2017 Membership renewal period now open

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 12/13/2016 - 10:27

 

AGA is committed to your success in gastroenterology. Make sure to renew your membership at www.gastro.org/renew to maintain your benefits and stay up to date on the latest discoveries in GI through subscriptions to leading publications. These include Gastroenterology, Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, and Cellular and Molecular Gastroenterology and Hepatology, as well as members-only publications covering leading trends in the field.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

AGA is committed to your success in gastroenterology. Make sure to renew your membership at www.gastro.org/renew to maintain your benefits and stay up to date on the latest discoveries in GI through subscriptions to leading publications. These include Gastroenterology, Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, and Cellular and Molecular Gastroenterology and Hepatology, as well as members-only publications covering leading trends in the field.

 

AGA is committed to your success in gastroenterology. Make sure to renew your membership at www.gastro.org/renew to maintain your benefits and stay up to date on the latest discoveries in GI through subscriptions to leading publications. These include Gastroenterology, Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, and Cellular and Molecular Gastroenterology and Hepatology, as well as members-only publications covering leading trends in the field.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads

Support young researchers through the AGA Research Foundation

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 12/13/2016 - 10:27

 

The AGA Research Foundation plays an important role in medical research by providing grants to young scientists at a critical time in their careers. In the 2016 research award cycle, the foundation provided more than $2.5 million in research award support to 66 scientists. We funded four Research Scholar Award (RSA) recipients; outside of the RSAs, the foundation provided several other funding vehicles for individuals ranging from high school students to established investigators.

With the support of our donors, we are building a community of researchers whose work serves the greater community and benefits all our patients. Here are just a few of the investigators the AGA Research Foundation is funding.
 

Dr. Kyle Staller
Kyle Staller, MD, MPH

Massachusetts General Hospital

2016 AGA Research Scholar Award Recipient

“I would like to thank the AGA Research Foundation and its donors for their generous support. This award is a critical step in allowing me to develop an infrastructure to support future research examining additional lifestyle risk factors for IBS.” – He will use this research funding to evaluate the association of early-life risk factors and risk of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) in prospective multicenter cohorts.

Dr. Ting-Chin D. Shen
Ting-Chin D. Shen, MD

University of Pennsylvania

2016 AGA Microbiome Junior Investigator Research Award

“I am extremely honored to have received this award. This grant is instrumental in my career development as a physician-scientist working in the gut microbiome field. The opportunities and resources this award affords will gear me toward achieving my research goals.” – His research project aims to investigate the role of bacterial urease, which hydrolyzes host-derived urea into ammonia in the colon, in host and gut microbiota amino acid metabolism.

Elizabeth Edouard
Elizabeth Edouard

Mt. Saint Mary’s University

2016 AGA Investing in the Future Student Research Fellowship

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

The AGA Research Foundation plays an important role in medical research by providing grants to young scientists at a critical time in their careers. In the 2016 research award cycle, the foundation provided more than $2.5 million in research award support to 66 scientists. We funded four Research Scholar Award (RSA) recipients; outside of the RSAs, the foundation provided several other funding vehicles for individuals ranging from high school students to established investigators.

With the support of our donors, we are building a community of researchers whose work serves the greater community and benefits all our patients. Here are just a few of the investigators the AGA Research Foundation is funding.
 

Dr. Kyle Staller
Kyle Staller, MD, MPH

Massachusetts General Hospital

2016 AGA Research Scholar Award Recipient

“I would like to thank the AGA Research Foundation and its donors for their generous support. This award is a critical step in allowing me to develop an infrastructure to support future research examining additional lifestyle risk factors for IBS.” – He will use this research funding to evaluate the association of early-life risk factors and risk of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) in prospective multicenter cohorts.

Dr. Ting-Chin D. Shen
Ting-Chin D. Shen, MD

University of Pennsylvania

2016 AGA Microbiome Junior Investigator Research Award

“I am extremely honored to have received this award. This grant is instrumental in my career development as a physician-scientist working in the gut microbiome field. The opportunities and resources this award affords will gear me toward achieving my research goals.” – His research project aims to investigate the role of bacterial urease, which hydrolyzes host-derived urea into ammonia in the colon, in host and gut microbiota amino acid metabolism.

Elizabeth Edouard
Elizabeth Edouard

Mt. Saint Mary’s University

2016 AGA Investing in the Future Student Research Fellowship

 

The AGA Research Foundation plays an important role in medical research by providing grants to young scientists at a critical time in their careers. In the 2016 research award cycle, the foundation provided more than $2.5 million in research award support to 66 scientists. We funded four Research Scholar Award (RSA) recipients; outside of the RSAs, the foundation provided several other funding vehicles for individuals ranging from high school students to established investigators.

With the support of our donors, we are building a community of researchers whose work serves the greater community and benefits all our patients. Here are just a few of the investigators the AGA Research Foundation is funding.
 

Dr. Kyle Staller
Kyle Staller, MD, MPH

Massachusetts General Hospital

2016 AGA Research Scholar Award Recipient

“I would like to thank the AGA Research Foundation and its donors for their generous support. This award is a critical step in allowing me to develop an infrastructure to support future research examining additional lifestyle risk factors for IBS.” – He will use this research funding to evaluate the association of early-life risk factors and risk of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) in prospective multicenter cohorts.

Dr. Ting-Chin D. Shen
Ting-Chin D. Shen, MD

University of Pennsylvania

2016 AGA Microbiome Junior Investigator Research Award

“I am extremely honored to have received this award. This grant is instrumental in my career development as a physician-scientist working in the gut microbiome field. The opportunities and resources this award affords will gear me toward achieving my research goals.” – His research project aims to investigate the role of bacterial urease, which hydrolyzes host-derived urea into ammonia in the colon, in host and gut microbiota amino acid metabolism.

Elizabeth Edouard
Elizabeth Edouard

Mt. Saint Mary’s University

2016 AGA Investing in the Future Student Research Fellowship

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads

Choosing Wisely Initiative Helps Physicians Provide Appropriate Care

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 03/28/2019 - 15:01

HILTON HEAD, SCPhysicians sometimes order unnecessary medical tests and procedures for their patients, which results in wasteful spending and inappropriate care. Following medical associations’ practice recommendations, which have been collected by the Choosing Wisely initiative, can help physicians reduce waste in the health care system and provide appropriate treatment for patients, according to an overview presented at the 39th Annual Contemporary Clinical Neurology Symposium.

Avoiding Unnecessary Treatments and Tests

The American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation created the Choosing Wisely website to encourage dialogue between physicians and patients about the overuse of treatments and tests. An additional goal was to empower patients to make informed treatment decisions. More than 70 societies, including the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) and the American Headache Society, submitted recommendations to advise patients and clinicians about proper healthcare. “You can find a list of all the organizations that contributed on the Choosing Wisely website, and each one was asked to contribute five different topics for Choosing Wisely,” said Peter Donofrio, MD, Professor of Neurology at Vanderbilt University in Nashville.

Peter Donofrio, MD

The AAN recommends that clinicians not perform an EEG for headaches. In addition, the organization recommends that physicians not perform imaging of the carotid arteries for simple syncope without other neurologic symptoms. For patients with migraine, opioids or butalbital treatment should be a last resort. The AAN also recommends that doctors not prescribe interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate for patients with disability resulting from progressive, nonrelapsing forms of multiple sclerosis, because the drugs are ineffective. Finally, it advises doctors not to recommend carotid endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid stenosis unless the complication rate from surgery is less than 3%.

The American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine recommends that physicians not perform MRI scans of the brain or spine for patients with peripheral neuropathy without signs of cerebral or spinal cord disease. In addition, the association discourages physicians from performing nerve conduction studies (NCSs) without a needle EMG for radiculopathy assessment. It also recommends that physicians not order or perform four-limb EMG/NCS testing for neck or back pain after trauma.

Treating Acute Low Back Pain and Headache

Other medical associations have made recommendations regarding the assessment and treatment of acute low back pain and headache. The North American Spine Society does not recommend advanced imaging of the spine within the first six weeks in patients with nonspecific acute low back pain in the absence of red flags.

The American Headache Society (AHS) recommends that physicians avoid advising prolonged or frequent use of over-the-counter pain medications for headache. The organization also discourages physicians from prescribing opioid or butalbital-containing medications as first-line treatment for recurrent headache disorders. Furthermore, it does not recommend surgical deactivation of migraine trigger points outside of a clinical trial. In addition, the society advises physicians not to perform CT imaging for headache when an MRI is available, except in emergency settings. The society also recommends that physicians should not perform neuroimaging studies for patients with stable headaches that meet migraine criteria.

When CT Scans Are Unnecessary in Children

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) advises that CT scans and MRI scans are not necessary in a child with simple febrile seizure. The AAP also does not recommend CT scans for the immediate evaluation of minor head injuries; clinical observation and Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) criteria should be used to determine whether imaging is indicated.

Treating Insomnia and Sleep Disorders

The American Academy of Sleep Medicine advises doctors not to prescribe medication for childhood insomnia, which usually arises from parent–child interactions and responds to behavioral intervention. In addition, the academy does not recommend the use of hypnotics as a primary therapy for chronic insomnia in adults; instead, it advises physicians to offer cognitive behavioral therapy and reserve medication for adjunctive treatment when necessary. It recommends that a polysomnography be avoided in chronic insomnia unless symptoms suggest a comorbid sleep disorder. Additional Choosing Wisely recommendations are available at www.choosingwisely.org.

Erica Tricarico

Suggested Reading

Callaghan BC, De Lott LB, Kerber KA, et al. Neurology Choosing Wisely recommendations: 74 and growing. Neurol Clin Pract. 2015;5(5):439-447.

Langer-Gould AM, Anderson WE, Armstrong MJ, et al. The American Academy of Neurology’s top five choosing wisely recommendations. Neurology. 2013;81(11):1004-1011.

Loder E, Weisenbaum E, Fishberg B, et al. Choosing wisely in headache medicine: the American Headache Society’s list of five things physicians and patients should question. Headache. 2013;53(10):1651-1659.

Issue
Neurology Reviews - 24(11)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
8-9
Sections
Related Articles

HILTON HEAD, SCPhysicians sometimes order unnecessary medical tests and procedures for their patients, which results in wasteful spending and inappropriate care. Following medical associations’ practice recommendations, which have been collected by the Choosing Wisely initiative, can help physicians reduce waste in the health care system and provide appropriate treatment for patients, according to an overview presented at the 39th Annual Contemporary Clinical Neurology Symposium.

Avoiding Unnecessary Treatments and Tests

The American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation created the Choosing Wisely website to encourage dialogue between physicians and patients about the overuse of treatments and tests. An additional goal was to empower patients to make informed treatment decisions. More than 70 societies, including the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) and the American Headache Society, submitted recommendations to advise patients and clinicians about proper healthcare. “You can find a list of all the organizations that contributed on the Choosing Wisely website, and each one was asked to contribute five different topics for Choosing Wisely,” said Peter Donofrio, MD, Professor of Neurology at Vanderbilt University in Nashville.

Peter Donofrio, MD

The AAN recommends that clinicians not perform an EEG for headaches. In addition, the organization recommends that physicians not perform imaging of the carotid arteries for simple syncope without other neurologic symptoms. For patients with migraine, opioids or butalbital treatment should be a last resort. The AAN also recommends that doctors not prescribe interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate for patients with disability resulting from progressive, nonrelapsing forms of multiple sclerosis, because the drugs are ineffective. Finally, it advises doctors not to recommend carotid endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid stenosis unless the complication rate from surgery is less than 3%.

The American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine recommends that physicians not perform MRI scans of the brain or spine for patients with peripheral neuropathy without signs of cerebral or spinal cord disease. In addition, the association discourages physicians from performing nerve conduction studies (NCSs) without a needle EMG for radiculopathy assessment. It also recommends that physicians not order or perform four-limb EMG/NCS testing for neck or back pain after trauma.

Treating Acute Low Back Pain and Headache

Other medical associations have made recommendations regarding the assessment and treatment of acute low back pain and headache. The North American Spine Society does not recommend advanced imaging of the spine within the first six weeks in patients with nonspecific acute low back pain in the absence of red flags.

The American Headache Society (AHS) recommends that physicians avoid advising prolonged or frequent use of over-the-counter pain medications for headache. The organization also discourages physicians from prescribing opioid or butalbital-containing medications as first-line treatment for recurrent headache disorders. Furthermore, it does not recommend surgical deactivation of migraine trigger points outside of a clinical trial. In addition, the society advises physicians not to perform CT imaging for headache when an MRI is available, except in emergency settings. The society also recommends that physicians should not perform neuroimaging studies for patients with stable headaches that meet migraine criteria.

When CT Scans Are Unnecessary in Children

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) advises that CT scans and MRI scans are not necessary in a child with simple febrile seizure. The AAP also does not recommend CT scans for the immediate evaluation of minor head injuries; clinical observation and Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) criteria should be used to determine whether imaging is indicated.

Treating Insomnia and Sleep Disorders

The American Academy of Sleep Medicine advises doctors not to prescribe medication for childhood insomnia, which usually arises from parent–child interactions and responds to behavioral intervention. In addition, the academy does not recommend the use of hypnotics as a primary therapy for chronic insomnia in adults; instead, it advises physicians to offer cognitive behavioral therapy and reserve medication for adjunctive treatment when necessary. It recommends that a polysomnography be avoided in chronic insomnia unless symptoms suggest a comorbid sleep disorder. Additional Choosing Wisely recommendations are available at www.choosingwisely.org.

Erica Tricarico

Suggested Reading

Callaghan BC, De Lott LB, Kerber KA, et al. Neurology Choosing Wisely recommendations: 74 and growing. Neurol Clin Pract. 2015;5(5):439-447.

Langer-Gould AM, Anderson WE, Armstrong MJ, et al. The American Academy of Neurology’s top five choosing wisely recommendations. Neurology. 2013;81(11):1004-1011.

Loder E, Weisenbaum E, Fishberg B, et al. Choosing wisely in headache medicine: the American Headache Society’s list of five things physicians and patients should question. Headache. 2013;53(10):1651-1659.

HILTON HEAD, SCPhysicians sometimes order unnecessary medical tests and procedures for their patients, which results in wasteful spending and inappropriate care. Following medical associations’ practice recommendations, which have been collected by the Choosing Wisely initiative, can help physicians reduce waste in the health care system and provide appropriate treatment for patients, according to an overview presented at the 39th Annual Contemporary Clinical Neurology Symposium.

Avoiding Unnecessary Treatments and Tests

The American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation created the Choosing Wisely website to encourage dialogue between physicians and patients about the overuse of treatments and tests. An additional goal was to empower patients to make informed treatment decisions. More than 70 societies, including the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) and the American Headache Society, submitted recommendations to advise patients and clinicians about proper healthcare. “You can find a list of all the organizations that contributed on the Choosing Wisely website, and each one was asked to contribute five different topics for Choosing Wisely,” said Peter Donofrio, MD, Professor of Neurology at Vanderbilt University in Nashville.

Peter Donofrio, MD

The AAN recommends that clinicians not perform an EEG for headaches. In addition, the organization recommends that physicians not perform imaging of the carotid arteries for simple syncope without other neurologic symptoms. For patients with migraine, opioids or butalbital treatment should be a last resort. The AAN also recommends that doctors not prescribe interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate for patients with disability resulting from progressive, nonrelapsing forms of multiple sclerosis, because the drugs are ineffective. Finally, it advises doctors not to recommend carotid endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid stenosis unless the complication rate from surgery is less than 3%.

The American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine recommends that physicians not perform MRI scans of the brain or spine for patients with peripheral neuropathy without signs of cerebral or spinal cord disease. In addition, the association discourages physicians from performing nerve conduction studies (NCSs) without a needle EMG for radiculopathy assessment. It also recommends that physicians not order or perform four-limb EMG/NCS testing for neck or back pain after trauma.

Treating Acute Low Back Pain and Headache

Other medical associations have made recommendations regarding the assessment and treatment of acute low back pain and headache. The North American Spine Society does not recommend advanced imaging of the spine within the first six weeks in patients with nonspecific acute low back pain in the absence of red flags.

The American Headache Society (AHS) recommends that physicians avoid advising prolonged or frequent use of over-the-counter pain medications for headache. The organization also discourages physicians from prescribing opioid or butalbital-containing medications as first-line treatment for recurrent headache disorders. Furthermore, it does not recommend surgical deactivation of migraine trigger points outside of a clinical trial. In addition, the society advises physicians not to perform CT imaging for headache when an MRI is available, except in emergency settings. The society also recommends that physicians should not perform neuroimaging studies for patients with stable headaches that meet migraine criteria.

When CT Scans Are Unnecessary in Children

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) advises that CT scans and MRI scans are not necessary in a child with simple febrile seizure. The AAP also does not recommend CT scans for the immediate evaluation of minor head injuries; clinical observation and Pediatric Emergency Care Applied Research Network (PECARN) criteria should be used to determine whether imaging is indicated.

Treating Insomnia and Sleep Disorders

The American Academy of Sleep Medicine advises doctors not to prescribe medication for childhood insomnia, which usually arises from parent–child interactions and responds to behavioral intervention. In addition, the academy does not recommend the use of hypnotics as a primary therapy for chronic insomnia in adults; instead, it advises physicians to offer cognitive behavioral therapy and reserve medication for adjunctive treatment when necessary. It recommends that a polysomnography be avoided in chronic insomnia unless symptoms suggest a comorbid sleep disorder. Additional Choosing Wisely recommendations are available at www.choosingwisely.org.

Erica Tricarico

Suggested Reading

Callaghan BC, De Lott LB, Kerber KA, et al. Neurology Choosing Wisely recommendations: 74 and growing. Neurol Clin Pract. 2015;5(5):439-447.

Langer-Gould AM, Anderson WE, Armstrong MJ, et al. The American Academy of Neurology’s top five choosing wisely recommendations. Neurology. 2013;81(11):1004-1011.

Loder E, Weisenbaum E, Fishberg B, et al. Choosing wisely in headache medicine: the American Headache Society’s list of five things physicians and patients should question. Headache. 2013;53(10):1651-1659.

Issue
Neurology Reviews - 24(11)
Issue
Neurology Reviews - 24(11)
Page Number
8-9
Page Number
8-9
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads

Reasons Behind the Ink

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 01/10/2019 - 13:35

Tattoos have been viewed as one of the most exotic forms of art for thousands of years. In ancient times, tattoos were used mainly for therapeutic and status purposes. According to British archeologist Joann Fletcher, the oldest evidence of tattoo use was found on the famous “Iceman,” a 5200-year-old frozen mummy that was discovered more than 20 years ago.1 Tattoos were thought to be a form of therapy used to decrease joint pain. On the other hand, the ancient Egyptians used tattoos as symbols of wealth and high status; surprisingly, only women were tattooed. Fletcher also reported that tattoos were used as a form of therapy during pregnancy in upper-class women.1

Tattoos have served different purposes in the last few centuries, making their way to the United States at the start of the 20th century.2 New York City became the tattoo capital of the country. During this early period, male artists often would tattoo their wives so that they could advertise their work. After the Prohibition era, tattoos became widely used within the US Military, becoming a way to show pride and patriotism.2

Due to the permanent nature of tattoos, we sought to understand the reasons for obtaining this particular genre of body art. The purpose of this study was to provide a greater understanding of the current demographics of individuals who get tattoos, looking at specific trends in age and level of education of those who get tattoos as well as the motivation for tattoo placement. As dermatologists, it is essential to understand this patient population to be able to provide services (ie, tattoo removal) in the safe setting of a physician’s office.

Methods

The study was conducted at a private dermatology clinic in the Chicago (Illinois) metropolitan area with no institutional review board approval. Between January 2011 and December 2012, local patients with at least 1 tattoo were asked, with assumed consent, to fill out an investigator-developed survey containing 18 multiple-choice questions regarding age, educational and family background, and other factors. The race and gender of the respondents as well as the number of patients who declined to complete the survey were not recorded.

Results

A total of 363 patients completed the in-person survey. Responses were tabulated and converted into percentages for comparison (N=363). Data analysis was divided into 3 parameters: education level, health concerns, and motivation for getting a tattoo. Figure 1 shows that 70% of respondents had obtained a college degree or higher.

Figure 1. Highest level of education completed by survey respondents (N=363).

With regard to health concerns associated with tattoos, the majority of respondents (71%) claimed they were not concerned with the health risks (eg, infection with human immunodeficiency virus or hepatitis C virus) associated with getting a tattoo. Also, only 6% of respondents admitted to being under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of getting a tattoo. Of 21 respondents who claimed drugs and/or alcohol were part of their tattoo experience, the highest level of education was high school in 7 respondents and 2 got their first tattoo when they were younger than 14 years.

Survey results revealed that the majority of respondents got a tattoo as an act of rememberance (Figure 2). For example, one respondent reported getting a tattoo for religious purposes, while another got a tattoo to celebrate and mark each level of completed education (ie, high school, college, graduate school). However, a high percentage of respondents (26%) got a tattoo for fun.

Figure 2. Self-reported reasons for getting a tattoo among survey respondents (N=363).

 

 

Comment

Although ancient tattoos were used for therapeutic purposes, this study revealed that tattoos are now obtained by individuals with higher levels of education to remember a loved one or purely for enjoyment. The potential health risks associated with getting a tattoo did not deter the respondents in this study. Converse to the popular belief that individuals are under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol when getting a tattoo, our study found that only 6% of respondents were under the influence. A comparable trend was found among US military service members in a similar study.3 The majority of respondents did not regret their tattoos and did not report taking a mind-altering substance. Tattoos serve as a symbol of one’s proud individualism.3 However, a 2001 study found a correlation between greater use of alcohol and marijuana among college students with tattoos and piecings.4 These circumstances may lead patients to seek consultation from a dermatologist for tattoo removal. Therefore, it is important to have a better understanding of this particular patient population to facilitate care in an efficient manner.

Evaluation of the gender and race of survey respondents would be useful in the future. Financial status of respondents also may be explored, as wealth and status were used by the ancient Egyptians to determine who could get a tattoo. A follow-up analysis on removal of tattoos also will be explored in the future.

References
  1. Lineberry C. Tattoos: the ancient and mysterious history. Smithsonian. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/tattoo.html. Published January 1, 2007. Accessed April 29, 2016.
  2. Bickerstaff L. Tattoos: fad, fashion, or folly? Odyssey. 2005;14:34-36.
  3. Lande RG, Bahroo BA, Soumoff A. United States military service members and their tattoos: a descriptive study. Mil Med. 2013;178:921-925.
  4. Forbes GB. College students with tattoos and piercings: motives, family experiences, personality factors, and perception by others. Psychol Rep. 2001;89:774-786.
Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

From University Dermatology, Darien, Illinois.

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Matthew Newman, MS-IV, 8810 S Cass Ave, Darien, IL 60561 ([email protected]).

Issue
Cutis - 98(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
320-322
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

From University Dermatology, Darien, Illinois.

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Matthew Newman, MS-IV, 8810 S Cass Ave, Darien, IL 60561 ([email protected]).

Author and Disclosure Information

From University Dermatology, Darien, Illinois.

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Correspondence: Matthew Newman, MS-IV, 8810 S Cass Ave, Darien, IL 60561 ([email protected]).

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

Tattoos have been viewed as one of the most exotic forms of art for thousands of years. In ancient times, tattoos were used mainly for therapeutic and status purposes. According to British archeologist Joann Fletcher, the oldest evidence of tattoo use was found on the famous “Iceman,” a 5200-year-old frozen mummy that was discovered more than 20 years ago.1 Tattoos were thought to be a form of therapy used to decrease joint pain. On the other hand, the ancient Egyptians used tattoos as symbols of wealth and high status; surprisingly, only women were tattooed. Fletcher also reported that tattoos were used as a form of therapy during pregnancy in upper-class women.1

Tattoos have served different purposes in the last few centuries, making their way to the United States at the start of the 20th century.2 New York City became the tattoo capital of the country. During this early period, male artists often would tattoo their wives so that they could advertise their work. After the Prohibition era, tattoos became widely used within the US Military, becoming a way to show pride and patriotism.2

Due to the permanent nature of tattoos, we sought to understand the reasons for obtaining this particular genre of body art. The purpose of this study was to provide a greater understanding of the current demographics of individuals who get tattoos, looking at specific trends in age and level of education of those who get tattoos as well as the motivation for tattoo placement. As dermatologists, it is essential to understand this patient population to be able to provide services (ie, tattoo removal) in the safe setting of a physician’s office.

Methods

The study was conducted at a private dermatology clinic in the Chicago (Illinois) metropolitan area with no institutional review board approval. Between January 2011 and December 2012, local patients with at least 1 tattoo were asked, with assumed consent, to fill out an investigator-developed survey containing 18 multiple-choice questions regarding age, educational and family background, and other factors. The race and gender of the respondents as well as the number of patients who declined to complete the survey were not recorded.

Results

A total of 363 patients completed the in-person survey. Responses were tabulated and converted into percentages for comparison (N=363). Data analysis was divided into 3 parameters: education level, health concerns, and motivation for getting a tattoo. Figure 1 shows that 70% of respondents had obtained a college degree or higher.

Figure 1. Highest level of education completed by survey respondents (N=363).

With regard to health concerns associated with tattoos, the majority of respondents (71%) claimed they were not concerned with the health risks (eg, infection with human immunodeficiency virus or hepatitis C virus) associated with getting a tattoo. Also, only 6% of respondents admitted to being under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of getting a tattoo. Of 21 respondents who claimed drugs and/or alcohol were part of their tattoo experience, the highest level of education was high school in 7 respondents and 2 got their first tattoo when they were younger than 14 years.

Survey results revealed that the majority of respondents got a tattoo as an act of rememberance (Figure 2). For example, one respondent reported getting a tattoo for religious purposes, while another got a tattoo to celebrate and mark each level of completed education (ie, high school, college, graduate school). However, a high percentage of respondents (26%) got a tattoo for fun.

Figure 2. Self-reported reasons for getting a tattoo among survey respondents (N=363).

 

 

Comment

Although ancient tattoos were used for therapeutic purposes, this study revealed that tattoos are now obtained by individuals with higher levels of education to remember a loved one or purely for enjoyment. The potential health risks associated with getting a tattoo did not deter the respondents in this study. Converse to the popular belief that individuals are under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol when getting a tattoo, our study found that only 6% of respondents were under the influence. A comparable trend was found among US military service members in a similar study.3 The majority of respondents did not regret their tattoos and did not report taking a mind-altering substance. Tattoos serve as a symbol of one’s proud individualism.3 However, a 2001 study found a correlation between greater use of alcohol and marijuana among college students with tattoos and piecings.4 These circumstances may lead patients to seek consultation from a dermatologist for tattoo removal. Therefore, it is important to have a better understanding of this particular patient population to facilitate care in an efficient manner.

Evaluation of the gender and race of survey respondents would be useful in the future. Financial status of respondents also may be explored, as wealth and status were used by the ancient Egyptians to determine who could get a tattoo. A follow-up analysis on removal of tattoos also will be explored in the future.

Tattoos have been viewed as one of the most exotic forms of art for thousands of years. In ancient times, tattoos were used mainly for therapeutic and status purposes. According to British archeologist Joann Fletcher, the oldest evidence of tattoo use was found on the famous “Iceman,” a 5200-year-old frozen mummy that was discovered more than 20 years ago.1 Tattoos were thought to be a form of therapy used to decrease joint pain. On the other hand, the ancient Egyptians used tattoos as symbols of wealth and high status; surprisingly, only women were tattooed. Fletcher also reported that tattoos were used as a form of therapy during pregnancy in upper-class women.1

Tattoos have served different purposes in the last few centuries, making their way to the United States at the start of the 20th century.2 New York City became the tattoo capital of the country. During this early period, male artists often would tattoo their wives so that they could advertise their work. After the Prohibition era, tattoos became widely used within the US Military, becoming a way to show pride and patriotism.2

Due to the permanent nature of tattoos, we sought to understand the reasons for obtaining this particular genre of body art. The purpose of this study was to provide a greater understanding of the current demographics of individuals who get tattoos, looking at specific trends in age and level of education of those who get tattoos as well as the motivation for tattoo placement. As dermatologists, it is essential to understand this patient population to be able to provide services (ie, tattoo removal) in the safe setting of a physician’s office.

Methods

The study was conducted at a private dermatology clinic in the Chicago (Illinois) metropolitan area with no institutional review board approval. Between January 2011 and December 2012, local patients with at least 1 tattoo were asked, with assumed consent, to fill out an investigator-developed survey containing 18 multiple-choice questions regarding age, educational and family background, and other factors. The race and gender of the respondents as well as the number of patients who declined to complete the survey were not recorded.

Results

A total of 363 patients completed the in-person survey. Responses were tabulated and converted into percentages for comparison (N=363). Data analysis was divided into 3 parameters: education level, health concerns, and motivation for getting a tattoo. Figure 1 shows that 70% of respondents had obtained a college degree or higher.

Figure 1. Highest level of education completed by survey respondents (N=363).

With regard to health concerns associated with tattoos, the majority of respondents (71%) claimed they were not concerned with the health risks (eg, infection with human immunodeficiency virus or hepatitis C virus) associated with getting a tattoo. Also, only 6% of respondents admitted to being under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of getting a tattoo. Of 21 respondents who claimed drugs and/or alcohol were part of their tattoo experience, the highest level of education was high school in 7 respondents and 2 got their first tattoo when they were younger than 14 years.

Survey results revealed that the majority of respondents got a tattoo as an act of rememberance (Figure 2). For example, one respondent reported getting a tattoo for religious purposes, while another got a tattoo to celebrate and mark each level of completed education (ie, high school, college, graduate school). However, a high percentage of respondents (26%) got a tattoo for fun.

Figure 2. Self-reported reasons for getting a tattoo among survey respondents (N=363).

 

 

Comment

Although ancient tattoos were used for therapeutic purposes, this study revealed that tattoos are now obtained by individuals with higher levels of education to remember a loved one or purely for enjoyment. The potential health risks associated with getting a tattoo did not deter the respondents in this study. Converse to the popular belief that individuals are under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol when getting a tattoo, our study found that only 6% of respondents were under the influence. A comparable trend was found among US military service members in a similar study.3 The majority of respondents did not regret their tattoos and did not report taking a mind-altering substance. Tattoos serve as a symbol of one’s proud individualism.3 However, a 2001 study found a correlation between greater use of alcohol and marijuana among college students with tattoos and piecings.4 These circumstances may lead patients to seek consultation from a dermatologist for tattoo removal. Therefore, it is important to have a better understanding of this particular patient population to facilitate care in an efficient manner.

Evaluation of the gender and race of survey respondents would be useful in the future. Financial status of respondents also may be explored, as wealth and status were used by the ancient Egyptians to determine who could get a tattoo. A follow-up analysis on removal of tattoos also will be explored in the future.

References
  1. Lineberry C. Tattoos: the ancient and mysterious history. Smithsonian. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/tattoo.html. Published January 1, 2007. Accessed April 29, 2016.
  2. Bickerstaff L. Tattoos: fad, fashion, or folly? Odyssey. 2005;14:34-36.
  3. Lande RG, Bahroo BA, Soumoff A. United States military service members and their tattoos: a descriptive study. Mil Med. 2013;178:921-925.
  4. Forbes GB. College students with tattoos and piercings: motives, family experiences, personality factors, and perception by others. Psychol Rep. 2001;89:774-786.
References
  1. Lineberry C. Tattoos: the ancient and mysterious history. Smithsonian. http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/tattoo.html. Published January 1, 2007. Accessed April 29, 2016.
  2. Bickerstaff L. Tattoos: fad, fashion, or folly? Odyssey. 2005;14:34-36.
  3. Lande RG, Bahroo BA, Soumoff A. United States military service members and their tattoos: a descriptive study. Mil Med. 2013;178:921-925.
  4. Forbes GB. College students with tattoos and piercings: motives, family experiences, personality factors, and perception by others. Psychol Rep. 2001;89:774-786.
Issue
Cutis - 98(5)
Issue
Cutis - 98(5)
Page Number
320-322
Page Number
320-322
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Inside the Article

Practice Points

  • Individuals who get tattoos often are more educated and well informed than previously thought, more likely leading them to seek removal if desired.
  • Our results indicate that tattoos are not regretted as often as previously speculated.
Disallow All Ads
Article PDF Media

Erratum

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 12/15/2022 - 14:56
Display Headline
Erratum (Cutis. 2016;98:206-207)

Due to a submission error, the article “A Boxed Warning for Inadequate Psoriasis Treatment” (Cutis. 2016;98:206-207) did not contain the complete author disclosure information. The corrected disclosure statement appears below:

Ms. Kagha and Ms. Anderson report no conflict of interest. Dr. Blauvelt has served as a clinical study investigator and scientific adviser for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Genentech, Inc; GlaxoSmithKline; Janssen Biotech, Inc; Merck & Co; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; Sanofi; Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd; UCB; and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc, as well as a paid speaker for Eli Lilly and Company. Dr. Leonardi has served as an advisory board member and consultant for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Janssen Biotech, Inc; LEO Pharma; Pfizer Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; UCB; and Vitae Pharmaceuticals. He also has been an investigator for AbbVie Inc; Actavis Pharma, Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Coherus BioSciences; Corrona, LLC; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Galderma Laboratories, LP; Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Inc; Janssen Biotech, Inc; LEO Pharma; Merck & Co; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; Stiefel, a GSK company; and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Dr. Leonardi also has been on the speaker’s bureau for AbbVie Inc; Celgene Corporation; Eli Lilly and Company; and Novartis. Dr. Feldman is a consultant, researcher, and/or speaker for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Baxter; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Janssen Biotech, Inc; Merck & Co; Mylan; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc.

The staff of Cutis® makes every possible effort to ensure accuracy in its articles and apologizes for the mistake.

Article PDF
Issue
Cutis - 98(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
322
Sections
Article PDF
Article PDF

Due to a submission error, the article “A Boxed Warning for Inadequate Psoriasis Treatment” (Cutis. 2016;98:206-207) did not contain the complete author disclosure information. The corrected disclosure statement appears below:

Ms. Kagha and Ms. Anderson report no conflict of interest. Dr. Blauvelt has served as a clinical study investigator and scientific adviser for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Genentech, Inc; GlaxoSmithKline; Janssen Biotech, Inc; Merck & Co; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; Sanofi; Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd; UCB; and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc, as well as a paid speaker for Eli Lilly and Company. Dr. Leonardi has served as an advisory board member and consultant for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Janssen Biotech, Inc; LEO Pharma; Pfizer Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; UCB; and Vitae Pharmaceuticals. He also has been an investigator for AbbVie Inc; Actavis Pharma, Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Coherus BioSciences; Corrona, LLC; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Galderma Laboratories, LP; Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Inc; Janssen Biotech, Inc; LEO Pharma; Merck & Co; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; Stiefel, a GSK company; and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Dr. Leonardi also has been on the speaker’s bureau for AbbVie Inc; Celgene Corporation; Eli Lilly and Company; and Novartis. Dr. Feldman is a consultant, researcher, and/or speaker for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Baxter; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Janssen Biotech, Inc; Merck & Co; Mylan; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc.

The staff of Cutis® makes every possible effort to ensure accuracy in its articles and apologizes for the mistake.

Due to a submission error, the article “A Boxed Warning for Inadequate Psoriasis Treatment” (Cutis. 2016;98:206-207) did not contain the complete author disclosure information. The corrected disclosure statement appears below:

Ms. Kagha and Ms. Anderson report no conflict of interest. Dr. Blauvelt has served as a clinical study investigator and scientific adviser for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Genentech, Inc; GlaxoSmithKline; Janssen Biotech, Inc; Merck & Co; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; Sanofi; Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd; UCB; and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc, as well as a paid speaker for Eli Lilly and Company. Dr. Leonardi has served as an advisory board member and consultant for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Janssen Biotech, Inc; LEO Pharma; Pfizer Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; UCB; and Vitae Pharmaceuticals. He also has been an investigator for AbbVie Inc; Actavis Pharma, Inc; Amgen, Inc; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Coherus BioSciences; Corrona, LLC; Dermira Inc; Eli Lilly and Company; Galderma Laboratories, LP; Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Inc; Janssen Biotech, Inc; LEO Pharma; Merck & Co; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; Sandoz, a Novartis Division; Stiefel, a GSK company; and Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Dr. Leonardi also has been on the speaker’s bureau for AbbVie Inc; Celgene Corporation; Eli Lilly and Company; and Novartis. Dr. Feldman is a consultant, researcher, and/or speaker for AbbVie Inc; Amgen, Inc; Baxter; Boehringer Ingelheim; Celgene Corporation; Janssen Biotech, Inc; Merck & Co; Mylan; Novartis; Pfizer Inc; and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc.

The staff of Cutis® makes every possible effort to ensure accuracy in its articles and apologizes for the mistake.

Issue
Cutis - 98(5)
Issue
Cutis - 98(5)
Page Number
322
Page Number
322
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Erratum (Cutis. 2016;98:206-207)
Display Headline
Erratum (Cutis. 2016;98:206-207)
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Article PDF Media

Two migraine prevention drugs prove no better than placebo in children

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

 

Two commonly used drugs to prevent migraine in adults, amitriptyline and topiramate, proved no better than placebo at preventing migraine in children and adolescents and also were associated with more adverse events in the double-blind, randomized Childhood and Adolescent Migraine Prevention (CHAMP) trial.

Monkey Business Images Ltd./Thinkstock
Despite previous studies showing a high placebo response rate in pediatric patients with migraine, the group of investigators, led by Scott Powers, PhD, of the department of pediatrics at the University of Cincinnati, said they expected both topiramate and amitriptyline to provide greater relief from headaches, compared with placebo, and that one of the active treatments would provide greater relief than the other. They noted that the trial was important to establish evidence for the use of the drugs because pediatric clinical practice guidelines for treatment of migraine are based only on expert consensus.

The 24-week, multicenter trial involved 328 children and adolescents aged 8-17 years who were diagnosed with migraine with or without aura or chronic migraine without continuous headache. They were randomized on a 2:2:1 ratio to receive oral amitriptyline (n = 132), topiramate (n = 130), or placebo (n = 66) according to age (8-12 years vs. 13-17 years). The target dose in the study was 1 mg/kg of body weight per day for amitriptyline and 2 mg/kg for topiramate. Doses were escalated every 2 weeks over an 8-week period and dose modifications were made according to side effects.

Overall, 52% on amitriptyline, 55% on topiramate, and 61% on placebo reached the study’s primary endpoint of a relative reduction of 50% or more in the number of headache days from baseline to the last 28 days of the trial; the outcomes were not significantly different from one another. The participants recorded the number of headache days they experienced in a diary kept during and after the 28-day baseline period of the study.

No significant differences were seen between the groups in the secondary outcomes of headache-related disability, headache days, or the number of patients who completed the trial.

However, the authors observed higher rates of adverse events overall in the active treatment groups, compared with placebo. Amitriptyline users significantly more often reported fatigue (30% vs. 14%, P = .01) and dry mouth (25% vs. 12%, P = .03), whereas topiramate users significantly more often reported paresthesia (31% vs. 8%, P less than .001) and weight loss (8% vs. 0%, P = .02).

Other adverse events among topiramate users were fatigue (25%), dry mouth (18%), memory impairment (17%), aphasia (16%), cognitive disorder (16%), and upper respiratory tract infection (12%).

Serious adverse events included altered mood in three patients in the amitriptyline group and one suicide attempt in the topiramate group.

“Given the null outcome in this trial and the adverse events and serious adverse events reported in the amitriptyline and topiramate groups, the data do not show a favorable risk-benefit profile for the use of these therapies in pediatric migraine prevention, at least over the 24-week duration of the trial,” the study authors concluded.

They noted that during their trial, the Food and Drug Administration approved topiramate for the treatment of episodic migraine in adolescents aged 12-17 years.

“Although our trial included patients outside this age range and included those with either episodic or chronic migraine, the trial results suggest that prevention medication for pediatric migraine might be reexamined,” they wrote.

The high placebo response seen in the study suggested the placebo effect might be advantageous for children and adolescents with migraine, they added.

The trial was supported by grants from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. The authors had no relevant financial disclosures.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Two commonly used drugs to prevent migraine in adults, amitriptyline and topiramate, proved no better than placebo at preventing migraine in children and adolescents and also were associated with more adverse events in the double-blind, randomized Childhood and Adolescent Migraine Prevention (CHAMP) trial.

Monkey Business Images Ltd./Thinkstock
Despite previous studies showing a high placebo response rate in pediatric patients with migraine, the group of investigators, led by Scott Powers, PhD, of the department of pediatrics at the University of Cincinnati, said they expected both topiramate and amitriptyline to provide greater relief from headaches, compared with placebo, and that one of the active treatments would provide greater relief than the other. They noted that the trial was important to establish evidence for the use of the drugs because pediatric clinical practice guidelines for treatment of migraine are based only on expert consensus.

The 24-week, multicenter trial involved 328 children and adolescents aged 8-17 years who were diagnosed with migraine with or without aura or chronic migraine without continuous headache. They were randomized on a 2:2:1 ratio to receive oral amitriptyline (n = 132), topiramate (n = 130), or placebo (n = 66) according to age (8-12 years vs. 13-17 years). The target dose in the study was 1 mg/kg of body weight per day for amitriptyline and 2 mg/kg for topiramate. Doses were escalated every 2 weeks over an 8-week period and dose modifications were made according to side effects.

Overall, 52% on amitriptyline, 55% on topiramate, and 61% on placebo reached the study’s primary endpoint of a relative reduction of 50% or more in the number of headache days from baseline to the last 28 days of the trial; the outcomes were not significantly different from one another. The participants recorded the number of headache days they experienced in a diary kept during and after the 28-day baseline period of the study.

No significant differences were seen between the groups in the secondary outcomes of headache-related disability, headache days, or the number of patients who completed the trial.

However, the authors observed higher rates of adverse events overall in the active treatment groups, compared with placebo. Amitriptyline users significantly more often reported fatigue (30% vs. 14%, P = .01) and dry mouth (25% vs. 12%, P = .03), whereas topiramate users significantly more often reported paresthesia (31% vs. 8%, P less than .001) and weight loss (8% vs. 0%, P = .02).

Other adverse events among topiramate users were fatigue (25%), dry mouth (18%), memory impairment (17%), aphasia (16%), cognitive disorder (16%), and upper respiratory tract infection (12%).

Serious adverse events included altered mood in three patients in the amitriptyline group and one suicide attempt in the topiramate group.

“Given the null outcome in this trial and the adverse events and serious adverse events reported in the amitriptyline and topiramate groups, the data do not show a favorable risk-benefit profile for the use of these therapies in pediatric migraine prevention, at least over the 24-week duration of the trial,” the study authors concluded.

They noted that during their trial, the Food and Drug Administration approved topiramate for the treatment of episodic migraine in adolescents aged 12-17 years.

“Although our trial included patients outside this age range and included those with either episodic or chronic migraine, the trial results suggest that prevention medication for pediatric migraine might be reexamined,” they wrote.

The high placebo response seen in the study suggested the placebo effect might be advantageous for children and adolescents with migraine, they added.

The trial was supported by grants from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. The authors had no relevant financial disclosures.

 

Two commonly used drugs to prevent migraine in adults, amitriptyline and topiramate, proved no better than placebo at preventing migraine in children and adolescents and also were associated with more adverse events in the double-blind, randomized Childhood and Adolescent Migraine Prevention (CHAMP) trial.

Monkey Business Images Ltd./Thinkstock
Despite previous studies showing a high placebo response rate in pediatric patients with migraine, the group of investigators, led by Scott Powers, PhD, of the department of pediatrics at the University of Cincinnati, said they expected both topiramate and amitriptyline to provide greater relief from headaches, compared with placebo, and that one of the active treatments would provide greater relief than the other. They noted that the trial was important to establish evidence for the use of the drugs because pediatric clinical practice guidelines for treatment of migraine are based only on expert consensus.

The 24-week, multicenter trial involved 328 children and adolescents aged 8-17 years who were diagnosed with migraine with or without aura or chronic migraine without continuous headache. They were randomized on a 2:2:1 ratio to receive oral amitriptyline (n = 132), topiramate (n = 130), or placebo (n = 66) according to age (8-12 years vs. 13-17 years). The target dose in the study was 1 mg/kg of body weight per day for amitriptyline and 2 mg/kg for topiramate. Doses were escalated every 2 weeks over an 8-week period and dose modifications were made according to side effects.

Overall, 52% on amitriptyline, 55% on topiramate, and 61% on placebo reached the study’s primary endpoint of a relative reduction of 50% or more in the number of headache days from baseline to the last 28 days of the trial; the outcomes were not significantly different from one another. The participants recorded the number of headache days they experienced in a diary kept during and after the 28-day baseline period of the study.

No significant differences were seen between the groups in the secondary outcomes of headache-related disability, headache days, or the number of patients who completed the trial.

However, the authors observed higher rates of adverse events overall in the active treatment groups, compared with placebo. Amitriptyline users significantly more often reported fatigue (30% vs. 14%, P = .01) and dry mouth (25% vs. 12%, P = .03), whereas topiramate users significantly more often reported paresthesia (31% vs. 8%, P less than .001) and weight loss (8% vs. 0%, P = .02).

Other adverse events among topiramate users were fatigue (25%), dry mouth (18%), memory impairment (17%), aphasia (16%), cognitive disorder (16%), and upper respiratory tract infection (12%).

Serious adverse events included altered mood in three patients in the amitriptyline group and one suicide attempt in the topiramate group.

“Given the null outcome in this trial and the adverse events and serious adverse events reported in the amitriptyline and topiramate groups, the data do not show a favorable risk-benefit profile for the use of these therapies in pediatric migraine prevention, at least over the 24-week duration of the trial,” the study authors concluded.

They noted that during their trial, the Food and Drug Administration approved topiramate for the treatment of episodic migraine in adolescents aged 12-17 years.

“Although our trial included patients outside this age range and included those with either episodic or chronic migraine, the trial results suggest that prevention medication for pediatric migraine might be reexamined,” they wrote.

The high placebo response seen in the study suggested the placebo effect might be advantageous for children and adolescents with migraine, they added.

The trial was supported by grants from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. The authors had no relevant financial disclosures.

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

FROM CNS 2016

Disallow All Ads
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: The adult model of migraine treatment, in which amitriptyline and topiramate have been effective, may not apply to pediatric patients.

Main finding: Fifty-two percent, 55%, and 61% of patients randomized to amitriptyline, topiramate, and placebo groups, respectively, reached the study primary endpoint of a relative reduction of 50% or more in the number of headache days from baseline to the last 28 days of the 24-week trial.

Data source: A phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of 328 children and adolescents aged 8-17 years who were diagnosed with migraine with or without aura or chronic migraine without continuous headache.

Disclosures: The trial was supported by grants from the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. The authors had no relevant financial disclosures.

Renewal in Cosmetic Dermatology

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 01/10/2019 - 13:35
Display Headline
Renewal in Cosmetic Dermatology

It is an exciting time for dermatologists. In the 16 years that I have been in practice our knowledge of disease pathogenesis has increased and has shaped treatments that can now offer life-changing improvement for patients with extensive dermatologic disease. The everyday practice of cosmetic dermatology also has advanced. Sixteen years ago the only cosmetic options we had for our patients were bovine or human collagen injections, traditional CO2 laser resurfacing, and the older generations of pulsed dye lasers. Neuromodulators were just being introduced. We quickly learned the limitations and complications associated with these modalities. Collagen injections were directed at fine perioral lines and lasted 3 to 4 months. The worst complication would be a bruise or an allergic reaction to the bovine collagen. If we really needed to restore volume beyond the perioral regions, our only option was autologous fat transfer. CO2 laser resurfacing was used to firm skin, erase deep wrinkles, and improve sun damage, but its use was limited to older, fair-skinned individuals due to the inherent risk for hypopigmentation and depigmentation. Pulsed dye lasers similarly had no means of cooling the skin, thus they were limited to lighter-skinned individuals and had notable risk for blisters, burns, and hypopigmentation. Since then, our understanding of skin healing, laser-tissue interaction, and facial aging has driven the field to new heights of technological advances and safety. Just as I tell my patients and residents, there is no better time to be in this field than at this moment. Dermatologists have driven the advances behind many of the technologies that are now in widespread use among physicians in a variety of specialties.

Our understanding of facial aging has evolved to include the complex interplay of skeletal change, fat atrophy, and skin aging, which must all be considered when improving a patient’s appearance. Fillers have evolved in physical characteristics to give us the ability to choose between lift, spread, neocollagenesis, or water absorption. Thus, we can select the proper filler for the specific anatomic area we are rejuvenating.

Our understanding of photoaging and laser-tissue physics has allowed for the development of a newer generation of lasers ranging from fractionated lasers to noninvasive modalities that can safely be used in a variety of ethnic skin types to address acne scars, wrinkles, and inflammatory processes such as acne and rosacea. Similarly, the desire to tighten redundant skin has continued to drive ultrasound and radiofrequency technology and sparked growth in a newer field of cryolipolysis and chemical lipolysis agents.

Our dialogue with patients also has evolved to include the 4 R’s of antiaging: resurfacing the skin (eg, lasers, peels), refilling the lost volume (eg, fillers, fat), redraping the excess skin (eg, radiofrequency, ultrasound, laser, surgery), and relaxing dynamic lines (eg, neuromodulators). I propose an additional R: renewal! We must focus on the need for constant renewal so that patients maintain the results we have achieved. I apply the analogy of exercising to get into shape. One must go to the gym regularly to get to the desired level of fitness, but you do not stop exercising, otherwise you will quickly relapse to your former lack of fitness. Similarly, patients should receive the appropriate treatments to bring them to the desired level of rejuvenation, but then some form of constant renewal process is needed to maintain them at that level. Without the stimulation of the skin, the aging process continues and the cycle begins all over again.

In my practice, renewal is achieved by driving the skin to maintain the glow and smoothness that enhances the results of the fillers, neuromodulators, lasers, and peels that we have used. The skin is the first thing people notice. Without the glow, the patient will look good but not great. I tell patients that this part of the process is their responsibility. They must adhere to the skin care regimen specifically designed to address their needs. By incorporating the patient in the rejuvenation process, he/she is empowered to take control over the aging process and has grown more confident in you as a physician.

These are exciting times and there is still so much in the pipeline. By continually learning, reading, and attending workshops and meetings, you can make sure our specialty continue to be the leader in the antiaging field.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

From the UPMC Cosmetic Surgery & Skin Health Center, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pennsylvania.

Dr. Obagi is on the scientific advisory board for Galderma Laboratories, LP, and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc.

Correspondence: Suzan Obagi, MD, UPMC Cosmetic Surgery & Skin Health Center, 1603 Carmody Ct, #103, Sewickley, PA 15143 ([email protected]).

Issue
Cutis - 98(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
292
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

From the UPMC Cosmetic Surgery & Skin Health Center, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pennsylvania.

Dr. Obagi is on the scientific advisory board for Galderma Laboratories, LP, and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc.

Correspondence: Suzan Obagi, MD, UPMC Cosmetic Surgery & Skin Health Center, 1603 Carmody Ct, #103, Sewickley, PA 15143 ([email protected]).

Author and Disclosure Information

From the UPMC Cosmetic Surgery & Skin Health Center, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pennsylvania.

Dr. Obagi is on the scientific advisory board for Galderma Laboratories, LP, and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc.

Correspondence: Suzan Obagi, MD, UPMC Cosmetic Surgery & Skin Health Center, 1603 Carmody Ct, #103, Sewickley, PA 15143 ([email protected]).

Article PDF
Article PDF
Related Articles

It is an exciting time for dermatologists. In the 16 years that I have been in practice our knowledge of disease pathogenesis has increased and has shaped treatments that can now offer life-changing improvement for patients with extensive dermatologic disease. The everyday practice of cosmetic dermatology also has advanced. Sixteen years ago the only cosmetic options we had for our patients were bovine or human collagen injections, traditional CO2 laser resurfacing, and the older generations of pulsed dye lasers. Neuromodulators were just being introduced. We quickly learned the limitations and complications associated with these modalities. Collagen injections were directed at fine perioral lines and lasted 3 to 4 months. The worst complication would be a bruise or an allergic reaction to the bovine collagen. If we really needed to restore volume beyond the perioral regions, our only option was autologous fat transfer. CO2 laser resurfacing was used to firm skin, erase deep wrinkles, and improve sun damage, but its use was limited to older, fair-skinned individuals due to the inherent risk for hypopigmentation and depigmentation. Pulsed dye lasers similarly had no means of cooling the skin, thus they were limited to lighter-skinned individuals and had notable risk for blisters, burns, and hypopigmentation. Since then, our understanding of skin healing, laser-tissue interaction, and facial aging has driven the field to new heights of technological advances and safety. Just as I tell my patients and residents, there is no better time to be in this field than at this moment. Dermatologists have driven the advances behind many of the technologies that are now in widespread use among physicians in a variety of specialties.

Our understanding of facial aging has evolved to include the complex interplay of skeletal change, fat atrophy, and skin aging, which must all be considered when improving a patient’s appearance. Fillers have evolved in physical characteristics to give us the ability to choose between lift, spread, neocollagenesis, or water absorption. Thus, we can select the proper filler for the specific anatomic area we are rejuvenating.

Our understanding of photoaging and laser-tissue physics has allowed for the development of a newer generation of lasers ranging from fractionated lasers to noninvasive modalities that can safely be used in a variety of ethnic skin types to address acne scars, wrinkles, and inflammatory processes such as acne and rosacea. Similarly, the desire to tighten redundant skin has continued to drive ultrasound and radiofrequency technology and sparked growth in a newer field of cryolipolysis and chemical lipolysis agents.

Our dialogue with patients also has evolved to include the 4 R’s of antiaging: resurfacing the skin (eg, lasers, peels), refilling the lost volume (eg, fillers, fat), redraping the excess skin (eg, radiofrequency, ultrasound, laser, surgery), and relaxing dynamic lines (eg, neuromodulators). I propose an additional R: renewal! We must focus on the need for constant renewal so that patients maintain the results we have achieved. I apply the analogy of exercising to get into shape. One must go to the gym regularly to get to the desired level of fitness, but you do not stop exercising, otherwise you will quickly relapse to your former lack of fitness. Similarly, patients should receive the appropriate treatments to bring them to the desired level of rejuvenation, but then some form of constant renewal process is needed to maintain them at that level. Without the stimulation of the skin, the aging process continues and the cycle begins all over again.

In my practice, renewal is achieved by driving the skin to maintain the glow and smoothness that enhances the results of the fillers, neuromodulators, lasers, and peels that we have used. The skin is the first thing people notice. Without the glow, the patient will look good but not great. I tell patients that this part of the process is their responsibility. They must adhere to the skin care regimen specifically designed to address their needs. By incorporating the patient in the rejuvenation process, he/she is empowered to take control over the aging process and has grown more confident in you as a physician.

These are exciting times and there is still so much in the pipeline. By continually learning, reading, and attending workshops and meetings, you can make sure our specialty continue to be the leader in the antiaging field.

It is an exciting time for dermatologists. In the 16 years that I have been in practice our knowledge of disease pathogenesis has increased and has shaped treatments that can now offer life-changing improvement for patients with extensive dermatologic disease. The everyday practice of cosmetic dermatology also has advanced. Sixteen years ago the only cosmetic options we had for our patients were bovine or human collagen injections, traditional CO2 laser resurfacing, and the older generations of pulsed dye lasers. Neuromodulators were just being introduced. We quickly learned the limitations and complications associated with these modalities. Collagen injections were directed at fine perioral lines and lasted 3 to 4 months. The worst complication would be a bruise or an allergic reaction to the bovine collagen. If we really needed to restore volume beyond the perioral regions, our only option was autologous fat transfer. CO2 laser resurfacing was used to firm skin, erase deep wrinkles, and improve sun damage, but its use was limited to older, fair-skinned individuals due to the inherent risk for hypopigmentation and depigmentation. Pulsed dye lasers similarly had no means of cooling the skin, thus they were limited to lighter-skinned individuals and had notable risk for blisters, burns, and hypopigmentation. Since then, our understanding of skin healing, laser-tissue interaction, and facial aging has driven the field to new heights of technological advances and safety. Just as I tell my patients and residents, there is no better time to be in this field than at this moment. Dermatologists have driven the advances behind many of the technologies that are now in widespread use among physicians in a variety of specialties.

Our understanding of facial aging has evolved to include the complex interplay of skeletal change, fat atrophy, and skin aging, which must all be considered when improving a patient’s appearance. Fillers have evolved in physical characteristics to give us the ability to choose between lift, spread, neocollagenesis, or water absorption. Thus, we can select the proper filler for the specific anatomic area we are rejuvenating.

Our understanding of photoaging and laser-tissue physics has allowed for the development of a newer generation of lasers ranging from fractionated lasers to noninvasive modalities that can safely be used in a variety of ethnic skin types to address acne scars, wrinkles, and inflammatory processes such as acne and rosacea. Similarly, the desire to tighten redundant skin has continued to drive ultrasound and radiofrequency technology and sparked growth in a newer field of cryolipolysis and chemical lipolysis agents.

Our dialogue with patients also has evolved to include the 4 R’s of antiaging: resurfacing the skin (eg, lasers, peels), refilling the lost volume (eg, fillers, fat), redraping the excess skin (eg, radiofrequency, ultrasound, laser, surgery), and relaxing dynamic lines (eg, neuromodulators). I propose an additional R: renewal! We must focus on the need for constant renewal so that patients maintain the results we have achieved. I apply the analogy of exercising to get into shape. One must go to the gym regularly to get to the desired level of fitness, but you do not stop exercising, otherwise you will quickly relapse to your former lack of fitness. Similarly, patients should receive the appropriate treatments to bring them to the desired level of rejuvenation, but then some form of constant renewal process is needed to maintain them at that level. Without the stimulation of the skin, the aging process continues and the cycle begins all over again.

In my practice, renewal is achieved by driving the skin to maintain the glow and smoothness that enhances the results of the fillers, neuromodulators, lasers, and peels that we have used. The skin is the first thing people notice. Without the glow, the patient will look good but not great. I tell patients that this part of the process is their responsibility. They must adhere to the skin care regimen specifically designed to address their needs. By incorporating the patient in the rejuvenation process, he/she is empowered to take control over the aging process and has grown more confident in you as a physician.

These are exciting times and there is still so much in the pipeline. By continually learning, reading, and attending workshops and meetings, you can make sure our specialty continue to be the leader in the antiaging field.

Issue
Cutis - 98(5)
Issue
Cutis - 98(5)
Page Number
292
Page Number
292
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Renewal in Cosmetic Dermatology
Display Headline
Renewal in Cosmetic Dermatology
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Article PDF Media

Treatment plan addresses circadian rhythm disorders from nighttime screen use

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

 

Among the most significant concerns associated with youth’s increasing use of screen media is the impact on their sleep, according to two policy statements of the American Academy of Pediatrics on children and media use.

To help pediatricians better understand how media might affect sleep, Sujay Kansagra, MD, a pediatric neurologist at Duke University Medical Center in Durham, N.C., presented an overview of circadian rhythm disorders and how to address them during a program on electronic media at the AAP annual meeting.

Teen in bed checking her cell phone
maewjpho/Thinkstock
Dr. Kansagra described the natural history of a circadian rhythm, including the period during which melatonin floods the brain to signal that it’s dark. Exposure to light delays the release of melatonin and can therefore push back a person’s circadian rhythm, he explained.

Approximately 3 hours before waking, a person experiences a nadir in body temperature that designates “the point at which the light exposure flips from delaying your rhythm to advancing your rhythm,” Dr. Kansagra said. “Five minutes before this point, it delays your phase; 5 minutes after, it advances your phase.”

A significantly advanced or delayed sleep phase can become a circadian rhythm disorder, in which a person gets the normal amount and quality of sleep he or she needs – but not at the right times. “Those with circadian rhythm disorders have failed to entrain to their environmental cues,” such as light, food, and activity levels, he said.

In youth, particularly adolescents, the most common circadian rhythm disorder is delayed sleep-wake phase syndrome, defined in the International Classification of Sleep Disorders – Third Edition (ICSD-3) with four criteria:
 

• A significant delay in major sleep episode in relation to desired or required sleep time and waking time (often involving a sleep time around 4 a.m.).

• The symptoms are present for more than 3 months.

• When allowed to choose a schedule, the person will exhibit improved sleep quality/duration and maintain delayed phase.

• A sleep log and/or actigraphy demonstrates a delay in timing of the sleep period for at least 7 days.

Because nearly all screen media emit light, use of such media in the evenings may contribute to this disorder. “When you combine light exposure with someone who has that later chronotype, you’re setting yourself up for disaster,” Dr. Kansagra said.

Delayed sleep-wake phase disorder can greatly interfere with school, work, and normal daily activities, and Dr. Kansagra outlined the major steps in preventing and/or treating it, starting with avoiding light exposure at night, whether from the TV, tablets, laptops, or cell phones.

“If they can’t avoid light completely, the brightness is also important,” he said. “We know that the brighter the light, the more likely you are to suppress your brain’s melatonin.” Therefore, reducing the brightness on devices that must be used can mitigate the problem, as can using red- or yellow-tinted light, provided as a “night mode” on some devices, instead of the blue light emitted by the majority of devices.

Next, he recommended that individuals maintain a set bedtime and wake time each day, including on the weekends. Although he acknowledged the challenge this schedule might present, particularly in teenagers, he described how detrimental it can be to stay up late and sleep in late on the weekends. If teens stay up until 11 p.m. throughout the week, then a little later on Friday night, and then up to 2 a.m. on Saturday night, they will likely sleep in until around 11 a.m. on Sunday. But if they need to get up at 6 a.m. for school Monday morning, that’s the equivalent of flying from Hawaii to New York in terms of jet lag effects, he explained.

“They will spend the rest of the school week slowly advancing their clock until the weekend and do it all over again,” Dr. Kansagra said. “They are perpetually jet lagged. No wonder they’re so angry all the time,” he joked. “It’s social jet lag.”

Such social jet lag leads to sleepiness throughout the week, often mistaken for laziness by frustrated parents, he said.

“Sleepiness is not laziness,” he emphasized. “It’s a problem with the quality or quantity of sleep. It’s really important to get parents’ buy in on this because it’s a contentious topic in a lot of families.”

After getting the child or teen on a regular schedule, the next important step in realigning a circadian rhythm and then maintaining it is to expose the person to light early in the morning – but after that temperature nadir that occurs 3 hours before waking. Meanwhile, 2-6 hours before their sleep time, youth trying to adjust their clocks can take a low dose of melatonin, around 0.5-1 mg. But he pointed out a common misconception about how melatonin works.

“Melatonin plays no role in fixing insomnia; melatonin doesn’t make you sleepy,” Dr. Kansagra said. “Melatonin just tells your brain what to do when it’s dark. Melatonin is good for shifting your circadian rhythm.”

But all of these steps can be successful only if the pediatrician and/or parent can convince the child or teen that it’s important to adjust their circadian rhythm. This can include discussions that lead them to realize or conclude that they are unpleasant, angry, or irritable when they don’t get enough sleep. Perhaps they have been told they are rude by a classmate on days they don’t get enough sleep, or perhaps they realize they do not perform as well while playing sports when they don’t have the rest they need. Children who can make those connections can help get the buy in needed to follow all the previous steps.

Some individuals, however, can be particularly resistant to adjusting the circadian rhythm, which calls for a much more dramatic and difficult treatment called chronotherapy. This treatment begins very counterintuitively by flipping the script: The youth should now actually try to stay up later than their bedtime while playing video games, watching TV, using a computer, or engaging in similar activities. Ideally, they should stay up until 6 a.m. and then sleep in as late as they wish.

The next evening, they should stay up even later – until 8 a.m. – and again sleep in as late as they need to. Each successive day, they should go to bed 2 hours later – 10 a.m., 12 p.m., 2 p.m., and so forth – and sleep the adequate amount anyone would need, until they eventually are going to bed at the time they should be, such as 8 p.m. or 10 p.m. Although this is a dramatic treatment, it can be very effective at resetting a person’s clock when other methods have not succeeded, he said.

The key practice-altering elements of Dr. Kansagra’s talk focused on using melatonin as a “clock-shifting” medication instead of a “sleep-inducing one” and dosing children at the appropriate time, 2-6 hours before bed. If nighttime use of light cannot be eliminated, have patients reduce the brightness and duration, and change the color, of the light to lessen its effect on the brain’s melatonin release. Finally, help families understand the concept of “social jet lag” so they grasp the importance of regular sleep times and do not mistake sleepiness for laziness.

Dr. Kansagra reported no relevant financial disclosures or external funding.


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

 

Among the most significant concerns associated with youth’s increasing use of screen media is the impact on their sleep, according to two policy statements of the American Academy of Pediatrics on children and media use.

To help pediatricians better understand how media might affect sleep, Sujay Kansagra, MD, a pediatric neurologist at Duke University Medical Center in Durham, N.C., presented an overview of circadian rhythm disorders and how to address them during a program on electronic media at the AAP annual meeting.

Teen in bed checking her cell phone
maewjpho/Thinkstock
Dr. Kansagra described the natural history of a circadian rhythm, including the period during which melatonin floods the brain to signal that it’s dark. Exposure to light delays the release of melatonin and can therefore push back a person’s circadian rhythm, he explained.

Approximately 3 hours before waking, a person experiences a nadir in body temperature that designates “the point at which the light exposure flips from delaying your rhythm to advancing your rhythm,” Dr. Kansagra said. “Five minutes before this point, it delays your phase; 5 minutes after, it advances your phase.”

A significantly advanced or delayed sleep phase can become a circadian rhythm disorder, in which a person gets the normal amount and quality of sleep he or she needs – but not at the right times. “Those with circadian rhythm disorders have failed to entrain to their environmental cues,” such as light, food, and activity levels, he said.

In youth, particularly adolescents, the most common circadian rhythm disorder is delayed sleep-wake phase syndrome, defined in the International Classification of Sleep Disorders – Third Edition (ICSD-3) with four criteria:
 

• A significant delay in major sleep episode in relation to desired or required sleep time and waking time (often involving a sleep time around 4 a.m.).

• The symptoms are present for more than 3 months.

• When allowed to choose a schedule, the person will exhibit improved sleep quality/duration and maintain delayed phase.

• A sleep log and/or actigraphy demonstrates a delay in timing of the sleep period for at least 7 days.

Because nearly all screen media emit light, use of such media in the evenings may contribute to this disorder. “When you combine light exposure with someone who has that later chronotype, you’re setting yourself up for disaster,” Dr. Kansagra said.

Delayed sleep-wake phase disorder can greatly interfere with school, work, and normal daily activities, and Dr. Kansagra outlined the major steps in preventing and/or treating it, starting with avoiding light exposure at night, whether from the TV, tablets, laptops, or cell phones.

“If they can’t avoid light completely, the brightness is also important,” he said. “We know that the brighter the light, the more likely you are to suppress your brain’s melatonin.” Therefore, reducing the brightness on devices that must be used can mitigate the problem, as can using red- or yellow-tinted light, provided as a “night mode” on some devices, instead of the blue light emitted by the majority of devices.

Next, he recommended that individuals maintain a set bedtime and wake time each day, including on the weekends. Although he acknowledged the challenge this schedule might present, particularly in teenagers, he described how detrimental it can be to stay up late and sleep in late on the weekends. If teens stay up until 11 p.m. throughout the week, then a little later on Friday night, and then up to 2 a.m. on Saturday night, they will likely sleep in until around 11 a.m. on Sunday. But if they need to get up at 6 a.m. for school Monday morning, that’s the equivalent of flying from Hawaii to New York in terms of jet lag effects, he explained.

“They will spend the rest of the school week slowly advancing their clock until the weekend and do it all over again,” Dr. Kansagra said. “They are perpetually jet lagged. No wonder they’re so angry all the time,” he joked. “It’s social jet lag.”

Such social jet lag leads to sleepiness throughout the week, often mistaken for laziness by frustrated parents, he said.

“Sleepiness is not laziness,” he emphasized. “It’s a problem with the quality or quantity of sleep. It’s really important to get parents’ buy in on this because it’s a contentious topic in a lot of families.”

After getting the child or teen on a regular schedule, the next important step in realigning a circadian rhythm and then maintaining it is to expose the person to light early in the morning – but after that temperature nadir that occurs 3 hours before waking. Meanwhile, 2-6 hours before their sleep time, youth trying to adjust their clocks can take a low dose of melatonin, around 0.5-1 mg. But he pointed out a common misconception about how melatonin works.

“Melatonin plays no role in fixing insomnia; melatonin doesn’t make you sleepy,” Dr. Kansagra said. “Melatonin just tells your brain what to do when it’s dark. Melatonin is good for shifting your circadian rhythm.”

But all of these steps can be successful only if the pediatrician and/or parent can convince the child or teen that it’s important to adjust their circadian rhythm. This can include discussions that lead them to realize or conclude that they are unpleasant, angry, or irritable when they don’t get enough sleep. Perhaps they have been told they are rude by a classmate on days they don’t get enough sleep, or perhaps they realize they do not perform as well while playing sports when they don’t have the rest they need. Children who can make those connections can help get the buy in needed to follow all the previous steps.

Some individuals, however, can be particularly resistant to adjusting the circadian rhythm, which calls for a much more dramatic and difficult treatment called chronotherapy. This treatment begins very counterintuitively by flipping the script: The youth should now actually try to stay up later than their bedtime while playing video games, watching TV, using a computer, or engaging in similar activities. Ideally, they should stay up until 6 a.m. and then sleep in as late as they wish.

The next evening, they should stay up even later – until 8 a.m. – and again sleep in as late as they need to. Each successive day, they should go to bed 2 hours later – 10 a.m., 12 p.m., 2 p.m., and so forth – and sleep the adequate amount anyone would need, until they eventually are going to bed at the time they should be, such as 8 p.m. or 10 p.m. Although this is a dramatic treatment, it can be very effective at resetting a person’s clock when other methods have not succeeded, he said.

The key practice-altering elements of Dr. Kansagra’s talk focused on using melatonin as a “clock-shifting” medication instead of a “sleep-inducing one” and dosing children at the appropriate time, 2-6 hours before bed. If nighttime use of light cannot be eliminated, have patients reduce the brightness and duration, and change the color, of the light to lessen its effect on the brain’s melatonin release. Finally, help families understand the concept of “social jet lag” so they grasp the importance of regular sleep times and do not mistake sleepiness for laziness.

Dr. Kansagra reported no relevant financial disclosures or external funding.


 

Among the most significant concerns associated with youth’s increasing use of screen media is the impact on their sleep, according to two policy statements of the American Academy of Pediatrics on children and media use.

To help pediatricians better understand how media might affect sleep, Sujay Kansagra, MD, a pediatric neurologist at Duke University Medical Center in Durham, N.C., presented an overview of circadian rhythm disorders and how to address them during a program on electronic media at the AAP annual meeting.

Teen in bed checking her cell phone
maewjpho/Thinkstock
Dr. Kansagra described the natural history of a circadian rhythm, including the period during which melatonin floods the brain to signal that it’s dark. Exposure to light delays the release of melatonin and can therefore push back a person’s circadian rhythm, he explained.

Approximately 3 hours before waking, a person experiences a nadir in body temperature that designates “the point at which the light exposure flips from delaying your rhythm to advancing your rhythm,” Dr. Kansagra said. “Five minutes before this point, it delays your phase; 5 minutes after, it advances your phase.”

A significantly advanced or delayed sleep phase can become a circadian rhythm disorder, in which a person gets the normal amount and quality of sleep he or she needs – but not at the right times. “Those with circadian rhythm disorders have failed to entrain to their environmental cues,” such as light, food, and activity levels, he said.

In youth, particularly adolescents, the most common circadian rhythm disorder is delayed sleep-wake phase syndrome, defined in the International Classification of Sleep Disorders – Third Edition (ICSD-3) with four criteria:
 

• A significant delay in major sleep episode in relation to desired or required sleep time and waking time (often involving a sleep time around 4 a.m.).

• The symptoms are present for more than 3 months.

• When allowed to choose a schedule, the person will exhibit improved sleep quality/duration and maintain delayed phase.

• A sleep log and/or actigraphy demonstrates a delay in timing of the sleep period for at least 7 days.

Because nearly all screen media emit light, use of such media in the evenings may contribute to this disorder. “When you combine light exposure with someone who has that later chronotype, you’re setting yourself up for disaster,” Dr. Kansagra said.

Delayed sleep-wake phase disorder can greatly interfere with school, work, and normal daily activities, and Dr. Kansagra outlined the major steps in preventing and/or treating it, starting with avoiding light exposure at night, whether from the TV, tablets, laptops, or cell phones.

“If they can’t avoid light completely, the brightness is also important,” he said. “We know that the brighter the light, the more likely you are to suppress your brain’s melatonin.” Therefore, reducing the brightness on devices that must be used can mitigate the problem, as can using red- or yellow-tinted light, provided as a “night mode” on some devices, instead of the blue light emitted by the majority of devices.

Next, he recommended that individuals maintain a set bedtime and wake time each day, including on the weekends. Although he acknowledged the challenge this schedule might present, particularly in teenagers, he described how detrimental it can be to stay up late and sleep in late on the weekends. If teens stay up until 11 p.m. throughout the week, then a little later on Friday night, and then up to 2 a.m. on Saturday night, they will likely sleep in until around 11 a.m. on Sunday. But if they need to get up at 6 a.m. for school Monday morning, that’s the equivalent of flying from Hawaii to New York in terms of jet lag effects, he explained.

“They will spend the rest of the school week slowly advancing their clock until the weekend and do it all over again,” Dr. Kansagra said. “They are perpetually jet lagged. No wonder they’re so angry all the time,” he joked. “It’s social jet lag.”

Such social jet lag leads to sleepiness throughout the week, often mistaken for laziness by frustrated parents, he said.

“Sleepiness is not laziness,” he emphasized. “It’s a problem with the quality or quantity of sleep. It’s really important to get parents’ buy in on this because it’s a contentious topic in a lot of families.”

After getting the child or teen on a regular schedule, the next important step in realigning a circadian rhythm and then maintaining it is to expose the person to light early in the morning – but after that temperature nadir that occurs 3 hours before waking. Meanwhile, 2-6 hours before their sleep time, youth trying to adjust their clocks can take a low dose of melatonin, around 0.5-1 mg. But he pointed out a common misconception about how melatonin works.

“Melatonin plays no role in fixing insomnia; melatonin doesn’t make you sleepy,” Dr. Kansagra said. “Melatonin just tells your brain what to do when it’s dark. Melatonin is good for shifting your circadian rhythm.”

But all of these steps can be successful only if the pediatrician and/or parent can convince the child or teen that it’s important to adjust their circadian rhythm. This can include discussions that lead them to realize or conclude that they are unpleasant, angry, or irritable when they don’t get enough sleep. Perhaps they have been told they are rude by a classmate on days they don’t get enough sleep, or perhaps they realize they do not perform as well while playing sports when they don’t have the rest they need. Children who can make those connections can help get the buy in needed to follow all the previous steps.

Some individuals, however, can be particularly resistant to adjusting the circadian rhythm, which calls for a much more dramatic and difficult treatment called chronotherapy. This treatment begins very counterintuitively by flipping the script: The youth should now actually try to stay up later than their bedtime while playing video games, watching TV, using a computer, or engaging in similar activities. Ideally, they should stay up until 6 a.m. and then sleep in as late as they wish.

The next evening, they should stay up even later – until 8 a.m. – and again sleep in as late as they need to. Each successive day, they should go to bed 2 hours later – 10 a.m., 12 p.m., 2 p.m., and so forth – and sleep the adequate amount anyone would need, until they eventually are going to bed at the time they should be, such as 8 p.m. or 10 p.m. Although this is a dramatic treatment, it can be very effective at resetting a person’s clock when other methods have not succeeded, he said.

The key practice-altering elements of Dr. Kansagra’s talk focused on using melatonin as a “clock-shifting” medication instead of a “sleep-inducing one” and dosing children at the appropriate time, 2-6 hours before bed. If nighttime use of light cannot be eliminated, have patients reduce the brightness and duration, and change the color, of the light to lessen its effect on the brain’s melatonin release. Finally, help families understand the concept of “social jet lag” so they grasp the importance of regular sleep times and do not mistake sleepiness for laziness.

Dr. Kansagra reported no relevant financial disclosures or external funding.


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

EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM AAP 16

Disallow All Ads

Test Your Knowledge: Likelihood Ratios for Differentiating Cirrhotic vs. Non-Cirrhotic Liver Disease

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 09/14/2018 - 12:02
Display Headline
Test Your Knowledge: Likelihood Ratios for Differentiating Cirrhotic vs. Non-Cirrhotic Liver Disease

[WpProQuiz 15] [WpProQuiz_toplist 15]

Issue
The Hospitalist - 2016(10)
Publications
Topics
Sections

[WpProQuiz 15] [WpProQuiz_toplist 15]

[WpProQuiz 15] [WpProQuiz_toplist 15]

Issue
The Hospitalist - 2016(10)
Issue
The Hospitalist - 2016(10)
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Test Your Knowledge: Likelihood Ratios for Differentiating Cirrhotic vs. Non-Cirrhotic Liver Disease
Display Headline
Test Your Knowledge: Likelihood Ratios for Differentiating Cirrhotic vs. Non-Cirrhotic Liver Disease
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)

Early change in emotional processing predicts antidepressant response

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

 

– A novel method of individualizing antidepressant drug therapy while drastically shortening the time required to figure out whether a given agent will be effective in a depressed patient is undergoing its definitive evaluation in five European countries.

“I think this study will provide a critical test of whether we can use these kinds of correlations with emotional processing of information to actually improve the treatment of depression,” Catherine J. Harmer, DPhil, said at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.

Bruce Jancin/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Catherine J. Harmer
The clinical trial, known as PReDicT (Predicting Response to Depression Treatment), has been funded with a 4 million Euro grant from the European Commission through its Horizon 2020 public health improvement program. PReDicT represents the culmination of years of original work by Dr. Harmer, who is credited with developing and validating an influential cognitive neuropsychological theory of antidepressant drug action.

As early as 2009, she and her coinvestigators demonstrated that depression is associated with a measurable negative bias in the processing of emotional information. Depressed patients selectively pay more attention to and better remember negative information. For example, when depressed patients taking the Facial Expression Recognition Test are quickly shown a photo of a smiling face, they are more likely to describe it as “sad.” Similarly, in a word recall test that includes “positive” adjectives such as cheerful, poised, original, and optimistic and “negative” words such as mean, hostile, domineering, and untidy, they recall fewer positive words than nondepressed people.

This negative emotional bias is a key factor in maintenance of depression. Many weeks before patients report feeling improvement in their mood and clinical symptoms of depression in response to effective antidepressant medication, the drug produces a favorable effect on their cognitive biases in emotional processing, explained Dr. Harmer, professor of cognitive neuroscience and director of the Psychopharmacology and Emotional Research Lab at the University of Oxford (England).

Dr. Harmer hypothesized that antidepressants don’t necessarily act as direct mood enhancers, but instead change the balance away from negative to more positive emotional processing, resulting in neural modulation in limbic and prefrontal circuitry. These neural changes take time to reach the subjective conscious mind, which is why improvement in clinical symptoms of depression doesn’t manifest until 2-3 weeks into therapy, with the drug’s full effects not seen until 6-7 weeks (Br J Psychiatry. 2009 Aug;195[2]:102-8).

“Antidepressants can target cognitive biases surprisingly early on in treatment, before patients report any change in their clinical symptoms. This could explain the delay in antidepressant effect. You need life events, stressors, and environmental stimuli before a change in bias would be expected to result in a change in clinical state,” she said.

Together with her colleagues, she employed functional MRI to study changes in the brain associated with the improvement in negative biases in emotional processing that occur when depressed patients go on antidepressant medication. Forty-two unmedicated depressed patients were randomized to 10 mg of escitalopram (Lexapro) daily for 7 days or placebo. At baseline, all subjects demonstrated amygdala hyperactivity in response to fearful facial expressions, a response that didn’t occur in healthy controls. After 7 days of escitalopram – weeks before any improvement in depressed mood – amygdala activity was normalized in the active treatment group but not in placebo-treated controls (Psychol Med. 2012 Dec;42[12]:2609-17).

Dr. Harmer and a colleague expanded on her theory of depression in a review article aptly titled, “It’s the way that you look at it” (Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2013 Feb 25;368[1615]:20120407).

A measurable improvement in emotional processing can be seen within a few hours after a depressed patient takes the first dose of an effective antidepressant. Thus, early change in negative emotional processing is predictive of subsequent clinical outcome. Lack of an early shift to positive emotional processing has been associated in multiple studies by Dr. Harmer and others with a high likelihood that an antidepressant won’t provide significant improvement in depressive symptoms at week 6.

The predictive accuracy of tests of emotional processing is higher when testing is done after a patient has been on an antidepressant medication for a few days rather than after the very first dose. Based upon Dr. Harmer’s work, pharmaceutical companies are now using tests of change in emotional processing at 1 week to help screen and select novel treatments for depression and anxiety.

In PReDicT, depressed patients being treated in primary care clinics across Europe will undergo emotional processing testing at baseline. In the active intervention arm, participants will be retested after 1 week on antidepressant therapy in order to identify those who are unlikely to have a favorable clinical response to that drug, enabling physicians to accelerate decision making about the appropriate next treatment. Treatment decisions in the control group will be made without the emotional processing results, mirroring current everyday practice.

Instead of waiting 4-6 weeks before concluding that a switch to another antidepressant with a different mechanism of action is warranted, as is now routine, participating PReDicT physicians whose patients are in the active intervention arm can make an informed change after just 1 week. The study hypothesis is that participants randomized to this study arm will take less time to respond to antidepressant therapy, because their physicians will be able to find the right drug faster than in the control group. The primary study endpoint will be the percentage of patients in the two study arms showing at least a 50% reduction in their Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS SR-16) score at 8 weeks. Secondary endpoints will focus on cumulative health care costs at weeks 24 and 48.

The PReDicT study is being run by P1vital Products Ltd., an Oxfordshire health care company that will use its proprietary Internet-based eHealth Emotional Test Battery to assess early changes in emotional processing. The test battery, which is classified as a medical device, is based upon Dr. Harmer’s earlier work. She is an investigator in PReDicT.

Her research funding comes from the U.K. Medical Research Council, Eli Lilly, and the EU’s Horizon 2020 program.

 

 

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

 

– A novel method of individualizing antidepressant drug therapy while drastically shortening the time required to figure out whether a given agent will be effective in a depressed patient is undergoing its definitive evaluation in five European countries.

“I think this study will provide a critical test of whether we can use these kinds of correlations with emotional processing of information to actually improve the treatment of depression,” Catherine J. Harmer, DPhil, said at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.

Bruce Jancin/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Catherine J. Harmer
The clinical trial, known as PReDicT (Predicting Response to Depression Treatment), has been funded with a 4 million Euro grant from the European Commission through its Horizon 2020 public health improvement program. PReDicT represents the culmination of years of original work by Dr. Harmer, who is credited with developing and validating an influential cognitive neuropsychological theory of antidepressant drug action.

As early as 2009, she and her coinvestigators demonstrated that depression is associated with a measurable negative bias in the processing of emotional information. Depressed patients selectively pay more attention to and better remember negative information. For example, when depressed patients taking the Facial Expression Recognition Test are quickly shown a photo of a smiling face, they are more likely to describe it as “sad.” Similarly, in a word recall test that includes “positive” adjectives such as cheerful, poised, original, and optimistic and “negative” words such as mean, hostile, domineering, and untidy, they recall fewer positive words than nondepressed people.

This negative emotional bias is a key factor in maintenance of depression. Many weeks before patients report feeling improvement in their mood and clinical symptoms of depression in response to effective antidepressant medication, the drug produces a favorable effect on their cognitive biases in emotional processing, explained Dr. Harmer, professor of cognitive neuroscience and director of the Psychopharmacology and Emotional Research Lab at the University of Oxford (England).

Dr. Harmer hypothesized that antidepressants don’t necessarily act as direct mood enhancers, but instead change the balance away from negative to more positive emotional processing, resulting in neural modulation in limbic and prefrontal circuitry. These neural changes take time to reach the subjective conscious mind, which is why improvement in clinical symptoms of depression doesn’t manifest until 2-3 weeks into therapy, with the drug’s full effects not seen until 6-7 weeks (Br J Psychiatry. 2009 Aug;195[2]:102-8).

“Antidepressants can target cognitive biases surprisingly early on in treatment, before patients report any change in their clinical symptoms. This could explain the delay in antidepressant effect. You need life events, stressors, and environmental stimuli before a change in bias would be expected to result in a change in clinical state,” she said.

Together with her colleagues, she employed functional MRI to study changes in the brain associated with the improvement in negative biases in emotional processing that occur when depressed patients go on antidepressant medication. Forty-two unmedicated depressed patients were randomized to 10 mg of escitalopram (Lexapro) daily for 7 days or placebo. At baseline, all subjects demonstrated amygdala hyperactivity in response to fearful facial expressions, a response that didn’t occur in healthy controls. After 7 days of escitalopram – weeks before any improvement in depressed mood – amygdala activity was normalized in the active treatment group but not in placebo-treated controls (Psychol Med. 2012 Dec;42[12]:2609-17).

Dr. Harmer and a colleague expanded on her theory of depression in a review article aptly titled, “It’s the way that you look at it” (Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2013 Feb 25;368[1615]:20120407).

A measurable improvement in emotional processing can be seen within a few hours after a depressed patient takes the first dose of an effective antidepressant. Thus, early change in negative emotional processing is predictive of subsequent clinical outcome. Lack of an early shift to positive emotional processing has been associated in multiple studies by Dr. Harmer and others with a high likelihood that an antidepressant won’t provide significant improvement in depressive symptoms at week 6.

The predictive accuracy of tests of emotional processing is higher when testing is done after a patient has been on an antidepressant medication for a few days rather than after the very first dose. Based upon Dr. Harmer’s work, pharmaceutical companies are now using tests of change in emotional processing at 1 week to help screen and select novel treatments for depression and anxiety.

In PReDicT, depressed patients being treated in primary care clinics across Europe will undergo emotional processing testing at baseline. In the active intervention arm, participants will be retested after 1 week on antidepressant therapy in order to identify those who are unlikely to have a favorable clinical response to that drug, enabling physicians to accelerate decision making about the appropriate next treatment. Treatment decisions in the control group will be made without the emotional processing results, mirroring current everyday practice.

Instead of waiting 4-6 weeks before concluding that a switch to another antidepressant with a different mechanism of action is warranted, as is now routine, participating PReDicT physicians whose patients are in the active intervention arm can make an informed change after just 1 week. The study hypothesis is that participants randomized to this study arm will take less time to respond to antidepressant therapy, because their physicians will be able to find the right drug faster than in the control group. The primary study endpoint will be the percentage of patients in the two study arms showing at least a 50% reduction in their Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS SR-16) score at 8 weeks. Secondary endpoints will focus on cumulative health care costs at weeks 24 and 48.

The PReDicT study is being run by P1vital Products Ltd., an Oxfordshire health care company that will use its proprietary Internet-based eHealth Emotional Test Battery to assess early changes in emotional processing. The test battery, which is classified as a medical device, is based upon Dr. Harmer’s earlier work. She is an investigator in PReDicT.

Her research funding comes from the U.K. Medical Research Council, Eli Lilly, and the EU’s Horizon 2020 program.

 

 

 

– A novel method of individualizing antidepressant drug therapy while drastically shortening the time required to figure out whether a given agent will be effective in a depressed patient is undergoing its definitive evaluation in five European countries.

“I think this study will provide a critical test of whether we can use these kinds of correlations with emotional processing of information to actually improve the treatment of depression,” Catherine J. Harmer, DPhil, said at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.

Bruce Jancin/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Catherine J. Harmer
The clinical trial, known as PReDicT (Predicting Response to Depression Treatment), has been funded with a 4 million Euro grant from the European Commission through its Horizon 2020 public health improvement program. PReDicT represents the culmination of years of original work by Dr. Harmer, who is credited with developing and validating an influential cognitive neuropsychological theory of antidepressant drug action.

As early as 2009, she and her coinvestigators demonstrated that depression is associated with a measurable negative bias in the processing of emotional information. Depressed patients selectively pay more attention to and better remember negative information. For example, when depressed patients taking the Facial Expression Recognition Test are quickly shown a photo of a smiling face, they are more likely to describe it as “sad.” Similarly, in a word recall test that includes “positive” adjectives such as cheerful, poised, original, and optimistic and “negative” words such as mean, hostile, domineering, and untidy, they recall fewer positive words than nondepressed people.

This negative emotional bias is a key factor in maintenance of depression. Many weeks before patients report feeling improvement in their mood and clinical symptoms of depression in response to effective antidepressant medication, the drug produces a favorable effect on their cognitive biases in emotional processing, explained Dr. Harmer, professor of cognitive neuroscience and director of the Psychopharmacology and Emotional Research Lab at the University of Oxford (England).

Dr. Harmer hypothesized that antidepressants don’t necessarily act as direct mood enhancers, but instead change the balance away from negative to more positive emotional processing, resulting in neural modulation in limbic and prefrontal circuitry. These neural changes take time to reach the subjective conscious mind, which is why improvement in clinical symptoms of depression doesn’t manifest until 2-3 weeks into therapy, with the drug’s full effects not seen until 6-7 weeks (Br J Psychiatry. 2009 Aug;195[2]:102-8).

“Antidepressants can target cognitive biases surprisingly early on in treatment, before patients report any change in their clinical symptoms. This could explain the delay in antidepressant effect. You need life events, stressors, and environmental stimuli before a change in bias would be expected to result in a change in clinical state,” she said.

Together with her colleagues, she employed functional MRI to study changes in the brain associated with the improvement in negative biases in emotional processing that occur when depressed patients go on antidepressant medication. Forty-two unmedicated depressed patients were randomized to 10 mg of escitalopram (Lexapro) daily for 7 days or placebo. At baseline, all subjects demonstrated amygdala hyperactivity in response to fearful facial expressions, a response that didn’t occur in healthy controls. After 7 days of escitalopram – weeks before any improvement in depressed mood – amygdala activity was normalized in the active treatment group but not in placebo-treated controls (Psychol Med. 2012 Dec;42[12]:2609-17).

Dr. Harmer and a colleague expanded on her theory of depression in a review article aptly titled, “It’s the way that you look at it” (Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2013 Feb 25;368[1615]:20120407).

A measurable improvement in emotional processing can be seen within a few hours after a depressed patient takes the first dose of an effective antidepressant. Thus, early change in negative emotional processing is predictive of subsequent clinical outcome. Lack of an early shift to positive emotional processing has been associated in multiple studies by Dr. Harmer and others with a high likelihood that an antidepressant won’t provide significant improvement in depressive symptoms at week 6.

The predictive accuracy of tests of emotional processing is higher when testing is done after a patient has been on an antidepressant medication for a few days rather than after the very first dose. Based upon Dr. Harmer’s work, pharmaceutical companies are now using tests of change in emotional processing at 1 week to help screen and select novel treatments for depression and anxiety.

In PReDicT, depressed patients being treated in primary care clinics across Europe will undergo emotional processing testing at baseline. In the active intervention arm, participants will be retested after 1 week on antidepressant therapy in order to identify those who are unlikely to have a favorable clinical response to that drug, enabling physicians to accelerate decision making about the appropriate next treatment. Treatment decisions in the control group will be made without the emotional processing results, mirroring current everyday practice.

Instead of waiting 4-6 weeks before concluding that a switch to another antidepressant with a different mechanism of action is warranted, as is now routine, participating PReDicT physicians whose patients are in the active intervention arm can make an informed change after just 1 week. The study hypothesis is that participants randomized to this study arm will take less time to respond to antidepressant therapy, because their physicians will be able to find the right drug faster than in the control group. The primary study endpoint will be the percentage of patients in the two study arms showing at least a 50% reduction in their Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS SR-16) score at 8 weeks. Secondary endpoints will focus on cumulative health care costs at weeks 24 and 48.

The PReDicT study is being run by P1vital Products Ltd., an Oxfordshire health care company that will use its proprietary Internet-based eHealth Emotional Test Battery to assess early changes in emotional processing. The test battery, which is classified as a medical device, is based upon Dr. Harmer’s earlier work. She is an investigator in PReDicT.

Her research funding comes from the U.K. Medical Research Council, Eli Lilly, and the EU’s Horizon 2020 program.

 

 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads