Orthorexia Nervosa: An Obsession With Healthy Eating

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 01/31/2018 - 14:00
Despite a focus on eating, orthorexia nervosa may lead to malnourishment, loss of relationships, and poor quality of life.

First named by Steven Bratman in 1997, orthorexia nervosa (ON) from the Greek ortho, meaning correct, and orexi, meaning appetite, is classified as an unspecified feeding and eating disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edition (DSM-5).1,2

Hypothetical Case

Mr. P is a 30-year-old male who presented to the mental health clinic with his wife. The patient recounted that he had wanted to “be healthy” since childhood and has focused on exercise and proper diet, but anxiety about diet and food intake have steadily increased. Two years ago, he adopted a vegetarian diet by progressively eliminating several foods and food groups from his diet. He now feels “proud” to eat certain organically grown fruits, vegetables, nuts, beans, and drink only fruit or vegetable juice.

His wife stated that he spent between 3 and 5 hours daily preparing food or talking to friends and family about “correct foods to eat.” He also believed that errors in dietary habits caused physical or mental illnesses. He reported significant guilt and shame whenever he “slips up” on his dietary regimen and eats anything containing seafood, beef, or pork products, which he corrects by a day of fasting. His wife was frustrated because he refused to go to restaurants and started declining offers from friends to eat dinner at their homes unless he could bring his prepared food. He describes feeling “annoyed” when he sees other people eating fast food or meat.

Mr. P reported no significant medical or surgical history. His family history was significant for anxiety in his mother. He used to drink alcohol socially but ceased a few years ago due to its carbohydrate content. He never smoked or used illicit drugs.

A mental status exam revealed a thin male who appeared his stated age. He was cooperative, casually dressed, and made fair eye contact. He spoke clearly with an anxious tone and appropriate rate and volume. His affect was congruent with stated anxious mood. He was alert, awake, and oriented to person, place, and time. He reported no paranoia, auditory or visual hallucinations, and suicidal or homicidal ideation.

A physical exam revealed a thin male in no distress who measured 5 feet 10 inches tall and weighed 145 pounds, which yielded a body mass index of 20.8. His vitals included temperature of 98° F, blood pressure 115/76, pulse 74, and oxygen saturation 98% on room air. The remaining physical examination revealed no abnormalities. A complete blood count, thyroid function, urinalysis, and urine drug screens were within normal limits. Comprehensive metabolic profile revealed decreased sodium of 130 meq/L. Electrocardiogram revealed bradycardia.

An ON diagnosis is made primarily through a clinical interview. Collateral information from individuals familiar with the patient can be helpful. Experts have proposed and recently revised criteria for ON (Table). Although the ORTO-15 assessment tool may assist with diagnosis, the tool does not substitute for the clinical interview.

Discussion

There is no reliable measure of prevalence of ON, though Varga and colleagues initially estimated ON to occur in 6.9% of the general population, and ON may occur more frequently in health care professionals and performance artists.3 However, these may be overestimates, as the assessment tool used in the study does not adequately separate people with healthy eating habits from those with ON.4,5

Most prevalence studies were conducted in Europe and Turkey, and prevalence of ON may differ in the U.S. population. A recent assessment determined a prevalence of about 1%, similar to that of other eating disorders.5 No study has reported a correlation between ON and gender, but a survey of 448 college students in the U.S. (mean age 22 years) reported highest ON tendencies in Hispanic/Latino and overweight/obese students.6

Relationship to Other Illnesses

There is significant debate whether ON is a single syndrome, a variance of other syndromes, or a behavioral and culturally influenced attitude.7,8 Although ON may lead to or be comorbid with anorexia nervosa (AN) or obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), subtle differences exist between ON and these conditions.

To meet DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for AN, patients must weigh below minimally normal weight for their height and age, have an intense fear of gaining weight or becoming fat, and have a disturbed experience of their weight or body shape or cannot recognize the severity of the low weight.2 In contrast, an individual with ON may possess normal or low-normal weight. Patients with AN focus on food quantity, while patients with ON tend to focus on food quality. As summarized by Bratman, “People are ashamed of their anorexia, but they actively evangelize their orthorexia. People with anorexia skip meals; people with orthorexia do not (unless they are fasting). Those with anorexia focus only on avoiding foods, while those with orthorexia both avoid foods they think are bad and embrace foods they think are super-healthy.”9

Similarities between ON and OCD include anxiety, a need to exert control, and perfectionism. However, patients with OCD tend to report distress from compulsive behavior and a desire to change, thus exhibiting insight into their illness.8,10 Similarities between obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD) and ON include perfectionism, rigid thinking, excessive devotion, hypermorality, and a preoccupation with details and perceived rules.11

While no studies have yet described ON as a feature of somatoform disorders, some experts have hypothesized that preoccupation with illness in a patient with somatization disorder may engender a preoccupation with food and diet as a way to combat either real or perceived illness.11 Finally, there is a report of ON associated with the prodromal phase of schizophrenia, and the development of ON may increase risk for future psychotic disorders.11,12

 

 

Pathophysiology

The exact cause of ON is unknown, though it is likely multifactorial. Individuals with ON have neurocognitive deficits similar to those seen in patients with AN and OCD, including impairments in set-shifting (flexible problem solving), external attention, and working memory.11,13 Given these cognitive deficits as well as similar symptomatology, there may be analogous brain dysfunction in patients with ON and AN or OCD. Neuroimaging studies of patients with AN have revealed dysregulation of dopamine transmission in the reward circuitry of the ventral striatum and the food regulatory mechanism in the hypothalamus.14

Dysmorphology of and dysfunction in neural circuitry, particularly the cortico-striato-thalamo-cortical pathway, have been implicated in OCD.15 Neuroimaging studies have revealed increased volume and activation of the orbitofrontal cortex, which may be associated with obsessions and difficulty with extinction recall.14,15 In contrast, decreased volume and activity of the thalamus may impair its ability to inhibit the orbitofrontal cortex.15,16 Decreased volume and activity of the cingulate gyrus may be associated with difficulty in error monitoring and fear conditioning, while overactivation of the parietal lobe and cerebellum may be associated with compulsive behaviors.15,16

Risk Factors

Factors that contribute to the development of AN and possibly ON include development of food preferences, inherited differences in taste perception, food neophobia or pickiness, being premorbidly overweight or obese, parental feeding practices, and a history of parental eating disorders.14 One survey associated orthorexic tendencies with perfectionism, appearance orientation, overweight preoccupation, self-classified weight, and fearful and dismissing attachment styles.17 Significant predictors of ON included overweight preoccupation, appearance orientation, and a history of an eating disorder.17

Treatment

In contrast to patients with AN, patients with ON may be easily amenable to treatment, given their pursuit of and emphasis on wellness.18 Experts recommend a multidisciplinary team approach that includes physicians, psychotherapists, and dieticians.11 Treatment may be undertaken in an outpatient setting, but hospitalization for refeeding is recommended in cases with significant weight loss or malnourishment.11 Physical examination and laboratory studies are warranted, as excessive dietary restrictions can lead to weight loss and medical complications similar to those seen in AN, including osteopenia, anemia, hyponatremia, pancytopenia, bradycardia, and even pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum.19-21

There are no reported studies exploring the efficacy of psychotherapy or psychotropic medications for patients with ON. However, several treatments have been proposed given the symptom overlap with AN. Serotonin reuptake inhibitors may be beneficial for anxiety and obsessive-compulsive traits.18 However, patients with ON may refuse medications as unnatural substances.18

Cognitive behavioral therapy may be beneficial to address perfectionism and cognitive distortions, and exposure and response prevention may reduce obsessive-compulsive behaviors.11 Relaxation therapy may reduce mealtime anxiety. Psychoeducation may correct inaccurate beliefs about food groups, purity, and preparation, but it may induce emotional stress for the patient with ON.11

Conclusion

Orthorexia nervosa is perhaps best summarized as an obsession with healthy eating with associated restrictive behaviors. However, the attempt to attain optimum health through attention to diet may lead to malnourishment, loss of relationships, and poor quality of life.11 It is a little-understood disorder with uncertain etiology, imprecise assessment tools, and no formal diagnostic criteria or classification. Orthorexic characteristics vary from normal to pathologic in degree, and making a diagnosis remains a clinical judgment.22 Further research is needed to develop valid diagnostic tools and determining whether ON should be classified as a unique illness or a variation of other eating or anxiety disorders. Further research also may identify the etiology of ON, thus enabling targeted multidisciplinary treatment.

References

1. Bratman S. Health food junkie. Yoga J. 1997;136:42-50.

2. American Psychiatric Association. Feeding and eating disorders. In: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2013:329-354.

3. Varga M, Dukay-Szabó S, Túry F, van Furth EF. Evidence and gaps in the literature on orthorexia nervosa. Eat Weight Disord. 2013;18(2):103-111.

4. Donini LM, Marsili D, Graziani MP, Imbriale M, Cannella C. Orthorexia nervosa: validation of a diagnosis questionnaire. Eat Weight Disord. 2005;10(2):e28-e32.

5. Dunn TM, Gibbs J, Whitney N, Starosta A. Prevalence of orthorexia nervosa is less than 1 %: data from a US sample. Eat Weight Disord. 2016;22(1):185-192.

6. Bundros J, Clifford D, Silliman K, Neyman Morris M. Prevalence of orthorexia nervosa among college students based on Bratman’s test and associated tendencies. Appetite. 2016;101:86-94.

7. Vandereycken W. Media hype, diagnostic fad or genuine disorder? Professionals’ opinions about night eating syndrome, orthorexia, muscle dysmorphia, and emetophobia. Eat Disord. 2011;19(2):145-155.

8. Dell’Osso L, Abelli M, Carpita B, et al. Historical evolution of the concept of anorexia nervosa and relationships with orthorexia nervosa, autism, and obsessive-compulsive spectrum. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2016;12:1651-1660.

9. Bratman S. Orthorexia: an update. http://www.orthorexia.com/orthorexia-an-update. Updated October 5, 2015. Accessed April 18, 2017.

10. Dunn TM, Bratman S. On orthorexia nervosa: a review of the literature and proposed diagnostic criteria. Eat Behav. 2016;21:11-17.

11. Koven NS, Abry AW. The clinical basis of orthorexia nervosa: emerging perspectives. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2015;11:385-394.

12. Saddichha S, Babu GN, Chandra P. Orthorexia nervosa presenting as prodrome of schizophrenia. Schizophr Res. 2012;134(1):110.

13. Koven NS, Senbonmatsu R. A neuropsychological evaluation of orthorexia nervosa. Open J Psychiatry. 2013;3(2):214-222.

14. Gorwood P, Blanchet-Collet C, Chartrel N, et al. New insights in anorexia nervosa. Front Neurosci. 2016;10:256.

15. Milad MR, Rauch SL. Obsessive-compulsive disorder: beyond segregated cortico-striatal pathways. Trends Cogn Sci. 2012;16(1):43-51.

16. Tang W, Zhu Q, Gong X, Zhu C, Wang Y, Chen S. Cortico-striato-thalamo-cortical circuit abnormalities in obsessive-compulsive disorder: A voxel-based morphometric and fMRI study of the whole brain. Behav Brain Res. 2016;313:17-22.

17. Barnes MA, Caltabiano ML. The interrelationship between orthorexia nervosa, perfectionism, body image and attachment style. Eat Weight Disord. 2017;22(1):177-184.

18. Mathieu J. What is orthorexia? J Am Diet Assoc. 2005;105(10):1510-1512.

19. Catalina Zamora ML, Bote Bonaechea B, García Sánchez F, Ríos Rial B. Orthorexia nervosa. A new eating behavior disorder? [in Spanish]. Actas Esp Psiquiatr. 2005;33(1):66-68.

20. Moroze RM, Dunn TM, Craig Holland J, Yager J, Weintraub P. Microthinking about micronutrients: a case of transition from obsessions about healthy eating to near-fatal “orthorexia nervosa” and proposed diagnostic criteria. Psychosomatics. 2015;56(4):397-403.

21. Park SW, Kim JY, Go GJ, Jeon ES, Pyo HJ, Kwon YJ. Orthorexia nervosa with hyponatremia, subcutaneous emphysema, pneumomediastimum, pneumothorax, and pancytopenia. Electrolyte Blood Press. 2011;9(1):32-37.

22. Mogallapu RNG, Aynampudi AR, Scarff JR, Lippmann S. Orthorexia nervosa. The Kentucky Psychiatrist. 2012;22(3):3-6.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Scarff is a psychiatrist at the William Jennings Bryan Dorn VA Community-Based Outpatient Clinic in Spartanburg, South Carolina.

Author disclosures
The author reports no actual or potential conflicts of interest with regard to this article.

Disclaimer
The opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of
Federal Practitioner, Frontline Medical Communications Inc., the U.S. Government, or any of its agencies. This article may discuss unlabeled or investigational use of certain drugs. Please review the complete prescribing information for specific drugs or drug combinations—including indications, contraindications, warnings, and adverse effects—before administering pharmacologic therapy to patients.

Issue
Federal Practitioner - 34(6)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
36-39
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Scarff is a psychiatrist at the William Jennings Bryan Dorn VA Community-Based Outpatient Clinic in Spartanburg, South Carolina.

Author disclosures
The author reports no actual or potential conflicts of interest with regard to this article.

Disclaimer
The opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of
Federal Practitioner, Frontline Medical Communications Inc., the U.S. Government, or any of its agencies. This article may discuss unlabeled or investigational use of certain drugs. Please review the complete prescribing information for specific drugs or drug combinations—including indications, contraindications, warnings, and adverse effects—before administering pharmacologic therapy to patients.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Scarff is a psychiatrist at the William Jennings Bryan Dorn VA Community-Based Outpatient Clinic in Spartanburg, South Carolina.

Author disclosures
The author reports no actual or potential conflicts of interest with regard to this article.

Disclaimer
The opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of
Federal Practitioner, Frontline Medical Communications Inc., the U.S. Government, or any of its agencies. This article may discuss unlabeled or investigational use of certain drugs. Please review the complete prescribing information for specific drugs or drug combinations—including indications, contraindications, warnings, and adverse effects—before administering pharmacologic therapy to patients.

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles
Despite a focus on eating, orthorexia nervosa may lead to malnourishment, loss of relationships, and poor quality of life.
Despite a focus on eating, orthorexia nervosa may lead to malnourishment, loss of relationships, and poor quality of life.

First named by Steven Bratman in 1997, orthorexia nervosa (ON) from the Greek ortho, meaning correct, and orexi, meaning appetite, is classified as an unspecified feeding and eating disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edition (DSM-5).1,2

Hypothetical Case

Mr. P is a 30-year-old male who presented to the mental health clinic with his wife. The patient recounted that he had wanted to “be healthy” since childhood and has focused on exercise and proper diet, but anxiety about diet and food intake have steadily increased. Two years ago, he adopted a vegetarian diet by progressively eliminating several foods and food groups from his diet. He now feels “proud” to eat certain organically grown fruits, vegetables, nuts, beans, and drink only fruit or vegetable juice.

His wife stated that he spent between 3 and 5 hours daily preparing food or talking to friends and family about “correct foods to eat.” He also believed that errors in dietary habits caused physical or mental illnesses. He reported significant guilt and shame whenever he “slips up” on his dietary regimen and eats anything containing seafood, beef, or pork products, which he corrects by a day of fasting. His wife was frustrated because he refused to go to restaurants and started declining offers from friends to eat dinner at their homes unless he could bring his prepared food. He describes feeling “annoyed” when he sees other people eating fast food or meat.

Mr. P reported no significant medical or surgical history. His family history was significant for anxiety in his mother. He used to drink alcohol socially but ceased a few years ago due to its carbohydrate content. He never smoked or used illicit drugs.

A mental status exam revealed a thin male who appeared his stated age. He was cooperative, casually dressed, and made fair eye contact. He spoke clearly with an anxious tone and appropriate rate and volume. His affect was congruent with stated anxious mood. He was alert, awake, and oriented to person, place, and time. He reported no paranoia, auditory or visual hallucinations, and suicidal or homicidal ideation.

A physical exam revealed a thin male in no distress who measured 5 feet 10 inches tall and weighed 145 pounds, which yielded a body mass index of 20.8. His vitals included temperature of 98° F, blood pressure 115/76, pulse 74, and oxygen saturation 98% on room air. The remaining physical examination revealed no abnormalities. A complete blood count, thyroid function, urinalysis, and urine drug screens were within normal limits. Comprehensive metabolic profile revealed decreased sodium of 130 meq/L. Electrocardiogram revealed bradycardia.

An ON diagnosis is made primarily through a clinical interview. Collateral information from individuals familiar with the patient can be helpful. Experts have proposed and recently revised criteria for ON (Table). Although the ORTO-15 assessment tool may assist with diagnosis, the tool does not substitute for the clinical interview.

Discussion

There is no reliable measure of prevalence of ON, though Varga and colleagues initially estimated ON to occur in 6.9% of the general population, and ON may occur more frequently in health care professionals and performance artists.3 However, these may be overestimates, as the assessment tool used in the study does not adequately separate people with healthy eating habits from those with ON.4,5

Most prevalence studies were conducted in Europe and Turkey, and prevalence of ON may differ in the U.S. population. A recent assessment determined a prevalence of about 1%, similar to that of other eating disorders.5 No study has reported a correlation between ON and gender, but a survey of 448 college students in the U.S. (mean age 22 years) reported highest ON tendencies in Hispanic/Latino and overweight/obese students.6

Relationship to Other Illnesses

There is significant debate whether ON is a single syndrome, a variance of other syndromes, or a behavioral and culturally influenced attitude.7,8 Although ON may lead to or be comorbid with anorexia nervosa (AN) or obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), subtle differences exist between ON and these conditions.

To meet DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for AN, patients must weigh below minimally normal weight for their height and age, have an intense fear of gaining weight or becoming fat, and have a disturbed experience of their weight or body shape or cannot recognize the severity of the low weight.2 In contrast, an individual with ON may possess normal or low-normal weight. Patients with AN focus on food quantity, while patients with ON tend to focus on food quality. As summarized by Bratman, “People are ashamed of their anorexia, but they actively evangelize their orthorexia. People with anorexia skip meals; people with orthorexia do not (unless they are fasting). Those with anorexia focus only on avoiding foods, while those with orthorexia both avoid foods they think are bad and embrace foods they think are super-healthy.”9

Similarities between ON and OCD include anxiety, a need to exert control, and perfectionism. However, patients with OCD tend to report distress from compulsive behavior and a desire to change, thus exhibiting insight into their illness.8,10 Similarities between obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD) and ON include perfectionism, rigid thinking, excessive devotion, hypermorality, and a preoccupation with details and perceived rules.11

While no studies have yet described ON as a feature of somatoform disorders, some experts have hypothesized that preoccupation with illness in a patient with somatization disorder may engender a preoccupation with food and diet as a way to combat either real or perceived illness.11 Finally, there is a report of ON associated with the prodromal phase of schizophrenia, and the development of ON may increase risk for future psychotic disorders.11,12

 

 

Pathophysiology

The exact cause of ON is unknown, though it is likely multifactorial. Individuals with ON have neurocognitive deficits similar to those seen in patients with AN and OCD, including impairments in set-shifting (flexible problem solving), external attention, and working memory.11,13 Given these cognitive deficits as well as similar symptomatology, there may be analogous brain dysfunction in patients with ON and AN or OCD. Neuroimaging studies of patients with AN have revealed dysregulation of dopamine transmission in the reward circuitry of the ventral striatum and the food regulatory mechanism in the hypothalamus.14

Dysmorphology of and dysfunction in neural circuitry, particularly the cortico-striato-thalamo-cortical pathway, have been implicated in OCD.15 Neuroimaging studies have revealed increased volume and activation of the orbitofrontal cortex, which may be associated with obsessions and difficulty with extinction recall.14,15 In contrast, decreased volume and activity of the thalamus may impair its ability to inhibit the orbitofrontal cortex.15,16 Decreased volume and activity of the cingulate gyrus may be associated with difficulty in error monitoring and fear conditioning, while overactivation of the parietal lobe and cerebellum may be associated with compulsive behaviors.15,16

Risk Factors

Factors that contribute to the development of AN and possibly ON include development of food preferences, inherited differences in taste perception, food neophobia or pickiness, being premorbidly overweight or obese, parental feeding practices, and a history of parental eating disorders.14 One survey associated orthorexic tendencies with perfectionism, appearance orientation, overweight preoccupation, self-classified weight, and fearful and dismissing attachment styles.17 Significant predictors of ON included overweight preoccupation, appearance orientation, and a history of an eating disorder.17

Treatment

In contrast to patients with AN, patients with ON may be easily amenable to treatment, given their pursuit of and emphasis on wellness.18 Experts recommend a multidisciplinary team approach that includes physicians, psychotherapists, and dieticians.11 Treatment may be undertaken in an outpatient setting, but hospitalization for refeeding is recommended in cases with significant weight loss or malnourishment.11 Physical examination and laboratory studies are warranted, as excessive dietary restrictions can lead to weight loss and medical complications similar to those seen in AN, including osteopenia, anemia, hyponatremia, pancytopenia, bradycardia, and even pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum.19-21

There are no reported studies exploring the efficacy of psychotherapy or psychotropic medications for patients with ON. However, several treatments have been proposed given the symptom overlap with AN. Serotonin reuptake inhibitors may be beneficial for anxiety and obsessive-compulsive traits.18 However, patients with ON may refuse medications as unnatural substances.18

Cognitive behavioral therapy may be beneficial to address perfectionism and cognitive distortions, and exposure and response prevention may reduce obsessive-compulsive behaviors.11 Relaxation therapy may reduce mealtime anxiety. Psychoeducation may correct inaccurate beliefs about food groups, purity, and preparation, but it may induce emotional stress for the patient with ON.11

Conclusion

Orthorexia nervosa is perhaps best summarized as an obsession with healthy eating with associated restrictive behaviors. However, the attempt to attain optimum health through attention to diet may lead to malnourishment, loss of relationships, and poor quality of life.11 It is a little-understood disorder with uncertain etiology, imprecise assessment tools, and no formal diagnostic criteria or classification. Orthorexic characteristics vary from normal to pathologic in degree, and making a diagnosis remains a clinical judgment.22 Further research is needed to develop valid diagnostic tools and determining whether ON should be classified as a unique illness or a variation of other eating or anxiety disorders. Further research also may identify the etiology of ON, thus enabling targeted multidisciplinary treatment.

First named by Steven Bratman in 1997, orthorexia nervosa (ON) from the Greek ortho, meaning correct, and orexi, meaning appetite, is classified as an unspecified feeding and eating disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edition (DSM-5).1,2

Hypothetical Case

Mr. P is a 30-year-old male who presented to the mental health clinic with his wife. The patient recounted that he had wanted to “be healthy” since childhood and has focused on exercise and proper diet, but anxiety about diet and food intake have steadily increased. Two years ago, he adopted a vegetarian diet by progressively eliminating several foods and food groups from his diet. He now feels “proud” to eat certain organically grown fruits, vegetables, nuts, beans, and drink only fruit or vegetable juice.

His wife stated that he spent between 3 and 5 hours daily preparing food or talking to friends and family about “correct foods to eat.” He also believed that errors in dietary habits caused physical or mental illnesses. He reported significant guilt and shame whenever he “slips up” on his dietary regimen and eats anything containing seafood, beef, or pork products, which he corrects by a day of fasting. His wife was frustrated because he refused to go to restaurants and started declining offers from friends to eat dinner at their homes unless he could bring his prepared food. He describes feeling “annoyed” when he sees other people eating fast food or meat.

Mr. P reported no significant medical or surgical history. His family history was significant for anxiety in his mother. He used to drink alcohol socially but ceased a few years ago due to its carbohydrate content. He never smoked or used illicit drugs.

A mental status exam revealed a thin male who appeared his stated age. He was cooperative, casually dressed, and made fair eye contact. He spoke clearly with an anxious tone and appropriate rate and volume. His affect was congruent with stated anxious mood. He was alert, awake, and oriented to person, place, and time. He reported no paranoia, auditory or visual hallucinations, and suicidal or homicidal ideation.

A physical exam revealed a thin male in no distress who measured 5 feet 10 inches tall and weighed 145 pounds, which yielded a body mass index of 20.8. His vitals included temperature of 98° F, blood pressure 115/76, pulse 74, and oxygen saturation 98% on room air. The remaining physical examination revealed no abnormalities. A complete blood count, thyroid function, urinalysis, and urine drug screens were within normal limits. Comprehensive metabolic profile revealed decreased sodium of 130 meq/L. Electrocardiogram revealed bradycardia.

An ON diagnosis is made primarily through a clinical interview. Collateral information from individuals familiar with the patient can be helpful. Experts have proposed and recently revised criteria for ON (Table). Although the ORTO-15 assessment tool may assist with diagnosis, the tool does not substitute for the clinical interview.

Discussion

There is no reliable measure of prevalence of ON, though Varga and colleagues initially estimated ON to occur in 6.9% of the general population, and ON may occur more frequently in health care professionals and performance artists.3 However, these may be overestimates, as the assessment tool used in the study does not adequately separate people with healthy eating habits from those with ON.4,5

Most prevalence studies were conducted in Europe and Turkey, and prevalence of ON may differ in the U.S. population. A recent assessment determined a prevalence of about 1%, similar to that of other eating disorders.5 No study has reported a correlation between ON and gender, but a survey of 448 college students in the U.S. (mean age 22 years) reported highest ON tendencies in Hispanic/Latino and overweight/obese students.6

Relationship to Other Illnesses

There is significant debate whether ON is a single syndrome, a variance of other syndromes, or a behavioral and culturally influenced attitude.7,8 Although ON may lead to or be comorbid with anorexia nervosa (AN) or obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), subtle differences exist between ON and these conditions.

To meet DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for AN, patients must weigh below minimally normal weight for their height and age, have an intense fear of gaining weight or becoming fat, and have a disturbed experience of their weight or body shape or cannot recognize the severity of the low weight.2 In contrast, an individual with ON may possess normal or low-normal weight. Patients with AN focus on food quantity, while patients with ON tend to focus on food quality. As summarized by Bratman, “People are ashamed of their anorexia, but they actively evangelize their orthorexia. People with anorexia skip meals; people with orthorexia do not (unless they are fasting). Those with anorexia focus only on avoiding foods, while those with orthorexia both avoid foods they think are bad and embrace foods they think are super-healthy.”9

Similarities between ON and OCD include anxiety, a need to exert control, and perfectionism. However, patients with OCD tend to report distress from compulsive behavior and a desire to change, thus exhibiting insight into their illness.8,10 Similarities between obsessive-compulsive personality disorder (OCPD) and ON include perfectionism, rigid thinking, excessive devotion, hypermorality, and a preoccupation with details and perceived rules.11

While no studies have yet described ON as a feature of somatoform disorders, some experts have hypothesized that preoccupation with illness in a patient with somatization disorder may engender a preoccupation with food and diet as a way to combat either real or perceived illness.11 Finally, there is a report of ON associated with the prodromal phase of schizophrenia, and the development of ON may increase risk for future psychotic disorders.11,12

 

 

Pathophysiology

The exact cause of ON is unknown, though it is likely multifactorial. Individuals with ON have neurocognitive deficits similar to those seen in patients with AN and OCD, including impairments in set-shifting (flexible problem solving), external attention, and working memory.11,13 Given these cognitive deficits as well as similar symptomatology, there may be analogous brain dysfunction in patients with ON and AN or OCD. Neuroimaging studies of patients with AN have revealed dysregulation of dopamine transmission in the reward circuitry of the ventral striatum and the food regulatory mechanism in the hypothalamus.14

Dysmorphology of and dysfunction in neural circuitry, particularly the cortico-striato-thalamo-cortical pathway, have been implicated in OCD.15 Neuroimaging studies have revealed increased volume and activation of the orbitofrontal cortex, which may be associated with obsessions and difficulty with extinction recall.14,15 In contrast, decreased volume and activity of the thalamus may impair its ability to inhibit the orbitofrontal cortex.15,16 Decreased volume and activity of the cingulate gyrus may be associated with difficulty in error monitoring and fear conditioning, while overactivation of the parietal lobe and cerebellum may be associated with compulsive behaviors.15,16

Risk Factors

Factors that contribute to the development of AN and possibly ON include development of food preferences, inherited differences in taste perception, food neophobia or pickiness, being premorbidly overweight or obese, parental feeding practices, and a history of parental eating disorders.14 One survey associated orthorexic tendencies with perfectionism, appearance orientation, overweight preoccupation, self-classified weight, and fearful and dismissing attachment styles.17 Significant predictors of ON included overweight preoccupation, appearance orientation, and a history of an eating disorder.17

Treatment

In contrast to patients with AN, patients with ON may be easily amenable to treatment, given their pursuit of and emphasis on wellness.18 Experts recommend a multidisciplinary team approach that includes physicians, psychotherapists, and dieticians.11 Treatment may be undertaken in an outpatient setting, but hospitalization for refeeding is recommended in cases with significant weight loss or malnourishment.11 Physical examination and laboratory studies are warranted, as excessive dietary restrictions can lead to weight loss and medical complications similar to those seen in AN, including osteopenia, anemia, hyponatremia, pancytopenia, bradycardia, and even pneumothorax and pneumomediastinum.19-21

There are no reported studies exploring the efficacy of psychotherapy or psychotropic medications for patients with ON. However, several treatments have been proposed given the symptom overlap with AN. Serotonin reuptake inhibitors may be beneficial for anxiety and obsessive-compulsive traits.18 However, patients with ON may refuse medications as unnatural substances.18

Cognitive behavioral therapy may be beneficial to address perfectionism and cognitive distortions, and exposure and response prevention may reduce obsessive-compulsive behaviors.11 Relaxation therapy may reduce mealtime anxiety. Psychoeducation may correct inaccurate beliefs about food groups, purity, and preparation, but it may induce emotional stress for the patient with ON.11

Conclusion

Orthorexia nervosa is perhaps best summarized as an obsession with healthy eating with associated restrictive behaviors. However, the attempt to attain optimum health through attention to diet may lead to malnourishment, loss of relationships, and poor quality of life.11 It is a little-understood disorder with uncertain etiology, imprecise assessment tools, and no formal diagnostic criteria or classification. Orthorexic characteristics vary from normal to pathologic in degree, and making a diagnosis remains a clinical judgment.22 Further research is needed to develop valid diagnostic tools and determining whether ON should be classified as a unique illness or a variation of other eating or anxiety disorders. Further research also may identify the etiology of ON, thus enabling targeted multidisciplinary treatment.

References

1. Bratman S. Health food junkie. Yoga J. 1997;136:42-50.

2. American Psychiatric Association. Feeding and eating disorders. In: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2013:329-354.

3. Varga M, Dukay-Szabó S, Túry F, van Furth EF. Evidence and gaps in the literature on orthorexia nervosa. Eat Weight Disord. 2013;18(2):103-111.

4. Donini LM, Marsili D, Graziani MP, Imbriale M, Cannella C. Orthorexia nervosa: validation of a diagnosis questionnaire. Eat Weight Disord. 2005;10(2):e28-e32.

5. Dunn TM, Gibbs J, Whitney N, Starosta A. Prevalence of orthorexia nervosa is less than 1 %: data from a US sample. Eat Weight Disord. 2016;22(1):185-192.

6. Bundros J, Clifford D, Silliman K, Neyman Morris M. Prevalence of orthorexia nervosa among college students based on Bratman’s test and associated tendencies. Appetite. 2016;101:86-94.

7. Vandereycken W. Media hype, diagnostic fad or genuine disorder? Professionals’ opinions about night eating syndrome, orthorexia, muscle dysmorphia, and emetophobia. Eat Disord. 2011;19(2):145-155.

8. Dell’Osso L, Abelli M, Carpita B, et al. Historical evolution of the concept of anorexia nervosa and relationships with orthorexia nervosa, autism, and obsessive-compulsive spectrum. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2016;12:1651-1660.

9. Bratman S. Orthorexia: an update. http://www.orthorexia.com/orthorexia-an-update. Updated October 5, 2015. Accessed April 18, 2017.

10. Dunn TM, Bratman S. On orthorexia nervosa: a review of the literature and proposed diagnostic criteria. Eat Behav. 2016;21:11-17.

11. Koven NS, Abry AW. The clinical basis of orthorexia nervosa: emerging perspectives. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2015;11:385-394.

12. Saddichha S, Babu GN, Chandra P. Orthorexia nervosa presenting as prodrome of schizophrenia. Schizophr Res. 2012;134(1):110.

13. Koven NS, Senbonmatsu R. A neuropsychological evaluation of orthorexia nervosa. Open J Psychiatry. 2013;3(2):214-222.

14. Gorwood P, Blanchet-Collet C, Chartrel N, et al. New insights in anorexia nervosa. Front Neurosci. 2016;10:256.

15. Milad MR, Rauch SL. Obsessive-compulsive disorder: beyond segregated cortico-striatal pathways. Trends Cogn Sci. 2012;16(1):43-51.

16. Tang W, Zhu Q, Gong X, Zhu C, Wang Y, Chen S. Cortico-striato-thalamo-cortical circuit abnormalities in obsessive-compulsive disorder: A voxel-based morphometric and fMRI study of the whole brain. Behav Brain Res. 2016;313:17-22.

17. Barnes MA, Caltabiano ML. The interrelationship between orthorexia nervosa, perfectionism, body image and attachment style. Eat Weight Disord. 2017;22(1):177-184.

18. Mathieu J. What is orthorexia? J Am Diet Assoc. 2005;105(10):1510-1512.

19. Catalina Zamora ML, Bote Bonaechea B, García Sánchez F, Ríos Rial B. Orthorexia nervosa. A new eating behavior disorder? [in Spanish]. Actas Esp Psiquiatr. 2005;33(1):66-68.

20. Moroze RM, Dunn TM, Craig Holland J, Yager J, Weintraub P. Microthinking about micronutrients: a case of transition from obsessions about healthy eating to near-fatal “orthorexia nervosa” and proposed diagnostic criteria. Psychosomatics. 2015;56(4):397-403.

21. Park SW, Kim JY, Go GJ, Jeon ES, Pyo HJ, Kwon YJ. Orthorexia nervosa with hyponatremia, subcutaneous emphysema, pneumomediastimum, pneumothorax, and pancytopenia. Electrolyte Blood Press. 2011;9(1):32-37.

22. Mogallapu RNG, Aynampudi AR, Scarff JR, Lippmann S. Orthorexia nervosa. The Kentucky Psychiatrist. 2012;22(3):3-6.

References

1. Bratman S. Health food junkie. Yoga J. 1997;136:42-50.

2. American Psychiatric Association. Feeding and eating disorders. In: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2013:329-354.

3. Varga M, Dukay-Szabó S, Túry F, van Furth EF. Evidence and gaps in the literature on orthorexia nervosa. Eat Weight Disord. 2013;18(2):103-111.

4. Donini LM, Marsili D, Graziani MP, Imbriale M, Cannella C. Orthorexia nervosa: validation of a diagnosis questionnaire. Eat Weight Disord. 2005;10(2):e28-e32.

5. Dunn TM, Gibbs J, Whitney N, Starosta A. Prevalence of orthorexia nervosa is less than 1 %: data from a US sample. Eat Weight Disord. 2016;22(1):185-192.

6. Bundros J, Clifford D, Silliman K, Neyman Morris M. Prevalence of orthorexia nervosa among college students based on Bratman’s test and associated tendencies. Appetite. 2016;101:86-94.

7. Vandereycken W. Media hype, diagnostic fad or genuine disorder? Professionals’ opinions about night eating syndrome, orthorexia, muscle dysmorphia, and emetophobia. Eat Disord. 2011;19(2):145-155.

8. Dell’Osso L, Abelli M, Carpita B, et al. Historical evolution of the concept of anorexia nervosa and relationships with orthorexia nervosa, autism, and obsessive-compulsive spectrum. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2016;12:1651-1660.

9. Bratman S. Orthorexia: an update. http://www.orthorexia.com/orthorexia-an-update. Updated October 5, 2015. Accessed April 18, 2017.

10. Dunn TM, Bratman S. On orthorexia nervosa: a review of the literature and proposed diagnostic criteria. Eat Behav. 2016;21:11-17.

11. Koven NS, Abry AW. The clinical basis of orthorexia nervosa: emerging perspectives. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2015;11:385-394.

12. Saddichha S, Babu GN, Chandra P. Orthorexia nervosa presenting as prodrome of schizophrenia. Schizophr Res. 2012;134(1):110.

13. Koven NS, Senbonmatsu R. A neuropsychological evaluation of orthorexia nervosa. Open J Psychiatry. 2013;3(2):214-222.

14. Gorwood P, Blanchet-Collet C, Chartrel N, et al. New insights in anorexia nervosa. Front Neurosci. 2016;10:256.

15. Milad MR, Rauch SL. Obsessive-compulsive disorder: beyond segregated cortico-striatal pathways. Trends Cogn Sci. 2012;16(1):43-51.

16. Tang W, Zhu Q, Gong X, Zhu C, Wang Y, Chen S. Cortico-striato-thalamo-cortical circuit abnormalities in obsessive-compulsive disorder: A voxel-based morphometric and fMRI study of the whole brain. Behav Brain Res. 2016;313:17-22.

17. Barnes MA, Caltabiano ML. The interrelationship between orthorexia nervosa, perfectionism, body image and attachment style. Eat Weight Disord. 2017;22(1):177-184.

18. Mathieu J. What is orthorexia? J Am Diet Assoc. 2005;105(10):1510-1512.

19. Catalina Zamora ML, Bote Bonaechea B, García Sánchez F, Ríos Rial B. Orthorexia nervosa. A new eating behavior disorder? [in Spanish]. Actas Esp Psiquiatr. 2005;33(1):66-68.

20. Moroze RM, Dunn TM, Craig Holland J, Yager J, Weintraub P. Microthinking about micronutrients: a case of transition from obsessions about healthy eating to near-fatal “orthorexia nervosa” and proposed diagnostic criteria. Psychosomatics. 2015;56(4):397-403.

21. Park SW, Kim JY, Go GJ, Jeon ES, Pyo HJ, Kwon YJ. Orthorexia nervosa with hyponatremia, subcutaneous emphysema, pneumomediastimum, pneumothorax, and pancytopenia. Electrolyte Blood Press. 2011;9(1):32-37.

22. Mogallapu RNG, Aynampudi AR, Scarff JR, Lippmann S. Orthorexia nervosa. The Kentucky Psychiatrist. 2012;22(3):3-6.

Issue
Federal Practitioner - 34(6)
Issue
Federal Practitioner - 34(6)
Page Number
36-39
Page Number
36-39
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Article PDF Media

Inhibitor elicits responses in heavily pretreated FL, DLBCL

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 01/17/2023 - 11:17
Display Headline
Inhibitor elicits responses in heavily pretreated FL, DLBCL

 

14th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma (ICML)

 

LUGANO, SWITZERLAND—Interim results of a phase 2 trial suggest tazemetostat can be effective in patients with heavily pretreated, relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

 

The EZH2 inhibitor produced the highest overall response rate in patients with EZH2-mutated follicular lymphoma (FL), followed by EZH2-mutated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

 

However, the drug also produced complete responses in FL and DLBCL patients with wild-type EZH2.

 

“If we had focused [only] on patients with EZH2 mutations, we would have missed those other complete responders in the wild-type setting,” said study investigator Franck Morschhauser, MD, PhD, of Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Lille in France.

 

He presented results of the trial* during the plenary session of the 14th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma (ICML). The research was sponsored by Epizyme, the company developing tazemetostat.

 

The trial enrolled patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL or FL who had received at least 2 prior therapies. The patients received tazemetostat at 800 mg twice daily until disease progression or study withdrawal.

 

Efficacy in FL

 

Dr Morschhauser presented efficacy data on 67 patients with FL. Thirteen had EZH2 mutations, and 54 had wild-type EZH2. The median age was 62 in the mutated group and 61 in the wild-type group.

 

Both groups had a median of 4 prior lines of therapy. Fifty-four percent of EZH2-mutated patients were refractory to their last treatment, as were 48% of wild-type patients.

 

The median time from diagnosis was 7.4 years in mutated patients and 4.9 years in wild-type patients. The median time from last therapy was 13 weeks and 41.3 weeks, respectively.

 

The overall response rate was 92% (12/13) in EZH2-mutated patients and 26% (14/54) in wild-type patients. The complete response rates were 8% (n=1) and 6% (n=3), respectively.

 

The median time to first response was 11.9 weeks and 15.2 weeks, respectively.

 

None of the EZH2-mutated patients have progressed, but 13 (24%) wild-type patients have.

 

Forty-eight percent of all FL patients remain on study. One EZH2-mutated patient with stable disease is still on study, as are 23 wild-type patients with stable disease.

 

Efficacy in DLBCL

 

Dr Morschhauser presented data on 137 patients with DLBCL, 17 with EZH2 mutations and 120 with wild-type EZH2. The median age was 61 in the mutated group and 69 in the wild-type group.

 

Both groups had a median of 3 prior lines of therapy. Eighty-two percent of EZH2-mutated patients were refractory to their last treatment, as were 63% of wild-type patients.

 

The median time from diagnosis was 1 year in mutated patients and 2 years in wild-type patients. The median time from last therapy was 8.6 weeks and 11.6 weeks, respectively.

 

The overall response rate was 29% (5/17) in EZH2-mutated patients and 15% (18/119) in wild-type patients. The complete response rates were 0% (n=0) and 8% (n=10), respectively.

 

The median time to first response was 8.3 weeks and 8.5 weeks, respectively.

 

Six (35%) of the EZH2-mutated patients have progressed, as have 60 (50%) wild-type patients.

 

Twelve percent of all DLBCL patients remain on study. One EZH2-mutated patient with stable disease is still on therapy, as are 4 wild-type patients with stable disease.

 

Predictors of response

 

Dr Morschhauser and his colleagues performed next-generation sequencing of samples from 92 patients in an attempt to identify predictors of response to tazemetostat.

 

The data suggested that EZH2 and MYD88 activating mutations are positive predictors of response, and negative predictors include MYC, TP53, and HIST1H1E.

 

Safety

 

Safety data were available for 210 patients. The overall rate of treatment-related adverse events (AEs) was 59%, the rate of grade 3 or higher treatment-related AEs was 18%, and the rate of serious treatment-related AEs was 10%.

 

 

 

There were treatment-related AEs leading to dose interruption (15%), dose reduction (3%), and discontinuation of tazemetostat (2%).

 

The most common treatment-related AEs were nausea (14%), thrombocytopenia (13%), anemia (10%), neutropenia (9%), diarrhea (8%), asthenia (8%), and fatigue (7%).

 

Dr Morschhauser said these results “confirm that tazemetostat is quite safe” in this patient population, and enrollment in this trial is ongoing. 

 

*Data in the abstract differ from the presentation.

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

 

14th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma (ICML)

 

LUGANO, SWITZERLAND—Interim results of a phase 2 trial suggest tazemetostat can be effective in patients with heavily pretreated, relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

 

The EZH2 inhibitor produced the highest overall response rate in patients with EZH2-mutated follicular lymphoma (FL), followed by EZH2-mutated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

 

However, the drug also produced complete responses in FL and DLBCL patients with wild-type EZH2.

 

“If we had focused [only] on patients with EZH2 mutations, we would have missed those other complete responders in the wild-type setting,” said study investigator Franck Morschhauser, MD, PhD, of Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Lille in France.

 

He presented results of the trial* during the plenary session of the 14th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma (ICML). The research was sponsored by Epizyme, the company developing tazemetostat.

 

The trial enrolled patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL or FL who had received at least 2 prior therapies. The patients received tazemetostat at 800 mg twice daily until disease progression or study withdrawal.

 

Efficacy in FL

 

Dr Morschhauser presented efficacy data on 67 patients with FL. Thirteen had EZH2 mutations, and 54 had wild-type EZH2. The median age was 62 in the mutated group and 61 in the wild-type group.

 

Both groups had a median of 4 prior lines of therapy. Fifty-four percent of EZH2-mutated patients were refractory to their last treatment, as were 48% of wild-type patients.

 

The median time from diagnosis was 7.4 years in mutated patients and 4.9 years in wild-type patients. The median time from last therapy was 13 weeks and 41.3 weeks, respectively.

 

The overall response rate was 92% (12/13) in EZH2-mutated patients and 26% (14/54) in wild-type patients. The complete response rates were 8% (n=1) and 6% (n=3), respectively.

 

The median time to first response was 11.9 weeks and 15.2 weeks, respectively.

 

None of the EZH2-mutated patients have progressed, but 13 (24%) wild-type patients have.

 

Forty-eight percent of all FL patients remain on study. One EZH2-mutated patient with stable disease is still on study, as are 23 wild-type patients with stable disease.

 

Efficacy in DLBCL

 

Dr Morschhauser presented data on 137 patients with DLBCL, 17 with EZH2 mutations and 120 with wild-type EZH2. The median age was 61 in the mutated group and 69 in the wild-type group.

 

Both groups had a median of 3 prior lines of therapy. Eighty-two percent of EZH2-mutated patients were refractory to their last treatment, as were 63% of wild-type patients.

 

The median time from diagnosis was 1 year in mutated patients and 2 years in wild-type patients. The median time from last therapy was 8.6 weeks and 11.6 weeks, respectively.

 

The overall response rate was 29% (5/17) in EZH2-mutated patients and 15% (18/119) in wild-type patients. The complete response rates were 0% (n=0) and 8% (n=10), respectively.

 

The median time to first response was 8.3 weeks and 8.5 weeks, respectively.

 

Six (35%) of the EZH2-mutated patients have progressed, as have 60 (50%) wild-type patients.

 

Twelve percent of all DLBCL patients remain on study. One EZH2-mutated patient with stable disease is still on therapy, as are 4 wild-type patients with stable disease.

 

Predictors of response

 

Dr Morschhauser and his colleagues performed next-generation sequencing of samples from 92 patients in an attempt to identify predictors of response to tazemetostat.

 

The data suggested that EZH2 and MYD88 activating mutations are positive predictors of response, and negative predictors include MYC, TP53, and HIST1H1E.

 

Safety

 

Safety data were available for 210 patients. The overall rate of treatment-related adverse events (AEs) was 59%, the rate of grade 3 or higher treatment-related AEs was 18%, and the rate of serious treatment-related AEs was 10%.

 

 

 

There were treatment-related AEs leading to dose interruption (15%), dose reduction (3%), and discontinuation of tazemetostat (2%).

 

The most common treatment-related AEs were nausea (14%), thrombocytopenia (13%), anemia (10%), neutropenia (9%), diarrhea (8%), asthenia (8%), and fatigue (7%).

 

Dr Morschhauser said these results “confirm that tazemetostat is quite safe” in this patient population, and enrollment in this trial is ongoing. 

 

*Data in the abstract differ from the presentation.

 

14th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma (ICML)

 

LUGANO, SWITZERLAND—Interim results of a phase 2 trial suggest tazemetostat can be effective in patients with heavily pretreated, relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

 

The EZH2 inhibitor produced the highest overall response rate in patients with EZH2-mutated follicular lymphoma (FL), followed by EZH2-mutated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

 

However, the drug also produced complete responses in FL and DLBCL patients with wild-type EZH2.

 

“If we had focused [only] on patients with EZH2 mutations, we would have missed those other complete responders in the wild-type setting,” said study investigator Franck Morschhauser, MD, PhD, of Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Lille in France.

 

He presented results of the trial* during the plenary session of the 14th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma (ICML). The research was sponsored by Epizyme, the company developing tazemetostat.

 

The trial enrolled patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL or FL who had received at least 2 prior therapies. The patients received tazemetostat at 800 mg twice daily until disease progression or study withdrawal.

 

Efficacy in FL

 

Dr Morschhauser presented efficacy data on 67 patients with FL. Thirteen had EZH2 mutations, and 54 had wild-type EZH2. The median age was 62 in the mutated group and 61 in the wild-type group.

 

Both groups had a median of 4 prior lines of therapy. Fifty-four percent of EZH2-mutated patients were refractory to their last treatment, as were 48% of wild-type patients.

 

The median time from diagnosis was 7.4 years in mutated patients and 4.9 years in wild-type patients. The median time from last therapy was 13 weeks and 41.3 weeks, respectively.

 

The overall response rate was 92% (12/13) in EZH2-mutated patients and 26% (14/54) in wild-type patients. The complete response rates were 8% (n=1) and 6% (n=3), respectively.

 

The median time to first response was 11.9 weeks and 15.2 weeks, respectively.

 

None of the EZH2-mutated patients have progressed, but 13 (24%) wild-type patients have.

 

Forty-eight percent of all FL patients remain on study. One EZH2-mutated patient with stable disease is still on study, as are 23 wild-type patients with stable disease.

 

Efficacy in DLBCL

 

Dr Morschhauser presented data on 137 patients with DLBCL, 17 with EZH2 mutations and 120 with wild-type EZH2. The median age was 61 in the mutated group and 69 in the wild-type group.

 

Both groups had a median of 3 prior lines of therapy. Eighty-two percent of EZH2-mutated patients were refractory to their last treatment, as were 63% of wild-type patients.

 

The median time from diagnosis was 1 year in mutated patients and 2 years in wild-type patients. The median time from last therapy was 8.6 weeks and 11.6 weeks, respectively.

 

The overall response rate was 29% (5/17) in EZH2-mutated patients and 15% (18/119) in wild-type patients. The complete response rates were 0% (n=0) and 8% (n=10), respectively.

 

The median time to first response was 8.3 weeks and 8.5 weeks, respectively.

 

Six (35%) of the EZH2-mutated patients have progressed, as have 60 (50%) wild-type patients.

 

Twelve percent of all DLBCL patients remain on study. One EZH2-mutated patient with stable disease is still on therapy, as are 4 wild-type patients with stable disease.

 

Predictors of response

 

Dr Morschhauser and his colleagues performed next-generation sequencing of samples from 92 patients in an attempt to identify predictors of response to tazemetostat.

 

The data suggested that EZH2 and MYD88 activating mutations are positive predictors of response, and negative predictors include MYC, TP53, and HIST1H1E.

 

Safety

 

Safety data were available for 210 patients. The overall rate of treatment-related adverse events (AEs) was 59%, the rate of grade 3 or higher treatment-related AEs was 18%, and the rate of serious treatment-related AEs was 10%.

 

 

 

There were treatment-related AEs leading to dose interruption (15%), dose reduction (3%), and discontinuation of tazemetostat (2%).

 

The most common treatment-related AEs were nausea (14%), thrombocytopenia (13%), anemia (10%), neutropenia (9%), diarrhea (8%), asthenia (8%), and fatigue (7%).

 

Dr Morschhauser said these results “confirm that tazemetostat is quite safe” in this patient population, and enrollment in this trial is ongoing. 

 

*Data in the abstract differ from the presentation.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Inhibitor elicits responses in heavily pretreated FL, DLBCL
Display Headline
Inhibitor elicits responses in heavily pretreated FL, DLBCL
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

New frontline treatments needed for Hodgkin lymphoma

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 06/22/2017 - 00:05
Display Headline
New frontline treatments needed for Hodgkin lymphoma

Anna Sureda, MD, PhD

In this editorial, Anna Sureda, MD, PhD, details the need for new frontline treatments for patients with Hodgkin lymphoma, including those with advanced stage disease.

 Dr Sureda is head of the Hematology Department and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Programme at the Institut Català d'Oncologia, Hospital Duran i Reynals, in Barcelona, Spain. She has received consultancy fees from Takeda/Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Bristol-Myers Squibb.

 

Hodgkin lymphoma has traditionally been known as a cancer with generally favorable outcomes. Yet, as with any cancer treatment, there is always room for improvement. For Hodgkin lymphoma specifically, there remains a significant unmet need in the frontline setting for patients with advanced disease (Stage III or Stage IV).

Hodgkin lymphoma most commonly affects young adults as well as adults over the age of 55.1 Both age at diagnosis and stage of the disease are significant factors that must be considered when determining treatment plans, as they can affect a patient’s success in achieving long-term remission.

Though early stage patients have demonstrated 5-year survival rates of approximately 90%, this number drops to 70% in patients with advanced stage disease,2-4 underlining the challenges of treating later stage Hodgkin lymphoma.

Additionally, only 50% of patients with relapsed or refractory disease will experience long-term remission with high-dose chemotherapy and an autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT)5-6— a historically and frequently used treatment regimen.

These facts support the importance of successful frontline treatment and highlight a gap with current treatment regimens.7-10

With current frontline Hodgkin lymphoma treatments, it can be a challenge for physicians to balance efficacy with safety. While allowing the patient to achieve long-term remission remains the goal, physicians are also considering the impact of treatment-related side effects including endocrine dysfunction, cardiac dysfunction, lung toxicity, infertility, and an increased risk of secondary cancers when determining the best possible treatment.8-15

Advanced stage vs early stage Hodgkin lymphoma

Stage of disease at diagnosis has a large influence on outcomes, with advanced stage patients having poorer outcomes than earlier stage patients.7,15-16 Advanced Hodgkin lymphoma patients are more likely to progress or relapse,7,15-16 with nearly one third remaining uncured following standard frontline therapy.7-10

As seen in Figure 1 below, there is a clear difference in progression-free survival for early versus advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma.16

The difference between early stage and advanced stage patients treated with doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine (ABVD) demonstrates the heightened importance of successful frontline treatment for those with advanced stage disease.16

 Unmet needs with current frontline Hodgkin lymphoma treatment

 Though current treatments for frontline Hodgkin lymphoma, including ABVD and bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (BEACOPP), have improved outcomes for patients, these standard regimens are more than 20 years old.

ABVD is generally regarded as the treatment of choice based on its efficacy, relative ease of administration, and side effect profile.17

Escalated BEACOPP, on the other hand, was developed to improve outcomes for advanced stage patients but is associated with increased toxicity.8-10,13,18

Positron emission tomography (PET) scans have also been identified as a pathway to help guide further treatment, but patients with advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma may relapse more often, despite a negative interim PET scan, compared to stage II patients.19

Among current treatments, side effects including lung and cardiotoxicity as well as an increased risk of secondary cancers are a concern for both physicians and their patients.8-10,13-15

 Similarly, radiation therapy, often used in conjunction with chemotherapy for patients who have a large tumor burden in one part of the body, usually the chest,20 is also associated with an increased risk of secondary cancers and cardiotoxicity.8-10,21

 

 

With these complications in mind, stabilizing the effects between improved efficacy and minimizing the toxicities associated with current frontline treatments needs to be a focus as new therapies are developed.

For young patients specifically, minimizing toxicities is crucial, as many will have a lifetime ahead of them after Hodgkin lymphoma and will want to avoid the risks associated with current treatments including lung disease, heart disease and infertility.8-10,12-15,22

Treating elderly patients can also be challenging due to their reduced ability to tolerate aggressive frontline treatment and multi-agent chemotherapy, which causes inferior survival outcomes when compared to younger patients.23-25 These secondary effects can affect a patient’s quality of life8-9,12,14-15,22,26-28  and exacerbate preexisting conditions commonly experienced by those undergoing treatment, including long-term fatigue, chronic medical and psychosocial complications, and general deterioration in physical well-being.22

Studies have shown that most relapses after ASCT typically occur within 2 years.29 After a relapse, the patient may endure a substantial physical and psychological burden due to the need for additional treatment, impacting quality of life for both the patient and their caregiver.22,26,30

 Goals of clinical research

Despite its recognition as a highly treatable cancer, newly diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma remains incurable in up to 30% of patients with advanced disease.7-10 Though current therapies seek to achieve remission and extend the lives of patients, it is often at the cost of treatment-related toxicities and side effects that can significantly reduce quality of life.

Moving forward, it is critical that these gaps in treatment are addressed in new frontline treatments that aim to benefit patients, including those with advanced stage disease, while reducing short-term and long-term toxicities. 

 Acknowledgements: The author would like to acknowledge the W2O Group for their writing support, which was funded by Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.

______________________________________________________

1American Cancer Society. What Are the Key Statistics About Hodgkin Disease? https://www.cancer.org/cancer/hodgkin-lymphoma/about/key-statistics.html. Accessed February 16, 2017.

2Ries LAG, Young JL, Keel GE, Eisner MP, Lin YD, Horner M-J (editors). SEER Survival Monograph: Cancer Survival Among Adults: U.S. SEER Program, 1988-2001, Patient and Tumor Characteristics. National Cancer Institute, SEER Program, NIH Pub. No. 07-6215, Bethesda, MD, 2007.

3American Cancer Society. Survival Rates for Hodgkin Disease by Stage. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/hodgkin-lymphoma/detection-diagnosis-staging/survival-rates.html. Accessed February 16, 2017.

4Fermé C, et al. New Engl J Med, 2007.357:1916–27.

5Sureda A, et al. Ann Oncol, 2005;16: 625–633.

6Majhail NS, et al. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant, 2006;12:1065–1072.

7Gordon LI, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2013;31:684-691.

8Carde P, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2016;34(17):2028-2036.

9Engert A, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2009;27(27):4548-4554

10Viviani S, et al. New Engl J Med, 2011;365(3):203-212.

11Sklar C, et al. J Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2000;85(9):3227-3232

12Behringer K, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2013;31:231-239.

13Borchmann P, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2011;29(32):4234-4242.

14Duggan DB, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2003;21(4):607-614.

15Johnson P, McKenzie H. Blood, 2015;125(11):1717-1723.

16Maddi RN, et al. Indian J Medical and Paediatric Oncology, 2015;36(4):255-260

17Ansell SM. American Journal of Hematology, 2014;89: 771–779.

18Merli F, et al. J Clin Oncol, 34:1175-1181.

19Johnson P, et al. N Engl J Med. 2016;3‌74:24‌19‑24‌29

20American Cancer Society. Treating Hodgkin Disease: Radiation Therapy for Hodgkin Disease. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/hodgkin-lymphoma/treating/radiation.html. Accessed January 30, 2017.

21Adams MJ, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2004; 22: 3139–48.

22Khimani N, et al. Ann Oncol, 2013;24(1):226-230.

23Engert A, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2005;23(22):5052-60.

24Evens AM, et al. Br J Haematol, 2013;161: 76–86.

25Janssen-Heijnen ML, et al. Br J Haematol, 2005;129:597-606.

26Ganz PA et al. J Clin Oncol, 2003;21(18):3512-3519.

 

 

27Daniels LA, et al. Br J Cancer 2014;110:868-874.

28Loge JH, et al. Ann Oncol. 1999;10:71-77.

29Brusamolino E, Carella AM. Haematologica, 2007;92:6-10

30Consolidation Therapy After ASCT in Hodgkin Lymphoma: Why and Who to Treat? Personalized Medicine in Oncology, 2016. http://www.personalizedmedonc.com/article/consolidation-therapy-after-asct-in-hodgkin-lymphoma-why-and-who-to-treat/. Accessed February 16, 2017.

Publications
Topics

Anna Sureda, MD, PhD

In this editorial, Anna Sureda, MD, PhD, details the need for new frontline treatments for patients with Hodgkin lymphoma, including those with advanced stage disease.

 Dr Sureda is head of the Hematology Department and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Programme at the Institut Català d'Oncologia, Hospital Duran i Reynals, in Barcelona, Spain. She has received consultancy fees from Takeda/Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Bristol-Myers Squibb.

 

Hodgkin lymphoma has traditionally been known as a cancer with generally favorable outcomes. Yet, as with any cancer treatment, there is always room for improvement. For Hodgkin lymphoma specifically, there remains a significant unmet need in the frontline setting for patients with advanced disease (Stage III or Stage IV).

Hodgkin lymphoma most commonly affects young adults as well as adults over the age of 55.1 Both age at diagnosis and stage of the disease are significant factors that must be considered when determining treatment plans, as they can affect a patient’s success in achieving long-term remission.

Though early stage patients have demonstrated 5-year survival rates of approximately 90%, this number drops to 70% in patients with advanced stage disease,2-4 underlining the challenges of treating later stage Hodgkin lymphoma.

Additionally, only 50% of patients with relapsed or refractory disease will experience long-term remission with high-dose chemotherapy and an autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT)5-6— a historically and frequently used treatment regimen.

These facts support the importance of successful frontline treatment and highlight a gap with current treatment regimens.7-10

With current frontline Hodgkin lymphoma treatments, it can be a challenge for physicians to balance efficacy with safety. While allowing the patient to achieve long-term remission remains the goal, physicians are also considering the impact of treatment-related side effects including endocrine dysfunction, cardiac dysfunction, lung toxicity, infertility, and an increased risk of secondary cancers when determining the best possible treatment.8-15

Advanced stage vs early stage Hodgkin lymphoma

Stage of disease at diagnosis has a large influence on outcomes, with advanced stage patients having poorer outcomes than earlier stage patients.7,15-16 Advanced Hodgkin lymphoma patients are more likely to progress or relapse,7,15-16 with nearly one third remaining uncured following standard frontline therapy.7-10

As seen in Figure 1 below, there is a clear difference in progression-free survival for early versus advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma.16

The difference between early stage and advanced stage patients treated with doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine (ABVD) demonstrates the heightened importance of successful frontline treatment for those with advanced stage disease.16

 Unmet needs with current frontline Hodgkin lymphoma treatment

 Though current treatments for frontline Hodgkin lymphoma, including ABVD and bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (BEACOPP), have improved outcomes for patients, these standard regimens are more than 20 years old.

ABVD is generally regarded as the treatment of choice based on its efficacy, relative ease of administration, and side effect profile.17

Escalated BEACOPP, on the other hand, was developed to improve outcomes for advanced stage patients but is associated with increased toxicity.8-10,13,18

Positron emission tomography (PET) scans have also been identified as a pathway to help guide further treatment, but patients with advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma may relapse more often, despite a negative interim PET scan, compared to stage II patients.19

Among current treatments, side effects including lung and cardiotoxicity as well as an increased risk of secondary cancers are a concern for both physicians and their patients.8-10,13-15

 Similarly, radiation therapy, often used in conjunction with chemotherapy for patients who have a large tumor burden in one part of the body, usually the chest,20 is also associated with an increased risk of secondary cancers and cardiotoxicity.8-10,21

 

 

With these complications in mind, stabilizing the effects between improved efficacy and minimizing the toxicities associated with current frontline treatments needs to be a focus as new therapies are developed.

For young patients specifically, minimizing toxicities is crucial, as many will have a lifetime ahead of them after Hodgkin lymphoma and will want to avoid the risks associated with current treatments including lung disease, heart disease and infertility.8-10,12-15,22

Treating elderly patients can also be challenging due to their reduced ability to tolerate aggressive frontline treatment and multi-agent chemotherapy, which causes inferior survival outcomes when compared to younger patients.23-25 These secondary effects can affect a patient’s quality of life8-9,12,14-15,22,26-28  and exacerbate preexisting conditions commonly experienced by those undergoing treatment, including long-term fatigue, chronic medical and psychosocial complications, and general deterioration in physical well-being.22

Studies have shown that most relapses after ASCT typically occur within 2 years.29 After a relapse, the patient may endure a substantial physical and psychological burden due to the need for additional treatment, impacting quality of life for both the patient and their caregiver.22,26,30

 Goals of clinical research

Despite its recognition as a highly treatable cancer, newly diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma remains incurable in up to 30% of patients with advanced disease.7-10 Though current therapies seek to achieve remission and extend the lives of patients, it is often at the cost of treatment-related toxicities and side effects that can significantly reduce quality of life.

Moving forward, it is critical that these gaps in treatment are addressed in new frontline treatments that aim to benefit patients, including those with advanced stage disease, while reducing short-term and long-term toxicities. 

 Acknowledgements: The author would like to acknowledge the W2O Group for their writing support, which was funded by Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.

______________________________________________________

1American Cancer Society. What Are the Key Statistics About Hodgkin Disease? https://www.cancer.org/cancer/hodgkin-lymphoma/about/key-statistics.html. Accessed February 16, 2017.

2Ries LAG, Young JL, Keel GE, Eisner MP, Lin YD, Horner M-J (editors). SEER Survival Monograph: Cancer Survival Among Adults: U.S. SEER Program, 1988-2001, Patient and Tumor Characteristics. National Cancer Institute, SEER Program, NIH Pub. No. 07-6215, Bethesda, MD, 2007.

3American Cancer Society. Survival Rates for Hodgkin Disease by Stage. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/hodgkin-lymphoma/detection-diagnosis-staging/survival-rates.html. Accessed February 16, 2017.

4Fermé C, et al. New Engl J Med, 2007.357:1916–27.

5Sureda A, et al. Ann Oncol, 2005;16: 625–633.

6Majhail NS, et al. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant, 2006;12:1065–1072.

7Gordon LI, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2013;31:684-691.

8Carde P, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2016;34(17):2028-2036.

9Engert A, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2009;27(27):4548-4554

10Viviani S, et al. New Engl J Med, 2011;365(3):203-212.

11Sklar C, et al. J Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2000;85(9):3227-3232

12Behringer K, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2013;31:231-239.

13Borchmann P, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2011;29(32):4234-4242.

14Duggan DB, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2003;21(4):607-614.

15Johnson P, McKenzie H. Blood, 2015;125(11):1717-1723.

16Maddi RN, et al. Indian J Medical and Paediatric Oncology, 2015;36(4):255-260

17Ansell SM. American Journal of Hematology, 2014;89: 771–779.

18Merli F, et al. J Clin Oncol, 34:1175-1181.

19Johnson P, et al. N Engl J Med. 2016;3‌74:24‌19‑24‌29

20American Cancer Society. Treating Hodgkin Disease: Radiation Therapy for Hodgkin Disease. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/hodgkin-lymphoma/treating/radiation.html. Accessed January 30, 2017.

21Adams MJ, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2004; 22: 3139–48.

22Khimani N, et al. Ann Oncol, 2013;24(1):226-230.

23Engert A, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2005;23(22):5052-60.

24Evens AM, et al. Br J Haematol, 2013;161: 76–86.

25Janssen-Heijnen ML, et al. Br J Haematol, 2005;129:597-606.

26Ganz PA et al. J Clin Oncol, 2003;21(18):3512-3519.

 

 

27Daniels LA, et al. Br J Cancer 2014;110:868-874.

28Loge JH, et al. Ann Oncol. 1999;10:71-77.

29Brusamolino E, Carella AM. Haematologica, 2007;92:6-10

30Consolidation Therapy After ASCT in Hodgkin Lymphoma: Why and Who to Treat? Personalized Medicine in Oncology, 2016. http://www.personalizedmedonc.com/article/consolidation-therapy-after-asct-in-hodgkin-lymphoma-why-and-who-to-treat/. Accessed February 16, 2017.

Anna Sureda, MD, PhD

In this editorial, Anna Sureda, MD, PhD, details the need for new frontline treatments for patients with Hodgkin lymphoma, including those with advanced stage disease.

 Dr Sureda is head of the Hematology Department and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Programme at the Institut Català d'Oncologia, Hospital Duran i Reynals, in Barcelona, Spain. She has received consultancy fees from Takeda/Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Bristol-Myers Squibb.

 

Hodgkin lymphoma has traditionally been known as a cancer with generally favorable outcomes. Yet, as with any cancer treatment, there is always room for improvement. For Hodgkin lymphoma specifically, there remains a significant unmet need in the frontline setting for patients with advanced disease (Stage III or Stage IV).

Hodgkin lymphoma most commonly affects young adults as well as adults over the age of 55.1 Both age at diagnosis and stage of the disease are significant factors that must be considered when determining treatment plans, as they can affect a patient’s success in achieving long-term remission.

Though early stage patients have demonstrated 5-year survival rates of approximately 90%, this number drops to 70% in patients with advanced stage disease,2-4 underlining the challenges of treating later stage Hodgkin lymphoma.

Additionally, only 50% of patients with relapsed or refractory disease will experience long-term remission with high-dose chemotherapy and an autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT)5-6— a historically and frequently used treatment regimen.

These facts support the importance of successful frontline treatment and highlight a gap with current treatment regimens.7-10

With current frontline Hodgkin lymphoma treatments, it can be a challenge for physicians to balance efficacy with safety. While allowing the patient to achieve long-term remission remains the goal, physicians are also considering the impact of treatment-related side effects including endocrine dysfunction, cardiac dysfunction, lung toxicity, infertility, and an increased risk of secondary cancers when determining the best possible treatment.8-15

Advanced stage vs early stage Hodgkin lymphoma

Stage of disease at diagnosis has a large influence on outcomes, with advanced stage patients having poorer outcomes than earlier stage patients.7,15-16 Advanced Hodgkin lymphoma patients are more likely to progress or relapse,7,15-16 with nearly one third remaining uncured following standard frontline therapy.7-10

As seen in Figure 1 below, there is a clear difference in progression-free survival for early versus advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma.16

The difference between early stage and advanced stage patients treated with doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine (ABVD) demonstrates the heightened importance of successful frontline treatment for those with advanced stage disease.16

 Unmet needs with current frontline Hodgkin lymphoma treatment

 Though current treatments for frontline Hodgkin lymphoma, including ABVD and bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (BEACOPP), have improved outcomes for patients, these standard regimens are more than 20 years old.

ABVD is generally regarded as the treatment of choice based on its efficacy, relative ease of administration, and side effect profile.17

Escalated BEACOPP, on the other hand, was developed to improve outcomes for advanced stage patients but is associated with increased toxicity.8-10,13,18

Positron emission tomography (PET) scans have also been identified as a pathway to help guide further treatment, but patients with advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma may relapse more often, despite a negative interim PET scan, compared to stage II patients.19

Among current treatments, side effects including lung and cardiotoxicity as well as an increased risk of secondary cancers are a concern for both physicians and their patients.8-10,13-15

 Similarly, radiation therapy, often used in conjunction with chemotherapy for patients who have a large tumor burden in one part of the body, usually the chest,20 is also associated with an increased risk of secondary cancers and cardiotoxicity.8-10,21

 

 

With these complications in mind, stabilizing the effects between improved efficacy and minimizing the toxicities associated with current frontline treatments needs to be a focus as new therapies are developed.

For young patients specifically, minimizing toxicities is crucial, as many will have a lifetime ahead of them after Hodgkin lymphoma and will want to avoid the risks associated with current treatments including lung disease, heart disease and infertility.8-10,12-15,22

Treating elderly patients can also be challenging due to their reduced ability to tolerate aggressive frontline treatment and multi-agent chemotherapy, which causes inferior survival outcomes when compared to younger patients.23-25 These secondary effects can affect a patient’s quality of life8-9,12,14-15,22,26-28  and exacerbate preexisting conditions commonly experienced by those undergoing treatment, including long-term fatigue, chronic medical and psychosocial complications, and general deterioration in physical well-being.22

Studies have shown that most relapses after ASCT typically occur within 2 years.29 After a relapse, the patient may endure a substantial physical and psychological burden due to the need for additional treatment, impacting quality of life for both the patient and their caregiver.22,26,30

 Goals of clinical research

Despite its recognition as a highly treatable cancer, newly diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma remains incurable in up to 30% of patients with advanced disease.7-10 Though current therapies seek to achieve remission and extend the lives of patients, it is often at the cost of treatment-related toxicities and side effects that can significantly reduce quality of life.

Moving forward, it is critical that these gaps in treatment are addressed in new frontline treatments that aim to benefit patients, including those with advanced stage disease, while reducing short-term and long-term toxicities. 

 Acknowledgements: The author would like to acknowledge the W2O Group for their writing support, which was funded by Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.

______________________________________________________

1American Cancer Society. What Are the Key Statistics About Hodgkin Disease? https://www.cancer.org/cancer/hodgkin-lymphoma/about/key-statistics.html. Accessed February 16, 2017.

2Ries LAG, Young JL, Keel GE, Eisner MP, Lin YD, Horner M-J (editors). SEER Survival Monograph: Cancer Survival Among Adults: U.S. SEER Program, 1988-2001, Patient and Tumor Characteristics. National Cancer Institute, SEER Program, NIH Pub. No. 07-6215, Bethesda, MD, 2007.

3American Cancer Society. Survival Rates for Hodgkin Disease by Stage. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/hodgkin-lymphoma/detection-diagnosis-staging/survival-rates.html. Accessed February 16, 2017.

4Fermé C, et al. New Engl J Med, 2007.357:1916–27.

5Sureda A, et al. Ann Oncol, 2005;16: 625–633.

6Majhail NS, et al. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant, 2006;12:1065–1072.

7Gordon LI, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2013;31:684-691.

8Carde P, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2016;34(17):2028-2036.

9Engert A, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2009;27(27):4548-4554

10Viviani S, et al. New Engl J Med, 2011;365(3):203-212.

11Sklar C, et al. J Endocrinology & Metabolism, 2000;85(9):3227-3232

12Behringer K, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2013;31:231-239.

13Borchmann P, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2011;29(32):4234-4242.

14Duggan DB, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2003;21(4):607-614.

15Johnson P, McKenzie H. Blood, 2015;125(11):1717-1723.

16Maddi RN, et al. Indian J Medical and Paediatric Oncology, 2015;36(4):255-260

17Ansell SM. American Journal of Hematology, 2014;89: 771–779.

18Merli F, et al. J Clin Oncol, 34:1175-1181.

19Johnson P, et al. N Engl J Med. 2016;3‌74:24‌19‑24‌29

20American Cancer Society. Treating Hodgkin Disease: Radiation Therapy for Hodgkin Disease. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/hodgkin-lymphoma/treating/radiation.html. Accessed January 30, 2017.

21Adams MJ, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2004; 22: 3139–48.

22Khimani N, et al. Ann Oncol, 2013;24(1):226-230.

23Engert A, et al. J Clin Oncol, 2005;23(22):5052-60.

24Evens AM, et al. Br J Haematol, 2013;161: 76–86.

25Janssen-Heijnen ML, et al. Br J Haematol, 2005;129:597-606.

26Ganz PA et al. J Clin Oncol, 2003;21(18):3512-3519.

 

 

27Daniels LA, et al. Br J Cancer 2014;110:868-874.

28Loge JH, et al. Ann Oncol. 1999;10:71-77.

29Brusamolino E, Carella AM. Haematologica, 2007;92:6-10

30Consolidation Therapy After ASCT in Hodgkin Lymphoma: Why and Who to Treat? Personalized Medicine in Oncology, 2016. http://www.personalizedmedonc.com/article/consolidation-therapy-after-asct-in-hodgkin-lymphoma-why-and-who-to-treat/. Accessed February 16, 2017.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
New frontline treatments needed for Hodgkin lymphoma
Display Headline
New frontline treatments needed for Hodgkin lymphoma
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Less sex, more contraception use in teens in last decade

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 16:51

 

Fewer teens were having sex in 2011-2015, compared with past years, and contraception use increased among both male and female teens, according to a report by Joyce C. Abma, PhD, and Gladys M. Martinez, PhD, of the Division of Vital Statistics at the National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, Md.

The percentage of female teens who had ever had sexual intercourse declined from 51% in 1988 to 42% in 2011-2015. For male teens, the percentage who were sexually experienced declined from 60% in 1988 to 44% in 2011-2015.

©Florea Marius Catalin/iStockphoto.com
Contraception use increased from 98% among female teens in 2002 to 99% in 2011-2015. The most commonly used contraception among female teens in 2011-2015 was the condom (97%), followed by withdrawal or “pulling out” (60%), and the pill (56%). Also, 17% of female teenagers had ever used Depo-Provera, and 2% were using the contraceptive patch by 2011-2015. In the same time period, 6% of teenagers had ever used long-acting reversible contraception, or LARC, with 3% having used the IUD and 3% having used implants. Use of emergency contraception rose from 8% in 2002 to 23% in 2011-2015, the researchers reported.

Male teens’ condom use during their first sexual experiences increased from 71% in 2002 to 77% in 2011-2015. This plateau in male contraception is in part the result of various types of contraception for women being developed and widely distributed in the course of these years, such as intrauterine devices.

The report features the most recent data from the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG), resulting in 4 years of interviews spanning 2011 through 2015 and including 2,047 female teens and 2,087 male teens aged 15-19 years (National Health Statistics Reports; no 104. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2017). Data also was abstracted from the 1988 and 1995 National Surveys of Adolescent Males, a national panel survey of male teens.

NSFG is currently the only source of ongoing data on the topics of sexual activity and contraceptive use for the total U.S. population of teenagers, paralleling the teen population whose pregnancy and birth rates are captured by birth certificates as part of the statistics of the National Center for Health Statistics. “Using data from the 2011-2015 NSFG and earlier NSFG surveys, this report provides an update of information on U.S. teenagers’ sexual activity and contraceptive use, thus helping to improve understanding of their risk of pregnancy,” said Dr. Abma and her associates. “This report … provides insights into the ways in which those determinants are changing with time, how they differ by sociodemographic groups, and what circumstances are most associated with them. The information can be used to monitor and understand trends in teen sexual behavior and contraception use.”

The 2011-2015 National Survey of Family Growth was conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics with the support and assistance of a number of other organizations and individuals. Interviewing and other tasks were carried out by the University of Michigan’s Survey Research Center and the Institute for Social Research under a contract with NCHS.

[email protected]

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Fewer teens were having sex in 2011-2015, compared with past years, and contraception use increased among both male and female teens, according to a report by Joyce C. Abma, PhD, and Gladys M. Martinez, PhD, of the Division of Vital Statistics at the National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, Md.

The percentage of female teens who had ever had sexual intercourse declined from 51% in 1988 to 42% in 2011-2015. For male teens, the percentage who were sexually experienced declined from 60% in 1988 to 44% in 2011-2015.

©Florea Marius Catalin/iStockphoto.com
Contraception use increased from 98% among female teens in 2002 to 99% in 2011-2015. The most commonly used contraception among female teens in 2011-2015 was the condom (97%), followed by withdrawal or “pulling out” (60%), and the pill (56%). Also, 17% of female teenagers had ever used Depo-Provera, and 2% were using the contraceptive patch by 2011-2015. In the same time period, 6% of teenagers had ever used long-acting reversible contraception, or LARC, with 3% having used the IUD and 3% having used implants. Use of emergency contraception rose from 8% in 2002 to 23% in 2011-2015, the researchers reported.

Male teens’ condom use during their first sexual experiences increased from 71% in 2002 to 77% in 2011-2015. This plateau in male contraception is in part the result of various types of contraception for women being developed and widely distributed in the course of these years, such as intrauterine devices.

The report features the most recent data from the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG), resulting in 4 years of interviews spanning 2011 through 2015 and including 2,047 female teens and 2,087 male teens aged 15-19 years (National Health Statistics Reports; no 104. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2017). Data also was abstracted from the 1988 and 1995 National Surveys of Adolescent Males, a national panel survey of male teens.

NSFG is currently the only source of ongoing data on the topics of sexual activity and contraceptive use for the total U.S. population of teenagers, paralleling the teen population whose pregnancy and birth rates are captured by birth certificates as part of the statistics of the National Center for Health Statistics. “Using data from the 2011-2015 NSFG and earlier NSFG surveys, this report provides an update of information on U.S. teenagers’ sexual activity and contraceptive use, thus helping to improve understanding of their risk of pregnancy,” said Dr. Abma and her associates. “This report … provides insights into the ways in which those determinants are changing with time, how they differ by sociodemographic groups, and what circumstances are most associated with them. The information can be used to monitor and understand trends in teen sexual behavior and contraception use.”

The 2011-2015 National Survey of Family Growth was conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics with the support and assistance of a number of other organizations and individuals. Interviewing and other tasks were carried out by the University of Michigan’s Survey Research Center and the Institute for Social Research under a contract with NCHS.

[email protected]

 

Fewer teens were having sex in 2011-2015, compared with past years, and contraception use increased among both male and female teens, according to a report by Joyce C. Abma, PhD, and Gladys M. Martinez, PhD, of the Division of Vital Statistics at the National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, Md.

The percentage of female teens who had ever had sexual intercourse declined from 51% in 1988 to 42% in 2011-2015. For male teens, the percentage who were sexually experienced declined from 60% in 1988 to 44% in 2011-2015.

©Florea Marius Catalin/iStockphoto.com
Contraception use increased from 98% among female teens in 2002 to 99% in 2011-2015. The most commonly used contraception among female teens in 2011-2015 was the condom (97%), followed by withdrawal or “pulling out” (60%), and the pill (56%). Also, 17% of female teenagers had ever used Depo-Provera, and 2% were using the contraceptive patch by 2011-2015. In the same time period, 6% of teenagers had ever used long-acting reversible contraception, or LARC, with 3% having used the IUD and 3% having used implants. Use of emergency contraception rose from 8% in 2002 to 23% in 2011-2015, the researchers reported.

Male teens’ condom use during their first sexual experiences increased from 71% in 2002 to 77% in 2011-2015. This plateau in male contraception is in part the result of various types of contraception for women being developed and widely distributed in the course of these years, such as intrauterine devices.

The report features the most recent data from the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG), resulting in 4 years of interviews spanning 2011 through 2015 and including 2,047 female teens and 2,087 male teens aged 15-19 years (National Health Statistics Reports; no 104. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2017). Data also was abstracted from the 1988 and 1995 National Surveys of Adolescent Males, a national panel survey of male teens.

NSFG is currently the only source of ongoing data on the topics of sexual activity and contraceptive use for the total U.S. population of teenagers, paralleling the teen population whose pregnancy and birth rates are captured by birth certificates as part of the statistics of the National Center for Health Statistics. “Using data from the 2011-2015 NSFG and earlier NSFG surveys, this report provides an update of information on U.S. teenagers’ sexual activity and contraceptive use, thus helping to improve understanding of their risk of pregnancy,” said Dr. Abma and her associates. “This report … provides insights into the ways in which those determinants are changing with time, how they differ by sociodemographic groups, and what circumstances are most associated with them. The information can be used to monitor and understand trends in teen sexual behavior and contraception use.”

The 2011-2015 National Survey of Family Growth was conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics with the support and assistance of a number of other organizations and individuals. Interviewing and other tasks were carried out by the University of Michigan’s Survey Research Center and the Institute for Social Research under a contract with NCHS.

[email protected]

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM NATIONAL HEALTH STATISTICS REPORTS

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

 

Key clinical point: Contraception use has gone up in the last decade

Major finding: Contraception use has increased to 99% in girls and 77% in boys in the last decade.

Data source: This report presents U.S. data on the sexual activity and contraceptive use of males and females aged 15-19 years, using data from the 2011-2015 and earlier National Surveys of Family Growth and the 1988 and 1995 National Surveys of Adolescent Males.

Disclosures: The 2011-2015 National Survey of Family Growth was conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics with the support and assistance of a number of other organizations and individuals. Interviewing and other tasks were carried out by the University of Michigan’s Survey Research Center and the Institute for Social Research under a contract with NCHS.

Red line when skin is rubbed

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 08:47
Display Headline
Red line when skin is rubbed

 

The FP suspected that this was a case of dermatographism. To confirm his suspicions, he used the end of a cotton-tipped applicator and wrote on the patient’s skin. Within 3 minutes, the writing turned into a triple reaction with some erythema, blanching, and swelling—confirming the diagnosis.

Dermatographism often accompanies urticaria, but can occur without it. If one writes on the skin, one is able to see the resulting words or shapes. The cause of this condition is unknown, but the pathophysiology involves degranulation of mast cells and the release of histamine.

No treatment is required for asymptomatic dermatographism. If patients are symptomatic, they should be advised to avoid precipitating physical stimuli. Dry skin may stimulate scratching, so the use of emollients can help. If the patient wants a medication, start with a second-generation antihistamine such as loratadine or cetirizine. While the recommended over-the-counter dose of these 2 medications is 10 mg/d, the dose may be increased to 20 mg twice daily. It is best to start at the lowest dose and then titrate up according to response and tolerance of adverse effects. (The second-generation antihistamines can still be sedating.) If this doesn’t work, a sedating antihistamine can be added before bedtime.

Dermatographism is not life-threatening and does not lead to anaphylaxis. The patient in this case didn’t want treatment and was pleased to know what was going on with his skin.

 

Photos and text for Photo Rounds Friday courtesy of Richard P. Usatine, MD. This case was adapted from: Usatine R. Urticaria and angioedema. In: Usatine R, Smith M, Mayeaux EJ, et al, eds. Color Atlas of Family Medicine. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2013: 863-870.

To learn more about the Color Atlas of Family Medicine, see: www.amazon.com/Color-Family-Medicine-Richard-Usatine/dp/0071769641/

You can now get the second edition of the Color Atlas of Family Medicine as an app by clicking on this link: usatinemedia.com

Issue
The Journal of Family Practice - 66(6)
Publications
Topics
Sections

 

The FP suspected that this was a case of dermatographism. To confirm his suspicions, he used the end of a cotton-tipped applicator and wrote on the patient’s skin. Within 3 minutes, the writing turned into a triple reaction with some erythema, blanching, and swelling—confirming the diagnosis.

Dermatographism often accompanies urticaria, but can occur without it. If one writes on the skin, one is able to see the resulting words or shapes. The cause of this condition is unknown, but the pathophysiology involves degranulation of mast cells and the release of histamine.

No treatment is required for asymptomatic dermatographism. If patients are symptomatic, they should be advised to avoid precipitating physical stimuli. Dry skin may stimulate scratching, so the use of emollients can help. If the patient wants a medication, start with a second-generation antihistamine such as loratadine or cetirizine. While the recommended over-the-counter dose of these 2 medications is 10 mg/d, the dose may be increased to 20 mg twice daily. It is best to start at the lowest dose and then titrate up according to response and tolerance of adverse effects. (The second-generation antihistamines can still be sedating.) If this doesn’t work, a sedating antihistamine can be added before bedtime.

Dermatographism is not life-threatening and does not lead to anaphylaxis. The patient in this case didn’t want treatment and was pleased to know what was going on with his skin.

 

Photos and text for Photo Rounds Friday courtesy of Richard P. Usatine, MD. This case was adapted from: Usatine R. Urticaria and angioedema. In: Usatine R, Smith M, Mayeaux EJ, et al, eds. Color Atlas of Family Medicine. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2013: 863-870.

To learn more about the Color Atlas of Family Medicine, see: www.amazon.com/Color-Family-Medicine-Richard-Usatine/dp/0071769641/

You can now get the second edition of the Color Atlas of Family Medicine as an app by clicking on this link: usatinemedia.com

 

The FP suspected that this was a case of dermatographism. To confirm his suspicions, he used the end of a cotton-tipped applicator and wrote on the patient’s skin. Within 3 minutes, the writing turned into a triple reaction with some erythema, blanching, and swelling—confirming the diagnosis.

Dermatographism often accompanies urticaria, but can occur without it. If one writes on the skin, one is able to see the resulting words or shapes. The cause of this condition is unknown, but the pathophysiology involves degranulation of mast cells and the release of histamine.

No treatment is required for asymptomatic dermatographism. If patients are symptomatic, they should be advised to avoid precipitating physical stimuli. Dry skin may stimulate scratching, so the use of emollients can help. If the patient wants a medication, start with a second-generation antihistamine such as loratadine or cetirizine. While the recommended over-the-counter dose of these 2 medications is 10 mg/d, the dose may be increased to 20 mg twice daily. It is best to start at the lowest dose and then titrate up according to response and tolerance of adverse effects. (The second-generation antihistamines can still be sedating.) If this doesn’t work, a sedating antihistamine can be added before bedtime.

Dermatographism is not life-threatening and does not lead to anaphylaxis. The patient in this case didn’t want treatment and was pleased to know what was going on with his skin.

 

Photos and text for Photo Rounds Friday courtesy of Richard P. Usatine, MD. This case was adapted from: Usatine R. Urticaria and angioedema. In: Usatine R, Smith M, Mayeaux EJ, et al, eds. Color Atlas of Family Medicine. 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2013: 863-870.

To learn more about the Color Atlas of Family Medicine, see: www.amazon.com/Color-Family-Medicine-Richard-Usatine/dp/0071769641/

You can now get the second edition of the Color Atlas of Family Medicine as an app by clicking on this link: usatinemedia.com

Issue
The Journal of Family Practice - 66(6)
Issue
The Journal of Family Practice - 66(6)
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Red line when skin is rubbed
Display Headline
Red line when skin is rubbed
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

Liver disease doubles risk of colorectal cancer

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 05/26/2021 - 13:52

 

Chronic liver disease appears to double the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), even after patients undergo liver transplantation, according to a report published in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Chronic liver disease appears to double the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), even after patients undergo liver transplantation, according to a report published in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.

 

Chronic liver disease appears to double the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), even after patients undergo liver transplantation, according to a report published in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.

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

FROM GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY

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

 

Key clinical point: Chronic liver disease appears to double the risk of colorectal cancer, even after patients undergo liver transplantation.

Major finding: The pooled standardized incidence ratio of colorectal cancer was 2.06 among patients with liver disease, compared with control subjects.

Data source: A meta-analysis of 50 observational studies (55,991 participants) that examined the rate of colorectal cancer in patients with a variety of liver diseases.

Disclosures: No specific sponsor was identified for this study. Dr. Komaki reported receiving research support from the Children’s Cancer Association of Japan. Dr. Komaki and associates reported having no other relevant financial disclosures.

Supreme Court rules to speed biosimilar drugs to market

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 03/28/2019 - 14:50

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that biosimilar companies can take their versions of biological drugs to the market 6 months sooner in a precedential ruling that could mean quicker access to less expensive medications.

The unanimous ruling overturns an appeals court ruling in favor of California-based Amgen that had barred competitor Sandoz from marketing its biosimilar of Neupogen (filgrastim) until 6 months after Food and Drug Administration approval. Justices held that the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) allows biosimilar applicants to provide notice of commercial marketing prior to obtaining licensure by the FDA.

Carol Lynch, global head of Biopharmaceuticals at Sandoz, said the ruling helps to eliminate unnecessary barriers so that patients can access more affordable medicine in a more timely manner.

“Biosimilars offer significant value to patients, providers, and payers, increasing the number of treatment options available to patients across many disease areas at a reduced cost to the health care system,” Ms. Lynch said in a statement. “The justices’ unanimous ruling on the notice of commercial marketing will help expedite patient access to life-enhancing treatments. We also appreciate the clarity provided on the patent dance, which will help the biosimilars industry move forward.”

Gregory Twachtman/Frontline Medical Media
The U.S. Supreme Court Building


In a statement, an Amgen spokeswoman said the company was “disappointed in the court’s decision on the notice of commercial marketing,” but that it will “continue to seek to enforce our intellectual property against those parties that infringe upon our rights.”

The “patent dance” referred to by Ms. Lynch is the often lengthy process by which companies marketing brand name and biosimilar medications spar and undergo legal proceedings before the biosimilar can enter the market.

In this case, Sandoz filed an application with the FDA in May 2014 seeking approval to market Zarxio (filgrastim-sndz). Amgen, the manufacturer of the reference product, has marketed Neupogen since 1991 and holds patents on methods of manufacturing and using filgrastim. In July 2014, the FDA accepted Sandoz’ application for review. In October 2014, Amgen sued for patent infringement, alleging that Sandoz failed to adhere to the BPCIA by unlawfully providing its notice of commercial marketing before FDA licensure, among other arguments.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington ruled in favor of Amgen, holding that Sandoz must wait for an FDA license before marketing its biosimilar, which meant another 6-month waiting period. The Supreme Court disagreed. Justices based their decision on the plain language of the BPCIA, ruling that the statute allows for applicants to provide marketing notice either before or after receiving FDA approval.

In a statement, the Pharmaceutical Care Management Association said the Supreme Court’s ruling on biosimilars will help create more competition among costly biologic medications, “which is the key to reducing overall prescription drug costs for consumers, employers, government programs, and others.”

AGA Resource

Publications
Topics
Sections

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that biosimilar companies can take their versions of biological drugs to the market 6 months sooner in a precedential ruling that could mean quicker access to less expensive medications.

The unanimous ruling overturns an appeals court ruling in favor of California-based Amgen that had barred competitor Sandoz from marketing its biosimilar of Neupogen (filgrastim) until 6 months after Food and Drug Administration approval. Justices held that the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) allows biosimilar applicants to provide notice of commercial marketing prior to obtaining licensure by the FDA.

Carol Lynch, global head of Biopharmaceuticals at Sandoz, said the ruling helps to eliminate unnecessary barriers so that patients can access more affordable medicine in a more timely manner.

“Biosimilars offer significant value to patients, providers, and payers, increasing the number of treatment options available to patients across many disease areas at a reduced cost to the health care system,” Ms. Lynch said in a statement. “The justices’ unanimous ruling on the notice of commercial marketing will help expedite patient access to life-enhancing treatments. We also appreciate the clarity provided on the patent dance, which will help the biosimilars industry move forward.”

Gregory Twachtman/Frontline Medical Media
The U.S. Supreme Court Building


In a statement, an Amgen spokeswoman said the company was “disappointed in the court’s decision on the notice of commercial marketing,” but that it will “continue to seek to enforce our intellectual property against those parties that infringe upon our rights.”

The “patent dance” referred to by Ms. Lynch is the often lengthy process by which companies marketing brand name and biosimilar medications spar and undergo legal proceedings before the biosimilar can enter the market.

In this case, Sandoz filed an application with the FDA in May 2014 seeking approval to market Zarxio (filgrastim-sndz). Amgen, the manufacturer of the reference product, has marketed Neupogen since 1991 and holds patents on methods of manufacturing and using filgrastim. In July 2014, the FDA accepted Sandoz’ application for review. In October 2014, Amgen sued for patent infringement, alleging that Sandoz failed to adhere to the BPCIA by unlawfully providing its notice of commercial marketing before FDA licensure, among other arguments.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington ruled in favor of Amgen, holding that Sandoz must wait for an FDA license before marketing its biosimilar, which meant another 6-month waiting period. The Supreme Court disagreed. Justices based their decision on the plain language of the BPCIA, ruling that the statute allows for applicants to provide marketing notice either before or after receiving FDA approval.

In a statement, the Pharmaceutical Care Management Association said the Supreme Court’s ruling on biosimilars will help create more competition among costly biologic medications, “which is the key to reducing overall prescription drug costs for consumers, employers, government programs, and others.”

AGA Resource

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that biosimilar companies can take their versions of biological drugs to the market 6 months sooner in a precedential ruling that could mean quicker access to less expensive medications.

The unanimous ruling overturns an appeals court ruling in favor of California-based Amgen that had barred competitor Sandoz from marketing its biosimilar of Neupogen (filgrastim) until 6 months after Food and Drug Administration approval. Justices held that the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) allows biosimilar applicants to provide notice of commercial marketing prior to obtaining licensure by the FDA.

Carol Lynch, global head of Biopharmaceuticals at Sandoz, said the ruling helps to eliminate unnecessary barriers so that patients can access more affordable medicine in a more timely manner.

“Biosimilars offer significant value to patients, providers, and payers, increasing the number of treatment options available to patients across many disease areas at a reduced cost to the health care system,” Ms. Lynch said in a statement. “The justices’ unanimous ruling on the notice of commercial marketing will help expedite patient access to life-enhancing treatments. We also appreciate the clarity provided on the patent dance, which will help the biosimilars industry move forward.”

Gregory Twachtman/Frontline Medical Media
The U.S. Supreme Court Building


In a statement, an Amgen spokeswoman said the company was “disappointed in the court’s decision on the notice of commercial marketing,” but that it will “continue to seek to enforce our intellectual property against those parties that infringe upon our rights.”

The “patent dance” referred to by Ms. Lynch is the often lengthy process by which companies marketing brand name and biosimilar medications spar and undergo legal proceedings before the biosimilar can enter the market.

In this case, Sandoz filed an application with the FDA in May 2014 seeking approval to market Zarxio (filgrastim-sndz). Amgen, the manufacturer of the reference product, has marketed Neupogen since 1991 and holds patents on methods of manufacturing and using filgrastim. In July 2014, the FDA accepted Sandoz’ application for review. In October 2014, Amgen sued for patent infringement, alleging that Sandoz failed to adhere to the BPCIA by unlawfully providing its notice of commercial marketing before FDA licensure, among other arguments.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington ruled in favor of Amgen, holding that Sandoz must wait for an FDA license before marketing its biosimilar, which meant another 6-month waiting period. The Supreme Court disagreed. Justices based their decision on the plain language of the BPCIA, ruling that the statute allows for applicants to provide marketing notice either before or after receiving FDA approval.

In a statement, the Pharmaceutical Care Management Association said the Supreme Court’s ruling on biosimilars will help create more competition among costly biologic medications, “which is the key to reducing overall prescription drug costs for consumers, employers, government programs, and others.”

AGA Resource

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

Digital cohorts within the social mediome to circumvent conventional research challenges?

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 03/28/2019 - 14:50

 

We are becoming comfortable with the concept of a sharing economy, where resources are shared among many individuals using online forums. Whether activities involve sharing rides (Uber, Lyft, and others), accommodations (Airbnb), or information (social media), underlying attributes include reduced transactional costs, enhanced information transparency, dynamic feedback, and socialization of opportunity. As health care systems realize that they are changing from direct-to-business to a direct-to-customer model, their ability to connect directly with individuals will become a foundational strategy.

This month’s column introduces us to social media as a research tool. Information derived from social media sites can be harvested for critical clinical information (the Centers for Disease and Control and Prevention tracks the spread of influenza using social media analytic tools), research data (patient preferences), and as a recruitment method for clinical studies. Kulanthaivel and colleagues have described their experiences and literature review to help us imagine new ways to collect data at markedly reduced transaction costs (compared to a formal clinical trial). While there are many cautions about the use of social media in your practice or research, we are only beginning to understand its potential.

John I. Allen, MD, MBA, AGAF

Editor in Chief

Medical knowledge, culminating from the collection and translation of patient data, is the primary objective of the clinical research paradigm. The successful conduct of this traditional model has become even more challenging with expansion of costs and a dwindling research infrastructure. Beyond systemic issues, conventional research methods are burdened further by minimal patient engagement, inadequate staffing, and geographic limitations to recruitment. Clinical research also has failed to keep pace with patient demands, and the limited scope of well-funded, disease-specific investigations have left many patients feeling disenfranchised. Social media venues may represent a viable option to surpass these current and evolving barriers when used as an adjunctive approach to traditional clinical investigation.

Dr. Anand Kulanthaivel
The term social media (SM) most commonly refers to relatively public, Internet-based communication platforms that enable users to consume and disseminate information. The most popular SM venues currently include Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and independent online forums (Table 1). These digital platforms support sharing multiple forms of media including text, images, and videos between users who interact within a wide realm of medical groups and genres (e.g., specific diseases, symptoms, and so forth). This collective mediome1 is a relatively untapped resource for clinical study, but research applications using SM methodology have begun to produce real study benefits in an array of diseases. Effective implementation of this technology by interested investigators will require an in-depth working knowledge of digital venues beyond their own online social presence. A firm grasp of these applications can enable contact with previously out-of-reach study participants, promote patient engagement and disease investment, and cultivate a community of interacting patients and researchers. This data-rich resource already has facilitated various aspects of biomedical studies, including dissemination of epidemiologic surveys,2 direct recruitment into clinical trials,3 collection of biologic samples,4 and extraction of patient-provided data, all within SM platforms.5

Advantages and pitfalls in social media research

SM is a new frontier containing a wide spectrum of clinical and qualitative data from connected users (patients). Collection and examination of either individuals’ or groups’ SM information use can provide insight into qualitative life experiences, just as analysis of biologic samples can enable dissection of genetic disease underpinnings. This mediome is analogous to the human genome, both in content and utility.1 Analyzing data streams from SM for interpersonal interactions, message content, and even frequency can provide digital investigators with volumes of information that otherwise would remain unattainable.

Dr. Rachel Fogel
There are many advantages to scientific interrogation of the social mediome, specifically because applications within SM have no physical bounds, encourage information exchange among stakeholders, and work in real time. Patient access to clinical studies and individual investment can limit both conventional and unconventional approaches to research. However, SM far exceeds the geographic limitations determined by the location of patients and academic systems, thus expanding the available recruitment population dramatically (Table 1). Patient-to-patient communication is facilitated by the format of most SM venues (Facebook and other Internet forums), thus creating an enriched collection of disease testimonies, symptom discussions, and treatment effects. In fact, patients frequently use SM to form online support groups to share experiences with similarly afflicted patients and families. These groups and their documented communications are valuable because qualitative patient data can provide a high resolution of variable patient metrics to investigators.5 Finally, data collection from SM can occur continuously in real time and with little cost. Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are free to use, although online Internet forums may incur small monetary investments (typically $15–$50 per month). Because of study heterogeneity, it remains challenging to compare costs between a SM-based research study and a similar traditional clinic-based approach. However, historically, costs incurred to SM research pioneers have been dramatically lower than cost estimates of conventional approaches in the clinic.6

Several limitations and potential risks of SM for medical research should be addressed, including the possible compromise of privacy and confidentiality, the use and dissemination of medical advice and information, potential demographic biases, and a required trust of the investigator by patients. Many of these challenges can be similar to traditional methods, however, as in the conventional model, careful management can drastically reduce unwanted study issues.

The risk of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act violations must be considered seriously in the context of patient–researcher interactions on SM. Because of the relatively public nature of these venues, patient confidentiality may be at risk if patients choose to divulge personal medical information. However, if proper protective measures are taken to ensure that the venue is secure (e.g., a private or closed group on Facebook or a by-invitation-only online Internet forum), and the researcher vets all patients who request entrance into the group, this risk may be minimized. Moreover, to further reduce any legal liability, the researcher should not provide any medical advice to patients who participate in a SM study. The drive to provide medical direction in study patients with clinical need may be strong because collaborative relationships between investigator and patients are likely to form. Furthermore, digital access to investigators on SM commonly becomes easy for patients. Safe approaches to communication could include redirecting patients to consult with their own doctor for advice, unbiased dissemination of disease-specific educational materials, or depiction of only institutional review board–approved study materials.7,8

Dr. Josette Jones
An investigator-driven interactive community (e.g., Facebook group) may bolster patient involvement in SM studies and help facilitate disease-specific research. However, because most SM venues facilitate patient–patient interactions, misleading or incorrect medical information may be spread quickly between patients and could be misconstrued as official medical advice.9 To mitigate this, a researcher or trusted study personnel must actively moderate the digital venue to prevent the spread of counterproductive information.7 Although it is not possible to completely eliminate the sharing of unverified information, regular moderation will reduce the potentially negative impact of such sharing.

The perception that only younger populations use SM may appear to be a significant limitation for its implementation in clinical research. However, this limitation is rapidly becoming less significant because recent studies have shown that the use of SM has become increasingly common among older adults. As of 2014, more than half of the US adult population used Facebook, including 73% and 63% of Internet-using adults ages 30–49 and 50–64 years, respectively.10 SM may not be suitable for all diseases, however, there is likely significant demographic overlap for many disease populations.

Finally, it is imperative for researchers to gain the trust of patients on SM to effectively use these venues for research purposes. Because patient–researcher interaction does not occur face-to-face on these platforms, gaining the trust of patients may be more difficult than it would be in a clinical setting. Thus, patient–patient and patient–researcher communications within SM platforms must be cultivated carefully to instill participant confidence in the research being performed on their behalf. One of the authors (C.L.) has established an SM educational model for this exchange.4 Specifically, he provides patients with a distillation of current field research by posting updates in a research-specific Facebook group and on Twitter. This model not only empowers patients with disease education, it also solidifies the importance of patient investment in disease-specific research. Furthermore, invested patients bring ideas to research, take a more educated and proactive role in their care team, and, ultimately, return to seek more study involvement.

Dr. Craig Lammert
A number of studies have shown SM methods to be an effective means of collecting data and improving quality of care for patients. One randomized controlled trial found that the use of SM to disseminate instructional information to patients alongside the traditional educational pamphlet increased patients’ quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopies.11 Another study successfully used the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America Partners Internet Cohort of more than 14,000 patients to examine factors associated with fiber consumption in inflammatory bowel disease and whether fiber was associated with disease flares.2 In addition, several studies have assessed the roles of mobile applications, remote health sensors, and telemedicine in research and patient care and have found that these tools are effective at providing more complete care in real time and with decreased costs.12 Riaz and Atreja13 noted that the most significant barrier to the use of these techniques in research and patient care is provider acceptability, in addition to the need for strict Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act compliance to ensure patient confidentiality. Keeping these limitations in mind, the aforementioned studies lend significant support to the effective use of SM as adjuncts to traditional clinical investigation.

 

 

Social media in rare disease research

Rare diseases (conditions with a prevalence of less than 200,000 patients in North America), in particular, are prime for high-yield results and community impact using novel SM approaches. This is the result of established digital support groups, publications with historically low study numbers, and few focused investigators. Several studies of rare diseases have shown considerable advantages of using SM as a study tool. For instance, an existing neuroendocrine cervical cancer Facebook support group recently was used to recruit a geographically widespread cohort of patients with this rare cancer. Through an online survey posted in the Facebook group, patients were able to provide specific information on their treatment, disease, and symptom history, current disease status, and quality of life, including various psychological factors. Without the use of SM, collecting this information would have been virtually impossible because the patients were treated at 51 cancer centers across the country.14

Similarly, a 2014 study investigating Fontan-associated protein-losing enteropathy and plastic bronchitis aimed to compare patient participation in surveys posted on SM with participation in more traditional research modalities. The investigators found that 84% of responses were referred from SM. As of 2014, this cohort was the largest known group of post-Fontan protein-losing enteropathy and plastic bronchitis patients in existence.15

Currently, the use of SM in hepatology research, focused specifically on autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), is under exploration at Indiana University. AIH is a rare autoimmune liver disease that results in immune-mediated destruction of liver cells, possibly resulting in fibrosis, cirrhosis, or liver failure if treatment is unsuccessful. One of the authors (C.L.) used both Facebook and Twitter to construct a large study group of individuals affected with AIH called the Autoimmune Hepatitis Research Network (AHRN; 1,500 members) during the past 2 years.4 Interested individuals have joined this research group after searching for AIH online support groups or reading shared AHRN posts on other media platforms. Between April 2015 and April 2016, there were posts by more than 750 unique active members (more than 50% of the group contributes to discussions), most of whom appear to be either caregivers of AIH patients or AIH patients themselves.

Preliminary informational analysis on this group has shown that C.L. and study collaborators have been able to uncover rich clinical and nonclinical information that otherwise would remain unknown. This research was performed by semi-automated download of the Facebook group’s content and subsequent semantic analysis. Qualitative analysis also was performed by direct reading of patient narratives. Collected clinical information has included histories of medication side effects, familial autoimmune diseases, and comorbid conditions. The most common factors that patients were unlikely to discuss with a provider (e.g., financial issues, employment, personal relationships, use of supplements, and alcohol use) frequently were discussed in the AHRN group, allowing a more transparent view of the complete disease experience.

Beyond research conducted in the current paradigm, the AHRN has provided a rich community construct in which patients offer each other social support. The patient impression of AHRN on Facebook has been overwhelmingly positive, and patients often wonder why such a model has not been used with other diseases. The close digital interaction the author (C.L.) has had with numerous patients and families has promoted other benefits of this methodology: more than 40 new AIH patients from outside Indiana have traveled to Indiana University for medical consultation despite no advertisement.

Conclusions

SM has the potential to transform health care research as a supplement to traditional research methods. Compared with a conventional research model, this methodology has proven to be cost and time effective, wide reaching, and similarly capable of data collection. Use of SM in research has tremendous potential to direct patient-centered research because invested patient collaborators can take an active role in their own disease and may hone investigatory focus on stakeholder priorities. Limitations to this method are known, however; if implemented cautiously, these can be mitigated. Investment in and application of the social mediome by investigators and patients has the potential to support and transform research that otherwise would be impossible.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to extend their gratitude to the members of the Autoimmune Hepatitis Research Network for their continued proactivity and engagement in autoimmune hepatitis research. Furthermore, the authors are grateful to Dr. Naga Chalasani for his continued mentorship and extensive contributions to the development of social media approaches in clinical investigation.

References

1. Asch, D.A., Rader, D.J., Merchant, R.M. Mining the social mediome. Trends Mol Med. 2015;21:528-9.

2. Brotherton, C.S., Martin, C.A., Long, M.D. et al. Avoidance of fiber is associated with greater risk of Crohn’s disease flare in a 6-month period. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:1130-6.

3. Fenner, Y., Garland, S.M., Moore, E.E., et al. Web-based recruiting for health research using a social networking site: an exploratory study. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14:e20.

4. Lammert, C., Comerford, M., Love, J., et al. Investigation gone viral: application of the social mediasphere in research. Gastroenterology. 2015;149:839-43.

5. Wicks, P., Massagli, M., Frost, J., et al. Sharing health data for better outcomes on PatientsLikeMe. J Med Internet Res. 2010;12:e19.

6. Admon, L., Haefner, J.K., Kolenic, G.E., et al. Recruiting pregnant patients for survey research: a head to head comparison of social media-based versus clinic-based approaches. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18:e326.

7. Farnan, J.M., Sulmasy, L.S., Chaudhry, H. Online medical professionalism. Ann Intern Med. 2013;159:158-9.

8. Massachusetts Medical Society: Social Media Guidelines for Physicians. Available from: http://www.massmed.org/Physicians/Legal-and-Regulatory/Social-Media-Guidelines-for-Physicians/#. Accessed: January 3, 2017.

9. Pirraglia, P.A. Kravitz, R.L. Social media: new opportunities, new ethical concerns. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28:165-6.

10. Duggan, M., Ellison, N.B., Lampe, C. et al. Demographics of key social networking platforms. (Available from:) (Accessed: January 4, 2017) Pew Res Cent Internet Sci Tech. 2015; http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/09/demographics-of-key-social-networking-platforms-2

11. Kang, X., Zhao, L., Leung, F., et al. Delivery of Instructions via mobile social media app increases quality of bowel preparation. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:429-35.

12. Bajaj, J.S., Heuman, D.M., Sterling, R.K., et al. Validation of EncephalApp, Smartphone-based Stroop test, for the diagnosis of covert hepatic encephalopathy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;13:1828-35.

13. Riaz, M.S. Atreja, A. Personalized technologies in chronic gastrointestinal disorders: self-monitoring and remote sensor technologies. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:1697-705.

14. Zaid, T., Burzawa, J., Basen-Engquist, K., et al. Use of social media to conduct a cross-sectional epidemiologic and quality of life survey of patients with neuroendocrine carcinoma of the cervix: a feasibility study. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;132:149-53.

15. Schumacher, K.R., Stringer, K.A., Donohue, J.E., et al. Social media methods for studying rare diseases. Pediatrics. 2014;133:e1345–53.

 

 

Dr. Kulanthaivel and Dr. Jones are in the school of informatics and computing, Purdue University, Indiana University, Indianapolis; Dr. Fogel and Dr. Lammert are in the department of digestive and liver diseases, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis. This study was supported by KL2TR001106 and UL1TR001108 from the National Institutes of Health, and the Clinical and Translational Sciences Award from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (C.L.). The authors disclose no conflicts.
 

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

We are becoming comfortable with the concept of a sharing economy, where resources are shared among many individuals using online forums. Whether activities involve sharing rides (Uber, Lyft, and others), accommodations (Airbnb), or information (social media), underlying attributes include reduced transactional costs, enhanced information transparency, dynamic feedback, and socialization of opportunity. As health care systems realize that they are changing from direct-to-business to a direct-to-customer model, their ability to connect directly with individuals will become a foundational strategy.

This month’s column introduces us to social media as a research tool. Information derived from social media sites can be harvested for critical clinical information (the Centers for Disease and Control and Prevention tracks the spread of influenza using social media analytic tools), research data (patient preferences), and as a recruitment method for clinical studies. Kulanthaivel and colleagues have described their experiences and literature review to help us imagine new ways to collect data at markedly reduced transaction costs (compared to a formal clinical trial). While there are many cautions about the use of social media in your practice or research, we are only beginning to understand its potential.

John I. Allen, MD, MBA, AGAF

Editor in Chief

Medical knowledge, culminating from the collection and translation of patient data, is the primary objective of the clinical research paradigm. The successful conduct of this traditional model has become even more challenging with expansion of costs and a dwindling research infrastructure. Beyond systemic issues, conventional research methods are burdened further by minimal patient engagement, inadequate staffing, and geographic limitations to recruitment. Clinical research also has failed to keep pace with patient demands, and the limited scope of well-funded, disease-specific investigations have left many patients feeling disenfranchised. Social media venues may represent a viable option to surpass these current and evolving barriers when used as an adjunctive approach to traditional clinical investigation.

Dr. Anand Kulanthaivel
The term social media (SM) most commonly refers to relatively public, Internet-based communication platforms that enable users to consume and disseminate information. The most popular SM venues currently include Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and independent online forums (Table 1). These digital platforms support sharing multiple forms of media including text, images, and videos between users who interact within a wide realm of medical groups and genres (e.g., specific diseases, symptoms, and so forth). This collective mediome1 is a relatively untapped resource for clinical study, but research applications using SM methodology have begun to produce real study benefits in an array of diseases. Effective implementation of this technology by interested investigators will require an in-depth working knowledge of digital venues beyond their own online social presence. A firm grasp of these applications can enable contact with previously out-of-reach study participants, promote patient engagement and disease investment, and cultivate a community of interacting patients and researchers. This data-rich resource already has facilitated various aspects of biomedical studies, including dissemination of epidemiologic surveys,2 direct recruitment into clinical trials,3 collection of biologic samples,4 and extraction of patient-provided data, all within SM platforms.5

Advantages and pitfalls in social media research

SM is a new frontier containing a wide spectrum of clinical and qualitative data from connected users (patients). Collection and examination of either individuals’ or groups’ SM information use can provide insight into qualitative life experiences, just as analysis of biologic samples can enable dissection of genetic disease underpinnings. This mediome is analogous to the human genome, both in content and utility.1 Analyzing data streams from SM for interpersonal interactions, message content, and even frequency can provide digital investigators with volumes of information that otherwise would remain unattainable.

Dr. Rachel Fogel
There are many advantages to scientific interrogation of the social mediome, specifically because applications within SM have no physical bounds, encourage information exchange among stakeholders, and work in real time. Patient access to clinical studies and individual investment can limit both conventional and unconventional approaches to research. However, SM far exceeds the geographic limitations determined by the location of patients and academic systems, thus expanding the available recruitment population dramatically (Table 1). Patient-to-patient communication is facilitated by the format of most SM venues (Facebook and other Internet forums), thus creating an enriched collection of disease testimonies, symptom discussions, and treatment effects. In fact, patients frequently use SM to form online support groups to share experiences with similarly afflicted patients and families. These groups and their documented communications are valuable because qualitative patient data can provide a high resolution of variable patient metrics to investigators.5 Finally, data collection from SM can occur continuously in real time and with little cost. Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are free to use, although online Internet forums may incur small monetary investments (typically $15–$50 per month). Because of study heterogeneity, it remains challenging to compare costs between a SM-based research study and a similar traditional clinic-based approach. However, historically, costs incurred to SM research pioneers have been dramatically lower than cost estimates of conventional approaches in the clinic.6

Several limitations and potential risks of SM for medical research should be addressed, including the possible compromise of privacy and confidentiality, the use and dissemination of medical advice and information, potential demographic biases, and a required trust of the investigator by patients. Many of these challenges can be similar to traditional methods, however, as in the conventional model, careful management can drastically reduce unwanted study issues.

The risk of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act violations must be considered seriously in the context of patient–researcher interactions on SM. Because of the relatively public nature of these venues, patient confidentiality may be at risk if patients choose to divulge personal medical information. However, if proper protective measures are taken to ensure that the venue is secure (e.g., a private or closed group on Facebook or a by-invitation-only online Internet forum), and the researcher vets all patients who request entrance into the group, this risk may be minimized. Moreover, to further reduce any legal liability, the researcher should not provide any medical advice to patients who participate in a SM study. The drive to provide medical direction in study patients with clinical need may be strong because collaborative relationships between investigator and patients are likely to form. Furthermore, digital access to investigators on SM commonly becomes easy for patients. Safe approaches to communication could include redirecting patients to consult with their own doctor for advice, unbiased dissemination of disease-specific educational materials, or depiction of only institutional review board–approved study materials.7,8

Dr. Josette Jones
An investigator-driven interactive community (e.g., Facebook group) may bolster patient involvement in SM studies and help facilitate disease-specific research. However, because most SM venues facilitate patient–patient interactions, misleading or incorrect medical information may be spread quickly between patients and could be misconstrued as official medical advice.9 To mitigate this, a researcher or trusted study personnel must actively moderate the digital venue to prevent the spread of counterproductive information.7 Although it is not possible to completely eliminate the sharing of unverified information, regular moderation will reduce the potentially negative impact of such sharing.

The perception that only younger populations use SM may appear to be a significant limitation for its implementation in clinical research. However, this limitation is rapidly becoming less significant because recent studies have shown that the use of SM has become increasingly common among older adults. As of 2014, more than half of the US adult population used Facebook, including 73% and 63% of Internet-using adults ages 30–49 and 50–64 years, respectively.10 SM may not be suitable for all diseases, however, there is likely significant demographic overlap for many disease populations.

Finally, it is imperative for researchers to gain the trust of patients on SM to effectively use these venues for research purposes. Because patient–researcher interaction does not occur face-to-face on these platforms, gaining the trust of patients may be more difficult than it would be in a clinical setting. Thus, patient–patient and patient–researcher communications within SM platforms must be cultivated carefully to instill participant confidence in the research being performed on their behalf. One of the authors (C.L.) has established an SM educational model for this exchange.4 Specifically, he provides patients with a distillation of current field research by posting updates in a research-specific Facebook group and on Twitter. This model not only empowers patients with disease education, it also solidifies the importance of patient investment in disease-specific research. Furthermore, invested patients bring ideas to research, take a more educated and proactive role in their care team, and, ultimately, return to seek more study involvement.

Dr. Craig Lammert
A number of studies have shown SM methods to be an effective means of collecting data and improving quality of care for patients. One randomized controlled trial found that the use of SM to disseminate instructional information to patients alongside the traditional educational pamphlet increased patients’ quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopies.11 Another study successfully used the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America Partners Internet Cohort of more than 14,000 patients to examine factors associated with fiber consumption in inflammatory bowel disease and whether fiber was associated with disease flares.2 In addition, several studies have assessed the roles of mobile applications, remote health sensors, and telemedicine in research and patient care and have found that these tools are effective at providing more complete care in real time and with decreased costs.12 Riaz and Atreja13 noted that the most significant barrier to the use of these techniques in research and patient care is provider acceptability, in addition to the need for strict Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act compliance to ensure patient confidentiality. Keeping these limitations in mind, the aforementioned studies lend significant support to the effective use of SM as adjuncts to traditional clinical investigation.

 

 

Social media in rare disease research

Rare diseases (conditions with a prevalence of less than 200,000 patients in North America), in particular, are prime for high-yield results and community impact using novel SM approaches. This is the result of established digital support groups, publications with historically low study numbers, and few focused investigators. Several studies of rare diseases have shown considerable advantages of using SM as a study tool. For instance, an existing neuroendocrine cervical cancer Facebook support group recently was used to recruit a geographically widespread cohort of patients with this rare cancer. Through an online survey posted in the Facebook group, patients were able to provide specific information on their treatment, disease, and symptom history, current disease status, and quality of life, including various psychological factors. Without the use of SM, collecting this information would have been virtually impossible because the patients were treated at 51 cancer centers across the country.14

Similarly, a 2014 study investigating Fontan-associated protein-losing enteropathy and plastic bronchitis aimed to compare patient participation in surveys posted on SM with participation in more traditional research modalities. The investigators found that 84% of responses were referred from SM. As of 2014, this cohort was the largest known group of post-Fontan protein-losing enteropathy and plastic bronchitis patients in existence.15

Currently, the use of SM in hepatology research, focused specifically on autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), is under exploration at Indiana University. AIH is a rare autoimmune liver disease that results in immune-mediated destruction of liver cells, possibly resulting in fibrosis, cirrhosis, or liver failure if treatment is unsuccessful. One of the authors (C.L.) used both Facebook and Twitter to construct a large study group of individuals affected with AIH called the Autoimmune Hepatitis Research Network (AHRN; 1,500 members) during the past 2 years.4 Interested individuals have joined this research group after searching for AIH online support groups or reading shared AHRN posts on other media platforms. Between April 2015 and April 2016, there were posts by more than 750 unique active members (more than 50% of the group contributes to discussions), most of whom appear to be either caregivers of AIH patients or AIH patients themselves.

Preliminary informational analysis on this group has shown that C.L. and study collaborators have been able to uncover rich clinical and nonclinical information that otherwise would remain unknown. This research was performed by semi-automated download of the Facebook group’s content and subsequent semantic analysis. Qualitative analysis also was performed by direct reading of patient narratives. Collected clinical information has included histories of medication side effects, familial autoimmune diseases, and comorbid conditions. The most common factors that patients were unlikely to discuss with a provider (e.g., financial issues, employment, personal relationships, use of supplements, and alcohol use) frequently were discussed in the AHRN group, allowing a more transparent view of the complete disease experience.

Beyond research conducted in the current paradigm, the AHRN has provided a rich community construct in which patients offer each other social support. The patient impression of AHRN on Facebook has been overwhelmingly positive, and patients often wonder why such a model has not been used with other diseases. The close digital interaction the author (C.L.) has had with numerous patients and families has promoted other benefits of this methodology: more than 40 new AIH patients from outside Indiana have traveled to Indiana University for medical consultation despite no advertisement.

Conclusions

SM has the potential to transform health care research as a supplement to traditional research methods. Compared with a conventional research model, this methodology has proven to be cost and time effective, wide reaching, and similarly capable of data collection. Use of SM in research has tremendous potential to direct patient-centered research because invested patient collaborators can take an active role in their own disease and may hone investigatory focus on stakeholder priorities. Limitations to this method are known, however; if implemented cautiously, these can be mitigated. Investment in and application of the social mediome by investigators and patients has the potential to support and transform research that otherwise would be impossible.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to extend their gratitude to the members of the Autoimmune Hepatitis Research Network for their continued proactivity and engagement in autoimmune hepatitis research. Furthermore, the authors are grateful to Dr. Naga Chalasani for his continued mentorship and extensive contributions to the development of social media approaches in clinical investigation.

References

1. Asch, D.A., Rader, D.J., Merchant, R.M. Mining the social mediome. Trends Mol Med. 2015;21:528-9.

2. Brotherton, C.S., Martin, C.A., Long, M.D. et al. Avoidance of fiber is associated with greater risk of Crohn’s disease flare in a 6-month period. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:1130-6.

3. Fenner, Y., Garland, S.M., Moore, E.E., et al. Web-based recruiting for health research using a social networking site: an exploratory study. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14:e20.

4. Lammert, C., Comerford, M., Love, J., et al. Investigation gone viral: application of the social mediasphere in research. Gastroenterology. 2015;149:839-43.

5. Wicks, P., Massagli, M., Frost, J., et al. Sharing health data for better outcomes on PatientsLikeMe. J Med Internet Res. 2010;12:e19.

6. Admon, L., Haefner, J.K., Kolenic, G.E., et al. Recruiting pregnant patients for survey research: a head to head comparison of social media-based versus clinic-based approaches. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18:e326.

7. Farnan, J.M., Sulmasy, L.S., Chaudhry, H. Online medical professionalism. Ann Intern Med. 2013;159:158-9.

8. Massachusetts Medical Society: Social Media Guidelines for Physicians. Available from: http://www.massmed.org/Physicians/Legal-and-Regulatory/Social-Media-Guidelines-for-Physicians/#. Accessed: January 3, 2017.

9. Pirraglia, P.A. Kravitz, R.L. Social media: new opportunities, new ethical concerns. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28:165-6.

10. Duggan, M., Ellison, N.B., Lampe, C. et al. Demographics of key social networking platforms. (Available from:) (Accessed: January 4, 2017) Pew Res Cent Internet Sci Tech. 2015; http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/09/demographics-of-key-social-networking-platforms-2

11. Kang, X., Zhao, L., Leung, F., et al. Delivery of Instructions via mobile social media app increases quality of bowel preparation. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:429-35.

12. Bajaj, J.S., Heuman, D.M., Sterling, R.K., et al. Validation of EncephalApp, Smartphone-based Stroop test, for the diagnosis of covert hepatic encephalopathy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;13:1828-35.

13. Riaz, M.S. Atreja, A. Personalized technologies in chronic gastrointestinal disorders: self-monitoring and remote sensor technologies. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:1697-705.

14. Zaid, T., Burzawa, J., Basen-Engquist, K., et al. Use of social media to conduct a cross-sectional epidemiologic and quality of life survey of patients with neuroendocrine carcinoma of the cervix: a feasibility study. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;132:149-53.

15. Schumacher, K.R., Stringer, K.A., Donohue, J.E., et al. Social media methods for studying rare diseases. Pediatrics. 2014;133:e1345–53.

 

 

Dr. Kulanthaivel and Dr. Jones are in the school of informatics and computing, Purdue University, Indiana University, Indianapolis; Dr. Fogel and Dr. Lammert are in the department of digestive and liver diseases, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis. This study was supported by KL2TR001106 and UL1TR001108 from the National Institutes of Health, and the Clinical and Translational Sciences Award from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (C.L.). The authors disclose no conflicts.
 

 

We are becoming comfortable with the concept of a sharing economy, where resources are shared among many individuals using online forums. Whether activities involve sharing rides (Uber, Lyft, and others), accommodations (Airbnb), or information (social media), underlying attributes include reduced transactional costs, enhanced information transparency, dynamic feedback, and socialization of opportunity. As health care systems realize that they are changing from direct-to-business to a direct-to-customer model, their ability to connect directly with individuals will become a foundational strategy.

This month’s column introduces us to social media as a research tool. Information derived from social media sites can be harvested for critical clinical information (the Centers for Disease and Control and Prevention tracks the spread of influenza using social media analytic tools), research data (patient preferences), and as a recruitment method for clinical studies. Kulanthaivel and colleagues have described their experiences and literature review to help us imagine new ways to collect data at markedly reduced transaction costs (compared to a formal clinical trial). While there are many cautions about the use of social media in your practice or research, we are only beginning to understand its potential.

John I. Allen, MD, MBA, AGAF

Editor in Chief

Medical knowledge, culminating from the collection and translation of patient data, is the primary objective of the clinical research paradigm. The successful conduct of this traditional model has become even more challenging with expansion of costs and a dwindling research infrastructure. Beyond systemic issues, conventional research methods are burdened further by minimal patient engagement, inadequate staffing, and geographic limitations to recruitment. Clinical research also has failed to keep pace with patient demands, and the limited scope of well-funded, disease-specific investigations have left many patients feeling disenfranchised. Social media venues may represent a viable option to surpass these current and evolving barriers when used as an adjunctive approach to traditional clinical investigation.

Dr. Anand Kulanthaivel
The term social media (SM) most commonly refers to relatively public, Internet-based communication platforms that enable users to consume and disseminate information. The most popular SM venues currently include Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and independent online forums (Table 1). These digital platforms support sharing multiple forms of media including text, images, and videos between users who interact within a wide realm of medical groups and genres (e.g., specific diseases, symptoms, and so forth). This collective mediome1 is a relatively untapped resource for clinical study, but research applications using SM methodology have begun to produce real study benefits in an array of diseases. Effective implementation of this technology by interested investigators will require an in-depth working knowledge of digital venues beyond their own online social presence. A firm grasp of these applications can enable contact with previously out-of-reach study participants, promote patient engagement and disease investment, and cultivate a community of interacting patients and researchers. This data-rich resource already has facilitated various aspects of biomedical studies, including dissemination of epidemiologic surveys,2 direct recruitment into clinical trials,3 collection of biologic samples,4 and extraction of patient-provided data, all within SM platforms.5

Advantages and pitfalls in social media research

SM is a new frontier containing a wide spectrum of clinical and qualitative data from connected users (patients). Collection and examination of either individuals’ or groups’ SM information use can provide insight into qualitative life experiences, just as analysis of biologic samples can enable dissection of genetic disease underpinnings. This mediome is analogous to the human genome, both in content and utility.1 Analyzing data streams from SM for interpersonal interactions, message content, and even frequency can provide digital investigators with volumes of information that otherwise would remain unattainable.

Dr. Rachel Fogel
There are many advantages to scientific interrogation of the social mediome, specifically because applications within SM have no physical bounds, encourage information exchange among stakeholders, and work in real time. Patient access to clinical studies and individual investment can limit both conventional and unconventional approaches to research. However, SM far exceeds the geographic limitations determined by the location of patients and academic systems, thus expanding the available recruitment population dramatically (Table 1). Patient-to-patient communication is facilitated by the format of most SM venues (Facebook and other Internet forums), thus creating an enriched collection of disease testimonies, symptom discussions, and treatment effects. In fact, patients frequently use SM to form online support groups to share experiences with similarly afflicted patients and families. These groups and their documented communications are valuable because qualitative patient data can provide a high resolution of variable patient metrics to investigators.5 Finally, data collection from SM can occur continuously in real time and with little cost. Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are free to use, although online Internet forums may incur small monetary investments (typically $15–$50 per month). Because of study heterogeneity, it remains challenging to compare costs between a SM-based research study and a similar traditional clinic-based approach. However, historically, costs incurred to SM research pioneers have been dramatically lower than cost estimates of conventional approaches in the clinic.6

Several limitations and potential risks of SM for medical research should be addressed, including the possible compromise of privacy and confidentiality, the use and dissemination of medical advice and information, potential demographic biases, and a required trust of the investigator by patients. Many of these challenges can be similar to traditional methods, however, as in the conventional model, careful management can drastically reduce unwanted study issues.

The risk of Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act violations must be considered seriously in the context of patient–researcher interactions on SM. Because of the relatively public nature of these venues, patient confidentiality may be at risk if patients choose to divulge personal medical information. However, if proper protective measures are taken to ensure that the venue is secure (e.g., a private or closed group on Facebook or a by-invitation-only online Internet forum), and the researcher vets all patients who request entrance into the group, this risk may be minimized. Moreover, to further reduce any legal liability, the researcher should not provide any medical advice to patients who participate in a SM study. The drive to provide medical direction in study patients with clinical need may be strong because collaborative relationships between investigator and patients are likely to form. Furthermore, digital access to investigators on SM commonly becomes easy for patients. Safe approaches to communication could include redirecting patients to consult with their own doctor for advice, unbiased dissemination of disease-specific educational materials, or depiction of only institutional review board–approved study materials.7,8

Dr. Josette Jones
An investigator-driven interactive community (e.g., Facebook group) may bolster patient involvement in SM studies and help facilitate disease-specific research. However, because most SM venues facilitate patient–patient interactions, misleading or incorrect medical information may be spread quickly between patients and could be misconstrued as official medical advice.9 To mitigate this, a researcher or trusted study personnel must actively moderate the digital venue to prevent the spread of counterproductive information.7 Although it is not possible to completely eliminate the sharing of unverified information, regular moderation will reduce the potentially negative impact of such sharing.

The perception that only younger populations use SM may appear to be a significant limitation for its implementation in clinical research. However, this limitation is rapidly becoming less significant because recent studies have shown that the use of SM has become increasingly common among older adults. As of 2014, more than half of the US adult population used Facebook, including 73% and 63% of Internet-using adults ages 30–49 and 50–64 years, respectively.10 SM may not be suitable for all diseases, however, there is likely significant demographic overlap for many disease populations.

Finally, it is imperative for researchers to gain the trust of patients on SM to effectively use these venues for research purposes. Because patient–researcher interaction does not occur face-to-face on these platforms, gaining the trust of patients may be more difficult than it would be in a clinical setting. Thus, patient–patient and patient–researcher communications within SM platforms must be cultivated carefully to instill participant confidence in the research being performed on their behalf. One of the authors (C.L.) has established an SM educational model for this exchange.4 Specifically, he provides patients with a distillation of current field research by posting updates in a research-specific Facebook group and on Twitter. This model not only empowers patients with disease education, it also solidifies the importance of patient investment in disease-specific research. Furthermore, invested patients bring ideas to research, take a more educated and proactive role in their care team, and, ultimately, return to seek more study involvement.

Dr. Craig Lammert
A number of studies have shown SM methods to be an effective means of collecting data and improving quality of care for patients. One randomized controlled trial found that the use of SM to disseminate instructional information to patients alongside the traditional educational pamphlet increased patients’ quality of bowel preparation for colonoscopies.11 Another study successfully used the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation of America Partners Internet Cohort of more than 14,000 patients to examine factors associated with fiber consumption in inflammatory bowel disease and whether fiber was associated with disease flares.2 In addition, several studies have assessed the roles of mobile applications, remote health sensors, and telemedicine in research and patient care and have found that these tools are effective at providing more complete care in real time and with decreased costs.12 Riaz and Atreja13 noted that the most significant barrier to the use of these techniques in research and patient care is provider acceptability, in addition to the need for strict Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act compliance to ensure patient confidentiality. Keeping these limitations in mind, the aforementioned studies lend significant support to the effective use of SM as adjuncts to traditional clinical investigation.

 

 

Social media in rare disease research

Rare diseases (conditions with a prevalence of less than 200,000 patients in North America), in particular, are prime for high-yield results and community impact using novel SM approaches. This is the result of established digital support groups, publications with historically low study numbers, and few focused investigators. Several studies of rare diseases have shown considerable advantages of using SM as a study tool. For instance, an existing neuroendocrine cervical cancer Facebook support group recently was used to recruit a geographically widespread cohort of patients with this rare cancer. Through an online survey posted in the Facebook group, patients were able to provide specific information on their treatment, disease, and symptom history, current disease status, and quality of life, including various psychological factors. Without the use of SM, collecting this information would have been virtually impossible because the patients were treated at 51 cancer centers across the country.14

Similarly, a 2014 study investigating Fontan-associated protein-losing enteropathy and plastic bronchitis aimed to compare patient participation in surveys posted on SM with participation in more traditional research modalities. The investigators found that 84% of responses were referred from SM. As of 2014, this cohort was the largest known group of post-Fontan protein-losing enteropathy and plastic bronchitis patients in existence.15

Currently, the use of SM in hepatology research, focused specifically on autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), is under exploration at Indiana University. AIH is a rare autoimmune liver disease that results in immune-mediated destruction of liver cells, possibly resulting in fibrosis, cirrhosis, or liver failure if treatment is unsuccessful. One of the authors (C.L.) used both Facebook and Twitter to construct a large study group of individuals affected with AIH called the Autoimmune Hepatitis Research Network (AHRN; 1,500 members) during the past 2 years.4 Interested individuals have joined this research group after searching for AIH online support groups or reading shared AHRN posts on other media platforms. Between April 2015 and April 2016, there were posts by more than 750 unique active members (more than 50% of the group contributes to discussions), most of whom appear to be either caregivers of AIH patients or AIH patients themselves.

Preliminary informational analysis on this group has shown that C.L. and study collaborators have been able to uncover rich clinical and nonclinical information that otherwise would remain unknown. This research was performed by semi-automated download of the Facebook group’s content and subsequent semantic analysis. Qualitative analysis also was performed by direct reading of patient narratives. Collected clinical information has included histories of medication side effects, familial autoimmune diseases, and comorbid conditions. The most common factors that patients were unlikely to discuss with a provider (e.g., financial issues, employment, personal relationships, use of supplements, and alcohol use) frequently were discussed in the AHRN group, allowing a more transparent view of the complete disease experience.

Beyond research conducted in the current paradigm, the AHRN has provided a rich community construct in which patients offer each other social support. The patient impression of AHRN on Facebook has been overwhelmingly positive, and patients often wonder why such a model has not been used with other diseases. The close digital interaction the author (C.L.) has had with numerous patients and families has promoted other benefits of this methodology: more than 40 new AIH patients from outside Indiana have traveled to Indiana University for medical consultation despite no advertisement.

Conclusions

SM has the potential to transform health care research as a supplement to traditional research methods. Compared with a conventional research model, this methodology has proven to be cost and time effective, wide reaching, and similarly capable of data collection. Use of SM in research has tremendous potential to direct patient-centered research because invested patient collaborators can take an active role in their own disease and may hone investigatory focus on stakeholder priorities. Limitations to this method are known, however; if implemented cautiously, these can be mitigated. Investment in and application of the social mediome by investigators and patients has the potential to support and transform research that otherwise would be impossible.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to extend their gratitude to the members of the Autoimmune Hepatitis Research Network for their continued proactivity and engagement in autoimmune hepatitis research. Furthermore, the authors are grateful to Dr. Naga Chalasani for his continued mentorship and extensive contributions to the development of social media approaches in clinical investigation.

References

1. Asch, D.A., Rader, D.J., Merchant, R.M. Mining the social mediome. Trends Mol Med. 2015;21:528-9.

2. Brotherton, C.S., Martin, C.A., Long, M.D. et al. Avoidance of fiber is associated with greater risk of Crohn’s disease flare in a 6-month period. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:1130-6.

3. Fenner, Y., Garland, S.M., Moore, E.E., et al. Web-based recruiting for health research using a social networking site: an exploratory study. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14:e20.

4. Lammert, C., Comerford, M., Love, J., et al. Investigation gone viral: application of the social mediasphere in research. Gastroenterology. 2015;149:839-43.

5. Wicks, P., Massagli, M., Frost, J., et al. Sharing health data for better outcomes on PatientsLikeMe. J Med Internet Res. 2010;12:e19.

6. Admon, L., Haefner, J.K., Kolenic, G.E., et al. Recruiting pregnant patients for survey research: a head to head comparison of social media-based versus clinic-based approaches. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18:e326.

7. Farnan, J.M., Sulmasy, L.S., Chaudhry, H. Online medical professionalism. Ann Intern Med. 2013;159:158-9.

8. Massachusetts Medical Society: Social Media Guidelines for Physicians. Available from: http://www.massmed.org/Physicians/Legal-and-Regulatory/Social-Media-Guidelines-for-Physicians/#. Accessed: January 3, 2017.

9. Pirraglia, P.A. Kravitz, R.L. Social media: new opportunities, new ethical concerns. J Gen Intern Med. 2013;28:165-6.

10. Duggan, M., Ellison, N.B., Lampe, C. et al. Demographics of key social networking platforms. (Available from:) (Accessed: January 4, 2017) Pew Res Cent Internet Sci Tech. 2015; http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/09/demographics-of-key-social-networking-platforms-2

11. Kang, X., Zhao, L., Leung, F., et al. Delivery of Instructions via mobile social media app increases quality of bowel preparation. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:429-35.

12. Bajaj, J.S., Heuman, D.M., Sterling, R.K., et al. Validation of EncephalApp, Smartphone-based Stroop test, for the diagnosis of covert hepatic encephalopathy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015;13:1828-35.

13. Riaz, M.S. Atreja, A. Personalized technologies in chronic gastrointestinal disorders: self-monitoring and remote sensor technologies. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;14:1697-705.

14. Zaid, T., Burzawa, J., Basen-Engquist, K., et al. Use of social media to conduct a cross-sectional epidemiologic and quality of life survey of patients with neuroendocrine carcinoma of the cervix: a feasibility study. Gynecol Oncol. 2014;132:149-53.

15. Schumacher, K.R., Stringer, K.A., Donohue, J.E., et al. Social media methods for studying rare diseases. Pediatrics. 2014;133:e1345–53.

 

 

Dr. Kulanthaivel and Dr. Jones are in the school of informatics and computing, Purdue University, Indiana University, Indianapolis; Dr. Fogel and Dr. Lammert are in the department of digestive and liver diseases, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis. This study was supported by KL2TR001106 and UL1TR001108 from the National Institutes of Health, and the Clinical and Translational Sciences Award from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (C.L.). The authors disclose no conflicts.
 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

Cotempla XR-ODT approved for children, adolescents with ADHD

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 16:51

 

The Food and Drug Administration has approved the first methylphenidate extended-release orally disintegrating tablet for treating ADHD in patients aged 6-17 years old, Neos Therapeutics announced June 19.

The company said the approval came after a phase III trial showed that treatment in a laboratory classroom with the drug, called Cotempla XR-ODT, showed a significant improvement in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptom control when compared with a placebo across the classroom day (placebo-subtracted difference of –11). The onset of effect was shown at 1 hour post-dose and lasted through 12 hours. No serious adverse events were reported during the trial, and the adverse event profile was consistent with the established safety profile for other extended-release methylphenidate products.

“Cotempla XR-ODT offers a new methylphenidate option in ADHD management because it dissolves in the mouth with no need for chewing or drinking water. It has a clinical profile consistent with commonly prescribed methylphenidate ADHD treatments, which are generally available as capsules that must be swallowed whole,” said Ann Childress, MD, president of the Center for Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, Las Vegas, in a press release. “Cotempla XR-ODT will offer physicians and their patients a differentiated treatment option that combines the convenience of once-daily dosing with an orally disintegrating methylphenidate dosage form.”

Cotempla XR-ODT will be available commercially in a portable, child-resistant blister pack in the fall of 2017.

Find the full press release on Neos Therapeutics website.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

The Food and Drug Administration has approved the first methylphenidate extended-release orally disintegrating tablet for treating ADHD in patients aged 6-17 years old, Neos Therapeutics announced June 19.

The company said the approval came after a phase III trial showed that treatment in a laboratory classroom with the drug, called Cotempla XR-ODT, showed a significant improvement in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptom control when compared with a placebo across the classroom day (placebo-subtracted difference of –11). The onset of effect was shown at 1 hour post-dose and lasted through 12 hours. No serious adverse events were reported during the trial, and the adverse event profile was consistent with the established safety profile for other extended-release methylphenidate products.

“Cotempla XR-ODT offers a new methylphenidate option in ADHD management because it dissolves in the mouth with no need for chewing or drinking water. It has a clinical profile consistent with commonly prescribed methylphenidate ADHD treatments, which are generally available as capsules that must be swallowed whole,” said Ann Childress, MD, president of the Center for Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, Las Vegas, in a press release. “Cotempla XR-ODT will offer physicians and their patients a differentiated treatment option that combines the convenience of once-daily dosing with an orally disintegrating methylphenidate dosage form.”

Cotempla XR-ODT will be available commercially in a portable, child-resistant blister pack in the fall of 2017.

Find the full press release on Neos Therapeutics website.

 

The Food and Drug Administration has approved the first methylphenidate extended-release orally disintegrating tablet for treating ADHD in patients aged 6-17 years old, Neos Therapeutics announced June 19.

The company said the approval came after a phase III trial showed that treatment in a laboratory classroom with the drug, called Cotempla XR-ODT, showed a significant improvement in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptom control when compared with a placebo across the classroom day (placebo-subtracted difference of –11). The onset of effect was shown at 1 hour post-dose and lasted through 12 hours. No serious adverse events were reported during the trial, and the adverse event profile was consistent with the established safety profile for other extended-release methylphenidate products.

“Cotempla XR-ODT offers a new methylphenidate option in ADHD management because it dissolves in the mouth with no need for chewing or drinking water. It has a clinical profile consistent with commonly prescribed methylphenidate ADHD treatments, which are generally available as capsules that must be swallowed whole,” said Ann Childress, MD, president of the Center for Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, Las Vegas, in a press release. “Cotempla XR-ODT will offer physicians and their patients a differentiated treatment option that combines the convenience of once-daily dosing with an orally disintegrating methylphenidate dosage form.”

Cotempla XR-ODT will be available commercially in a portable, child-resistant blister pack in the fall of 2017.

Find the full press release on Neos Therapeutics website.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

Breastfeeding may reduce moms’ stroke risk

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 16:51

 

Breastfeeding not only benefits babies; it also may lower the risk for a heart attack or stroke later in life for mothers who breastfeed more than for women who don’t.

The findings, which were published online June 21 in the Journal of the American Heart Association, are based on data from a prospective study of nearly 300,000 women in China.

Mother breastfeeding her child.
©Jupiterimages/Thinkstock
Data from previous studies suggest that the cardiometabolic changes associated with pregnancy, such as greater insulin resistance and higher circulating lipid levels “may reverse more quickly and more completely with breastfeeding,” wrote Sanne A.E. Peters, PhD, of the University of Oxford, England, and her colleagues. However, data on the long-term impact of breastfeeding on maternal health are limited, the researchers said.

To assess the impact of breastfeeding on maternal cardiovascular health, the researchers reviewed data from 289,573 women who were participating in the China Kadoorie Biobank study to assess their reproductive history and lifestyle. At the time of study enrollment, none of the women had a history of cardiovascular disease and 99% reported at least one live birth. The average age of the women at baseline was 51 years.

Of the women who had given birth, 97% reported ever breastfeeding, and 91% reported breastfeeding each child for at least 6 months. The median duration of breastfeeding was 12 months per child (J Am Heart Assoc. 2017 Jun 21. doi: JAHA/2017/006081-T2).

During an 8-year follow-up period, participants experienced 16,671 cases of coronary heart disease and 23,983 strokes.

Overall, women who breastfed babies had a 9% reduction in risk of coronary heart disease and an 8% reduction in risk of stroke, compared with women who never breastfed. The longer the duration of breastfeeding, the greater the risk reduction; for every additional 6 months of breastfeeding, researchers found a 4% reduction in heart disease risk and a 3% reduction in stroke risk. Mothers who breastfed for 2 years or more had the most protection – an 18% reduced risk of heart disease and a 17% reduced risk of stroke, compared with mothers who never breastfed.

The study was limited by several factors, including its observational nature, which cannot confirm a causal relationship between breastfeeding and CVD. However, the results suggest that, if causal, “interventions to increase the likelihood and duration of breastfeeding could have persistent benefits to maternal cardiovascular health,” they wrote.

The baseline study was funded by the Kadoorie Charitable Foundation in Hong Kong; long-term support came from the UK Wellcome Trust, Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology, and the Chinese National Natural Science Foundation. Other support came from the British Heart Foundation, UK Medical Research Council and Cancer Research UK, and the National Natural Science Foundation of China. Dr. Peters has received support from the British Heart Foundation.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Breastfeeding not only benefits babies; it also may lower the risk for a heart attack or stroke later in life for mothers who breastfeed more than for women who don’t.

The findings, which were published online June 21 in the Journal of the American Heart Association, are based on data from a prospective study of nearly 300,000 women in China.

Mother breastfeeding her child.
©Jupiterimages/Thinkstock
Data from previous studies suggest that the cardiometabolic changes associated with pregnancy, such as greater insulin resistance and higher circulating lipid levels “may reverse more quickly and more completely with breastfeeding,” wrote Sanne A.E. Peters, PhD, of the University of Oxford, England, and her colleagues. However, data on the long-term impact of breastfeeding on maternal health are limited, the researchers said.

To assess the impact of breastfeeding on maternal cardiovascular health, the researchers reviewed data from 289,573 women who were participating in the China Kadoorie Biobank study to assess their reproductive history and lifestyle. At the time of study enrollment, none of the women had a history of cardiovascular disease and 99% reported at least one live birth. The average age of the women at baseline was 51 years.

Of the women who had given birth, 97% reported ever breastfeeding, and 91% reported breastfeeding each child for at least 6 months. The median duration of breastfeeding was 12 months per child (J Am Heart Assoc. 2017 Jun 21. doi: JAHA/2017/006081-T2).

During an 8-year follow-up period, participants experienced 16,671 cases of coronary heart disease and 23,983 strokes.

Overall, women who breastfed babies had a 9% reduction in risk of coronary heart disease and an 8% reduction in risk of stroke, compared with women who never breastfed. The longer the duration of breastfeeding, the greater the risk reduction; for every additional 6 months of breastfeeding, researchers found a 4% reduction in heart disease risk and a 3% reduction in stroke risk. Mothers who breastfed for 2 years or more had the most protection – an 18% reduced risk of heart disease and a 17% reduced risk of stroke, compared with mothers who never breastfed.

The study was limited by several factors, including its observational nature, which cannot confirm a causal relationship between breastfeeding and CVD. However, the results suggest that, if causal, “interventions to increase the likelihood and duration of breastfeeding could have persistent benefits to maternal cardiovascular health,” they wrote.

The baseline study was funded by the Kadoorie Charitable Foundation in Hong Kong; long-term support came from the UK Wellcome Trust, Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology, and the Chinese National Natural Science Foundation. Other support came from the British Heart Foundation, UK Medical Research Council and Cancer Research UK, and the National Natural Science Foundation of China. Dr. Peters has received support from the British Heart Foundation.

 

Breastfeeding not only benefits babies; it also may lower the risk for a heart attack or stroke later in life for mothers who breastfeed more than for women who don’t.

The findings, which were published online June 21 in the Journal of the American Heart Association, are based on data from a prospective study of nearly 300,000 women in China.

Mother breastfeeding her child.
©Jupiterimages/Thinkstock
Data from previous studies suggest that the cardiometabolic changes associated with pregnancy, such as greater insulin resistance and higher circulating lipid levels “may reverse more quickly and more completely with breastfeeding,” wrote Sanne A.E. Peters, PhD, of the University of Oxford, England, and her colleagues. However, data on the long-term impact of breastfeeding on maternal health are limited, the researchers said.

To assess the impact of breastfeeding on maternal cardiovascular health, the researchers reviewed data from 289,573 women who were participating in the China Kadoorie Biobank study to assess their reproductive history and lifestyle. At the time of study enrollment, none of the women had a history of cardiovascular disease and 99% reported at least one live birth. The average age of the women at baseline was 51 years.

Of the women who had given birth, 97% reported ever breastfeeding, and 91% reported breastfeeding each child for at least 6 months. The median duration of breastfeeding was 12 months per child (J Am Heart Assoc. 2017 Jun 21. doi: JAHA/2017/006081-T2).

During an 8-year follow-up period, participants experienced 16,671 cases of coronary heart disease and 23,983 strokes.

Overall, women who breastfed babies had a 9% reduction in risk of coronary heart disease and an 8% reduction in risk of stroke, compared with women who never breastfed. The longer the duration of breastfeeding, the greater the risk reduction; for every additional 6 months of breastfeeding, researchers found a 4% reduction in heart disease risk and a 3% reduction in stroke risk. Mothers who breastfed for 2 years or more had the most protection – an 18% reduced risk of heart disease and a 17% reduced risk of stroke, compared with mothers who never breastfed.

The study was limited by several factors, including its observational nature, which cannot confirm a causal relationship between breastfeeding and CVD. However, the results suggest that, if causal, “interventions to increase the likelihood and duration of breastfeeding could have persistent benefits to maternal cardiovascular health,” they wrote.

The baseline study was funded by the Kadoorie Charitable Foundation in Hong Kong; long-term support came from the UK Wellcome Trust, Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology, and the Chinese National Natural Science Foundation. Other support came from the British Heart Foundation, UK Medical Research Council and Cancer Research UK, and the National Natural Science Foundation of China. Dr. Peters has received support from the British Heart Foundation.

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

FROM THE JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION

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

 

Key clinical point: Interventions to encourage breastfeeding may benefit mothers’ cardiovascular health later in life.

Major finding: Women who breastfed their babies had a 10% reduction in risk of cardiovascular disease later in life.

Data source: A prospective study of approximately 300,000 women in China.

Disclosures: The baseline study was funded by the Kadoorie Charitable Foundation in Hong Kong; long-term support came from the UK Wellcome Trust, Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology, and the Chinese National Natural Science Foundation. Dr. Peters has received support from the British Heart Foundation.