User login
Eradicating HCV significantly improved liver stiffness in meta-analysis
Eradicating chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection led to significant decreases in liver stiffness in a systematic review and meta-analysis of nearly 3,000 patients.
Mean liver stiffness fell by 4.1 kPa (kilopascals) (95% confidence interval, 3.3-4.9 kPa) 12 or more months after patients achieved sustained virologic response to treatment, but did not significantly change in patients who did not achieve SVR, reported Siddharth Singh, MD, of the University of San Diego, La Jolla, Calif., and his associates in the January issue of Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology (doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.04.038). The results were especially striking among patients who received direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) or who had high baseline levels of inflammation, the investigators added.
SOURCE: AMERICAN GASTROENTEROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION
Based on these findings, about 47% of patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis at baseline will drop below 9.5 kPa after achieving SVR, they reported. “With this decline in liver stiffness, it is conceivable that risk of liver-related complications would decrease, particularly in patients without cirrhosis,” they added. “Future research is warranted on the impact of magnitude and kinetics of decline in liver stiffness on improvement in liver-related outcomes.”
Eradicating HCV infection was known to decrease liver stiffness, but the magnitude of decline was not well understood. Therefore, the reviewers searched the literature through October 2016 for studies of HCV-infected adults who underwent liver stiffness measurement by vibration-controlled transient elastography before and at least once after completing HCV treatment. All studies also included data on median liver stiffness among patients who did and did not achieve SVR. The search identified 23 observational studies and one post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial, for a total of 2,934 patients, of whom 2,214 achieved SVR.
Among patients who achieved SVR, mean liver stiffness dropped by 2.4 kPa at the end of treatment (95% CI, 1.7-3.0 kPa), by 3.1 kPa 1-6 months later (95% CI, 1.6-4.7 kPa), and by 3.2 kPa 6-12 months after completing treatment (90% CI, 2.6-3.9 kPa). A year or more after finishing treatment, patients who achieved SVR had a 28% median decrease in liver stiffness (interquartile range, 22%-35%). However, liver stiffness did not significantly change among patients who did not achieve SVR, the reviewers reported.
Mean liver stiffness declined significantly more among patients who received DAAs (4.5 kPa) than among recipients of interferon-based regimens (2.6 kPa; P = .03). However, studies of DAAs included patients with greater liver stiffness at baseline, which could at least partially explain this discrepancy, the investigators said. Baseline cirrhosis also was associated with a greater decline in liver stiffness (mean, 5.1 kPa, vs. 2.8 kPa in patients without cirrhosis; P = .02), as was high baseline alanine aminotransferase level (P less than .01). Among patients whose baseline liver stiffness measurement exceeded 9.5 kPa, 47% had their liver stiffness drop to less than 9.5 kPa after achieving SVR.
Coinfection with HIV did not significantly alter the magnitude of decline in liver stiffness 6-12 months after treatment in patients who achieved SVR, the reviewers noted. “[Follow-up] assessment after SVR was relatively short; hence, long-term evolution of liver stiffness after antiviral therapy and impact of decline in liver stiffness on patient clinical outcomes could not be ascertained,” they wrote. The studies also did not consistently assess potential confounders such as nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, diabetes, and alcohol consumption.
One reviewer disclosed funding from the National Institutes of Health/National Library of Medicine. None had conflicts of interest.
The current era of new-generation direct-acting antiviral agents have revolutionized the treatment landscape of chronic hepatitis C virus infection, providing short-duration, safe, and consistently effective regimens that achieve SVR or cure in nearly 100% of patients. While achieving SVR is important, even more important is the long-term impact of SVR and whether cure translates into outcomes such as improved mortality or a reduced risk of disease progression. Although improved mortality after SVR has been demonstrated, one of the main drivers of risk of disease progression is the severity of hepatic fibrosis.
Robert J. Wong, MD, MS, is with the department of medicine and is director of research and education, division of gastroenterology and hepatology, Alameda Health System – Highland Hospital, Oakland, Calif. He has received a 2017-2019 Clinical Translational Research Award from AASLD, has received research funding from Gilead and AbbVie, and is on the speakers bureau of Gilead, Salix, and Bayer. He has also done consulting for and been an advisory board member for Gilead.
The current era of new-generation direct-acting antiviral agents have revolutionized the treatment landscape of chronic hepatitis C virus infection, providing short-duration, safe, and consistently effective regimens that achieve SVR or cure in nearly 100% of patients. While achieving SVR is important, even more important is the long-term impact of SVR and whether cure translates into outcomes such as improved mortality or a reduced risk of disease progression. Although improved mortality after SVR has been demonstrated, one of the main drivers of risk of disease progression is the severity of hepatic fibrosis.
Robert J. Wong, MD, MS, is with the department of medicine and is director of research and education, division of gastroenterology and hepatology, Alameda Health System – Highland Hospital, Oakland, Calif. He has received a 2017-2019 Clinical Translational Research Award from AASLD, has received research funding from Gilead and AbbVie, and is on the speakers bureau of Gilead, Salix, and Bayer. He has also done consulting for and been an advisory board member for Gilead.
The current era of new-generation direct-acting antiviral agents have revolutionized the treatment landscape of chronic hepatitis C virus infection, providing short-duration, safe, and consistently effective regimens that achieve SVR or cure in nearly 100% of patients. While achieving SVR is important, even more important is the long-term impact of SVR and whether cure translates into outcomes such as improved mortality or a reduced risk of disease progression. Although improved mortality after SVR has been demonstrated, one of the main drivers of risk of disease progression is the severity of hepatic fibrosis.
Robert J. Wong, MD, MS, is with the department of medicine and is director of research and education, division of gastroenterology and hepatology, Alameda Health System – Highland Hospital, Oakland, Calif. He has received a 2017-2019 Clinical Translational Research Award from AASLD, has received research funding from Gilead and AbbVie, and is on the speakers bureau of Gilead, Salix, and Bayer. He has also done consulting for and been an advisory board member for Gilead.
Eradicating chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection led to significant decreases in liver stiffness in a systematic review and meta-analysis of nearly 3,000 patients.
Mean liver stiffness fell by 4.1 kPa (kilopascals) (95% confidence interval, 3.3-4.9 kPa) 12 or more months after patients achieved sustained virologic response to treatment, but did not significantly change in patients who did not achieve SVR, reported Siddharth Singh, MD, of the University of San Diego, La Jolla, Calif., and his associates in the January issue of Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology (doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.04.038). The results were especially striking among patients who received direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) or who had high baseline levels of inflammation, the investigators added.
SOURCE: AMERICAN GASTROENTEROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION
Based on these findings, about 47% of patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis at baseline will drop below 9.5 kPa after achieving SVR, they reported. “With this decline in liver stiffness, it is conceivable that risk of liver-related complications would decrease, particularly in patients without cirrhosis,” they added. “Future research is warranted on the impact of magnitude and kinetics of decline in liver stiffness on improvement in liver-related outcomes.”
Eradicating HCV infection was known to decrease liver stiffness, but the magnitude of decline was not well understood. Therefore, the reviewers searched the literature through October 2016 for studies of HCV-infected adults who underwent liver stiffness measurement by vibration-controlled transient elastography before and at least once after completing HCV treatment. All studies also included data on median liver stiffness among patients who did and did not achieve SVR. The search identified 23 observational studies and one post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial, for a total of 2,934 patients, of whom 2,214 achieved SVR.
Among patients who achieved SVR, mean liver stiffness dropped by 2.4 kPa at the end of treatment (95% CI, 1.7-3.0 kPa), by 3.1 kPa 1-6 months later (95% CI, 1.6-4.7 kPa), and by 3.2 kPa 6-12 months after completing treatment (90% CI, 2.6-3.9 kPa). A year or more after finishing treatment, patients who achieved SVR had a 28% median decrease in liver stiffness (interquartile range, 22%-35%). However, liver stiffness did not significantly change among patients who did not achieve SVR, the reviewers reported.
Mean liver stiffness declined significantly more among patients who received DAAs (4.5 kPa) than among recipients of interferon-based regimens (2.6 kPa; P = .03). However, studies of DAAs included patients with greater liver stiffness at baseline, which could at least partially explain this discrepancy, the investigators said. Baseline cirrhosis also was associated with a greater decline in liver stiffness (mean, 5.1 kPa, vs. 2.8 kPa in patients without cirrhosis; P = .02), as was high baseline alanine aminotransferase level (P less than .01). Among patients whose baseline liver stiffness measurement exceeded 9.5 kPa, 47% had their liver stiffness drop to less than 9.5 kPa after achieving SVR.
Coinfection with HIV did not significantly alter the magnitude of decline in liver stiffness 6-12 months after treatment in patients who achieved SVR, the reviewers noted. “[Follow-up] assessment after SVR was relatively short; hence, long-term evolution of liver stiffness after antiviral therapy and impact of decline in liver stiffness on patient clinical outcomes could not be ascertained,” they wrote. The studies also did not consistently assess potential confounders such as nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, diabetes, and alcohol consumption.
One reviewer disclosed funding from the National Institutes of Health/National Library of Medicine. None had conflicts of interest.
Eradicating chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection led to significant decreases in liver stiffness in a systematic review and meta-analysis of nearly 3,000 patients.
Mean liver stiffness fell by 4.1 kPa (kilopascals) (95% confidence interval, 3.3-4.9 kPa) 12 or more months after patients achieved sustained virologic response to treatment, but did not significantly change in patients who did not achieve SVR, reported Siddharth Singh, MD, of the University of San Diego, La Jolla, Calif., and his associates in the January issue of Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology (doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.04.038). The results were especially striking among patients who received direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) or who had high baseline levels of inflammation, the investigators added.
SOURCE: AMERICAN GASTROENTEROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION
Based on these findings, about 47% of patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis at baseline will drop below 9.5 kPa after achieving SVR, they reported. “With this decline in liver stiffness, it is conceivable that risk of liver-related complications would decrease, particularly in patients without cirrhosis,” they added. “Future research is warranted on the impact of magnitude and kinetics of decline in liver stiffness on improvement in liver-related outcomes.”
Eradicating HCV infection was known to decrease liver stiffness, but the magnitude of decline was not well understood. Therefore, the reviewers searched the literature through October 2016 for studies of HCV-infected adults who underwent liver stiffness measurement by vibration-controlled transient elastography before and at least once after completing HCV treatment. All studies also included data on median liver stiffness among patients who did and did not achieve SVR. The search identified 23 observational studies and one post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial, for a total of 2,934 patients, of whom 2,214 achieved SVR.
Among patients who achieved SVR, mean liver stiffness dropped by 2.4 kPa at the end of treatment (95% CI, 1.7-3.0 kPa), by 3.1 kPa 1-6 months later (95% CI, 1.6-4.7 kPa), and by 3.2 kPa 6-12 months after completing treatment (90% CI, 2.6-3.9 kPa). A year or more after finishing treatment, patients who achieved SVR had a 28% median decrease in liver stiffness (interquartile range, 22%-35%). However, liver stiffness did not significantly change among patients who did not achieve SVR, the reviewers reported.
Mean liver stiffness declined significantly more among patients who received DAAs (4.5 kPa) than among recipients of interferon-based regimens (2.6 kPa; P = .03). However, studies of DAAs included patients with greater liver stiffness at baseline, which could at least partially explain this discrepancy, the investigators said. Baseline cirrhosis also was associated with a greater decline in liver stiffness (mean, 5.1 kPa, vs. 2.8 kPa in patients without cirrhosis; P = .02), as was high baseline alanine aminotransferase level (P less than .01). Among patients whose baseline liver stiffness measurement exceeded 9.5 kPa, 47% had their liver stiffness drop to less than 9.5 kPa after achieving SVR.
Coinfection with HIV did not significantly alter the magnitude of decline in liver stiffness 6-12 months after treatment in patients who achieved SVR, the reviewers noted. “[Follow-up] assessment after SVR was relatively short; hence, long-term evolution of liver stiffness after antiviral therapy and impact of decline in liver stiffness on patient clinical outcomes could not be ascertained,” they wrote. The studies also did not consistently assess potential confounders such as nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, diabetes, and alcohol consumption.
One reviewer disclosed funding from the National Institutes of Health/National Library of Medicine. None had conflicts of interest.
FROM CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY
Key clinical point: Eradicating chronic hepatitis C virus infection led to significant decreases in liver stiffness.
Major finding: Mean liver stiffness decreased by 4.1 kPa 12 or more months after patients achieved sustained virologic response to treatment, but did not significantly improve in patients who lacked SVR.
Data source: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 2,934 patients from 23 observational studies and one post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial.
Disclosures: One reviewer disclosed funding from the National Institutes of Health/National Library of Medicine. The reviewers reported having no conflicts of interest.
Letter from the Editor
GI & Hepatology News is one of the most widely read publications focused on the gastroenterology community and is the official newspaper of the AGA. The New Gastroenterologist is the AGA publication targeted to trainees and early career physicians. Recognizing the strength of both digital and print communication, the AGA has consolidated its communication media.
John I. Allen, MD, MBA, AGAF
Editor in Chief of GI & Hepatology News
When The New Gastroenterologist debuted almost 3 years ago, it provided a mechanism for the AGA to condense and disseminate information in a single publication for those of us in training or in the early stages of our careers. Since then, The New Gastroenterologist has become a valuable resource for the AGA community and beyond. It is with great excitement that in 2018, The New Gastroenterologist will switch to a primarily digital format. Content will be distributed in quarterly e-newsletters, which will allow for easier distribution via social media. This will allow for the creation of a website archive of past articles that can be easily queried and accessed. Additionally, The New Gastroenterologist will debut an “In Focus” series of concise updates on pertinent topics in our field. These In Focus articles will be published on a quarterly basis in GI & Hepatology News and will undoubtedly be practical and informative features that will be of interest to all AGA members, regardless of their career stage. The first In Focus article, which appears in this issue of GI & Hepatology News, is written by Nitin Ahuja, MD, and James Reynolds, MD, and provides an enlightening overview of the evaluation and management of chronic constipation. I hope that everyone enjoys this new format of The New Gastroenterologist. As always, if you have any feedback, have interest in contributing, or have ideas that you would like to hear about, please contact me ([email protected]) or Managing Editor Ryan Farrell ([email protected]).
Bryson W. Katona, MD, PhD
Editor in Chief of The New Gastroenterologist
GI & Hepatology News is one of the most widely read publications focused on the gastroenterology community and is the official newspaper of the AGA. The New Gastroenterologist is the AGA publication targeted to trainees and early career physicians. Recognizing the strength of both digital and print communication, the AGA has consolidated its communication media.
John I. Allen, MD, MBA, AGAF
Editor in Chief of GI & Hepatology News
When The New Gastroenterologist debuted almost 3 years ago, it provided a mechanism for the AGA to condense and disseminate information in a single publication for those of us in training or in the early stages of our careers. Since then, The New Gastroenterologist has become a valuable resource for the AGA community and beyond. It is with great excitement that in 2018, The New Gastroenterologist will switch to a primarily digital format. Content will be distributed in quarterly e-newsletters, which will allow for easier distribution via social media. This will allow for the creation of a website archive of past articles that can be easily queried and accessed. Additionally, The New Gastroenterologist will debut an “In Focus” series of concise updates on pertinent topics in our field. These In Focus articles will be published on a quarterly basis in GI & Hepatology News and will undoubtedly be practical and informative features that will be of interest to all AGA members, regardless of their career stage. The first In Focus article, which appears in this issue of GI & Hepatology News, is written by Nitin Ahuja, MD, and James Reynolds, MD, and provides an enlightening overview of the evaluation and management of chronic constipation. I hope that everyone enjoys this new format of The New Gastroenterologist. As always, if you have any feedback, have interest in contributing, or have ideas that you would like to hear about, please contact me ([email protected]) or Managing Editor Ryan Farrell ([email protected]).
Bryson W. Katona, MD, PhD
Editor in Chief of The New Gastroenterologist
GI & Hepatology News is one of the most widely read publications focused on the gastroenterology community and is the official newspaper of the AGA. The New Gastroenterologist is the AGA publication targeted to trainees and early career physicians. Recognizing the strength of both digital and print communication, the AGA has consolidated its communication media.
John I. Allen, MD, MBA, AGAF
Editor in Chief of GI & Hepatology News
When The New Gastroenterologist debuted almost 3 years ago, it provided a mechanism for the AGA to condense and disseminate information in a single publication for those of us in training or in the early stages of our careers. Since then, The New Gastroenterologist has become a valuable resource for the AGA community and beyond. It is with great excitement that in 2018, The New Gastroenterologist will switch to a primarily digital format. Content will be distributed in quarterly e-newsletters, which will allow for easier distribution via social media. This will allow for the creation of a website archive of past articles that can be easily queried and accessed. Additionally, The New Gastroenterologist will debut an “In Focus” series of concise updates on pertinent topics in our field. These In Focus articles will be published on a quarterly basis in GI & Hepatology News and will undoubtedly be practical and informative features that will be of interest to all AGA members, regardless of their career stage. The first In Focus article, which appears in this issue of GI & Hepatology News, is written by Nitin Ahuja, MD, and James Reynolds, MD, and provides an enlightening overview of the evaluation and management of chronic constipation. I hope that everyone enjoys this new format of The New Gastroenterologist. As always, if you have any feedback, have interest in contributing, or have ideas that you would like to hear about, please contact me ([email protected]) or Managing Editor Ryan Farrell ([email protected]).
Bryson W. Katona, MD, PhD
Editor in Chief of The New Gastroenterologist
Outpatient Videos May Help Diagnose Psychogenic Nonepileptic Seizures
WASHINGTON, DC—Smartphone videos may help to support the clinical diagnosis of psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES), according to research presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. However, smartphone videos do not replace the need for video-EEG monitoring, researchers noted. “Smartphone videos are a complementary addition to medical history and physical examinations in the outpatient epilepsy clinic and can help triage hospital admission for video EEG-monitoring,” said William O. Tatum, DO, Professor of Neurology at the Mayo Clinic
Video-EEG monitoring is the standard technique for a definitive diagnosis in patients with suspected seizures. Approximately 20% to 30% of patients admitted to the video-EEG monitoring unit are misdiagnosed with epilepsy, however. In addition, expertise availability, cost, and resource utilization of video-EEG monitoring is limited. Patient-generated videos can potentially address these limitations.
A Multicenter Blinded Trial
Dr. Tatum and colleagues conducted a prospective, multicenter, blinded trial to determine the usefulness of outpatient smartphone videos in epilepsy evaluation. Investigators evaluated 41 consecutive patients with uncontrolled seizures (13 participants were male; mean age was 43.7). Patients were excluded if they were younger than 18, had an incomplete medical history and physical examination, had an atypical event, had an inadequate smartphone video, had an unconfirmed video-EEG monitoring diagnosis, or if they did not consent.
Medical history and physical examinations, smartphone videos, and video-EEG monitoring were performed from July 2014 to November 2017. Treating physicians reached a final clinical diagnosis of epilepsy, PNES, or physiologic non-epileptic events using a degree of certainty (scale: 0–10). Ten epileptologists and eight general neurology residents without a special interest in epilepsy were surveyed for a blinded smartphone video diagnosis.
Researchers shared data via HIPPA-protected data transfer utilizing web-based software. The history and physical exams, smartphone videos, and video-EEG monitoring results were obtained using survey forms and were then compared. Finally, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were analyzed.
Most Smartphone Videos Showed Nonconvulsive Seizures
Epileptologists performed 310 smartphone video reads and residents performed 230 smartphone video reads. Smartphone videos were reviewed in 2.15 minutes compared with 60 minutes for medical history and physicals and 2.54 days for video-EEG monitoring. Most semiology was convulsive and most epilepsy was nonconvulsive. Physicians made a final diagnosis of PNES in 26 patients, epilepsy in 11 patients, physiologic non-epileptic events in three patients, and a PNES with physiologic non-epileptic events in one patient. Medical history and physical examination predicted a definitive diagnosis by video-EEG monitoring in 31 patients.
The median correct response for a smart phone video was 71.4% for epileptologists and 66.7% for residents. The level of confidence was similar between experts and residents, but those who made a correct diagnosis were slightly more confident. Using a level of confidence of at least five, 78% of epileptologists provided correct identification versus 68% of residents. “This suggests that a gap exists in training relative to viewing semiology for diagnostic implications and supports the ongoing need for education in patients with ’events‘”, said Dr. Tatum and colleagues.
The overall quality of smartphone videos was considered adequate for interpretation in 78% of patients. Inter-subject differences were present mainly based upon technical limitations as opposed to video quality. The primary technical limitation was lack of focus on the area of the interest. Researchers concluded that the “secure uploading, exchange, and analysis of smartphone video data in patients with paroxysmal neurological events is feasible.” No safety concerns or complications of taking smartphone videos were reported.
—Erica Tricarico
WASHINGTON, DC—Smartphone videos may help to support the clinical diagnosis of psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES), according to research presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. However, smartphone videos do not replace the need for video-EEG monitoring, researchers noted. “Smartphone videos are a complementary addition to medical history and physical examinations in the outpatient epilepsy clinic and can help triage hospital admission for video EEG-monitoring,” said William O. Tatum, DO, Professor of Neurology at the Mayo Clinic
Video-EEG monitoring is the standard technique for a definitive diagnosis in patients with suspected seizures. Approximately 20% to 30% of patients admitted to the video-EEG monitoring unit are misdiagnosed with epilepsy, however. In addition, expertise availability, cost, and resource utilization of video-EEG monitoring is limited. Patient-generated videos can potentially address these limitations.
A Multicenter Blinded Trial
Dr. Tatum and colleagues conducted a prospective, multicenter, blinded trial to determine the usefulness of outpatient smartphone videos in epilepsy evaluation. Investigators evaluated 41 consecutive patients with uncontrolled seizures (13 participants were male; mean age was 43.7). Patients were excluded if they were younger than 18, had an incomplete medical history and physical examination, had an atypical event, had an inadequate smartphone video, had an unconfirmed video-EEG monitoring diagnosis, or if they did not consent.
Medical history and physical examinations, smartphone videos, and video-EEG monitoring were performed from July 2014 to November 2017. Treating physicians reached a final clinical diagnosis of epilepsy, PNES, or physiologic non-epileptic events using a degree of certainty (scale: 0–10). Ten epileptologists and eight general neurology residents without a special interest in epilepsy were surveyed for a blinded smartphone video diagnosis.
Researchers shared data via HIPPA-protected data transfer utilizing web-based software. The history and physical exams, smartphone videos, and video-EEG monitoring results were obtained using survey forms and were then compared. Finally, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were analyzed.
Most Smartphone Videos Showed Nonconvulsive Seizures
Epileptologists performed 310 smartphone video reads and residents performed 230 smartphone video reads. Smartphone videos were reviewed in 2.15 minutes compared with 60 minutes for medical history and physicals and 2.54 days for video-EEG monitoring. Most semiology was convulsive and most epilepsy was nonconvulsive. Physicians made a final diagnosis of PNES in 26 patients, epilepsy in 11 patients, physiologic non-epileptic events in three patients, and a PNES with physiologic non-epileptic events in one patient. Medical history and physical examination predicted a definitive diagnosis by video-EEG monitoring in 31 patients.
The median correct response for a smart phone video was 71.4% for epileptologists and 66.7% for residents. The level of confidence was similar between experts and residents, but those who made a correct diagnosis were slightly more confident. Using a level of confidence of at least five, 78% of epileptologists provided correct identification versus 68% of residents. “This suggests that a gap exists in training relative to viewing semiology for diagnostic implications and supports the ongoing need for education in patients with ’events‘”, said Dr. Tatum and colleagues.
The overall quality of smartphone videos was considered adequate for interpretation in 78% of patients. Inter-subject differences were present mainly based upon technical limitations as opposed to video quality. The primary technical limitation was lack of focus on the area of the interest. Researchers concluded that the “secure uploading, exchange, and analysis of smartphone video data in patients with paroxysmal neurological events is feasible.” No safety concerns or complications of taking smartphone videos were reported.
—Erica Tricarico
WASHINGTON, DC—Smartphone videos may help to support the clinical diagnosis of psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES), according to research presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. However, smartphone videos do not replace the need for video-EEG monitoring, researchers noted. “Smartphone videos are a complementary addition to medical history and physical examinations in the outpatient epilepsy clinic and can help triage hospital admission for video EEG-monitoring,” said William O. Tatum, DO, Professor of Neurology at the Mayo Clinic
Video-EEG monitoring is the standard technique for a definitive diagnosis in patients with suspected seizures. Approximately 20% to 30% of patients admitted to the video-EEG monitoring unit are misdiagnosed with epilepsy, however. In addition, expertise availability, cost, and resource utilization of video-EEG monitoring is limited. Patient-generated videos can potentially address these limitations.
A Multicenter Blinded Trial
Dr. Tatum and colleagues conducted a prospective, multicenter, blinded trial to determine the usefulness of outpatient smartphone videos in epilepsy evaluation. Investigators evaluated 41 consecutive patients with uncontrolled seizures (13 participants were male; mean age was 43.7). Patients were excluded if they were younger than 18, had an incomplete medical history and physical examination, had an atypical event, had an inadequate smartphone video, had an unconfirmed video-EEG monitoring diagnosis, or if they did not consent.
Medical history and physical examinations, smartphone videos, and video-EEG monitoring were performed from July 2014 to November 2017. Treating physicians reached a final clinical diagnosis of epilepsy, PNES, or physiologic non-epileptic events using a degree of certainty (scale: 0–10). Ten epileptologists and eight general neurology residents without a special interest in epilepsy were surveyed for a blinded smartphone video diagnosis.
Researchers shared data via HIPPA-protected data transfer utilizing web-based software. The history and physical exams, smartphone videos, and video-EEG monitoring results were obtained using survey forms and were then compared. Finally, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were analyzed.
Most Smartphone Videos Showed Nonconvulsive Seizures
Epileptologists performed 310 smartphone video reads and residents performed 230 smartphone video reads. Smartphone videos were reviewed in 2.15 minutes compared with 60 minutes for medical history and physicals and 2.54 days for video-EEG monitoring. Most semiology was convulsive and most epilepsy was nonconvulsive. Physicians made a final diagnosis of PNES in 26 patients, epilepsy in 11 patients, physiologic non-epileptic events in three patients, and a PNES with physiologic non-epileptic events in one patient. Medical history and physical examination predicted a definitive diagnosis by video-EEG monitoring in 31 patients.
The median correct response for a smart phone video was 71.4% for epileptologists and 66.7% for residents. The level of confidence was similar between experts and residents, but those who made a correct diagnosis were slightly more confident. Using a level of confidence of at least five, 78% of epileptologists provided correct identification versus 68% of residents. “This suggests that a gap exists in training relative to viewing semiology for diagnostic implications and supports the ongoing need for education in patients with ’events‘”, said Dr. Tatum and colleagues.
The overall quality of smartphone videos was considered adequate for interpretation in 78% of patients. Inter-subject differences were present mainly based upon technical limitations as opposed to video quality. The primary technical limitation was lack of focus on the area of the interest. Researchers concluded that the “secure uploading, exchange, and analysis of smartphone video data in patients with paroxysmal neurological events is feasible.” No safety concerns or complications of taking smartphone videos were reported.
—Erica Tricarico
The Placebo Effect May be Overrated
Clinical trials that evaluate experimental treatment for patients with epilepsy often produce large placebo effects, but a recent database analysis suggests that what appears like a placebo effect may in fact result from the natural variability in patients’ response to treatment.
- Researchers conducted clinical trial simulations using data from sources including a large patient-managed seizure tracking diary database called SeizureTracker.com, a clinical trial that looked at transcranial magnetic stimulation, and a seizure diary dataset called NeuroVista, which tracks longitudinal intracranial monitoring.
- The analysis measured 50% responder rates and median percentage change.
- The clinical trial simulations were performed in 2 directions; it measured outcomes with time running forward and in reverse, ie, moving backwards from baseline through titration, to treatment.
- The analysis found that temporal reversal didn’t prevent large 50% responder rates, suggesting that what appears to be a placebo effect in clinical trials is in fact normal variability in the way patients respond to active treatment.
A multi-dataset time-reversal approach to clinical trial placebo response and the relationship to natural variability in epilepsy. Seizure. 2017; 53:31-36. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seizure.2017.10.016.
Clinical trials that evaluate experimental treatment for patients with epilepsy often produce large placebo effects, but a recent database analysis suggests that what appears like a placebo effect may in fact result from the natural variability in patients’ response to treatment.
- Researchers conducted clinical trial simulations using data from sources including a large patient-managed seizure tracking diary database called SeizureTracker.com, a clinical trial that looked at transcranial magnetic stimulation, and a seizure diary dataset called NeuroVista, which tracks longitudinal intracranial monitoring.
- The analysis measured 50% responder rates and median percentage change.
- The clinical trial simulations were performed in 2 directions; it measured outcomes with time running forward and in reverse, ie, moving backwards from baseline through titration, to treatment.
- The analysis found that temporal reversal didn’t prevent large 50% responder rates, suggesting that what appears to be a placebo effect in clinical trials is in fact normal variability in the way patients respond to active treatment.
A multi-dataset time-reversal approach to clinical trial placebo response and the relationship to natural variability in epilepsy. Seizure. 2017; 53:31-36. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seizure.2017.10.016.
Clinical trials that evaluate experimental treatment for patients with epilepsy often produce large placebo effects, but a recent database analysis suggests that what appears like a placebo effect may in fact result from the natural variability in patients’ response to treatment.
- Researchers conducted clinical trial simulations using data from sources including a large patient-managed seizure tracking diary database called SeizureTracker.com, a clinical trial that looked at transcranial magnetic stimulation, and a seizure diary dataset called NeuroVista, which tracks longitudinal intracranial monitoring.
- The analysis measured 50% responder rates and median percentage change.
- The clinical trial simulations were performed in 2 directions; it measured outcomes with time running forward and in reverse, ie, moving backwards from baseline through titration, to treatment.
- The analysis found that temporal reversal didn’t prevent large 50% responder rates, suggesting that what appears to be a placebo effect in clinical trials is in fact normal variability in the way patients respond to active treatment.
A multi-dataset time-reversal approach to clinical trial placebo response and the relationship to natural variability in epilepsy. Seizure. 2017; 53:31-36. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seizure.2017.10.016.
Lower residual RA activity after initial ETN-MTX, better remission chance
There are four factors at baseline in adults with moderately active rheumatoid arthritis that predict those who are most likely to achieve remission with full-dose combo etanercept-methotrexate (ETN-MTX) induction treatment, said Josef S. Smolen, MD, of the University of Vienna, and his associates.
The original PRESERVE study found that after 604 adults with moderately active rheumatoid arthritis achieved low disease activity after 36 weeks of full-dose etanercept (50 mg once weekly) plus methotrexate, subsequent full-dose or reduced-dose (25 mg once weekly) ETN-MTX combos were better at maintaining remission than was methotrexate alone. At the time of the original study, a Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) less than 2.6 was considered to denote remission in practice and clinical trials; now that the American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean definition of remission has been published, a DAS28 less than 2.6 no longer indicates remission according to ACR/EULAR criteria, but rather indicates minimal disease activity, the investigators explained.
This study aimed to determine predictors of remission, the researchers said in their article published in Arthritis Research & Therapy.
Those predictors at baseline are young age; body mass index less than 30 kg/m2; lower Health Assessment Questionnaire scores; and lower disease activity – as measured by DAS28, Simplified Disease Activity Index, and Clinical Disease Activity Index.
If the predictors are favorable and the patients have an “early, strong, and durable response to induction therapy, they are most likely to experience a sustained response after biologic tapering or withdrawal,” Dr. Smolen and his associates said.
In other words, the investigators found that, the lower the residual disease activity, the greater the chance of an enduring response.
“Our findings suggest that patients who did not achieve sustained remission in the open-label period and had higher DAS28 at week 36 were more likely to lose remission with maintenance therapy in the double-blind period. Not surprisingly, patients who achieved remission at only week 36, those who sustained remission at only weeks 28 and 36, and those who sustained remission at only weeks 20, 28, and 36, were at higher risk for loss of remission than patients who sustained remission from week 12 to week 36, indicating that depth of disease control is an important predictor of remission loss,” noted Dr. Smolen and his colleagues.
This study was sponsored by Pfizer. Dr. Smolen has received research grants and consulting fees from AbbVie, Pfizer, Roche, and other biopharmaceutical companies. Several of the investigators are employees of Pfizer and hold Pfizer stock. Another author is an employee of inVentiv Health and was contracted by Pfizer to provide statistical support.
SOURCE: Smolen JS et al. Arthritis Res Ther. doi: 10.1186/s13075-017-1484-9.
There are four factors at baseline in adults with moderately active rheumatoid arthritis that predict those who are most likely to achieve remission with full-dose combo etanercept-methotrexate (ETN-MTX) induction treatment, said Josef S. Smolen, MD, of the University of Vienna, and his associates.
The original PRESERVE study found that after 604 adults with moderately active rheumatoid arthritis achieved low disease activity after 36 weeks of full-dose etanercept (50 mg once weekly) plus methotrexate, subsequent full-dose or reduced-dose (25 mg once weekly) ETN-MTX combos were better at maintaining remission than was methotrexate alone. At the time of the original study, a Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) less than 2.6 was considered to denote remission in practice and clinical trials; now that the American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean definition of remission has been published, a DAS28 less than 2.6 no longer indicates remission according to ACR/EULAR criteria, but rather indicates minimal disease activity, the investigators explained.
This study aimed to determine predictors of remission, the researchers said in their article published in Arthritis Research & Therapy.
Those predictors at baseline are young age; body mass index less than 30 kg/m2; lower Health Assessment Questionnaire scores; and lower disease activity – as measured by DAS28, Simplified Disease Activity Index, and Clinical Disease Activity Index.
If the predictors are favorable and the patients have an “early, strong, and durable response to induction therapy, they are most likely to experience a sustained response after biologic tapering or withdrawal,” Dr. Smolen and his associates said.
In other words, the investigators found that, the lower the residual disease activity, the greater the chance of an enduring response.
