User login
Vaccination does not eliminate risk for meningococcal disease in eculizumab recipients
Patients taking eculizumab are at a significant risk for meningococcal disease even if they have received the quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate (MenACWY) and serogroup B (MenB) meningococcal vaccines, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, released July 7.
Between 2008 and 2016, 16 cases of meningococcal disease were reported in eculizumab users in 10 jurisdictions within the United States. Of those infected, 14 had received MenACWY and MenB vaccines as recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, according to the CDC report.
Required vaccination plus antimicrobial prophylaxis for the duration of eculizumab treatment might reduce the risk for meningococcal disease in these patients, but the addition of antibiotic prophylaxis is no guarantee that all cases of meningococcal disease would be prevented, wrote Lucy A. McNamara, PhD, of the division of bacterial diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC, and her colleagues.
They advised physician and patient vigilance regarding meningococcal disease symptoms and urged that patients be advised to seek immediate care and be rapidly treated, regardless of meningococcal vaccination or antimicrobial prophylaxis status.
Health organizations in Europe, including France and the United Kingdom, are recommending eculizumab users receive penicillin during eculizumab treatment. A recent study of invasive meningococcal isolates in the United States found most were susceptible to penicillin, according to the report.
In the 16 U.S. cases reported, nongroupable Neisseria meningitidis caused meningococcal disease in 11 of the patients, serogroup Y was the cause in 4 patients, and the cause was not identified in 1 patient.
Ten patients had meningococcemia without meningitis, the researchers noted. “Initial symptoms of meningococcemia are often relatively mild and nonspecific and might include fever, chills, fatigue, vomiting, diarrhea, and aches or pains in the muscles, joints, chest, or abdomen; however, these symptoms can progress to severe illness and death within hours.”
Eculizumab (Soliris, Alexion Pharmaceuticals) is licensed in the United States for treatment of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria and atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome, two diseases that are rare and can be fatal.
Eculizumab is associated with a 1,000-fold to 2,000-fold increased incidence of meningococcal disease among persons receiving the drug. The Food and Drug Administration–approved prescribing information includes a boxed warning regarding increased risk for meningococcal disease.
The CDC is collecting reports from state health departments for further analysis of the risk among eculizumab recipients.
The researchers reported having no conflicts of interest.
[email protected]
On Twitter @eaztweets
Patients taking eculizumab are at a significant risk for meningococcal disease even if they have received the quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate (MenACWY) and serogroup B (MenB) meningococcal vaccines, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, released July 7.
Between 2008 and 2016, 16 cases of meningococcal disease were reported in eculizumab users in 10 jurisdictions within the United States. Of those infected, 14 had received MenACWY and MenB vaccines as recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, according to the CDC report.
Required vaccination plus antimicrobial prophylaxis for the duration of eculizumab treatment might reduce the risk for meningococcal disease in these patients, but the addition of antibiotic prophylaxis is no guarantee that all cases of meningococcal disease would be prevented, wrote Lucy A. McNamara, PhD, of the division of bacterial diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC, and her colleagues.
They advised physician and patient vigilance regarding meningococcal disease symptoms and urged that patients be advised to seek immediate care and be rapidly treated, regardless of meningococcal vaccination or antimicrobial prophylaxis status.
Health organizations in Europe, including France and the United Kingdom, are recommending eculizumab users receive penicillin during eculizumab treatment. A recent study of invasive meningococcal isolates in the United States found most were susceptible to penicillin, according to the report.
In the 16 U.S. cases reported, nongroupable Neisseria meningitidis caused meningococcal disease in 11 of the patients, serogroup Y was the cause in 4 patients, and the cause was not identified in 1 patient.
Ten patients had meningococcemia without meningitis, the researchers noted. “Initial symptoms of meningococcemia are often relatively mild and nonspecific and might include fever, chills, fatigue, vomiting, diarrhea, and aches or pains in the muscles, joints, chest, or abdomen; however, these symptoms can progress to severe illness and death within hours.”
Eculizumab (Soliris, Alexion Pharmaceuticals) is licensed in the United States for treatment of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria and atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome, two diseases that are rare and can be fatal.
Eculizumab is associated with a 1,000-fold to 2,000-fold increased incidence of meningococcal disease among persons receiving the drug. The Food and Drug Administration–approved prescribing information includes a boxed warning regarding increased risk for meningococcal disease.
The CDC is collecting reports from state health departments for further analysis of the risk among eculizumab recipients.
The researchers reported having no conflicts of interest.
[email protected]
On Twitter @eaztweets
Patients taking eculizumab are at a significant risk for meningococcal disease even if they have received the quadrivalent meningococcal conjugate (MenACWY) and serogroup B (MenB) meningococcal vaccines, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, released July 7.
Between 2008 and 2016, 16 cases of meningococcal disease were reported in eculizumab users in 10 jurisdictions within the United States. Of those infected, 14 had received MenACWY and MenB vaccines as recommended by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, according to the CDC report.
Required vaccination plus antimicrobial prophylaxis for the duration of eculizumab treatment might reduce the risk for meningococcal disease in these patients, but the addition of antibiotic prophylaxis is no guarantee that all cases of meningococcal disease would be prevented, wrote Lucy A. McNamara, PhD, of the division of bacterial diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC, and her colleagues.
They advised physician and patient vigilance regarding meningococcal disease symptoms and urged that patients be advised to seek immediate care and be rapidly treated, regardless of meningococcal vaccination or antimicrobial prophylaxis status.
Health organizations in Europe, including France and the United Kingdom, are recommending eculizumab users receive penicillin during eculizumab treatment. A recent study of invasive meningococcal isolates in the United States found most were susceptible to penicillin, according to the report.
In the 16 U.S. cases reported, nongroupable Neisseria meningitidis caused meningococcal disease in 11 of the patients, serogroup Y was the cause in 4 patients, and the cause was not identified in 1 patient.
Ten patients had meningococcemia without meningitis, the researchers noted. “Initial symptoms of meningococcemia are often relatively mild and nonspecific and might include fever, chills, fatigue, vomiting, diarrhea, and aches or pains in the muscles, joints, chest, or abdomen; however, these symptoms can progress to severe illness and death within hours.”
Eculizumab (Soliris, Alexion Pharmaceuticals) is licensed in the United States for treatment of paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria and atypical hemolytic uremic syndrome, two diseases that are rare and can be fatal.
Eculizumab is associated with a 1,000-fold to 2,000-fold increased incidence of meningococcal disease among persons receiving the drug. The Food and Drug Administration–approved prescribing information includes a boxed warning regarding increased risk for meningococcal disease.
The CDC is collecting reports from state health departments for further analysis of the risk among eculizumab recipients.
The researchers reported having no conflicts of interest.
[email protected]
On Twitter @eaztweets
FROM MMWR
Standardization lacking in pediatric trials of atopic dermatitis
CHICAGO – There is considerable variability and poor documentation of severity assessments used for inclusion criteria and baseline severity evaluations in randomized, controlled pediatric atopic dermatitis (AD) trials, results from a systematic review showed.
“It is important for clinicians and investigators to recognize that these differences may limit our ability to reproduce trials, interpret individual studies, and compare results between studies of similar target populations for severity,” lead study author Rishi Chopra, MS, said in an interview in advance of the World Congress of Pediatric Dermatology. “Moreover, this heterogeneity should be considered when retroactively pooling results for meta-analyses of pediatric atopic dermatitis randomized, controlled trials.”
In an effort to evaluate the documentation and characterize the severity assessments used in inclusion criteria and baseline evaluations for randomized, controlled trials of pediatric AD internationally, the researchers performed a systematic review of relevant studies contained in the Cochrane Library, Embase, LILACS, GREAT, MEDLINE, and Scopus databases during 2007-2016. Inclusion criteria were RCT with a pharmacological intervention and any comparison with a control group, children, and males or females. In all, 89 studies met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Most (70.8%) were studies of pediatric populations aged 0-17 years, and almost 17% were studies of infants aged 0-1 years. The most common target populations were mild-moderate AD (31.5%), moderate-severe AD (18.0%), or undefined (36.0%).
Mr. Chopra and his associates found that the most commonly used severity indices were Scoring AD (SCORAD) in 29.2%, Body Surface Area (BSA) in 16.9%, and global assessments in 13.4%, while the most common assessments of baseline severity were SCORAD in 43.8%, global assessments in 20.2%, Eczema Area and Severity Index in 17.9%, BSA in 14.6%, and visual itch in 13.5%. Only 85.4% of studies recorded the severity assessments used for recruiting the predefined target population and only 76.4% of studies documented baseline severity.
There was considerable heterogeneity across studies, as 16 unique assessments were used as inclusion criteria and 34 assessments were used to evaluate baseline severity. “In addition, even within an individual study, there was substantial discordance in their use as only 71.2% of studies used the same assessments for inclusion and documenting baseline disease severity,” Mr. Chopra said. “Altogether, this multidimensional lack of documentation and heterogeneity of inclusion criteria and baseline severity assessments limits our ability to assess whether the recruitment methods for patients were adequate and confirm whether the intended target population for severity was successfully enrolled.”
He acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the fact that it may not be generalizable to nonpharmacological interventional trials or noninterventional studies. “In addition, we could only conduct an analysis for studies that provided adequate documentation of inclusion criteria and baseline severity,” Mr. Chopra said. “Thus, those studies that did not provide this information were left out. Nevertheless, across all studies, the uniformity and concordance between assessments likely are even more negatively impacted. It should also be noted that lack of documentation of assessments for inclusion criteria and baseline severity does not imply lack of their utilization. Finally, it is important to acknowledge that AD’s diverse phenotype and relapsing and remitting course may result in the unavoidable heterogeneity of severity assessment use. This may actually help to capture a broader range of disease and improve the external validity of results.”
He reported having no financial disclosures.
CHICAGO – There is considerable variability and poor documentation of severity assessments used for inclusion criteria and baseline severity evaluations in randomized, controlled pediatric atopic dermatitis (AD) trials, results from a systematic review showed.
“It is important for clinicians and investigators to recognize that these differences may limit our ability to reproduce trials, interpret individual studies, and compare results between studies of similar target populations for severity,” lead study author Rishi Chopra, MS, said in an interview in advance of the World Congress of Pediatric Dermatology. “Moreover, this heterogeneity should be considered when retroactively pooling results for meta-analyses of pediatric atopic dermatitis randomized, controlled trials.”
In an effort to evaluate the documentation and characterize the severity assessments used in inclusion criteria and baseline evaluations for randomized, controlled trials of pediatric AD internationally, the researchers performed a systematic review of relevant studies contained in the Cochrane Library, Embase, LILACS, GREAT, MEDLINE, and Scopus databases during 2007-2016. Inclusion criteria were RCT with a pharmacological intervention and any comparison with a control group, children, and males or females. In all, 89 studies met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Most (70.8%) were studies of pediatric populations aged 0-17 years, and almost 17% were studies of infants aged 0-1 years. The most common target populations were mild-moderate AD (31.5%), moderate-severe AD (18.0%), or undefined (36.0%).
Mr. Chopra and his associates found that the most commonly used severity indices were Scoring AD (SCORAD) in 29.2%, Body Surface Area (BSA) in 16.9%, and global assessments in 13.4%, while the most common assessments of baseline severity were SCORAD in 43.8%, global assessments in 20.2%, Eczema Area and Severity Index in 17.9%, BSA in 14.6%, and visual itch in 13.5%. Only 85.4% of studies recorded the severity assessments used for recruiting the predefined target population and only 76.4% of studies documented baseline severity.
There was considerable heterogeneity across studies, as 16 unique assessments were used as inclusion criteria and 34 assessments were used to evaluate baseline severity. “In addition, even within an individual study, there was substantial discordance in their use as only 71.2% of studies used the same assessments for inclusion and documenting baseline disease severity,” Mr. Chopra said. “Altogether, this multidimensional lack of documentation and heterogeneity of inclusion criteria and baseline severity assessments limits our ability to assess whether the recruitment methods for patients were adequate and confirm whether the intended target population for severity was successfully enrolled.”
He acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the fact that it may not be generalizable to nonpharmacological interventional trials or noninterventional studies. “In addition, we could only conduct an analysis for studies that provided adequate documentation of inclusion criteria and baseline severity,” Mr. Chopra said. “Thus, those studies that did not provide this information were left out. Nevertheless, across all studies, the uniformity and concordance between assessments likely are even more negatively impacted. It should also be noted that lack of documentation of assessments for inclusion criteria and baseline severity does not imply lack of their utilization. Finally, it is important to acknowledge that AD’s diverse phenotype and relapsing and remitting course may result in the unavoidable heterogeneity of severity assessment use. This may actually help to capture a broader range of disease and improve the external validity of results.”
He reported having no financial disclosures.
CHICAGO – There is considerable variability and poor documentation of severity assessments used for inclusion criteria and baseline severity evaluations in randomized, controlled pediatric atopic dermatitis (AD) trials, results from a systematic review showed.
“It is important for clinicians and investigators to recognize that these differences may limit our ability to reproduce trials, interpret individual studies, and compare results between studies of similar target populations for severity,” lead study author Rishi Chopra, MS, said in an interview in advance of the World Congress of Pediatric Dermatology. “Moreover, this heterogeneity should be considered when retroactively pooling results for meta-analyses of pediatric atopic dermatitis randomized, controlled trials.”
In an effort to evaluate the documentation and characterize the severity assessments used in inclusion criteria and baseline evaluations for randomized, controlled trials of pediatric AD internationally, the researchers performed a systematic review of relevant studies contained in the Cochrane Library, Embase, LILACS, GREAT, MEDLINE, and Scopus databases during 2007-2016. Inclusion criteria were RCT with a pharmacological intervention and any comparison with a control group, children, and males or females. In all, 89 studies met the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Most (70.8%) were studies of pediatric populations aged 0-17 years, and almost 17% were studies of infants aged 0-1 years. The most common target populations were mild-moderate AD (31.5%), moderate-severe AD (18.0%), or undefined (36.0%).
Mr. Chopra and his associates found that the most commonly used severity indices were Scoring AD (SCORAD) in 29.2%, Body Surface Area (BSA) in 16.9%, and global assessments in 13.4%, while the most common assessments of baseline severity were SCORAD in 43.8%, global assessments in 20.2%, Eczema Area and Severity Index in 17.9%, BSA in 14.6%, and visual itch in 13.5%. Only 85.4% of studies recorded the severity assessments used for recruiting the predefined target population and only 76.4% of studies documented baseline severity.
There was considerable heterogeneity across studies, as 16 unique assessments were used as inclusion criteria and 34 assessments were used to evaluate baseline severity. “In addition, even within an individual study, there was substantial discordance in their use as only 71.2% of studies used the same assessments for inclusion and documenting baseline disease severity,” Mr. Chopra said. “Altogether, this multidimensional lack of documentation and heterogeneity of inclusion criteria and baseline severity assessments limits our ability to assess whether the recruitment methods for patients were adequate and confirm whether the intended target population for severity was successfully enrolled.”
He acknowledged certain limitations of the study, including the fact that it may not be generalizable to nonpharmacological interventional trials or noninterventional studies. “In addition, we could only conduct an analysis for studies that provided adequate documentation of inclusion criteria and baseline severity,” Mr. Chopra said. “Thus, those studies that did not provide this information were left out. Nevertheless, across all studies, the uniformity and concordance between assessments likely are even more negatively impacted. It should also be noted that lack of documentation of assessments for inclusion criteria and baseline severity does not imply lack of their utilization. Finally, it is important to acknowledge that AD’s diverse phenotype and relapsing and remitting course may result in the unavoidable heterogeneity of severity assessment use. This may actually help to capture a broader range of disease and improve the external validity of results.”
He reported having no financial disclosures.
AT WCPD 2017
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Only 85.4% of studies recorded the severity assessments used for recruiting the predefined target population, and only 76.4% of studies documented baseline severity.
Data source: A systematic review of 89 pediatric atopic dermatitis randomized, controlled trials published during 2007-2016.
Disclosures: Mr. Chopra reported having no financial disclosures.
Subset of pediatric herpes simplex virus entails frequent episodes
There’s a newly identified, atypical, but substantial subset of patients: Young children who have frequent episodes of herpes simplex virus (HSV) that may not affect mucosal tissue, often are multifocal, and may require suppressive therapy, according to a report published in Pediatric Dermatology.
“Most of our knowledge of the clinical manifestations of HSV infections in children derives from cases of common mucosal HSV that present to and are treated by primary care providers,” said Julia K. Gittler, MD, and her associates at New York University. 
These cases comprise primary herpetic gingivostomatitis or the well-known orolabial HSV. To characterize the more atypical presentations in the pediatric population, the investigators reviewed the charts of all 48 patients referred to their pediatric dermatology clinic in a 10-year period after receiving a diagnosis of HSV. Only 19% of these patients were older than 11 years of age, and more than 40% were younger than 2 years of age at presentation.
Dr. Gittler and her associates found a “substantial” subset of 19 patients (approximately 40% of the study sample) who had six or more outbreaks per year. Only four patients (8.3%) had one or fewer outbreaks per year. The mean frequency of outbreaks in their study population was seven per year. “Reported triggers for outbreaks included fever, viral infections, sun, cold, stress, vaccinations, and courses of oral corticosteroids for asthma flares,” the investigators said.
Given this high frequency of outbreaks, antiviral therapy was initiated in 16 patients (33%). The average age of this treatment initiation was only 6 years. “In the general population, only approximately 15%-40% of patients with serologic evidence of HSV-1 have recurrent HSV; most of these will have an average of 2 outbreaks per year, and only 5%-10% have more than 6 outbreaks per year,” the investigators wrote (Pediatr Dermatol. 2017. doi: 10.1111/pde.13190).
The majority of the study participants (29 patients) had no labial or mucosal involvement. Approximately 23% had cutaneous involvement of the cheek, “which may have been because the primary infection was acquired through the kiss of a caregiver,” they said. Other sites of cutaneous lesions that were frequent in this population but are considered atypical in general were the ear, forehead, chest, and knees.
Most commonly, the physical examination findings were vesicles or papulovesicles (52%), but crusting (33%), pustules (6%), and erosions (23%) also occurred.
Fully half of the study population had multifocal rather than unifocal presentations.
Atypical presentation of HSV is frequently misdiagnosed as impetigo or herpes zoster, according to reports in the literature. Fifteen (31%) patients in this study had a previous misdiagnosis of impetigo. “These less typical cutaneous presentations of HSV may evade accurate diagnosis and delay initiation of appropriate treatment,” Dr. Gittler and her associates noted.
No financial disclosures were provided for Dr. Gittler and her associates.
There’s a newly identified, atypical, but substantial subset of patients: Young children who have frequent episodes of herpes simplex virus (HSV) that may not affect mucosal tissue, often are multifocal, and may require suppressive therapy, according to a report published in Pediatric Dermatology.
“Most of our knowledge of the clinical manifestations of HSV infections in children derives from cases of common mucosal HSV that present to and are treated by primary care providers,” said Julia K. Gittler, MD, and her associates at New York University.
These cases comprise primary herpetic gingivostomatitis or the well-known orolabial HSV. To characterize the more atypical presentations in the pediatric population, the investigators reviewed the charts of all 48 patients referred to their pediatric dermatology clinic in a 10-year period after receiving a diagnosis of HSV. Only 19% of these patients were older than 11 years of age, and more than 40% were younger than 2 years of age at presentation.
Dr. Gittler and her associates found a “substantial” subset of 19 patients (approximately 40% of the study sample) who had six or more outbreaks per year. Only four patients (8.3%) had one or fewer outbreaks per year. The mean frequency of outbreaks in their study population was seven per year. “Reported triggers for outbreaks included fever, viral infections, sun, cold, stress, vaccinations, and courses of oral corticosteroids for asthma flares,” the investigators said.
Given this high frequency of outbreaks, antiviral therapy was initiated in 16 patients (33%). The average age of this treatment initiation was only 6 years. “In the general population, only approximately 15%-40% of patients with serologic evidence of HSV-1 have recurrent HSV; most of these will have an average of 2 outbreaks per year, and only 5%-10% have more than 6 outbreaks per year,” the investigators wrote (Pediatr Dermatol. 2017. doi: 10.1111/pde.13190).
The majority of the study participants (29 patients) had no labial or mucosal involvement. Approximately 23% had cutaneous involvement of the cheek, “which may have been because the primary infection was acquired through the kiss of a caregiver,” they said. Other sites of cutaneous lesions that were frequent in this population but are considered atypical in general were the ear, forehead, chest, and knees.
Most commonly, the physical examination findings were vesicles or papulovesicles (52%), but crusting (33%), pustules (6%), and erosions (23%) also occurred.
Fully half of the study population had multifocal rather than unifocal presentations.
Atypical presentation of HSV is frequently misdiagnosed as impetigo or herpes zoster, according to reports in the literature. Fifteen (31%) patients in this study had a previous misdiagnosis of impetigo. “These less typical cutaneous presentations of HSV may evade accurate diagnosis and delay initiation of appropriate treatment,” Dr. Gittler and her associates noted.
No financial disclosures were provided for Dr. Gittler and her associates.
There’s a newly identified, atypical, but substantial subset of patients: Young children who have frequent episodes of herpes simplex virus (HSV) that may not affect mucosal tissue, often are multifocal, and may require suppressive therapy, according to a report published in Pediatric Dermatology.
