Walking the walk

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 17:35

 

In March 2018, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), an advocacy organization dedicated to improving the lives of LGBTQ people, released its 11th Annual Healthcare Equality Index. The HEI is an indicator of how inclusive and equitable health care facilities are in providing care for their LGBTQ patients. My own institution, Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh, scored very high on this index and received the “Leader in LGBTQ Healthcare Equality” designation. The process of receiving this designation is very rigorous, and I am proud of my institution for making great strides in expanding health care access for LGBTQ patients, especially transgender patients. However, this is no time to rest on one’s laurels, as many transgender people still experience challenges and barriers in navigating the health care system.

AlexRaths/Thinkstock
Disparities in health outcomes between transgender and nontransgender people is well known, and some of these discrepancies can be attributed to difficulty in accessing high-quality health care. The biggest barrier is finding a health care provider who is culturally competent in delivering health care to transgender patients. Many transgender individuals expect rejection and discrimination everywhere they go,1 and health care institutions are no exception. For example, about one-fifth of transgender individuals report being denied health care at their primary care provider because of the person’s gender identity and/or gender expression.2 Even if they’re not rejected outright, many transgender patients often are misgendered by health care staff, or they find themselves educating the provider on transgender health issues.2 Even transgender individuals who find a provider who is competent in providing transgender health care still experience additional barriers. For example, EHRs often do not list gender identity and/or pronouns in the chart. This makes it more likely for providers to misgender patients by mistake because they only have the EHR as a reference.

Insurance access continues to be a problem. I wrote a column in June 2017 about obtaining health care insurance for transgender patients. Preauthorization is common for obtaining cross-sex hormones or pubertal blockers even for insurance companies that are willing to pay for them – a process that can take weeks, even months, to complete. This creates delays in obtaining necessary care for transgender patients. This is just one of the many barriers transgender people face in navigating the health care system.

Increasing access to health care services for transgender patients is more about improving health outcomes than patient satisfaction. Even the smallest policy change may have a meaningful impact on the lives of transgender individuals. A study by Russell et al., in the April 2018 issue of Journal of Adolescent Health found that transgender youth allowed to use their chosen name (instead of the name assigned to them by their parents at birth) were more likely to have fewer depressive symptoms and lower rates of suicidal ideation and suicidal behavior.3 These findings highlight that even a small change can have a huge impact on the health and well-being of this patient population.

 

 


What can you do to expand access? First, you must educate yourself and teach others. Many providers report never having received education on LGBTQ health during their training,4 and most barriers for transgender patients stem from this lack of training. Second, work with the transgender community – it is very tempting to see your institution’s name on the HEI and think all the work is done, but the lived experiences of transgender patients sometimes are different than what is seen on paper (or online). Team up with local organizations such as PFLAG (formerly known as Parents and Families of Lesbians and Gays) that can create support groups for both transgender youth and their families. Help create a network of referral systems for your transgender patients – the community is often small enough that they know which providers or establishments are safe for transgender individuals. Many transgender patients find this extremely helpful.5 You still wield significant influence in the community, so work with the health care and insurance systems to improve access and coverage for gender-related services. The HRC HEI is becoming coveted by health care institutions. This is a prime opportunity to be involved in committees seeking to improve health care access for transgender individuals. Finally, as there are champions for transgender health in your clinic, there also are champions for transgender health in insurance companies. They often are well known in the community, so find that individual for counseling on how to navigate the insurance system for your transgender patients.

Although an increasing number of health care institutions and clinics are recognizing the health care needs of transgender patients and providing appropriate care, the health care system remains challenging for transgender individuals to navigate. Small policy changes may have a substantial impact on the health and well-being of transgender individuals. Although creating change within an institution may seem like a monumental task, you do have the agency to help create this type change within the system to expand health care access for transgender patients.

Dr. Gerald Montano

Dr. Montano is an assistant professor of pediatrics at the University of Pittsburgh and an adolescent medicine physician at Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC. Email him at [email protected].

 

Resources

  • HRC HEI: If you’re interested in learning what policies are inclusive and equitable for LGBT patients, check out the HRC HEI scoring criteria. It’s a good place to start if you want to expand health care access for transgender individuals.
  • To find out more about the health care legal protections transgender individuals are entitled to, check out the National Center for Transgender Equality.

References

1. Psychol Bull. 2003 Sep;129(5):674-97.

2. “Injustice at every turn: A report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey.” (Washington: National Center for Transgender Equality and National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, 2011.)

3. J. Adolesc Health. 2018 Apr. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.02.003.

4. Int J Transgenderism. 2008. doi: 10.1300/J485v08n02_08.

5. Transgend Health. 2016 Nov 1;1(1):238-49.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

In March 2018, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), an advocacy organization dedicated to improving the lives of LGBTQ people, released its 11th Annual Healthcare Equality Index. The HEI is an indicator of how inclusive and equitable health care facilities are in providing care for their LGBTQ patients. My own institution, Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh, scored very high on this index and received the “Leader in LGBTQ Healthcare Equality” designation. The process of receiving this designation is very rigorous, and I am proud of my institution for making great strides in expanding health care access for LGBTQ patients, especially transgender patients. However, this is no time to rest on one’s laurels, as many transgender people still experience challenges and barriers in navigating the health care system.

AlexRaths/Thinkstock
Disparities in health outcomes between transgender and nontransgender people is well known, and some of these discrepancies can be attributed to difficulty in accessing high-quality health care. The biggest barrier is finding a health care provider who is culturally competent in delivering health care to transgender patients. Many transgender individuals expect rejection and discrimination everywhere they go,1 and health care institutions are no exception. For example, about one-fifth of transgender individuals report being denied health care at their primary care provider because of the person’s gender identity and/or gender expression.2 Even if they’re not rejected outright, many transgender patients often are misgendered by health care staff, or they find themselves educating the provider on transgender health issues.2 Even transgender individuals who find a provider who is competent in providing transgender health care still experience additional barriers. For example, EHRs often do not list gender identity and/or pronouns in the chart. This makes it more likely for providers to misgender patients by mistake because they only have the EHR as a reference.

Insurance access continues to be a problem. I wrote a column in June 2017 about obtaining health care insurance for transgender patients. Preauthorization is common for obtaining cross-sex hormones or pubertal blockers even for insurance companies that are willing to pay for them – a process that can take weeks, even months, to complete. This creates delays in obtaining necessary care for transgender patients. This is just one of the many barriers transgender people face in navigating the health care system.

Increasing access to health care services for transgender patients is more about improving health outcomes than patient satisfaction. Even the smallest policy change may have a meaningful impact on the lives of transgender individuals. A study by Russell et al., in the April 2018 issue of Journal of Adolescent Health found that transgender youth allowed to use their chosen name (instead of the name assigned to them by their parents at birth) were more likely to have fewer depressive symptoms and lower rates of suicidal ideation and suicidal behavior.3 These findings highlight that even a small change can have a huge impact on the health and well-being of this patient population.

 

 


What can you do to expand access? First, you must educate yourself and teach others. Many providers report never having received education on LGBTQ health during their training,4 and most barriers for transgender patients stem from this lack of training. Second, work with the transgender community – it is very tempting to see your institution’s name on the HEI and think all the work is done, but the lived experiences of transgender patients sometimes are different than what is seen on paper (or online). Team up with local organizations such as PFLAG (formerly known as Parents and Families of Lesbians and Gays) that can create support groups for both transgender youth and their families. Help create a network of referral systems for your transgender patients – the community is often small enough that they know which providers or establishments are safe for transgender individuals. Many transgender patients find this extremely helpful.5 You still wield significant influence in the community, so work with the health care and insurance systems to improve access and coverage for gender-related services. The HRC HEI is becoming coveted by health care institutions. This is a prime opportunity to be involved in committees seeking to improve health care access for transgender individuals. Finally, as there are champions for transgender health in your clinic, there also are champions for transgender health in insurance companies. They often are well known in the community, so find that individual for counseling on how to navigate the insurance system for your transgender patients.

Although an increasing number of health care institutions and clinics are recognizing the health care needs of transgender patients and providing appropriate care, the health care system remains challenging for transgender individuals to navigate. Small policy changes may have a substantial impact on the health and well-being of transgender individuals. Although creating change within an institution may seem like a monumental task, you do have the agency to help create this type change within the system to expand health care access for transgender patients.

Dr. Gerald Montano

Dr. Montano is an assistant professor of pediatrics at the University of Pittsburgh and an adolescent medicine physician at Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC. Email him at [email protected].

 

Resources

  • HRC HEI: If you’re interested in learning what policies are inclusive and equitable for LGBT patients, check out the HRC HEI scoring criteria. It’s a good place to start if you want to expand health care access for transgender individuals.
  • To find out more about the health care legal protections transgender individuals are entitled to, check out the National Center for Transgender Equality.

References

1. Psychol Bull. 2003 Sep;129(5):674-97.

2. “Injustice at every turn: A report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey.” (Washington: National Center for Transgender Equality and National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, 2011.)

3. J. Adolesc Health. 2018 Apr. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.02.003.

4. Int J Transgenderism. 2008. doi: 10.1300/J485v08n02_08.

5. Transgend Health. 2016 Nov 1;1(1):238-49.

 

In March 2018, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), an advocacy organization dedicated to improving the lives of LGBTQ people, released its 11th Annual Healthcare Equality Index. The HEI is an indicator of how inclusive and equitable health care facilities are in providing care for their LGBTQ patients. My own institution, Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh, scored very high on this index and received the “Leader in LGBTQ Healthcare Equality” designation. The process of receiving this designation is very rigorous, and I am proud of my institution for making great strides in expanding health care access for LGBTQ patients, especially transgender patients. However, this is no time to rest on one’s laurels, as many transgender people still experience challenges and barriers in navigating the health care system.

AlexRaths/Thinkstock
Disparities in health outcomes between transgender and nontransgender people is well known, and some of these discrepancies can be attributed to difficulty in accessing high-quality health care. The biggest barrier is finding a health care provider who is culturally competent in delivering health care to transgender patients. Many transgender individuals expect rejection and discrimination everywhere they go,1 and health care institutions are no exception. For example, about one-fifth of transgender individuals report being denied health care at their primary care provider because of the person’s gender identity and/or gender expression.2 Even if they’re not rejected outright, many transgender patients often are misgendered by health care staff, or they find themselves educating the provider on transgender health issues.2 Even transgender individuals who find a provider who is competent in providing transgender health care still experience additional barriers. For example, EHRs often do not list gender identity and/or pronouns in the chart. This makes it more likely for providers to misgender patients by mistake because they only have the EHR as a reference.

Insurance access continues to be a problem. I wrote a column in June 2017 about obtaining health care insurance for transgender patients. Preauthorization is common for obtaining cross-sex hormones or pubertal blockers even for insurance companies that are willing to pay for them – a process that can take weeks, even months, to complete. This creates delays in obtaining necessary care for transgender patients. This is just one of the many barriers transgender people face in navigating the health care system.

Increasing access to health care services for transgender patients is more about improving health outcomes than patient satisfaction. Even the smallest policy change may have a meaningful impact on the lives of transgender individuals. A study by Russell et al., in the April 2018 issue of Journal of Adolescent Health found that transgender youth allowed to use their chosen name (instead of the name assigned to them by their parents at birth) were more likely to have fewer depressive symptoms and lower rates of suicidal ideation and suicidal behavior.3 These findings highlight that even a small change can have a huge impact on the health and well-being of this patient population.

 

 


What can you do to expand access? First, you must educate yourself and teach others. Many providers report never having received education on LGBTQ health during their training,4 and most barriers for transgender patients stem from this lack of training. Second, work with the transgender community – it is very tempting to see your institution’s name on the HEI and think all the work is done, but the lived experiences of transgender patients sometimes are different than what is seen on paper (or online). Team up with local organizations such as PFLAG (formerly known as Parents and Families of Lesbians and Gays) that can create support groups for both transgender youth and their families. Help create a network of referral systems for your transgender patients – the community is often small enough that they know which providers or establishments are safe for transgender individuals. Many transgender patients find this extremely helpful.5 You still wield significant influence in the community, so work with the health care and insurance systems to improve access and coverage for gender-related services. The HRC HEI is becoming coveted by health care institutions. This is a prime opportunity to be involved in committees seeking to improve health care access for transgender individuals. Finally, as there are champions for transgender health in your clinic, there also are champions for transgender health in insurance companies. They often are well known in the community, so find that individual for counseling on how to navigate the insurance system for your transgender patients.

Although an increasing number of health care institutions and clinics are recognizing the health care needs of transgender patients and providing appropriate care, the health care system remains challenging for transgender individuals to navigate. Small policy changes may have a substantial impact on the health and well-being of transgender individuals. Although creating change within an institution may seem like a monumental task, you do have the agency to help create this type change within the system to expand health care access for transgender patients.

Dr. Gerald Montano

Dr. Montano is an assistant professor of pediatrics at the University of Pittsburgh and an adolescent medicine physician at Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC. Email him at [email protected].

 

Resources

  • HRC HEI: If you’re interested in learning what policies are inclusive and equitable for LGBT patients, check out the HRC HEI scoring criteria. It’s a good place to start if you want to expand health care access for transgender individuals.
  • To find out more about the health care legal protections transgender individuals are entitled to, check out the National Center for Transgender Equality.

References

1. Psychol Bull. 2003 Sep;129(5):674-97.

2. “Injustice at every turn: A report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey.” (Washington: National Center for Transgender Equality and National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, 2011.)

3. J. Adolesc Health. 2018 Apr. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.02.003.

4. Int J Transgenderism. 2008. doi: 10.1300/J485v08n02_08.

5. Transgend Health. 2016 Nov 1;1(1):238-49.

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

What’s in a name? Get ready for the feds’ Promoting Interoperability program

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 04/03/2019 - 10:21

 

The federal EHR Incentive Program – a program most doctors love to hate – is getting a new name to better reflect a focus on interoperability and improved patient access to their health care data, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services announced.

For clinicians who participate in fee-for-service Medicare, eligible hospitals, and critical access hospitals, the new name of the program will be the Promoting Interoperability Program. For those participating in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) track of the Quality Payment Program (QPP), the Advancing Care Information performance category will be rebranded the Promoting Interoperability performance category.

Skynesher/iStockphoto
The changes are a part of an overall initiative called MyHealthEData, which aims to get patients to interact more with their electronic health data and take proactive efforts in their health care decision making.

The first steps of these changes were announced April 25 in the 2019 proposed rule for the inpatient prospective payment system and the Long-Term Care Hospital Prospective Payment System.

CMS notes in the proposed rule that the name EHR Incentive Program “does not adequately reflect the current status of the programs, as the incentive payments under Medicare generally have ended.” Eligible medical professionals and hospitals have received Medicare bonuses for adopting and demonstrating meaningful use of EHRs. Penalties for not doing so are still in place.

pandpstock001/Thinktock
While hospital-based changes have been proposed, changes to office-based practice are expected in the upcoming proposed update to the outpatient prospective payment system, which is typically released shortly after the inpatient prospective payment system proposed update.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

The federal EHR Incentive Program – a program most doctors love to hate – is getting a new name to better reflect a focus on interoperability and improved patient access to their health care data, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services announced.

For clinicians who participate in fee-for-service Medicare, eligible hospitals, and critical access hospitals, the new name of the program will be the Promoting Interoperability Program. For those participating in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) track of the Quality Payment Program (QPP), the Advancing Care Information performance category will be rebranded the Promoting Interoperability performance category.

Skynesher/iStockphoto
The changes are a part of an overall initiative called MyHealthEData, which aims to get patients to interact more with their electronic health data and take proactive efforts in their health care decision making.

The first steps of these changes were announced April 25 in the 2019 proposed rule for the inpatient prospective payment system and the Long-Term Care Hospital Prospective Payment System.

CMS notes in the proposed rule that the name EHR Incentive Program “does not adequately reflect the current status of the programs, as the incentive payments under Medicare generally have ended.” Eligible medical professionals and hospitals have received Medicare bonuses for adopting and demonstrating meaningful use of EHRs. Penalties for not doing so are still in place.

pandpstock001/Thinktock
While hospital-based changes have been proposed, changes to office-based practice are expected in the upcoming proposed update to the outpatient prospective payment system, which is typically released shortly after the inpatient prospective payment system proposed update.

 

The federal EHR Incentive Program – a program most doctors love to hate – is getting a new name to better reflect a focus on interoperability and improved patient access to their health care data, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services announced.

For clinicians who participate in fee-for-service Medicare, eligible hospitals, and critical access hospitals, the new name of the program will be the Promoting Interoperability Program. For those participating in the Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) track of the Quality Payment Program (QPP), the Advancing Care Information performance category will be rebranded the Promoting Interoperability performance category.

Skynesher/iStockphoto
The changes are a part of an overall initiative called MyHealthEData, which aims to get patients to interact more with their electronic health data and take proactive efforts in their health care decision making.

The first steps of these changes were announced April 25 in the 2019 proposed rule for the inpatient prospective payment system and the Long-Term Care Hospital Prospective Payment System.

CMS notes in the proposed rule that the name EHR Incentive Program “does not adequately reflect the current status of the programs, as the incentive payments under Medicare generally have ended.” Eligible medical professionals and hospitals have received Medicare bonuses for adopting and demonstrating meaningful use of EHRs. Penalties for not doing so are still in place.

pandpstock001/Thinktock
While hospital-based changes have been proposed, changes to office-based practice are expected in the upcoming proposed update to the outpatient prospective payment system, which is typically released shortly after the inpatient prospective payment system proposed update.

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

Intrauterine therapy showed promise in XLHED

Larger trial justified
Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 17:35

 

Intra-amniotic therapy with a novel recombinant protein enabled three patients with X-linked hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia (XLHED) to sweat normally, researchers reported.

For up to 22 months of postnatal follow-up, patients had no hyperthermia and were not hospitalized for respiratory reasons, reported Holm Schneider, MD, of the University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany, and his associates. Treatment may have induced premature delivery at 33 weeks of a pair of twins, although most twins are born preterm, they noted. “Combined with the ability to identify affected fetuses through noninvasive sonographic prenatal screening, the approach we describe here represents a new means of protein-replacement therapy to correct XLHED,” they wrote online April 25 in the New England Journal of Medicine.

XLHED is caused by loss-of-function variants of the gene encoding ectodysplasin A (EDA). The investigational recombinant fusion protein Fc-EDA (EDI200) developed by Edimer Pharmaceuticals, which contains the receptor-binding domain of EDA and the Fc domain of human immunoglobulin G1, has shown no signs of toxicity in nonhuman primates. In prior studies, its intra-amniotic infusion prevented XLHED in EDA-deficient murine fetuses, while human postnatal Fc-EDA therapy was ineffective (NCT01775462).

Based on these data, University Hospital Erlangan approved a parental request for compassionate use of Fc-EDA in male twin fetuses with genetic deficiency of EDA. Treatment (100 mg/kg estimated fetal body weight) occurred at gestational weeks 26 and 31. Despite premature delivery at 33 weeks, 5-minute Apgar scores were 9 for one twin and 10 for the other. Cord blood testing detected Fc-EDA, suggesting its continuous uptake into fetal blood. The twins both had normal sweat-duct density, sweated as much as healthy controls, salivated normally, and had 8-10 tooth germs; their 5-year-old brother with XLHED had only three teeth and one tooth germ.

Parents of another EDA-deficient fetus also requested compassionate use of Fc-EDA, which was administrated as a single dose (because of limited supply) at gestational week 26. Birth occurred at week 39 and Apgar scores all were 10s. Sweat pore density was slightly low, compared with healthy controls, and by age 4 months, the patient had developed moderate urticaria pigmentosa.

In all cases, maternal circulation showed no trace of Fc-EDA within 24 hours of treatment.

Funders included Edimer Pharmaceuticals, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Swiss National Science Foundation, the German-Swiss-Austrian ectodermal dysplasia patient organization, and the National Foundation for Ectodermal Dysplasias. Three of the investigators have either patents issued or patents pending related to the treatment, one is an employee of Edimer Pharmaceuticals, and two have grants from some of the abovementioned companies or organizations.
 

SOURCE: Schneider H et al. N Engl J Med. 2018 Apr 25. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1714322.

Body

 

These early findings are “remarkable and encouraging,” especially because routine ultrasonography can identify fetuses with X-linked hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia (XLHED), wrote Marja L. Mikkola, PhD.

Although the study was small, intranatal therapy with recombinant ectodysplasin A produced “sustained sweating ability,” normalized saliva production, and substantially corrected tooth bud count, Dr. Mikkola wrote in an editorial accompanying the study.

Treatment might have induced early delivery of the set of twins in this study, who were born at week 33, she noted. However, twins often are born early, and the study uncovered no other safety concerns. Taken together, the findings justify a larger trial of this new approach.

Dr. Mikkola is with the University of Helsinki (Finland). She reported having no conflicts of interest. These comments paraphrase her editorial (N Engl J Med. 2018 Apr 25. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe1803224).

Publications
Topics
Sections
Body

 

These early findings are “remarkable and encouraging,” especially because routine ultrasonography can identify fetuses with X-linked hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia (XLHED), wrote Marja L. Mikkola, PhD.

Although the study was small, intranatal therapy with recombinant ectodysplasin A produced “sustained sweating ability,” normalized saliva production, and substantially corrected tooth bud count, Dr. Mikkola wrote in an editorial accompanying the study.

Treatment might have induced early delivery of the set of twins in this study, who were born at week 33, she noted. However, twins often are born early, and the study uncovered no other safety concerns. Taken together, the findings justify a larger trial of this new approach.

Dr. Mikkola is with the University of Helsinki (Finland). She reported having no conflicts of interest. These comments paraphrase her editorial (N Engl J Med. 2018 Apr 25. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe1803224).

Body

 

These early findings are “remarkable and encouraging,” especially because routine ultrasonography can identify fetuses with X-linked hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia (XLHED), wrote Marja L. Mikkola, PhD.

Although the study was small, intranatal therapy with recombinant ectodysplasin A produced “sustained sweating ability,” normalized saliva production, and substantially corrected tooth bud count, Dr. Mikkola wrote in an editorial accompanying the study.

Treatment might have induced early delivery of the set of twins in this study, who were born at week 33, she noted. However, twins often are born early, and the study uncovered no other safety concerns. Taken together, the findings justify a larger trial of this new approach.

Dr. Mikkola is with the University of Helsinki (Finland). She reported having no conflicts of interest. These comments paraphrase her editorial (N Engl J Med. 2018 Apr 25. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe1803224).

Title
Larger trial justified
Larger trial justified

 

Intra-amniotic therapy with a novel recombinant protein enabled three patients with X-linked hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia (XLHED) to sweat normally, researchers reported.

For up to 22 months of postnatal follow-up, patients had no hyperthermia and were not hospitalized for respiratory reasons, reported Holm Schneider, MD, of the University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany, and his associates. Treatment may have induced premature delivery at 33 weeks of a pair of twins, although most twins are born preterm, they noted. “Combined with the ability to identify affected fetuses through noninvasive sonographic prenatal screening, the approach we describe here represents a new means of protein-replacement therapy to correct XLHED,” they wrote online April 25 in the New England Journal of Medicine.

XLHED is caused by loss-of-function variants of the gene encoding ectodysplasin A (EDA). The investigational recombinant fusion protein Fc-EDA (EDI200) developed by Edimer Pharmaceuticals, which contains the receptor-binding domain of EDA and the Fc domain of human immunoglobulin G1, has shown no signs of toxicity in nonhuman primates. In prior studies, its intra-amniotic infusion prevented XLHED in EDA-deficient murine fetuses, while human postnatal Fc-EDA therapy was ineffective (NCT01775462).

Based on these data, University Hospital Erlangan approved a parental request for compassionate use of Fc-EDA in male twin fetuses with genetic deficiency of EDA. Treatment (100 mg/kg estimated fetal body weight) occurred at gestational weeks 26 and 31. Despite premature delivery at 33 weeks, 5-minute Apgar scores were 9 for one twin and 10 for the other. Cord blood testing detected Fc-EDA, suggesting its continuous uptake into fetal blood. The twins both had normal sweat-duct density, sweated as much as healthy controls, salivated normally, and had 8-10 tooth germs; their 5-year-old brother with XLHED had only three teeth and one tooth germ.

Parents of another EDA-deficient fetus also requested compassionate use of Fc-EDA, which was administrated as a single dose (because of limited supply) at gestational week 26. Birth occurred at week 39 and Apgar scores all were 10s. Sweat pore density was slightly low, compared with healthy controls, and by age 4 months, the patient had developed moderate urticaria pigmentosa.

In all cases, maternal circulation showed no trace of Fc-EDA within 24 hours of treatment.

Funders included Edimer Pharmaceuticals, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Swiss National Science Foundation, the German-Swiss-Austrian ectodermal dysplasia patient organization, and the National Foundation for Ectodermal Dysplasias. Three of the investigators have either patents issued or patents pending related to the treatment, one is an employee of Edimer Pharmaceuticals, and two have grants from some of the abovementioned companies or organizations.
 

SOURCE: Schneider H et al. N Engl J Med. 2018 Apr 25. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1714322.

 

Intra-amniotic therapy with a novel recombinant protein enabled three patients with X-linked hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia (XLHED) to sweat normally, researchers reported.

For up to 22 months of postnatal follow-up, patients had no hyperthermia and were not hospitalized for respiratory reasons, reported Holm Schneider, MD, of the University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany, and his associates. Treatment may have induced premature delivery at 33 weeks of a pair of twins, although most twins are born preterm, they noted. “Combined with the ability to identify affected fetuses through noninvasive sonographic prenatal screening, the approach we describe here represents a new means of protein-replacement therapy to correct XLHED,” they wrote online April 25 in the New England Journal of Medicine.

XLHED is caused by loss-of-function variants of the gene encoding ectodysplasin A (EDA). The investigational recombinant fusion protein Fc-EDA (EDI200) developed by Edimer Pharmaceuticals, which contains the receptor-binding domain of EDA and the Fc domain of human immunoglobulin G1, has shown no signs of toxicity in nonhuman primates. In prior studies, its intra-amniotic infusion prevented XLHED in EDA-deficient murine fetuses, while human postnatal Fc-EDA therapy was ineffective (NCT01775462).

Based on these data, University Hospital Erlangan approved a parental request for compassionate use of Fc-EDA in male twin fetuses with genetic deficiency of EDA. Treatment (100 mg/kg estimated fetal body weight) occurred at gestational weeks 26 and 31. Despite premature delivery at 33 weeks, 5-minute Apgar scores were 9 for one twin and 10 for the other. Cord blood testing detected Fc-EDA, suggesting its continuous uptake into fetal blood. The twins both had normal sweat-duct density, sweated as much as healthy controls, salivated normally, and had 8-10 tooth germs; their 5-year-old brother with XLHED had only three teeth and one tooth germ.

Parents of another EDA-deficient fetus also requested compassionate use of Fc-EDA, which was administrated as a single dose (because of limited supply) at gestational week 26. Birth occurred at week 39 and Apgar scores all were 10s. Sweat pore density was slightly low, compared with healthy controls, and by age 4 months, the patient had developed moderate urticaria pigmentosa.

In all cases, maternal circulation showed no trace of Fc-EDA within 24 hours of treatment.

Funders included Edimer Pharmaceuticals, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Swiss National Science Foundation, the German-Swiss-Austrian ectodermal dysplasia patient organization, and the National Foundation for Ectodermal Dysplasias. Three of the investigators have either patents issued or patents pending related to the treatment, one is an employee of Edimer Pharmaceuticals, and two have grants from some of the abovementioned companies or organizations.
 

SOURCE: Schneider H et al. N Engl J Med. 2018 Apr 25. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1714322.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE

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

 

Key clinical point: A novel intra-amniotic therapy effectively treated X-linked hypohidrotic ectodermal dysplasia (XLHED).

Major finding: Patients could sweat normally through up to 22 months of follow-up.

Study details: Intra-amniotic treatment of three fetuses with confirmed XLHED.

Disclosures: Funders included Edimer Pharmaceuticals, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Swiss National Science Foundation, the German-Swiss-Austrian ectodermal dysplasia patient organization, and the National Foundation for Ectodermal Dysplasias. Three of the investigators have either patents issued or patents pending related to the treatment, one is an employee of Edimer Pharmaceuticals, and two have grants from some of the abovementioned companies or organizations.

Source: Schneider H et al. N Engl J Med. 2018 Apr 25. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1714322.

Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Antiretroviral choice for pregnant women with HIV does not appear to impact birth outcomes

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 17:35

 

Three different regimens of antiretroviral therapy did not produce significantly different adverse birth outcomes in women with HIV despite previous research showing an increased risk in premature birth or death in infants after a regimen of tenofovir, emtricitabine, and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir therapy, according to a recent analysis of two multicenter cohort studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Kathryn Rough, ScD, of the Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston and colleagues analyzed 4,646 birth outcomes in the SMARTT (NCT01310023) and P1025 (NCT00028145) trials from 3,847 unique women who received tenofovir, emtricitabine, and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (TDF–FTC–LPV/r), zidovudine, lamivudine, and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (ZDV–3TC–LPV/r), or TDF–FTC with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r) during gestation. There were 954 infants or fetuses exposed to ZDV–3TC–LPV/r (20.5%), 539 infants or fetuses exposed to TDF–FTC–ATV/r (11.6%), and 128 infants or fetuses exposed to TDF–FTC–LPV/r (2.8%), with 4,480 singleton, 80 twin, and 2 triplet pregnancies.

©PhotoDisk
“TDF–FTC–LPV/r was rarely used by pregnant women with HIV infection in either U.S.-based cohort, and its use in other settings is also limited, because it is not among the first-line regimens recommended by the WHO,” Dr. Rough and her colleagues wrote in their study (N Engl J Med 2018;378:1593-603).

“Concerns regarding the use of TDF–FTC–LPV/r during pregnancy remain; further investigation is warranted to understand why women who initiated TDF–FTC– LPV/r before conception had higher risks of preterm birth, low birth weight, and any adverse outcome than women who initiated ZDV–3TC– LPV/r or TDF–FTC–ATV/r before conception in subgroup analyses.”

Overall, there was a premature birth risk between 16.1% and 21.4% and a low birth weight risk between 16.2% and 23.8% across all antiretroviral therapy regimens, with an overall adverse outcome rate between 23.7% and 28.1%. For women who received TDF–FTC–LPV/r, there was a risk ratio of 0.90 (95% confidence interval, 0.60-1.33) for preterm births, 1.13 for low birth weight (95% CI, 0.78-1.64) and 0.92 for any adverse outcome (95% CI, 0.67-1.28) compared with women who received ZDV–3TC–LPV/r.

“For the outcomes of preterm birth, low birth weight, and any adverse outcome, TDF–FTC–ATV/r appeared to have lower risks than the LPV/r-based regimens; however, many of these associations were not significant,” the authors wrote.

Women who received TDF–FTC–LPV/r had a risk ratio of 1.14 (95% CI, 0.75-1.72) and a low-birth-weight risk ratio of 1.45 (95% CI, 0.96-2.17), compared with women who received TDF-FTC-ATV/r. Regarding very-low-birth-weight and very-preterm birth, the researchers noted no significant differences among regimen groups.

 

 


One author reported stock from Abbott, AbbVie, Novartis, and Roche outside the submitted work; one author reported personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim; and five authors reported grants from pharmaceutical companies and Google outside the submitted work.

SOURCE: Rough K et al. N Engl J Med 2018;378:1593-603.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Three different regimens of antiretroviral therapy did not produce significantly different adverse birth outcomes in women with HIV despite previous research showing an increased risk in premature birth or death in infants after a regimen of tenofovir, emtricitabine, and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir therapy, according to a recent analysis of two multicenter cohort studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Kathryn Rough, ScD, of the Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston and colleagues analyzed 4,646 birth outcomes in the SMARTT (NCT01310023) and P1025 (NCT00028145) trials from 3,847 unique women who received tenofovir, emtricitabine, and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (TDF–FTC–LPV/r), zidovudine, lamivudine, and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (ZDV–3TC–LPV/r), or TDF–FTC with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r) during gestation. There were 954 infants or fetuses exposed to ZDV–3TC–LPV/r (20.5%), 539 infants or fetuses exposed to TDF–FTC–ATV/r (11.6%), and 128 infants or fetuses exposed to TDF–FTC–LPV/r (2.8%), with 4,480 singleton, 80 twin, and 2 triplet pregnancies.

©PhotoDisk
“TDF–FTC–LPV/r was rarely used by pregnant women with HIV infection in either U.S.-based cohort, and its use in other settings is also limited, because it is not among the first-line regimens recommended by the WHO,” Dr. Rough and her colleagues wrote in their study (N Engl J Med 2018;378:1593-603).

“Concerns regarding the use of TDF–FTC–LPV/r during pregnancy remain; further investigation is warranted to understand why women who initiated TDF–FTC– LPV/r before conception had higher risks of preterm birth, low birth weight, and any adverse outcome than women who initiated ZDV–3TC– LPV/r or TDF–FTC–ATV/r before conception in subgroup analyses.”

Overall, there was a premature birth risk between 16.1% and 21.4% and a low birth weight risk between 16.2% and 23.8% across all antiretroviral therapy regimens, with an overall adverse outcome rate between 23.7% and 28.1%. For women who received TDF–FTC–LPV/r, there was a risk ratio of 0.90 (95% confidence interval, 0.60-1.33) for preterm births, 1.13 for low birth weight (95% CI, 0.78-1.64) and 0.92 for any adverse outcome (95% CI, 0.67-1.28) compared with women who received ZDV–3TC–LPV/r.

“For the outcomes of preterm birth, low birth weight, and any adverse outcome, TDF–FTC–ATV/r appeared to have lower risks than the LPV/r-based regimens; however, many of these associations were not significant,” the authors wrote.

Women who received TDF–FTC–LPV/r had a risk ratio of 1.14 (95% CI, 0.75-1.72) and a low-birth-weight risk ratio of 1.45 (95% CI, 0.96-2.17), compared with women who received TDF-FTC-ATV/r. Regarding very-low-birth-weight and very-preterm birth, the researchers noted no significant differences among regimen groups.

 

 


One author reported stock from Abbott, AbbVie, Novartis, and Roche outside the submitted work; one author reported personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim; and five authors reported grants from pharmaceutical companies and Google outside the submitted work.

SOURCE: Rough K et al. N Engl J Med 2018;378:1593-603.

 

Three different regimens of antiretroviral therapy did not produce significantly different adverse birth outcomes in women with HIV despite previous research showing an increased risk in premature birth or death in infants after a regimen of tenofovir, emtricitabine, and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir therapy, according to a recent analysis of two multicenter cohort studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Kathryn Rough, ScD, of the Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston and colleagues analyzed 4,646 birth outcomes in the SMARTT (NCT01310023) and P1025 (NCT00028145) trials from 3,847 unique women who received tenofovir, emtricitabine, and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (TDF–FTC–LPV/r), zidovudine, lamivudine, and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (ZDV–3TC–LPV/r), or TDF–FTC with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATV/r) during gestation. There were 954 infants or fetuses exposed to ZDV–3TC–LPV/r (20.5%), 539 infants or fetuses exposed to TDF–FTC–ATV/r (11.6%), and 128 infants or fetuses exposed to TDF–FTC–LPV/r (2.8%), with 4,480 singleton, 80 twin, and 2 triplet pregnancies.

©PhotoDisk
“TDF–FTC–LPV/r was rarely used by pregnant women with HIV infection in either U.S.-based cohort, and its use in other settings is also limited, because it is not among the first-line regimens recommended by the WHO,” Dr. Rough and her colleagues wrote in their study (N Engl J Med 2018;378:1593-603).

“Concerns regarding the use of TDF–FTC–LPV/r during pregnancy remain; further investigation is warranted to understand why women who initiated TDF–FTC– LPV/r before conception had higher risks of preterm birth, low birth weight, and any adverse outcome than women who initiated ZDV–3TC– LPV/r or TDF–FTC–ATV/r before conception in subgroup analyses.”

Overall, there was a premature birth risk between 16.1% and 21.4% and a low birth weight risk between 16.2% and 23.8% across all antiretroviral therapy regimens, with an overall adverse outcome rate between 23.7% and 28.1%. For women who received TDF–FTC–LPV/r, there was a risk ratio of 0.90 (95% confidence interval, 0.60-1.33) for preterm births, 1.13 for low birth weight (95% CI, 0.78-1.64) and 0.92 for any adverse outcome (95% CI, 0.67-1.28) compared with women who received ZDV–3TC–LPV/r.

“For the outcomes of preterm birth, low birth weight, and any adverse outcome, TDF–FTC–ATV/r appeared to have lower risks than the LPV/r-based regimens; however, many of these associations were not significant,” the authors wrote.

Women who received TDF–FTC–LPV/r had a risk ratio of 1.14 (95% CI, 0.75-1.72) and a low-birth-weight risk ratio of 1.45 (95% CI, 0.96-2.17), compared with women who received TDF-FTC-ATV/r. Regarding very-low-birth-weight and very-preterm birth, the researchers noted no significant differences among regimen groups.

 

 


One author reported stock from Abbott, AbbVie, Novartis, and Roche outside the submitted work; one author reported personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim; and five authors reported grants from pharmaceutical companies and Google outside the submitted work.

SOURCE: Rough K et al. N Engl J Med 2018;378:1593-603.

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

FROM NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE

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

 

Key clinical point: No significant adverse birth outcomes were seen among patients receiving tenofovir, emtricitabine, and ritonavir-boosted lopinavir antiretroviral therapy or zidovudine, lamivudine, and ritonavir-boosted therapy or TDF–FTC with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir.

Major finding: Women receiving TDF–FTC–LPV/r had a preterm birth risk ratio of 0.90 and a low-birth-weight risk ratio of 1.13 when compared with women receiving ZDV–3TC–LPV/r, and risk ratios of 1.14 and 1.45 for preterm birth and low birth weight, compared with TDF–FTC–ATV/r, respectively.

Study details: An analysis of two multisite cohort studies of 3,847 women and 4,646 birth outcomes between 2002 and 2016.

Disclosures: The study was funded by NIH, NIAID and NICHD. One author reported stock from Abbott, AbbVie, Novartis, and Roche; one author reported personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim; and five authors reported grants from pharmaceutical companies and Google outside the submitted work.

Source: Rough K. et al. N Engl J Med 2018;378:1593-603.

Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

On cardiology training

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 17:35

 

I recently received a letter from a former fellow who completed his training almost 25 years ago, thanking me for guiding him through his education and to his successful medical career. It’s one of those letters that we all have received and that makes us feel that it is all worth it. When he went through his requisite 2 years of training, it seemed to me that my responsibility was to provide a model of how to provide excellent care at the bedside and clinic with expertise and compassion.

Dr. Sidney Goldstein
At that time, our tools were limited, and much of what we did was to provide what would be defined today as terminal care of the cardiac patient. Within a few years after this fellow finished training, there was an explosion of new technology and drugs that opened up the opportunity to treat the cardiac patients rather than just cataloging their demise. Just being a kind and informed doctor who listened to the patient was no longer enough.

Percutaneous coronary angiography, echocardiography, radioisotope imaging, and new dramatically effective lifesaving drugs such as beta-blockers, ACE inhibitors, and thrombolytic therapies were developed almost overnight. Their application to the patient became a challenge, and an exciting period of clinical research ensued. As a training director, it seemed that our responsibility was not only to continue to provide a model of competent care but also to create an environment in which our new tools of diagnosis and therapy could be applied at the bedside. At the time, it became apparent that there was a need for staff members to develop expertise in all of these areas in order to provide an adequate teaching environment. These new developments also provided a unique opportunity to conduct clinical research in order develop the full range of the new therapeutic and diagnostic potentials.

Within a few years, we changed from being the bedside cardiologists who could do everything in a very limited way, to a staff focused on special areas of expertise in order to provide an optimal teaching environment. This led to the development of subspecialty areas of cardiac care, which became the future framework of the contemporary cardiology unit. It resulted in a decreased time on bedside care and a greater emphasis on pursuing specialty care. Many of the aspects of interpersonal relationships at the bedside became less important in order to provide trainees with the sufficient experience in the newly developing subspecialty areas. The competence of a cardiology fellow was no longer judged by his commitment to patient care but rather, by the achievement of sufficient number of procedures to meet certification exams. Both students and teachers became focused on the numbers game.

It is clear that the body of cardiology knowledge has expanded to a point where most of us cannot handle it all, and we need to turn to our colleagues with special expertise for help. This transition, which is not unique to cardiology, removed the teacher-practitioners from their role as the model of ethical and compassionate caregiver to that of the provider of procedures. Now, more than ever, there is a need to return to the model of the compassionate and concerned doctor. The need for expertise is undeniable, but in the process of achieving that, we cannot forget that we are doctors to patients and not just procedure readers and number crunchers. There is still time in our day to do that. If there isn’t, we need to find it.
 

Dr. Goldstein, medical editor of Cardiology News, is professor of medicine at Wayne State University and division head emeritus of cardiovascular medicine at Henry Ford Hospital, both in Detroit. He is on data safety monitoring committees for the National Institutes of Health and several pharmaceutical companies.
 

Publications
Topics
Sections
Related Articles

 

I recently received a letter from a former fellow who completed his training almost 25 years ago, thanking me for guiding him through his education and to his successful medical career. It’s one of those letters that we all have received and that makes us feel that it is all worth it. When he went through his requisite 2 years of training, it seemed to me that my responsibility was to provide a model of how to provide excellent care at the bedside and clinic with expertise and compassion.

Dr. Sidney Goldstein
At that time, our tools were limited, and much of what we did was to provide what would be defined today as terminal care of the cardiac patient. Within a few years after this fellow finished training, there was an explosion of new technology and drugs that opened up the opportunity to treat the cardiac patients rather than just cataloging their demise. Just being a kind and informed doctor who listened to the patient was no longer enough.

Percutaneous coronary angiography, echocardiography, radioisotope imaging, and new dramatically effective lifesaving drugs such as beta-blockers, ACE inhibitors, and thrombolytic therapies were developed almost overnight. Their application to the patient became a challenge, and an exciting period of clinical research ensued. As a training director, it seemed that our responsibility was not only to continue to provide a model of competent care but also to create an environment in which our new tools of diagnosis and therapy could be applied at the bedside. At the time, it became apparent that there was a need for staff members to develop expertise in all of these areas in order to provide an adequate teaching environment. These new developments also provided a unique opportunity to conduct clinical research in order develop the full range of the new therapeutic and diagnostic potentials.

Within a few years, we changed from being the bedside cardiologists who could do everything in a very limited way, to a staff focused on special areas of expertise in order to provide an optimal teaching environment. This led to the development of subspecialty areas of cardiac care, which became the future framework of the contemporary cardiology unit. It resulted in a decreased time on bedside care and a greater emphasis on pursuing specialty care. Many of the aspects of interpersonal relationships at the bedside became less important in order to provide trainees with the sufficient experience in the newly developing subspecialty areas. The competence of a cardiology fellow was no longer judged by his commitment to patient care but rather, by the achievement of sufficient number of procedures to meet certification exams. Both students and teachers became focused on the numbers game.

It is clear that the body of cardiology knowledge has expanded to a point where most of us cannot handle it all, and we need to turn to our colleagues with special expertise for help. This transition, which is not unique to cardiology, removed the teacher-practitioners from their role as the model of ethical and compassionate caregiver to that of the provider of procedures. Now, more than ever, there is a need to return to the model of the compassionate and concerned doctor. The need for expertise is undeniable, but in the process of achieving that, we cannot forget that we are doctors to patients and not just procedure readers and number crunchers. There is still time in our day to do that. If there isn’t, we need to find it.
 

Dr. Goldstein, medical editor of Cardiology News, is professor of medicine at Wayne State University and division head emeritus of cardiovascular medicine at Henry Ford Hospital, both in Detroit. He is on data safety monitoring committees for the National Institutes of Health and several pharmaceutical companies.
 

 

I recently received a letter from a former fellow who completed his training almost 25 years ago, thanking me for guiding him through his education and to his successful medical career. It’s one of those letters that we all have received and that makes us feel that it is all worth it. When he went through his requisite 2 years of training, it seemed to me that my responsibility was to provide a model of how to provide excellent care at the bedside and clinic with expertise and compassion.

Dr. Sidney Goldstein
At that time, our tools were limited, and much of what we did was to provide what would be defined today as terminal care of the cardiac patient. Within a few years after this fellow finished training, there was an explosion of new technology and drugs that opened up the opportunity to treat the cardiac patients rather than just cataloging their demise. Just being a kind and informed doctor who listened to the patient was no longer enough.

Percutaneous coronary angiography, echocardiography, radioisotope imaging, and new dramatically effective lifesaving drugs such as beta-blockers, ACE inhibitors, and thrombolytic therapies were developed almost overnight. Their application to the patient became a challenge, and an exciting period of clinical research ensued. As a training director, it seemed that our responsibility was not only to continue to provide a model of competent care but also to create an environment in which our new tools of diagnosis and therapy could be applied at the bedside. At the time, it became apparent that there was a need for staff members to develop expertise in all of these areas in order to provide an adequate teaching environment. These new developments also provided a unique opportunity to conduct clinical research in order develop the full range of the new therapeutic and diagnostic potentials.

Within a few years, we changed from being the bedside cardiologists who could do everything in a very limited way, to a staff focused on special areas of expertise in order to provide an optimal teaching environment. This led to the development of subspecialty areas of cardiac care, which became the future framework of the contemporary cardiology unit. It resulted in a decreased time on bedside care and a greater emphasis on pursuing specialty care. Many of the aspects of interpersonal relationships at the bedside became less important in order to provide trainees with the sufficient experience in the newly developing subspecialty areas. The competence of a cardiology fellow was no longer judged by his commitment to patient care but rather, by the achievement of sufficient number of procedures to meet certification exams. Both students and teachers became focused on the numbers game.

It is clear that the body of cardiology knowledge has expanded to a point where most of us cannot handle it all, and we need to turn to our colleagues with special expertise for help. This transition, which is not unique to cardiology, removed the teacher-practitioners from their role as the model of ethical and compassionate caregiver to that of the provider of procedures. Now, more than ever, there is a need to return to the model of the compassionate and concerned doctor. The need for expertise is undeniable, but in the process of achieving that, we cannot forget that we are doctors to patients and not just procedure readers and number crunchers. There is still time in our day to do that. If there isn’t, we need to find it.
 

Dr. Goldstein, medical editor of Cardiology News, is professor of medicine at Wayne State University and division head emeritus of cardiovascular medicine at Henry Ford Hospital, both in Detroit. He is on data safety monitoring committees for the National Institutes of Health and several pharmaceutical companies.
 

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

Probe linked to smartphone found effective in diagnosing oral cancer

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 17:35

 

– A low-cost compact oral probe combined with a cloud-based diagnostic algorithm was able to differentiate between healthy, dysplastic, and malignant oral cancer, in a clinical study of 92 people.

“Oral cancer is the sixth most common cancer in the world, but it’s the only major cancer whose outcome has not improved in the last 50 years,” study author Petra Wilder-Smith DDS, PhD, said in an interview following the annual conference of the American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery Inc. “The main challenge is that over two-thirds of oral cancers are detected after they’ve metastasized. When you get spread like that, your survival is about 20% at 5 years, whereas if you detect it before spread, your survival is about 80% at 5 years.”

Vania Firmalino
Dr. Wilder-Smith, professor and director of dentistry at the University of California, Irvine, pointed out that oral cancer primarily affects the medically underserved. “That ties in with the second challenge, which is that oral cancer is really hard to diagnose and monitor visually with the naked eye,” she said. “I’m reasonably good at it because I’ve been doing it for 30 years, but everyone still needs to biopsy their patients to diagnose them and to monitor them. It’s important, because a high proportion of the population have lesions that may become malignant in the mouth. We are unable to predict which lesions, in whom, and when. That’s why we have a huge problem.”



At the meeting, Vania Firmalino, an undergraduate student at the University of California, Irvine, discussed efforts by Dr. Wilder-Smith, Rongguang Liang, PhD, of the College of Optical Sciences at the University of Arizona, Tucson, and their colleagues to develop and evaluate the screening performance of a novel, low-cost smartphone-based mini probe for oral cancer screening and oral potentially premalignant lesions (OPMLs). The device provides high-resolution polarized white light images in combination with autofluorescence (AF) imaging capability.

Courtesy Petra Wilder-Smith, DDS, PhD
An early prototype of the probe used in the study.
The researchers recruited 92 people with visually healthy oral mucosa or oral leukoplakia, erythroplakia, or ulceration. Polarized white light and AF, as well as standard photographic images, were recorded of eight standard locations in the oral cavity of each patient. Each of these locations was separately diagnosed per usual standard of care by a blinded clinician. By evaluating a total of 32 variables from the polarized white light and AF images, characteristic signatures and cutoffs were determined for healthy mucosa, OPMLs, and oral cancer at each of the standard locations.

The researchers found that inter-subject variation at each location was small, but inter-site differences were considerable. For example, optical data from OPMLs and oral cancer sites differed from normal with regard to white-light reflectance intensities, vascular homogeneity, and standard deviation. The AF signal in OPMLs and oral cancers shifted progressively to the red, together with a diminished green fluorescence signal. The cloud-based diagnostic algorithm based on these properties performed well, with an agreement with standard-of-care diagnosis of 80.6%.

“Artificial intelligence improves with data,” said Dr. Wilder-Smith, who is also a senior fellow at the university’s Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center. “We trained this system on about 200 images. When you’re up to 1,000 images per condition, that’s when you really start to get the benefits of artificial intelligence and machine learning. There’s huge potential here, especially when you think that 40% of the world’s risk for oral cancer is in India, which has good cell phone coverage. India also has a government-financed public health program whereby they already send health care workers to the remote areas of India to screen for basic diseases.”

 

 


Dr. Petra Wilder-Smith
In the not-too-distant future, she predicted that patients could use the device to self-monitor their disease. “That means we can just tell patients to take a photo of their tongue, for example,” Dr. Wilder-Smith said. “Imagine that the calendar on your phone pings a message every 3 months to ‘take a picture of your tongue and upload it to this link.’ You have self-monitoring. For the first time, it allows ethical and effective monitoring of high-risk populations in a way that we can afford.”

The study won an award for best overall clinical abstract at the meeting. Dr. Wilder-Smith reported having no financial disclosures. The project was supported with funding from the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering and the Beckman Foundation.

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

 

– A low-cost compact oral probe combined with a cloud-based diagnostic algorithm was able to differentiate between healthy, dysplastic, and malignant oral cancer, in a clinical study of 92 people.

“Oral cancer is the sixth most common cancer in the world, but it’s the only major cancer whose outcome has not improved in the last 50 years,” study author Petra Wilder-Smith DDS, PhD, said in an interview following the annual conference of the American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery Inc. “The main challenge is that over two-thirds of oral cancers are detected after they’ve metastasized. When you get spread like that, your survival is about 20% at 5 years, whereas if you detect it before spread, your survival is about 80% at 5 years.”

Vania Firmalino
Dr. Wilder-Smith, professor and director of dentistry at the University of California, Irvine, pointed out that oral cancer primarily affects the medically underserved. “That ties in with the second challenge, which is that oral cancer is really hard to diagnose and monitor visually with the naked eye,” she said. “I’m reasonably good at it because I’ve been doing it for 30 years, but everyone still needs to biopsy their patients to diagnose them and to monitor them. It’s important, because a high proportion of the population have lesions that may become malignant in the mouth. We are unable to predict which lesions, in whom, and when. That’s why we have a huge problem.”



At the meeting, Vania Firmalino, an undergraduate student at the University of California, Irvine, discussed efforts by Dr. Wilder-Smith, Rongguang Liang, PhD, of the College of Optical Sciences at the University of Arizona, Tucson, and their colleagues to develop and evaluate the screening performance of a novel, low-cost smartphone-based mini probe for oral cancer screening and oral potentially premalignant lesions (OPMLs). The device provides high-resolution polarized white light images in combination with autofluorescence (AF) imaging capability.

Courtesy Petra Wilder-Smith, DDS, PhD
An early prototype of the probe used in the study.
The researchers recruited 92 people with visually healthy oral mucosa or oral leukoplakia, erythroplakia, or ulceration. Polarized white light and AF, as well as standard photographic images, were recorded of eight standard locations in the oral cavity of each patient. Each of these locations was separately diagnosed per usual standard of care by a blinded clinician. By evaluating a total of 32 variables from the polarized white light and AF images, characteristic signatures and cutoffs were determined for healthy mucosa, OPMLs, and oral cancer at each of the standard locations.

The researchers found that inter-subject variation at each location was small, but inter-site differences were considerable. For example, optical data from OPMLs and oral cancer sites differed from normal with regard to white-light reflectance intensities, vascular homogeneity, and standard deviation. The AF signal in OPMLs and oral cancers shifted progressively to the red, together with a diminished green fluorescence signal. The cloud-based diagnostic algorithm based on these properties performed well, with an agreement with standard-of-care diagnosis of 80.6%.

“Artificial intelligence improves with data,” said Dr. Wilder-Smith, who is also a senior fellow at the university’s Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center. “We trained this system on about 200 images. When you’re up to 1,000 images per condition, that’s when you really start to get the benefits of artificial intelligence and machine learning. There’s huge potential here, especially when you think that 40% of the world’s risk for oral cancer is in India, which has good cell phone coverage. India also has a government-financed public health program whereby they already send health care workers to the remote areas of India to screen for basic diseases.”

 

 


Dr. Petra Wilder-Smith
In the not-too-distant future, she predicted that patients could use the device to self-monitor their disease. “That means we can just tell patients to take a photo of their tongue, for example,” Dr. Wilder-Smith said. “Imagine that the calendar on your phone pings a message every 3 months to ‘take a picture of your tongue and upload it to this link.’ You have self-monitoring. For the first time, it allows ethical and effective monitoring of high-risk populations in a way that we can afford.”

The study won an award for best overall clinical abstract at the meeting. Dr. Wilder-Smith reported having no financial disclosures. The project was supported with funding from the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering and the Beckman Foundation.

 

– A low-cost compact oral probe combined with a cloud-based diagnostic algorithm was able to differentiate between healthy, dysplastic, and malignant oral cancer, in a clinical study of 92 people.

“Oral cancer is the sixth most common cancer in the world, but it’s the only major cancer whose outcome has not improved in the last 50 years,” study author Petra Wilder-Smith DDS, PhD, said in an interview following the annual conference of the American Society for Laser Medicine and Surgery Inc. “The main challenge is that over two-thirds of oral cancers are detected after they’ve metastasized. When you get spread like that, your survival is about 20% at 5 years, whereas if you detect it before spread, your survival is about 80% at 5 years.”

Vania Firmalino
Dr. Wilder-Smith, professor and director of dentistry at the University of California, Irvine, pointed out that oral cancer primarily affects the medically underserved. “That ties in with the second challenge, which is that oral cancer is really hard to diagnose and monitor visually with the naked eye,” she said. “I’m reasonably good at it because I’ve been doing it for 30 years, but everyone still needs to biopsy their patients to diagnose them and to monitor them. It’s important, because a high proportion of the population have lesions that may become malignant in the mouth. We are unable to predict which lesions, in whom, and when. That’s why we have a huge problem.”



At the meeting, Vania Firmalino, an undergraduate student at the University of California, Irvine, discussed efforts by Dr. Wilder-Smith, Rongguang Liang, PhD, of the College of Optical Sciences at the University of Arizona, Tucson, and their colleagues to develop and evaluate the screening performance of a novel, low-cost smartphone-based mini probe for oral cancer screening and oral potentially premalignant lesions (OPMLs). The device provides high-resolution polarized white light images in combination with autofluorescence (AF) imaging capability.

Courtesy Petra Wilder-Smith, DDS, PhD
An early prototype of the probe used in the study.
The researchers recruited 92 people with visually healthy oral mucosa or oral leukoplakia, erythroplakia, or ulceration. Polarized white light and AF, as well as standard photographic images, were recorded of eight standard locations in the oral cavity of each patient. Each of these locations was separately diagnosed per usual standard of care by a blinded clinician. By evaluating a total of 32 variables from the polarized white light and AF images, characteristic signatures and cutoffs were determined for healthy mucosa, OPMLs, and oral cancer at each of the standard locations.

The researchers found that inter-subject variation at each location was small, but inter-site differences were considerable. For example, optical data from OPMLs and oral cancer sites differed from normal with regard to white-light reflectance intensities, vascular homogeneity, and standard deviation. The AF signal in OPMLs and oral cancers shifted progressively to the red, together with a diminished green fluorescence signal. The cloud-based diagnostic algorithm based on these properties performed well, with an agreement with standard-of-care diagnosis of 80.6%.

“Artificial intelligence improves with data,” said Dr. Wilder-Smith, who is also a senior fellow at the university’s Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center. “We trained this system on about 200 images. When you’re up to 1,000 images per condition, that’s when you really start to get the benefits of artificial intelligence and machine learning. There’s huge potential here, especially when you think that 40% of the world’s risk for oral cancer is in India, which has good cell phone coverage. India also has a government-financed public health program whereby they already send health care workers to the remote areas of India to screen for basic diseases.”

 

 


Dr. Petra Wilder-Smith
In the not-too-distant future, she predicted that patients could use the device to self-monitor their disease. “That means we can just tell patients to take a photo of their tongue, for example,” Dr. Wilder-Smith said. “Imagine that the calendar on your phone pings a message every 3 months to ‘take a picture of your tongue and upload it to this link.’ You have self-monitoring. For the first time, it allows ethical and effective monitoring of high-risk populations in a way that we can afford.”

The study won an award for best overall clinical abstract at the meeting. Dr. Wilder-Smith reported having no financial disclosures. The project was supported with funding from the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering and the Beckman Foundation.

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

REPORTING FROM ASLMS 2018

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

 

Key clinical point: A compact oral probe that links to a smartphone was able to detect oral cancer.

Major finding: The optical diagnostic probe had a high rate of agreement (80.6%) with standard-of-care diagnosis.

Study details: A clinical analysis of 92 people with visually healthy oral mucosa or oral leukoplakia, erythroplakia, or ulceration.

Disclosures: Dr. Wilder-Smith reported having no financial disclosures. The National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering and the Beckman Foundation funded the project.

Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Early breast cancer: Patients report favorable quality of life after partial breast irradiation

Brachytherapy-based APBI: Results meaningful for women
Article Type
Changed
Thu, 12/15/2022 - 17:47

 

In women with breast cancer undergoing breast-conserving surgery, accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) using multicatheter brachytherapy does not negatively affect quality of life, compared with standard whole breast irradiation, investigators have reported.

Patients reported similar quality of life scores for multicatheter brachytherapy–based APBI and whole breast irradiation in the study by the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie of European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO).

Moreover, breast symptom scores were significantly worse for whole-breast radiation, Rebekka Schäfer, MD, of the department of radiation oncology at the University Hospital Würzburg (Germany) and colleagues reported in Lancet Oncology.

“This trial provides further clinical evidence that APBI with interstitial brachytherapy can be considered as an alternative treatment option after breast-conserving surgery for patients with low-risk breast cancer,” Dr. Schäfer and coauthors wrote.

In several previous studies, APBI has been shown to have clinical outcomes equivalent to those of whole breast irradiation in terms of disease recurrence, survival, and treatment side effects, they added.

The quality of life findings in the present report come from long-term follow-up of a randomized, controlled, phase 3 trial conducted at 16 European centers. This study included 1,184 women with early breast cancer randomly who, after receiving breast-conserving surgery, were assigned either to APBI that used multicatheter brachytherapy or to whole breast irradiation.

Women in the study completed validated quality of life questionnaires right before and right after radiotherapy, as well as during follow-up.

 

 


A little more than half of the women in each group completed the quality of life questionnaires after the treatment and again at follow-up, investigators said.

Global health status was stable over time in both groups, investigators reported. In the APBI group, global health status score on a scale of 0-100 was 65.6 right after the procedure and 66.2 at 5 years; similarly, scores in the whole breast irradiation group were 64.6 after radiotherapy and 66.0 at 5 years.

The only quality of life difference between arms that investigators characterized as moderately clinically relevant was in breast symptom scores, which were significantly worse in the whole breast radiation group right after radiotherapy (difference of means, 13.6; 95% CI, 9.7-17.5; P less than .0001) and at 3-month follow-up (difference of means, 12.7; 95% CI, 9.8-15.6; P less than .0001).

Emotional functioning, fatigue, and financial difficulty scores in the APBI group were “slightly better” than in the whole breast radiation group right after radiotherapy and at a 3-month follow-up, investigators reported; however, at 5 year follow-up, there were no significant differences between arms in those measures.

 

 


“Our findings show that APBI using multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy does not result in clinically significant deterioration of overall quality of life and that the different domains of quality of life after APBI were not worse in comparison with whole breast irradiation in terms of clinically relevant differences,” Dr. Schäfer and colleagues concluded in their report.

Dr. Schäfer reported no conflicts of interest. Coauthors reported disclosures outside of the submitted work including Nucletron Operations BV, Elekta Company, Merck Serono, Novocure, AstraZeneca, and Bristol-Myers Squibb, among others.

SOURCE: Schäfer R et al. Lancet Oncol. 2018 Apr 22. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30195-5.

Body

 

This study by Schäfer and colleagues supports results of earlier and smaller studies showing promising quality of life results following accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) using multicatheter brachytherapy, according to Reshma Jagsi, MD.

“The results suggest that for quality of life, multicatheter brachytherapy-based APBI does not adversely affect outcomes, compared with whole breast irradiation,” Dr. Jagsi wrote in an editorial accompanying the article.

Dr. Reshma Jagsi
Dr. Jagsi highlighted “modest but significant” differences favoring APBI for early breast symptoms, both right after treatment and at 3-month follow-up. Likewise, there were slight improvements in fatigue, emotional functioning, and financial difficulties for APBI-treated patients at both of those time points.

In previous trials, APBI using external radiation beam techniques has likewise shown favorable and promising quality of life outcomes.

There are now eagerly anticipated studies of APBI delivered primarily using external beam techniques that have included rigorous collection of quality of life outcomes, Dr. Jagsi added.

Those trials, which include RAPID and RTOG 0413/NSABP B39, will provide additional evidence to consider alongside those of the trial reported by Schäfer and colleagues on behalf of the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie of European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO).

“Together with the results from the GEC-ESTRO trial, results from these trials will be meaningful to the many tens of thousands of women who undergo breast-conserving surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy each year,” Dr. Jagsi wrote.

Reshma Jagsi, MD, is with the department of radiation oncology at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. These comments are derived from editorial in Lancet Oncology . Dr. Jagsi reported receiving personal fees from Amgen.

Publications
Topics
Sections
Body

 

This study by Schäfer and colleagues supports results of earlier and smaller studies showing promising quality of life results following accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) using multicatheter brachytherapy, according to Reshma Jagsi, MD.

“The results suggest that for quality of life, multicatheter brachytherapy-based APBI does not adversely affect outcomes, compared with whole breast irradiation,” Dr. Jagsi wrote in an editorial accompanying the article.

Dr. Reshma Jagsi
Dr. Jagsi highlighted “modest but significant” differences favoring APBI for early breast symptoms, both right after treatment and at 3-month follow-up. Likewise, there were slight improvements in fatigue, emotional functioning, and financial difficulties for APBI-treated patients at both of those time points.

In previous trials, APBI using external radiation beam techniques has likewise shown favorable and promising quality of life outcomes.

There are now eagerly anticipated studies of APBI delivered primarily using external beam techniques that have included rigorous collection of quality of life outcomes, Dr. Jagsi added.

Those trials, which include RAPID and RTOG 0413/NSABP B39, will provide additional evidence to consider alongside those of the trial reported by Schäfer and colleagues on behalf of the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie of European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO).

“Together with the results from the GEC-ESTRO trial, results from these trials will be meaningful to the many tens of thousands of women who undergo breast-conserving surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy each year,” Dr. Jagsi wrote.

Reshma Jagsi, MD, is with the department of radiation oncology at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. These comments are derived from editorial in Lancet Oncology . Dr. Jagsi reported receiving personal fees from Amgen.

Body

 

This study by Schäfer and colleagues supports results of earlier and smaller studies showing promising quality of life results following accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) using multicatheter brachytherapy, according to Reshma Jagsi, MD.

“The results suggest that for quality of life, multicatheter brachytherapy-based APBI does not adversely affect outcomes, compared with whole breast irradiation,” Dr. Jagsi wrote in an editorial accompanying the article.

Dr. Reshma Jagsi
Dr. Jagsi highlighted “modest but significant” differences favoring APBI for early breast symptoms, both right after treatment and at 3-month follow-up. Likewise, there were slight improvements in fatigue, emotional functioning, and financial difficulties for APBI-treated patients at both of those time points.

In previous trials, APBI using external radiation beam techniques has likewise shown favorable and promising quality of life outcomes.

There are now eagerly anticipated studies of APBI delivered primarily using external beam techniques that have included rigorous collection of quality of life outcomes, Dr. Jagsi added.

Those trials, which include RAPID and RTOG 0413/NSABP B39, will provide additional evidence to consider alongside those of the trial reported by Schäfer and colleagues on behalf of the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie of European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO).

“Together with the results from the GEC-ESTRO trial, results from these trials will be meaningful to the many tens of thousands of women who undergo breast-conserving surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy each year,” Dr. Jagsi wrote.

Reshma Jagsi, MD, is with the department of radiation oncology at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. These comments are derived from editorial in Lancet Oncology . Dr. Jagsi reported receiving personal fees from Amgen.

Title
Brachytherapy-based APBI: Results meaningful for women
Brachytherapy-based APBI: Results meaningful for women

 

In women with breast cancer undergoing breast-conserving surgery, accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) using multicatheter brachytherapy does not negatively affect quality of life, compared with standard whole breast irradiation, investigators have reported.

Patients reported similar quality of life scores for multicatheter brachytherapy–based APBI and whole breast irradiation in the study by the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie of European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO).

Moreover, breast symptom scores were significantly worse for whole-breast radiation, Rebekka Schäfer, MD, of the department of radiation oncology at the University Hospital Würzburg (Germany) and colleagues reported in Lancet Oncology.

“This trial provides further clinical evidence that APBI with interstitial brachytherapy can be considered as an alternative treatment option after breast-conserving surgery for patients with low-risk breast cancer,” Dr. Schäfer and coauthors wrote.

In several previous studies, APBI has been shown to have clinical outcomes equivalent to those of whole breast irradiation in terms of disease recurrence, survival, and treatment side effects, they added.

The quality of life findings in the present report come from long-term follow-up of a randomized, controlled, phase 3 trial conducted at 16 European centers. This study included 1,184 women with early breast cancer randomly who, after receiving breast-conserving surgery, were assigned either to APBI that used multicatheter brachytherapy or to whole breast irradiation.

Women in the study completed validated quality of life questionnaires right before and right after radiotherapy, as well as during follow-up.

 

 


A little more than half of the women in each group completed the quality of life questionnaires after the treatment and again at follow-up, investigators said.

Global health status was stable over time in both groups, investigators reported. In the APBI group, global health status score on a scale of 0-100 was 65.6 right after the procedure and 66.2 at 5 years; similarly, scores in the whole breast irradiation group were 64.6 after radiotherapy and 66.0 at 5 years.

The only quality of life difference between arms that investigators characterized as moderately clinically relevant was in breast symptom scores, which were significantly worse in the whole breast radiation group right after radiotherapy (difference of means, 13.6; 95% CI, 9.7-17.5; P less than .0001) and at 3-month follow-up (difference of means, 12.7; 95% CI, 9.8-15.6; P less than .0001).

Emotional functioning, fatigue, and financial difficulty scores in the APBI group were “slightly better” than in the whole breast radiation group right after radiotherapy and at a 3-month follow-up, investigators reported; however, at 5 year follow-up, there were no significant differences between arms in those measures.

 

 


“Our findings show that APBI using multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy does not result in clinically significant deterioration of overall quality of life and that the different domains of quality of life after APBI were not worse in comparison with whole breast irradiation in terms of clinically relevant differences,” Dr. Schäfer and colleagues concluded in their report.

Dr. Schäfer reported no conflicts of interest. Coauthors reported disclosures outside of the submitted work including Nucletron Operations BV, Elekta Company, Merck Serono, Novocure, AstraZeneca, and Bristol-Myers Squibb, among others.

SOURCE: Schäfer R et al. Lancet Oncol. 2018 Apr 22. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30195-5.

 

In women with breast cancer undergoing breast-conserving surgery, accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) using multicatheter brachytherapy does not negatively affect quality of life, compared with standard whole breast irradiation, investigators have reported.

Patients reported similar quality of life scores for multicatheter brachytherapy–based APBI and whole breast irradiation in the study by the Groupe Européen de Curiethérapie of European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (GEC-ESTRO).

Moreover, breast symptom scores were significantly worse for whole-breast radiation, Rebekka Schäfer, MD, of the department of radiation oncology at the University Hospital Würzburg (Germany) and colleagues reported in Lancet Oncology.

“This trial provides further clinical evidence that APBI with interstitial brachytherapy can be considered as an alternative treatment option after breast-conserving surgery for patients with low-risk breast cancer,” Dr. Schäfer and coauthors wrote.

In several previous studies, APBI has been shown to have clinical outcomes equivalent to those of whole breast irradiation in terms of disease recurrence, survival, and treatment side effects, they added.

The quality of life findings in the present report come from long-term follow-up of a randomized, controlled, phase 3 trial conducted at 16 European centers. This study included 1,184 women with early breast cancer randomly who, after receiving breast-conserving surgery, were assigned either to APBI that used multicatheter brachytherapy or to whole breast irradiation.

Women in the study completed validated quality of life questionnaires right before and right after radiotherapy, as well as during follow-up.

 

 


A little more than half of the women in each group completed the quality of life questionnaires after the treatment and again at follow-up, investigators said.

Global health status was stable over time in both groups, investigators reported. In the APBI group, global health status score on a scale of 0-100 was 65.6 right after the procedure and 66.2 at 5 years; similarly, scores in the whole breast irradiation group were 64.6 after radiotherapy and 66.0 at 5 years.

The only quality of life difference between arms that investigators characterized as moderately clinically relevant was in breast symptom scores, which were significantly worse in the whole breast radiation group right after radiotherapy (difference of means, 13.6; 95% CI, 9.7-17.5; P less than .0001) and at 3-month follow-up (difference of means, 12.7; 95% CI, 9.8-15.6; P less than .0001).

Emotional functioning, fatigue, and financial difficulty scores in the APBI group were “slightly better” than in the whole breast radiation group right after radiotherapy and at a 3-month follow-up, investigators reported; however, at 5 year follow-up, there were no significant differences between arms in those measures.

 

 


“Our findings show that APBI using multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy does not result in clinically significant deterioration of overall quality of life and that the different domains of quality of life after APBI were not worse in comparison with whole breast irradiation in terms of clinically relevant differences,” Dr. Schäfer and colleagues concluded in their report.

Dr. Schäfer reported no conflicts of interest. Coauthors reported disclosures outside of the submitted work including Nucletron Operations BV, Elekta Company, Merck Serono, Novocure, AstraZeneca, and Bristol-Myers Squibb, among others.

SOURCE: Schäfer R et al. Lancet Oncol. 2018 Apr 22. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30195-5.

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

FROM LANCET ONCOLOGY

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

 

Key clinical point: Quality of life results support the use of accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI) using multicatheter brachytherapy as an alternative to whole breast radiation after breast-conserving surgery.

Major finding: Patients reported similar quality of life scores for the two modalities, while breast symptom scores for whole breast radiation were significantly worse right after radiotherapy (difference of means, 13.6; 95% confidence interval, 9.7-17.5; P less than .0001) and at 3-month follow-up (difference of means, 12.7; 95% CI, 9.8-15.6; P less than .0001), compared with those for APBI.

Study details: 5-year quality of life results from a European phase 3 trial including 1,184 women with early breast cancer who, after undergoing breast-conserving surgery, received either whole breast irradiation or APBI using multicatheter brachytherapy.

Disclosures: Authors reported disclosures outside of the submitted work including Nucletron Operations BV, Elekta Company, Merck Serono, Novocure, AstraZeneca, and Bristol-Myers Squibb, among others.

Source: Schäfer R et al. Lancet Oncol. 2018 Apr 22. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30195-5.

Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Nation’s Top Doc Wants The Overdose Antidote Widely On Hand. Is That Feasible?

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 04/25/2018 - 14:02

When Surgeon General Jerome Adams issued an advisory calling for more people to carry naloxone — not just people at overdose risk, but also friends and family — experts and advocates were almost giddy.

This is an “unequivocally positive” step forward, said Leo Beletsky, an associate professor of law and health sciences at Northeastern University.

And not necessarily a surprise. Adams, who previously was Indiana’s health commissioner, was recruited to be the nation’s top doctor in part because of his work with then-Gov. Mike Pence, now the vice president. In Indiana, Adams pushed for harm-reduction approaches, which included expanded access to naloxone and the implementation of a needle exchange to combat the state’s much-publicized HIV outbreak, which began in 2015 and was linked to injection drug use.

Others cautioned, though, that his have-naloxone-will-carry recommendation is at best limited in what it can achieve, in part because the drug is relatively expensive.

Kaiser Health News breaks down what the advisory means, experts’ concerns and what policy approaches may be in the pipeline.

Many public health advocates applaud the surgeon general’s position.

Naloxone, which is a drug that can keep drug users alive by reversing opioid overdoses, is viewed by many as the cornerstone of the harm-reduction approach to the epidemic. Experts say people with addiction problems should carry it, and so should their family, friends and acquaintances.

“We want to put it more in reach,” said Traci Green, an associate professor of emergency medicine and community health sciences at Boston University, who has extensively researched the opioid abuse crisis. “It could not have been a better endorsement.”

Others, including Diane Goodman, who penned a recent Medscape commentary reflecting on the advisory, wonder whether this is a “rational” response to the scourge, since opioid addiction is one of many health problems people might encounter in everyday life and for which treatment options are still limited.

“I’m not sure it makes much more sense than any of us carrying a bottle of nitroglycerin to treat patients with end-stage angina,” wrote Goodman, an acute-care nurse practitioner, referring to chest pain.

“What, exactly, are we offering to addicts once their condition has been reversed?” she asked, noting that without treatment and therapy programs that help wean people from addiction “the odds of survival for any length of time remain low, no matter how much reversal medication is kept nearby.”

Results would likely be limited by naloxone’s price tag.

Take Baltimore, which has been hit particularly hard by the opioid epidemic. Its health department already has pushed for more people to carry naloxone.

But the drug’s price is an issue, said Dr. Leana Wen, the city’s health commissioner, and an emergency physician. She suggested that the federal government negotiate directly for a lower price, or give more money to organizations and agencies like hers so they can afford to maintain an adequate supply.

“Every day, people are calling us at the Baltimore City Health Department and requesting naloxone, and I have to tell them I can’t afford for them to have it,” Wen said.

The drug is available in generic form, which can be stored in a vial and injected via a needle, as well as in patented products, such as the nasal spray Narcan, sold by ADAPT Pharmaceuticals, and Kaleo’s Evzio, a talking auto-injector.

Generic naloxone costs $20 to $40 per dose. Narcan, the nasal spray, costs $125 for a two-dose carton, according to ADAPT’s website. A two-pack of Evzio costs close to $4,000, according to GoodRx.

Health departments and first responders qualify for a discounted rate of $75 per carton of Narcan. Kaleo has made Evzio coupons available to consumers, so that some will not have a copay, and it advertises a discount for federal and state agencies.

Skeptics point out that similar methods have been used to build brand loyalty and potentially make a particular product a household name. That’s how Epi-Pen became synonymous with epinephrine for the treatment of anaphylactic shock.

“There’s clearly some overlap” here between the pricing strategies used by naloxone manufacturers and Epi-Pen distributor Mylan, said Richard Evans, co-founder of SSR Health, which tracks the pharmaceutical industry.

But it’s not a perfect comparison. The presence of low-cost generics changes the calculus, he said, as does the different level of demand.

Nonprofit organizations and health care providers keenly feel the pressures of increasing demand and cost.

Experts say price breaks on naloxone are not sufficient to cover the costs on the ground.

“Sixty-four thousand people lost their lives [nationally in 2016] — that’s someone every 12 minutes,” said Justin Phillips, executive director of Overdose Lifeline, an Indianapolis-based nonprofit. “Ten free kits is not going to be enough.”

Phillips said her organization relies on generic naloxone, which is the least expensive formulation. It’s the only feasible option, using dedicated grant money the group received from the state attorney general’s office as part of a program funded by a settlement with pharmaceutical companies.

But that money is almost dried up. “We need to be able to access naloxone — which I’m told is pennies to make — for the pennies it cost to make it,” Phillips said.

Phillips, who worked with Adams when he ran Indiana’s health department, said she has discussed the need for naloxone funding with the surgeon general, but never its price.

Pharmacies assess the hurdles of distribution.

Local pharmacies are key in this chain, but the overdose antidote is new territory for many pharmacists, said Randy Hitchens, the executive vice president of the Indiana Pharmacists Alliance. He said in 2015, when Adams began his push to get naloxone into the hands of drug users and their families, only one or two retail pharmacies carried it.

“This has always been an emergency room drug. Retail pharmacists typically were not used to dealing with [it],” Hitchens said. “A lot were probably saying, ‘What in the devil is naloxone?’”

Today, he estimates 60 to 70 percent of Indiana’s more than 1,100 retail pharmacies carry the drug. Walgreens, the pharmacy chain, has committed to stocking Narcan.

Access, though, is always subject to retail pressures.

“If pharmacies are not seeing a steady stream coming in asking for it, they won’t be incentivized to carry it on their shelves,” said Daniel Raymond, the deputy director of policy and planning for the Harm Reduction Coalition.

A patchwork of other decentralized sources for naloxone exist: syringe-exchange vans, county and state health departments, churches and community centers, all trying to find ways to get overdose medication into the hands of people who need it.

That supply stream “meets people where they are,” Raymond said, but those little programs don’t have the muscle to negotiate discounted prices.

“Individual health programs are trying to navigate the crisis on their own, but when you see … growing demand and limited supply, it’s a role for federal intervention,” Raymond said.

He’d like to see the federal government step in to negotiate prices where smaller programs can’t.

The surgeon general’s message is one part of Washington’s broader response to the epidemic. But even as Congress crafts an opioid epidemic response package, it’s not clear it will tackle these concerns.

In the House of Representatives’ Energy and Commerce Committee, one bill being discussed would require all state Medicaid programs to cover at least one form of naloxone. Currently, not all state Medicaid programs do so.

A Senate bill would authorize $300 million annually to equip first responders with naloxone.

But critics say those approaches still don’t address the underlying problems: cost and funding.

“You can either make naloxone available, at a much discounted price, or we need to have a lot more resources in order to purchase it,” Wen said. “I don’t care which one. My only concern is the health and well-being of our residents.”

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation which is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

Publications
Topics
Sections

When Surgeon General Jerome Adams issued an advisory calling for more people to carry naloxone — not just people at overdose risk, but also friends and family — experts and advocates were almost giddy.

This is an “unequivocally positive” step forward, said Leo Beletsky, an associate professor of law and health sciences at Northeastern University.

And not necessarily a surprise. Adams, who previously was Indiana’s health commissioner, was recruited to be the nation’s top doctor in part because of his work with then-Gov. Mike Pence, now the vice president. In Indiana, Adams pushed for harm-reduction approaches, which included expanded access to naloxone and the implementation of a needle exchange to combat the state’s much-publicized HIV outbreak, which began in 2015 and was linked to injection drug use.

Others cautioned, though, that his have-naloxone-will-carry recommendation is at best limited in what it can achieve, in part because the drug is relatively expensive.

Kaiser Health News breaks down what the advisory means, experts’ concerns and what policy approaches may be in the pipeline.

Many public health advocates applaud the surgeon general’s position.

Naloxone, which is a drug that can keep drug users alive by reversing opioid overdoses, is viewed by many as the cornerstone of the harm-reduction approach to the epidemic. Experts say people with addiction problems should carry it, and so should their family, friends and acquaintances.

“We want to put it more in reach,” said Traci Green, an associate professor of emergency medicine and community health sciences at Boston University, who has extensively researched the opioid abuse crisis. “It could not have been a better endorsement.”

Others, including Diane Goodman, who penned a recent Medscape commentary reflecting on the advisory, wonder whether this is a “rational” response to the scourge, since opioid addiction is one of many health problems people might encounter in everyday life and for which treatment options are still limited.

“I’m not sure it makes much more sense than any of us carrying a bottle of nitroglycerin to treat patients with end-stage angina,” wrote Goodman, an acute-care nurse practitioner, referring to chest pain.

“What, exactly, are we offering to addicts once their condition has been reversed?” she asked, noting that without treatment and therapy programs that help wean people from addiction “the odds of survival for any length of time remain low, no matter how much reversal medication is kept nearby.”

Results would likely be limited by naloxone’s price tag.

Take Baltimore, which has been hit particularly hard by the opioid epidemic. Its health department already has pushed for more people to carry naloxone.

But the drug’s price is an issue, said Dr. Leana Wen, the city’s health commissioner, and an emergency physician. She suggested that the federal government negotiate directly for a lower price, or give more money to organizations and agencies like hers so they can afford to maintain an adequate supply.

“Every day, people are calling us at the Baltimore City Health Department and requesting naloxone, and I have to tell them I can’t afford for them to have it,” Wen said.

The drug is available in generic form, which can be stored in a vial and injected via a needle, as well as in patented products, such as the nasal spray Narcan, sold by ADAPT Pharmaceuticals, and Kaleo’s Evzio, a talking auto-injector.

Generic naloxone costs $20 to $40 per dose. Narcan, the nasal spray, costs $125 for a two-dose carton, according to ADAPT’s website. A two-pack of Evzio costs close to $4,000, according to GoodRx.

Health departments and first responders qualify for a discounted rate of $75 per carton of Narcan. Kaleo has made Evzio coupons available to consumers, so that some will not have a copay, and it advertises a discount for federal and state agencies.

Skeptics point out that similar methods have been used to build brand loyalty and potentially make a particular product a household name. That’s how Epi-Pen became synonymous with epinephrine for the treatment of anaphylactic shock.

“There’s clearly some overlap” here between the pricing strategies used by naloxone manufacturers and Epi-Pen distributor Mylan, said Richard Evans, co-founder of SSR Health, which tracks the pharmaceutical industry.

But it’s not a perfect comparison. The presence of low-cost generics changes the calculus, he said, as does the different level of demand.

Nonprofit organizations and health care providers keenly feel the pressures of increasing demand and cost.

Experts say price breaks on naloxone are not sufficient to cover the costs on the ground.

“Sixty-four thousand people lost their lives [nationally in 2016] — that’s someone every 12 minutes,” said Justin Phillips, executive director of Overdose Lifeline, an Indianapolis-based nonprofit. “Ten free kits is not going to be enough.”

Phillips said her organization relies on generic naloxone, which is the least expensive formulation. It’s the only feasible option, using dedicated grant money the group received from the state attorney general’s office as part of a program funded by a settlement with pharmaceutical companies.

But that money is almost dried up. “We need to be able to access naloxone — which I’m told is pennies to make — for the pennies it cost to make it,” Phillips said.

Phillips, who worked with Adams when he ran Indiana’s health department, said she has discussed the need for naloxone funding with the surgeon general, but never its price.

Pharmacies assess the hurdles of distribution.

Local pharmacies are key in this chain, but the overdose antidote is new territory for many pharmacists, said Randy Hitchens, the executive vice president of the Indiana Pharmacists Alliance. He said in 2015, when Adams began his push to get naloxone into the hands of drug users and their families, only one or two retail pharmacies carried it.

“This has always been an emergency room drug. Retail pharmacists typically were not used to dealing with [it],” Hitchens said. “A lot were probably saying, ‘What in the devil is naloxone?’”

Today, he estimates 60 to 70 percent of Indiana’s more than 1,100 retail pharmacies carry the drug. Walgreens, the pharmacy chain, has committed to stocking Narcan.

Access, though, is always subject to retail pressures.

“If pharmacies are not seeing a steady stream coming in asking for it, they won’t be incentivized to carry it on their shelves,” said Daniel Raymond, the deputy director of policy and planning for the Harm Reduction Coalition.

A patchwork of other decentralized sources for naloxone exist: syringe-exchange vans, county and state health departments, churches and community centers, all trying to find ways to get overdose medication into the hands of people who need it.

That supply stream “meets people where they are,” Raymond said, but those little programs don’t have the muscle to negotiate discounted prices.

“Individual health programs are trying to navigate the crisis on their own, but when you see … growing demand and limited supply, it’s a role for federal intervention,” Raymond said.

He’d like to see the federal government step in to negotiate prices where smaller programs can’t.

The surgeon general’s message is one part of Washington’s broader response to the epidemic. But even as Congress crafts an opioid epidemic response package, it’s not clear it will tackle these concerns.

In the House of Representatives’ Energy and Commerce Committee, one bill being discussed would require all state Medicaid programs to cover at least one form of naloxone. Currently, not all state Medicaid programs do so.

A Senate bill would authorize $300 million annually to equip first responders with naloxone.

But critics say those approaches still don’t address the underlying problems: cost and funding.

“You can either make naloxone available, at a much discounted price, or we need to have a lot more resources in order to purchase it,” Wen said. “I don’t care which one. My only concern is the health and well-being of our residents.”

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation which is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

When Surgeon General Jerome Adams issued an advisory calling for more people to carry naloxone — not just people at overdose risk, but also friends and family — experts and advocates were almost giddy.

This is an “unequivocally positive” step forward, said Leo Beletsky, an associate professor of law and health sciences at Northeastern University.

And not necessarily a surprise. Adams, who previously was Indiana’s health commissioner, was recruited to be the nation’s top doctor in part because of his work with then-Gov. Mike Pence, now the vice president. In Indiana, Adams pushed for harm-reduction approaches, which included expanded access to naloxone and the implementation of a needle exchange to combat the state’s much-publicized HIV outbreak, which began in 2015 and was linked to injection drug use.

Others cautioned, though, that his have-naloxone-will-carry recommendation is at best limited in what it can achieve, in part because the drug is relatively expensive.

Kaiser Health News breaks down what the advisory means, experts’ concerns and what policy approaches may be in the pipeline.

Many public health advocates applaud the surgeon general’s position.

Naloxone, which is a drug that can keep drug users alive by reversing opioid overdoses, is viewed by many as the cornerstone of the harm-reduction approach to the epidemic. Experts say people with addiction problems should carry it, and so should their family, friends and acquaintances.

“We want to put it more in reach,” said Traci Green, an associate professor of emergency medicine and community health sciences at Boston University, who has extensively researched the opioid abuse crisis. “It could not have been a better endorsement.”

Others, including Diane Goodman, who penned a recent Medscape commentary reflecting on the advisory, wonder whether this is a “rational” response to the scourge, since opioid addiction is one of many health problems people might encounter in everyday life and for which treatment options are still limited.

“I’m not sure it makes much more sense than any of us carrying a bottle of nitroglycerin to treat patients with end-stage angina,” wrote Goodman, an acute-care nurse practitioner, referring to chest pain.

“What, exactly, are we offering to addicts once their condition has been reversed?” she asked, noting that without treatment and therapy programs that help wean people from addiction “the odds of survival for any length of time remain low, no matter how much reversal medication is kept nearby.”

Results would likely be limited by naloxone’s price tag.

Take Baltimore, which has been hit particularly hard by the opioid epidemic. Its health department already has pushed for more people to carry naloxone.

But the drug’s price is an issue, said Dr. Leana Wen, the city’s health commissioner, and an emergency physician. She suggested that the federal government negotiate directly for a lower price, or give more money to organizations and agencies like hers so they can afford to maintain an adequate supply.

“Every day, people are calling us at the Baltimore City Health Department and requesting naloxone, and I have to tell them I can’t afford for them to have it,” Wen said.

The drug is available in generic form, which can be stored in a vial and injected via a needle, as well as in patented products, such as the nasal spray Narcan, sold by ADAPT Pharmaceuticals, and Kaleo’s Evzio, a talking auto-injector.

Generic naloxone costs $20 to $40 per dose. Narcan, the nasal spray, costs $125 for a two-dose carton, according to ADAPT’s website. A two-pack of Evzio costs close to $4,000, according to GoodRx.

Health departments and first responders qualify for a discounted rate of $75 per carton of Narcan. Kaleo has made Evzio coupons available to consumers, so that some will not have a copay, and it advertises a discount for federal and state agencies.

Skeptics point out that similar methods have been used to build brand loyalty and potentially make a particular product a household name. That’s how Epi-Pen became synonymous with epinephrine for the treatment of anaphylactic shock.

“There’s clearly some overlap” here between the pricing strategies used by naloxone manufacturers and Epi-Pen distributor Mylan, said Richard Evans, co-founder of SSR Health, which tracks the pharmaceutical industry.

But it’s not a perfect comparison. The presence of low-cost generics changes the calculus, he said, as does the different level of demand.

Nonprofit organizations and health care providers keenly feel the pressures of increasing demand and cost.

Experts say price breaks on naloxone are not sufficient to cover the costs on the ground.

“Sixty-four thousand people lost their lives [nationally in 2016] — that’s someone every 12 minutes,” said Justin Phillips, executive director of Overdose Lifeline, an Indianapolis-based nonprofit. “Ten free kits is not going to be enough.”

Phillips said her organization relies on generic naloxone, which is the least expensive formulation. It’s the only feasible option, using dedicated grant money the group received from the state attorney general’s office as part of a program funded by a settlement with pharmaceutical companies.

But that money is almost dried up. “We need to be able to access naloxone — which I’m told is pennies to make — for the pennies it cost to make it,” Phillips said.

Phillips, who worked with Adams when he ran Indiana’s health department, said she has discussed the need for naloxone funding with the surgeon general, but never its price.

Pharmacies assess the hurdles of distribution.

Local pharmacies are key in this chain, but the overdose antidote is new territory for many pharmacists, said Randy Hitchens, the executive vice president of the Indiana Pharmacists Alliance. He said in 2015, when Adams began his push to get naloxone into the hands of drug users and their families, only one or two retail pharmacies carried it.

“This has always been an emergency room drug. Retail pharmacists typically were not used to dealing with [it],” Hitchens said. “A lot were probably saying, ‘What in the devil is naloxone?’”

Today, he estimates 60 to 70 percent of Indiana’s more than 1,100 retail pharmacies carry the drug. Walgreens, the pharmacy chain, has committed to stocking Narcan.

Access, though, is always subject to retail pressures.

“If pharmacies are not seeing a steady stream coming in asking for it, they won’t be incentivized to carry it on their shelves,” said Daniel Raymond, the deputy director of policy and planning for the Harm Reduction Coalition.

A patchwork of other decentralized sources for naloxone exist: syringe-exchange vans, county and state health departments, churches and community centers, all trying to find ways to get overdose medication into the hands of people who need it.

That supply stream “meets people where they are,” Raymond said, but those little programs don’t have the muscle to negotiate discounted prices.

“Individual health programs are trying to navigate the crisis on their own, but when you see … growing demand and limited supply, it’s a role for federal intervention,” Raymond said.

He’d like to see the federal government step in to negotiate prices where smaller programs can’t.

The surgeon general’s message is one part of Washington’s broader response to the epidemic. But even as Congress crafts an opioid epidemic response package, it’s not clear it will tackle these concerns.

In the House of Representatives’ Energy and Commerce Committee, one bill being discussed would require all state Medicaid programs to cover at least one form of naloxone. Currently, not all state Medicaid programs do so.

A Senate bill would authorize $300 million annually to equip first responders with naloxone.

But critics say those approaches still don’t address the underlying problems: cost and funding.

“You can either make naloxone available, at a much discounted price, or we need to have a lot more resources in order to purchase it,” Wen said. “I don’t care which one. My only concern is the health and well-being of our residents.”

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation which is not affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Gate On Date
Wed, 04/25/2018 - 14:00
Un-Gate On Date
Wed, 04/25/2018 - 14:00
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Wed, 04/25/2018 - 14:00

Screening tool IDs older NSCLC patients suitable for SBRT

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/04/2019 - 14:16

 

A validated screening tool may help to identify older adults with early-stage non–small cell lung cancer who could benefit from stereotactic body radiotherapy with curative intent, investigators contend,

Among 43 patients aged 65-89 years (median age 78) with stage T1 or T2 non–small cell lung cancer tumors who underwent stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), scores of 13 or higher on the Geriatric 8 (G8) screening tool were associated with high 2- and 5-year survival rates, reported Toshiya Maebayashi, MD, PhD, from Nihon University in Tokyo, and colleagues.

“Regardless of age, the G8 screening tool may enable us to identify relatively healthy seniors who would be likely to have longer survival times after SBRT for early lung cancer,” they wrote in a study published in the Journal of Geriatric Oncology.

The G8 Screening tool assesses the health status of older patients according to their food intake, recent weight loss, mobility, neuropsychological problems, body mass index, prescription drug use, and age. Higher scores on the scale, which can range from 0 to 17, are indicative of better health status.

To see whether the G8 tool could predict the benefits of SBRT, the investigators performed a retrospective study of long-term outcomes in older patients with early-stage non–small cell lung cancer.

They included 34 patients with T1 tumors and 9 patients with T2 tumors who underwent SBRT from 2004 to 2011 at their center. The median follow-up was 46 months (range, 3-112 months).

Patients with T1 tumors had G8 scores ranging from 9 to 16 (median 13). Patients with T2 tumors had scores ranging from 8 to 15 (median 12).

 

 


For patients with G8 scores of 12 or lower, the overall survival rate after 2 years was 56.1%, and 28% after 5 years. In contrast, the respective 2- and 5-year overall survival rates for patients with G8 scores of 13 or higher were 94.1% and 68.4% (P = .0014).

In univariate analysis, factors significantly associated with survival included T-stage (P = .034), pathology (P = .004), and G8 score (P = .001). G8 score was also significantly associated with overall survival in multivariate analysis (P = .006).

Adverse events included rib fractures in nine patients, grade 2 pneumonitis in four and grade 3 pneumonitis in two patients. There were no cases of hemoptysis. Neither G8 score nor age were related to adverse events.

“We anticipate that functional evaluation of older patients will allow us to actively recommend SBRT [an approach less likely than other current treatments to cause adverse events] to older patients who are in relatively good condition but hesitant to receive treatment,” the investigators wrote.

The authors did not receive special funding for the study, and had no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Maebayashi T et al. J Geriatr Oncol. 2018 Mar 22. doi: 10.1016/j.jgo.2018.03.005.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

A validated screening tool may help to identify older adults with early-stage non–small cell lung cancer who could benefit from stereotactic body radiotherapy with curative intent, investigators contend,

Among 43 patients aged 65-89 years (median age 78) with stage T1 or T2 non–small cell lung cancer tumors who underwent stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), scores of 13 or higher on the Geriatric 8 (G8) screening tool were associated with high 2- and 5-year survival rates, reported Toshiya Maebayashi, MD, PhD, from Nihon University in Tokyo, and colleagues.

“Regardless of age, the G8 screening tool may enable us to identify relatively healthy seniors who would be likely to have longer survival times after SBRT for early lung cancer,” they wrote in a study published in the Journal of Geriatric Oncology.

The G8 Screening tool assesses the health status of older patients according to their food intake, recent weight loss, mobility, neuropsychological problems, body mass index, prescription drug use, and age. Higher scores on the scale, which can range from 0 to 17, are indicative of better health status.

To see whether the G8 tool could predict the benefits of SBRT, the investigators performed a retrospective study of long-term outcomes in older patients with early-stage non–small cell lung cancer.

They included 34 patients with T1 tumors and 9 patients with T2 tumors who underwent SBRT from 2004 to 2011 at their center. The median follow-up was 46 months (range, 3-112 months).

Patients with T1 tumors had G8 scores ranging from 9 to 16 (median 13). Patients with T2 tumors had scores ranging from 8 to 15 (median 12).

 

 


For patients with G8 scores of 12 or lower, the overall survival rate after 2 years was 56.1%, and 28% after 5 years. In contrast, the respective 2- and 5-year overall survival rates for patients with G8 scores of 13 or higher were 94.1% and 68.4% (P = .0014).

In univariate analysis, factors significantly associated with survival included T-stage (P = .034), pathology (P = .004), and G8 score (P = .001). G8 score was also significantly associated with overall survival in multivariate analysis (P = .006).

Adverse events included rib fractures in nine patients, grade 2 pneumonitis in four and grade 3 pneumonitis in two patients. There were no cases of hemoptysis. Neither G8 score nor age were related to adverse events.

“We anticipate that functional evaluation of older patients will allow us to actively recommend SBRT [an approach less likely than other current treatments to cause adverse events] to older patients who are in relatively good condition but hesitant to receive treatment,” the investigators wrote.

The authors did not receive special funding for the study, and had no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Maebayashi T et al. J Geriatr Oncol. 2018 Mar 22. doi: 10.1016/j.jgo.2018.03.005.

 

A validated screening tool may help to identify older adults with early-stage non–small cell lung cancer who could benefit from stereotactic body radiotherapy with curative intent, investigators contend,

Among 43 patients aged 65-89 years (median age 78) with stage T1 or T2 non–small cell lung cancer tumors who underwent stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), scores of 13 or higher on the Geriatric 8 (G8) screening tool were associated with high 2- and 5-year survival rates, reported Toshiya Maebayashi, MD, PhD, from Nihon University in Tokyo, and colleagues.

“Regardless of age, the G8 screening tool may enable us to identify relatively healthy seniors who would be likely to have longer survival times after SBRT for early lung cancer,” they wrote in a study published in the Journal of Geriatric Oncology.

The G8 Screening tool assesses the health status of older patients according to their food intake, recent weight loss, mobility, neuropsychological problems, body mass index, prescription drug use, and age. Higher scores on the scale, which can range from 0 to 17, are indicative of better health status.

To see whether the G8 tool could predict the benefits of SBRT, the investigators performed a retrospective study of long-term outcomes in older patients with early-stage non–small cell lung cancer.

They included 34 patients with T1 tumors and 9 patients with T2 tumors who underwent SBRT from 2004 to 2011 at their center. The median follow-up was 46 months (range, 3-112 months).

Patients with T1 tumors had G8 scores ranging from 9 to 16 (median 13). Patients with T2 tumors had scores ranging from 8 to 15 (median 12).

 

 


For patients with G8 scores of 12 or lower, the overall survival rate after 2 years was 56.1%, and 28% after 5 years. In contrast, the respective 2- and 5-year overall survival rates for patients with G8 scores of 13 or higher were 94.1% and 68.4% (P = .0014).

In univariate analysis, factors significantly associated with survival included T-stage (P = .034), pathology (P = .004), and G8 score (P = .001). G8 score was also significantly associated with overall survival in multivariate analysis (P = .006).

Adverse events included rib fractures in nine patients, grade 2 pneumonitis in four and grade 3 pneumonitis in two patients. There were no cases of hemoptysis. Neither G8 score nor age were related to adverse events.

“We anticipate that functional evaluation of older patients will allow us to actively recommend SBRT [an approach less likely than other current treatments to cause adverse events] to older patients who are in relatively good condition but hesitant to receive treatment,” the investigators wrote.

The authors did not receive special funding for the study, and had no conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Maebayashi T et al. J Geriatr Oncol. 2018 Mar 22. doi: 10.1016/j.jgo.2018.03.005.

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

FROM THE JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC ONCOLOGY

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

 

Key clinical point: The Geriatric 8 screening tool may identify older patients with non–small cell lung cancer who could benefit from stereotactic body radiotherapy.

Major finding: Geriatric 8 scores of 13 or higher were associated with better 2- and 5-year overall survival.

Study details: A retrospective analysis of 43 patients aged 65-89 years with stage T1 or T2 non–small cell lung cancer.

Disclosures: The authors did not receive special funding for the study, and had no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Source: Maebayashi T et al. J Geriatr Oncol. 2018 Mar 22. doi: 10.1016/j.jgo.2018.03.005.

Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Colchicine looks promising for treating prurigo pigmentosa in case report

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 01/14/2019 - 10:21

 

Colchicine may be an effective alternative treatment for the rare inflammatory skin disorder prurigo pigmentosa, said Isa An, MD of Dicle University, Diyarbakır, Turkey, and associates.

They described a 16-year-old Turkish girl who presented with an itchy rash on her back of 4 weeks’ duration. Treatment with oral antihistamines, and topical and systemic steroids were ineffective. On physical examination, there were erythematous macules, sporadic excoriated papules, and reticulate hyperpigmentation on her back. Complete blood count and liver function tests were normal.

Histopathologic examination showed “infrequent necrotic keratinocytes with marked acanthosis and spongiosis on the epidermis, increased basal layer pigmentation, and perivascular lymphocytic infiltrate on the upper dermis.” Because of these findings, a diagnosis of prurigo pigmentosa was made, they wrote in Pediatric Dermatology.

Treatment with colchicine 1.5 g/day was started, and while the lesions resolved in the second week of treatment, the reticulate hyperpigmentation remained, Dr. An and her associates reported. The reticulate hyperpigmentation did not regress during the first month of treatment. At 6-month follow-up, there were no more symptoms of itch or recurrence of the original lesions. The reticulate hyperpigmentation was not treated.

A rare inflammatory skin disease seen principally in young Japanese women, prurigo pigmentosa has been reported in both men and women of other ethnicities, they said. Generally, macrolide antibiotics, such as clarithromycin, dapsone, and isotretinoin have been used effectively to treat prurigo pigmentosa. Minocycline and doxycycline are considered to be effective in treating this skin disease because of their anti-inflammatory effects and because they have “been shown to inhibit the synthesis of cytokines and chemokines that regulate leukocyte differentiation and activation.” Leukocyte differentiation and activation “are key pathologic features of prurigo pigmentosa,” the authors added.

Colchicine, a neutral, liposoluble tricyclic alkaloid, “exerts an anti-inflammatory effect by inhibiting neutrophil chemotaxis,” said Dr. An and her associates, which is why it is thought to be a potentially effective drug for treating prurigo pigmentosa, as shown in this case study. “Further studies are required to verify whether colchicine is an effective treatment option,” for prurigo pigmentosa, they added.

SOURCE: An I et al. Pediatr Dermatol. 2018 Apr 11. doi: 10.1111/pde.13480.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Colchicine may be an effective alternative treatment for the rare inflammatory skin disorder prurigo pigmentosa, said Isa An, MD of Dicle University, Diyarbakır, Turkey, and associates.

They described a 16-year-old Turkish girl who presented with an itchy rash on her back of 4 weeks’ duration. Treatment with oral antihistamines, and topical and systemic steroids were ineffective. On physical examination, there were erythematous macules, sporadic excoriated papules, and reticulate hyperpigmentation on her back. Complete blood count and liver function tests were normal.

Histopathologic examination showed “infrequent necrotic keratinocytes with marked acanthosis and spongiosis on the epidermis, increased basal layer pigmentation, and perivascular lymphocytic infiltrate on the upper dermis.” Because of these findings, a diagnosis of prurigo pigmentosa was made, they wrote in Pediatric Dermatology.

Treatment with colchicine 1.5 g/day was started, and while the lesions resolved in the second week of treatment, the reticulate hyperpigmentation remained, Dr. An and her associates reported. The reticulate hyperpigmentation did not regress during the first month of treatment. At 6-month follow-up, there were no more symptoms of itch or recurrence of the original lesions. The reticulate hyperpigmentation was not treated.

A rare inflammatory skin disease seen principally in young Japanese women, prurigo pigmentosa has been reported in both men and women of other ethnicities, they said. Generally, macrolide antibiotics, such as clarithromycin, dapsone, and isotretinoin have been used effectively to treat prurigo pigmentosa. Minocycline and doxycycline are considered to be effective in treating this skin disease because of their anti-inflammatory effects and because they have “been shown to inhibit the synthesis of cytokines and chemokines that regulate leukocyte differentiation and activation.” Leukocyte differentiation and activation “are key pathologic features of prurigo pigmentosa,” the authors added.

Colchicine, a neutral, liposoluble tricyclic alkaloid, “exerts an anti-inflammatory effect by inhibiting neutrophil chemotaxis,” said Dr. An and her associates, which is why it is thought to be a potentially effective drug for treating prurigo pigmentosa, as shown in this case study. “Further studies are required to verify whether colchicine is an effective treatment option,” for prurigo pigmentosa, they added.

SOURCE: An I et al. Pediatr Dermatol. 2018 Apr 11. doi: 10.1111/pde.13480.

 

Colchicine may be an effective alternative treatment for the rare inflammatory skin disorder prurigo pigmentosa, said Isa An, MD of Dicle University, Diyarbakır, Turkey, and associates.

They described a 16-year-old Turkish girl who presented with an itchy rash on her back of 4 weeks’ duration. Treatment with oral antihistamines, and topical and systemic steroids were ineffective. On physical examination, there were erythematous macules, sporadic excoriated papules, and reticulate hyperpigmentation on her back. Complete blood count and liver function tests were normal.

Histopathologic examination showed “infrequent necrotic keratinocytes with marked acanthosis and spongiosis on the epidermis, increased basal layer pigmentation, and perivascular lymphocytic infiltrate on the upper dermis.” Because of these findings, a diagnosis of prurigo pigmentosa was made, they wrote in Pediatric Dermatology.

Treatment with colchicine 1.5 g/day was started, and while the lesions resolved in the second week of treatment, the reticulate hyperpigmentation remained, Dr. An and her associates reported. The reticulate hyperpigmentation did not regress during the first month of treatment. At 6-month follow-up, there were no more symptoms of itch or recurrence of the original lesions. The reticulate hyperpigmentation was not treated.

A rare inflammatory skin disease seen principally in young Japanese women, prurigo pigmentosa has been reported in both men and women of other ethnicities, they said. Generally, macrolide antibiotics, such as clarithromycin, dapsone, and isotretinoin have been used effectively to treat prurigo pigmentosa. Minocycline and doxycycline are considered to be effective in treating this skin disease because of their anti-inflammatory effects and because they have “been shown to inhibit the synthesis of cytokines and chemokines that regulate leukocyte differentiation and activation.” Leukocyte differentiation and activation “are key pathologic features of prurigo pigmentosa,” the authors added.

Colchicine, a neutral, liposoluble tricyclic alkaloid, “exerts an anti-inflammatory effect by inhibiting neutrophil chemotaxis,” said Dr. An and her associates, which is why it is thought to be a potentially effective drug for treating prurigo pigmentosa, as shown in this case study. “Further studies are required to verify whether colchicine is an effective treatment option,” for prurigo pigmentosa, they added.

SOURCE: An I et al. Pediatr Dermatol. 2018 Apr 11. doi: 10.1111/pde.13480.

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

FROM PEDIATRIC DERMATOLOGY

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica