Rheumatology News

Intra-articular calcium crystal deposition is commonly seen in knee osteoarthritis, but its significance has been debated.

Now, a new study that relied on knee radiographs and bilateral knee CT imaging to evaluate 2,093 participants, including some with and without knee mineralization, has provided some new insights.

The study has addressed the longstanding question: Is the calcium deposition a cause or a consequence of the OA? “If it’s a cause, targeting it might be helpful,” Jean Liew, MD, MS, the study’s lead author and assistant professor of medicine at Boston University, said in an interview. “If a consequence of the OA, targeting is not going to help.”

In this new study, because of the use of advanced imaging, the researchers demonstrated a strong relationship of the presence of this calcification with different pain characteristics, said Tuhina Neogi, MD, PhD, professor of medicine and epidemiology at Boston University, the corresponding author of the study who has focused on this research for many years. “This indicates this mineralization is not inconsequential.”

The bottom line? “Calcification in the knee may not be simply inert and an innocent bystander of longstanding OA,” Dr. Neogi said in an interview.
 

Study details

Dr. Neogi and colleagues evaluated 2,093 participants (mean age, 61 years; 57% female) with a mean body mass index of 28.8 kg/m². In all, 10.2% of knees had intra-articular mineralization. The data came from the National Institutes of Health–funded longitudinal Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study. At baseline, participants had knee radiographs and bilateral knee CT scans, and pain assessments every 8 months for 2 years. The Boston University Calcium Knee Score was used to score the CT imaging. The researchers longitudinally examined the relationship of the CT-detected intra-articular mineralization to the risk of frequent knee pain, intermittent or constant knee pain worsening, and pain severity worsening. All analyses were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, race, site, and Kellgren-Lawrence grade.

Having any mineralization in the cartilage was associated with a doubling of odds for having frequent knee pain (95% confidence interval, 1.38-2.78), and 1.86 times greater likelihood of more frequent intermittent or constant knee pain (95% CI, 1.20-2.78) over the 2 years of follow-up. Similar results were seen for the presence of any intra-articular mineralization in the meniscus or joint capsule. The higher the burden of mineralization anywhere within the knee was linked with higher odds for all pain outcomes, with odds ratios ranging from 2.14 to 2.21.
 

Perspective

“Because we used more sensitive imaging to pick up the calcification, we are able to more confidently evaluate this association,” Dr. Neogi said in an interview. The problem with prior studies was their reliance on plain radiographs, which are not sensitive enough to pick up this calcification.

Among the other strengths of the new research, she said, is that it was longitudinal, included more than 2,000 people and used multiple ways to look at the pain experience, getting consistent results.

“Here we are saying there seems to be clinical relevance [to the mineralization]. That’s not so surprising. We know there are other medical conditions in which calcium calcification can cause severe pain and inflammation.” The old term, pseudogout, is now called calcium pyrophosphate deposition disease.

The next steps of research, Dr. Neogi said, are to investigate the link of the mineralization to inflammation and its association to cartilage damage.
 

Could colchicine help?

In another recent study, researchers conducted a post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial of the anti-inflammatory drug colchicine, finding that the use of colchicine at 0.5 mg daily was associated with a lower incidence of total knee and hip replacements (TKR, THR). In that study, 2,762 participants received colchicine, while 2,760 received placebo during the median follow-up of 28.6 months. During the trial, TKR or THR was done in 68 patients (2.5%) of those in the treated group and 97 patients (3.5%) in the placebo groups. That resulted in an incidence rate difference of –0.40 [95% CI, –0.74 to –0.06 ] per 100 person-years.

The authors wrote that the results suggest that “colchicine may slow the progression of OA, but this needs to be confirmed in an appropriately designed prospective placebo-controlled trial.”
 

Independent perspective

The new Boston University study supports the idea that there may be a larger subset of patients that may have a calcium mineralization component, said C. Kent Kwoh, MD, professor of medicine and medical imaging at the University of Arizona, Tucson. He reviewed both studies and provided perspective. He is an editorial advisory board member for MDedge Rheumatology.

courtesy Banner University Medical Group–Tucson

The study by Dr. Liew and colleagues shows that “there is an association of crystal deposition not just in the cartilage, but various parts of the joint.” He emphasized the study found only an association and that more study is needed.

As for the colchicine study, he said, it “really shows there is potential at least within some individuals where it may decrease symptoms to the point where people are less likely to need joint replacement.” That analysis follows some previous research, some of it shorter term, finding that colchicine was not beneficial.
 

Takeaways

Would colchicine be worth a try in patients who have knee pain and calcium mineral deposits?

Dr. Neogi noted that a formulation of colchicine (Lodoco) was recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration to reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and other cardiovascular disease. While she does not advocate adopting a practice without evidence, she suggested if someone has both mineralization and cardiovascular disease, along with difficulty managing symptoms with established treatments, it might be worth a try, if no contraindications exist.

Dr. Kwoh agreed it may be worth a try, given that it is “relatively safe and relatively inexpensive.”

On one point all agreed: More research is needed.

Dr. Kwoh, Dr. Neogi and Dr. Liew have no relevant disclosures.

Intra-articular calcium crystal deposition is commonly seen in knee osteoarthritis, but its significance has been debated.

Now, a new study that relied on knee radiographs and bilateral knee CT imaging to evaluate 2,093 participants, including some with and without knee mineralization, has provided some new insights.

The study has addressed the longstanding question: Is the calcium deposition a cause or a consequence of the OA? “If it’s a cause, targeting it might be helpful,” Jean Liew, MD, MS, the study’s lead author and assistant professor of medicine at Boston University, said in an interview. “If a consequence of the OA, targeting is not going to help.”

In this new study, because of the use of advanced imaging, the researchers demonstrated a strong relationship of the presence of this calcification with different pain characteristics, said Tuhina Neogi, MD, PhD, professor of medicine and epidemiology at Boston University, the corresponding author of the study who has focused on this research for many years. “This indicates this mineralization is not inconsequential.”

The bottom line? “Calcification in the knee may not be simply inert and an innocent bystander of longstanding OA,” Dr. Neogi said in an interview.
 

Study details

Dr. Neogi and colleagues evaluated 2,093 participants (mean age, 61 years; 57% female) with a mean body mass index of 28.8 kg/m². In all, 10.2% of knees had intra-articular mineralization. The data came from the National Institutes of Health–funded longitudinal Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study. At baseline, participants had knee radiographs and bilateral knee CT scans, and pain assessments every 8 months for 2 years. The Boston University Calcium Knee Score was used to score the CT imaging. The researchers longitudinally examined the relationship of the CT-detected intra-articular mineralization to the risk of frequent knee pain, intermittent or constant knee pain worsening, and pain severity worsening. All analyses were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, race, site, and Kellgren-Lawrence grade.

Having any mineralization in the cartilage was associated with a doubling of odds for having frequent knee pain (95% confidence interval, 1.38-2.78), and 1.86 times greater likelihood of more frequent intermittent or constant knee pain (95% CI, 1.20-2.78) over the 2 years of follow-up. Similar results were seen for the presence of any intra-articular mineralization in the meniscus or joint capsule. The higher the burden of mineralization anywhere within the knee was linked with higher odds for all pain outcomes, with odds ratios ranging from 2.14 to 2.21.
 

Perspective

“Because we used more sensitive imaging to pick up the calcification, we are able to more confidently evaluate this association,” Dr. Neogi said in an interview. The problem with prior studies was their reliance on plain radiographs, which are not sensitive enough to pick up this calcification.

Among the other strengths of the new research, she said, is that it was longitudinal, included more than 2,000 people and used multiple ways to look at the pain experience, getting consistent results.

“Here we are saying there seems to be clinical relevance [to the mineralization]. That’s not so surprising. We know there are other medical conditions in which calcium calcification can cause severe pain and inflammation.” The old term, pseudogout, is now called calcium pyrophosphate deposition disease.

The next steps of research, Dr. Neogi said, are to investigate the link of the mineralization to inflammation and its association to cartilage damage.
 

Could colchicine help?

In another recent study, researchers conducted a post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial of the anti-inflammatory drug colchicine, finding that the use of colchicine at 0.5 mg daily was associated with a lower incidence of total knee and hip replacements (TKR, THR). In that study, 2,762 participants received colchicine, while 2,760 received placebo during the median follow-up of 28.6 months. During the trial, TKR or THR was done in 68 patients (2.5%) of those in the treated group and 97 patients (3.5%) in the placebo groups. That resulted in an incidence rate difference of –0.40 [95% CI, –0.74 to –0.06 ] per 100 person-years.

The authors wrote that the results suggest that “colchicine may slow the progression of OA, but this needs to be confirmed in an appropriately designed prospective placebo-controlled trial.”
 

Independent perspective

The new Boston University study supports the idea that there may be a larger subset of patients that may have a calcium mineralization component, said C. Kent Kwoh, MD, professor of medicine and medical imaging at the University of Arizona, Tucson. He reviewed both studies and provided perspective. He is an editorial advisory board member for MDedge Rheumatology.

courtesy Banner University Medical Group–Tucson

The study by Dr. Liew and colleagues shows that “there is an association of crystal deposition not just in the cartilage, but various parts of the joint.” He emphasized the study found only an association and that more study is needed.

As for the colchicine study, he said, it “really shows there is potential at least within some individuals where it may decrease symptoms to the point where people are less likely to need joint replacement.” That analysis follows some previous research, some of it shorter term, finding that colchicine was not beneficial.
 

Takeaways

Would colchicine be worth a try in patients who have knee pain and calcium mineral deposits?

Dr. Neogi noted that a formulation of colchicine (Lodoco) was recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration to reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and other cardiovascular disease. While she does not advocate adopting a practice without evidence, she suggested if someone has both mineralization and cardiovascular disease, along with difficulty managing symptoms with established treatments, it might be worth a try, if no contraindications exist.

Dr. Kwoh agreed it may be worth a try, given that it is “relatively safe and relatively inexpensive.”

On one point all agreed: More research is needed.

Dr. Kwoh, Dr. Neogi and Dr. Liew have no relevant disclosures.

Intra-articular calcium crystal deposition is commonly seen in knee osteoarthritis, but its significance has been debated.

Now, a new study that relied on knee radiographs and bilateral knee CT imaging to evaluate 2,093 participants, including some with and without knee mineralization, has provided some new insights.

The study has addressed the longstanding question: Is the calcium deposition a cause or a consequence of the OA? “If it’s a cause, targeting it might be helpful,” Jean Liew, MD, MS, the study’s lead author and assistant professor of medicine at Boston University, said in an interview. “If a consequence of the OA, targeting is not going to help.”

In this new study, because of the use of advanced imaging, the researchers demonstrated a strong relationship of the presence of this calcification with different pain characteristics, said Tuhina Neogi, MD, PhD, professor of medicine and epidemiology at Boston University, the corresponding author of the study who has focused on this research for many years. “This indicates this mineralization is not inconsequential.”

The bottom line? “Calcification in the knee may not be simply inert and an innocent bystander of longstanding OA,” Dr. Neogi said in an interview.
 

Study details

Dr. Neogi and colleagues evaluated 2,093 participants (mean age, 61 years; 57% female) with a mean body mass index of 28.8 kg/m². In all, 10.2% of knees had intra-articular mineralization. The data came from the National Institutes of Health–funded longitudinal Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study. At baseline, participants had knee radiographs and bilateral knee CT scans, and pain assessments every 8 months for 2 years. The Boston University Calcium Knee Score was used to score the CT imaging. The researchers longitudinally examined the relationship of the CT-detected intra-articular mineralization to the risk of frequent knee pain, intermittent or constant knee pain worsening, and pain severity worsening. All analyses were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, race, site, and Kellgren-Lawrence grade.

Having any mineralization in the cartilage was associated with a doubling of odds for having frequent knee pain (95% confidence interval, 1.38-2.78), and 1.86 times greater likelihood of more frequent intermittent or constant knee pain (95% CI, 1.20-2.78) over the 2 years of follow-up. Similar results were seen for the presence of any intra-articular mineralization in the meniscus or joint capsule. The higher the burden of mineralization anywhere within the knee was linked with higher odds for all pain outcomes, with odds ratios ranging from 2.14 to 2.21.
 

Perspective

“Because we used more sensitive imaging to pick up the calcification, we are able to more confidently evaluate this association,” Dr. Neogi said in an interview. The problem with prior studies was their reliance on plain radiographs, which are not sensitive enough to pick up this calcification.

Among the other strengths of the new research, she said, is that it was longitudinal, included more than 2,000 people and used multiple ways to look at the pain experience, getting consistent results.

“Here we are saying there seems to be clinical relevance [to the mineralization]. That’s not so surprising. We know there are other medical conditions in which calcium calcification can cause severe pain and inflammation.” The old term, pseudogout, is now called calcium pyrophosphate deposition disease.

The next steps of research, Dr. Neogi said, are to investigate the link of the mineralization to inflammation and its association to cartilage damage.
 

Could colchicine help?

In another recent study, researchers conducted a post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial of the anti-inflammatory drug colchicine, finding that the use of colchicine at 0.5 mg daily was associated with a lower incidence of total knee and hip replacements (TKR, THR). In that study, 2,762 participants received colchicine, while 2,760 received placebo during the median follow-up of 28.6 months. During the trial, TKR or THR was done in 68 patients (2.5%) of those in the treated group and 97 patients (3.5%) in the placebo groups. That resulted in an incidence rate difference of –0.40 [95% CI, –0.74 to –0.06 ] per 100 person-years.

The authors wrote that the results suggest that “colchicine may slow the progression of OA, but this needs to be confirmed in an appropriately designed prospective placebo-controlled trial.”
 

Independent perspective

The new Boston University study supports the idea that there may be a larger subset of patients that may have a calcium mineralization component, said C. Kent Kwoh, MD, professor of medicine and medical imaging at the University of Arizona, Tucson. He reviewed both studies and provided perspective. He is an editorial advisory board member for MDedge Rheumatology.

courtesy Banner University Medical Group–Tucson

The study by Dr. Liew and colleagues shows that “there is an association of crystal deposition not just in the cartilage, but various parts of the joint.” He emphasized the study found only an association and that more study is needed.

As for the colchicine study, he said, it “really shows there is potential at least within some individuals where it may decrease symptoms to the point where people are less likely to need joint replacement.” That analysis follows some previous research, some of it shorter term, finding that colchicine was not beneficial.
 

Takeaways

Would colchicine be worth a try in patients who have knee pain and calcium mineral deposits?

Dr. Neogi noted that a formulation of colchicine (Lodoco) was recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration to reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and other cardiovascular disease. While she does not advocate adopting a practice without evidence, she suggested if someone has both mineralization and cardiovascular disease, along with difficulty managing symptoms with established treatments, it might be worth a try, if no contraindications exist.

Dr. Kwoh agreed it may be worth a try, given that it is “relatively safe and relatively inexpensive.”

On one point all agreed: More research is needed.

Dr. Kwoh, Dr. Neogi and Dr. Liew have no relevant disclosures.

Noninvasive auricular vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is no more effective than placebo at controlling symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis, according to a new study. But experts emphasize that these results do not mean trials of different forms of VNS will have the same fate.

VNS offers a potential additional therapy for autoimmune disease beyond disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, explained first author Matthew Baker, MD, clinical chief, division of immunology and rheumatology, Stanford (Calif.) University, and colleagues.

“The principle of VNS is based upon the inflammatory reflex, which describes a primitive connection between the nervous system and immune system,” the authors write. Signals sent down the vagus nerve to the splenic nerve stimulate immune cells in the spleen, which ultimately results in blocking production of inflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor. “It is hypothesized that this reduction in systemic inflammation can be harnessed for the treatment of diseases such as RA,” they continue, and smaller studies suggest this treatment could benefit patients.

In a previous 12-week, open-label trial, 17 patients with RA who were implanted with a VNS device on the left cervical vagus nerve saw improvement in RA symptoms, as well as a decrease in TNF production. Noninvasive devices that stimulate the auricular branch of the vagus nerve have also shown some promise. A sham-controlled study of 18 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) found that patients who received transcutaneous auricular VNS reported reduced musculoskeletal pain over just 4 days. An open-label study of 30 patients with RA showed clinically significant reductions in disease activity score of 28 joints with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) and clinical improvement in American College of Rheumatology responses over 12 weeks. Additional trials have also demonstrated this positive effect of noninvasive VNS on RA symptoms, but all studies conducted thus far have been relatively small or uncontrolled, Dr. Baker said.
 

Results of latest trial

In this new trial, published online in Arthritis & Rheumatology, researchers enrolled 113 patients with active RA who had inadequate responses or intolerance to conventional synthetic DMARDs and were naïve to biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs. All patients were given an auricular vagus nerve stimulator via a custom-molded earpiece that was controlled by a smartphone app. Patients wore the device for 15 minutes each day. When worn and turned on, the device generated electrical signals delivered transcutaneously to the cymba concha, a region of the ear connected to the auricular branch of the vagus nerve. This stimulation is imperceptible to patients, Dr. Baker explained. “For the sham arm, we simply did not turn the device on at all,” he said. A subject in the sham arm would use the same device on a 15-minute timer, but no stimulation was given.

After 12 weeks, researchers found no statistically significant difference between the treatment and sham arms in achieving 20% improvement in ACR response criteria or mean change in DAS28-CRP. A total of 17 patients, including 12 in the treatment arm, reported adverse events during the study, and all events were categorized as mild to moderate.

While the research team was “obviously disappointed” about the results, Dr. Baker said, negative findings in trials also are important. “The real value of our study is pointing out the need for large controlled, sham-controlled studies,” he said, especially for potential treatments with a lot of enthusiasm behind them.
 

Results don’t seal the fate of other VNS approaches

“As a properly controlled trial, the results are impressively negative,” writes Roy Fleischmann, MD, clinical professor of medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, and codirector, Metroplex Clinical Research Center, both in Dallas, in an editorial about the study. Many of the previous studies looking at this therapy in RA were open label, which could bias the results, he argued. The biggest question, he noted, is if other blinded, sham-controlled trials looking at VNS devices will show similar results.

By itself, this finding does not imply that other VNS devices will be unsuccessful, argued Jonathan Kay, MD, the Timothy S. and Elaine L. Peterson chair in rheumatology, and professor of medicine and population and quantitative health sciences, UMass Chan Medical School and UMass Memorial Medical Center, both in Worcester, Mass. He is also an investigator for the RESET-RA trial, a randomized, sham-controlled trial that will assess the safety and efficacy of an implantable VNS device in an estimated 250 patients with RA. He was not involved with Dr. Baker’s work.

“Auricular VNS is delivered more distally than cervical or splenic nerve stimulation,” Dr. Kay said, and the potential effect of these other forms of VNS may have different outcomes.

Cynthia Aranow, MD, rheumatologist and director of the Clinical Autoimmunity Center of Excellence at Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research, Manhasset, New York, agreed with Dr. Kay, noting that direct VNS stimulation via implantable device and transcutaneous stimulation through the skin are not comparable. She also is unaffiliated with the study.

“This group conducted a well-designed, sham-controlled study of a reasonable number of patients and over a reasonable period of time and observed no significant differences between those participants receiving true and those participants receiving sham stimulation,” she wrote in an email. “However, it’s important to point out that the stimulation settings used in this study were kHz (kilohertz) which is 1,000 times greater than the settings used in multiple other studies in which transauricular VNS has been shown to be clinically effective, including studies in long COVID, tinnitus, SLE, cluster headaches, erosive hand osteoarthritis, pediatric kidney disease, among others,” she said.

The role for VNS treatment, whether direct stimulation via implantable device or transcutaneous, in autoimmune and inflammatory diseases “remains to be determined by future studies,” she said.

The study was funded by Nesos. Dr. Baker received personal fees from Nesos during the study. Dr. Kay has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celltrion Healthcare, and several other pharmaceutical companies. Dr. Aranow reports no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Noninvasive auricular vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is no more effective than placebo at controlling symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis, according to a new study. But experts emphasize that these results do not mean trials of different forms of VNS will have the same fate.

VNS offers a potential additional therapy for autoimmune disease beyond disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, explained first author Matthew Baker, MD, clinical chief, division of immunology and rheumatology, Stanford (Calif.) University, and colleagues.

“The principle of VNS is based upon the inflammatory reflex, which describes a primitive connection between the nervous system and immune system,” the authors write. Signals sent down the vagus nerve to the splenic nerve stimulate immune cells in the spleen, which ultimately results in blocking production of inflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor. “It is hypothesized that this reduction in systemic inflammation can be harnessed for the treatment of diseases such as RA,” they continue, and smaller studies suggest this treatment could benefit patients.

In a previous 12-week, open-label trial, 17 patients with RA who were implanted with a VNS device on the left cervical vagus nerve saw improvement in RA symptoms, as well as a decrease in TNF production. Noninvasive devices that stimulate the auricular branch of the vagus nerve have also shown some promise. A sham-controlled study of 18 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) found that patients who received transcutaneous auricular VNS reported reduced musculoskeletal pain over just 4 days. An open-label study of 30 patients with RA showed clinically significant reductions in disease activity score of 28 joints with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) and clinical improvement in American College of Rheumatology responses over 12 weeks. Additional trials have also demonstrated this positive effect of noninvasive VNS on RA symptoms, but all studies conducted thus far have been relatively small or uncontrolled, Dr. Baker said.
 

Results of latest trial

In this new trial, published online in Arthritis & Rheumatology, researchers enrolled 113 patients with active RA who had inadequate responses or intolerance to conventional synthetic DMARDs and were naïve to biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs. All patients were given an auricular vagus nerve stimulator via a custom-molded earpiece that was controlled by a smartphone app. Patients wore the device for 15 minutes each day. When worn and turned on, the device generated electrical signals delivered transcutaneously to the cymba concha, a region of the ear connected to the auricular branch of the vagus nerve. This stimulation is imperceptible to patients, Dr. Baker explained. “For the sham arm, we simply did not turn the device on at all,” he said. A subject in the sham arm would use the same device on a 15-minute timer, but no stimulation was given.

After 12 weeks, researchers found no statistically significant difference between the treatment and sham arms in achieving 20% improvement in ACR response criteria or mean change in DAS28-CRP. A total of 17 patients, including 12 in the treatment arm, reported adverse events during the study, and all events were categorized as mild to moderate.

While the research team was “obviously disappointed” about the results, Dr. Baker said, negative findings in trials also are important. “The real value of our study is pointing out the need for large controlled, sham-controlled studies,” he said, especially for potential treatments with a lot of enthusiasm behind them.
 

Results don’t seal the fate of other VNS approaches

“As a properly controlled trial, the results are impressively negative,” writes Roy Fleischmann, MD, clinical professor of medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, and codirector, Metroplex Clinical Research Center, both in Dallas, in an editorial about the study. Many of the previous studies looking at this therapy in RA were open label, which could bias the results, he argued. The biggest question, he noted, is if other blinded, sham-controlled trials looking at VNS devices will show similar results.

By itself, this finding does not imply that other VNS devices will be unsuccessful, argued Jonathan Kay, MD, the Timothy S. and Elaine L. Peterson chair in rheumatology, and professor of medicine and population and quantitative health sciences, UMass Chan Medical School and UMass Memorial Medical Center, both in Worcester, Mass. He is also an investigator for the RESET-RA trial, a randomized, sham-controlled trial that will assess the safety and efficacy of an implantable VNS device in an estimated 250 patients with RA. He was not involved with Dr. Baker’s work.

“Auricular VNS is delivered more distally than cervical or splenic nerve stimulation,” Dr. Kay said, and the potential effect of these other forms of VNS may have different outcomes.

Cynthia Aranow, MD, rheumatologist and director of the Clinical Autoimmunity Center of Excellence at Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research, Manhasset, New York, agreed with Dr. Kay, noting that direct VNS stimulation via implantable device and transcutaneous stimulation through the skin are not comparable. She also is unaffiliated with the study.

“This group conducted a well-designed, sham-controlled study of a reasonable number of patients and over a reasonable period of time and observed no significant differences between those participants receiving true and those participants receiving sham stimulation,” she wrote in an email. “However, it’s important to point out that the stimulation settings used in this study were kHz (kilohertz) which is 1,000 times greater than the settings used in multiple other studies in which transauricular VNS has been shown to be clinically effective, including studies in long COVID, tinnitus, SLE, cluster headaches, erosive hand osteoarthritis, pediatric kidney disease, among others,” she said.

The role for VNS treatment, whether direct stimulation via implantable device or transcutaneous, in autoimmune and inflammatory diseases “remains to be determined by future studies,” she said.

The study was funded by Nesos. Dr. Baker received personal fees from Nesos during the study. Dr. Kay has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celltrion Healthcare, and several other pharmaceutical companies. Dr. Aranow reports no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Noninvasive auricular vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is no more effective than placebo at controlling symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis, according to a new study. But experts emphasize that these results do not mean trials of different forms of VNS will have the same fate.

VNS offers a potential additional therapy for autoimmune disease beyond disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, explained first author Matthew Baker, MD, clinical chief, division of immunology and rheumatology, Stanford (Calif.) University, and colleagues.

“The principle of VNS is based upon the inflammatory reflex, which describes a primitive connection between the nervous system and immune system,” the authors write. Signals sent down the vagus nerve to the splenic nerve stimulate immune cells in the spleen, which ultimately results in blocking production of inflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor. “It is hypothesized that this reduction in systemic inflammation can be harnessed for the treatment of diseases such as RA,” they continue, and smaller studies suggest this treatment could benefit patients.

In a previous 12-week, open-label trial, 17 patients with RA who were implanted with a VNS device on the left cervical vagus nerve saw improvement in RA symptoms, as well as a decrease in TNF production. Noninvasive devices that stimulate the auricular branch of the vagus nerve have also shown some promise. A sham-controlled study of 18 patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) found that patients who received transcutaneous auricular VNS reported reduced musculoskeletal pain over just 4 days. An open-label study of 30 patients with RA showed clinically significant reductions in disease activity score of 28 joints with C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) and clinical improvement in American College of Rheumatology responses over 12 weeks. Additional trials have also demonstrated this positive effect of noninvasive VNS on RA symptoms, but all studies conducted thus far have been relatively small or uncontrolled, Dr. Baker said.
 

Results of latest trial

In this new trial, published online in Arthritis & Rheumatology, researchers enrolled 113 patients with active RA who had inadequate responses or intolerance to conventional synthetic DMARDs and were naïve to biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs. All patients were given an auricular vagus nerve stimulator via a custom-molded earpiece that was controlled by a smartphone app. Patients wore the device for 15 minutes each day. When worn and turned on, the device generated electrical signals delivered transcutaneously to the cymba concha, a region of the ear connected to the auricular branch of the vagus nerve. This stimulation is imperceptible to patients, Dr. Baker explained. “For the sham arm, we simply did not turn the device on at all,” he said. A subject in the sham arm would use the same device on a 15-minute timer, but no stimulation was given.

After 12 weeks, researchers found no statistically significant difference between the treatment and sham arms in achieving 20% improvement in ACR response criteria or mean change in DAS28-CRP. A total of 17 patients, including 12 in the treatment arm, reported adverse events during the study, and all events were categorized as mild to moderate.

While the research team was “obviously disappointed” about the results, Dr. Baker said, negative findings in trials also are important. “The real value of our study is pointing out the need for large controlled, sham-controlled studies,” he said, especially for potential treatments with a lot of enthusiasm behind them.
 

Results don’t seal the fate of other VNS approaches

“As a properly controlled trial, the results are impressively negative,” writes Roy Fleischmann, MD, clinical professor of medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, and codirector, Metroplex Clinical Research Center, both in Dallas, in an editorial about the study. Many of the previous studies looking at this therapy in RA were open label, which could bias the results, he argued. The biggest question, he noted, is if other blinded, sham-controlled trials looking at VNS devices will show similar results.

By itself, this finding does not imply that other VNS devices will be unsuccessful, argued Jonathan Kay, MD, the Timothy S. and Elaine L. Peterson chair in rheumatology, and professor of medicine and population and quantitative health sciences, UMass Chan Medical School and UMass Memorial Medical Center, both in Worcester, Mass. He is also an investigator for the RESET-RA trial, a randomized, sham-controlled trial that will assess the safety and efficacy of an implantable VNS device in an estimated 250 patients with RA. He was not involved with Dr. Baker’s work.

“Auricular VNS is delivered more distally than cervical or splenic nerve stimulation,” Dr. Kay said, and the potential effect of these other forms of VNS may have different outcomes.

Cynthia Aranow, MD, rheumatologist and director of the Clinical Autoimmunity Center of Excellence at Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research, Manhasset, New York, agreed with Dr. Kay, noting that direct VNS stimulation via implantable device and transcutaneous stimulation through the skin are not comparable. She also is unaffiliated with the study.

“This group conducted a well-designed, sham-controlled study of a reasonable number of patients and over a reasonable period of time and observed no significant differences between those participants receiving true and those participants receiving sham stimulation,” she wrote in an email. “However, it’s important to point out that the stimulation settings used in this study were kHz (kilohertz) which is 1,000 times greater than the settings used in multiple other studies in which transauricular VNS has been shown to be clinically effective, including studies in long COVID, tinnitus, SLE, cluster headaches, erosive hand osteoarthritis, pediatric kidney disease, among others,” she said.

The role for VNS treatment, whether direct stimulation via implantable device or transcutaneous, in autoimmune and inflammatory diseases “remains to be determined by future studies,” she said.

The study was funded by Nesos. Dr. Baker received personal fees from Nesos during the study. Dr. Kay has received consulting fees from AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celltrion Healthcare, and several other pharmaceutical companies. Dr. Aranow reports no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Among U.S. high school students, males and non-Whites are at greatest risk for not using sunscreen, a cornerstone of skin cancer prevention, according to results from a systematic review.

“We know that skin cancer is one of the most common malignancies in the world, and sun protection methods such as sunscreen make it highly preventable,” first author Carly R. Stevens, a student at Tulane University, New Orleans, said in an interview. “This study demonstrates the adolescent populations that are most vulnerable to sun damage and how we can help mitigate their risk of developing skin cancer through education methods, such as Sun Protection Outreach Teaching by Students.”  

Ms. Stevens and coauthors presented the findings during a poster session at the annual meeting of the Society for Pediatric Dermatology.

To investigate predictors of sunscreen use among high school students, they searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science using the terms (“sunscreen” or “SPF” or “sun protection”) and (“high school” or “teen” or “teenager” or “adolescent”) and limited the analysis to English studies reporting data on sunscreen use in U.S. high school students up to November 2021.

A total of 20 studies were included in the final review. The study populations ranged in number from 208 to 24,645. Of 11 studies that examined gender, all showed increased sunscreen use in females compared with males. Of five studies that examined age, all showed increased sunscreen use in younger adolescents, compared with their older counterparts.

Of four studies that examined the role of ethnicity on sunscreen use, White students were more likely to use sunscreen, compared with their peers of other ethnicities. “This may be due to perceived sun sensitivity, as [these four studies] also showed increased sunscreen use in populations that believed were more susceptible to sun damage,” the researchers wrote in their abstract.

Wavebreakmedia Ltd/Thinkstock

In other findings, two studies that examined perceived self-efficacy concluded that higher levels of sunscreen use correlated with higher self-efficacy, while four studies concluded that high school students were more likely to use sunscreen if their parents encouraged them the wear it or if the parent used it themselves.

“With 40%-50% of ultraviolet damage being done before the age of 20, it’s crucial that we find ways to educate adolescents on the importance of sunscreen use and target those populations who were found to rarely use sunscreen in our study,” Ms. Stevens said.

In one outreach program, Sun Protection Outreach Teaching by Students (SPOTS), medical students visit middle and high schools to educate them about the importance of practicing sun protection. The program began as a collaboration between Saint Louis University and Washington University in St. Louis, but has expanded nationwide. Ms. Stevens described SPOTS as “a great way for medical students to present the information to middle and high school students in a way that is engaging and interactive.”

The researchers reported having no disclosures.

Among U.S. high school students, males and non-Whites are at greatest risk for not using sunscreen, a cornerstone of skin cancer prevention, according to results from a systematic review.

“We know that skin cancer is one of the most common malignancies in the world, and sun protection methods such as sunscreen make it highly preventable,” first author Carly R. Stevens, a student at Tulane University, New Orleans, said in an interview. “This study demonstrates the adolescent populations that are most vulnerable to sun damage and how we can help mitigate their risk of developing skin cancer through education methods, such as Sun Protection Outreach Teaching by Students.”  

Ms. Stevens and coauthors presented the findings during a poster session at the annual meeting of the Society for Pediatric Dermatology.

To investigate predictors of sunscreen use among high school students, they searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science using the terms (“sunscreen” or “SPF” or “sun protection”) and (“high school” or “teen” or “teenager” or “adolescent”) and limited the analysis to English studies reporting data on sunscreen use in U.S. high school students up to November 2021.

A total of 20 studies were included in the final review. The study populations ranged in number from 208 to 24,645. Of 11 studies that examined gender, all showed increased sunscreen use in females compared with males. Of five studies that examined age, all showed increased sunscreen use in younger adolescents, compared with their older counterparts.

Of four studies that examined the role of ethnicity on sunscreen use, White students were more likely to use sunscreen, compared with their peers of other ethnicities. “This may be due to perceived sun sensitivity, as [these four studies] also showed increased sunscreen use in populations that believed were more susceptible to sun damage,” the researchers wrote in their abstract.

Wavebreakmedia Ltd/Thinkstock

In other findings, two studies that examined perceived self-efficacy concluded that higher levels of sunscreen use correlated with higher self-efficacy, while four studies concluded that high school students were more likely to use sunscreen if their parents encouraged them the wear it or if the parent used it themselves.

“With 40%-50% of ultraviolet damage being done before the age of 20, it’s crucial that we find ways to educate adolescents on the importance of sunscreen use and target those populations who were found to rarely use sunscreen in our study,” Ms. Stevens said.

In one outreach program, Sun Protection Outreach Teaching by Students (SPOTS), medical students visit middle and high schools to educate them about the importance of practicing sun protection. The program began as a collaboration between Saint Louis University and Washington University in St. Louis, but has expanded nationwide. Ms. Stevens described SPOTS as “a great way for medical students to present the information to middle and high school students in a way that is engaging and interactive.”

The researchers reported having no disclosures.

Among U.S. high school students, males and non-Whites are at greatest risk for not using sunscreen, a cornerstone of skin cancer prevention, according to results from a systematic review.

“We know that skin cancer is one of the most common malignancies in the world, and sun protection methods such as sunscreen make it highly preventable,” first author Carly R. Stevens, a student at Tulane University, New Orleans, said in an interview. “This study demonstrates the adolescent populations that are most vulnerable to sun damage and how we can help mitigate their risk of developing skin cancer through education methods, such as Sun Protection Outreach Teaching by Students.”  

Ms. Stevens and coauthors presented the findings during a poster session at the annual meeting of the Society for Pediatric Dermatology.

To investigate predictors of sunscreen use among high school students, they searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science using the terms (“sunscreen” or “SPF” or “sun protection”) and (“high school” or “teen” or “teenager” or “adolescent”) and limited the analysis to English studies reporting data on sunscreen use in U.S. high school students up to November 2021.

A total of 20 studies were included in the final review. The study populations ranged in number from 208 to 24,645. Of 11 studies that examined gender, all showed increased sunscreen use in females compared with males. Of five studies that examined age, all showed increased sunscreen use in younger adolescents, compared with their older counterparts.

Of four studies that examined the role of ethnicity on sunscreen use, White students were more likely to use sunscreen, compared with their peers of other ethnicities. “This may be due to perceived sun sensitivity, as [these four studies] also showed increased sunscreen use in populations that believed were more susceptible to sun damage,” the researchers wrote in their abstract.

Wavebreakmedia Ltd/Thinkstock

In other findings, two studies that examined perceived self-efficacy concluded that higher levels of sunscreen use correlated with higher self-efficacy, while four studies concluded that high school students were more likely to use sunscreen if their parents encouraged them the wear it or if the parent used it themselves.

“With 40%-50% of ultraviolet damage being done before the age of 20, it’s crucial that we find ways to educate adolescents on the importance of sunscreen use and target those populations who were found to rarely use sunscreen in our study,” Ms. Stevens said.

In one outreach program, Sun Protection Outreach Teaching by Students (SPOTS), medical students visit middle and high schools to educate them about the importance of practicing sun protection. The program began as a collaboration between Saint Louis University and Washington University in St. Louis, but has expanded nationwide. Ms. Stevens described SPOTS as “a great way for medical students to present the information to middle and high school students in a way that is engaging and interactive.”

The researchers reported having no disclosures.

Experience with long COVID has shone a spotlight on persistent Lyme disease and other often debilitating chronic illnesses that follow known or suspected infections – and on the urgent need for a common and well-funded research agenda, education of physicians, growth of multidisciplinary clinics, and financially supported clinical care.

“We critically need to understand the epidemiology and pathogenesis of chronic symptoms, and identify more effective ways to manage, treat, and potentially cure these illnesses,” Lyle Petersen, MD, MPH, director of the division of vector-borne diseases at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said at the start of a 2-day National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) workshop, “Toward a Common Research Agenda in Infection-Associated Chronic Illnesses.”

Thinking about infection-associated chronic illnesses as an entity – one predicated on commonalities in chronic symptoms and in leading hypotheses for causes – represents a paradigm shift that researchers and patient advocates said can avoid research redundancies and is essential to address what the NASEM calls an overlooked, growing public health problem.

An estimated 2 million people in the United States are living with what’s called posttreatment Lyme disease (PTLD) – a subset of patients with persistent or chronic Lyme disease – and an estimated 1.7-3.3 million people in the United States have diagnoses of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). More than 700,000 people are living with multiple sclerosis. And as of January 2023, 11% of people in the United States reported having long COVID symptoms; the incidence of long COVID is currently estimated at 10%-30% of nonhospitalized cases of COVID-19.

These illnesses “have come under one umbrella,” said Avindra Nath, MD, clinical director of the National Institute of Neurologic Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), Bethesda, Md.

Dr. Nath

Persistent infection, viral reactivation

RNA viral infections can lead to persistent inflammation and dysregulated immunity, with or without viral persistence over time, Timothy J. Henrich, MD, MMSc, associate professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, said in a keynote address.

Research on Ebola survivors has documented long-lasting inflammation and severe immune dysfunction 2 years after infection, for instance. And it’s well known that HIV-1 leads to aberrant immune responses, inflammation, and organ damage despite antiretroviral therapy, said Dr. Henrich, who leads a laboratory/research group that studies approaches to HIV-1 cure and PET-based imaging approaches to characterize viral reservoirs and immune sequelae.

Viral persistence, which can be difficult to measure, has also been documented in Ebola survivors. And in patients living with HIV-1, HIV-1 RNA and protein expression have been shown to persist, again despite antiretroviral therapy. The UCSF Long-Term Immunological Impact of Novel Coronavirus (LIINC) study, for which Dr. Henrich is the principal investigator, found spike RNA in colorectal tissue more than 22 months post COVID, and other research documented viral protein in gut tissue for up to 6 months, he said.

“I think we’re appreciating now, in at least the scientific and treatment community, that there’s a potential for ‘acute’ infections to exhibit some degree of persistence leading to clinical morbidity,” said Dr. Henrich, one of several speakers to describe reports of pathogen persistence. Regarding long COVID, its “etiology is likely heterogeneous,” he said, but persistence of SARS-CoV-2 “may lay behind” other described mechanisms, from clotting/microvascular dysfunction to inflammation and tissue damage to immune dysregulation.

Reactivation of existing latent viral infections in the setting of new acute microbial illness may also play an etiologic role in chronic illnesses, Dr. Henrich said. Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) reactivation has been shown in some studies, including their UCSF COVID-19 cohort, to be associated with long COVID.

“Physicians have been trained to be skeptical about the role [of latent viral infections],” Michael Peluso, MD, an infectious disease physician and assistant professor at UCSF, said during a talk on viral reactivation. This skepticism needs to be “reexamined and overcome,” he said.

Herpesviruses have frequently been associated with ME/CFS, he noted. And evidence of a strong association between EBV and multiple sclerosis came recently from a prospective study of 10 million military recruits that found a 32-fold increased risk of MS after EBV infection but no increase after infection with other viruses, Dr. Peluso and Dr. Henrich both noted.
 

Research needs, treatment trials

Research needs are vast: The need to learn more about the mechanisms of pathogen persistence and immune evasion, for instance, and the need for more biomarker studies, more imaging studies and tissue analyses, more study of microbiome composition and activity, and continued development and application of metagenomic next-generation sequencing.

Workshop participants also spoke of the need to better understand the molecular mimicry that can occur between pathogen-produced proteins and self-antigens, for instance, and the effects of inflammation and infection-related immune changes on neuronal and microglial function in the brain.

“We should perform similar forms of analysis [across] patients with different infection-associated chronic conditions,” said Amy Proal, PhD, president of the PolyBio Research Foundation, which funds research on infection-associated chronic infections. And within individual conditions and well-characterized study groups “we should perform many different forms of analysis … so we can define endotypes and get more solid biomarkers so that industry [will have more confidence] to run clinical trials.”

In the meantime, patients need fast-moving treatment trials for long COVID, long Lyme, and other infection-associated chronic illnesses, speakers emphasized. “We all agree that treatment trials are overdue,” said the NINDS’ Dr. Nath. “We can’t afford to wait for another decade until we understand all the mechanisms, but rather we can do clinical trials based on what we understand now and study the pathophysiology in the context of the clinical trials.”

Just as was done with HIV, said Steven G. Deeks, MD, professor of medicine at UCSF, researchers must “practice experimental medicine” and select pathways and mechanisms of interest, interrupt those pathways in a controlled manner, and assess impact. “Much of this can be done by repurposing existing drugs,” he said, like antivirals for persistent viral infection, EBV-directed therapies for EBV reactivation, anti-inflammatory drugs for inflammation, B–cell-directed therapies for autoantibodies, and antiplatelet drugs for microvascular disease.

When done correctly, he said, such “probe” studies can deepen mechanistic understandings, lead to biomarkers, and provide proof-of-concept that “will encourage massive investment in developing new therapies” for long COVID and other infection-associated chronic illnesses.

Trials of treatments for long COVID “are starting, so I’m optimistic,” said Dr. Deeks, an expert on HIV pathogenesis and treatment and a principal investigator of the Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER) study. Among the trials: A study of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) for neurologic long COVID; a study of an anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody that can deplete tissue/cellular reservoirs of viral particles (replicating or not); and a study evaluating baricitinib (Olumiant), a Janus kinase inhibitor, for neurocognitive impairment and cardiopulmonary symptoms of long COVID.

Alessio Fasano, MD, professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School and professor of nutrition at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, described at the workshop how he began investigating the use of larazotide acetate – an inhibitor of the protein zonulin, which increases intestinal permeability – in children with COVID-19 Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome (MIS-C) after learning that SARS-CoV-2 viral particles persist in the gastrointestinal tract, causing dysbiosis and zonulin upregulation.

In an ongoing phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, the agent thus far has expedited the resolution of gastrointestinal symptoms and clearance of spike protein from the circulation, he said. A phase 2 trial of the agent for pediatric patients with long COVID and SARS-CoV-2 antigenemia is underway. “What if we were to stop [chains of events] by stopping the passage of elements from the virus into circulation?’ he said.

In the realm of Lyme disease, a recently launched Clinical Trials Network for Lyme and Other Tick-Borne Diseases has awarded pilot study grants to evaluate treatments aimed at a variety of possible disease mechanisms that, notably, are similar to those of other chronic illnesses: persistence of infection or remnants of infection, immune dysregulation and autoimmune reactions, neural dysfunction, and gut microbiome changes. (Microclots and mitochondrial dysfunction have not been as well studied in Lyme.)

Current and upcoming studies include evaluations of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation for those with persistent Lyme fatigue, transcranial direct current stimulation with cognitive retraining for Lyme brain fog, and tetracycline for PTLD, said Brian Fallon, MD, MPH, professor of clinical psychiatry at Columbia University, New York, who directs the Lyme & Tick-Borne Diseases Research Center and the coordinating center of the new network.

Columbia University Irving Medical Center

Calls for a new NIH center and patient involvement

Patients and patient advocacy organizations have played a vital role in research thus far: They’ve documented post-COVID symptoms that academic researchers said they would not otherwise have known of. Leaders of the Patient-Led Research Collaborative have coauthored published reviews with leading long COVID experts. And patients with tick-borne illnesses have enrolled in the MyLymeData patient registry run by LymeDisease.org, which has documented patient-experienced efficacy of alternative treatments and described antibiotic responders and nonresponders.

At the workshop, they shared findings alongside academic experts, and researchers called for their continued involvement. “Patient engagement at every step of the research process is critical,” Dr. Nath said.

“We need to ensure that research is reflective of lived experiences … and [that we’re] accelerating clinical trials of therapeutics that are of priority to the patient community,” said Lisa McCorkell, cofounder of the long COVID-focused Patient-Led Research Collaborative.

Ms. McCorkell also called for the creation of an office for infection-associated chronic illnesses in the NIH director’s office. Others voiced their support. “I think it’s a great idea to have an NIH center for infection-associated chronic illnesses,” said Dr. Fallon. “I think it would have a profound impact.”

The other great need, of course, is funding. “We have ideas, we have drugs that can be repurposed, we have a highly informed and engaged community that will enroll in and be retained in studies, and we have outcomes we can measure,” Dr. Deeks said. “What we’re missing is industry engagement and funding. We need massive engagement from the NIH.”
 

Real-world treatment needs

In the meantime, patients are seeking treatment, and “clinicians need to have uncertainty tolerance” and try multiple treatments simultaneously, said David Putrino, PT, PhD, director of rehabilitation innovation for the Mount Sinai Health System and professor of rehabilitation and human performance at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York. He oversees a multidisciplinary hybrid clinical care research center that has seen over 1,500 patients with long COVID and is beginning to see patients with other infection-associated chronic illnesses.

Claudia Paul

It’s a model that should be replicated to help fill the “enormous unmet clinical need” of patients with infection-associated chronic illness, said Peter Rowe, MD, professor of pediatrics at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and an expert on ME/CFS. And “as we request [more research funding], we will also need [financial] support for clinical care,” he emphasized, to provide equitable access for patients and to attract treating physicians.

Moreover, said Linda Geng, MD, PhD, the culture of stigma needs to change. Right now, patients with long COVID often feel dismissed not only by friends, families, and coworkers, but by clinicians who find it find it hard “to grasp that this is real and a biological condition.”

And it’s not just conditions such as long COVID that are stigmatized, but treatments as well, she said. For instance, some clinicians view low-dose naltrexone, a treatment increasingly being used for inflammation, with suspicion because it is used for opioid use disorder and alcohol use disorder – or because the “low-dose” label summons mistrust of homeopathy. “Even with therapies, there are preconceived notions and biases,” said Dr. Geng, cofounder and codirector of the Stanford (Calif.) Long COVID program.

“What almost killed me,” said Meghan O’Rourke, who has ongoing effects from long-undiagnosed tick-borne illness, “was the invisibility of the illness.” Ms. O’Rourke teaches at Yale University and is the author of “The Invisible Kingdom: Reimagining Chronic Illness.”

Teaching young physicians about these illnesses would help, she and others said. During a question and answer session, Dr. Putrino shared that the Icahn School of Medicine has recently committed to “create a complex chronic illness medical curriculum” that will impact medical education from the first year of medical school through residencies. Dr. Putrino said his team is also working on materials to help other clinics develop care models similar to those at his Mount Sinai clinic.

The NASEM workshop did not collect or require disclosures of its participants.

Experience with long COVID has shone a spotlight on persistent Lyme disease and other often debilitating chronic illnesses that follow known or suspected infections – and on the urgent need for a common and well-funded research agenda, education of physicians, growth of multidisciplinary clinics, and financially supported clinical care.

“We critically need to understand the epidemiology and pathogenesis of chronic symptoms, and identify more effective ways to manage, treat, and potentially cure these illnesses,” Lyle Petersen, MD, MPH, director of the division of vector-borne diseases at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said at the start of a 2-day National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) workshop, “Toward a Common Research Agenda in Infection-Associated Chronic Illnesses.”

Thinking about infection-associated chronic illnesses as an entity – one predicated on commonalities in chronic symptoms and in leading hypotheses for causes – represents a paradigm shift that researchers and patient advocates said can avoid research redundancies and is essential to address what the NASEM calls an overlooked, growing public health problem.

An estimated 2 million people in the United States are living with what’s called posttreatment Lyme disease (PTLD) – a subset of patients with persistent or chronic Lyme disease – and an estimated 1.7-3.3 million people in the United States have diagnoses of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). More than 700,000 people are living with multiple sclerosis. And as of January 2023, 11% of people in the United States reported having long COVID symptoms; the incidence of long COVID is currently estimated at 10%-30% of nonhospitalized cases of COVID-19.

These illnesses “have come under one umbrella,” said Avindra Nath, MD, clinical director of the National Institute of Neurologic Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), Bethesda, Md.

Dr. Nath

Persistent infection, viral reactivation

RNA viral infections can lead to persistent inflammation and dysregulated immunity, with or without viral persistence over time, Timothy J. Henrich, MD, MMSc, associate professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, said in a keynote address.

Research on Ebola survivors has documented long-lasting inflammation and severe immune dysfunction 2 years after infection, for instance. And it’s well known that HIV-1 leads to aberrant immune responses, inflammation, and organ damage despite antiretroviral therapy, said Dr. Henrich, who leads a laboratory/research group that studies approaches to HIV-1 cure and PET-based imaging approaches to characterize viral reservoirs and immune sequelae.

Viral persistence, which can be difficult to measure, has also been documented in Ebola survivors. And in patients living with HIV-1, HIV-1 RNA and protein expression have been shown to persist, again despite antiretroviral therapy. The UCSF Long-Term Immunological Impact of Novel Coronavirus (LIINC) study, for which Dr. Henrich is the principal investigator, found spike RNA in colorectal tissue more than 22 months post COVID, and other research documented viral protein in gut tissue for up to 6 months, he said.

“I think we’re appreciating now, in at least the scientific and treatment community, that there’s a potential for ‘acute’ infections to exhibit some degree of persistence leading to clinical morbidity,” said Dr. Henrich, one of several speakers to describe reports of pathogen persistence. Regarding long COVID, its “etiology is likely heterogeneous,” he said, but persistence of SARS-CoV-2 “may lay behind” other described mechanisms, from clotting/microvascular dysfunction to inflammation and tissue damage to immune dysregulation.

Reactivation of existing latent viral infections in the setting of new acute microbial illness may also play an etiologic role in chronic illnesses, Dr. Henrich said. Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) reactivation has been shown in some studies, including their UCSF COVID-19 cohort, to be associated with long COVID.

“Physicians have been trained to be skeptical about the role [of latent viral infections],” Michael Peluso, MD, an infectious disease physician and assistant professor at UCSF, said during a talk on viral reactivation. This skepticism needs to be “reexamined and overcome,” he said.

Herpesviruses have frequently been associated with ME/CFS, he noted. And evidence of a strong association between EBV and multiple sclerosis came recently from a prospective study of 10 million military recruits that found a 32-fold increased risk of MS after EBV infection but no increase after infection with other viruses, Dr. Peluso and Dr. Henrich both noted.
 

Research needs, treatment trials

Research needs are vast: The need to learn more about the mechanisms of pathogen persistence and immune evasion, for instance, and the need for more biomarker studies, more imaging studies and tissue analyses, more study of microbiome composition and activity, and continued development and application of metagenomic next-generation sequencing.

Workshop participants also spoke of the need to better understand the molecular mimicry that can occur between pathogen-produced proteins and self-antigens, for instance, and the effects of inflammation and infection-related immune changes on neuronal and microglial function in the brain.

“We should perform similar forms of analysis [across] patients with different infection-associated chronic conditions,” said Amy Proal, PhD, president of the PolyBio Research Foundation, which funds research on infection-associated chronic infections. And within individual conditions and well-characterized study groups “we should perform many different forms of analysis … so we can define endotypes and get more solid biomarkers so that industry [will have more confidence] to run clinical trials.”

In the meantime, patients need fast-moving treatment trials for long COVID, long Lyme, and other infection-associated chronic illnesses, speakers emphasized. “We all agree that treatment trials are overdue,” said the NINDS’ Dr. Nath. “We can’t afford to wait for another decade until we understand all the mechanisms, but rather we can do clinical trials based on what we understand now and study the pathophysiology in the context of the clinical trials.”

Just as was done with HIV, said Steven G. Deeks, MD, professor of medicine at UCSF, researchers must “practice experimental medicine” and select pathways and mechanisms of interest, interrupt those pathways in a controlled manner, and assess impact. “Much of this can be done by repurposing existing drugs,” he said, like antivirals for persistent viral infection, EBV-directed therapies for EBV reactivation, anti-inflammatory drugs for inflammation, B–cell-directed therapies for autoantibodies, and antiplatelet drugs for microvascular disease.

When done correctly, he said, such “probe” studies can deepen mechanistic understandings, lead to biomarkers, and provide proof-of-concept that “will encourage massive investment in developing new therapies” for long COVID and other infection-associated chronic illnesses.

Trials of treatments for long COVID “are starting, so I’m optimistic,” said Dr. Deeks, an expert on HIV pathogenesis and treatment and a principal investigator of the Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER) study. Among the trials: A study of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) for neurologic long COVID; a study of an anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody that can deplete tissue/cellular reservoirs of viral particles (replicating or not); and a study evaluating baricitinib (Olumiant), a Janus kinase inhibitor, for neurocognitive impairment and cardiopulmonary symptoms of long COVID.

Alessio Fasano, MD, professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School and professor of nutrition at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, described at the workshop how he began investigating the use of larazotide acetate – an inhibitor of the protein zonulin, which increases intestinal permeability – in children with COVID-19 Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome (MIS-C) after learning that SARS-CoV-2 viral particles persist in the gastrointestinal tract, causing dysbiosis and zonulin upregulation.

In an ongoing phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, the agent thus far has expedited the resolution of gastrointestinal symptoms and clearance of spike protein from the circulation, he said. A phase 2 trial of the agent for pediatric patients with long COVID and SARS-CoV-2 antigenemia is underway. “What if we were to stop [chains of events] by stopping the passage of elements from the virus into circulation?’ he said.

In the realm of Lyme disease, a recently launched Clinical Trials Network for Lyme and Other Tick-Borne Diseases has awarded pilot study grants to evaluate treatments aimed at a variety of possible disease mechanisms that, notably, are similar to those of other chronic illnesses: persistence of infection or remnants of infection, immune dysregulation and autoimmune reactions, neural dysfunction, and gut microbiome changes. (Microclots and mitochondrial dysfunction have not been as well studied in Lyme.)

Current and upcoming studies include evaluations of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation for those with persistent Lyme fatigue, transcranial direct current stimulation with cognitive retraining for Lyme brain fog, and tetracycline for PTLD, said Brian Fallon, MD, MPH, professor of clinical psychiatry at Columbia University, New York, who directs the Lyme & Tick-Borne Diseases Research Center and the coordinating center of the new network.

Columbia University Irving Medical Center

Calls for a new NIH center and patient involvement

Patients and patient advocacy organizations have played a vital role in research thus far: They’ve documented post-COVID symptoms that academic researchers said they would not otherwise have known of. Leaders of the Patient-Led Research Collaborative have coauthored published reviews with leading long COVID experts. And patients with tick-borne illnesses have enrolled in the MyLymeData patient registry run by LymeDisease.org, which has documented patient-experienced efficacy of alternative treatments and described antibiotic responders and nonresponders.

At the workshop, they shared findings alongside academic experts, and researchers called for their continued involvement. “Patient engagement at every step of the research process is critical,” Dr. Nath said.

“We need to ensure that research is reflective of lived experiences … and [that we’re] accelerating clinical trials of therapeutics that are of priority to the patient community,” said Lisa McCorkell, cofounder of the long COVID-focused Patient-Led Research Collaborative.

Ms. McCorkell also called for the creation of an office for infection-associated chronic illnesses in the NIH director’s office. Others voiced their support. “I think it’s a great idea to have an NIH center for infection-associated chronic illnesses,” said Dr. Fallon. “I think it would have a profound impact.”

The other great need, of course, is funding. “We have ideas, we have drugs that can be repurposed, we have a highly informed and engaged community that will enroll in and be retained in studies, and we have outcomes we can measure,” Dr. Deeks said. “What we’re missing is industry engagement and funding. We need massive engagement from the NIH.”
 

Real-world treatment needs

In the meantime, patients are seeking treatment, and “clinicians need to have uncertainty tolerance” and try multiple treatments simultaneously, said David Putrino, PT, PhD, director of rehabilitation innovation for the Mount Sinai Health System and professor of rehabilitation and human performance at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York. He oversees a multidisciplinary hybrid clinical care research center that has seen over 1,500 patients with long COVID and is beginning to see patients with other infection-associated chronic illnesses.

Claudia Paul

It’s a model that should be replicated to help fill the “enormous unmet clinical need” of patients with infection-associated chronic illness, said Peter Rowe, MD, professor of pediatrics at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and an expert on ME/CFS. And “as we request [more research funding], we will also need [financial] support for clinical care,” he emphasized, to provide equitable access for patients and to attract treating physicians.

Moreover, said Linda Geng, MD, PhD, the culture of stigma needs to change. Right now, patients with long COVID often feel dismissed not only by friends, families, and coworkers, but by clinicians who find it find it hard “to grasp that this is real and a biological condition.”

And it’s not just conditions such as long COVID that are stigmatized, but treatments as well, she said. For instance, some clinicians view low-dose naltrexone, a treatment increasingly being used for inflammation, with suspicion because it is used for opioid use disorder and alcohol use disorder – or because the “low-dose” label summons mistrust of homeopathy. “Even with therapies, there are preconceived notions and biases,” said Dr. Geng, cofounder and codirector of the Stanford (Calif.) Long COVID program.

“What almost killed me,” said Meghan O’Rourke, who has ongoing effects from long-undiagnosed tick-borne illness, “was the invisibility of the illness.” Ms. O’Rourke teaches at Yale University and is the author of “The Invisible Kingdom: Reimagining Chronic Illness.”

Teaching young physicians about these illnesses would help, she and others said. During a question and answer session, Dr. Putrino shared that the Icahn School of Medicine has recently committed to “create a complex chronic illness medical curriculum” that will impact medical education from the first year of medical school through residencies. Dr. Putrino said his team is also working on materials to help other clinics develop care models similar to those at his Mount Sinai clinic.

The NASEM workshop did not collect or require disclosures of its participants.

Experience with long COVID has shone a spotlight on persistent Lyme disease and other often debilitating chronic illnesses that follow known or suspected infections – and on the urgent need for a common and well-funded research agenda, education of physicians, growth of multidisciplinary clinics, and financially supported clinical care.

“We critically need to understand the epidemiology and pathogenesis of chronic symptoms, and identify more effective ways to manage, treat, and potentially cure these illnesses,” Lyle Petersen, MD, MPH, director of the division of vector-borne diseases at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said at the start of a 2-day National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) workshop, “Toward a Common Research Agenda in Infection-Associated Chronic Illnesses.”

Thinking about infection-associated chronic illnesses as an entity – one predicated on commonalities in chronic symptoms and in leading hypotheses for causes – represents a paradigm shift that researchers and patient advocates said can avoid research redundancies and is essential to address what the NASEM calls an overlooked, growing public health problem.

An estimated 2 million people in the United States are living with what’s called posttreatment Lyme disease (PTLD) – a subset of patients with persistent or chronic Lyme disease – and an estimated 1.7-3.3 million people in the United States have diagnoses of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS). More than 700,000 people are living with multiple sclerosis. And as of January 2023, 11% of people in the United States reported having long COVID symptoms; the incidence of long COVID is currently estimated at 10%-30% of nonhospitalized cases of COVID-19.

These illnesses “have come under one umbrella,” said Avindra Nath, MD, clinical director of the National Institute of Neurologic Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), Bethesda, Md.

Dr. Nath

Persistent infection, viral reactivation

RNA viral infections can lead to persistent inflammation and dysregulated immunity, with or without viral persistence over time, Timothy J. Henrich, MD, MMSc, associate professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, said in a keynote address.

Research on Ebola survivors has documented long-lasting inflammation and severe immune dysfunction 2 years after infection, for instance. And it’s well known that HIV-1 leads to aberrant immune responses, inflammation, and organ damage despite antiretroviral therapy, said Dr. Henrich, who leads a laboratory/research group that studies approaches to HIV-1 cure and PET-based imaging approaches to characterize viral reservoirs and immune sequelae.

Viral persistence, which can be difficult to measure, has also been documented in Ebola survivors. And in patients living with HIV-1, HIV-1 RNA and protein expression have been shown to persist, again despite antiretroviral therapy. The UCSF Long-Term Immunological Impact of Novel Coronavirus (LIINC) study, for which Dr. Henrich is the principal investigator, found spike RNA in colorectal tissue more than 22 months post COVID, and other research documented viral protein in gut tissue for up to 6 months, he said.

“I think we’re appreciating now, in at least the scientific and treatment community, that there’s a potential for ‘acute’ infections to exhibit some degree of persistence leading to clinical morbidity,” said Dr. Henrich, one of several speakers to describe reports of pathogen persistence. Regarding long COVID, its “etiology is likely heterogeneous,” he said, but persistence of SARS-CoV-2 “may lay behind” other described mechanisms, from clotting/microvascular dysfunction to inflammation and tissue damage to immune dysregulation.

Reactivation of existing latent viral infections in the setting of new acute microbial illness may also play an etiologic role in chronic illnesses, Dr. Henrich said. Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) reactivation has been shown in some studies, including their UCSF COVID-19 cohort, to be associated with long COVID.

“Physicians have been trained to be skeptical about the role [of latent viral infections],” Michael Peluso, MD, an infectious disease physician and assistant professor at UCSF, said during a talk on viral reactivation. This skepticism needs to be “reexamined and overcome,” he said.

Herpesviruses have frequently been associated with ME/CFS, he noted. And evidence of a strong association between EBV and multiple sclerosis came recently from a prospective study of 10 million military recruits that found a 32-fold increased risk of MS after EBV infection but no increase after infection with other viruses, Dr. Peluso and Dr. Henrich both noted.
 

Research needs, treatment trials

Research needs are vast: The need to learn more about the mechanisms of pathogen persistence and immune evasion, for instance, and the need for more biomarker studies, more imaging studies and tissue analyses, more study of microbiome composition and activity, and continued development and application of metagenomic next-generation sequencing.

Workshop participants also spoke of the need to better understand the molecular mimicry that can occur between pathogen-produced proteins and self-antigens, for instance, and the effects of inflammation and infection-related immune changes on neuronal and microglial function in the brain.

“We should perform similar forms of analysis [across] patients with different infection-associated chronic conditions,” said Amy Proal, PhD, president of the PolyBio Research Foundation, which funds research on infection-associated chronic infections. And within individual conditions and well-characterized study groups “we should perform many different forms of analysis … so we can define endotypes and get more solid biomarkers so that industry [will have more confidence] to run clinical trials.”

In the meantime, patients need fast-moving treatment trials for long COVID, long Lyme, and other infection-associated chronic illnesses, speakers emphasized. “We all agree that treatment trials are overdue,” said the NINDS’ Dr. Nath. “We can’t afford to wait for another decade until we understand all the mechanisms, but rather we can do clinical trials based on what we understand now and study the pathophysiology in the context of the clinical trials.”

Just as was done with HIV, said Steven G. Deeks, MD, professor of medicine at UCSF, researchers must “practice experimental medicine” and select pathways and mechanisms of interest, interrupt those pathways in a controlled manner, and assess impact. “Much of this can be done by repurposing existing drugs,” he said, like antivirals for persistent viral infection, EBV-directed therapies for EBV reactivation, anti-inflammatory drugs for inflammation, B–cell-directed therapies for autoantibodies, and antiplatelet drugs for microvascular disease.

When done correctly, he said, such “probe” studies can deepen mechanistic understandings, lead to biomarkers, and provide proof-of-concept that “will encourage massive investment in developing new therapies” for long COVID and other infection-associated chronic illnesses.

Trials of treatments for long COVID “are starting, so I’m optimistic,” said Dr. Deeks, an expert on HIV pathogenesis and treatment and a principal investigator of the Researching COVID to Enhance Recovery (RECOVER) study. Among the trials: A study of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) for neurologic long COVID; a study of an anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody that can deplete tissue/cellular reservoirs of viral particles (replicating or not); and a study evaluating baricitinib (Olumiant), a Janus kinase inhibitor, for neurocognitive impairment and cardiopulmonary symptoms of long COVID.

Alessio Fasano, MD, professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School and professor of nutrition at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, described at the workshop how he began investigating the use of larazotide acetate – an inhibitor of the protein zonulin, which increases intestinal permeability – in children with COVID-19 Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome (MIS-C) after learning that SARS-CoV-2 viral particles persist in the gastrointestinal tract, causing dysbiosis and zonulin upregulation.

In an ongoing phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, the agent thus far has expedited the resolution of gastrointestinal symptoms and clearance of spike protein from the circulation, he said. A phase 2 trial of the agent for pediatric patients with long COVID and SARS-CoV-2 antigenemia is underway. “What if we were to stop [chains of events] by stopping the passage of elements from the virus into circulation?’ he said.

In the realm of Lyme disease, a recently launched Clinical Trials Network for Lyme and Other Tick-Borne Diseases has awarded pilot study grants to evaluate treatments aimed at a variety of possible disease mechanisms that, notably, are similar to those of other chronic illnesses: persistence of infection or remnants of infection, immune dysregulation and autoimmune reactions, neural dysfunction, and gut microbiome changes. (Microclots and mitochondrial dysfunction have not been as well studied in Lyme.)

Current and upcoming studies include evaluations of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation for those with persistent Lyme fatigue, transcranial direct current stimulation with cognitive retraining for Lyme brain fog, and tetracycline for PTLD, said Brian Fallon, MD, MPH, professor of clinical psychiatry at Columbia University, New York, who directs the Lyme & Tick-Borne Diseases Research Center and the coordinating center of the new network.

Columbia University Irving Medical Center

Calls for a new NIH center and patient involvement

Patients and patient advocacy organizations have played a vital role in research thus far: They’ve documented post-COVID symptoms that academic researchers said they would not otherwise have known of. Leaders of the Patient-Led Research Collaborative have coauthored published reviews with leading long COVID experts. And patients with tick-borne illnesses have enrolled in the MyLymeData patient registry run by LymeDisease.org, which has documented patient-experienced efficacy of alternative treatments and described antibiotic responders and nonresponders.

At the workshop, they shared findings alongside academic experts, and researchers called for their continued involvement. “Patient engagement at every step of the research process is critical,” Dr. Nath said.

“We need to ensure that research is reflective of lived experiences … and [that we’re] accelerating clinical trials of therapeutics that are of priority to the patient community,” said Lisa McCorkell, cofounder of the long COVID-focused Patient-Led Research Collaborative.

Ms. McCorkell also called for the creation of an office for infection-associated chronic illnesses in the NIH director’s office. Others voiced their support. “I think it’s a great idea to have an NIH center for infection-associated chronic illnesses,” said Dr. Fallon. “I think it would have a profound impact.”

The other great need, of course, is funding. “We have ideas, we have drugs that can be repurposed, we have a highly informed and engaged community that will enroll in and be retained in studies, and we have outcomes we can measure,” Dr. Deeks said. “What we’re missing is industry engagement and funding. We need massive engagement from the NIH.”
 

Real-world treatment needs

In the meantime, patients are seeking treatment, and “clinicians need to have uncertainty tolerance” and try multiple treatments simultaneously, said David Putrino, PT, PhD, director of rehabilitation innovation for the Mount Sinai Health System and professor of rehabilitation and human performance at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York. He oversees a multidisciplinary hybrid clinical care research center that has seen over 1,500 patients with long COVID and is beginning to see patients with other infection-associated chronic illnesses.

Claudia Paul

It’s a model that should be replicated to help fill the “enormous unmet clinical need” of patients with infection-associated chronic illness, said Peter Rowe, MD, professor of pediatrics at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and an expert on ME/CFS. And “as we request [more research funding], we will also need [financial] support for clinical care,” he emphasized, to provide equitable access for patients and to attract treating physicians.

Moreover, said Linda Geng, MD, PhD, the culture of stigma needs to change. Right now, patients with long COVID often feel dismissed not only by friends, families, and coworkers, but by clinicians who find it find it hard “to grasp that this is real and a biological condition.”

And it’s not just conditions such as long COVID that are stigmatized, but treatments as well, she said. For instance, some clinicians view low-dose naltrexone, a treatment increasingly being used for inflammation, with suspicion because it is used for opioid use disorder and alcohol use disorder – or because the “low-dose” label summons mistrust of homeopathy. “Even with therapies, there are preconceived notions and biases,” said Dr. Geng, cofounder and codirector of the Stanford (Calif.) Long COVID program.

“What almost killed me,” said Meghan O’Rourke, who has ongoing effects from long-undiagnosed tick-borne illness, “was the invisibility of the illness.” Ms. O’Rourke teaches at Yale University and is the author of “The Invisible Kingdom: Reimagining Chronic Illness.”

Teaching young physicians about these illnesses would help, she and others said. During a question and answer session, Dr. Putrino shared that the Icahn School of Medicine has recently committed to “create a complex chronic illness medical curriculum” that will impact medical education from the first year of medical school through residencies. Dr. Putrino said his team is also working on materials to help other clinics develop care models similar to those at his Mount Sinai clinic.

The NASEM workshop did not collect or require disclosures of its participants.

Three California nurse practitioners with doctorates (DNP) have sued the state over its law that only physicians can call themselves doctors, saying it violates their first amendment right to use the honorific title without fear of regulatory repercussions.

The case highlights ongoing scope-creep battles as the American Medical Association tries to preserve the physician-led team model and nursing organizations and some lawmakers push for greater autonomy for allied professionals.

In the complaint filed in district court in June, plaintiffs Jacqueline Palmer, DNP, Heather Lewis, DNP, and Rodolfo Jaravata-Hanson, DNP, say they fear the state will sanction them. They note that “Doctor Sarah,” another DNP, was fined nearly $20,000 by the state last November for false advertising and fraud after using the moniker in her online advertising and social media accounts.

The fine was part of a settlement that the DNP, Sarah Erny, reached with the state to resolve allegations that she failed to identify her supervising physician and inform the public that she was not a medical doctor.

Under California’s Medical Practice Act, individuals cannot refer to themselves as “doctor, physician, or any other terms or letters indicating or implying that he or she is a physician and surgeon ... without having ... a certificate as a physician and surgeon.”

Instead, nurse practitioners certified by the California Board of Registered Nursing may use titles like “Certified Nurse Practitioner” and “Advanced Practice Registered Nurse,” corresponding letters such as APRN-CNP, RN, and NP, and phrases like pediatric nurse practitioner to identify specialization.

Individuals who misrepresent themselves are subject to misdemeanor charges and civil penalties.

The nonprofit Pacific Legal Foundation represents the plaintiffs. In court records, its attorneys argue that after “years earning their advanced degrees and qualifications ... they should be able to speak truthfully about them in their workplaces, on their business cards, the Internet, and social media, so long as they clarify that they are nurse practitioners.”

State lawmakers’ attempts to clarify the roles of physicians and nurse practitioners have seen mixed results. Florida legislators recently passed a bill to prevent advanced practice nurses from using the honorific title, reserving it only for MDs and DOs. Gov. Ron DeSantis vetoed it last month.

In May, Georgia lawmakers passed the Health Care Practitioners Truth and Transparency Act. It requires advanced practice nurses and physician assistants with doctoral degrees who refer to themselves as doctors in a clinical setting to state they are not medical doctors or physicians.

Still, some health professionals say that the designation should only be used in academic settings or among peers, and that all doctoral degree holders should ditch the moniker at the bedside to ease patient communications.

Named as defendants in the suit are three state officials: California Attorney General Rob Bonta, state Medical Board President Kristina Lawson, and California Board of Registered Nursing Executive Officer Loretta Melby.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Three California nurse practitioners with doctorates (DNP) have sued the state over its law that only physicians can call themselves doctors, saying it violates their first amendment right to use the honorific title without fear of regulatory repercussions.

The case highlights ongoing scope-creep battles as the American Medical Association tries to preserve the physician-led team model and nursing organizations and some lawmakers push for greater autonomy for allied professionals.

In the complaint filed in district court in June, plaintiffs Jacqueline Palmer, DNP, Heather Lewis, DNP, and Rodolfo Jaravata-Hanson, DNP, say they fear the state will sanction them. They note that “Doctor Sarah,” another DNP, was fined nearly $20,000 by the state last November for false advertising and fraud after using the moniker in her online advertising and social media accounts.

The fine was part of a settlement that the DNP, Sarah Erny, reached with the state to resolve allegations that she failed to identify her supervising physician and inform the public that she was not a medical doctor.

Under California’s Medical Practice Act, individuals cannot refer to themselves as “doctor, physician, or any other terms or letters indicating or implying that he or she is a physician and surgeon ... without having ... a certificate as a physician and surgeon.”

Instead, nurse practitioners certified by the California Board of Registered Nursing may use titles like “Certified Nurse Practitioner” and “Advanced Practice Registered Nurse,” corresponding letters such as APRN-CNP, RN, and NP, and phrases like pediatric nurse practitioner to identify specialization.

Individuals who misrepresent themselves are subject to misdemeanor charges and civil penalties.

The nonprofit Pacific Legal Foundation represents the plaintiffs. In court records, its attorneys argue that after “years earning their advanced degrees and qualifications ... they should be able to speak truthfully about them in their workplaces, on their business cards, the Internet, and social media, so long as they clarify that they are nurse practitioners.”

State lawmakers’ attempts to clarify the roles of physicians and nurse practitioners have seen mixed results. Florida legislators recently passed a bill to prevent advanced practice nurses from using the honorific title, reserving it only for MDs and DOs. Gov. Ron DeSantis vetoed it last month.

In May, Georgia lawmakers passed the Health Care Practitioners Truth and Transparency Act. It requires advanced practice nurses and physician assistants with doctoral degrees who refer to themselves as doctors in a clinical setting to state they are not medical doctors or physicians.

Still, some health professionals say that the designation should only be used in academic settings or among peers, and that all doctoral degree holders should ditch the moniker at the bedside to ease patient communications.

Named as defendants in the suit are three state officials: California Attorney General Rob Bonta, state Medical Board President Kristina Lawson, and California Board of Registered Nursing Executive Officer Loretta Melby.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Three California nurse practitioners with doctorates (DNP) have sued the state over its law that only physicians can call themselves doctors, saying it violates their first amendment right to use the honorific title without fear of regulatory repercussions.

The case highlights ongoing scope-creep battles as the American Medical Association tries to preserve the physician-led team model and nursing organizations and some lawmakers push for greater autonomy for allied professionals.

In the complaint filed in district court in June, plaintiffs Jacqueline Palmer, DNP, Heather Lewis, DNP, and Rodolfo Jaravata-Hanson, DNP, say they fear the state will sanction them. They note that “Doctor Sarah,” another DNP, was fined nearly $20,000 by the state last November for false advertising and fraud after using the moniker in her online advertising and social media accounts.

The fine was part of a settlement that the DNP, Sarah Erny, reached with the state to resolve allegations that she failed to identify her supervising physician and inform the public that she was not a medical doctor.

Under California’s Medical Practice Act, individuals cannot refer to themselves as “doctor, physician, or any other terms or letters indicating or implying that he or she is a physician and surgeon ... without having ... a certificate as a physician and surgeon.”

Instead, nurse practitioners certified by the California Board of Registered Nursing may use titles like “Certified Nurse Practitioner” and “Advanced Practice Registered Nurse,” corresponding letters such as APRN-CNP, RN, and NP, and phrases like pediatric nurse practitioner to identify specialization.

Individuals who misrepresent themselves are subject to misdemeanor charges and civil penalties.

The nonprofit Pacific Legal Foundation represents the plaintiffs. In court records, its attorneys argue that after “years earning their advanced degrees and qualifications ... they should be able to speak truthfully about them in their workplaces, on their business cards, the Internet, and social media, so long as they clarify that they are nurse practitioners.”

State lawmakers’ attempts to clarify the roles of physicians and nurse practitioners have seen mixed results. Florida legislators recently passed a bill to prevent advanced practice nurses from using the honorific title, reserving it only for MDs and DOs. Gov. Ron DeSantis vetoed it last month.

In May, Georgia lawmakers passed the Health Care Practitioners Truth and Transparency Act. It requires advanced practice nurses and physician assistants with doctoral degrees who refer to themselves as doctors in a clinical setting to state they are not medical doctors or physicians.

Still, some health professionals say that the designation should only be used in academic settings or among peers, and that all doctoral degree holders should ditch the moniker at the bedside to ease patient communications.

Named as defendants in the suit are three state officials: California Attorney General Rob Bonta, state Medical Board President Kristina Lawson, and California Board of Registered Nursing Executive Officer Loretta Melby.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Several recent developments in Lyme disease treatment and diagnosis may pave the way forward for combating disease that persists following missed or delayed diagnoses or remains following standard treatment. These include combination therapy to address “persister” bacteria and diagnostic tests that test directly for the pathogen and/or indirectly test for host response, according to experts who presented at a 2-day National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine workshop on infection-associated chronic illnesses.

Research has shown that 60% of people who are infected and not treated during the early or early disseminated stages of Lyme disease go on to develop late Lyme arthritis, said John Aucott, MD, director of the Johns Hopkins Lyme Disease Clinical Research Center in Baltimore. And in the real world, there’s an additional category of patients: Those who are misdiagnosed and develop infection-related persistent symptoms – such as fatigue, brain fog/cognitive dysfunction, and musculoskeletal problems – that don’t match the “textbook schematic” involving late Lyme arthritis and late neurologic disease.

Moreover, of patients who are treated with protocols recommended by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), about 15% go on to develop persistent symptoms at 6 months – again, symptoms that don’t match textbook manifestations and do match symptoms of other infection-associated chronic illnesses. As a “research construct,” this has been coined posttreatment Lyme disease (PTLD), he said at the workshop, “Toward a Common Research Agenda in Infection-Associated Chronic Illnesses.”

(On a practical level, it is hard to know clinically who has early disseminated disease unless they have multiple erythema migrans rashes or neurologic or cardiac involvement, he said after the meeting.)

All this points to the need for tests that are sensitive and specific for diagnosis at all stages of infection and disease, he said in a talk on diagnostics. Currently available tests – those that fit into the widely used two-tiered enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, Western Blot serology testing – have significant limitations in sensitivity and specificity, including for acute infection when the body has not generated enough antibodies, yet treatment is most likely to succeed.
 

Move toward combination therapy research

Lyme disease is most commonly treated with doxycycline, and that’s problematic because the antibiotic is a microstatic whose efficacy relies on immune clearance of static bacteria, said Monica E. Embers, PhD, director of vector-borne disease at the Tulane National Primate Research Center and associate professor of immunology at Tulane University, New Orleans.

courtesy Tulane University-Paula Burch-Celentano

“But we know that Borrelia burgdorferi has the capability to evade the host immune response in almost every way possible. Persistence is the norm in an immunocompetent host ... [and] dormant bacteria/persisters are more tolerant of microstatic antibiotics,” she said.

Other considerations for antibiotic efficacy include the fact that B. burgdorferi survives for many months inside ticks without nutrient replenishment or replication, “so dormancy is part of their life cycle,” she said. Moreover, the bacteria can be found deep in connective tissues and joints.

The efficacy of accepted regimens of antibiotic treatment has been “a very contentious issue,” she said, noting that guidelines from the International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society “leave open the possibility for antibiotic retreatment when a chronic infection is judged to be a possible cause [of ongoing symptoms].”

The development of persister B. burgdorferi in the presence of antibiotics has been well studied in vitro, which has limitations, Dr. Embers said. But her group specializes in animal models and has shown persistence of antimicrobial-tolerant B. burgdorferi in tick-inoculated rhesus macaques 8-9 months after treatment with oral doxycycline.

“We [also] saw persistence of mild-moderate inflammation in the brain, peripheral nerves, spinal cord, joints and skeletal muscle, and in the heart,” Dr. Embers said, who coauthored a 2022 review of B. burgdorferi antimicrobial-tolerant persistence in Lyme disease and PTLD.

Her work has also shown that ceftriaxone, which is recommended by IDSA for patients with clinically evident neurological and/or cardiac involvement, does not clear infection in mice. “In general, single drugs have not been capable of clearing the infection, yet combinations show promise,” she said.

Dr. Embers has combed large drug libraries looking for combinations of antibiotics that employ different mechanisms of action in hopes of eliminating persister spirochetes. Certain combinations have shown promise in mice and have been tested in her rhesus macaque model; data analyses are underway.

Other research teams, such as that of Ying Zhang, MD, PhD, at Johns Hopkins, have similarly been screening combinations of antibiotics and other compounds, identifying candidates for further testing.

During a question and answer period, Dr. Embers said her team is also investigating the pathophysiology and long-term effects of tick-borne coinfections, including Bartonella, and is pursuing a hypothesis that infection with Borrelia allows Bartonella to cause more extensive disease and persist longer. “I think Lyme is at the core because of its ability to evade and suppress the immune response so effectively.”
 

Diagnostic possibilities, biomarkers for PTLD

Direct diagnostic tests for microbial nucleic acid and proteins “are promising alternatives for indirect serologic tests,” Dr. Aucott said. For instance, in addition to polymerase chain reaction tests, which “are making advances,” it may be possible to target the B. burgdorferi peptidoglycan for antigen detection.

Researchers have shown that peptidoglycan, a component of the B. burgdorferi cell envelope, is a persistent antigen in the synovial fluid of patients with Lyme arthritis who have been treated with oral and intravenous antibiotics, and that it likely contributes to inflammation.

“Maybe the infection is gone but parts of the bacteria are still there that are driving inflammation,” said Dr. Aucott, also associate professor of medicine at John Hopkins.

Researchers have also been looking at the host response to B. burgdorferi – including cytokines, chemokines, and autoantibiodies – to identify biomarkers for PTLD and to identify patients during posttreatment follow-up who are at increased risk of developing PTLD, with the hope of someday intervening. Persistently high levels of interleukin-23, CCL19, and interferon-alpha have each been associated in different studies with persistent symptoms after treatment, Dr. Aucott said.

In addition, metabolomics research is showing that patients with PTLD have metabolic fingerprints that are different from those who return to good health after treatment, and it may be possible to identify an epigenetic signature for Lyme disease. A project sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency called ECHO (Epigenetic Characterization and Observation) aims to identify epigenetic signatures of exposures to various threats, including B. burgdorferi.

“At the very proximal end of [indirectly testing for host response], there are modifications of the DNA that can occur in response to infectious insults ... and that changed DNA changes RNA expression and protein synthesis,” Dr. Aucott explained. DARPA’s project is “exciting because their goal [at DARPA] is to have a diagnostic test quickly as a result of this epigenetics work.”

Imaging research is also fast offering diagnostic opportunities, Dr. Aucott said. Levels of microglial activation on brain PET imaging have been found to correlate with PTLD, and a study at Johns Hopkins of multimodal neuroimaging with functional MRI and diffusion tensor imaging has shown distinct changes to white matter activation within the frontal lobe of patients with PTLD, compared with controls.

The NASEM workshop did not collect or require disclosures of its participants.

Several recent developments in Lyme disease treatment and diagnosis may pave the way forward for combating disease that persists following missed or delayed diagnoses or remains following standard treatment. These include combination therapy to address “persister” bacteria and diagnostic tests that test directly for the pathogen and/or indirectly test for host response, according to experts who presented at a 2-day National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine workshop on infection-associated chronic illnesses.

Research has shown that 60% of people who are infected and not treated during the early or early disseminated stages of Lyme disease go on to develop late Lyme arthritis, said John Aucott, MD, director of the Johns Hopkins Lyme Disease Clinical Research Center in Baltimore. And in the real world, there’s an additional category of patients: Those who are misdiagnosed and develop infection-related persistent symptoms – such as fatigue, brain fog/cognitive dysfunction, and musculoskeletal problems – that don’t match the “textbook schematic” involving late Lyme arthritis and late neurologic disease.

Moreover, of patients who are treated with protocols recommended by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), about 15% go on to develop persistent symptoms at 6 months – again, symptoms that don’t match textbook manifestations and do match symptoms of other infection-associated chronic illnesses. As a “research construct,” this has been coined posttreatment Lyme disease (PTLD), he said at the workshop, “Toward a Common Research Agenda in Infection-Associated Chronic Illnesses.”

(On a practical level, it is hard to know clinically who has early disseminated disease unless they have multiple erythema migrans rashes or neurologic or cardiac involvement, he said after the meeting.)

All this points to the need for tests that are sensitive and specific for diagnosis at all stages of infection and disease, he said in a talk on diagnostics. Currently available tests – those that fit into the widely used two-tiered enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, Western Blot serology testing – have significant limitations in sensitivity and specificity, including for acute infection when the body has not generated enough antibodies, yet treatment is most likely to succeed.
 

Move toward combination therapy research

Lyme disease is most commonly treated with doxycycline, and that’s problematic because the antibiotic is a microstatic whose efficacy relies on immune clearance of static bacteria, said Monica E. Embers, PhD, director of vector-borne disease at the Tulane National Primate Research Center and associate professor of immunology at Tulane University, New Orleans.

courtesy Tulane University-Paula Burch-Celentano

“But we know that Borrelia burgdorferi has the capability to evade the host immune response in almost every way possible. Persistence is the norm in an immunocompetent host ... [and] dormant bacteria/persisters are more tolerant of microstatic antibiotics,” she said.

Other considerations for antibiotic efficacy include the fact that B. burgdorferi survives for many months inside ticks without nutrient replenishment or replication, “so dormancy is part of their life cycle,” she said. Moreover, the bacteria can be found deep in connective tissues and joints.

The efficacy of accepted regimens of antibiotic treatment has been “a very contentious issue,” she said, noting that guidelines from the International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society “leave open the possibility for antibiotic retreatment when a chronic infection is judged to be a possible cause [of ongoing symptoms].”

The development of persister B. burgdorferi in the presence of antibiotics has been well studied in vitro, which has limitations, Dr. Embers said. But her group specializes in animal models and has shown persistence of antimicrobial-tolerant B. burgdorferi in tick-inoculated rhesus macaques 8-9 months after treatment with oral doxycycline.

“We [also] saw persistence of mild-moderate inflammation in the brain, peripheral nerves, spinal cord, joints and skeletal muscle, and in the heart,” Dr. Embers said, who coauthored a 2022 review of B. burgdorferi antimicrobial-tolerant persistence in Lyme disease and PTLD.

Her work has also shown that ceftriaxone, which is recommended by IDSA for patients with clinically evident neurological and/or cardiac involvement, does not clear infection in mice. “In general, single drugs have not been capable of clearing the infection, yet combinations show promise,” she said.

Dr. Embers has combed large drug libraries looking for combinations of antibiotics that employ different mechanisms of action in hopes of eliminating persister spirochetes. Certain combinations have shown promise in mice and have been tested in her rhesus macaque model; data analyses are underway.

Other research teams, such as that of Ying Zhang, MD, PhD, at Johns Hopkins, have similarly been screening combinations of antibiotics and other compounds, identifying candidates for further testing.

During a question and answer period, Dr. Embers said her team is also investigating the pathophysiology and long-term effects of tick-borne coinfections, including Bartonella, and is pursuing a hypothesis that infection with Borrelia allows Bartonella to cause more extensive disease and persist longer. “I think Lyme is at the core because of its ability to evade and suppress the immune response so effectively.”
 

Diagnostic possibilities, biomarkers for PTLD

Direct diagnostic tests for microbial nucleic acid and proteins “are promising alternatives for indirect serologic tests,” Dr. Aucott said. For instance, in addition to polymerase chain reaction tests, which “are making advances,” it may be possible to target the B. burgdorferi peptidoglycan for antigen detection.

Researchers have shown that peptidoglycan, a component of the B. burgdorferi cell envelope, is a persistent antigen in the synovial fluid of patients with Lyme arthritis who have been treated with oral and intravenous antibiotics, and that it likely contributes to inflammation.

“Maybe the infection is gone but parts of the bacteria are still there that are driving inflammation,” said Dr. Aucott, also associate professor of medicine at John Hopkins.

Researchers have also been looking at the host response to B. burgdorferi – including cytokines, chemokines, and autoantibiodies – to identify biomarkers for PTLD and to identify patients during posttreatment follow-up who are at increased risk of developing PTLD, with the hope of someday intervening. Persistently high levels of interleukin-23, CCL19, and interferon-alpha have each been associated in different studies with persistent symptoms after treatment, Dr. Aucott said.

In addition, metabolomics research is showing that patients with PTLD have metabolic fingerprints that are different from those who return to good health after treatment, and it may be possible to identify an epigenetic signature for Lyme disease. A project sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency called ECHO (Epigenetic Characterization and Observation) aims to identify epigenetic signatures of exposures to various threats, including B. burgdorferi.

“At the very proximal end of [indirectly testing for host response], there are modifications of the DNA that can occur in response to infectious insults ... and that changed DNA changes RNA expression and protein synthesis,” Dr. Aucott explained. DARPA’s project is “exciting because their goal [at DARPA] is to have a diagnostic test quickly as a result of this epigenetics work.”

Imaging research is also fast offering diagnostic opportunities, Dr. Aucott said. Levels of microglial activation on brain PET imaging have been found to correlate with PTLD, and a study at Johns Hopkins of multimodal neuroimaging with functional MRI and diffusion tensor imaging has shown distinct changes to white matter activation within the frontal lobe of patients with PTLD, compared with controls.

The NASEM workshop did not collect or require disclosures of its participants.

Several recent developments in Lyme disease treatment and diagnosis may pave the way forward for combating disease that persists following missed or delayed diagnoses or remains following standard treatment. These include combination therapy to address “persister” bacteria and diagnostic tests that test directly for the pathogen and/or indirectly test for host response, according to experts who presented at a 2-day National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine workshop on infection-associated chronic illnesses.

Research has shown that 60% of people who are infected and not treated during the early or early disseminated stages of Lyme disease go on to develop late Lyme arthritis, said John Aucott, MD, director of the Johns Hopkins Lyme Disease Clinical Research Center in Baltimore. And in the real world, there’s an additional category of patients: Those who are misdiagnosed and develop infection-related persistent symptoms – such as fatigue, brain fog/cognitive dysfunction, and musculoskeletal problems – that don’t match the “textbook schematic” involving late Lyme arthritis and late neurologic disease.

Moreover, of patients who are treated with protocols recommended by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), about 15% go on to develop persistent symptoms at 6 months – again, symptoms that don’t match textbook manifestations and do match symptoms of other infection-associated chronic illnesses. As a “research construct,” this has been coined posttreatment Lyme disease (PTLD), he said at the workshop, “Toward a Common Research Agenda in Infection-Associated Chronic Illnesses.”

(On a practical level, it is hard to know clinically who has early disseminated disease unless they have multiple erythema migrans rashes or neurologic or cardiac involvement, he said after the meeting.)

All this points to the need for tests that are sensitive and specific for diagnosis at all stages of infection and disease, he said in a talk on diagnostics. Currently available tests – those that fit into the widely used two-tiered enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, Western Blot serology testing – have significant limitations in sensitivity and specificity, including for acute infection when the body has not generated enough antibodies, yet treatment is most likely to succeed.
 

Move toward combination therapy research

Lyme disease is most commonly treated with doxycycline, and that’s problematic because the antibiotic is a microstatic whose efficacy relies on immune clearance of static bacteria, said Monica E. Embers, PhD, director of vector-borne disease at the Tulane National Primate Research Center and associate professor of immunology at Tulane University, New Orleans.

courtesy Tulane University-Paula Burch-Celentano

“But we know that Borrelia burgdorferi has the capability to evade the host immune response in almost every way possible. Persistence is the norm in an immunocompetent host ... [and] dormant bacteria/persisters are more tolerant of microstatic antibiotics,” she said.

Other considerations for antibiotic efficacy include the fact that B. burgdorferi survives for many months inside ticks without nutrient replenishment or replication, “so dormancy is part of their life cycle,” she said. Moreover, the bacteria can be found deep in connective tissues and joints.

The efficacy of accepted regimens of antibiotic treatment has been “a very contentious issue,” she said, noting that guidelines from the International Lyme and Associated Diseases Society “leave open the possibility for antibiotic retreatment when a chronic infection is judged to be a possible cause [of ongoing symptoms].”

The development of persister B. burgdorferi in the presence of antibiotics has been well studied in vitro, which has limitations, Dr. Embers said. But her group specializes in animal models and has shown persistence of antimicrobial-tolerant B. burgdorferi in tick-inoculated rhesus macaques 8-9 months after treatment with oral doxycycline.

“We [also] saw persistence of mild-moderate inflammation in the brain, peripheral nerves, spinal cord, joints and skeletal muscle, and in the heart,” Dr. Embers said, who coauthored a 2022 review of B. burgdorferi antimicrobial-tolerant persistence in Lyme disease and PTLD.

Her work has also shown that ceftriaxone, which is recommended by IDSA for patients with clinically evident neurological and/or cardiac involvement, does not clear infection in mice. “In general, single drugs have not been capable of clearing the infection, yet combinations show promise,” she said.

Dr. Embers has combed large drug libraries looking for combinations of antibiotics that employ different mechanisms of action in hopes of eliminating persister spirochetes. Certain combinations have shown promise in mice and have been tested in her rhesus macaque model; data analyses are underway.

Other research teams, such as that of Ying Zhang, MD, PhD, at Johns Hopkins, have similarly been screening combinations of antibiotics and other compounds, identifying candidates for further testing.

During a question and answer period, Dr. Embers said her team is also investigating the pathophysiology and long-term effects of tick-borne coinfections, including Bartonella, and is pursuing a hypothesis that infection with Borrelia allows Bartonella to cause more extensive disease and persist longer. “I think Lyme is at the core because of its ability to evade and suppress the immune response so effectively.”
 

Diagnostic possibilities, biomarkers for PTLD

Direct diagnostic tests for microbial nucleic acid and proteins “are promising alternatives for indirect serologic tests,” Dr. Aucott said. For instance, in addition to polymerase chain reaction tests, which “are making advances,” it may be possible to target the B. burgdorferi peptidoglycan for antigen detection.

Researchers have shown that peptidoglycan, a component of the B. burgdorferi cell envelope, is a persistent antigen in the synovial fluid of patients with Lyme arthritis who have been treated with oral and intravenous antibiotics, and that it likely contributes to inflammation.

“Maybe the infection is gone but parts of the bacteria are still there that are driving inflammation,” said Dr. Aucott, also associate professor of medicine at John Hopkins.

Researchers have also been looking at the host response to B. burgdorferi – including cytokines, chemokines, and autoantibiodies – to identify biomarkers for PTLD and to identify patients during posttreatment follow-up who are at increased risk of developing PTLD, with the hope of someday intervening. Persistently high levels of interleukin-23, CCL19, and interferon-alpha have each been associated in different studies with persistent symptoms after treatment, Dr. Aucott said.

In addition, metabolomics research is showing that patients with PTLD have metabolic fingerprints that are different from those who return to good health after treatment, and it may be possible to identify an epigenetic signature for Lyme disease. A project sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency called ECHO (Epigenetic Characterization and Observation) aims to identify epigenetic signatures of exposures to various threats, including B. burgdorferi.

“At the very proximal end of [indirectly testing for host response], there are modifications of the DNA that can occur in response to infectious insults ... and that changed DNA changes RNA expression and protein synthesis,” Dr. Aucott explained. DARPA’s project is “exciting because their goal [at DARPA] is to have a diagnostic test quickly as a result of this epigenetics work.”

Imaging research is also fast offering diagnostic opportunities, Dr. Aucott said. Levels of microglial activation on brain PET imaging have been found to correlate with PTLD, and a study at Johns Hopkins of multimodal neuroimaging with functional MRI and diffusion tensor imaging has shown distinct changes to white matter activation within the frontal lobe of patients with PTLD, compared with controls.

The NASEM workshop did not collect or require disclosures of its participants.

Physicians’ demonstrations of empathy toward their patients can decrease the sensation of pain. These are the results of a study, recently published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, that was conducted by a team led by neuroscientist Dan-Mikael Ellingsen, PhD, from Oslo University Hospital.

The researchers used functional MRI to scan the brains of 20 patients with chronic pain to investigate how a physician’s demeanor may affect patients’ sensitivity to pain, including effects in the central nervous system. During the scans, which were conducted in two sessions, the patients’ legs were exposed to stimuli that ranged from painless to moderately painful. The patients recorded perceived pain intensity using a scale. The physicians also underwent fMRI.

Half of the patients were subjected to the pain stimuli while alone; the other half were subjected to pain while in the presence of a physician. The latter group of patients was divided into two subgroups. Half of the patients had spoken to the accompanying physician before the examination. They discussed the history of the patient’s condition to date, among other things. The other half underwent the brain scans without any prior interaction with a physician.
 

Worse when alone

Dr. Ellingsen and his colleagues found that patients who were alone during the examination reported greater pain than those who were in the presence of a physician, even though they were subjected to stimuli of the same intensity. In instances in which the physician and patient had already spoken before the brain scan, patients additionally felt that the physician was empathetic and understood their pain. Furthermore, the physicians were better able to estimate the pain that their patients experienced.

The patients who had a physician by their side consistently experienced pain that was milder than the pain experienced by those who were alone. For pairs that had spoken beforehand, the patients considered their physician to be better able to understand their pain, and the physicians estimated the perceived pain intensity of their patients more accurately.
 

Evidence of trust

There was greater activity in the dorsolateral and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, as well as in the primary and secondary somatosensory areas, in patients in the subgroup that had spoken to a physician. For the physicians, compared with the comparison group, there was an increase in correspondence between activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and activity in the secondary somatosensory areas of patients, which is a brain region that is known to react to pain. The brain activity correlation increased in line with the self-reported mutual trust between the physician and patient.

“These results prove that empathy and support can decrease pain intensity,” the investigators write. The data shed light on the brain processes behind the social modulation of pain during the interaction between the physician and the patient. Concordances in the brain are increased by greater therapeutic alliance.
 

Beyond medication

Winfried Meissner, MD, head of the pain clinic at the department of anesthesiology and intensive care medicine at Jena University Hospital, Germany, and former president of the German Pain Society, said in an interview: “I view this as a vital study that impressively demonstrates that effective, intensive pain therapy is not just a case of administering the correct analgesic.”

“Instead, a focus should be placed on what common sense tells us, which is just how crucial an empathetic attitude from physicians and good communication with patients are when it comes to the success of any therapy,” Dr. Meissner added. Unfortunately, such an attitude and such communication often are not provided in clinical practice because of limitations on time.

“Now, with objectively collected data from patients and physicians, [Dr.] Ellingsen’s team has been able to demonstrate that human interaction has a decisive impact on the treatment of patients experiencing pain,” said Dr. Meissner. “The study should encourage practitioners to treat communication just as seriously as the pharmacology of analgesics.”
 

Perception and attitude

“The study shows remarkably well that empathetic conversation between the physician and patient represents a valuable therapeutic method and should be recognized as such,” emphasized Dr. Meissner. Of course, conversation cannot replace pharmacologic treatment, but it can supplement and reinforce it. Furthermore, a physician’s empathy presumably has an effect that is at least as great as a suitable analgesic.

“Pain is more than just sensory perception,” explained Dr. Meissner. “We all know that it has a strong affective component, and perception is greatly determined by context.” This can be seen, for example, in athletes, who often attribute less importance to their pain and can successfully perform competitively despite a painful injury.
 

Positive expectations

Dr. Meissner advised all physicians to treat patients with pain empathetically. He encourages them to ask patients about their pain, accompanying symptoms, possible fears, and other mental stress and to take these factors seriously.

Moreover, the findings accentuate the effect of prescribed analgesics. “Numerous studies have meanwhile shown that the more positive a patient’s expectations, the better the effect of a medication,” said Dr. Meissner. “We physicians must exploit this effect, too.”

This article was translated from the Medscape German Edition and a version appeared on Medscape.com.

Physicians’ demonstrations of empathy toward their patients can decrease the sensation of pain. These are the results of a study, recently published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, that was conducted by a team led by neuroscientist Dan-Mikael Ellingsen, PhD, from Oslo University Hospital.

The researchers used functional MRI to scan the brains of 20 patients with chronic pain to investigate how a physician’s demeanor may affect patients’ sensitivity to pain, including effects in the central nervous system. During the scans, which were conducted in two sessions, the patients’ legs were exposed to stimuli that ranged from painless to moderately painful. The patients recorded perceived pain intensity using a scale. The physicians also underwent fMRI.

Half of the patients were subjected to the pain stimuli while alone; the other half were subjected to pain while in the presence of a physician. The latter group of patients was divided into two subgroups. Half of the patients had spoken to the accompanying physician before the examination. They discussed the history of the patient’s condition to date, among other things. The other half underwent the brain scans without any prior interaction with a physician.
 

Worse when alone

Dr. Ellingsen and his colleagues found that patients who were alone during the examination reported greater pain than those who were in the presence of a physician, even though they were subjected to stimuli of the same intensity. In instances in which the physician and patient had already spoken before the brain scan, patients additionally felt that the physician was empathetic and understood their pain. Furthermore, the physicians were better able to estimate the pain that their patients experienced.

The patients who had a physician by their side consistently experienced pain that was milder than the pain experienced by those who were alone. For pairs that had spoken beforehand, the patients considered their physician to be better able to understand their pain, and the physicians estimated the perceived pain intensity of their patients more accurately.
 

Evidence of trust

There was greater activity in the dorsolateral and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, as well as in the primary and secondary somatosensory areas, in patients in the subgroup that had spoken to a physician. For the physicians, compared with the comparison group, there was an increase in correspondence between activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and activity in the secondary somatosensory areas of patients, which is a brain region that is known to react to pain. The brain activity correlation increased in line with the self-reported mutual trust between the physician and patient.

“These results prove that empathy and support can decrease pain intensity,” the investigators write. The data shed light on the brain processes behind the social modulation of pain during the interaction between the physician and the patient. Concordances in the brain are increased by greater therapeutic alliance.
 

Beyond medication

Winfried Meissner, MD, head of the pain clinic at the department of anesthesiology and intensive care medicine at Jena University Hospital, Germany, and former president of the German Pain Society, said in an interview: “I view this as a vital study that impressively demonstrates that effective, intensive pain therapy is not just a case of administering the correct analgesic.”

“Instead, a focus should be placed on what common sense tells us, which is just how crucial an empathetic attitude from physicians and good communication with patients are when it comes to the success of any therapy,” Dr. Meissner added. Unfortunately, such an attitude and such communication often are not provided in clinical practice because of limitations on time.

“Now, with objectively collected data from patients and physicians, [Dr.] Ellingsen’s team has been able to demonstrate that human interaction has a decisive impact on the treatment of patients experiencing pain,” said Dr. Meissner. “The study should encourage practitioners to treat communication just as seriously as the pharmacology of analgesics.”
 

Perception and attitude

“The study shows remarkably well that empathetic conversation between the physician and patient represents a valuable therapeutic method and should be recognized as such,” emphasized Dr. Meissner. Of course, conversation cannot replace pharmacologic treatment, but it can supplement and reinforce it. Furthermore, a physician’s empathy presumably has an effect that is at least as great as a suitable analgesic.

“Pain is more than just sensory perception,” explained Dr. Meissner. “We all know that it has a strong affective component, and perception is greatly determined by context.” This can be seen, for example, in athletes, who often attribute less importance to their pain and can successfully perform competitively despite a painful injury.
 

Positive expectations

Dr. Meissner advised all physicians to treat patients with pain empathetically. He encourages them to ask patients about their pain, accompanying symptoms, possible fears, and other mental stress and to take these factors seriously.

Moreover, the findings accentuate the effect of prescribed analgesics. “Numerous studies have meanwhile shown that the more positive a patient’s expectations, the better the effect of a medication,” said Dr. Meissner. “We physicians must exploit this effect, too.”

This article was translated from the Medscape German Edition and a version appeared on Medscape.com.

Physicians’ demonstrations of empathy toward their patients can decrease the sensation of pain. These are the results of a study, recently published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, that was conducted by a team led by neuroscientist Dan-Mikael Ellingsen, PhD, from Oslo University Hospital.

The researchers used functional MRI to scan the brains of 20 patients with chronic pain to investigate how a physician’s demeanor may affect patients’ sensitivity to pain, including effects in the central nervous system. During the scans, which were conducted in two sessions, the patients’ legs were exposed to stimuli that ranged from painless to moderately painful. The patients recorded perceived pain intensity using a scale. The physicians also underwent fMRI.

Half of the patients were subjected to the pain stimuli while alone; the other half were subjected to pain while in the presence of a physician. The latter group of patients was divided into two subgroups. Half of the patients had spoken to the accompanying physician before the examination. They discussed the history of the patient’s condition to date, among other things. The other half underwent the brain scans without any prior interaction with a physician.
 

Worse when alone

Dr. Ellingsen and his colleagues found that patients who were alone during the examination reported greater pain than those who were in the presence of a physician, even though they were subjected to stimuli of the same intensity. In instances in which the physician and patient had already spoken before the brain scan, patients additionally felt that the physician was empathetic and understood their pain. Furthermore, the physicians were better able to estimate the pain that their patients experienced.

The patients who had a physician by their side consistently experienced pain that was milder than the pain experienced by those who were alone. For pairs that had spoken beforehand, the patients considered their physician to be better able to understand their pain, and the physicians estimated the perceived pain intensity of their patients more accurately.
 

Evidence of trust

There was greater activity in the dorsolateral and ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, as well as in the primary and secondary somatosensory areas, in patients in the subgroup that had spoken to a physician. For the physicians, compared with the comparison group, there was an increase in correspondence between activity in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and activity in the secondary somatosensory areas of patients, which is a brain region that is known to react to pain. The brain activity correlation increased in line with the self-reported mutual trust between the physician and patient.

“These results prove that empathy and support can decrease pain intensity,” the investigators write. The data shed light on the brain processes behind the social modulation of pain during the interaction between the physician and the patient. Concordances in the brain are increased by greater therapeutic alliance.
 

Beyond medication

Winfried Meissner, MD, head of the pain clinic at the department of anesthesiology and intensive care medicine at Jena University Hospital, Germany, and former president of the German Pain Society, said in an interview: “I view this as a vital study that impressively demonstrates that effective, intensive pain therapy is not just a case of administering the correct analgesic.”

“Instead, a focus should be placed on what common sense tells us, which is just how crucial an empathetic attitude from physicians and good communication with patients are when it comes to the success of any therapy,” Dr. Meissner added. Unfortunately, such an attitude and such communication often are not provided in clinical practice because of limitations on time.

“Now, with objectively collected data from patients and physicians, [Dr.] Ellingsen’s team has been able to demonstrate that human interaction has a decisive impact on the treatment of patients experiencing pain,” said Dr. Meissner. “The study should encourage practitioners to treat communication just as seriously as the pharmacology of analgesics.”
 

Perception and attitude

“The study shows remarkably well that empathetic conversation between the physician and patient represents a valuable therapeutic method and should be recognized as such,” emphasized Dr. Meissner. Of course, conversation cannot replace pharmacologic treatment, but it can supplement and reinforce it. Furthermore, a physician’s empathy presumably has an effect that is at least as great as a suitable analgesic.

“Pain is more than just sensory perception,” explained Dr. Meissner. “We all know that it has a strong affective component, and perception is greatly determined by context.” This can be seen, for example, in athletes, who often attribute less importance to their pain and can successfully perform competitively despite a painful injury.
 

Positive expectations

Dr. Meissner advised all physicians to treat patients with pain empathetically. He encourages them to ask patients about their pain, accompanying symptoms, possible fears, and other mental stress and to take these factors seriously.

Moreover, the findings accentuate the effect of prescribed analgesics. “Numerous studies have meanwhile shown that the more positive a patient’s expectations, the better the effect of a medication,” said Dr. Meissner. “We physicians must exploit this effect, too.”

This article was translated from the Medscape German Edition and a version appeared on Medscape.com.

The best-selling drug Humira (adalimumab) now faces competition in the United States after a 20-year monopoly. The first adalimumab biosimilar, Amjevita, launched in the United States on January 31, and in July, seven additional biosimilars became available. These drugs have the potential to lower prescription drug prices, but when and by how much remains to be seen.

Here’s what you need to know about adalimumab biosimilars.
 

What Humira biosimilars are now available?

Eight different biosimilars have launched in 2023 with discounts as large at 85% from Humira’s list price of $6,922. A few companies also offer two price points.

Three of these biosimilars – Hadlima, Hyrimoz, and Yuflyma – are available in high concentration formulations. This high concentration formulation makes up 85% of Humira prescriptions, according to a report from Goodroot, a collection of companies focused on lowering health care costs.

Cyltezo is currently the only adalimumab biosimilar with an interchangeability designation, meaning that a pharmacist can substitute the biosimilar for an equivalent Humira prescription without the intervention of a clinician. A total of 47 states allow for these substitutions without prior approval from a clinician, according to Goodroot, and the clinician must be notified of the switch within a certain time frame. A total of 40 states require that patients be notified of the switch before substitution.

However, it’s not clear if this interchangeability designation will prove an advantage for Cyltezo, as it is interchangeable with the lower concentration version of Humira that makes up just 15% of prescriptions.

Most of the companies behind these biosimilars are pursuing interchangeability designations for their drugs, except for Fresenius Kabi (Idacio) and Coherus (Yusimry).

A ninth biosimilar, Pfizer’s adalimumab-afzb (Abrilada), is not yet on the market and is currently awaiting an approval decision from the Food and Drug Administration to add an interchangeability designation to its prior approval for a low-concentration formulation.
 

Why are they priced differently?

The two price points offer different deals to payers. Pharmacy benefit managers make confidential agreements with drug manufacturers to get a discount – called a rebate – to get the drug on the PBM’s formulary. The PBM keeps a portion of that rebate, and the rest is passed on to the insurance company and patients. Biosimilars at a higher price point will likely offer larger rebates. Biosimilars offered at lower price points incorporate this discount up front in their list pricing and likely will not offer large rebates.

Will biosimilars be covered by payers?

Currently, biosimilars are being offered on formularies at parity with Humira, meaning they are on the same tier. The PBM companies OptumRx and Cigna Group’s Express Scripts will offer Amjevita (at both price points), Cyltezo, and Hyrimoz (at both price points).

“This decision allows our clients flexibility to provide access to the lower list price, so members in high-deductible plans and benefit designs with coinsurance can experience lower out-of-pocket costs,” said OptumRx spokesperson Isaac Sorensen in an email.

Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company, which uses a direct-to-consumer model, will offer Yusimry for $567.27 on its website. SmithRx, a PBM based in San Francisco, announced it would partner with Cost Plus Drugs to offer Yusimry, adding that SmithRx members can use their insurance benefits to further reduce out-of-pocket costs. RxPreferred, another PBM, will also offer Yusimry through its partnership with Cuban’s company.

The news website Formulary Watch previously reported that CVS Caremark, another of the biggest PBMs, will be offering Amjevita, but as a nonpreferred brand, while Humira remains the preferred brand. CVS Caremark did not respond to a request for comment.
 

Will patients pay less?

Biosimilars have been touted as a potential solution to lower spending on biologic drugs, but it’s unknown if patients will ultimately benefit with lower out-of-pocket costs. It’s “impossible to predict” if the discount that third-party payers pay will be passed on to consumers, said Mark Fendrick, MD, who directs the University of Michigan Center for Value-based Insurance Design in Ann Arbor.

Michigan Medicine

Generally, a consumer’s copay is a percentage of a drug’s list price, so it stands to reason that a low drug price would result in lower out-of-pocket payments. While this is mostly true, Humira has a successful copay assistance program to lower prescription costs for consumers. According to a 2022 IQVIA report, 82% of commercial prescriptions cost patients less than $10 for Humira because of this program.

To appeal to patients, biosimilar companies will need to offer similar savings, Dr. Fendrick added. “There will be some discontent if patients are actually asked to pay more out-of-pocket for a less expensive drug,” he said.

All eight companies behind these biosimilars are offering or will be launching copay saving programs, many which advertise copays as low as $0 per month for eligible patients.
 

How will Humira respond?

Marta Wosińska, PhD, a health care economist at the Brookings Institute, Washington, predicts payers will use these lower biosimilar prices to negotiate better deals with AbbVie, Humira’s manufacturer. “We have a lot of players coming into [the market] right now, so the competition is really fierce,” she said. In response, AbbVie will need to increase rebates on Humira and/or lower its price to compete with these biosimilars. 

“The ball is in AbbVie’s court,” she said. “If [the company] is not willing to drop price sufficiently, then payers will start switching to biosimilars.”

Dr. Fendrick reported past financial relationships and consulting arrangements with AbbVie, Amgen, Arnold Ventures, Bayer, CareFirst, BlueCross BlueShield, and many other companies. Dr. Wosińska has received funding from Arnold Ventures and serves as an expert witness on antitrust cases involving generic medication.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The best-selling drug Humira (adalimumab) now faces competition in the United States after a 20-year monopoly. The first adalimumab biosimilar, Amjevita, launched in the United States on January 31, and in July, seven additional biosimilars became available. These drugs have the potential to lower prescription drug prices, but when and by how much remains to be seen.

Here’s what you need to know about adalimumab biosimilars.
 

What Humira biosimilars are now available?

Eight different biosimilars have launched in 2023 with discounts as large at 85% from Humira’s list price of $6,922. A few companies also offer two price points.

Three of these biosimilars – Hadlima, Hyrimoz, and Yuflyma – are available in high concentration formulations. This high concentration formulation makes up 85% of Humira prescriptions, according to a report from Goodroot, a collection of companies focused on lowering health care costs.

Cyltezo is currently the only adalimumab biosimilar with an interchangeability designation, meaning that a pharmacist can substitute the biosimilar for an equivalent Humira prescription without the intervention of a clinician. A total of 47 states allow for these substitutions without prior approval from a clinician, according to Goodroot, and the clinician must be notified of the switch within a certain time frame. A total of 40 states require that patients be notified of the switch before substitution.

However, it’s not clear if this interchangeability designation will prove an advantage for Cyltezo, as it is interchangeable with the lower concentration version of Humira that makes up just 15% of prescriptions.

Most of the companies behind these biosimilars are pursuing interchangeability designations for their drugs, except for Fresenius Kabi (Idacio) and Coherus (Yusimry).

A ninth biosimilar, Pfizer’s adalimumab-afzb (Abrilada), is not yet on the market and is currently awaiting an approval decision from the Food and Drug Administration to add an interchangeability designation to its prior approval for a low-concentration formulation.
 

Why are they priced differently?

The two price points offer different deals to payers. Pharmacy benefit managers make confidential agreements with drug manufacturers to get a discount – called a rebate – to get the drug on the PBM’s formulary. The PBM keeps a portion of that rebate, and the rest is passed on to the insurance company and patients. Biosimilars at a higher price point will likely offer larger rebates. Biosimilars offered at lower price points incorporate this discount up front in their list pricing and likely will not offer large rebates.

Will biosimilars be covered by payers?

Currently, biosimilars are being offered on formularies at parity with Humira, meaning they are on the same tier. The PBM companies OptumRx and Cigna Group’s Express Scripts will offer Amjevita (at both price points), Cyltezo, and Hyrimoz (at both price points).

“This decision allows our clients flexibility to provide access to the lower list price, so members in high-deductible plans and benefit designs with coinsurance can experience lower out-of-pocket costs,” said OptumRx spokesperson Isaac Sorensen in an email.

Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company, which uses a direct-to-consumer model, will offer Yusimry for $567.27 on its website. SmithRx, a PBM based in San Francisco, announced it would partner with Cost Plus Drugs to offer Yusimry, adding that SmithRx members can use their insurance benefits to further reduce out-of-pocket costs. RxPreferred, another PBM, will also offer Yusimry through its partnership with Cuban’s company.

The news website Formulary Watch previously reported that CVS Caremark, another of the biggest PBMs, will be offering Amjevita, but as a nonpreferred brand, while Humira remains the preferred brand. CVS Caremark did not respond to a request for comment.
 

Will patients pay less?

Biosimilars have been touted as a potential solution to lower spending on biologic drugs, but it’s unknown if patients will ultimately benefit with lower out-of-pocket costs. It’s “impossible to predict” if the discount that third-party payers pay will be passed on to consumers, said Mark Fendrick, MD, who directs the University of Michigan Center for Value-based Insurance Design in Ann Arbor.

Michigan Medicine

Generally, a consumer’s copay is a percentage of a drug’s list price, so it stands to reason that a low drug price would result in lower out-of-pocket payments. While this is mostly true, Humira has a successful copay assistance program to lower prescription costs for consumers. According to a 2022 IQVIA report, 82% of commercial prescriptions cost patients less than $10 for Humira because of this program.

To appeal to patients, biosimilar companies will need to offer similar savings, Dr. Fendrick added. “There will be some discontent if patients are actually asked to pay more out-of-pocket for a less expensive drug,” he said.

All eight companies behind these biosimilars are offering or will be launching copay saving programs, many which advertise copays as low as $0 per month for eligible patients.
 

How will Humira respond?

Marta Wosińska, PhD, a health care economist at the Brookings Institute, Washington, predicts payers will use these lower biosimilar prices to negotiate better deals with AbbVie, Humira’s manufacturer. “We have a lot of players coming into [the market] right now, so the competition is really fierce,” she said. In response, AbbVie will need to increase rebates on Humira and/or lower its price to compete with these biosimilars. 

“The ball is in AbbVie’s court,” she said. “If [the company] is not willing to drop price sufficiently, then payers will start switching to biosimilars.”

Dr. Fendrick reported past financial relationships and consulting arrangements with AbbVie, Amgen, Arnold Ventures, Bayer, CareFirst, BlueCross BlueShield, and many other companies. Dr. Wosińska has received funding from Arnold Ventures and serves as an expert witness on antitrust cases involving generic medication.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The best-selling drug Humira (adalimumab) now faces competition in the United States after a 20-year monopoly. The first adalimumab biosimilar, Amjevita, launched in the United States on January 31, and in July, seven additional biosimilars became available. These drugs have the potential to lower prescription drug prices, but when and by how much remains to be seen.

Here’s what you need to know about adalimumab biosimilars.
 

What Humira biosimilars are now available?

Eight different biosimilars have launched in 2023 with discounts as large at 85% from Humira’s list price of $6,922. A few companies also offer two price points.

Three of these biosimilars – Hadlima, Hyrimoz, and Yuflyma – are available in high concentration formulations. This high concentration formulation makes up 85% of Humira prescriptions, according to a report from Goodroot, a collection of companies focused on lowering health care costs.

Cyltezo is currently the only adalimumab biosimilar with an interchangeability designation, meaning that a pharmacist can substitute the biosimilar for an equivalent Humira prescription without the intervention of a clinician. A total of 47 states allow for these substitutions without prior approval from a clinician, according to Goodroot, and the clinician must be notified of the switch within a certain time frame. A total of 40 states require that patients be notified of the switch before substitution.

However, it’s not clear if this interchangeability designation will prove an advantage for Cyltezo, as it is interchangeable with the lower concentration version of Humira that makes up just 15% of prescriptions.

Most of the companies behind these biosimilars are pursuing interchangeability designations for their drugs, except for Fresenius Kabi (Idacio) and Coherus (Yusimry).

A ninth biosimilar, Pfizer’s adalimumab-afzb (Abrilada), is not yet on the market and is currently awaiting an approval decision from the Food and Drug Administration to add an interchangeability designation to its prior approval for a low-concentration formulation.
 

Why are they priced differently?

The two price points offer different deals to payers. Pharmacy benefit managers make confidential agreements with drug manufacturers to get a discount – called a rebate – to get the drug on the PBM’s formulary. The PBM keeps a portion of that rebate, and the rest is passed on to the insurance company and patients. Biosimilars at a higher price point will likely offer larger rebates. Biosimilars offered at lower price points incorporate this discount up front in their list pricing and likely will not offer large rebates.

Will biosimilars be covered by payers?

Currently, biosimilars are being offered on formularies at parity with Humira, meaning they are on the same tier. The PBM companies OptumRx and Cigna Group’s Express Scripts will offer Amjevita (at both price points), Cyltezo, and Hyrimoz (at both price points).

“This decision allows our clients flexibility to provide access to the lower list price, so members in high-deductible plans and benefit designs with coinsurance can experience lower out-of-pocket costs,” said OptumRx spokesperson Isaac Sorensen in an email.

Mark Cuban Cost Plus Drug Company, which uses a direct-to-consumer model, will offer Yusimry for $567.27 on its website. SmithRx, a PBM based in San Francisco, announced it would partner with Cost Plus Drugs to offer Yusimry, adding that SmithRx members can use their insurance benefits to further reduce out-of-pocket costs. RxPreferred, another PBM, will also offer Yusimry through its partnership with Cuban’s company.

The news website Formulary Watch previously reported that CVS Caremark, another of the biggest PBMs, will be offering Amjevita, but as a nonpreferred brand, while Humira remains the preferred brand. CVS Caremark did not respond to a request for comment.
 

Will patients pay less?

Biosimilars have been touted as a potential solution to lower spending on biologic drugs, but it’s unknown if patients will ultimately benefit with lower out-of-pocket costs. It’s “impossible to predict” if the discount that third-party payers pay will be passed on to consumers, said Mark Fendrick, MD, who directs the University of Michigan Center for Value-based Insurance Design in Ann Arbor.

Michigan Medicine

Generally, a consumer’s copay is a percentage of a drug’s list price, so it stands to reason that a low drug price would result in lower out-of-pocket payments. While this is mostly true, Humira has a successful copay assistance program to lower prescription costs for consumers. According to a 2022 IQVIA report, 82% of commercial prescriptions cost patients less than $10 for Humira because of this program.

To appeal to patients, biosimilar companies will need to offer similar savings, Dr. Fendrick added. “There will be some discontent if patients are actually asked to pay more out-of-pocket for a less expensive drug,” he said.

All eight companies behind these biosimilars are offering or will be launching copay saving programs, many which advertise copays as low as $0 per month for eligible patients.
 

How will Humira respond?

Marta Wosińska, PhD, a health care economist at the Brookings Institute, Washington, predicts payers will use these lower biosimilar prices to negotiate better deals with AbbVie, Humira’s manufacturer. “We have a lot of players coming into [the market] right now, so the competition is really fierce,” she said. In response, AbbVie will need to increase rebates on Humira and/or lower its price to compete with these biosimilars. 

“The ball is in AbbVie’s court,” she said. “If [the company] is not willing to drop price sufficiently, then payers will start switching to biosimilars.”

Dr. Fendrick reported past financial relationships and consulting arrangements with AbbVie, Amgen, Arnold Ventures, Bayer, CareFirst, BlueCross BlueShield, and many other companies. Dr. Wosińska has received funding from Arnold Ventures and serves as an expert witness on antitrust cases involving generic medication.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.