene Rodriguez, MD
Director, Cardiovascular Pathology, Director, Autopsy Pathology, Department of Anatomic Pathology, Cleveland Clinic; Professor, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH

Dermot Phelan, MD
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic

Deborah Kwon, MD
Director of Cardiac MRI Research, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine and Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Cleveland Clinic; Assistant Professor, Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH

Wael Jaber, MD
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, and Department of Nuclear Medicine, Cleveland Clinic

Jason Valent, MD
Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology Cleveland Clinic

Michael Zhen-Yu Tong, MD, MBA
Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Cleveland Clinic

Address: Mazen Hanna, MD, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, J3-4, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195; [email protected]

From the Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine

This article has been removed from the website. The article was prepared by the editorial staff based on a transcript of the proceedings of a conference, and errors occurred during this process that were subsequently published. A clarification of the errors will be published in a future issue.

A review of this topic was published in the December 2017 issue of the Journal (Donnelly JP, Hanna M. Cardiac amyloidosis: An update on diagnosis and treatment. Cleve Clin J Med 2017;84[12suppl 3]:12–26). doi:10.3949/ccjm.84.s3.02

From the Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine

This article has been removed from the website. The article was prepared by the editorial staff based on a transcript of the proceedings of a conference, and errors occurred during this process that were subsequently published. A clarification of the errors will be published in a future issue.

A review of this topic was published in the December 2017 issue of the Journal (Donnelly JP, Hanna M. Cardiac amyloidosis: An update on diagnosis and treatment. Cleve Clin J Med 2017;84[12suppl 3]:12–26). doi:10.3949/ccjm.84.s3.02

Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 86(1)
Issue
Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine - 86(1)
Page Number
29-37
Page Number
29-37
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Progress in diagnosing and managing cardiac amyloidosis
Display Headline
Progress in diagnosing and managing cardiac amyloidosis
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Un-Gate On Date
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status

Painful lesion on lower lip

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
Painful lesion on lower lip

Painful lesion on lower lip

The FP recognized this as a probable squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) arising in a burn, known as a Marjolin ulcer.

The combination of the burn and the location on the lower lip made it extremely likely that this lesion was an SCC. The FP suggested the patient get a biopsy and have surgery for treatment. Unfortunately, the patient lived in poverty with no health insurance, financial means, running water, or electricity and stated that she could not afford any medical treatment. Her local hospital required cash payments, and she did not believe they would help her without funding and hoped that the medical mission team could help her. The FP was saddened by this news, but suggested that she do her best to access treatment in the near future. The FP did not have access to a pathologist (even if he could do the biopsy). Ultimately, the patient would need an experienced surgeon to excise this SCC.

With close to 1 billion people living in extreme poverty in the world, this is one sad example of a person that likely went without medical care for a serious, but treatable, illness.

Photos and text for Photo Rounds Friday courtesy of Richard P. Usatine, MD. This case was adapted from: Karnes J, Usatine R. Squamous cell carcinoma. In: Usatine R, Smith M, Mayeaux EJ, et al. Color Atlas of Family Medicine. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2013:999-1007.

To learn more about the newest 3rd edition of the Color Atlas and Synopsis of Family Medicine, see: https://www.amazon.com/Color-Atlas-Synopsis-Family-Medicine/dp/1259862046/

You can get the Color Atlas of Family Medicine app by clicking on this link: usatinemedia.com

Issue
The Journal of Family Practice - 68(1)
Publications
Topics
Sections

Painful lesion on lower lip

The FP recognized this as a probable squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) arising in a burn, known as a Marjolin ulcer.

The combination of the burn and the location on the lower lip made it extremely likely that this lesion was an SCC. The FP suggested the patient get a biopsy and have surgery for treatment. Unfortunately, the patient lived in poverty with no health insurance, financial means, running water, or electricity and stated that she could not afford any medical treatment. Her local hospital required cash payments, and she did not believe they would help her without funding and hoped that the medical mission team could help her. The FP was saddened by this news, but suggested that she do her best to access treatment in the near future. The FP did not have access to a pathologist (even if he could do the biopsy). Ultimately, the patient would need an experienced surgeon to excise this SCC.

With close to 1 billion people living in extreme poverty in the world, this is one sad example of a person that likely went without medical care for a serious, but treatable, illness.

Photos and text for Photo Rounds Friday courtesy of Richard P. Usatine, MD. This case was adapted from: Karnes J, Usatine R. Squamous cell carcinoma. In: Usatine R, Smith M, Mayeaux EJ, et al. Color Atlas of Family Medicine. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2013:999-1007.

To learn more about the newest 3rd edition of the Color Atlas and Synopsis of Family Medicine, see: https://www.amazon.com/Color-Atlas-Synopsis-Family-Medicine/dp/1259862046/

You can get the Color Atlas of Family Medicine app by clicking on this link: usatinemedia.com

Painful lesion on lower lip

The FP recognized this as a probable squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) arising in a burn, known as a Marjolin ulcer.

The combination of the burn and the location on the lower lip made it extremely likely that this lesion was an SCC. The FP suggested the patient get a biopsy and have surgery for treatment. Unfortunately, the patient lived in poverty with no health insurance, financial means, running water, or electricity and stated that she could not afford any medical treatment. Her local hospital required cash payments, and she did not believe they would help her without funding and hoped that the medical mission team could help her. The FP was saddened by this news, but suggested that she do her best to access treatment in the near future. The FP did not have access to a pathologist (even if he could do the biopsy). Ultimately, the patient would need an experienced surgeon to excise this SCC.

With close to 1 billion people living in extreme poverty in the world, this is one sad example of a person that likely went without medical care for a serious, but treatable, illness.

Photos and text for Photo Rounds Friday courtesy of Richard P. Usatine, MD. This case was adapted from: Karnes J, Usatine R. Squamous cell carcinoma. In: Usatine R, Smith M, Mayeaux EJ, et al. Color Atlas of Family Medicine. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2013:999-1007.

To learn more about the newest 3rd edition of the Color Atlas and Synopsis of Family Medicine, see: https://www.amazon.com/Color-Atlas-Synopsis-Family-Medicine/dp/1259862046/

You can get the Color Atlas of Family Medicine app by clicking on this link: usatinemedia.com

Issue
The Journal of Family Practice - 68(1)
Issue
The Journal of Family Practice - 68(1)
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Painful lesion on lower lip
Display Headline
Painful lesion on lower lip
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Un-Gate On Date
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status

Masterclass: Major Depression with Joseph Goldberg

Article Type
Changed

In this masterclass edition, Joseph Goldberg, MD, gives a talk on the first episode of major depression. Dr. Goldberg is a clinical professor of psychiatry at the Ichan school of medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City.