“Our findings suggest that patients who did not achieve sustained remission in the open-label period and had higher DAS28 at week 36 were more likely to lose remission with maintenance therapy in the double-blind period. Not surprisingly, patients who achieved remission at only week 36, those who sustained remission at only weeks 28 and 36, and those who sustained remission at only weeks 20, 28, and 36, were at higher risk for loss of remission than patients who sustained remission from week 12 to week 36, indicating that depth of disease control is an important predictor of remission loss,” noted Dr. Smolen and his colleagues.
This study was sponsored by Pfizer. Dr. Smolen has received research grants and consulting fees from AbbVie, Pfizer, Roche, and other biopharmaceutical companies. Several of the investigators are employees of Pfizer and hold Pfizer stock. Another author is an employee of inVentiv Health and was contracted by Pfizer to provide statistical support.
SOURCE: Smolen JS et al. Arthritis Res Ther. doi: 10.1186/s13075-017-1484-9.
There are four factors at baseline in adults with moderately active rheumatoid arthritis that predict those who are most likely to achieve remission with full-dose combo etanercept-methotrexate (ETN-MTX) induction treatment, said Josef S. Smolen, MD, of the University of Vienna, and his associates.
The original PRESERVE study found that after 604 adults with moderately active rheumatoid arthritis achieved low disease activity after 36 weeks of full-dose etanercept (50 mg once weekly) plus methotrexate, subsequent full-dose or reduced-dose (25 mg once weekly) ETN-MTX combos were better at maintaining remission than was methotrexate alone. At the time of the original study, a Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) less than 2.6 was considered to denote remission in practice and clinical trials; now that the American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism (ACR/EULAR) Boolean definition of remission has been published, a DAS28 less than 2.6 no longer indicates remission according to ACR/EULAR criteria, but rather indicates minimal disease activity, the investigators explained.
This study aimed to determine predictors of remission, the researchers said in their article published in Arthritis Research & Therapy.
Those predictors at baseline are young age; body mass index less than 30 kg/m2; lower Health Assessment Questionnaire scores; and lower disease activity – as measured by DAS28, Simplified Disease Activity Index, and Clinical Disease Activity Index.
If the predictors are favorable and the patients have an “early, strong, and durable response to induction therapy, they are most likely to experience a sustained response after biologic tapering or withdrawal,” Dr. Smolen and his associates said.
In other words, the investigators found that, the lower the residual disease activity, the greater the chance of an enduring response.
“Our findings suggest that patients who did not achieve sustained remission in the open-label period and had higher DAS28 at week 36 were more likely to lose remission with maintenance therapy in the double-blind period. Not surprisingly, patients who achieved remission at only week 36, those who sustained remission at only weeks 28 and 36, and those who sustained remission at only weeks 20, 28, and 36, were at higher risk for loss of remission than patients who sustained remission from week 12 to week 36, indicating that depth of disease control is an important predictor of remission loss,” noted Dr. Smolen and his colleagues.
This study was sponsored by Pfizer. Dr. Smolen has received research grants and consulting fees from AbbVie, Pfizer, Roche, and other biopharmaceutical companies. Several of the investigators are employees of Pfizer and hold Pfizer stock. Another author is an employee of inVentiv Health and was contracted by Pfizer to provide statistical support.
SOURCE: Smolen JS et al. Arthritis Res Ther. doi: 10.1186/s13075-017-1484-9.
FROM ARTHRITIS RESEARCH & THERAPY
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Predictors of remission at baseline are young age; BMI less than 30 kg/m2; lower HAQ scores; and lower disease activity – as measured by DAS28, SDAI, and CDAI.
Study details: Post hoc analysis of 604 patients with moderately active rheumatoid arthritis from the PRESERVE trial.
Disclosures: This study was sponsored by Pfizer. Dr. Smolen has received research grants and consulting fees from AbbVie, Pfizer, Roche, and other biopharmaceutical companies. Several of the investigators are employees of Pfizer and hold Pfizer stock. Another author is an employee of inVentiv Health and was contracted by Pfizer to provide statistical support.
Source: Smolen JS et al. Arthritis Res Ther. doi: 10.1186/s13075-017-1484-9.
EEG vs MRI for Locating Epileptic Lesions
Ictal electroencephalography (EEG) does not appear to help determine the best approach to surgery in pediatric patients if magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings and other presurgical data have pinpointed the epileptogenic focus, according to retrospective analysis that included 115 children.
- Investigators looked at children with epilepsy who had surgical resection based on a lesion that was identified by MRI and corroborated by other presurgical findings.
- Ictal video EEG findings were divided into 2 groups; ictal EEG findings were labeled “positive” if the identified location of the lesion agreed with the location indicated by the MRI, or “negative” if results were discordant with the MRI findings.
- The analysis found no differences in seizure-free outcomes when negative and positive EEGs were compared.
- A positive ictal EEG was not linked with better clinical outcomes regardless of the surgical site or the pathology of the lesion.
- EEGs had limited predictive value, which prompted researchers to question whether they are worth doing if MRI findings and related presurgical data confirm the location of the epileptogenic site.
MRI supersedes ictal EEG when other presurgical data are concordant. Seizure. 2017; 53:18-22. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seizure.2017.10.013.
Ictal electroencephalography (EEG) does not appear to help determine the best approach to surgery in pediatric patients if magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings and other presurgical data have pinpointed the epileptogenic focus, according to retrospective analysis that included 115 children.
- Investigators looked at children with epilepsy who had surgical resection based on a lesion that was identified by MRI and corroborated by other presurgical findings.
- Ictal video EEG findings were divided into 2 groups; ictal EEG findings were labeled “positive” if the identified location of the lesion agreed with the location indicated by the MRI, or “negative” if results were discordant with the MRI findings.
- The analysis found no differences in seizure-free outcomes when negative and positive EEGs were compared.
- A positive ictal EEG was not linked with better clinical outcomes regardless of the surgical site or the pathology of the lesion.
- EEGs had limited predictive value, which prompted researchers to question whether they are worth doing if MRI findings and related presurgical data confirm the location of the epileptogenic site.
MRI supersedes ictal EEG when other presurgical data are concordant. Seizure. 2017; 53:18-22. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seizure.2017.10.013.
Ictal electroencephalography (EEG) does not appear to help determine the best approach to surgery in pediatric patients if magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings and other presurgical data have pinpointed the epileptogenic focus, according to retrospective analysis that included 115 children.
- Investigators looked at children with epilepsy who had surgical resection based on a lesion that was identified by MRI and corroborated by other presurgical findings.
- Ictal video EEG findings were divided into 2 groups; ictal EEG findings were labeled “positive” if the identified location of the lesion agreed with the location indicated by the MRI, or “negative” if results were discordant with the MRI findings.
- The analysis found no differences in seizure-free outcomes when negative and positive EEGs were compared.
- A positive ictal EEG was not linked with better clinical outcomes regardless of the surgical site or the pathology of the lesion.
- EEGs had limited predictive value, which prompted researchers to question whether they are worth doing if MRI findings and related presurgical data confirm the location of the epileptogenic site.
MRI supersedes ictal EEG when other presurgical data are concordant. Seizure. 2017; 53:18-22. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seizure.2017.10.013.
Patient Questionnaires May Help Separate PNES from Epilepsy
Telling the difference between epilepsy and psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (PNES) has always been a challenge, especially in low-resource clinical settings in which video-electroencephalography (EEG) monitoring is not available. Patient questionnaires may help differentiate the 2 conditions, suggests a recent study.
- Investigators gave adult patients and eyewitnesses questionnaires that discussed subjective experiences and vulnerabilities, including signs, symptoms, and risk factors.
- They also calculated specificity and sensitivity for each measured variable, comparing the responses of patients and eyewitnesses to the final diagnosis.
- The study generated 28 useful patient questionnaires, including 17 from patients who had PNES and 11 who had epileptic seizures.
- The analysis uncovered 7 variables that had both high sensitivity and specificity scores, and 5 of these markers were found to be statistically significant diagnostic predictors.
- The most indicative items on the questionnaires included head injury, physical abuse, chronic fatigue, heart racing, and tingling or numbness.
- The analysis also yielded 16 useful eyewitness questionnaires, which found side-to-side head movements and closed eyes as statistically significant markers.
Patients’ and caregivers’ contributions for differentiating epileptic from psychogenic nonepileptic seizures. Value and limitations of self-reporting questionnaires: A pilot study. Seizure. 2017;53:66-71. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seizure.2017.11.001.
Telling the difference between epilepsy and psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (PNES) has always been a challenge, especially in low-resource clinical settings in which video-electroencephalography (EEG) monitoring is not available. Patient questionnaires may help differentiate the 2 conditions, suggests a recent study.
- Investigators gave adult patients and eyewitnesses questionnaires that discussed subjective experiences and vulnerabilities, including signs, symptoms, and risk factors.
- They also calculated specificity and sensitivity for each measured variable, comparing the responses of patients and eyewitnesses to the final diagnosis.
- The study generated 28 useful patient questionnaires, including 17 from patients who had PNES and 11 who had epileptic seizures.
- The analysis uncovered 7 variables that had both high sensitivity and specificity scores, and 5 of these markers were found to be statistically significant diagnostic predictors.
- The most indicative items on the questionnaires included head injury, physical abuse, chronic fatigue, heart racing, and tingling or numbness.
- The analysis also yielded 16 useful eyewitness questionnaires, which found side-to-side head movements and closed eyes as statistically significant markers.
Patients’ and caregivers’ contributions for differentiating epileptic from psychogenic nonepileptic seizures. Value and limitations of self-reporting questionnaires: A pilot study. Seizure. 2017;53:66-71. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seizure.2017.11.001.
Telling the difference between epilepsy and psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (PNES) has always been a challenge, especially in low-resource clinical settings in which video-electroencephalography (EEG) monitoring is not available. Patient questionnaires may help differentiate the 2 conditions, suggests a recent study.
- Investigators gave adult patients and eyewitnesses questionnaires that discussed subjective experiences and vulnerabilities, including signs, symptoms, and risk factors.
- They also calculated specificity and sensitivity for each measured variable, comparing the responses of patients and eyewitnesses to the final diagnosis.
- The study generated 28 useful patient questionnaires, including 17 from patients who had PNES and 11 who had epileptic seizures.
- The analysis uncovered 7 variables that had both high sensitivity and specificity scores, and 5 of these markers were found to be statistically significant diagnostic predictors.
- The most indicative items on the questionnaires included head injury, physical abuse, chronic fatigue, heart racing, and tingling or numbness.
- The analysis also yielded 16 useful eyewitness questionnaires, which found side-to-side head movements and closed eyes as statistically significant markers.
Patients’ and caregivers’ contributions for differentiating epileptic from psychogenic nonepileptic seizures. Value and limitations of self-reporting questionnaires: A pilot study. Seizure. 2017;53:66-71. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seizure.2017.11.001.
In Reference to “The Weekend Effect in Hospitalized Patients: A Meta-Analysis”
The prevalent reason offered for increased mortality rates during weekend hours are shortages in staffing and services. The “weekend effect,” elucidated by Pauls et al.1 in their recent meta-analysis, and the accompanying editorial by Quinn and Bell,2 highlight these and other potential causes for this anomaly.
Pauls et al.1 also cite patient selection bias as a possible explanation for the uptick in deaths during this span (off-hour admissions may be sicker). It is due to the latter that we wish to highlight additional studies published after mid-2013 when the authors concluded their search.
Recent disputes within the UK’s National Health Service3 concerning health system funding spurred timely papers in BMJ4 and Lancet5 on the uncertainty. They both discovered a stronger signal from patient characteristics admitted during this time rather than on-hand resources and workforce. These new investigations strengthen the support for patient acuity as a determinant in explaining worse outcomes.
We highlight these manuscripts so investigators will continue their attempts to understand the weekend phenomena as suggested by both Pauls et al.1 and the editorialists.2 To allow for the delivery of correct interventions, we must understand its root causes. In this case, it may be the unique features of patients presenting on Saturdays and Sundays and, hence, would require a different set of process changes.
Disclosure: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
1. Pauls L, Johnson-Paben R, McGready J, Murphy J, Pronovost P, Wu C. The weekend effect in hospitalized patients: A meta-analysis. J Hosp Med. 2017;12(9):760-766. PubMed
2. Quinn K, Bell C. Does the week-end justify the means? J Hosp Med. 2017;12(9):779-780. PubMed
3. Weaver M. Junior Doctors: Jeremy Hunt says five-day strike will be ‘worst in NHS history.’ The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/sep/01/jeremy-hunt-five-day-doctors-strike-worst-in-nhs-history. Accessed September 20, 2017.
4. Freemantle N, Ray D, McNulty D, et al. Increased mortality associated with weekend hospital admission: a case for expanded seven day services? BMJ. 2015;351:h4596. doi:10.1136/bmj.h4598. PubMed
5. Walker S, Mason A, Phuong Quan T, et al. Mortality risks associated with emergency admissions during weekends and public holidays: an analysis of electronic health records. The Lancet. 2017;390(10089):62-72. PubMed
The prevalent reason offered for increased mortality rates during weekend hours are shortages in staffing and services. The “weekend effect,” elucidated by Pauls et al.1 in their recent meta-analysis, and the accompanying editorial by Quinn and Bell,2 highlight these and other potential causes for this anomaly.
Pauls et al.1 also cite patient selection bias as a possible explanation for the uptick in deaths during this span (off-hour admissions may be sicker). It is due to the latter that we wish to highlight additional studies published after mid-2013 when the authors concluded their search.
Recent disputes within the UK’s National Health Service3 concerning health system funding spurred timely papers in BMJ4 and Lancet5 on the uncertainty. They both discovered a stronger signal from patient characteristics admitted during this time rather than on-hand resources and workforce. These new investigations strengthen the support for patient acuity as a determinant in explaining worse outcomes.
We highlight these manuscripts so investigators will continue their attempts to understand the weekend phenomena as suggested by both Pauls et al.1 and the editorialists.2 To allow for the delivery of correct interventions, we must understand its root causes. In this case, it may be the unique features of patients presenting on Saturdays and Sundays and, hence, would require a different set of process changes.
Disclosure: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
The prevalent reason offered for increased mortality rates during weekend hours are shortages in staffing and services. The “weekend effect,” elucidated by Pauls et al.1 in their recent meta-analysis, and the accompanying editorial by Quinn and Bell,2 highlight these and other potential causes for this anomaly.
Pauls et al.1 also cite patient selection bias as a possible explanation for the uptick in deaths during this span (off-hour admissions may be sicker). It is due to the latter that we wish to highlight additional studies published after mid-2013 when the authors concluded their search.
Recent disputes within the UK’s National Health Service3 concerning health system funding spurred timely papers in BMJ4 and Lancet5 on the uncertainty. They both discovered a stronger signal from patient characteristics admitted during this time rather than on-hand resources and workforce. These new investigations strengthen the support for patient acuity as a determinant in explaining worse outcomes.
We highlight these manuscripts so investigators will continue their attempts to understand the weekend phenomena as suggested by both Pauls et al.1 and the editorialists.2 To allow for the delivery of correct interventions, we must understand its root causes. In this case, it may be the unique features of patients presenting on Saturdays and Sundays and, hence, would require a different set of process changes.
Disclosure: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
1. Pauls L, Johnson-Paben R, McGready J, Murphy J, Pronovost P, Wu C. The weekend effect in hospitalized patients: A meta-analysis. J Hosp Med. 2017;12(9):760-766. PubMed
2. Quinn K, Bell C. Does the week-end justify the means? J Hosp Med. 2017;12(9):779-780. PubMed
3. Weaver M. Junior Doctors: Jeremy Hunt says five-day strike will be ‘worst in NHS history.’ The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/sep/01/jeremy-hunt-five-day-doctors-strike-worst-in-nhs-history. Accessed September 20, 2017.
4. Freemantle N, Ray D, McNulty D, et al. Increased mortality associated with weekend hospital admission: a case for expanded seven day services? BMJ. 2015;351:h4596. doi:10.1136/bmj.h4598. PubMed
5. Walker S, Mason A, Phuong Quan T, et al. Mortality risks associated with emergency admissions during weekends and public holidays: an analysis of electronic health records. The Lancet. 2017;390(10089):62-72. PubMed
1. Pauls L, Johnson-Paben R, McGready J, Murphy J, Pronovost P, Wu C. The weekend effect in hospitalized patients: A meta-analysis. J Hosp Med. 2017;12(9):760-766. PubMed
2. Quinn K, Bell C. Does the week-end justify the means? J Hosp Med. 2017;12(9):779-780. PubMed
3. Weaver M. Junior Doctors: Jeremy Hunt says five-day strike will be ‘worst in NHS history.’ The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/sep/01/jeremy-hunt-five-day-doctors-strike-worst-in-nhs-history. Accessed September 20, 2017.
4. Freemantle N, Ray D, McNulty D, et al. Increased mortality associated with weekend hospital admission: a case for expanded seven day services? BMJ. 2015;351:h4596. doi:10.1136/bmj.h4598. PubMed
5. Walker S, Mason A, Phuong Quan T, et al. Mortality risks associated with emergency admissions during weekends and public holidays: an analysis of electronic health records. The Lancet. 2017;390(10089):62-72. PubMed
© 2018 Society of Hospital Medicine
Low-dose rituximab cuts infection risk
Treating rheumatoid arthritis patients with lower doses of rituximab for long-term maintenance reduced the risk of serious infections and saved money, based on data from approximately 1,200 patients in a French registry.
In a study published in Rheumatology, Julien Henry, MD, of Institut pour la Sante et la Recherche Medicale, Paris, and colleagues reviewed data from 1,278 patients; 1,093 (85.5%) received a standard dose of rituximab, and 185 (14.5%) received a reduced dose for maintenance therapy. A standard dose was 1,000 mg per infusion given in two infusions 2 weeks apart), and a reduced dose was 500 mg per infusion given in two infusions 2 weeks apart.
After 5 years, maintenance was 55.5% in the standard group and 53.8% in the reduced group; with no significant difference (hazard ratio, 1.03). However, the cumulative dose for retreatment was 39% less in the reduced group (1.4 g per year vs. 2.3 g per year), “which is greatly cost effective,” the researchers wrote.
In addition, the rate of serious infections was significantly lower in the reduced-dose group, compared with the standard-dose group (2.2 per 100 patient-years vs. 4.1 per 100 patient-years; adjusted hazard ratio = 0.50).
“Of note, factors associated with risk of serious infection, such as baseline low gamma globulin or IgG levels, chronic lung or cardiac disease, and extra-articular involvement, did not differ between groups,” the researchers said.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the observational design and lack of data on certain RA outcome measures such as radiographic progression and function, the researchers noted. However, the results support data from similar studies and suggest that a lower dose of rituximab for retreatment of RA “did not alter the maintenance of the treatment at 5 years and is associated with a significant lower rate of serious infections,” they said.
Dr. Henry had no financial conflicts to disclose. Several coauthors disclosed relationships with multiple drug companies, but the study received no specific funding from any of these companies.
SOURCE: Henry J et al. Rheumatology. 2017 Dec 15. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kex446.
Treating rheumatoid arthritis patients with lower doses of rituximab for long-term maintenance reduced the risk of serious infections and saved money, based on data from approximately 1,200 patients in a French registry.
In a study published in Rheumatology, Julien Henry, MD, of Institut pour la Sante et la Recherche Medicale, Paris, and colleagues reviewed data from 1,278 patients; 1,093 (85.5%) received a standard dose of rituximab, and 185 (14.5%) received a reduced dose for maintenance therapy. A standard dose was 1,000 mg per infusion given in two infusions 2 weeks apart), and a reduced dose was 500 mg per infusion given in two infusions 2 weeks apart.
After 5 years, maintenance was 55.5% in the standard group and 53.8% in the reduced group; with no significant difference (hazard ratio, 1.03). However, the cumulative dose for retreatment was 39% less in the reduced group (1.4 g per year vs. 2.3 g per year), “which is greatly cost effective,” the researchers wrote.
In addition, the rate of serious infections was significantly lower in the reduced-dose group, compared with the standard-dose group (2.2 per 100 patient-years vs. 4.1 per 100 patient-years; adjusted hazard ratio = 0.50).
“Of note, factors associated with risk of serious infection, such as baseline low gamma globulin or IgG levels, chronic lung or cardiac disease, and extra-articular involvement, did not differ between groups,” the researchers said.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the observational design and lack of data on certain RA outcome measures such as radiographic progression and function, the researchers noted. However, the results support data from similar studies and suggest that a lower dose of rituximab for retreatment of RA “did not alter the maintenance of the treatment at 5 years and is associated with a significant lower rate of serious infections,” they said.
Dr. Henry had no financial conflicts to disclose. Several coauthors disclosed relationships with multiple drug companies, but the study received no specific funding from any of these companies.
SOURCE: Henry J et al. Rheumatology. 2017 Dec 15. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kex446.
Treating rheumatoid arthritis patients with lower doses of rituximab for long-term maintenance reduced the risk of serious infections and saved money, based on data from approximately 1,200 patients in a French registry.
In a study published in Rheumatology, Julien Henry, MD, of Institut pour la Sante et la Recherche Medicale, Paris, and colleagues reviewed data from 1,278 patients; 1,093 (85.5%) received a standard dose of rituximab, and 185 (14.5%) received a reduced dose for maintenance therapy. A standard dose was 1,000 mg per infusion given in two infusions 2 weeks apart), and a reduced dose was 500 mg per infusion given in two infusions 2 weeks apart.
After 5 years, maintenance was 55.5% in the standard group and 53.8% in the reduced group; with no significant difference (hazard ratio, 1.03). However, the cumulative dose for retreatment was 39% less in the reduced group (1.4 g per year vs. 2.3 g per year), “which is greatly cost effective,” the researchers wrote.
In addition, the rate of serious infections was significantly lower in the reduced-dose group, compared with the standard-dose group (2.2 per 100 patient-years vs. 4.1 per 100 patient-years; adjusted hazard ratio = 0.50).
“Of note, factors associated with risk of serious infection, such as baseline low gamma globulin or IgG levels, chronic lung or cardiac disease, and extra-articular involvement, did not differ between groups,” the researchers said.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the observational design and lack of data on certain RA outcome measures such as radiographic progression and function, the researchers noted. However, the results support data from similar studies and suggest that a lower dose of rituximab for retreatment of RA “did not alter the maintenance of the treatment at 5 years and is associated with a significant lower rate of serious infections,” they said.
Dr. Henry had no financial conflicts to disclose. Several coauthors disclosed relationships with multiple drug companies, but the study received no specific funding from any of these companies.
SOURCE: Henry J et al. Rheumatology. 2017 Dec 15. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kex446.
FROM RHEUMATOLOGY
Key clinical point: A reduced dose of rituximab for RA maintenance resulted in fewer infections and lower cost.
Major finding: A long-term low dose of rituximab for RA patients led to a 39% total dose reduction.
Study details: An observational study of data from 1,278 adult patients in the Autoimmunity and Rituximab registry.
Disclosures: Dr. Henry had no financial conflicts to disclose. Several coauthors disclosed relationships with multiple drug companies, but the study received no specific funding from any of these companies.
Source: Henry J et al. Rheumatology. 2017 Dec 15. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kex446.
Ultrasound could have utility in predicting which RA patients stay in remission
Synovitis detected by ultrasound in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical remission has a moderate but significant independent predictive value for the loss of remission, new research shows.
These findings, reported by Swiss investigators at multiple centers and with different sonographers and ultrasound (US) machines, adds to previous research that has shown that patients in clinical remission with US-detected residual synovitis had a tendency to flare more often and have a shorter duration of remission than did patients with sonographic remission.
“It is currently unknown whether the predictive value of US regarding flares and the duration of remission remains valid in the context of a large group of US assessors using different US machines, as encountered in a real-life setting,” wrote the research team, who conducted the research on behalf of the Swiss Sonography in Arthritis and Rheumatism group and the Swiss Clinical Quality Management in Rheumatic Diseases Foundation.
“Moreover, it remains unclear whether US should be recommended in everyday clinical practice to support therapeutic decisions and to monitor clinical remission,” they added.
In the current study, Dr. Zufferey and his associates analyzed how long 318 RA patients from the Swiss Clinical Quality Management in Rheumatic Diseases cohort remained in remission after they had their first US during remission. The investigators defined loss of remission in this study as either having a 28-joint Disease Activity Score greater than 2.6 or needing to step up treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.
The researchers used a previously validated score developed by the Swiss Sonography in Arthritis and Rheumatism group for the definition of US-detected residual synovitis by using cutoffs for B-mode, Doppler, and combined modes that had been defined by previous studies. For example, the cutoffs for significant US-detected residual synovitis were: B-mode of 2 or more joints with synovitis grade of 2 or greater or a total B-mode score greater than 8 points (max score 66 points) and any Doppler activity inside the joint. A combined US synovitis score was defined as B-mode score greater than 8 and/or any Doppler-detected residual synovitis. Patients in clinical remission with a baseline US score above these cutoffs were considered to have significant US-detected residual synovitis (US+), compared with patients who did not have residual synovitis (US–).
The research team observed a loss of remission in 60% of 378 remission phases, with having a 28-joint Disease Activity Score greater than 2.6 deciding the loss of remission status in 66% of cases in both the US+ and the US– groups.
The time from the first US during remission to loss of remission was 2-5 months longer for US– patients than it was for US+ patients.
“After adjusting for potential confounders, [the hazard ratio] of loss of remission for all remission phases using the complete follow-up time was higher for patients with US-detected synovitis at baseline than for those without (combined US score hazard ratio, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.03-2.00 vs. HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1 for left and right imputation, respectively),” the investigators wrote.
Hazard ratios for the loss of remission also showed a two- to threefold increase when US measurements were taken early in remission (that is, within 3-6 months), a finding that the authors wrote indicated “that the short-term predictive power of US-detected residual synovitis may be more significant than its long-term predictive power.”
The researchers concluded that their study showed that US could be useful in predicting how long patients were likely to remain in remission in “real-life conditions,” but said questions remained over whether it should be used at an individual level.
“According to our results, in particular regarding the moderate HR, a single US done in remission cannot be used as the unique predictor of flare,” they wrote.
Nevertheless, their results may have “some importance in promoting the widespread use of US in real-life conditions for the follow-up of RA, especially when in remission,” they said.
“The next step would be to evaluate whether previous US performed prior to reaching remission and repeated US performed while in remission, particularly after 3-6 months, could provide additional information that is useful to the clinician,” they added.
The Swiss Clinical Quality Management Foundation is supported by the Swiss Society of Rheumatology and nine pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Zufferey P et al. J Rheumatol. 2018 Jan 15. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.161193
Synovitis detected by ultrasound in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical remission has a moderate but significant independent predictive value for the loss of remission, new research shows.
These findings, reported by Swiss investigators at multiple centers and with different sonographers and ultrasound (US) machines, adds to previous research that has shown that patients in clinical remission with US-detected residual synovitis had a tendency to flare more often and have a shorter duration of remission than did patients with sonographic remission.
“It is currently unknown whether the predictive value of US regarding flares and the duration of remission remains valid in the context of a large group of US assessors using different US machines, as encountered in a real-life setting,” wrote the research team, who conducted the research on behalf of the Swiss Sonography in Arthritis and Rheumatism group and the Swiss Clinical Quality Management in Rheumatic Diseases Foundation.
“Moreover, it remains unclear whether US should be recommended in everyday clinical practice to support therapeutic decisions and to monitor clinical remission,” they added.
In the current study, Dr. Zufferey and his associates analyzed how long 318 RA patients from the Swiss Clinical Quality Management in Rheumatic Diseases cohort remained in remission after they had their first US during remission. The investigators defined loss of remission in this study as either having a 28-joint Disease Activity Score greater than 2.6 or needing to step up treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.
The researchers used a previously validated score developed by the Swiss Sonography in Arthritis and Rheumatism group for the definition of US-detected residual synovitis by using cutoffs for B-mode, Doppler, and combined modes that had been defined by previous studies. For example, the cutoffs for significant US-detected residual synovitis were: B-mode of 2 or more joints with synovitis grade of 2 or greater or a total B-mode score greater than 8 points (max score 66 points) and any Doppler activity inside the joint. A combined US synovitis score was defined as B-mode score greater than 8 and/or any Doppler-detected residual synovitis. Patients in clinical remission with a baseline US score above these cutoffs were considered to have significant US-detected residual synovitis (US+), compared with patients who did not have residual synovitis (US–).
The research team observed a loss of remission in 60% of 378 remission phases, with having a 28-joint Disease Activity Score greater than 2.6 deciding the loss of remission status in 66% of cases in both the US+ and the US– groups.
The time from the first US during remission to loss of remission was 2-5 months longer for US– patients than it was for US+ patients.
“After adjusting for potential confounders, [the hazard ratio] of loss of remission for all remission phases using the complete follow-up time was higher for patients with US-detected synovitis at baseline than for those without (combined US score hazard ratio, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.03-2.00 vs. HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1 for left and right imputation, respectively),” the investigators wrote.
Hazard ratios for the loss of remission also showed a two- to threefold increase when US measurements were taken early in remission (that is, within 3-6 months), a finding that the authors wrote indicated “that the short-term predictive power of US-detected residual synovitis may be more significant than its long-term predictive power.”
The researchers concluded that their study showed that US could be useful in predicting how long patients were likely to remain in remission in “real-life conditions,” but said questions remained over whether it should be used at an individual level.
“According to our results, in particular regarding the moderate HR, a single US done in remission cannot be used as the unique predictor of flare,” they wrote.
Nevertheless, their results may have “some importance in promoting the widespread use of US in real-life conditions for the follow-up of RA, especially when in remission,” they said.
“The next step would be to evaluate whether previous US performed prior to reaching remission and repeated US performed while in remission, particularly after 3-6 months, could provide additional information that is useful to the clinician,” they added.
The Swiss Clinical Quality Management Foundation is supported by the Swiss Society of Rheumatology and nine pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Zufferey P et al. J Rheumatol. 2018 Jan 15. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.161193
Synovitis detected by ultrasound in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical remission has a moderate but significant independent predictive value for the loss of remission, new research shows.
These findings, reported by Swiss investigators at multiple centers and with different sonographers and ultrasound (US) machines, adds to previous research that has shown that patients in clinical remission with US-detected residual synovitis had a tendency to flare more often and have a shorter duration of remission than did patients with sonographic remission.
“It is currently unknown whether the predictive value of US regarding flares and the duration of remission remains valid in the context of a large group of US assessors using different US machines, as encountered in a real-life setting,” wrote the research team, who conducted the research on behalf of the Swiss Sonography in Arthritis and Rheumatism group and the Swiss Clinical Quality Management in Rheumatic Diseases Foundation.
“Moreover, it remains unclear whether US should be recommended in everyday clinical practice to support therapeutic decisions and to monitor clinical remission,” they added.
In the current study, Dr. Zufferey and his associates analyzed how long 318 RA patients from the Swiss Clinical Quality Management in Rheumatic Diseases cohort remained in remission after they had their first US during remission. The investigators defined loss of remission in this study as either having a 28-joint Disease Activity Score greater than 2.6 or needing to step up treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs.
The researchers used a previously validated score developed by the Swiss Sonography in Arthritis and Rheumatism group for the definition of US-detected residual synovitis by using cutoffs for B-mode, Doppler, and combined modes that had been defined by previous studies. For example, the cutoffs for significant US-detected residual synovitis were: B-mode of 2 or more joints with synovitis grade of 2 or greater or a total B-mode score greater than 8 points (max score 66 points) and any Doppler activity inside the joint. A combined US synovitis score was defined as B-mode score greater than 8 and/or any Doppler-detected residual synovitis. Patients in clinical remission with a baseline US score above these cutoffs were considered to have significant US-detected residual synovitis (US+), compared with patients who did not have residual synovitis (US–).
The research team observed a loss of remission in 60% of 378 remission phases, with having a 28-joint Disease Activity Score greater than 2.6 deciding the loss of remission status in 66% of cases in both the US+ and the US– groups.
The time from the first US during remission to loss of remission was 2-5 months longer for US– patients than it was for US+ patients.
“After adjusting for potential confounders, [the hazard ratio] of loss of remission for all remission phases using the complete follow-up time was higher for patients with US-detected synovitis at baseline than for those without (combined US score hazard ratio, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.03-2.00 vs. HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1 for left and right imputation, respectively),” the investigators wrote.
Hazard ratios for the loss of remission also showed a two- to threefold increase when US measurements were taken early in remission (that is, within 3-6 months), a finding that the authors wrote indicated “that the short-term predictive power of US-detected residual synovitis may be more significant than its long-term predictive power.”
The researchers concluded that their study showed that US could be useful in predicting how long patients were likely to remain in remission in “real-life conditions,” but said questions remained over whether it should be used at an individual level.
“According to our results, in particular regarding the moderate HR, a single US done in remission cannot be used as the unique predictor of flare,” they wrote.
Nevertheless, their results may have “some importance in promoting the widespread use of US in real-life conditions for the follow-up of RA, especially when in remission,” they said.
“The next step would be to evaluate whether previous US performed prior to reaching remission and repeated US performed while in remission, particularly after 3-6 months, could provide additional information that is useful to the clinician,” they added.
The Swiss Clinical Quality Management Foundation is supported by the Swiss Society of Rheumatology and nine pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Zufferey P et al. J Rheumatol. 2018 Jan 15. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.161193
FROM JOURNAL OF RHEUMATOLOGY
Key clinical point: Ultrasound could be useful in predicting how long patients are likely to remain in remission in “real-life conditions.”
Major finding: Hazard ratios (HRs) for loss of remission were moderately but significantly higher for patients with ultrasound-detected synovitis at baseline than for those without (combined ultrasound score HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.03-2.00 vs. HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1 for left and right imputation, respectively).
Study details: A multicenter cohort study of 318 RA patients from the Swiss Clinical Quality Management cohort.
Disclosures: The Swiss Clinical Quality Management Foundation is supported by the Swiss Society of Rheumatology and nine pharmaceutical companies.
Source: Zufferey P et al. J Rheumatol. 2018 Jan 15. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.161193