“Most of our knowledge of the clinical manifestations of HSV infections in children derives from cases of common mucosal HSV that present to and are treated by primary care providers,” said Julia K. Gittler, MD, and her associates at New York University.
These cases comprise primary herpetic gingivostomatitis or the well-known orolabial HSV. To characterize the more atypical presentations in the pediatric population, the investigators reviewed the charts of all 48 patients referred to their pediatric dermatology clinic in a 10-year period after receiving a diagnosis of HSV. Only 19% of these patients were older than 11 years of age, and more than 40% were younger than 2 years of age at presentation.
Dr. Gittler and her associates found a “substantial” subset of 19 patients (approximately 40% of the study sample) who had six or more outbreaks per year. Only four patients (8.3%) had one or fewer outbreaks per year. The mean frequency of outbreaks in their study population was seven per year. “Reported triggers for outbreaks included fever, viral infections, sun, cold, stress, vaccinations, and courses of oral corticosteroids for asthma flares,” the investigators said.
Given this high frequency of outbreaks, antiviral therapy was initiated in 16 patients (33%). The average age of this treatment initiation was only 6 years. “In the general population, only approximately 15%-40% of patients with serologic evidence of HSV-1 have recurrent HSV; most of these will have an average of 2 outbreaks per year, and only 5%-10% have more than 6 outbreaks per year,” the investigators wrote (Pediatr Dermatol. 2017. doi: 10.1111/pde.13190).
The majority of the study participants (29 patients) had no labial or mucosal involvement. Approximately 23% had cutaneous involvement of the cheek, “which may have been because the primary infection was acquired through the kiss of a caregiver,” they said. Other sites of cutaneous lesions that were frequent in this population but are considered atypical in general were the ear, forehead, chest, and knees.
Most commonly, the physical examination findings were vesicles or papulovesicles (52%), but crusting (33%), pustules (6%), and erosions (23%) also occurred.
Fully half of the study population had multifocal rather than unifocal presentations.
Atypical presentation of HSV is frequently misdiagnosed as impetigo or herpes zoster, according to reports in the literature. Fifteen (31%) patients in this study had a previous misdiagnosis of impetigo. “These less typical cutaneous presentations of HSV may evade accurate diagnosis and delay initiation of appropriate treatment,” Dr. Gittler and her associates noted.
No financial disclosures were provided for Dr. Gittler and her associates.
FROM PEDIATRIC DERMATOLOGY
Key clinical point:
Major finding: 19 of 48 (40%) patients had six or more HSV outbreaks per year, and the mean frequency of outbreaks in this study population was seven per year.
Data source: Chart review of 48 cases referred to a single pediatric dermatology clinic in a 10-year period.
Disclosures: No financial disclosures were provided for Dr. Gittler and her associates.
Eroded Plaque on the Lower Lip
The Diagnosis: Squamous Cell Carcinoma
The initial clinical presentation suggested a diagnosis of herpes simplex labialis. The patient reported no response to topical acyclovir, and because the plaque persisted, a biopsy was performed. Pathology demonstrated squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) that was moderately well differentiated and invasive (Figure).
Approximately 38% of all oral SCCs in the United States occur on the lower lip and typically are solar-related cancers developing within the epidermis.1 Oral lesions initially may be asymptomatic and may not be of concern to the patient; however, it is important to recognize SCC early, as invasive lesions have the potential to metastasize. Some factors that increase the chance for the development of metastases include tumor size larger than 2 cm; location on the ear, lip, or other sites on the head and neck; and history of prior unsuccessful treatment.2 Any solitary ulcer, lump, wound, or lesion that will not heal and persists for more than 3 weeks should be regarded as cancer until proven otherwise. Although few oral SCCs are detected by clinicians at an early stage, diagnostic aids such as vital staining and molecular markers in tissues and saliva may be implemented.3 Toluidine blue is a simple, fast, and inexpensive technique that stains the nuclear material of malignant lesions, but not normal mucosa, and may be a worthwhile diagnostic adjunct to clinical inspection.4
Our patient presented with a lesion that clinically looked herpetic, though he reported no prodromal signs of tingling, burning, or pain before the occurrence of the lesion. Due to the persistence of the lesion and lack of response to treatment, a biopsy was indicated. The differential diagnoses include aphthous ulcers, which may occasionally extend on to the vermilion border of the lip and exhibit nondiagnostic histology.5 Bullous oral lichen planus is the least common variant of oral lichen planus, is unlikely to present as a solitary lesion, and is rarely seen on the lips. Histologically, the lesion demonstrated lichenoid inflammation.6 Solitary keratoacanthoma, though histologically similar to SCC, typically presents as a rapidly growing crateriform nodule without erosion or ulceration.7 The differential diagnoses are summarized in the Table.
The patient underwent wide excision with repair by mucosal advancement flap. He continues to be regularly seen in the clinic for monitoring of other skin cancers and is doing well. Clinicians encountering any wound or ulcer that does not show signs of healing should be wary of underlying malignancy and be prompted to perform a biopsy.
- Fehrenbach MJ. Extraoral and intraoral clinical assessment. In: Darby ML, Walsh MM, eds. Dental Hygiene: Theory and Practice. 4th ed. St Louis, MO: Elsevier; 2014:214-233.
- Hawrot A, Alam M, Ratner D. Squamous cell carcinoma. Curr Probl Dermatol. 2003;15:91-133.
- Scully C, Bagan J. Oral squamous cell carcinoma overview. Oral Oncol. 2009;45:301-308.
- Chhabra N, Chhabra S, Sapra N. Diagnostic modalities for squamous cell carcinoma: an extensive review of literature considering toluidine blue as a useful adjunct. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;14:188-200.
- Porter SR, Scully C, Pedersen A. Recurrent aphthous stomatitis. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2003;9:1499-1505.
- Bricker SL. Oral lichen planus: a review. Semin Dermatol. 1994;13:87-90.
- Cabrijan L, Lipozencic´ J, Batinac T, et al. Differences between keratoacanthoma and squamous cell carcinoma using TGF-alpha. Coll Antropol. 2013;37:147-150.
- Douglas GD, Couch RB. A prospective study of chronic herpes simplex virus infection and recurrent herpes labialis in humans. J Immunol. 1970;104:289-295.
- Alam M, Ratner D. Cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:976-983.
- van Tuyll van Serooskerken AM, van Marion AM, de Zwart-Storm E, et al. Lichen planus with bullous manifestation on the lip. Int J Dermatol. 2007;46(suppl 3):25-26.
- Messadi DV, Younai F. Apthous ulcers. Dermatol Ther. 2010;23:281-290.
- Ko CJ. Keratoacanthoma: facts and controversies. Clin Dermatol. 2010;28:254-261.
The Diagnosis: Squamous Cell Carcinoma
The initial clinical presentation suggested a diagnosis of herpes simplex labialis. The patient reported no response to topical acyclovir, and because the plaque persisted, a biopsy was performed. Pathology demonstrated squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) that was moderately well differentiated and invasive (Figure).
Approximately 38% of all oral SCCs in the United States occur on the lower lip and typically are solar-related cancers developing within the epidermis.1 Oral lesions initially may be asymptomatic and may not be of concern to the patient; however, it is important to recognize SCC early, as invasive lesions have the potential to metastasize. Some factors that increase the chance for the development of metastases include tumor size larger than 2 cm; location on the ear, lip, or other sites on the head and neck; and history of prior unsuccessful treatment.2 Any solitary ulcer, lump, wound, or lesion that will not heal and persists for more than 3 weeks should be regarded as cancer until proven otherwise. Although few oral SCCs are detected by clinicians at an early stage, diagnostic aids such as vital staining and molecular markers in tissues and saliva may be implemented.3 Toluidine blue is a simple, fast, and inexpensive technique that stains the nuclear material of malignant lesions, but not normal mucosa, and may be a worthwhile diagnostic adjunct to clinical inspection.4
Our patient presented with a lesion that clinically looked herpetic, though he reported no prodromal signs of tingling, burning, or pain before the occurrence of the lesion. Due to the persistence of the lesion and lack of response to treatment, a biopsy was indicated. The differential diagnoses include aphthous ulcers, which may occasionally extend on to the vermilion border of the lip and exhibit nondiagnostic histology.5 Bullous oral lichen planus is the least common variant of oral lichen planus, is unlikely to present as a solitary lesion, and is rarely seen on the lips. Histologically, the lesion demonstrated lichenoid inflammation.6 Solitary keratoacanthoma, though histologically similar to SCC, typically presents as a rapidly growing crateriform nodule without erosion or ulceration.7 The differential diagnoses are summarized in the Table.
The patient underwent wide excision with repair by mucosal advancement flap. He continues to be regularly seen in the clinic for monitoring of other skin cancers and is doing well. Clinicians encountering any wound or ulcer that does not show signs of healing should be wary of underlying malignancy and be prompted to perform a biopsy.
The Diagnosis: Squamous Cell Carcinoma
The initial clinical presentation suggested a diagnosis of herpes simplex labialis. The patient reported no response to topical acyclovir, and because the plaque persisted, a biopsy was performed. Pathology demonstrated squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) that was moderately well differentiated and invasive (Figure).
Approximately 38% of all oral SCCs in the United States occur on the lower lip and typically are solar-related cancers developing within the epidermis.1 Oral lesions initially may be asymptomatic and may not be of concern to the patient; however, it is important to recognize SCC early, as invasive lesions have the potential to metastasize. Some factors that increase the chance for the development of metastases include tumor size larger than 2 cm; location on the ear, lip, or other sites on the head and neck; and history of prior unsuccessful treatment.2 Any solitary ulcer, lump, wound, or lesion that will not heal and persists for more than 3 weeks should be regarded as cancer until proven otherwise. Although few oral SCCs are detected by clinicians at an early stage, diagnostic aids such as vital staining and molecular markers in tissues and saliva may be implemented.3 Toluidine blue is a simple, fast, and inexpensive technique that stains the nuclear material of malignant lesions, but not normal mucosa, and may be a worthwhile diagnostic adjunct to clinical inspection.4
Our patient presented with a lesion that clinically looked herpetic, though he reported no prodromal signs of tingling, burning, or pain before the occurrence of the lesion. Due to the persistence of the lesion and lack of response to treatment, a biopsy was indicated. The differential diagnoses include aphthous ulcers, which may occasionally extend on to the vermilion border of the lip and exhibit nondiagnostic histology.5 Bullous oral lichen planus is the least common variant of oral lichen planus, is unlikely to present as a solitary lesion, and is rarely seen on the lips. Histologically, the lesion demonstrated lichenoid inflammation.6 Solitary keratoacanthoma, though histologically similar to SCC, typically presents as a rapidly growing crateriform nodule without erosion or ulceration.7 The differential diagnoses are summarized in the Table.
The patient underwent wide excision with repair by mucosal advancement flap. He continues to be regularly seen in the clinic for monitoring of other skin cancers and is doing well. Clinicians encountering any wound or ulcer that does not show signs of healing should be wary of underlying malignancy and be prompted to perform a biopsy.
- Fehrenbach MJ. Extraoral and intraoral clinical assessment. In: Darby ML, Walsh MM, eds. Dental Hygiene: Theory and Practice. 4th ed. St Louis, MO: Elsevier; 2014:214-233.
- Hawrot A, Alam M, Ratner D. Squamous cell carcinoma. Curr Probl Dermatol. 2003;15:91-133.
- Scully C, Bagan J. Oral squamous cell carcinoma overview. Oral Oncol. 2009;45:301-308.
- Chhabra N, Chhabra S, Sapra N. Diagnostic modalities for squamous cell carcinoma: an extensive review of literature considering toluidine blue as a useful adjunct. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;14:188-200.
- Porter SR, Scully C, Pedersen A. Recurrent aphthous stomatitis. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2003;9:1499-1505.
- Bricker SL. Oral lichen planus: a review. Semin Dermatol. 1994;13:87-90.
- Cabrijan L, Lipozencic´ J, Batinac T, et al. Differences between keratoacanthoma and squamous cell carcinoma using TGF-alpha. Coll Antropol. 2013;37:147-150.
- Douglas GD, Couch RB. A prospective study of chronic herpes simplex virus infection and recurrent herpes labialis in humans. J Immunol. 1970;104:289-295.
- Alam M, Ratner D. Cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:976-983.
- van Tuyll van Serooskerken AM, van Marion AM, de Zwart-Storm E, et al. Lichen planus with bullous manifestation on the lip. Int J Dermatol. 2007;46(suppl 3):25-26.
- Messadi DV, Younai F. Apthous ulcers. Dermatol Ther. 2010;23:281-290.
- Ko CJ. Keratoacanthoma: facts and controversies. Clin Dermatol. 2010;28:254-261.
- Fehrenbach MJ. Extraoral and intraoral clinical assessment. In: Darby ML, Walsh MM, eds. Dental Hygiene: Theory and Practice. 4th ed. St Louis, MO: Elsevier; 2014:214-233.
- Hawrot A, Alam M, Ratner D. Squamous cell carcinoma. Curr Probl Dermatol. 2003;15:91-133.
- Scully C, Bagan J. Oral squamous cell carcinoma overview. Oral Oncol. 2009;45:301-308.
- Chhabra N, Chhabra S, Sapra N. Diagnostic modalities for squamous cell carcinoma: an extensive review of literature considering toluidine blue as a useful adjunct. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;14:188-200.
- Porter SR, Scully C, Pedersen A. Recurrent aphthous stomatitis. Crit Rev Oral Biol Med. 2003;9:1499-1505.
- Bricker SL. Oral lichen planus: a review. Semin Dermatol. 1994;13:87-90.
- Cabrijan L, Lipozencic´ J, Batinac T, et al. Differences between keratoacanthoma and squamous cell carcinoma using TGF-alpha. Coll Antropol. 2013;37:147-150.
- Douglas GD, Couch RB. A prospective study of chronic herpes simplex virus infection and recurrent herpes labialis in humans. J Immunol. 1970;104:289-295.
- Alam M, Ratner D. Cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:976-983.
- van Tuyll van Serooskerken AM, van Marion AM, de Zwart-Storm E, et al. Lichen planus with bullous manifestation on the lip. Int J Dermatol. 2007;46(suppl 3):25-26.
- Messadi DV, Younai F. Apthous ulcers. Dermatol Ther. 2010;23:281-290.
- Ko CJ. Keratoacanthoma: facts and controversies. Clin Dermatol. 2010;28:254-261.
An 83-year-old man presented with a new-onset 1.2-cm eroded plaque on the vermilion border of the right lower lip that reportedly developed 2 weeks prior and was increasing in size. The plaque was moist and was composed of confluent glistening papules. Medical history was notable for the presence of both basal cell and squamous cell carcinomas.
Monthly fitusiran showed promise in small phase I hemophilia trial
and increased thrombin production, according to the results of a small phase I dose-escalation study.
Compared with baseline, levels of antithrombin dropped by 70%-89%, K. John Pasi, MB, ChB, PhD, of the Royal London Haemophilia Centre and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry and his associates reported at the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis congress and simultaneously in the New England Journal of Medicine. There were no thromboembolic events during the study, and the most common adverse events were mild injection-site reactions, they added.
Patients with hemophilia typically need frequent infusions of clotting factors, creating an urgent need for new therapies. Fitusiran is an investigational RNA interference (RNAi) therapy that targets antithrombin. This multicenter, open-label, phase I study included four healthy volunteers and 25 patients with moderate or severe hemophilia A or B without inhibitors. The healthy participants received a single subcutaneous injection of fitusiran (0.03 mg/kg) or placebo. The hemophilia patients received three injections of fitusiran either once weekly (0.015, 0.045, or 0.075 mg/kg) or once monthly (0.225, 0.45, 0.9, or 1.8 mg/kg, or a fixed dose of 80 mg (N Engl J Med. 2017 July 10. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1616569).
The single fitusiran dose and the weekly treatment regimens both produced consistent, sustained drops in plasma antithrombin levels, which supported a longer interval between doses, the researchers said. A monthly dose of 0.225 mg/kg cut antithrombin levels by about 70%, compared with baseline (standard deviation, ±9%), while a monthly dose of 1.8 mg/kg produced about an 89% (standard deviation, ±1%) drop in antithrombin levels. The fixed 80-mg dose consistently lowered antithrombin levels by about 87%, compared with baseline. The decreases in antithrombin varied little during the weeks between doses and were associated with increased thrombin generation, regardless of whether patients had hemophilia A or B, Dr. Pasi and his associates said.
One patient stopped treatment because of severe chest pain, but the investigators ruled out thrombosis as a cause. Fitusiran targets the liver, and 36% of patients developed transient increases in liver aminotransferase levels, they noted. Most of these patients had a history of hepatitis C virus infection. An extension study (NCT02554773) is ongoing to assess longer-term safety and efficacy findings. The investigators also are studying fitusiran in patients with inhibitory alloantibodies.
Alnylam Pharmaceuticals provided funding. Dr. Pasi disclosed research funding, advisory board fees, and travel grants from Alnylam and Genzyme. Four coinvestigators also disclosed receiving support from Alnylam during the conduct of the study.
and increased thrombin production, according to the results of a small phase I dose-escalation study.
Compared with baseline, levels of antithrombin dropped by 70%-89%, K. John Pasi, MB, ChB, PhD, of the Royal London Haemophilia Centre and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry and his associates reported at the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis congress and simultaneously in the New England Journal of Medicine. There were no thromboembolic events during the study, and the most common adverse events were mild injection-site reactions, they added.
Patients with hemophilia typically need frequent infusions of clotting factors, creating an urgent need for new therapies. Fitusiran is an investigational RNA interference (RNAi) therapy that targets antithrombin. This multicenter, open-label, phase I study included four healthy volunteers and 25 patients with moderate or severe hemophilia A or B without inhibitors. The healthy participants received a single subcutaneous injection of fitusiran (0.03 mg/kg) or placebo. The hemophilia patients received three injections of fitusiran either once weekly (0.015, 0.045, or 0.075 mg/kg) or once monthly (0.225, 0.45, 0.9, or 1.8 mg/kg, or a fixed dose of 80 mg (N Engl J Med. 2017 July 10. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1616569).
The single fitusiran dose and the weekly treatment regimens both produced consistent, sustained drops in plasma antithrombin levels, which supported a longer interval between doses, the researchers said. A monthly dose of 0.225 mg/kg cut antithrombin levels by about 70%, compared with baseline (standard deviation, ±9%), while a monthly dose of 1.8 mg/kg produced about an 89% (standard deviation, ±1%) drop in antithrombin levels. The fixed 80-mg dose consistently lowered antithrombin levels by about 87%, compared with baseline. The decreases in antithrombin varied little during the weeks between doses and were associated with increased thrombin generation, regardless of whether patients had hemophilia A or B, Dr. Pasi and his associates said.
One patient stopped treatment because of severe chest pain, but the investigators ruled out thrombosis as a cause. Fitusiran targets the liver, and 36% of patients developed transient increases in liver aminotransferase levels, they noted. Most of these patients had a history of hepatitis C virus infection. An extension study (NCT02554773) is ongoing to assess longer-term safety and efficacy findings. The investigators also are studying fitusiran in patients with inhibitory alloantibodies.
Alnylam Pharmaceuticals provided funding. Dr. Pasi disclosed research funding, advisory board fees, and travel grants from Alnylam and Genzyme. Four coinvestigators also disclosed receiving support from Alnylam during the conduct of the study.
and increased thrombin production, according to the results of a small phase I dose-escalation study.
Compared with baseline, levels of antithrombin dropped by 70%-89%, K. John Pasi, MB, ChB, PhD, of the Royal London Haemophilia Centre and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry and his associates reported at the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis congress and simultaneously in the New England Journal of Medicine. There were no thromboembolic events during the study, and the most common adverse events were mild injection-site reactions, they added.
Patients with hemophilia typically need frequent infusions of clotting factors, creating an urgent need for new therapies. Fitusiran is an investigational RNA interference (RNAi) therapy that targets antithrombin. This multicenter, open-label, phase I study included four healthy volunteers and 25 patients with moderate or severe hemophilia A or B without inhibitors. The healthy participants received a single subcutaneous injection of fitusiran (0.03 mg/kg) or placebo. The hemophilia patients received three injections of fitusiran either once weekly (0.015, 0.045, or 0.075 mg/kg) or once monthly (0.225, 0.45, 0.9, or 1.8 mg/kg, or a fixed dose of 80 mg (N Engl J Med. 2017 July 10. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1616569).
The single fitusiran dose and the weekly treatment regimens both produced consistent, sustained drops in plasma antithrombin levels, which supported a longer interval between doses, the researchers said. A monthly dose of 0.225 mg/kg cut antithrombin levels by about 70%, compared with baseline (standard deviation, ±9%), while a monthly dose of 1.8 mg/kg produced about an 89% (standard deviation, ±1%) drop in antithrombin levels. The fixed 80-mg dose consistently lowered antithrombin levels by about 87%, compared with baseline. The decreases in antithrombin varied little during the weeks between doses and were associated with increased thrombin generation, regardless of whether patients had hemophilia A or B, Dr. Pasi and his associates said.
One patient stopped treatment because of severe chest pain, but the investigators ruled out thrombosis as a cause. Fitusiran targets the liver, and 36% of patients developed transient increases in liver aminotransferase levels, they noted. Most of these patients had a history of hepatitis C virus infection. An extension study (NCT02554773) is ongoing to assess longer-term safety and efficacy findings. The investigators also are studying fitusiran in patients with inhibitory alloantibodies.
Alnylam Pharmaceuticals provided funding. Dr. Pasi disclosed research funding, advisory board fees, and travel grants from Alnylam and Genzyme. Four coinvestigators also disclosed receiving support from Alnylam during the conduct of the study.
FROM THE 2017 ISTH CONGRESS
Key clinical point: Once-monthly subcutaneous treatment with fitusiran led to dose-dependent lowering of antithrombin levels and increased thrombin production among patients with hemophilia A or B without inhibitors.
Major finding: Compared with baseline, levels of antithrombin dropped by 70%-89%. There were no episodes of thrombosis, and the most common adverse events were injection-site reactions.
Data source: A phase I dose-escalation study.
Disclosures: Alnylam Pharmaceuticals provided funding. Dr. Pasi disclosed research funding, advisory board fees, and travel grants from Alnylam and Genzyme. Four coinvestigators also disclosed receiving support from Alnylam during the conduct of the study.
Obesity medicine: How to incorporate it into your practice
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Resources
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Resources
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Resources
Prophylactic emicizumab cut bleeds by 87% in hemophilia A with inhibitors
Once-weekly prophylactic therapy with emicizumab (ACE910) was associated an 87% lower rate of treated bleeding than no prophylaxis among patients with hemophilia A with inhibitors in the open-label, phase III HAVEN 1 trial.
After a median 24 weeks of treatment (range, 3-48 weeks), the 35 patients who were randomly assigned to prophylactic emicizumab (3.0 mg per kg for 4 weeks, followed by 1.5 mg per kg) had an annualized bleeding rate of 2.9 events, compared with an annualized rate of 23.3 events among the 18 patients who received no prophylaxis. The difference was statistically significant, reported Johannes Oldenburg, MD, PhD, and his associates at the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis congress and simultaneously in the New England Journal of Medicine (N Engl J Med. 2017 Jul 10. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1703068).
In addition, 63% of patients who received prophylactic emicizumab had no bleeding events, compared with only 6% of the comparison group, said Dr. Oldenburg of Universitaetsklinikum Bonn, Germany. Emicizumab also was associated with a 79% lower rate of treated bleeds, compared with the historic rate among 24 patients who previously had been on prophylactic bypassing agents (P less than .001). No patient developed detectable antidrug antibodies.
The most common adverse events were injection site reactions (15% of patients), followed by headache, upper respiratory tract infection, arthralgia, and fatigue. Four patients developed thrombotic microangiopathy or cavernous sinus thrombosis and skin necrosis, all of whom had experienced breakthrough bleeding for which they had received multiple infusions of activated prothrombin complex concentrate at doses averaging more than 100 U per kg per day.
Patients with severe hemophilia A typically require prophylactic factor VIII infusions two to three times a week, but 30% develop neutralizing antibodies against factor VIII (inhibitors), which increases care burden, costs, and complication rates.
Emicizumab is a recombinant humanized bispecific monoclonal antibody that restores the function of missing active factor VIII by bridging activated factor IX and factor X, the investigators noted. A phase I study linked once-weekly emicizumab prophylaxis to markedly lower bleeding rates without dose-limiting toxicities (N Engl J Med 2016;374:2044-53). Subsequently, the phase III HAVEN 1 study (NCT02622321) compared once-weekly subcutaneous prophylactic emicizumab with on-demand (episodic) and prophylactic use of bypassing agents (BPAs) in 109 adults and adolescents (12 years and older) with hemophilia A with inhibitors. The primary endpoint was the difference in rates of treated bleeds between the groups. Patients had a median age of 28 years, all were male, and most had severe hemophilia at baseline. They typically had more than nine bleeding events in the 6 months before enrollment, with bleeding in more than one target joint and factor VIII titers of 180 Bethesda units per mL.
HAVEN 1 was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche and Chugai Pharmaceutical. Dr. Oldenburg and 13 coinvestigators disclosed ties to Chugai, Roche, and other pharmaceutical companies. The remaining coinvestigator had no disclosures.
The results of this phase III trial are of great importance to patients with for hemophilia A, offering “an elegant new solution for treatment.” Although it is not clear how best to treat the infrequent events of breakthrough bleeding when administering emicizumab, it is evident that repeated high doses of activated prothrombin complex concentrate should be avoided. Also, how to integrate emicizumab prophylaxis with current schedules for the induction of immune tolerance to factor VIII remains to be seen.
Meanwhile, weekly subcutaneous emicizumab prophylaxis offer great reductions in bleeding rates and improve quality of life “for this very challenging patient group.” Additional studies already are underway to ascertain the benefit of emicizumab prophylaxis in children with hemophilia with inhibitors, and a study for patients with hemophilia A without inhibitors is planned.
“These are extraordinary times for innovation in hemophilia therapy, and the introduction of emicizumab represents a major contribution toward achieving an enhanced standard of care for this lifelong bleeding disorder.”
David Lillicrap, MD, is with the department of pathology and molecular medicine at Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario. He reported having no relevant conflicts of interest. These comments are from his accompanying editorial (N Engl J Med. 2017 June 10. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe1707802).
The results of this phase III trial are of great importance to patients with for hemophilia A, offering “an elegant new solution for treatment.” Although it is not clear how best to treat the infrequent events of breakthrough bleeding when administering emicizumab, it is evident that repeated high doses of activated prothrombin complex concentrate should be avoided. Also, how to integrate emicizumab prophylaxis with current schedules for the induction of immune tolerance to factor VIII remains to be seen.
Meanwhile, weekly subcutaneous emicizumab prophylaxis offer great reductions in bleeding rates and improve quality of life “for this very challenging patient group.” Additional studies already are underway to ascertain the benefit of emicizumab prophylaxis in children with hemophilia with inhibitors, and a study for patients with hemophilia A without inhibitors is planned.
“These are extraordinary times for innovation in hemophilia therapy, and the introduction of emicizumab represents a major contribution toward achieving an enhanced standard of care for this lifelong bleeding disorder.”
David Lillicrap, MD, is with the department of pathology and molecular medicine at Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario. He reported having no relevant conflicts of interest. These comments are from his accompanying editorial (N Engl J Med. 2017 June 10. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe1707802).
The results of this phase III trial are of great importance to patients with for hemophilia A, offering “an elegant new solution for treatment.” Although it is not clear how best to treat the infrequent events of breakthrough bleeding when administering emicizumab, it is evident that repeated high doses of activated prothrombin complex concentrate should be avoided. Also, how to integrate emicizumab prophylaxis with current schedules for the induction of immune tolerance to factor VIII remains to be seen.
Meanwhile, weekly subcutaneous emicizumab prophylaxis offer great reductions in bleeding rates and improve quality of life “for this very challenging patient group.” Additional studies already are underway to ascertain the benefit of emicizumab prophylaxis in children with hemophilia with inhibitors, and a study for patients with hemophilia A without inhibitors is planned.
“These are extraordinary times for innovation in hemophilia therapy, and the introduction of emicizumab represents a major contribution toward achieving an enhanced standard of care for this lifelong bleeding disorder.”
David Lillicrap, MD, is with the department of pathology and molecular medicine at Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario. He reported having no relevant conflicts of interest. These comments are from his accompanying editorial (N Engl J Med. 2017 June 10. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe1707802).
Once-weekly prophylactic therapy with emicizumab (ACE910) was associated an 87% lower rate of treated bleeding than no prophylaxis among patients with hemophilia A with inhibitors in the open-label, phase III HAVEN 1 trial.
After a median 24 weeks of treatment (range, 3-48 weeks), the 35 patients who were randomly assigned to prophylactic emicizumab (3.0 mg per kg for 4 weeks, followed by 1.5 mg per kg) had an annualized bleeding rate of 2.9 events, compared with an annualized rate of 23.3 events among the 18 patients who received no prophylaxis. The difference was statistically significant, reported Johannes Oldenburg, MD, PhD, and his associates at the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis congress and simultaneously in the New England Journal of Medicine (N Engl J Med. 2017 Jul 10. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1703068).
In addition, 63% of patients who received prophylactic emicizumab had no bleeding events, compared with only 6% of the comparison group, said Dr. Oldenburg of Universitaetsklinikum Bonn, Germany. Emicizumab also was associated with a 79% lower rate of treated bleeds, compared with the historic rate among 24 patients who previously had been on prophylactic bypassing agents (P less than .001). No patient developed detectable antidrug antibodies.
The most common adverse events were injection site reactions (15% of patients), followed by headache, upper respiratory tract infection, arthralgia, and fatigue. Four patients developed thrombotic microangiopathy or cavernous sinus thrombosis and skin necrosis, all of whom had experienced breakthrough bleeding for which they had received multiple infusions of activated prothrombin complex concentrate at doses averaging more than 100 U per kg per day.
Patients with severe hemophilia A typically require prophylactic factor VIII infusions two to three times a week, but 30% develop neutralizing antibodies against factor VIII (inhibitors), which increases care burden, costs, and complication rates.
Emicizumab is a recombinant humanized bispecific monoclonal antibody that restores the function of missing active factor VIII by bridging activated factor IX and factor X, the investigators noted. A phase I study linked once-weekly emicizumab prophylaxis to markedly lower bleeding rates without dose-limiting toxicities (N Engl J Med 2016;374:2044-53). Subsequently, the phase III HAVEN 1 study (NCT02622321) compared once-weekly subcutaneous prophylactic emicizumab with on-demand (episodic) and prophylactic use of bypassing agents (BPAs) in 109 adults and adolescents (12 years and older) with hemophilia A with inhibitors. The primary endpoint was the difference in rates of treated bleeds between the groups. Patients had a median age of 28 years, all were male, and most had severe hemophilia at baseline. They typically had more than nine bleeding events in the 6 months before enrollment, with bleeding in more than one target joint and factor VIII titers of 180 Bethesda units per mL.
HAVEN 1 was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche and Chugai Pharmaceutical. Dr. Oldenburg and 13 coinvestigators disclosed ties to Chugai, Roche, and other pharmaceutical companies. The remaining coinvestigator had no disclosures.
Once-weekly prophylactic therapy with emicizumab (ACE910) was associated an 87% lower rate of treated bleeding than no prophylaxis among patients with hemophilia A with inhibitors in the open-label, phase III HAVEN 1 trial.
After a median 24 weeks of treatment (range, 3-48 weeks), the 35 patients who were randomly assigned to prophylactic emicizumab (3.0 mg per kg for 4 weeks, followed by 1.5 mg per kg) had an annualized bleeding rate of 2.9 events, compared with an annualized rate of 23.3 events among the 18 patients who received no prophylaxis. The difference was statistically significant, reported Johannes Oldenburg, MD, PhD, and his associates at the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis congress and simultaneously in the New England Journal of Medicine (N Engl J Med. 2017 Jul 10. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1703068).
In addition, 63% of patients who received prophylactic emicizumab had no bleeding events, compared with only 6% of the comparison group, said Dr. Oldenburg of Universitaetsklinikum Bonn, Germany. Emicizumab also was associated with a 79% lower rate of treated bleeds, compared with the historic rate among 24 patients who previously had been on prophylactic bypassing agents (P less than .001). No patient developed detectable antidrug antibodies.
The most common adverse events were injection site reactions (15% of patients), followed by headache, upper respiratory tract infection, arthralgia, and fatigue. Four patients developed thrombotic microangiopathy or cavernous sinus thrombosis and skin necrosis, all of whom had experienced breakthrough bleeding for which they had received multiple infusions of activated prothrombin complex concentrate at doses averaging more than 100 U per kg per day.
Patients with severe hemophilia A typically require prophylactic factor VIII infusions two to three times a week, but 30% develop neutralizing antibodies against factor VIII (inhibitors), which increases care burden, costs, and complication rates.
Emicizumab is a recombinant humanized bispecific monoclonal antibody that restores the function of missing active factor VIII by bridging activated factor IX and factor X, the investigators noted. A phase I study linked once-weekly emicizumab prophylaxis to markedly lower bleeding rates without dose-limiting toxicities (N Engl J Med 2016;374:2044-53). Subsequently, the phase III HAVEN 1 study (NCT02622321) compared once-weekly subcutaneous prophylactic emicizumab with on-demand (episodic) and prophylactic use of bypassing agents (BPAs) in 109 adults and adolescents (12 years and older) with hemophilia A with inhibitors. The primary endpoint was the difference in rates of treated bleeds between the groups. Patients had a median age of 28 years, all were male, and most had severe hemophilia at baseline. They typically had more than nine bleeding events in the 6 months before enrollment, with bleeding in more than one target joint and factor VIII titers of 180 Bethesda units per mL.
HAVEN 1 was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche and Chugai Pharmaceutical. Dr. Oldenburg and 13 coinvestigators disclosed ties to Chugai, Roche, and other pharmaceutical companies. The remaining coinvestigator had no disclosures.
From 2017 ISTH CONGRESS
Key clinical point: .
Major finding: After a median 24 weeks of treatment, the intervention group averaged 2.9 bleeds per year vs. 23.3 events in the control group.
Data source: A phase III randomized multicenter open-label trial of 109 male adolescents and adults with hemophilia A and factor VIII inhibitors.
Disclosures: HAVEN 1 was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche and Chugai Pharmaceutical. Dr. Oldenburg and 13 coinvestigators disclosed ties to Chugai, Roche, and other pharmaceutical companies. The remaining coinvestigator had no disclosures.
Antibody could reduce bone fractures in MM
Preclinical research suggests a targeted therapy may be able to rebuild and strengthen bone in patients with multiple myeloma (MM).
Researchers tested an antibody targeting the protein sclerostin, an important regulator of bone formation, in mouse models of MM.
The antibody prevented bone loss and even increased bone volume in the mice.
The treatment also made bones more resistant to fracture and worked synergistically with zoledronic acid.
Michelle McDonald, PhD, of the Garvan Institute of Medical Research in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, and her colleagues reported these findings in Blood.
“Multiple myeloma is a cancer that grows in bone, and, in most patients, it is associated with widespread bone loss and recurrent bone fractures, which can be extremely painful and debilitating,” Dr McDonald said.
“The current treatment for myeloma-associated bone disease with bisphosphonate drugs prevents further bone loss, but it doesn’t fix damaged bones, so patients continue to fracture. We wanted to re-stimulate bone formation and increase bone strength and resistance to fracture.”
So the researchers tested an antibody that targets and neutralizes sclerostin. In clinical studies of osteoporosis, such antibodies have been shown to increase bone mass and reduce fracture incidence.
In the mouse models of MM, the antibody prevented further bone loss and even doubled bone volume in some of the mice.
“When we looked at the bones before and after treatment, the difference was remarkable,” Dr McDonald said. “We saw less lesions or ‘holes’ in the bones after anti-sclerostin treatment. These lesions are the primary cause of bone pain, so this is an extremely important result.”
The treatment also made the bones substantially stronger, with more than double the resistance to fracture observed in many of the tests.
The researchers then combined the antibody with the bisphosphonate zoledronic acid and observed positive results.
“Bisphosphonates work by preventing bone breakdown, so we combined zoledronic acid with the new anti-sclerostin antibody that rebuilds bone,” Dr McDonald said. “Together, the impact on bone thickness, strength, and resistance to fracture was greater than either treatment alone.”
The researchers said these findings suggest a potential new strategy for reducing fractures in patients with MM.
“[M]yelomas, like other cancers, vary from individual to individual and can therefore be difficult to target,” said study author Peter I. Croucher, PhD, of the Garvan Institute of Medical Research.
“By targeting sclerostin, we are blocking a protein that is active in every person’s bones and not something unique to a person’s cancer. Therefore, in the future, when we test this antibody in humans, we are hopeful to see a response in most, if not all, patients.”
“We are now looking towards clinical trials for this antibody and, in the future, development of this type of therapy for the clinical treatment of multiple myeloma. This therapeutic approach has the potential to transform the prognosis for myeloma patients, enhancing quality of life, and ultimately reducing mortality. It also has clinical implications for the treatment of other cancers that develop in the skeleton.” 
Preclinical research suggests a targeted therapy may be able to rebuild and strengthen bone in patients with multiple myeloma (MM).
Researchers tested an antibody targeting the protein sclerostin, an important regulator of bone formation, in mouse models of MM.
The antibody prevented bone loss and even increased bone volume in the mice.
The treatment also made bones more resistant to fracture and worked synergistically with zoledronic acid.
Michelle McDonald, PhD, of the Garvan Institute of Medical Research in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, and her colleagues reported these findings in Blood.
“Multiple myeloma is a cancer that grows in bone, and, in most patients, it is associated with widespread bone loss and recurrent bone fractures, which can be extremely painful and debilitating,” Dr McDonald said.
“The current treatment for myeloma-associated bone disease with bisphosphonate drugs prevents further bone loss, but it doesn’t fix damaged bones, so patients continue to fracture. We wanted to re-stimulate bone formation and increase bone strength and resistance to fracture.”
So the researchers tested an antibody that targets and neutralizes sclerostin. In clinical studies of osteoporosis, such antibodies have been shown to increase bone mass and reduce fracture incidence.
In the mouse models of MM, the antibody prevented further bone loss and even doubled bone volume in some of the mice.
“When we looked at the bones before and after treatment, the difference was remarkable,” Dr McDonald said. “We saw less lesions or ‘holes’ in the bones after anti-sclerostin treatment. These lesions are the primary cause of bone pain, so this is an extremely important result.”
The treatment also made the bones substantially stronger, with more than double the resistance to fracture observed in many of the tests.
The researchers then combined the antibody with the bisphosphonate zoledronic acid and observed positive results.
“Bisphosphonates work by preventing bone breakdown, so we combined zoledronic acid with the new anti-sclerostin antibody that rebuilds bone,” Dr McDonald said. “Together, the impact on bone thickness, strength, and resistance to fracture was greater than either treatment alone.”
The researchers said these findings suggest a potential new strategy for reducing fractures in patients with MM.
“[M]yelomas, like other cancers, vary from individual to individual and can therefore be difficult to target,” said study author Peter I. Croucher, PhD, of the Garvan Institute of Medical Research.
“By targeting sclerostin, we are blocking a protein that is active in every person’s bones and not something unique to a person’s cancer. Therefore, in the future, when we test this antibody in humans, we are hopeful to see a response in most, if not all, patients.”
“We are now looking towards clinical trials for this antibody and, in the future, development of this type of therapy for the clinical treatment of multiple myeloma. This therapeutic approach has the potential to transform the prognosis for myeloma patients, enhancing quality of life, and ultimately reducing mortality. It also has clinical implications for the treatment of other cancers that develop in the skeleton.”
Preclinical research suggests a targeted therapy may be able to rebuild and strengthen bone in patients with multiple myeloma (MM).
Researchers tested an antibody targeting the protein sclerostin, an important regulator of bone formation, in mouse models of MM.
The antibody prevented bone loss and even increased bone volume in the mice.
The treatment also made bones more resistant to fracture and worked synergistically with zoledronic acid.
Michelle McDonald, PhD, of the Garvan Institute of Medical Research in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, and her colleagues reported these findings in Blood.
“Multiple myeloma is a cancer that grows in bone, and, in most patients, it is associated with widespread bone loss and recurrent bone fractures, which can be extremely painful and debilitating,” Dr McDonald said.
“The current treatment for myeloma-associated bone disease with bisphosphonate drugs prevents further bone loss, but it doesn’t fix damaged bones, so patients continue to fracture. We wanted to re-stimulate bone formation and increase bone strength and resistance to fracture.”
So the researchers tested an antibody that targets and neutralizes sclerostin. In clinical studies of osteoporosis, such antibodies have been shown to increase bone mass and reduce fracture incidence.
In the mouse models of MM, the antibody prevented further bone loss and even doubled bone volume in some of the mice.
“When we looked at the bones before and after treatment, the difference was remarkable,” Dr McDonald said. “We saw less lesions or ‘holes’ in the bones after anti-sclerostin treatment. These lesions are the primary cause of bone pain, so this is an extremely important result.”
The treatment also made the bones substantially stronger, with more than double the resistance to fracture observed in many of the tests.
The researchers then combined the antibody with the bisphosphonate zoledronic acid and observed positive results.
“Bisphosphonates work by preventing bone breakdown, so we combined zoledronic acid with the new anti-sclerostin antibody that rebuilds bone,” Dr McDonald said. “Together, the impact on bone thickness, strength, and resistance to fracture was greater than either treatment alone.”
The researchers said these findings suggest a potential new strategy for reducing fractures in patients with MM.
“[M]yelomas, like other cancers, vary from individual to individual and can therefore be difficult to target,” said study author Peter I. Croucher, PhD, of the Garvan Institute of Medical Research.
“By targeting sclerostin, we are blocking a protein that is active in every person’s bones and not something unique to a person’s cancer. Therefore, in the future, when we test this antibody in humans, we are hopeful to see a response in most, if not all, patients.”
“We are now looking towards clinical trials for this antibody and, in the future, development of this type of therapy for the clinical treatment of multiple myeloma. This therapeutic approach has the potential to transform the prognosis for myeloma patients, enhancing quality of life, and ultimately reducing mortality. It also has clinical implications for the treatment of other cancers that develop in the skeleton.”
From Revved Up to Banged Up
ANSWER
There is significant diastasis of the pubic symphysis, measuring nearly 4 cm. No obvious fractures of the hip or pelvis are seen, but there is malalignment of the rami. There is also evidence of a proximal right femur fracture, although this area is not fully imaged.
Such radiographic findings are typically referred to as an open book pelvic fracture. Usually the result of a shear injury, these fractures are not uncommon and carry an increased risk for pelvic vascular injury.
Emergent orthopedic and vascular consults were obtained, and the patient was placed in a pelvic binder to help reduce the distraction and tamponade any potential vascular injuries.
ANSWER
There is significant diastasis of the pubic symphysis, measuring nearly 4 cm. No obvious fractures of the hip or pelvis are seen, but there is malalignment of the rami. There is also evidence of a proximal right femur fracture, although this area is not fully imaged.
Such radiographic findings are typically referred to as an open book pelvic fracture. Usually the result of a shear injury, these fractures are not uncommon and carry an increased risk for pelvic vascular injury.
Emergent orthopedic and vascular consults were obtained, and the patient was placed in a pelvic binder to help reduce the distraction and tamponade any potential vascular injuries.
ANSWER
There is significant diastasis of the pubic symphysis, measuring nearly 4 cm. No obvious fractures of the hip or pelvis are seen, but there is malalignment of the rami. There is also evidence of a proximal right femur fracture, although this area is not fully imaged.
Such radiographic findings are typically referred to as an open book pelvic fracture. Usually the result of a shear injury, these fractures are not uncommon and carry an increased risk for pelvic vascular injury.
Emergent orthopedic and vascular consults were obtained, and the patient was placed in a pelvic binder to help reduce the distraction and tamponade any potential vascular injuries.
A man, approximately 60 years old, is brought to your facility as a trauma code following a vehicular accident. He was riding a motorcycle when he crashed into another vehicle and was thrown off. Emergency medical personnel report that the patient has obvious head, facial, and extremity trauma. Due to decreased level of consciousness, he was intubated en route. History is otherwise unknown.
Upon arrival, he has two large-bore IVs in place, with fluids going wide open. Despite that, his systolic blood pressure is 90 mm Hg and his heart rate is in the range of 150-160 beats/min. The massive transfusion protocol has been initiated to aid in the aggressive resuscitation efforts.
Portable radiographs of the chest and pelvis are obtained; the latter is shown. What is your impression?
Lithoplasty tames heavily calcified coronary lesions
PARIS – A novel therapeutic ultrasound-based technology known as lithoplasty is turning heads in interventional cardiology and vascular medicine because it addresses the bane of interventionalists’ existence: complex, heavily calcified coronary and peripheral artery lesions.
“Calcification is something we deal with every day in interventional cardiology. It makes the procedures more expensive, longer, and in fact several recent studies have shown that the complication rate for calcified lesions is higher than for any other lesion subtype. Calcification is the next big thing that we’re trying to take on in interventional cardiology,” Todd J. Brinton, MD, observed at the annual congress of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions.
At EuroPCR, he presented the results of DISRUPT CAD, a seven-center study in which 60 patients with heavily calcified coronary lesions underwent lithoplasty in order to facilitate stent placement. The study met all of its safety and performance endpoints. As a result, the week prior to EuroPCR the European regulatory agency granted marketing approval for Shockwave Medical’s coronary lithoplasty system; the indication is for coronary vessel preparation prior to stenting. A large phase III U.S. trial aimed at gaining FDA approval is planned.
Moreover, on the basis of the earlier favorable DISRUPT PAD trial, lithoplasty has already been approved for treatment of peripheral artery disease (PAD) in Europe since late 2015 and by the FDA since September 2016. Now underway is DISRUPT PAD III, a large postmarketing randomized trial comparing lithoplasty with conventional balloon angioplasty in patients with heavily calcified PAD, added Dr. Brinton, an interventional cardiologist at Stanford (Calif.) University and cofounder of Shockwave Medical.
Lithoplasty is a potentially transformative technology which he described as “lithotripsy inside a balloon.” Lithotripsy has an established 30-year track record for the safe treatment of kidney stones. However, lithotripsy utilizes focused ultrasound, while lithoplasty relies upon circumferential unfocused therapeutic ultrasound delivered by miniaturized emitters placed inside a 12-mm intravascular balloon. The balloon is crossed to the target lesion, inflated to a modest pressure of 4 atmospheres, then the operator delivers lithoplasty pulses lasting over 1 microsec in duration at a rate of 1/sec for 10 seconds in order to fracture the thick intramedial calcium plaque, allowing the lesion to open up and thereby normalize vessel compliance.
“Once you’ve cracked the calcium you can easily dilate the lesion. It’s the calcium that’s restricting the ability to dilate. The real fundamental need here is to maximize acute gain to get really good stent apposition. We’re trying to get expansion,” the cardiologist explained.
That was readily achieved in the DISRUPT CAD study. The 60 participants had reference vessel diameters of 2.5-4.0 mm, with an average target lesion length of 20 mm. The calcification was heavy, covering on average 270 degrees of the vessel circumference as measured by optical coherence tomography, with an average calcium thickness of 0.97 mm and a calcified segment length of 22.3 mm.
The mean stent expansion was 112%. The minimum luminal diameter improved from 0.9 mm pretreatment to 2.6 mm post treatment, for an acute gain of 1.7 mm. The amount of acute gain was similar across the full range of vessel diameters.
The mean diameter stenosis went from 68% pretreatment to 13% post-treatment.
The primary safety endpoint was the 30-day rate of MACE, defined as cardiac death, MI, or target vessel revascularization. The rate was 5%, consisting of 3 patients with mild non–Q-wave MI defined by creatine kinase–MB elevations more than three times the upper limit of normal. The 6-month MACE rate was 8.5%, which included the three non–Q-wave MIs plus two cardiac deaths not related to the procedure or technology.
Final angiographic results adjudicated in a central core laboratory showed no perforations, abrupt closures, slow or no reflow events, or residual dissections. These are complications commonly seen with debulking devices such as rotational or orbital atherectomy, Dr. Brinton noted.
The primary performance endpoint in DISRUPT CAD was clinical success, defined as a residual stenosis of less than 50% post PCI with no in-hospital MACE. This was achieved in 57 of 60 patients, or 95%. The device was successfully delivered to the target lesion with subsequent performance of lithoplasty in 59 of 60 patients. An even more flexible and deliverable device will be released in the coming year, according to the cardiologist.
“I’d say the take-home is that the disease has changed,” Dr. Brinton commented. “It’s not the same disease that we had when Gruentzig did his first balloon angioplasty. These lesions are more calcified, more complex, yet for the most part we use the same balloon we’ve been using for the last 40 years. So lithoplasty is really an attempt to modernize the therapy in a new patient subset we now take care of who are much more complicated than the patients we originally took care of.”
“The reality is, we’re having difficulty taking care of these patients. For myself as an interventionalist, it’s not uncommon to look around the table and see a massive amount of tools when we’re doing these complex cases. Lithoplasty is intended to bring the simplicity. I would say it’s not necessarily to make the best operators better, it’s to bring all operators up to the ability to take on these complex lesions that are now usually reserved for high-volume centers that can do debulking,” he added.
Session cochair David R. Holmes Jr., MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., pronounced lithoplasty “tremendously exciting.” He and the other panelists focused on questions of safety and potential collateral damage: Where does the calcified debris go? What are the effects of the unfocused sonic pressure waves on noncalcified plaque? How hot does the vessel get?
Dr. Brinton replied that thick calcium plaque is located mostly in the medial vessel wall and stays there after fracturing. That’s why distal embolization wasn’t an issue in DISRUPT CAD. In animal studies, even at 20 times the energy dose used in clinical practice, lithoplasty had no effect on softer, noncalcified plaque or normal tissue. Vessel temperature increases by about 1.2 degrees C during lithoplasty, which isn’t sufficient to cause injury or drive restenosis.
Elsewhere at EuroPCR, Alberto Cremonesi, MD, who chaired a press conference where Dr. Brinton presented highlights of DISRUPT CAD, declared lithoplasty is “in my mind a real breakthrough, not only for coronary disease but also for PAD.”
Is it possible that stand-alone lithoplasty could reduce the need for multiple stents in longer coronary lesions, instead making possible more focal stenting? asked Dr. Cremonesi of Maria Cecilia Hospital in Cotignola, Italy.
That’s one of several possibilities worthy of future investigation, Dr. Brinton replied. Lithoplasty might also facilitate the results obtainable with bioresorbable coronary scaffolds or drug-coated balloons, he added.
He noted that as cofounder of and a consultant to Shockwave Medical, he has a sizable financial involvement with the company.
PARIS – A novel therapeutic ultrasound-based technology known as lithoplasty is turning heads in interventional cardiology and vascular medicine because it addresses the bane of interventionalists’ existence: complex, heavily calcified coronary and peripheral artery lesions.
“Calcification is something we deal with every day in interventional cardiology. It makes the procedures more expensive, longer, and in fact several recent studies have shown that the complication rate for calcified lesions is higher than for any other lesion subtype. Calcification is the next big thing that we’re trying to take on in interventional cardiology,” Todd J. Brinton, MD, observed at the annual congress of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions.
At EuroPCR, he presented the results of DISRUPT CAD, a seven-center study in which 60 patients with heavily calcified coronary lesions underwent lithoplasty in order to facilitate stent placement. The study met all of its safety and performance endpoints. As a result, the week prior to EuroPCR the European regulatory agency granted marketing approval for Shockwave Medical’s coronary lithoplasty system; the indication is for coronary vessel preparation prior to stenting. A large phase III U.S. trial aimed at gaining FDA approval is planned.
Moreover, on the basis of the earlier favorable DISRUPT PAD trial, lithoplasty has already been approved for treatment of peripheral artery disease (PAD) in Europe since late 2015 and by the FDA since September 2016. Now underway is DISRUPT PAD III, a large postmarketing randomized trial comparing lithoplasty with conventional balloon angioplasty in patients with heavily calcified PAD, added Dr. Brinton, an interventional cardiologist at Stanford (Calif.) University and cofounder of Shockwave Medical.
Lithoplasty is a potentially transformative technology which he described as “lithotripsy inside a balloon.” Lithotripsy has an established 30-year track record for the safe treatment of kidney stones. However, lithotripsy utilizes focused ultrasound, while lithoplasty relies upon circumferential unfocused therapeutic ultrasound delivered by miniaturized emitters placed inside a 12-mm intravascular balloon. The balloon is crossed to the target lesion, inflated to a modest pressure of 4 atmospheres, then the operator delivers lithoplasty pulses lasting over 1 microsec in duration at a rate of 1/sec for 10 seconds in order to fracture the thick intramedial calcium plaque, allowing the lesion to open up and thereby normalize vessel compliance.
“Once you’ve cracked the calcium you can easily dilate the lesion. It’s the calcium that’s restricting the ability to dilate. The real fundamental need here is to maximize acute gain to get really good stent apposition. We’re trying to get expansion,” the cardiologist explained.
That was readily achieved in the DISRUPT CAD study. The 60 participants had reference vessel diameters of 2.5-4.0 mm, with an average target lesion length of 20 mm. The calcification was heavy, covering on average 270 degrees of the vessel circumference as measured by optical coherence tomography, with an average calcium thickness of 0.97 mm and a calcified segment length of 22.3 mm.
The mean stent expansion was 112%. The minimum luminal diameter improved from 0.9 mm pretreatment to 2.6 mm post treatment, for an acute gain of 1.7 mm. The amount of acute gain was similar across the full range of vessel diameters.
The mean diameter stenosis went from 68% pretreatment to 13% post-treatment.
The primary safety endpoint was the 30-day rate of MACE, defined as cardiac death, MI, or target vessel revascularization. The rate was 5%, consisting of 3 patients with mild non–Q-wave MI defined by creatine kinase–MB elevations more than three times the upper limit of normal. The 6-month MACE rate was 8.5%, which included the three non–Q-wave MIs plus two cardiac deaths not related to the procedure or technology.
Final angiographic results adjudicated in a central core laboratory showed no perforations, abrupt closures, slow or no reflow events, or residual dissections. These are complications commonly seen with debulking devices such as rotational or orbital atherectomy, Dr. Brinton noted.
The primary performance endpoint in DISRUPT CAD was clinical success, defined as a residual stenosis of less than 50% post PCI with no in-hospital MACE. This was achieved in 57 of 60 patients, or 95%. The device was successfully delivered to the target lesion with subsequent performance of lithoplasty in 59 of 60 patients. An even more flexible and deliverable device will be released in the coming year, according to the cardiologist.
“I’d say the take-home is that the disease has changed,” Dr. Brinton commented. “It’s not the same disease that we had when Gruentzig did his first balloon angioplasty. These lesions are more calcified, more complex, yet for the most part we use the same balloon we’ve been using for the last 40 years. So lithoplasty is really an attempt to modernize the therapy in a new patient subset we now take care of who are much more complicated than the patients we originally took care of.”
“The reality is, we’re having difficulty taking care of these patients. For myself as an interventionalist, it’s not uncommon to look around the table and see a massive amount of tools when we’re doing these complex cases. Lithoplasty is intended to bring the simplicity. I would say it’s not necessarily to make the best operators better, it’s to bring all operators up to the ability to take on these complex lesions that are now usually reserved for high-volume centers that can do debulking,” he added.
Session cochair David R. Holmes Jr., MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., pronounced lithoplasty “tremendously exciting.” He and the other panelists focused on questions of safety and potential collateral damage: Where does the calcified debris go? What are the effects of the unfocused sonic pressure waves on noncalcified plaque? How hot does the vessel get?
Dr. Brinton replied that thick calcium plaque is located mostly in the medial vessel wall and stays there after fracturing. That’s why distal embolization wasn’t an issue in DISRUPT CAD. In animal studies, even at 20 times the energy dose used in clinical practice, lithoplasty had no effect on softer, noncalcified plaque or normal tissue. Vessel temperature increases by about 1.2 degrees C during lithoplasty, which isn’t sufficient to cause injury or drive restenosis.
Elsewhere at EuroPCR, Alberto Cremonesi, MD, who chaired a press conference where Dr. Brinton presented highlights of DISRUPT CAD, declared lithoplasty is “in my mind a real breakthrough, not only for coronary disease but also for PAD.”
Is it possible that stand-alone lithoplasty could reduce the need for multiple stents in longer coronary lesions, instead making possible more focal stenting? asked Dr. Cremonesi of Maria Cecilia Hospital in Cotignola, Italy.
That’s one of several possibilities worthy of future investigation, Dr. Brinton replied. Lithoplasty might also facilitate the results obtainable with bioresorbable coronary scaffolds or drug-coated balloons, he added.
He noted that as cofounder of and a consultant to Shockwave Medical, he has a sizable financial involvement with the company.
PARIS – A novel therapeutic ultrasound-based technology known as lithoplasty is turning heads in interventional cardiology and vascular medicine because it addresses the bane of interventionalists’ existence: complex, heavily calcified coronary and peripheral artery lesions.
“Calcification is something we deal with every day in interventional cardiology. It makes the procedures more expensive, longer, and in fact several recent studies have shown that the complication rate for calcified lesions is higher than for any other lesion subtype. Calcification is the next big thing that we’re trying to take on in interventional cardiology,” Todd J. Brinton, MD, observed at the annual congress of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions.
At EuroPCR, he presented the results of DISRUPT CAD, a seven-center study in which 60 patients with heavily calcified coronary lesions underwent lithoplasty in order to facilitate stent placement. The study met all of its safety and performance endpoints. As a result, the week prior to EuroPCR the European regulatory agency granted marketing approval for Shockwave Medical’s coronary lithoplasty system; the indication is for coronary vessel preparation prior to stenting. A large phase III U.S. trial aimed at gaining FDA approval is planned.
Moreover, on the basis of the earlier favorable DISRUPT PAD trial, lithoplasty has already been approved for treatment of peripheral artery disease (PAD) in Europe since late 2015 and by the FDA since September 2016. Now underway is DISRUPT PAD III, a large postmarketing randomized trial comparing lithoplasty with conventional balloon angioplasty in patients with heavily calcified PAD, added Dr. Brinton, an interventional cardiologist at Stanford (Calif.) University and cofounder of Shockwave Medical.
Lithoplasty is a potentially transformative technology which he described as “lithotripsy inside a balloon.” Lithotripsy has an established 30-year track record for the safe treatment of kidney stones. However, lithotripsy utilizes focused ultrasound, while lithoplasty relies upon circumferential unfocused therapeutic ultrasound delivered by miniaturized emitters placed inside a 12-mm intravascular balloon. The balloon is crossed to the target lesion, inflated to a modest pressure of 4 atmospheres, then the operator delivers lithoplasty pulses lasting over 1 microsec in duration at a rate of 1/sec for 10 seconds in order to fracture the thick intramedial calcium plaque, allowing the lesion to open up and thereby normalize vessel compliance.
“Once you’ve cracked the calcium you can easily dilate the lesion. It’s the calcium that’s restricting the ability to dilate. The real fundamental need here is to maximize acute gain to get really good stent apposition. We’re trying to get expansion,” the cardiologist explained.
That was readily achieved in the DISRUPT CAD study. The 60 participants had reference vessel diameters of 2.5-4.0 mm, with an average target lesion length of 20 mm. The calcification was heavy, covering on average 270 degrees of the vessel circumference as measured by optical coherence tomography, with an average calcium thickness of 0.97 mm and a calcified segment length of 22.3 mm.
The mean stent expansion was 112%. The minimum luminal diameter improved from 0.9 mm pretreatment to 2.6 mm post treatment, for an acute gain of 1.7 mm. The amount of acute gain was similar across the full range of vessel diameters.
The mean diameter stenosis went from 68% pretreatment to 13% post-treatment.
The primary safety endpoint was the 30-day rate of MACE, defined as cardiac death, MI, or target vessel revascularization. The rate was 5%, consisting of 3 patients with mild non–Q-wave MI defined by creatine kinase–MB elevations more than three times the upper limit of normal. The 6-month MACE rate was 8.5%, which included the three non–Q-wave MIs plus two cardiac deaths not related to the procedure or technology.
Final angiographic results adjudicated in a central core laboratory showed no perforations, abrupt closures, slow or no reflow events, or residual dissections. These are complications commonly seen with debulking devices such as rotational or orbital atherectomy, Dr. Brinton noted.
The primary performance endpoint in DISRUPT CAD was clinical success, defined as a residual stenosis of less than 50% post PCI with no in-hospital MACE. This was achieved in 57 of 60 patients, or 95%. The device was successfully delivered to the target lesion with subsequent performance of lithoplasty in 59 of 60 patients. An even more flexible and deliverable device will be released in the coming year, according to the cardiologist.
“I’d say the take-home is that the disease has changed,” Dr. Brinton commented. “It’s not the same disease that we had when Gruentzig did his first balloon angioplasty. These lesions are more calcified, more complex, yet for the most part we use the same balloon we’ve been using for the last 40 years. So lithoplasty is really an attempt to modernize the therapy in a new patient subset we now take care of who are much more complicated than the patients we originally took care of.”
“The reality is, we’re having difficulty taking care of these patients. For myself as an interventionalist, it’s not uncommon to look around the table and see a massive amount of tools when we’re doing these complex cases. Lithoplasty is intended to bring the simplicity. I would say it’s not necessarily to make the best operators better, it’s to bring all operators up to the ability to take on these complex lesions that are now usually reserved for high-volume centers that can do debulking,” he added.
Session cochair David R. Holmes Jr., MD, of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., pronounced lithoplasty “tremendously exciting.” He and the other panelists focused on questions of safety and potential collateral damage: Where does the calcified debris go? What are the effects of the unfocused sonic pressure waves on noncalcified plaque? How hot does the vessel get?
Dr. Brinton replied that thick calcium plaque is located mostly in the medial vessel wall and stays there after fracturing. That’s why distal embolization wasn’t an issue in DISRUPT CAD. In animal studies, even at 20 times the energy dose used in clinical practice, lithoplasty had no effect on softer, noncalcified plaque or normal tissue. Vessel temperature increases by about 1.2 degrees C during lithoplasty, which isn’t sufficient to cause injury or drive restenosis.
Elsewhere at EuroPCR, Alberto Cremonesi, MD, who chaired a press conference where Dr. Brinton presented highlights of DISRUPT CAD, declared lithoplasty is “in my mind a real breakthrough, not only for coronary disease but also for PAD.”
Is it possible that stand-alone lithoplasty could reduce the need for multiple stents in longer coronary lesions, instead making possible more focal stenting? asked Dr. Cremonesi of Maria Cecilia Hospital in Cotignola, Italy.
That’s one of several possibilities worthy of future investigation, Dr. Brinton replied. Lithoplasty might also facilitate the results obtainable with bioresorbable coronary scaffolds or drug-coated balloons, he added.
He noted that as cofounder of and a consultant to Shockwave Medical, he has a sizable financial involvement with the company.
AT EUROPCR
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Lithoplasty of heavily calcified coronary lesions improved the minimum luminal diameter from 0.9 mm pretreatment to 2.6 mm post-treatment, for an immediate gain of 1.7 mm prior to stent placement.
Data source: This study featured 6-month follow-up of 60 patients with heavily calcified coronary lesions who underwent lithoplasty followed by stenting.
Disclosures: The DISRUPT CAD study was sponsored by Shockwave Medical, which is developing lithoplasty. The presenter cofounded the company.