Amazon Alexa
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify

 

Publications
Topics
Sections

In this masterclass edition, Joseph Goldberg, MD, gives a talk on the first episode of major depression. Dr. Goldberg is a clinical professor of psychiatry at the Ichan school of medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City.

Amazon Alexa
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify

 

In this masterclass edition, Joseph Goldberg, MD, gives a talk on the first episode of major depression. Dr. Goldberg is a clinical professor of psychiatry at the Ichan school of medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City.

Amazon Alexa
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify

 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

EHRs and Burnout

Article Type
Changed

Electronic health records predict physician burnout. Also today, a new risk-prediction model for diabetes under development, firibastat is looking good for difficult-to-treat hypertension, and differences in gut bacteria can distinguish IBD from IBS.

Amazon Alexa
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify

 

Publications
Topics
Sections

Electronic health records predict physician burnout. Also today, a new risk-prediction model for diabetes under development, firibastat is looking good for difficult-to-treat hypertension, and differences in gut bacteria can distinguish IBD from IBS.

Amazon Alexa
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify

 

Electronic health records predict physician burnout. Also today, a new risk-prediction model for diabetes under development, firibastat is looking good for difficult-to-treat hypertension, and differences in gut bacteria can distinguish IBD from IBS.

Amazon Alexa
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify

 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

FDA approves dasatinib for kids with Ph+ ALL

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
FDA approves dasatinib for kids with Ph+ ALL

 

Photo by Bill Branson
Child with leukemia

 

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a second pediatric indication for dasatinib (Sprycel®).

 

The tyrosine kinase inhibitor is now approved for use in combination with chemotherapy to treat pediatric patients age 1 year and older who have newly diagnosed, Philadelphia-chromosome-positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

 

Dasatinib is also FDA-approved for use in children age 1 year and older who have chronic phase, Ph+ chronic myeloid leukemia (CML).

 

In adults, dasatinib is FDA-approved to treat:

 

 

 

 

 

  • Newly diagnosed, Ph+, chronic phase CML
  • Chronic, accelerated, or myeloid/lymphoid blast phase, Ph+ CML with resistance or intolerance to prior therapy including imatinib
  • Ph+ ALL with resistance or intolerance to prior therapy.

Trial results

 

The FDA’s approval of dasatinib in children with Ph+ ALL is based on data from a phase 2 study (CA180-372, NCT01460160).

 

In this trial, researchers evaluated dasatinib in combination with the AIEOP-BFM ALL 2000 chemotherapy protocol in patients (ages 1 to 17) with newly diagnosed, B-cell precursor, Ph+ ALL.

 

There were 78 patients evaluated for efficacy in cohort 1. They had a median age of 10.4 years (range, 2.6 to 17.9 years). They received dasatinib at a daily dose of 60 mg/m2 for up to 24 months.

 

Patients with central nervous system 3 disease received cranial irradiation, and patients were assigned to stem cell transplant based on minimal residual disease if they were thought to have a high risk of relapse.

 

The 3-year event-free survival rate in the 78 patients was 64.1%.

 

There were 81 patients evaluable for safety who received dasatinib continuously in combination with chemotherapy. Their median duration of treatment was 24 months (range, 2 to 27 months).

 

The most common adverse events (AEs) in these patients were mucositis (93%), febrile neutropenia (86%), pyrexia (85%), diarrhea (84%), nausea (84%), vomiting (83%), musculoskeletal pain (83%), abdominal pain (78%), cough (78%), headache (77%), rash (68%), fatigue (59%), and constipation (57%).

 

Eight (10%) patients had AEs leading to treatment discontinuation. These included fungal sepsis, hepatotoxicity in the setting of graft-versus-host disease, thrombocytopenia, cytomegalovirus infection, pneumonia, nausea, enteritis, and drug hypersensitivity.

 

Three patients (4%) had fatal AEs, all infections.

 

This trial was sponsored by Bristol-Myers Squibb. Additional data are available in the prescribing information for dasatinib.

Publications
Topics

 

Photo by Bill Branson
Child with leukemia

 

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a second pediatric indication for dasatinib (Sprycel®).

 

The tyrosine kinase inhibitor is now approved for use in combination with chemotherapy to treat pediatric patients age 1 year and older who have newly diagnosed, Philadelphia-chromosome-positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

 

Dasatinib is also FDA-approved for use in children age 1 year and older who have chronic phase, Ph+ chronic myeloid leukemia (CML).

 

In adults, dasatinib is FDA-approved to treat:

 

 

 

 

 

  • Newly diagnosed, Ph+, chronic phase CML
  • Chronic, accelerated, or myeloid/lymphoid blast phase, Ph+ CML with resistance or intolerance to prior therapy including imatinib
  • Ph+ ALL with resistance or intolerance to prior therapy.

Trial results

 

The FDA’s approval of dasatinib in children with Ph+ ALL is based on data from a phase 2 study (CA180-372, NCT01460160).

 

In this trial, researchers evaluated dasatinib in combination with the AIEOP-BFM ALL 2000 chemotherapy protocol in patients (ages 1 to 17) with newly diagnosed, B-cell precursor, Ph+ ALL.

 

There were 78 patients evaluated for efficacy in cohort 1. They had a median age of 10.4 years (range, 2.6 to 17.9 years). They received dasatinib at a daily dose of 60 mg/m2 for up to 24 months.

 

Patients with central nervous system 3 disease received cranial irradiation, and patients were assigned to stem cell transplant based on minimal residual disease if they were thought to have a high risk of relapse.

 

The 3-year event-free survival rate in the 78 patients was 64.1%.

 

There were 81 patients evaluable for safety who received dasatinib continuously in combination with chemotherapy. Their median duration of treatment was 24 months (range, 2 to 27 months).

 

The most common adverse events (AEs) in these patients were mucositis (93%), febrile neutropenia (86%), pyrexia (85%), diarrhea (84%), nausea (84%), vomiting (83%), musculoskeletal pain (83%), abdominal pain (78%), cough (78%), headache (77%), rash (68%), fatigue (59%), and constipation (57%).

 

Eight (10%) patients had AEs leading to treatment discontinuation. These included fungal sepsis, hepatotoxicity in the setting of graft-versus-host disease, thrombocytopenia, cytomegalovirus infection, pneumonia, nausea, enteritis, and drug hypersensitivity.

 

Three patients (4%) had fatal AEs, all infections.

 

This trial was sponsored by Bristol-Myers Squibb. Additional data are available in the prescribing information for dasatinib.

 

Photo by Bill Branson
Child with leukemia

 

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a second pediatric indication for dasatinib (Sprycel®).

 

The tyrosine kinase inhibitor is now approved for use in combination with chemotherapy to treat pediatric patients age 1 year and older who have newly diagnosed, Philadelphia-chromosome-positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

 

Dasatinib is also FDA-approved for use in children age 1 year and older who have chronic phase, Ph+ chronic myeloid leukemia (CML).

 

In adults, dasatinib is FDA-approved to treat:

 

 

 

 

 

  • Newly diagnosed, Ph+, chronic phase CML
  • Chronic, accelerated, or myeloid/lymphoid blast phase, Ph+ CML with resistance or intolerance to prior therapy including imatinib
  • Ph+ ALL with resistance or intolerance to prior therapy.

Trial results

 

The FDA’s approval of dasatinib in children with Ph+ ALL is based on data from a phase 2 study (CA180-372, NCT01460160).

 

In this trial, researchers evaluated dasatinib in combination with the AIEOP-BFM ALL 2000 chemotherapy protocol in patients (ages 1 to 17) with newly diagnosed, B-cell precursor, Ph+ ALL.

 

There were 78 patients evaluated for efficacy in cohort 1. They had a median age of 10.4 years (range, 2.6 to 17.9 years). They received dasatinib at a daily dose of 60 mg/m2 for up to 24 months.

 

Patients with central nervous system 3 disease received cranial irradiation, and patients were assigned to stem cell transplant based on minimal residual disease if they were thought to have a high risk of relapse.

 

The 3-year event-free survival rate in the 78 patients was 64.1%.

 

There were 81 patients evaluable for safety who received dasatinib continuously in combination with chemotherapy. Their median duration of treatment was 24 months (range, 2 to 27 months).

 

The most common adverse events (AEs) in these patients were mucositis (93%), febrile neutropenia (86%), pyrexia (85%), diarrhea (84%), nausea (84%), vomiting (83%), musculoskeletal pain (83%), abdominal pain (78%), cough (78%), headache (77%), rash (68%), fatigue (59%), and constipation (57%).

 

Eight (10%) patients had AEs leading to treatment discontinuation. These included fungal sepsis, hepatotoxicity in the setting of graft-versus-host disease, thrombocytopenia, cytomegalovirus infection, pneumonia, nausea, enteritis, and drug hypersensitivity.

 

Three patients (4%) had fatal AEs, all infections.

 

This trial was sponsored by Bristol-Myers Squibb. Additional data are available in the prescribing information for dasatinib.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
FDA approves dasatinib for kids with Ph+ ALL
Display Headline
FDA approves dasatinib for kids with Ph+ ALL
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Group proposes new grading systems for CRS, neurotoxicity

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
Group proposes new grading systems for CRS, neurotoxicity

Photo from Penn Medicine
CAR T cells

A group of experts has proposed new consensus definitions and grading systems for cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity related to immune effector cell therapies.

The group hopes their recommendations will be widely accepted and used in both trials and the clinical setting.

The recommendations were devised by 49 experts at a meeting supported by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (ASBMT), compiled by a writing group, and reviewed by stakeholders.

Daniel W. Lee, MD, of the University of Virginia School of Medicine in Charlottesville, and his colleagues described the ASBMT consensus definitions and grading systems in Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

CRS

The ASBMT consensus definition for CRS is “a supraphysiologic response following any immune therapy that results in the activation or engagement of endogenous or infused T cells and/or other immune effector cells.”

To be diagnosed with CRS, a patient must have a fever and may have the following symptoms:

  • Hypotension
  • Capillary leak (hypoxia)
  • End organ dysfunction.

The ASBMT consensus for grading CRS is as follows:

  • Grade 1—Patient has a fever, defined as a temperature of 38.0°C or higher
  • Grade 2—Patient has a fever, hypotension that doesn’t require vasopressors, and/or hypoxia that requires oxygen delivered by low-flow nasal cannula (≤6 L/min) or blow-by
  • Grade 3—Patient has a fever, hypotension requiring one vasopressor (with or without vasopressin), and/or hypoxia (not attributable to any other cause) that requires high-flow nasal cannula (>6 L/min), facemask, non-rebreather mask, or venturi mask
  • Grade 4—Patient has a fever, hypotension requiring multiple vasopressors (excluding vasopressin), and/or hypoxia (not attributable to any other cause) requiring positive-pressure ventilation
  • Grade 5—Death due to CRS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.

Typically, severe CRS can be considered resolved if “fever, oxygen, and pressor requirements have resolved,” Dr. Lee and his coauthors said.

The authors also stressed that neurotoxicity that occurs with or after CRS “does not inform the grade of CRS but is instead captured separately in the neurotoxicity scale.”

Neurotoxicity

Dr. Lee and his coauthors said neurotoxicity in this setting is called “immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS).”

The ASBMT consensus definition for ICANs is “a disorder characterized by a pathologic process involving the central nervous system following any immune therapy that results in the activation or engagement of endogenous or infused T cells and/or other immune effector cells.”

Symptoms of ICANS may include:

  • Aphasia
  • Altered level of consciousness
  • Impairment of cognitive skills
  • Motor weakness
  • Seizures
  • Cerebral edema.

The ASBMT consensus for grading ICANS in adults and children age 12 and older is as follows:

  • Grade 1—Patient has a score of 7-9 on the 10-point immune effector cell-associated encephalopathy (ICE) assessment and awakens spontaneously
  • Grade 2—Patient has a score of 3-6 on the ICE assessment and will awaken to the sound of a voice
  • Grade 3—Patient has a score of 0-2 on the ICE assessment, awakens only to tactile stimulus, has any clinical seizure that resolves rapidly or non-convulsive seizures that resolve with intervention, has focal/local edema on neuroimaging
  • Grade 4—Patient is unable to perform the ICE assessment, is unarousable or requires “vigorous stimuli” to be aroused, has life-threatening seizure (lasting more than 5 minutes) or repetitive clinical or electrical seizures without return to baseline in between, has deep focal motor weakness, and/or has decerebrate or decorticate posturing, cranial nerve VI palsy, papilledema, Cushing’s triad, or signs of diffuse cerebral edema on neuroimaging
  • Grade 5—Death due to ICANS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.
 

 

Dr. Lee and his coauthors noted that the ICE assessment is not suitable for children younger than 12. For these patients (and older patients with baseline developmental delays), ICANS can be assessed using the Cornell Assessment of Pediatric Delirium (CAPD).

The ASBMT consensus for grading ICANS in children younger than 12 (or older patients with developmental delays) is as follows:

  • Grade 1—Patient has a CAPD score lower than 9 and awakens spontaneously
  • Grade 2—Patient has a CAPD score lower than 9 and will awaken to the sound of a voice
  • Grade 3—Patient has a CAPD score of 9 or higher, awakens only to tactile stimulus, has any clinical seizure that resolves rapidly or non-convulsive seizures that resolve with intervention, and/or has focal/local edema on neuroimaging
  • Grade 4—Patient is unable to perform CAPD, is unarousable or requires “vigorous stimuli” to be aroused, has life-threatening seizure (lasting more than 5 minutes) or repetitive clinical or electrical seizures without return to baseline in between, has deep focal motor weakness, and/or has decerebrate or decorticate posturing, cranial nerve VI palsy, papilledema, Cushing’s triad, or signs of diffuse cerebral edema on neuroimaging
  • Grade 5—Death due to ICANS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.

Dr. Lee and his coauthors reported relationships with a range of companies. 

Publications
Topics

Photo from Penn Medicine
CAR T cells

A group of experts has proposed new consensus definitions and grading systems for cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity related to immune effector cell therapies.

The group hopes their recommendations will be widely accepted and used in both trials and the clinical setting.

The recommendations were devised by 49 experts at a meeting supported by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (ASBMT), compiled by a writing group, and reviewed by stakeholders.

Daniel W. Lee, MD, of the University of Virginia School of Medicine in Charlottesville, and his colleagues described the ASBMT consensus definitions and grading systems in Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

CRS

The ASBMT consensus definition for CRS is “a supraphysiologic response following any immune therapy that results in the activation or engagement of endogenous or infused T cells and/or other immune effector cells.”

To be diagnosed with CRS, a patient must have a fever and may have the following symptoms:

  • Hypotension
  • Capillary leak (hypoxia)
  • End organ dysfunction.

The ASBMT consensus for grading CRS is as follows:

  • Grade 1—Patient has a fever, defined as a temperature of 38.0°C or higher
  • Grade 2—Patient has a fever, hypotension that doesn’t require vasopressors, and/or hypoxia that requires oxygen delivered by low-flow nasal cannula (≤6 L/min) or blow-by
  • Grade 3—Patient has a fever, hypotension requiring one vasopressor (with or without vasopressin), and/or hypoxia (not attributable to any other cause) that requires high-flow nasal cannula (>6 L/min), facemask, non-rebreather mask, or venturi mask
  • Grade 4—Patient has a fever, hypotension requiring multiple vasopressors (excluding vasopressin), and/or hypoxia (not attributable to any other cause) requiring positive-pressure ventilation
  • Grade 5—Death due to CRS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.

Typically, severe CRS can be considered resolved if “fever, oxygen, and pressor requirements have resolved,” Dr. Lee and his coauthors said.

The authors also stressed that neurotoxicity that occurs with or after CRS “does not inform the grade of CRS but is instead captured separately in the neurotoxicity scale.”

Neurotoxicity

Dr. Lee and his coauthors said neurotoxicity in this setting is called “immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS).”

The ASBMT consensus definition for ICANs is “a disorder characterized by a pathologic process involving the central nervous system following any immune therapy that results in the activation or engagement of endogenous or infused T cells and/or other immune effector cells.”

Symptoms of ICANS may include:

  • Aphasia
  • Altered level of consciousness
  • Impairment of cognitive skills
  • Motor weakness
  • Seizures
  • Cerebral edema.

The ASBMT consensus for grading ICANS in adults and children age 12 and older is as follows:

  • Grade 1—Patient has a score of 7-9 on the 10-point immune effector cell-associated encephalopathy (ICE) assessment and awakens spontaneously
  • Grade 2—Patient has a score of 3-6 on the ICE assessment and will awaken to the sound of a voice
  • Grade 3—Patient has a score of 0-2 on the ICE assessment, awakens only to tactile stimulus, has any clinical seizure that resolves rapidly or non-convulsive seizures that resolve with intervention, has focal/local edema on neuroimaging
  • Grade 4—Patient is unable to perform the ICE assessment, is unarousable or requires “vigorous stimuli” to be aroused, has life-threatening seizure (lasting more than 5 minutes) or repetitive clinical or electrical seizures without return to baseline in between, has deep focal motor weakness, and/or has decerebrate or decorticate posturing, cranial nerve VI palsy, papilledema, Cushing’s triad, or signs of diffuse cerebral edema on neuroimaging
  • Grade 5—Death due to ICANS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.
 

 

Dr. Lee and his coauthors noted that the ICE assessment is not suitable for children younger than 12. For these patients (and older patients with baseline developmental delays), ICANS can be assessed using the Cornell Assessment of Pediatric Delirium (CAPD).

The ASBMT consensus for grading ICANS in children younger than 12 (or older patients with developmental delays) is as follows:

  • Grade 1—Patient has a CAPD score lower than 9 and awakens spontaneously
  • Grade 2—Patient has a CAPD score lower than 9 and will awaken to the sound of a voice
  • Grade 3—Patient has a CAPD score of 9 or higher, awakens only to tactile stimulus, has any clinical seizure that resolves rapidly or non-convulsive seizures that resolve with intervention, and/or has focal/local edema on neuroimaging
  • Grade 4—Patient is unable to perform CAPD, is unarousable or requires “vigorous stimuli” to be aroused, has life-threatening seizure (lasting more than 5 minutes) or repetitive clinical or electrical seizures without return to baseline in between, has deep focal motor weakness, and/or has decerebrate or decorticate posturing, cranial nerve VI palsy, papilledema, Cushing’s triad, or signs of diffuse cerebral edema on neuroimaging
  • Grade 5—Death due to ICANS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.

Dr. Lee and his coauthors reported relationships with a range of companies. 

Photo from Penn Medicine
CAR T cells

A group of experts has proposed new consensus definitions and grading systems for cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity related to immune effector cell therapies.

The group hopes their recommendations will be widely accepted and used in both trials and the clinical setting.

The recommendations were devised by 49 experts at a meeting supported by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (ASBMT), compiled by a writing group, and reviewed by stakeholders.

Daniel W. Lee, MD, of the University of Virginia School of Medicine in Charlottesville, and his colleagues described the ASBMT consensus definitions and grading systems in Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

CRS

The ASBMT consensus definition for CRS is “a supraphysiologic response following any immune therapy that results in the activation or engagement of endogenous or infused T cells and/or other immune effector cells.”

To be diagnosed with CRS, a patient must have a fever and may have the following symptoms:

  • Hypotension
  • Capillary leak (hypoxia)
  • End organ dysfunction.

The ASBMT consensus for grading CRS is as follows:

  • Grade 1—Patient has a fever, defined as a temperature of 38.0°C or higher
  • Grade 2—Patient has a fever, hypotension that doesn’t require vasopressors, and/or hypoxia that requires oxygen delivered by low-flow nasal cannula (≤6 L/min) or blow-by
  • Grade 3—Patient has a fever, hypotension requiring one vasopressor (with or without vasopressin), and/or hypoxia (not attributable to any other cause) that requires high-flow nasal cannula (>6 L/min), facemask, non-rebreather mask, or venturi mask
  • Grade 4—Patient has a fever, hypotension requiring multiple vasopressors (excluding vasopressin), and/or hypoxia (not attributable to any other cause) requiring positive-pressure ventilation
  • Grade 5—Death due to CRS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.

Typically, severe CRS can be considered resolved if “fever, oxygen, and pressor requirements have resolved,” Dr. Lee and his coauthors said.

The authors also stressed that neurotoxicity that occurs with or after CRS “does not inform the grade of CRS but is instead captured separately in the neurotoxicity scale.”

Neurotoxicity

Dr. Lee and his coauthors said neurotoxicity in this setting is called “immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS).”

The ASBMT consensus definition for ICANs is “a disorder characterized by a pathologic process involving the central nervous system following any immune therapy that results in the activation or engagement of endogenous or infused T cells and/or other immune effector cells.”

Symptoms of ICANS may include:

  • Aphasia
  • Altered level of consciousness
  • Impairment of cognitive skills
  • Motor weakness
  • Seizures
  • Cerebral edema.

The ASBMT consensus for grading ICANS in adults and children age 12 and older is as follows:

  • Grade 1—Patient has a score of 7-9 on the 10-point immune effector cell-associated encephalopathy (ICE) assessment and awakens spontaneously
  • Grade 2—Patient has a score of 3-6 on the ICE assessment and will awaken to the sound of a voice
  • Grade 3—Patient has a score of 0-2 on the ICE assessment, awakens only to tactile stimulus, has any clinical seizure that resolves rapidly or non-convulsive seizures that resolve with intervention, has focal/local edema on neuroimaging
  • Grade 4—Patient is unable to perform the ICE assessment, is unarousable or requires “vigorous stimuli” to be aroused, has life-threatening seizure (lasting more than 5 minutes) or repetitive clinical or electrical seizures without return to baseline in between, has deep focal motor weakness, and/or has decerebrate or decorticate posturing, cranial nerve VI palsy, papilledema, Cushing’s triad, or signs of diffuse cerebral edema on neuroimaging
  • Grade 5—Death due to ICANS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.
 

 

Dr. Lee and his coauthors noted that the ICE assessment is not suitable for children younger than 12. For these patients (and older patients with baseline developmental delays), ICANS can be assessed using the Cornell Assessment of Pediatric Delirium (CAPD).

The ASBMT consensus for grading ICANS in children younger than 12 (or older patients with developmental delays) is as follows:

  • Grade 1—Patient has a CAPD score lower than 9 and awakens spontaneously
  • Grade 2—Patient has a CAPD score lower than 9 and will awaken to the sound of a voice
  • Grade 3—Patient has a CAPD score of 9 or higher, awakens only to tactile stimulus, has any clinical seizure that resolves rapidly or non-convulsive seizures that resolve with intervention, and/or has focal/local edema on neuroimaging
  • Grade 4—Patient is unable to perform CAPD, is unarousable or requires “vigorous stimuli” to be aroused, has life-threatening seizure (lasting more than 5 minutes) or repetitive clinical or electrical seizures without return to baseline in between, has deep focal motor weakness, and/or has decerebrate or decorticate posturing, cranial nerve VI palsy, papilledema, Cushing’s triad, or signs of diffuse cerebral edema on neuroimaging
  • Grade 5—Death due to ICANS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.

Dr. Lee and his coauthors reported relationships with a range of companies. 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Group proposes new grading systems for CRS, neurotoxicity
Display Headline
Group proposes new grading systems for CRS, neurotoxicity
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

EC approves split dosing regimen for daratumumab

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
EC approves split dosing regimen for daratumumab

Photo courtesy of Janssen
Daratumumab (Darzalex)

The European Commission (EC) has granted marketing authorization for a split dosing regimen for daratumumab (Darzalex®).

The approval provides healthcare professionals with the option to split the first infusion of daratumumab over 2 consecutive days.

“We are hopeful that the availability of this more flexible dosing option will make the first infusion of Darzalex more convenient for European multiple myeloma patients,” said Jan van de Winkel, PhD, chief executive officer of Genmab, which licensed daratumumab to Janssen Biotech, Inc.

Daratumumab is currently EC-approved for the following indications:

  • For use in combination with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone to treat adults with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant
  • For use in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone, or bortezomib and dexamethasone, for the treatment of adults with MM who have received at least one prior therapy
  • As monotherapy for adults with relapsed and refractory MM whose prior therapy included a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent and who have demonstrated disease progression on their last therapy.

The EC’s approval of a split dosing regimen for daratumumab was based on data from the phase 1b EQUULEUS trial (MMY1001, NCT01998971), which was sponsored by Janssen.

This trial was designed to evaluate daratumumab in combination with bortezomib-dexamethasone, bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone, bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone, pomalidomide-dexamethasone, carfilzomib-dexamethasone, and carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone.

At the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1970), researchers presented data from this trial in MM patients who received their first 16 mg/kg daratumumab dose as a split dose of 8 mg/kg on day 1 of cycle 1 and 8 mg/kg on day 2 of cycle 1, compared to patients who received the full 16 mg/kg dose on day 1 of cycle 1.

The researchers said they observed “virtually identical” pharmacokinetics between the dosing groups.

Cmax on the first day of cycle 1 was lower in the split-dose group than in the full-dose group. However, after patients in the split-dose group received the second 8 mg/kg dose on day 2, concentrations were similar between the groups.

The researchers said they do not expect the initial difference they observed to have any impact on clinical outcomes.

The team also pointed out that there was no increase in infusion-related reactions among patients who received the split dose.

The researchers said split dosing of daratumumab is still being investigated in ongoing studies of MM patients, including CANDOR (NCT03158688) and LYRA (NCT02951819).

Publications
Topics

Photo courtesy of Janssen
Daratumumab (Darzalex)

The European Commission (EC) has granted marketing authorization for a split dosing regimen for daratumumab (Darzalex®).

The approval provides healthcare professionals with the option to split the first infusion of daratumumab over 2 consecutive days.

“We are hopeful that the availability of this more flexible dosing option will make the first infusion of Darzalex more convenient for European multiple myeloma patients,” said Jan van de Winkel, PhD, chief executive officer of Genmab, which licensed daratumumab to Janssen Biotech, Inc.

Daratumumab is currently EC-approved for the following indications:

  • For use in combination with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone to treat adults with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant
  • For use in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone, or bortezomib and dexamethasone, for the treatment of adults with MM who have received at least one prior therapy
  • As monotherapy for adults with relapsed and refractory MM whose prior therapy included a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent and who have demonstrated disease progression on their last therapy.

The EC’s approval of a split dosing regimen for daratumumab was based on data from the phase 1b EQUULEUS trial (MMY1001, NCT01998971), which was sponsored by Janssen.

This trial was designed to evaluate daratumumab in combination with bortezomib-dexamethasone, bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone, bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone, pomalidomide-dexamethasone, carfilzomib-dexamethasone, and carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone.

At the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1970), researchers presented data from this trial in MM patients who received their first 16 mg/kg daratumumab dose as a split dose of 8 mg/kg on day 1 of cycle 1 and 8 mg/kg on day 2 of cycle 1, compared to patients who received the full 16 mg/kg dose on day 1 of cycle 1.

The researchers said they observed “virtually identical” pharmacokinetics between the dosing groups.

Cmax on the first day of cycle 1 was lower in the split-dose group than in the full-dose group. However, after patients in the split-dose group received the second 8 mg/kg dose on day 2, concentrations were similar between the groups.

The researchers said they do not expect the initial difference they observed to have any impact on clinical outcomes.

The team also pointed out that there was no increase in infusion-related reactions among patients who received the split dose.

The researchers said split dosing of daratumumab is still being investigated in ongoing studies of MM patients, including CANDOR (NCT03158688) and LYRA (NCT02951819).

Photo courtesy of Janssen
Daratumumab (Darzalex)

The European Commission (EC) has granted marketing authorization for a split dosing regimen for daratumumab (Darzalex®).

The approval provides healthcare professionals with the option to split the first infusion of daratumumab over 2 consecutive days.

“We are hopeful that the availability of this more flexible dosing option will make the first infusion of Darzalex more convenient for European multiple myeloma patients,” said Jan van de Winkel, PhD, chief executive officer of Genmab, which licensed daratumumab to Janssen Biotech, Inc.

Daratumumab is currently EC-approved for the following indications:

  • For use in combination with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone to treat adults with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant
  • For use in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone, or bortezomib and dexamethasone, for the treatment of adults with MM who have received at least one prior therapy
  • As monotherapy for adults with relapsed and refractory MM whose prior therapy included a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory agent and who have demonstrated disease progression on their last therapy.

The EC’s approval of a split dosing regimen for daratumumab was based on data from the phase 1b EQUULEUS trial (MMY1001, NCT01998971), which was sponsored by Janssen.

This trial was designed to evaluate daratumumab in combination with bortezomib-dexamethasone, bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone, bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone, pomalidomide-dexamethasone, carfilzomib-dexamethasone, and carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone.

At the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1970), researchers presented data from this trial in MM patients who received their first 16 mg/kg daratumumab dose as a split dose of 8 mg/kg on day 1 of cycle 1 and 8 mg/kg on day 2 of cycle 1, compared to patients who received the full 16 mg/kg dose on day 1 of cycle 1.

The researchers said they observed “virtually identical” pharmacokinetics between the dosing groups.

Cmax on the first day of cycle 1 was lower in the split-dose group than in the full-dose group. However, after patients in the split-dose group received the second 8 mg/kg dose on day 2, concentrations were similar between the groups.

The researchers said they do not expect the initial difference they observed to have any impact on clinical outcomes.

The team also pointed out that there was no increase in infusion-related reactions among patients who received the split dose.

The researchers said split dosing of daratumumab is still being investigated in ongoing studies of MM patients, including CANDOR (NCT03158688) and LYRA (NCT02951819).

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
EC approves split dosing regimen for daratumumab
Display Headline
EC approves split dosing regimen for daratumumab
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

‘Walk and talk’ 3MDR psychotherapy for PTSD

Article Type
Changed

 

– The therapeutic setting for individual psychotherapy has shifted over the years from the analytic couch, with the therapist discretely tucked out of sight, to facing chairs, a similarly sedentary format. The next evolutionary development might be to plop a patient with posttraumatic stress disorder on an exercise treadmill and don a virtual reality helmet to engage in an interactive motion-assisted form of psychotherapy in which the therapist stands alongside the walking patient while providing guidance on processing traumatic memories, Eric Vermetten, MD, PhD, said at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News
Dr. Eric Vermetten

He and his colleagues have developed an innovative approach to delivering trauma-focused psychotherapy. They call it Multimodular Motion-Assisted Memory Desensitization and Reconsolidation (3MDR), or more informally, “walk and talk therapy,” explained Dr. Vermetten, professor of psychiatry at Leiden (the Netherlands) University and a military mental health researcher for the Dutch Ministry of Defense.

3MDR is a combination of personalized virtual reality using a headset, multisensory input using self-selected trauma-related pictures, and a dual-attention task borrowed from eye movement desensitization and reprocessing therapy, with treadmill walking throughout the treatment session.

The goal is to facilitate retrieval of fear memories and then reconsolidate them in a benign form. 3MDR is designed to boost this process of memory retrieval and reconsolidation by creating a more totally immersive patient experience intended to enhance treatment engagement and overcome behavioral avoidance. Through virtual reality, the PTSD patient literally walks toward his personal fear-related images.

Dr. Vermetten and his coinvestigators came up with 3MDR as a treatment designed for military veterans with chronic, combat-related, treatment-resistant PTSD. The impetus was the evident need for new and better forms of psychotherapy for such patients. Even though an array of evidence-based psychotherapies are available as guideline-recommended first-line treatments for PTSD, individuals with combat-related PTSD have a notoriously low response rate to these interventions, presumably because of the intensity and repetitive nature of their traumatic experiences. Indeed, up to two-thirds of veterans with PTSD experience substantial residual symptoms post treatment such that they still meet diagnostic criteria for the disorder.

3MDR is an amped up form of exposure-based therapy in which patients walk through a personalized virtual reality installation toward self-chosen trauma-related pictures of their deployment. The investigators developed this intensely immersive type of psychotherapy because they believe avoidance and lack of emotional engagement figure prominently in the low success rate of established forms of psychotherapy in combat-related PTSD. The treadmill walking aspect is considered key because of the large body of research showing that walking entails cognitive-motor interactions that facilitate problem solving, the psychiatrist explained.

The investigators recently published a detailed description of the therapeutic rationale for 3MDR and the nuts and bolts of the novel therapy (Front Psychiatry. 2018 May 4;9:176. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00176). Early anecdotal experience has been positive. However, as cochair of the ECNP Traumatic Stress Network, Dr. Vermetten is acutely aware of the need to demonstrate efficacy in rigorous randomized controlled trials.

“This is a way psychotherapy can be shaped in the future. We’re collaborating with various centers across the globe now to see whether this is effective for treatment-resistant PTSD patients,” Dr. Vermetten said.

If those studies prove positive, it will be worthwhile to determine whether 3MDR also has a role as a first-line treatment for earlier-stage PTSD and for forms of the disorder unrelated to military combat, he added.

Funding for the project has been provided by the Dutch Ministry of Defense.

[email protected]

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– The therapeutic setting for individual psychotherapy has shifted over the years from the analytic couch, with the therapist discretely tucked out of sight, to facing chairs, a similarly sedentary format. The next evolutionary development might be to plop a patient with posttraumatic stress disorder on an exercise treadmill and don a virtual reality helmet to engage in an interactive motion-assisted form of psychotherapy in which the therapist stands alongside the walking patient while providing guidance on processing traumatic memories, Eric Vermetten, MD, PhD, said at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News
Dr. Eric Vermetten

He and his colleagues have developed an innovative approach to delivering trauma-focused psychotherapy. They call it Multimodular Motion-Assisted Memory Desensitization and Reconsolidation (3MDR), or more informally, “walk and talk therapy,” explained Dr. Vermetten, professor of psychiatry at Leiden (the Netherlands) University and a military mental health researcher for the Dutch Ministry of Defense.

3MDR is a combination of personalized virtual reality using a headset, multisensory input using self-selected trauma-related pictures, and a dual-attention task borrowed from eye movement desensitization and reprocessing therapy, with treadmill walking throughout the treatment session.

The goal is to facilitate retrieval of fear memories and then reconsolidate them in a benign form. 3MDR is designed to boost this process of memory retrieval and reconsolidation by creating a more totally immersive patient experience intended to enhance treatment engagement and overcome behavioral avoidance. Through virtual reality, the PTSD patient literally walks toward his personal fear-related images.

Dr. Vermetten and his coinvestigators came up with 3MDR as a treatment designed for military veterans with chronic, combat-related, treatment-resistant PTSD. The impetus was the evident need for new and better forms of psychotherapy for such patients. Even though an array of evidence-based psychotherapies are available as guideline-recommended first-line treatments for PTSD, individuals with combat-related PTSD have a notoriously low response rate to these interventions, presumably because of the intensity and repetitive nature of their traumatic experiences. Indeed, up to two-thirds of veterans with PTSD experience substantial residual symptoms post treatment such that they still meet diagnostic criteria for the disorder.

3MDR is an amped up form of exposure-based therapy in which patients walk through a personalized virtual reality installation toward self-chosen trauma-related pictures of their deployment. The investigators developed this intensely immersive type of psychotherapy because they believe avoidance and lack of emotional engagement figure prominently in the low success rate of established forms of psychotherapy in combat-related PTSD. The treadmill walking aspect is considered key because of the large body of research showing that walking entails cognitive-motor interactions that facilitate problem solving, the psychiatrist explained.

The investigators recently published a detailed description of the therapeutic rationale for 3MDR and the nuts and bolts of the novel therapy (Front Psychiatry. 2018 May 4;9:176. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00176). Early anecdotal experience has been positive. However, as cochair of the ECNP Traumatic Stress Network, Dr. Vermetten is acutely aware of the need to demonstrate efficacy in rigorous randomized controlled trials.

“This is a way psychotherapy can be shaped in the future. We’re collaborating with various centers across the globe now to see whether this is effective for treatment-resistant PTSD patients,” Dr. Vermetten said.

If those studies prove positive, it will be worthwhile to determine whether 3MDR also has a role as a first-line treatment for earlier-stage PTSD and for forms of the disorder unrelated to military combat, he added.

Funding for the project has been provided by the Dutch Ministry of Defense.

[email protected]

 

– The therapeutic setting for individual psychotherapy has shifted over the years from the analytic couch, with the therapist discretely tucked out of sight, to facing chairs, a similarly sedentary format. The next evolutionary development might be to plop a patient with posttraumatic stress disorder on an exercise treadmill and don a virtual reality helmet to engage in an interactive motion-assisted form of psychotherapy in which the therapist stands alongside the walking patient while providing guidance on processing traumatic memories, Eric Vermetten, MD, PhD, said at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News
Dr. Eric Vermetten

He and his colleagues have developed an innovative approach to delivering trauma-focused psychotherapy. They call it Multimodular Motion-Assisted Memory Desensitization and Reconsolidation (3MDR), or more informally, “walk and talk therapy,” explained Dr. Vermetten, professor of psychiatry at Leiden (the Netherlands) University and a military mental health researcher for the Dutch Ministry of Defense.

3MDR is a combination of personalized virtual reality using a headset, multisensory input using self-selected trauma-related pictures, and a dual-attention task borrowed from eye movement desensitization and reprocessing therapy, with treadmill walking throughout the treatment session.

The goal is to facilitate retrieval of fear memories and then reconsolidate them in a benign form. 3MDR is designed to boost this process of memory retrieval and reconsolidation by creating a more totally immersive patient experience intended to enhance treatment engagement and overcome behavioral avoidance. Through virtual reality, the PTSD patient literally walks toward his personal fear-related images.

Dr. Vermetten and his coinvestigators came up with 3MDR as a treatment designed for military veterans with chronic, combat-related, treatment-resistant PTSD. The impetus was the evident need for new and better forms of psychotherapy for such patients. Even though an array of evidence-based psychotherapies are available as guideline-recommended first-line treatments for PTSD, individuals with combat-related PTSD have a notoriously low response rate to these interventions, presumably because of the intensity and repetitive nature of their traumatic experiences. Indeed, up to two-thirds of veterans with PTSD experience substantial residual symptoms post treatment such that they still meet diagnostic criteria for the disorder.

3MDR is an amped up form of exposure-based therapy in which patients walk through a personalized virtual reality installation toward self-chosen trauma-related pictures of their deployment. The investigators developed this intensely immersive type of psychotherapy because they believe avoidance and lack of emotional engagement figure prominently in the low success rate of established forms of psychotherapy in combat-related PTSD. The treadmill walking aspect is considered key because of the large body of research showing that walking entails cognitive-motor interactions that facilitate problem solving, the psychiatrist explained.

The investigators recently published a detailed description of the therapeutic rationale for 3MDR and the nuts and bolts of the novel therapy (Front Psychiatry. 2018 May 4;9:176. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00176). Early anecdotal experience has been positive. However, as cochair of the ECNP Traumatic Stress Network, Dr. Vermetten is acutely aware of the need to demonstrate efficacy in rigorous randomized controlled trials.

“This is a way psychotherapy can be shaped in the future. We’re collaborating with various centers across the globe now to see whether this is effective for treatment-resistant PTSD patients,” Dr. Vermetten said.

If those studies prove positive, it will be worthwhile to determine whether 3MDR also has a role as a first-line treatment for earlier-stage PTSD and for forms of the disorder unrelated to military combat, he added.

Funding for the project has been provided by the Dutch Ministry of Defense.

[email protected]

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM THE ECNP CONGRESS

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

Miscarriage after myomectomy depends on fibroid number, uterine incisions

Article Type
Changed

It’s the number of uterine incisions and fibroids removed that increase the risk of miscarriage after fibroid treatment, not the type of procedure, according to a review of 252 cases at Northwestern University, Chicago.

Surgeons feel terrible when a woman loses a pregnancy after fibroid treatment, and wonder if they “caused it, or if it was just a bad uterus or a bad initial pathology,” said lead investigator Laura M. Glaser, MD, an ob.gyn. in private practice in Lake Forest, Ill.

Her study, which was presented at a meeting sponsored by AAGL, suggests that miscarriage occurs mostly from complex pathology, as indicated by the number of fibroids and the degree of uterine cutting needed to remove them. The team reviewed outcomes among women who conceived after treatment; 28 had robotic-assisted myomectomies; 208 had open, abdominal myomectomies; and 16 had uterine fibroid embolization (UFE). Miscarriage was defined as pregnancy loss before 24 weeks.

After the researchers adjusted for age, body mass index, and parity, there were no statistically significant differences in miscarriage rates among the three groups (31% after UFE, 29% after robotic myomectomy, and 22% after abdominal myomectomy).

Open cases had the largest dominant fibroid at a mean of 8.5 cm, the most fibroids removed at 4.5, and the highest rate of cavity entry, 42%. Even so, at 22%, open cases were the least likely to miscarry.

Uterine size, specimen weight, time from procedure to pregnancy, and fibroid location didn’t seem to matter otherwise. The only risk factors that reached statistical significance were among women who had myomectomies; an increasing number of uterine cuts (odds ratio, 1.558; P = .004) and fibroids removed (OR, 1.11; P = .033) increased the odds of miscarriage.

More than 40% of women in the UFE group had previous fibroid surgery, versus 5% among women who had myomectomies. UFE women also were far more likely to have had a previous birth (50% versus 17%), but less likely to have subserosal fibroids (13% versus 33%), and their dominant fibroid was a few centimeters smaller.

Subjects were in their mid-30s, on average, with a mean body mass index of about 28 kg/m2. Just over 40% of the women who had myomectomies were white, versus 19% of women who had UFE.

There was no outside funding for the work, and the investigators didn’t have any disclosures.


SOURCE: Glaser LM et al. 2018 AAGL Global Congress, Abstract 160

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

It’s the number of uterine incisions and fibroids removed that increase the risk of miscarriage after fibroid treatment, not the type of procedure, according to a review of 252 cases at Northwestern University, Chicago.

Surgeons feel terrible when a woman loses a pregnancy after fibroid treatment, and wonder if they “caused it, or if it was just a bad uterus or a bad initial pathology,” said lead investigator Laura M. Glaser, MD, an ob.gyn. in private practice in Lake Forest, Ill.

Her study, which was presented at a meeting sponsored by AAGL, suggests that miscarriage occurs mostly from complex pathology, as indicated by the number of fibroids and the degree of uterine cutting needed to remove them. The team reviewed outcomes among women who conceived after treatment; 28 had robotic-assisted myomectomies; 208 had open, abdominal myomectomies; and 16 had uterine fibroid embolization (UFE). Miscarriage was defined as pregnancy loss before 24 weeks.

After the researchers adjusted for age, body mass index, and parity, there were no statistically significant differences in miscarriage rates among the three groups (31% after UFE, 29% after robotic myomectomy, and 22% after abdominal myomectomy).

Open cases had the largest dominant fibroid at a mean of 8.5 cm, the most fibroids removed at 4.5, and the highest rate of cavity entry, 42%. Even so, at 22%, open cases were the least likely to miscarry.

Uterine size, specimen weight, time from procedure to pregnancy, and fibroid location didn’t seem to matter otherwise. The only risk factors that reached statistical significance were among women who had myomectomies; an increasing number of uterine cuts (odds ratio, 1.558; P = .004) and fibroids removed (OR, 1.11; P = .033) increased the odds of miscarriage.

More than 40% of women in the UFE group had previous fibroid surgery, versus 5% among women who had myomectomies. UFE women also were far more likely to have had a previous birth (50% versus 17%), but less likely to have subserosal fibroids (13% versus 33%), and their dominant fibroid was a few centimeters smaller.

Subjects were in their mid-30s, on average, with a mean body mass index of about 28 kg/m2. Just over 40% of the women who had myomectomies were white, versus 19% of women who had UFE.

There was no outside funding for the work, and the investigators didn’t have any disclosures.


SOURCE: Glaser LM et al. 2018 AAGL Global Congress, Abstract 160

It’s the number of uterine incisions and fibroids removed that increase the risk of miscarriage after fibroid treatment, not the type of procedure, according to a review of 252 cases at Northwestern University, Chicago.

Surgeons feel terrible when a woman loses a pregnancy after fibroid treatment, and wonder if they “caused it, or if it was just a bad uterus or a bad initial pathology,” said lead investigator Laura M. Glaser, MD, an ob.gyn. in private practice in Lake Forest, Ill.

Her study, which was presented at a meeting sponsored by AAGL, suggests that miscarriage occurs mostly from complex pathology, as indicated by the number of fibroids and the degree of uterine cutting needed to remove them. The team reviewed outcomes among women who conceived after treatment; 28 had robotic-assisted myomectomies; 208 had open, abdominal myomectomies; and 16 had uterine fibroid embolization (UFE). Miscarriage was defined as pregnancy loss before 24 weeks.

After the researchers adjusted for age, body mass index, and parity, there were no statistically significant differences in miscarriage rates among the three groups (31% after UFE, 29% after robotic myomectomy, and 22% after abdominal myomectomy).

Open cases had the largest dominant fibroid at a mean of 8.5 cm, the most fibroids removed at 4.5, and the highest rate of cavity entry, 42%. Even so, at 22%, open cases were the least likely to miscarry.

Uterine size, specimen weight, time from procedure to pregnancy, and fibroid location didn’t seem to matter otherwise. The only risk factors that reached statistical significance were among women who had myomectomies; an increasing number of uterine cuts (odds ratio, 1.558; P = .004) and fibroids removed (OR, 1.11; P = .033) increased the odds of miscarriage.

More than 40% of women in the UFE group had previous fibroid surgery, versus 5% among women who had myomectomies. UFE women also were far more likely to have had a previous birth (50% versus 17%), but less likely to have subserosal fibroids (13% versus 33%), and their dominant fibroid was a few centimeters smaller.

Subjects were in their mid-30s, on average, with a mean body mass index of about 28 kg/m2. Just over 40% of the women who had myomectomies were white, versus 19% of women who had UFE.

There was no outside funding for the work, and the investigators didn’t have any disclosures.


SOURCE: Glaser LM et al. 2018 AAGL Global Congress, Abstract 160

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Active
Sections
Article Source

REPORTING FROM AAGL GLOBAL CONGRESS

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
CME ID
191892
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: The number of uterine incisions and fibroids removed increase the risk of miscarriage after fibroid treatment, not the type of procedure.

Major finding: After adjusting for age, body mass index, and parity, there were no statistically significant differences in miscarriage rates between the three groups (31% after uterine fibroid embolization; 29% after robotic myomectomy, and 22% after open abdominal myomectomy).

Study details: Review of 252 cases

Disclosures: There was no outside funding for the work, and the investigators didn’t have any disclosures.

Source: Glaser LM et al. 2018 AAGL Global Congress, Abstract 160

Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica