Commentary: Disease Activity, Progression to Psoriasis, and More in PsA, October 2022

Article Type
Changed
Dr. Chandran scans the journals, so you don't have to!

Vinod Chandran, MBBS, MD, DM, PhD

Research on psoriatic arthritis (PsA) published over the past month has highlighted the effect of disease on patients and provided insights into clinical management. Because of the heterogeneous nature of PsA, assessing disease activity is difficult. A blood biomarker for disease activity would be useful. C-reactive protein (CRP) is a commonly used and well-established marker of inflammation in general. However, CRP does not reflect PsA disease activity itself. In a cross-sectional study, Gialouri and colleagues evaluated the association between CRP and PsA disease activity. CRP status (CRP  ≤  0.5 mg/dL [normal] and CRP > 0.5  mg/dL [increased]) was not associated with any of the clinical disease activity (clinical Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis [cDAPSA] or minimal disease activity [MDA]) or patient-reported outcomes measures (Patient Global, Patient Pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index [HAQ-DI] or EuroQol [EQ-5D]). Among patients with normal CRP levels, a substantial proportion (45.9%) were not in MDA (thus, an indicator of active disease) while 76.7% of patients with elevated CRP were not in MDA. Therefore, an elevated CRP may indicate active PsA, but a normal CRP is not a reliable indicator of disease state in PsA.

 

Gender differences in PsA are increasingly being recognized as important. In a real-world survey of 2270 PsA patients (1047 women) from Europe and the United States, Gossec and colleagues demonstrated that, despite similar disease duration, disease presentation, and biologic use, women had worse quality-of-life, disability, and physical functioning scores, a greater degree of work activity impairment, and higher pain and fatigue scores compared with men. Thus, it is increasingly clear that PsA affects women differently from men. Interventions for the holistic management of PsA should be tailored according to the patient's gender for optimal outcomes.

 

Despite major advances in the treatment of adult PsA, the treatment options for children with PsA (juvenile PsA [JPsA]) are limited. Anti–tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents are the only currently approved advanced therapy. Brunner and colleagues conducted a treatment-withdrawal, phase 3 study including 86 biologic-naive patients with active enthesitis-related arthritis (n = 52) or JPsA (n = 34) who were randomly assigned to receive secukinumab or placebo.

 

This study demonstrated that, compared with placebo, secukinumab was associated with a significant delay in disease flare and a higher proportion of patients achieving juvenile idiopathic arthritis American College of Rheumatology 30 response at week 104. This study provides evidence that secukinumab, a safe and effective therapy used in adult psoriatic disease, may provide similar benefits in JPsA, especially in patients who either have not responded to or have contraindications to treatment with anti-TNF agents.

 

Finally, because skin disease predates joint disease in almost 90% of PsA patients, identifying predictors for the development of joint disease is of considerable interest. It is hoped that identifying such predictors will help dermatologists and primary care physicians stratify management such that those at higher risk are carefully followed up for early diagnosis or even preventive therapy.

 

To identify such predictors, Ogdie and colleagues conducted a prospective study of 1489 patients with psoriasis and no prior diagnosis of PsA from the CorEvitas Psoriasis registry. They demonstrated that 10% of patients with psoriasis developed PsA after 2 years. Psoriasis Epidemiology Screening Tool (PEST, a brief screening questionnaire for PsA) and body mass index (BMI) were important factors predicting the development of PsA. Although the incidence of PsA in this cohort is higher than that reported from other studies, the study indicates that PEST and BMI should be important factors that predict PsA and should be variables in any prediction model.

Author and Disclosure Information

Vinod Chandran, MBBS, MD, DM, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Medicine, University of Toledo, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Vinod Chandran, MBBS, MD, DM, PhD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:

Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: AbbVie; Amgen; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Eli Lilly; Janssen; Novartis; Pfizer; UCB

Received research grant from: Amgen; AbbVie; Eli Lilly

Spousal employment: Eli Lilly; AstraZeneca

Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Vinod Chandran, MBBS, MD, DM, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Medicine, University of Toledo, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Vinod Chandran, MBBS, MD, DM, PhD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:

Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: AbbVie; Amgen; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Eli Lilly; Janssen; Novartis; Pfizer; UCB

Received research grant from: Amgen; AbbVie; Eli Lilly

Spousal employment: Eli Lilly; AstraZeneca

Author and Disclosure Information

Vinod Chandran, MBBS, MD, DM, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Medicine, University of Toledo, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Vinod Chandran, MBBS, MD, DM, PhD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:

Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: AbbVie; Amgen; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Eli Lilly; Janssen; Novartis; Pfizer; UCB

Received research grant from: Amgen; AbbVie; Eli Lilly

Spousal employment: Eli Lilly; AstraZeneca

Dr. Chandran scans the journals, so you don't have to!
Dr. Chandran scans the journals, so you don't have to!

Vinod Chandran, MBBS, MD, DM, PhD

Research on psoriatic arthritis (PsA) published over the past month has highlighted the effect of disease on patients and provided insights into clinical management. Because of the heterogeneous nature of PsA, assessing disease activity is difficult. A blood biomarker for disease activity would be useful. C-reactive protein (CRP) is a commonly used and well-established marker of inflammation in general. However, CRP does not reflect PsA disease activity itself. In a cross-sectional study, Gialouri and colleagues evaluated the association between CRP and PsA disease activity. CRP status (CRP  ≤  0.5 mg/dL [normal] and CRP > 0.5  mg/dL [increased]) was not associated with any of the clinical disease activity (clinical Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis [cDAPSA] or minimal disease activity [MDA]) or patient-reported outcomes measures (Patient Global, Patient Pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index [HAQ-DI] or EuroQol [EQ-5D]). Among patients with normal CRP levels, a substantial proportion (45.9%) were not in MDA (thus, an indicator of active disease) while 76.7% of patients with elevated CRP were not in MDA. Therefore, an elevated CRP may indicate active PsA, but a normal CRP is not a reliable indicator of disease state in PsA.

 

Gender differences in PsA are increasingly being recognized as important. In a real-world survey of 2270 PsA patients (1047 women) from Europe and the United States, Gossec and colleagues demonstrated that, despite similar disease duration, disease presentation, and biologic use, women had worse quality-of-life, disability, and physical functioning scores, a greater degree of work activity impairment, and higher pain and fatigue scores compared with men. Thus, it is increasingly clear that PsA affects women differently from men. Interventions for the holistic management of PsA should be tailored according to the patient's gender for optimal outcomes.

 

Despite major advances in the treatment of adult PsA, the treatment options for children with PsA (juvenile PsA [JPsA]) are limited. Anti–tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents are the only currently approved advanced therapy. Brunner and colleagues conducted a treatment-withdrawal, phase 3 study including 86 biologic-naive patients with active enthesitis-related arthritis (n = 52) or JPsA (n = 34) who were randomly assigned to receive secukinumab or placebo.

 

This study demonstrated that, compared with placebo, secukinumab was associated with a significant delay in disease flare and a higher proportion of patients achieving juvenile idiopathic arthritis American College of Rheumatology 30 response at week 104. This study provides evidence that secukinumab, a safe and effective therapy used in adult psoriatic disease, may provide similar benefits in JPsA, especially in patients who either have not responded to or have contraindications to treatment with anti-TNF agents.

 

Finally, because skin disease predates joint disease in almost 90% of PsA patients, identifying predictors for the development of joint disease is of considerable interest. It is hoped that identifying such predictors will help dermatologists and primary care physicians stratify management such that those at higher risk are carefully followed up for early diagnosis or even preventive therapy.

 

To identify such predictors, Ogdie and colleagues conducted a prospective study of 1489 patients with psoriasis and no prior diagnosis of PsA from the CorEvitas Psoriasis registry. They demonstrated that 10% of patients with psoriasis developed PsA after 2 years. Psoriasis Epidemiology Screening Tool (PEST, a brief screening questionnaire for PsA) and body mass index (BMI) were important factors predicting the development of PsA. Although the incidence of PsA in this cohort is higher than that reported from other studies, the study indicates that PEST and BMI should be important factors that predict PsA and should be variables in any prediction model.

Vinod Chandran, MBBS, MD, DM, PhD

Research on psoriatic arthritis (PsA) published over the past month has highlighted the effect of disease on patients and provided insights into clinical management. Because of the heterogeneous nature of PsA, assessing disease activity is difficult. A blood biomarker for disease activity would be useful. C-reactive protein (CRP) is a commonly used and well-established marker of inflammation in general. However, CRP does not reflect PsA disease activity itself. In a cross-sectional study, Gialouri and colleagues evaluated the association between CRP and PsA disease activity. CRP status (CRP  ≤  0.5 mg/dL [normal] and CRP > 0.5  mg/dL [increased]) was not associated with any of the clinical disease activity (clinical Disease Activity Index for Psoriatic Arthritis [cDAPSA] or minimal disease activity [MDA]) or patient-reported outcomes measures (Patient Global, Patient Pain, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index [HAQ-DI] or EuroQol [EQ-5D]). Among patients with normal CRP levels, a substantial proportion (45.9%) were not in MDA (thus, an indicator of active disease) while 76.7% of patients with elevated CRP were not in MDA. Therefore, an elevated CRP may indicate active PsA, but a normal CRP is not a reliable indicator of disease state in PsA.

 

Gender differences in PsA are increasingly being recognized as important. In a real-world survey of 2270 PsA patients (1047 women) from Europe and the United States, Gossec and colleagues demonstrated that, despite similar disease duration, disease presentation, and biologic use, women had worse quality-of-life, disability, and physical functioning scores, a greater degree of work activity impairment, and higher pain and fatigue scores compared with men. Thus, it is increasingly clear that PsA affects women differently from men. Interventions for the holistic management of PsA should be tailored according to the patient's gender for optimal outcomes.

 

Despite major advances in the treatment of adult PsA, the treatment options for children with PsA (juvenile PsA [JPsA]) are limited. Anti–tumor necrosis factor (TNF) agents are the only currently approved advanced therapy. Brunner and colleagues conducted a treatment-withdrawal, phase 3 study including 86 biologic-naive patients with active enthesitis-related arthritis (n = 52) or JPsA (n = 34) who were randomly assigned to receive secukinumab or placebo.

 

This study demonstrated that, compared with placebo, secukinumab was associated with a significant delay in disease flare and a higher proportion of patients achieving juvenile idiopathic arthritis American College of Rheumatology 30 response at week 104. This study provides evidence that secukinumab, a safe and effective therapy used in adult psoriatic disease, may provide similar benefits in JPsA, especially in patients who either have not responded to or have contraindications to treatment with anti-TNF agents.

 

Finally, because skin disease predates joint disease in almost 90% of PsA patients, identifying predictors for the development of joint disease is of considerable interest. It is hoped that identifying such predictors will help dermatologists and primary care physicians stratify management such that those at higher risk are carefully followed up for early diagnosis or even preventive therapy.

 

To identify such predictors, Ogdie and colleagues conducted a prospective study of 1489 patients with psoriasis and no prior diagnosis of PsA from the CorEvitas Psoriasis registry. They demonstrated that 10% of patients with psoriasis developed PsA after 2 years. Psoriasis Epidemiology Screening Tool (PEST, a brief screening questionnaire for PsA) and body mass index (BMI) were important factors predicting the development of PsA. Although the incidence of PsA in this cohort is higher than that reported from other studies, the study indicates that PEST and BMI should be important factors that predict PsA and should be variables in any prediction model.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Psoriatic Arthritis, October 2022
Gate On Date
Un-Gate On Date
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Activity Salesforce Deliverable ID
333554.27
Activity ID
83192
Product Name
Clinical Edge Journal Scan
Product ID
124
Supporter Name /ID
SKYRIZI [ 5052 ]

Commentary: Organ Preservation and KRASG12C in CRC, October 2022

Article Type
Changed
Dr Abrams scans the journals so you don't have to!

Dr. Thomas Abrams, MD

As always, several provocative publications on colorectal cancer (CRC) have found their way into the medical literature. I will be discussing two of these in my Clinical Edge Journal Scan commentary for the month of October.

 

The first article, by Kennecke and colleagues, examines the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early rectal cancer. We have been inundated with data showing that organ preservation is achievable in cases of node-positive rectal cancer with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and chemotherapy (total neoadjuvant treatment [TNT] approach). As such, it stands to reason that organ preservation should also be achievable in cases of early, node-negative rectal cancer.

 

NEO was a single-arm, phase 2 trial examining the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy only in early rectal cancer. In it, 58 patients with clinical T1-T3ab N0 low-to-mid rectal adenocarcinoma (proficient mismatch repair status) eligible for endoscopic resection were treated with 3 months of mFOLFOX6 (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) or CAPEOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin). Those with evidence of tumor regression proceeded to transanal resection.

 

The primary endpoint was a protocol-specified organ preservation rate, defined as the proportion of patients with tumor downstaging to ypT0/T1 N0/X and who avoided radical surgery. Thirty-three (33) of the 58 patients were successfully downstaged, resulting in a protocol-specified organ preservation rate of 57% (90% CI 45-68). Of note, this treatment had no radiation at all and only used chemotherapy. Of the remaining 23 patients, 13 declined total mesorectal excision (TME) and went into observation. Of the 10 patients who underwent TME, seven had no histopathologic evidence of residual disease. The 1- and 2-year locoregional relapse-free survival rates were 98% (95% CI 86-100) and 90% (95% CI 58-98), respectively, and there were no metastatic recurrences or deaths. Although this is a small study, the results are enormously encouraging, suggesting that organ preservation not only can be achieved in early-stage rectal cancer, but also can be accomplished using only chemotherapy, further reducing morbidity to patients.

 

The second study I want to discuss was conducted by Ciardiello and colleagues and concerns the KRASG12C mutation in colorectal cancer. This mutation is targetable in lung cancer and has led to the approval of sotorasib for the treatment of advanced KRASG12C non–small-cell lung cancer . Unfortunately, previous studies of these inhibitors in advanced KRASG12C colorectal cancer have yielded disappointing results.

 

This study looked retrospectively at 6952 cases of metastatic colorectal cancer across Italy. A total of 256 cases (3.7%) demonstrated the KRASG12C mutation. Of those, 111 met inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Of note, this mutation was associated with a poor response to first-line chemotherapy (38.7%), with a median progression-free survival of 9 months (95% CI 7.5-10.5 months). Median overall survival was 21 months (95% CI 17.4-24.6 months). There was little difference between first-line oxaliplatin-containing regimens compared with those containing irinotecan. Triplet therapy (folinic acid, fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan; FOLFOXIRI) was associated with an objective response rate of 56.3% with a progression-free survival of 13 months and median overall survival of 32 months, suggesting that triplet therapy might be a better approach for these patients when they are identified. This study is important because it corroborates and builds upon data reported in smaller studies demonstrating the general resistance of KRASG12C metastatic colorectal cancer to chemotherapeutic treatments.

Author and Disclosure Information

Thomas Abrams, MD, Assistant Professor, Harvard/Dana Farber

Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Thomas Abrams, MD, Assistant Professor, Harvard/Dana Farber

Author and Disclosure Information

Thomas Abrams, MD, Assistant Professor, Harvard/Dana Farber

Dr Abrams scans the journals so you don't have to!
Dr Abrams scans the journals so you don't have to!

Dr. Thomas Abrams, MD

As always, several provocative publications on colorectal cancer (CRC) have found their way into the medical literature. I will be discussing two of these in my Clinical Edge Journal Scan commentary for the month of October.

 

The first article, by Kennecke and colleagues, examines the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early rectal cancer. We have been inundated with data showing that organ preservation is achievable in cases of node-positive rectal cancer with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and chemotherapy (total neoadjuvant treatment [TNT] approach). As such, it stands to reason that organ preservation should also be achievable in cases of early, node-negative rectal cancer.

 

NEO was a single-arm, phase 2 trial examining the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy only in early rectal cancer. In it, 58 patients with clinical T1-T3ab N0 low-to-mid rectal adenocarcinoma (proficient mismatch repair status) eligible for endoscopic resection were treated with 3 months of mFOLFOX6 (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) or CAPEOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin). Those with evidence of tumor regression proceeded to transanal resection.

 

The primary endpoint was a protocol-specified organ preservation rate, defined as the proportion of patients with tumor downstaging to ypT0/T1 N0/X and who avoided radical surgery. Thirty-three (33) of the 58 patients were successfully downstaged, resulting in a protocol-specified organ preservation rate of 57% (90% CI 45-68). Of note, this treatment had no radiation at all and only used chemotherapy. Of the remaining 23 patients, 13 declined total mesorectal excision (TME) and went into observation. Of the 10 patients who underwent TME, seven had no histopathologic evidence of residual disease. The 1- and 2-year locoregional relapse-free survival rates were 98% (95% CI 86-100) and 90% (95% CI 58-98), respectively, and there were no metastatic recurrences or deaths. Although this is a small study, the results are enormously encouraging, suggesting that organ preservation not only can be achieved in early-stage rectal cancer, but also can be accomplished using only chemotherapy, further reducing morbidity to patients.

 

The second study I want to discuss was conducted by Ciardiello and colleagues and concerns the KRASG12C mutation in colorectal cancer. This mutation is targetable in lung cancer and has led to the approval of sotorasib for the treatment of advanced KRASG12C non–small-cell lung cancer . Unfortunately, previous studies of these inhibitors in advanced KRASG12C colorectal cancer have yielded disappointing results.

 

This study looked retrospectively at 6952 cases of metastatic colorectal cancer across Italy. A total of 256 cases (3.7%) demonstrated the KRASG12C mutation. Of those, 111 met inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Of note, this mutation was associated with a poor response to first-line chemotherapy (38.7%), with a median progression-free survival of 9 months (95% CI 7.5-10.5 months). Median overall survival was 21 months (95% CI 17.4-24.6 months). There was little difference between first-line oxaliplatin-containing regimens compared with those containing irinotecan. Triplet therapy (folinic acid, fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan; FOLFOXIRI) was associated with an objective response rate of 56.3% with a progression-free survival of 13 months and median overall survival of 32 months, suggesting that triplet therapy might be a better approach for these patients when they are identified. This study is important because it corroborates and builds upon data reported in smaller studies demonstrating the general resistance of KRASG12C metastatic colorectal cancer to chemotherapeutic treatments.

Dr. Thomas Abrams, MD

As always, several provocative publications on colorectal cancer (CRC) have found their way into the medical literature. I will be discussing two of these in my Clinical Edge Journal Scan commentary for the month of October.

 

The first article, by Kennecke and colleagues, examines the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early rectal cancer. We have been inundated with data showing that organ preservation is achievable in cases of node-positive rectal cancer with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and chemotherapy (total neoadjuvant treatment [TNT] approach). As such, it stands to reason that organ preservation should also be achievable in cases of early, node-negative rectal cancer.

 

NEO was a single-arm, phase 2 trial examining the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy only in early rectal cancer. In it, 58 patients with clinical T1-T3ab N0 low-to-mid rectal adenocarcinoma (proficient mismatch repair status) eligible for endoscopic resection were treated with 3 months of mFOLFOX6 (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) or CAPEOX (capecitabine and oxaliplatin). Those with evidence of tumor regression proceeded to transanal resection.

 

The primary endpoint was a protocol-specified organ preservation rate, defined as the proportion of patients with tumor downstaging to ypT0/T1 N0/X and who avoided radical surgery. Thirty-three (33) of the 58 patients were successfully downstaged, resulting in a protocol-specified organ preservation rate of 57% (90% CI 45-68). Of note, this treatment had no radiation at all and only used chemotherapy. Of the remaining 23 patients, 13 declined total mesorectal excision (TME) and went into observation. Of the 10 patients who underwent TME, seven had no histopathologic evidence of residual disease. The 1- and 2-year locoregional relapse-free survival rates were 98% (95% CI 86-100) and 90% (95% CI 58-98), respectively, and there were no metastatic recurrences or deaths. Although this is a small study, the results are enormously encouraging, suggesting that organ preservation not only can be achieved in early-stage rectal cancer, but also can be accomplished using only chemotherapy, further reducing morbidity to patients.

 

The second study I want to discuss was conducted by Ciardiello and colleagues and concerns the KRASG12C mutation in colorectal cancer. This mutation is targetable in lung cancer and has led to the approval of sotorasib for the treatment of advanced KRASG12C non–small-cell lung cancer . Unfortunately, previous studies of these inhibitors in advanced KRASG12C colorectal cancer have yielded disappointing results.

 

This study looked retrospectively at 6952 cases of metastatic colorectal cancer across Italy. A total of 256 cases (3.7%) demonstrated the KRASG12C mutation. Of those, 111 met inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Of note, this mutation was associated with a poor response to first-line chemotherapy (38.7%), with a median progression-free survival of 9 months (95% CI 7.5-10.5 months). Median overall survival was 21 months (95% CI 17.4-24.6 months). There was little difference between first-line oxaliplatin-containing regimens compared with those containing irinotecan. Triplet therapy (folinic acid, fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan; FOLFOXIRI) was associated with an objective response rate of 56.3% with a progression-free survival of 13 months and median overall survival of 32 months, suggesting that triplet therapy might be a better approach for these patients when they are identified. This study is important because it corroborates and builds upon data reported in smaller studies demonstrating the general resistance of KRASG12C metastatic colorectal cancer to chemotherapeutic treatments.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Colorectal Cancer, October 2022
Gate On Date
Un-Gate On Date
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Activity Salesforce Deliverable ID
358067
Activity ID
86365
Product Name
Clinical Edge Journal Scan
Product ID
124
Supporter Name /ID
Cyramza [3745]

Commentary: New Results With DMARD in RA, October 2022

Article Type
Changed
Dr. Jayatilleke scans the journals, so you don't have to!

Arundathi Jayatilleke, MD

Interleukin (IL)–6 is known to be of great importance in the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) owing to its role in the inflammatory response. Current IL-6-directed therapies in RA, namely sarilumab and tocilizumab, target the receptor. In a double-blind randomized controlled trial with both placebo and active comparators, Smolen and colleagues evaluated the efficacy of olokizumab, which directly binds and inhibits the activity of IL-6, in combination with methotrexate, in the treatment of people with RA. Patients were treated with methotrexate alone or in combination with adalimumab or olokizumab, and clinical outcomes were evaluated after 12 weeks, a relatively short time frame. Olokizumab was noninferior to adalimumab in terms of the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology 20 response, with similar rates of serious adverse events, the most common of which was infection. Though this study included patients from across the globe, the percentage of Black and Asian patients was relatively low and thus may affect the generalizability of this study to a US population; the numbers of patients in each group was also relatively small. These results certainly warrant larger-scale and longer studies to evaluate olokizumab's efficacy.

 

For those patients with RA who achieve sustained disease remission, the question of medication tapering has been raised as a possible strategy for minimizing risks for therapy. Using insurance database information, Birkner and colleagues performed a prospective cohort study of over 400 patients in Germany. Using shared decision-making between patients and their rheumatologists, two groups of patients were followed: 237 people who elected to remain on therapy and 200 who decided to taper medication. Of note, similar proportions of patients in both groups were taking conventional and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) monotherapy, but more patients in the tapering group were taking a combination therapy with both. Flares and loss of remission were more common in the continuation group, a difference that did not persist after adjusting for patient risk characteristics. Overall, results from this "real-world" study were consistent with prior studies and support the possibility of tapering with flare in a subset of patients. Although the authors address the potential for selection bias in terms of patients "assigned" to each group, this can also be viewed as part of the shared decision-making in determining the appropriateness of tapering therapy in individual patients.

 

Because people receiving rituximab have experienced more severe COVID-19, studies aimed at enhancing the protection of these patients are of current interest. Of note, in a follow-up to a prior observational study by van der Togt and colleagues on the response to COVID-19 vaccines in people with RA being treated with rituximab, they looked at responses to the third (booster) dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Only about 20% of patients treated with rituximab developed a humoral response to a third vaccine dose, as defined by immunoglobulins (Ig; total, IgG, and IgM) against SARS-CoV-2. Patients treated with 200 mg rituximab had a higher response rate than did those treated with 500 mg or 1000 mg, though this difference was not statistically significant. The study lacked a control arm of people being treated with other DMARD and also did not measure B-cell counts, COVID-19, or outcomes. Reassuringly, those patients who did have a positive humoral response to the first two vaccine doses tended to maintain a humoral response to the third, regardless of rituximab dose or timing.

Author and Disclosure Information

Arundathi Jayatilleke, MD
Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Temple University

Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Arundathi Jayatilleke, MD
Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Temple University

Author and Disclosure Information

Arundathi Jayatilleke, MD
Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Temple University

Dr. Jayatilleke scans the journals, so you don't have to!
Dr. Jayatilleke scans the journals, so you don't have to!

Arundathi Jayatilleke, MD

Interleukin (IL)–6 is known to be of great importance in the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) owing to its role in the inflammatory response. Current IL-6-directed therapies in RA, namely sarilumab and tocilizumab, target the receptor. In a double-blind randomized controlled trial with both placebo and active comparators, Smolen and colleagues evaluated the efficacy of olokizumab, which directly binds and inhibits the activity of IL-6, in combination with methotrexate, in the treatment of people with RA. Patients were treated with methotrexate alone or in combination with adalimumab or olokizumab, and clinical outcomes were evaluated after 12 weeks, a relatively short time frame. Olokizumab was noninferior to adalimumab in terms of the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology 20 response, with similar rates of serious adverse events, the most common of which was infection. Though this study included patients from across the globe, the percentage of Black and Asian patients was relatively low and thus may affect the generalizability of this study to a US population; the numbers of patients in each group was also relatively small. These results certainly warrant larger-scale and longer studies to evaluate olokizumab's efficacy.

 

For those patients with RA who achieve sustained disease remission, the question of medication tapering has been raised as a possible strategy for minimizing risks for therapy. Using insurance database information, Birkner and colleagues performed a prospective cohort study of over 400 patients in Germany. Using shared decision-making between patients and their rheumatologists, two groups of patients were followed: 237 people who elected to remain on therapy and 200 who decided to taper medication. Of note, similar proportions of patients in both groups were taking conventional and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) monotherapy, but more patients in the tapering group were taking a combination therapy with both. Flares and loss of remission were more common in the continuation group, a difference that did not persist after adjusting for patient risk characteristics. Overall, results from this "real-world" study were consistent with prior studies and support the possibility of tapering with flare in a subset of patients. Although the authors address the potential for selection bias in terms of patients "assigned" to each group, this can also be viewed as part of the shared decision-making in determining the appropriateness of tapering therapy in individual patients.

 

Because people receiving rituximab have experienced more severe COVID-19, studies aimed at enhancing the protection of these patients are of current interest. Of note, in a follow-up to a prior observational study by van der Togt and colleagues on the response to COVID-19 vaccines in people with RA being treated with rituximab, they looked at responses to the third (booster) dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Only about 20% of patients treated with rituximab developed a humoral response to a third vaccine dose, as defined by immunoglobulins (Ig; total, IgG, and IgM) against SARS-CoV-2. Patients treated with 200 mg rituximab had a higher response rate than did those treated with 500 mg or 1000 mg, though this difference was not statistically significant. The study lacked a control arm of people being treated with other DMARD and also did not measure B-cell counts, COVID-19, or outcomes. Reassuringly, those patients who did have a positive humoral response to the first two vaccine doses tended to maintain a humoral response to the third, regardless of rituximab dose or timing.

Arundathi Jayatilleke, MD

Interleukin (IL)–6 is known to be of great importance in the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) owing to its role in the inflammatory response. Current IL-6-directed therapies in RA, namely sarilumab and tocilizumab, target the receptor. In a double-blind randomized controlled trial with both placebo and active comparators, Smolen and colleagues evaluated the efficacy of olokizumab, which directly binds and inhibits the activity of IL-6, in combination with methotrexate, in the treatment of people with RA. Patients were treated with methotrexate alone or in combination with adalimumab or olokizumab, and clinical outcomes were evaluated after 12 weeks, a relatively short time frame. Olokizumab was noninferior to adalimumab in terms of the proportion of patients achieving an American College of Rheumatology 20 response, with similar rates of serious adverse events, the most common of which was infection. Though this study included patients from across the globe, the percentage of Black and Asian patients was relatively low and thus may affect the generalizability of this study to a US population; the numbers of patients in each group was also relatively small. These results certainly warrant larger-scale and longer studies to evaluate olokizumab's efficacy.

 

For those patients with RA who achieve sustained disease remission, the question of medication tapering has been raised as a possible strategy for minimizing risks for therapy. Using insurance database information, Birkner and colleagues performed a prospective cohort study of over 400 patients in Germany. Using shared decision-making between patients and their rheumatologists, two groups of patients were followed: 237 people who elected to remain on therapy and 200 who decided to taper medication. Of note, similar proportions of patients in both groups were taking conventional and biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) monotherapy, but more patients in the tapering group were taking a combination therapy with both. Flares and loss of remission were more common in the continuation group, a difference that did not persist after adjusting for patient risk characteristics. Overall, results from this "real-world" study were consistent with prior studies and support the possibility of tapering with flare in a subset of patients. Although the authors address the potential for selection bias in terms of patients "assigned" to each group, this can also be viewed as part of the shared decision-making in determining the appropriateness of tapering therapy in individual patients.

 

Because people receiving rituximab have experienced more severe COVID-19, studies aimed at enhancing the protection of these patients are of current interest. Of note, in a follow-up to a prior observational study by van der Togt and colleagues on the response to COVID-19 vaccines in people with RA being treated with rituximab, they looked at responses to the third (booster) dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. Only about 20% of patients treated with rituximab developed a humoral response to a third vaccine dose, as defined by immunoglobulins (Ig; total, IgG, and IgM) against SARS-CoV-2. Patients treated with 200 mg rituximab had a higher response rate than did those treated with 500 mg or 1000 mg, though this difference was not statistically significant. The study lacked a control arm of people being treated with other DMARD and also did not measure B-cell counts, COVID-19, or outcomes. Reassuringly, those patients who did have a positive humoral response to the first two vaccine doses tended to maintain a humoral response to the third, regardless of rituximab dose or timing.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Rheumatoid Arthritis, October 2022
Gate On Date
Un-Gate On Date
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Activity Salesforce Deliverable ID
325029.34
Activity ID
77974
Product Name
Clinical Edge Journal Scan
Product ID
124
Supporter Name /ID
RINVOQ [ 5260 ]

Commentary: Evaluating HCC Treatments, October 2022

Article Type
Changed
Dr. Damjanov scans the journals, so you don’t have to!

Nevena Damjanov, MD
Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) may benefit from liver-directed therapies or palliative systemic therapies. This month we will review articles that address management of patients who were treated with different standard treatment options.

Komatsu and colleagues performed a case-matched analysis to evaluate the best first-line treatment for HCC in patients with macroscopic portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT). Patients had advanced HCC and macroscopic PVTT that invaded an ipsilateral first-order portal branch, main trunk, or contralateral portal vein. The propensity score–matched groups underwent either hepatectomy (n = 36) or received sorafenib (n = 36). To be considered for resection, patients had to have Child-Pugh (CP) grade A or B liver function, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score of ≤ 1, life expectancy of > 3 months, and the macroscopic resection of the targeted tumor could be planned with an estimated remnant liver volume ≥ 35%.

Out of 36 patients who underwent surgery, 23 underwent reductive hepatectomy, and 13 underwent complete resection of tumor. Out of 36 patients who received sorafenib, 21 underwent subsequent treatments. The median overall survival (OS) of patients who underwent hepatectomy was 15.1 months, significantly longer than the 4.5 months for patients who were treated with sorafenib. The authors concluded that selected patients who underwent tumor resection lived longer than patients who received systemic therapy with sorafenib first, despite the presence of macroscopic PVTT.

Lenvatinib is an approved treatment for patients with HCC. Because most patients with HCC have underlying cirrhosis, monitoring the underlying liver function is an important facet of patient management. Huynh and colleagues reported on patients in the REFLECT trial whose liver function deteriorated from CP-A to CP-B while receiving systemic therapy. This post hoc analysis included patients whose liver function deteriorated to CP-B or remained CP-A within 8 weeks of randomization to lenvatinib (CP-B: n = 60; CP-A: n = 413) or sorafenib (CP-B: n = 47; CP-A: n = 427). Patients receiving lenvatinib who developed CP-B cirrhosis compared with patients who maintained CP-A cirrhosis had a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 3.7 months (95% CI 1.8-7.4) vs 6.5 months (95% CI 5.6-7.4) and OS of 6.8 months (95% CI 2.6-10.3) vs 13.3 months (95% CI 11.6-16.1). CP-B patients receiving sorafenib had a median PFS and OS of only 0.5 months (95% CI 0.1-3.6) and 4.5 months (95% CI 2.9-6.1), respectively. No new safety signals were reported in CP-B patients. The investigators concluded that deterioration of liver function to CP-B does not require the discontinuation of lenvatinib therapy.

Finally, Brown and colleagues performed a meta-analysis of studies that evaluated transarterial radioembolization (TARE) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with HCC by reviewing 17 studies involving 2465 patients that directly compared TACE and TARE. TARE significantly prolonged the mean time to progression (17.5 vs 9.8 months; 95% CI 1.3-8.3 months) but resulted in comparable OS (absolute difference −0.55 months; 95% CI −1.95 to 3.05 months). Safety profiles appeared to favor TARE. The authors concluded that TACE and TARE should be compared in larger prospective studies to better compare survival, progression, and safety data.

Author and Disclosure Information

Nevena Damjanov, MD, Professor, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, University of Pennsylvania; Chief, Department of Hematology-Oncology, Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Nevena Damjanov, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:

Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: QED; Eisai

Received research grant from: Basilea; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Merck

Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Nevena Damjanov, MD, Professor, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, University of Pennsylvania; Chief, Department of Hematology-Oncology, Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Nevena Damjanov, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:

Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: QED; Eisai

Received research grant from: Basilea; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Merck

Author and Disclosure Information

Nevena Damjanov, MD, Professor, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, University of Pennsylvania; Chief, Department of Hematology-Oncology, Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Nevena Damjanov, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:

Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: QED; Eisai

Received research grant from: Basilea; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Merck

Dr. Damjanov scans the journals, so you don’t have to!
Dr. Damjanov scans the journals, so you don’t have to!

Nevena Damjanov, MD
Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) may benefit from liver-directed therapies or palliative systemic therapies. This month we will review articles that address management of patients who were treated with different standard treatment options.

Komatsu and colleagues performed a case-matched analysis to evaluate the best first-line treatment for HCC in patients with macroscopic portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT). Patients had advanced HCC and macroscopic PVTT that invaded an ipsilateral first-order portal branch, main trunk, or contralateral portal vein. The propensity score–matched groups underwent either hepatectomy (n = 36) or received sorafenib (n = 36). To be considered for resection, patients had to have Child-Pugh (CP) grade A or B liver function, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score of ≤ 1, life expectancy of > 3 months, and the macroscopic resection of the targeted tumor could be planned with an estimated remnant liver volume ≥ 35%.

Out of 36 patients who underwent surgery, 23 underwent reductive hepatectomy, and 13 underwent complete resection of tumor. Out of 36 patients who received sorafenib, 21 underwent subsequent treatments. The median overall survival (OS) of patients who underwent hepatectomy was 15.1 months, significantly longer than the 4.5 months for patients who were treated with sorafenib. The authors concluded that selected patients who underwent tumor resection lived longer than patients who received systemic therapy with sorafenib first, despite the presence of macroscopic PVTT.

Lenvatinib is an approved treatment for patients with HCC. Because most patients with HCC have underlying cirrhosis, monitoring the underlying liver function is an important facet of patient management. Huynh and colleagues reported on patients in the REFLECT trial whose liver function deteriorated from CP-A to CP-B while receiving systemic therapy. This post hoc analysis included patients whose liver function deteriorated to CP-B or remained CP-A within 8 weeks of randomization to lenvatinib (CP-B: n = 60; CP-A: n = 413) or sorafenib (CP-B: n = 47; CP-A: n = 427). Patients receiving lenvatinib who developed CP-B cirrhosis compared with patients who maintained CP-A cirrhosis had a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 3.7 months (95% CI 1.8-7.4) vs 6.5 months (95% CI 5.6-7.4) and OS of 6.8 months (95% CI 2.6-10.3) vs 13.3 months (95% CI 11.6-16.1). CP-B patients receiving sorafenib had a median PFS and OS of only 0.5 months (95% CI 0.1-3.6) and 4.5 months (95% CI 2.9-6.1), respectively. No new safety signals were reported in CP-B patients. The investigators concluded that deterioration of liver function to CP-B does not require the discontinuation of lenvatinib therapy.

Finally, Brown and colleagues performed a meta-analysis of studies that evaluated transarterial radioembolization (TARE) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with HCC by reviewing 17 studies involving 2465 patients that directly compared TACE and TARE. TARE significantly prolonged the mean time to progression (17.5 vs 9.8 months; 95% CI 1.3-8.3 months) but resulted in comparable OS (absolute difference −0.55 months; 95% CI −1.95 to 3.05 months). Safety profiles appeared to favor TARE. The authors concluded that TACE and TARE should be compared in larger prospective studies to better compare survival, progression, and safety data.

Nevena Damjanov, MD
Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) may benefit from liver-directed therapies or palliative systemic therapies. This month we will review articles that address management of patients who were treated with different standard treatment options.

Komatsu and colleagues performed a case-matched analysis to evaluate the best first-line treatment for HCC in patients with macroscopic portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT). Patients had advanced HCC and macroscopic PVTT that invaded an ipsilateral first-order portal branch, main trunk, or contralateral portal vein. The propensity score–matched groups underwent either hepatectomy (n = 36) or received sorafenib (n = 36). To be considered for resection, patients had to have Child-Pugh (CP) grade A or B liver function, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score of ≤ 1, life expectancy of > 3 months, and the macroscopic resection of the targeted tumor could be planned with an estimated remnant liver volume ≥ 35%.

Out of 36 patients who underwent surgery, 23 underwent reductive hepatectomy, and 13 underwent complete resection of tumor. Out of 36 patients who received sorafenib, 21 underwent subsequent treatments. The median overall survival (OS) of patients who underwent hepatectomy was 15.1 months, significantly longer than the 4.5 months for patients who were treated with sorafenib. The authors concluded that selected patients who underwent tumor resection lived longer than patients who received systemic therapy with sorafenib first, despite the presence of macroscopic PVTT.

Lenvatinib is an approved treatment for patients with HCC. Because most patients with HCC have underlying cirrhosis, monitoring the underlying liver function is an important facet of patient management. Huynh and colleagues reported on patients in the REFLECT trial whose liver function deteriorated from CP-A to CP-B while receiving systemic therapy. This post hoc analysis included patients whose liver function deteriorated to CP-B or remained CP-A within 8 weeks of randomization to lenvatinib (CP-B: n = 60; CP-A: n = 413) or sorafenib (CP-B: n = 47; CP-A: n = 427). Patients receiving lenvatinib who developed CP-B cirrhosis compared with patients who maintained CP-A cirrhosis had a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 3.7 months (95% CI 1.8-7.4) vs 6.5 months (95% CI 5.6-7.4) and OS of 6.8 months (95% CI 2.6-10.3) vs 13.3 months (95% CI 11.6-16.1). CP-B patients receiving sorafenib had a median PFS and OS of only 0.5 months (95% CI 0.1-3.6) and 4.5 months (95% CI 2.9-6.1), respectively. No new safety signals were reported in CP-B patients. The investigators concluded that deterioration of liver function to CP-B does not require the discontinuation of lenvatinib therapy.

Finally, Brown and colleagues performed a meta-analysis of studies that evaluated transarterial radioembolization (TARE) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with HCC by reviewing 17 studies involving 2465 patients that directly compared TACE and TARE. TARE significantly prolonged the mean time to progression (17.5 vs 9.8 months; 95% CI 1.3-8.3 months) but resulted in comparable OS (absolute difference −0.55 months; 95% CI −1.95 to 3.05 months). Safety profiles appeared to favor TARE. The authors concluded that TACE and TARE should be compared in larger prospective studies to better compare survival, progression, and safety data.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: HCC October 2022
Gate On Date
Un-Gate On Date
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Activity Salesforce Deliverable ID
332967.1
Activity ID
83146
Product Name
Clinical Edge Journal Scan
Product ID
124
Supporter Name /ID
Exact Sciences Corporate [ 6025 ]

Commentary: Evaluating HCC Treatments, October 2022

Article Type
Changed
Dr. Damjanov scans the journals, so you don’t have to!

Nevena Damjanov, MD
Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) may benefit from liver-directed therapies or palliative systemic therapies. This month we will review articles that address management of patients who were treated with different standard treatment options.

Komatsu and colleagues performed a case-matched analysis to evaluate the best first-line treatment for HCC in patients with macroscopic portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT). Patients had advanced HCC and macroscopic PVTT that invaded an ipsilateral first-order portal branch, main trunk, or contralateral portal vein. The propensity score–matched groups underwent either hepatectomy (n = 36) or received sorafenib (n = 36). To be considered for resection, patients had to have Child-Pugh (CP) grade A or B liver function, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score of ≤ 1, life expectancy of > 3 months, and the macroscopic resection of the targeted tumor could be planned with an estimated remnant liver volume ≥ 35%.

Out of 36 patients who underwent surgery, 23 underwent reductive hepatectomy, and 13 underwent complete resection of tumor. Out of 36 patients who received sorafenib, 21 underwent subsequent treatments. The median overall survival (OS) of patients who underwent hepatectomy was 15.1 months, significantly longer than the 4.5 months for patients who were treated with sorafenib. The authors concluded that selected patients who underwent tumor resection lived longer than patients who received systemic therapy with sorafenib first, despite the presence of macroscopic PVTT.

Lenvatinib is an approved treatment for patients with HCC. Because most patients with HCC have underlying cirrhosis, monitoring the underlying liver function is an important facet of patient management. Huynh and colleagues reported on patients in the REFLECT trial whose liver function deteriorated from CP-A to CP-B while receiving systemic therapy. This post hoc analysis included patients whose liver function deteriorated to CP-B or remained CP-A within 8 weeks of randomization to lenvatinib (CP-B: n = 60; CP-A: n = 413) or sorafenib (CP-B: n = 47; CP-A: n = 427). Patients receiving lenvatinib who developed CP-B cirrhosis compared with patients who maintained CP-A cirrhosis had a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 3.7 months (95% CI 1.8-7.4) vs 6.5 months (95% CI 5.6-7.4) and OS of 6.8 months (95% CI 2.6-10.3) vs 13.3 months (95% CI 11.6-16.1). CP-B patients receiving sorafenib had a median PFS and OS of only 0.5 months (95% CI 0.1-3.6) and 4.5 months (95% CI 2.9-6.1), respectively. No new safety signals were reported in CP-B patients. The investigators concluded that deterioration of liver function to CP-B does not require the discontinuation of lenvatinib therapy.

Finally, Brown and colleagues performed a meta-analysis of studies that evaluated transarterial radioembolization (TARE) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with HCC by reviewing 17 studies involving 2465 patients that directly compared TACE and TARE. TARE significantly prolonged the mean time to progression (17.5 vs 9.8 months; 95% CI 1.3-8.3 months) but resulted in comparable OS (absolute difference −0.55 months; 95% CI −1.95 to 3.05 months). Safety profiles appeared to favor TARE. The authors concluded that TACE and TARE should be compared in larger prospective studies to better compare survival, progression, and safety data.

Author and Disclosure Information

Nevena Damjanov, MD, Professor, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, University of Pennsylvania; Chief, Department of Hematology-Oncology, Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Nevena Damjanov, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:

Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: QED; Eisai

Received research grant from: Basilea; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Merck

Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Nevena Damjanov, MD, Professor, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, University of Pennsylvania; Chief, Department of Hematology-Oncology, Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Nevena Damjanov, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:

Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: QED; Eisai

Received research grant from: Basilea; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Merck

Author and Disclosure Information

Nevena Damjanov, MD, Professor, Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, University of Pennsylvania; Chief, Department of Hematology-Oncology, Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Nevena Damjanov, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:

Serve(d) as a director, officer, partner, employee, advisor, consultant, or trustee for: QED; Eisai

Received research grant from: Basilea; Bristol-Myers Squibb; Merck

Dr. Damjanov scans the journals, so you don’t have to!
Dr. Damjanov scans the journals, so you don’t have to!

Nevena Damjanov, MD
Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) may benefit from liver-directed therapies or palliative systemic therapies. This month we will review articles that address management of patients who were treated with different standard treatment options.

Komatsu and colleagues performed a case-matched analysis to evaluate the best first-line treatment for HCC in patients with macroscopic portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT). Patients had advanced HCC and macroscopic PVTT that invaded an ipsilateral first-order portal branch, main trunk, or contralateral portal vein. The propensity score–matched groups underwent either hepatectomy (n = 36) or received sorafenib (n = 36). To be considered for resection, patients had to have Child-Pugh (CP) grade A or B liver function, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score of ≤ 1, life expectancy of > 3 months, and the macroscopic resection of the targeted tumor could be planned with an estimated remnant liver volume ≥ 35%.

Out of 36 patients who underwent surgery, 23 underwent reductive hepatectomy, and 13 underwent complete resection of tumor. Out of 36 patients who received sorafenib, 21 underwent subsequent treatments. The median overall survival (OS) of patients who underwent hepatectomy was 15.1 months, significantly longer than the 4.5 months for patients who were treated with sorafenib. The authors concluded that selected patients who underwent tumor resection lived longer than patients who received systemic therapy with sorafenib first, despite the presence of macroscopic PVTT.

Lenvatinib is an approved treatment for patients with HCC. Because most patients with HCC have underlying cirrhosis, monitoring the underlying liver function is an important facet of patient management. Huynh and colleagues reported on patients in the REFLECT trial whose liver function deteriorated from CP-A to CP-B while receiving systemic therapy. This post hoc analysis included patients whose liver function deteriorated to CP-B or remained CP-A within 8 weeks of randomization to lenvatinib (CP-B: n = 60; CP-A: n = 413) or sorafenib (CP-B: n = 47; CP-A: n = 427). Patients receiving lenvatinib who developed CP-B cirrhosis compared with patients who maintained CP-A cirrhosis had a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 3.7 months (95% CI 1.8-7.4) vs 6.5 months (95% CI 5.6-7.4) and OS of 6.8 months (95% CI 2.6-10.3) vs 13.3 months (95% CI 11.6-16.1). CP-B patients receiving sorafenib had a median PFS and OS of only 0.5 months (95% CI 0.1-3.6) and 4.5 months (95% CI 2.9-6.1), respectively. No new safety signals were reported in CP-B patients. The investigators concluded that deterioration of liver function to CP-B does not require the discontinuation of lenvatinib therapy.

Finally, Brown and colleagues performed a meta-analysis of studies that evaluated transarterial radioembolization (TARE) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with HCC by reviewing 17 studies involving 2465 patients that directly compared TACE and TARE. TARE significantly prolonged the mean time to progression (17.5 vs 9.8 months; 95% CI 1.3-8.3 months) but resulted in comparable OS (absolute difference −0.55 months; 95% CI −1.95 to 3.05 months). Safety profiles appeared to favor TARE. The authors concluded that TACE and TARE should be compared in larger prospective studies to better compare survival, progression, and safety data.

Nevena Damjanov, MD
Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) may benefit from liver-directed therapies or palliative systemic therapies. This month we will review articles that address management of patients who were treated with different standard treatment options.

Komatsu and colleagues performed a case-matched analysis to evaluate the best first-line treatment for HCC in patients with macroscopic portal vein tumor thrombus (PVTT). Patients had advanced HCC and macroscopic PVTT that invaded an ipsilateral first-order portal branch, main trunk, or contralateral portal vein. The propensity score–matched groups underwent either hepatectomy (n = 36) or received sorafenib (n = 36). To be considered for resection, patients had to have Child-Pugh (CP) grade A or B liver function, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score of ≤ 1, life expectancy of > 3 months, and the macroscopic resection of the targeted tumor could be planned with an estimated remnant liver volume ≥ 35%.

Out of 36 patients who underwent surgery, 23 underwent reductive hepatectomy, and 13 underwent complete resection of tumor. Out of 36 patients who received sorafenib, 21 underwent subsequent treatments. The median overall survival (OS) of patients who underwent hepatectomy was 15.1 months, significantly longer than the 4.5 months for patients who were treated with sorafenib. The authors concluded that selected patients who underwent tumor resection lived longer than patients who received systemic therapy with sorafenib first, despite the presence of macroscopic PVTT.

Lenvatinib is an approved treatment for patients with HCC. Because most patients with HCC have underlying cirrhosis, monitoring the underlying liver function is an important facet of patient management. Huynh and colleagues reported on patients in the REFLECT trial whose liver function deteriorated from CP-A to CP-B while receiving systemic therapy. This post hoc analysis included patients whose liver function deteriorated to CP-B or remained CP-A within 8 weeks of randomization to lenvatinib (CP-B: n = 60; CP-A: n = 413) or sorafenib (CP-B: n = 47; CP-A: n = 427). Patients receiving lenvatinib who developed CP-B cirrhosis compared with patients who maintained CP-A cirrhosis had a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 3.7 months (95% CI 1.8-7.4) vs 6.5 months (95% CI 5.6-7.4) and OS of 6.8 months (95% CI 2.6-10.3) vs 13.3 months (95% CI 11.6-16.1). CP-B patients receiving sorafenib had a median PFS and OS of only 0.5 months (95% CI 0.1-3.6) and 4.5 months (95% CI 2.9-6.1), respectively. No new safety signals were reported in CP-B patients. The investigators concluded that deterioration of liver function to CP-B does not require the discontinuation of lenvatinib therapy.

Finally, Brown and colleagues performed a meta-analysis of studies that evaluated transarterial radioembolization (TARE) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with HCC by reviewing 17 studies involving 2465 patients that directly compared TACE and TARE. TARE significantly prolonged the mean time to progression (17.5 vs 9.8 months; 95% CI 1.3-8.3 months) but resulted in comparable OS (absolute difference −0.55 months; 95% CI −1.95 to 3.05 months). Safety profiles appeared to favor TARE. The authors concluded that TACE and TARE should be compared in larger prospective studies to better compare survival, progression, and safety data.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: HCC October 2022
Gate On Date
Un-Gate On Date
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Activity Salesforce Deliverable ID
332967.1
Activity ID
83146
Product Name
Clinical Edge Journal Scan
Product ID
124
Supporter Name /ID
Exact Sciences Corporate [ 6025 ]

Commentary: New Treatments and Fertility Preservation in BC, October 2022

Article Type
Changed
Dr. Roesch scans the journals, so you don't have to!

Erin Roesch, MD
The combination of endocrine therapy plus cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors has led to significant survival benefits in the first-line setting for hormone receptor–positive (HR+)/ human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer. However, the development of endocrine resistance poses a future challenge because sequential single-agent chemotherapy has historically been pursued in later lines of treatment.


The phase 3 TROPiCS-02 trial compared the trophoblast cell-surface antigen 2 (Trop-2)–directed antibody-drug conjugate sacituzumab govitecan with physician's choice of chemotherapy. There were 543 patients with HR+/HER2- locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic breast cancer that was also endocrine resistant and had been treated with two to four prior lines of chemotherapy in the advanced setting (Rugo et al). Sacituzumab govitecan led to a 34% reduction in risk for progression or death vs physician's choice of chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0.66; P = .0003; median progression-free survival [PFS], 5.5 months vs 4.0 months, respectively). The PFS at 6 and 12 months was 46% vs 30% and 21% vs 7% for sacituzumab govitecan and physician's choice chemotherapy, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 neutropenia and diarrhea were more common with sacituzumab govitecan than with physician's choice of chemotherapy (51% vs 9%) and were managed with supportive care measures.

Sacituzumab govitecan has previously proven an active drug for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, and the final results from the phase 3 ASCENT study1 confirmed a significant survival benefit with sacituzumab govitecan vs single-agent chemotherapy for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in the second-line or greater setting (median overall survival [OS] 12.1 vs 6.7 months; hazard ratio 0.48; P < .0001). Sacituzumab govitecan and other antibody-drug conjugates are emerging as active therapies for all subtypes of breast cancer, and more treatment options will inevitably yield future questions surrounding sequencing and resistance mechanisms.

The phase 3 NALA trial2 demonstrated superior outcomes with the combination of neratinib plus capecitabine vs lapatinib plus capecitabine among patients with previously treated HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (hazard ratio 0.76; 1-year PFS 29% vs 15%). Findings from a single-center retrospective study including 72 patients with HER2+ advanced breast cancer who received either neratinib plus capecitabine or neratinib alone support efficacy and tolerability in the real-world setting (Cunningham et al). Among all patients, the median PFS was 5.9 months and median OS was 15.0 months; for those with brain metastases (n = 38), median PFS and median OS were 5.7 and 12.5 months, respectively. The gastrointestinal toxicity of neratinib can affect its clinical use, and a total of 64% of patients in this study reported diarrhea (10% reported grade 3) despite using antidiarrheal prophylaxis.

The treatment algorithm for HER2+ metastatic breast cancer has been evolving at a rapid pace, specifically for second-line and beyond. Neratinib remains a relevant therapy choice for these patients. The central nervous system activity of neratinib and other tyrosine kinase inhibitors, such as tucatinib, often make these the preferred treatment options for patients with brain metastases and stimulate the idea of prevention of brain metastases at an earlier time point.

Young women with breast cancer encounter unique challenges related to the stage of life during which they are diagnosed. It is essential to consider the effect of cancer treatment on fertility, including direct effects of chemotherapy and the duration of endocrine therapy (5-10 years) that can delay attempts at conceiving. Potential concerns surrounding fertility preservation (FP) include the theoretical risk of increased estradiol levels and treatment delay to allow these procedures to occur; however, various studies have supported the safety of FP.3

A prospective cohort study including 1257 women of reproductive age who were diagnosed with breast cancer and underwent FP treatment demonstrated similar disease-specific mortality in women who underwent hormonal FP (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.59; 95% CI 0.32-1.09), those who underwent nonhormonal FP (aHR 0.51, 95% CI 0.20-1.29), and women who did not pursue FP (Marklund et al). Furthermore, among 723 women with detailed information on relapse there was no significant difference in rate of relapse or death among those who underwent hormonal FP (aHR 0.81; 95% CI 0.49-1.37) vs those who underwent nonhormonal FP (aHR 0.75; 95% CI 0.35-1.62).

The growing body of evidence in this field highlights the importance of oncofertility awareness for both patients and providers. Young women diagnosed with breast cancer should be offered referrals to fertility specialists when interested and educated on the safety of these approaches as it relates to breast cancer outcomes.

A multicenter retrospective study compared the efficacy and safety of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with letrozole (LetCOH) or without letrozole (cCOH) among 97 young women (≤ 40 years) diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer (Goldrat et al). The LetCOH group had lower peak estradiol levels (343 pg/mL vs 1009 pg/mL; P < .001) and higher oocyte maturation rates compared with the cCOH group, but a similar number of mature oocytes collected (P = .281). Disease recurrence occurred more frequently in the LetCOH group than in the cCOH group (17% vs 7.2%), and five patients in total had a distant recurrence (four undergoing LetCOH vs one undergoing cCOH).

The LetCOH group did have larger tumors and a higher number of HER2+ cancers. These findings suggest that a COH protocol using letrozole can yield FP outcomes similar to those of the conventional protocol while minimizing exposure to high levels of estradiol. Extended follow-up and future prospective studies will be essential to gain survival data and further define the roles of various FP procedures.

Additional References

  1. Bardia A, Tolaney SM, Loirat D, et al. Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) versus treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in patients (pts) with previously treated, metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC): final results from the phase 3 ASCENT study. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(16 Suppl):107 Doi: 10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.1071
  2. Saura C, Oliveira M, Feng YH, et al. Neratinib plus capecitabine versus lapatinib plus capecitabine in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer previously treated with ≥ 2 HER2-directed regimens: phase III NALA trial. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38:3138-3149. Doi: 10.1200/JCO.20.00147
  3. Moravek MB, Confino R, Lawson AK, et al. Predictors and outcomes in breast cancer patients who did or did not pursue fertility preservation. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2021;186:429-437. Doi: 10.1007/s10549-020-06031-4

 

Author and Disclosure Information

Erin E. Roesch, MD, Associate Staff, Department of Medical Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
Erin E. Roesch, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:
Serve(d) as a speaker or a member of a speakers bureau for: Puma Biotechnology

Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Erin E. Roesch, MD, Associate Staff, Department of Medical Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
Erin E. Roesch, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:
Serve(d) as a speaker or a member of a speakers bureau for: Puma Biotechnology

Author and Disclosure Information

Erin E. Roesch, MD, Associate Staff, Department of Medical Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
Erin E. Roesch, MD, has disclosed the following relevant financial relationships:
Serve(d) as a speaker or a member of a speakers bureau for: Puma Biotechnology

Dr. Roesch scans the journals, so you don't have to!
Dr. Roesch scans the journals, so you don't have to!

Erin Roesch, MD
The combination of endocrine therapy plus cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors has led to significant survival benefits in the first-line setting for hormone receptor–positive (HR+)/ human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer. However, the development of endocrine resistance poses a future challenge because sequential single-agent chemotherapy has historically been pursued in later lines of treatment.


The phase 3 TROPiCS-02 trial compared the trophoblast cell-surface antigen 2 (Trop-2)–directed antibody-drug conjugate sacituzumab govitecan with physician's choice of chemotherapy. There were 543 patients with HR+/HER2- locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic breast cancer that was also endocrine resistant and had been treated with two to four prior lines of chemotherapy in the advanced setting (Rugo et al). Sacituzumab govitecan led to a 34% reduction in risk for progression or death vs physician's choice of chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0.66; P = .0003; median progression-free survival [PFS], 5.5 months vs 4.0 months, respectively). The PFS at 6 and 12 months was 46% vs 30% and 21% vs 7% for sacituzumab govitecan and physician's choice chemotherapy, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 neutropenia and diarrhea were more common with sacituzumab govitecan than with physician's choice of chemotherapy (51% vs 9%) and were managed with supportive care measures.

Sacituzumab govitecan has previously proven an active drug for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, and the final results from the phase 3 ASCENT study1 confirmed a significant survival benefit with sacituzumab govitecan vs single-agent chemotherapy for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in the second-line or greater setting (median overall survival [OS] 12.1 vs 6.7 months; hazard ratio 0.48; P < .0001). Sacituzumab govitecan and other antibody-drug conjugates are emerging as active therapies for all subtypes of breast cancer, and more treatment options will inevitably yield future questions surrounding sequencing and resistance mechanisms.

The phase 3 NALA trial2 demonstrated superior outcomes with the combination of neratinib plus capecitabine vs lapatinib plus capecitabine among patients with previously treated HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (hazard ratio 0.76; 1-year PFS 29% vs 15%). Findings from a single-center retrospective study including 72 patients with HER2+ advanced breast cancer who received either neratinib plus capecitabine or neratinib alone support efficacy and tolerability in the real-world setting (Cunningham et al). Among all patients, the median PFS was 5.9 months and median OS was 15.0 months; for those with brain metastases (n = 38), median PFS and median OS were 5.7 and 12.5 months, respectively. The gastrointestinal toxicity of neratinib can affect its clinical use, and a total of 64% of patients in this study reported diarrhea (10% reported grade 3) despite using antidiarrheal prophylaxis.

The treatment algorithm for HER2+ metastatic breast cancer has been evolving at a rapid pace, specifically for second-line and beyond. Neratinib remains a relevant therapy choice for these patients. The central nervous system activity of neratinib and other tyrosine kinase inhibitors, such as tucatinib, often make these the preferred treatment options for patients with brain metastases and stimulate the idea of prevention of brain metastases at an earlier time point.

Young women with breast cancer encounter unique challenges related to the stage of life during which they are diagnosed. It is essential to consider the effect of cancer treatment on fertility, including direct effects of chemotherapy and the duration of endocrine therapy (5-10 years) that can delay attempts at conceiving. Potential concerns surrounding fertility preservation (FP) include the theoretical risk of increased estradiol levels and treatment delay to allow these procedures to occur; however, various studies have supported the safety of FP.3

A prospective cohort study including 1257 women of reproductive age who were diagnosed with breast cancer and underwent FP treatment demonstrated similar disease-specific mortality in women who underwent hormonal FP (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.59; 95% CI 0.32-1.09), those who underwent nonhormonal FP (aHR 0.51, 95% CI 0.20-1.29), and women who did not pursue FP (Marklund et al). Furthermore, among 723 women with detailed information on relapse there was no significant difference in rate of relapse or death among those who underwent hormonal FP (aHR 0.81; 95% CI 0.49-1.37) vs those who underwent nonhormonal FP (aHR 0.75; 95% CI 0.35-1.62).

The growing body of evidence in this field highlights the importance of oncofertility awareness for both patients and providers. Young women diagnosed with breast cancer should be offered referrals to fertility specialists when interested and educated on the safety of these approaches as it relates to breast cancer outcomes.

A multicenter retrospective study compared the efficacy and safety of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with letrozole (LetCOH) or without letrozole (cCOH) among 97 young women (≤ 40 years) diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer (Goldrat et al). The LetCOH group had lower peak estradiol levels (343 pg/mL vs 1009 pg/mL; P < .001) and higher oocyte maturation rates compared with the cCOH group, but a similar number of mature oocytes collected (P = .281). Disease recurrence occurred more frequently in the LetCOH group than in the cCOH group (17% vs 7.2%), and five patients in total had a distant recurrence (four undergoing LetCOH vs one undergoing cCOH).

The LetCOH group did have larger tumors and a higher number of HER2+ cancers. These findings suggest that a COH protocol using letrozole can yield FP outcomes similar to those of the conventional protocol while minimizing exposure to high levels of estradiol. Extended follow-up and future prospective studies will be essential to gain survival data and further define the roles of various FP procedures.

Additional References

  1. Bardia A, Tolaney SM, Loirat D, et al. Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) versus treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in patients (pts) with previously treated, metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC): final results from the phase 3 ASCENT study. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(16 Suppl):107 Doi: 10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.1071
  2. Saura C, Oliveira M, Feng YH, et al. Neratinib plus capecitabine versus lapatinib plus capecitabine in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer previously treated with ≥ 2 HER2-directed regimens: phase III NALA trial. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38:3138-3149. Doi: 10.1200/JCO.20.00147
  3. Moravek MB, Confino R, Lawson AK, et al. Predictors and outcomes in breast cancer patients who did or did not pursue fertility preservation. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2021;186:429-437. Doi: 10.1007/s10549-020-06031-4

 

Erin Roesch, MD
The combination of endocrine therapy plus cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors has led to significant survival benefits in the first-line setting for hormone receptor–positive (HR+)/ human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer. However, the development of endocrine resistance poses a future challenge because sequential single-agent chemotherapy has historically been pursued in later lines of treatment.


The phase 3 TROPiCS-02 trial compared the trophoblast cell-surface antigen 2 (Trop-2)–directed antibody-drug conjugate sacituzumab govitecan with physician's choice of chemotherapy. There were 543 patients with HR+/HER2- locally recurrent inoperable or metastatic breast cancer that was also endocrine resistant and had been treated with two to four prior lines of chemotherapy in the advanced setting (Rugo et al). Sacituzumab govitecan led to a 34% reduction in risk for progression or death vs physician's choice of chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0.66; P = .0003; median progression-free survival [PFS], 5.5 months vs 4.0 months, respectively). The PFS at 6 and 12 months was 46% vs 30% and 21% vs 7% for sacituzumab govitecan and physician's choice chemotherapy, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 neutropenia and diarrhea were more common with sacituzumab govitecan than with physician's choice of chemotherapy (51% vs 9%) and were managed with supportive care measures.

Sacituzumab govitecan has previously proven an active drug for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, and the final results from the phase 3 ASCENT study1 confirmed a significant survival benefit with sacituzumab govitecan vs single-agent chemotherapy for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer in the second-line or greater setting (median overall survival [OS] 12.1 vs 6.7 months; hazard ratio 0.48; P < .0001). Sacituzumab govitecan and other antibody-drug conjugates are emerging as active therapies for all subtypes of breast cancer, and more treatment options will inevitably yield future questions surrounding sequencing and resistance mechanisms.

The phase 3 NALA trial2 demonstrated superior outcomes with the combination of neratinib plus capecitabine vs lapatinib plus capecitabine among patients with previously treated HER2+ metastatic breast cancer (hazard ratio 0.76; 1-year PFS 29% vs 15%). Findings from a single-center retrospective study including 72 patients with HER2+ advanced breast cancer who received either neratinib plus capecitabine or neratinib alone support efficacy and tolerability in the real-world setting (Cunningham et al). Among all patients, the median PFS was 5.9 months and median OS was 15.0 months; for those with brain metastases (n = 38), median PFS and median OS were 5.7 and 12.5 months, respectively. The gastrointestinal toxicity of neratinib can affect its clinical use, and a total of 64% of patients in this study reported diarrhea (10% reported grade 3) despite using antidiarrheal prophylaxis.

The treatment algorithm for HER2+ metastatic breast cancer has been evolving at a rapid pace, specifically for second-line and beyond. Neratinib remains a relevant therapy choice for these patients. The central nervous system activity of neratinib and other tyrosine kinase inhibitors, such as tucatinib, often make these the preferred treatment options for patients with brain metastases and stimulate the idea of prevention of brain metastases at an earlier time point.

Young women with breast cancer encounter unique challenges related to the stage of life during which they are diagnosed. It is essential to consider the effect of cancer treatment on fertility, including direct effects of chemotherapy and the duration of endocrine therapy (5-10 years) that can delay attempts at conceiving. Potential concerns surrounding fertility preservation (FP) include the theoretical risk of increased estradiol levels and treatment delay to allow these procedures to occur; however, various studies have supported the safety of FP.3

A prospective cohort study including 1257 women of reproductive age who were diagnosed with breast cancer and underwent FP treatment demonstrated similar disease-specific mortality in women who underwent hormonal FP (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.59; 95% CI 0.32-1.09), those who underwent nonhormonal FP (aHR 0.51, 95% CI 0.20-1.29), and women who did not pursue FP (Marklund et al). Furthermore, among 723 women with detailed information on relapse there was no significant difference in rate of relapse or death among those who underwent hormonal FP (aHR 0.81; 95% CI 0.49-1.37) vs those who underwent nonhormonal FP (aHR 0.75; 95% CI 0.35-1.62).

The growing body of evidence in this field highlights the importance of oncofertility awareness for both patients and providers. Young women diagnosed with breast cancer should be offered referrals to fertility specialists when interested and educated on the safety of these approaches as it relates to breast cancer outcomes.

A multicenter retrospective study compared the efficacy and safety of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with letrozole (LetCOH) or without letrozole (cCOH) among 97 young women (≤ 40 years) diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer (Goldrat et al). The LetCOH group had lower peak estradiol levels (343 pg/mL vs 1009 pg/mL; P < .001) and higher oocyte maturation rates compared with the cCOH group, but a similar number of mature oocytes collected (P = .281). Disease recurrence occurred more frequently in the LetCOH group than in the cCOH group (17% vs 7.2%), and five patients in total had a distant recurrence (four undergoing LetCOH vs one undergoing cCOH).

The LetCOH group did have larger tumors and a higher number of HER2+ cancers. These findings suggest that a COH protocol using letrozole can yield FP outcomes similar to those of the conventional protocol while minimizing exposure to high levels of estradiol. Extended follow-up and future prospective studies will be essential to gain survival data and further define the roles of various FP procedures.

Additional References

  1. Bardia A, Tolaney SM, Loirat D, et al. Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) versus treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in patients (pts) with previously treated, metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC): final results from the phase 3 ASCENT study. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(16 Suppl):107 Doi: 10.1200/JCO.2022.40.16_suppl.1071
  2. Saura C, Oliveira M, Feng YH, et al. Neratinib plus capecitabine versus lapatinib plus capecitabine in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer previously treated with ≥ 2 HER2-directed regimens: phase III NALA trial. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38:3138-3149. Doi: 10.1200/JCO.20.00147
  3. Moravek MB, Confino R, Lawson AK, et al. Predictors and outcomes in breast cancer patients who did or did not pursue fertility preservation. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2021;186:429-437. Doi: 10.1007/s10549-020-06031-4

 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Breast Cancer October 2022
Gate On Date
Un-Gate On Date
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Activity Salesforce Deliverable ID
329444.1
Activity ID
77844
Product Name
Clinical Edge Journal Scan
Product ID
124
Supporter Name /ID
Kadcyla [ 3564 ]

Commentary: IBS and comorbid conditions, October 2022

Article Type
Changed
APN Kametas scans the journals, so you don’t have to!

Marita Kametas, MSN, FNP-BC, CMSRN, COCN
Three studies this month highlight the increased incidence of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) in the setting of other chronic diseases, specifically diseases with an effect on the abdomen and pelvis:
  • Fairbrass et al: Natural history and impact of IBS-type symptoms in inflammatory bowel disease during 6 years of longitudinal follow-up
  • Nabi et al: Endometriosis and IBS — a systematic review and meta-analyses
  • Wang et al: Factors related to IBS and differences among subtypes — a cross-sectional study in the UK Biobank

Combined diseases can make assessment and treatment very difficult for clinicians. Having a thorough understanding of the pathophysiology and phenotype of each of these diseases is imperative to ensuring that they are managed to the standard of care. When these diseases are in remission and abdominal symptoms persist, it begs the question what is the cause? IBS should always be in the differential diagnosis. The dynamic relationship between the varying presentations of IBS and co-occurring conditions can greatly affect the patient's quality of life and experience with the healthcare system. Thus, it is vital to implement an interdisciplinary approach in order to comprehensively care for the patient and build a therapeutic relationship with the patient. Establishing short-term and long-term goals through shared decision-making will create a foundation of trust and allow for improved patient experience.

Author and Disclosure Information

Marita Kametas, MSN,  FNP-BC, CMSRN, COCN, Advanced Practice Nurse, Department of Digestive Diseases, The University of Chicago Medicine, Chicage, Illinois

APN Kametas is an active member of the Abbvie Speakers’ Bureau

Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Marita Kametas, MSN,  FNP-BC, CMSRN, COCN, Advanced Practice Nurse, Department of Digestive Diseases, The University of Chicago Medicine, Chicage, Illinois

APN Kametas is an active member of the Abbvie Speakers’ Bureau

Author and Disclosure Information

Marita Kametas, MSN,  FNP-BC, CMSRN, COCN, Advanced Practice Nurse, Department of Digestive Diseases, The University of Chicago Medicine, Chicage, Illinois

APN Kametas is an active member of the Abbvie Speakers’ Bureau

APN Kametas scans the journals, so you don’t have to!
APN Kametas scans the journals, so you don’t have to!

Marita Kametas, MSN, FNP-BC, CMSRN, COCN
Three studies this month highlight the increased incidence of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) in the setting of other chronic diseases, specifically diseases with an effect on the abdomen and pelvis:
  • Fairbrass et al: Natural history and impact of IBS-type symptoms in inflammatory bowel disease during 6 years of longitudinal follow-up
  • Nabi et al: Endometriosis and IBS — a systematic review and meta-analyses
  • Wang et al: Factors related to IBS and differences among subtypes — a cross-sectional study in the UK Biobank

Combined diseases can make assessment and treatment very difficult for clinicians. Having a thorough understanding of the pathophysiology and phenotype of each of these diseases is imperative to ensuring that they are managed to the standard of care. When these diseases are in remission and abdominal symptoms persist, it begs the question what is the cause? IBS should always be in the differential diagnosis. The dynamic relationship between the varying presentations of IBS and co-occurring conditions can greatly affect the patient's quality of life and experience with the healthcare system. Thus, it is vital to implement an interdisciplinary approach in order to comprehensively care for the patient and build a therapeutic relationship with the patient. Establishing short-term and long-term goals through shared decision-making will create a foundation of trust and allow for improved patient experience.

Marita Kametas, MSN, FNP-BC, CMSRN, COCN
Three studies this month highlight the increased incidence of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) in the setting of other chronic diseases, specifically diseases with an effect on the abdomen and pelvis:
  • Fairbrass et al: Natural history and impact of IBS-type symptoms in inflammatory bowel disease during 6 years of longitudinal follow-up
  • Nabi et al: Endometriosis and IBS — a systematic review and meta-analyses
  • Wang et al: Factors related to IBS and differences among subtypes — a cross-sectional study in the UK Biobank

Combined diseases can make assessment and treatment very difficult for clinicians. Having a thorough understanding of the pathophysiology and phenotype of each of these diseases is imperative to ensuring that they are managed to the standard of care. When these diseases are in remission and abdominal symptoms persist, it begs the question what is the cause? IBS should always be in the differential diagnosis. The dynamic relationship between the varying presentations of IBS and co-occurring conditions can greatly affect the patient's quality of life and experience with the healthcare system. Thus, it is vital to implement an interdisciplinary approach in order to comprehensively care for the patient and build a therapeutic relationship with the patient. Establishing short-term and long-term goals through shared decision-making will create a foundation of trust and allow for improved patient experience.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: IBS October 2022
Gate On Date
Un-Gate On Date
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Activity Salesforce Deliverable ID
334012
Activity ID
87195
Product Name
Clinical Edge Journal Scan
Product ID
124
Supporter Name /ID
IBSRELA [6066]

Commentary: New Topical Approaches Hit the Spots (and the Itch) for AD, October 2022

Article Type
Changed
Dr. Silverberg scans the journals, so you don’t have to!

Jonathan Silverberg, MD, PhD, MPH
Over the past few months, I have commented on cutting-edge data supporting the use of multiple agents that were recently approved for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD), including injectable dupilumab and tralokinumab, oral abrocitinib, baricitinib and upadacitinib, and topical ruxolitinib. In this month's Clinical Edge Journal Scan commentary, I would like to address recent data for several novel topical treatments in AD.

The Janus kinase (JAK) family has become a popular target for novel drug development. There are four JAK subunits, JAK1, JAK2, JAK3, and TYK2, each playing different roles in vital immunologic, hematologic, and homeostatic functions. A wide array of topical JAK-inhibitors has been or are currently being investigated for the treatment of AD, each with different profiles of selectivity across the JAK family.

Ruxolitinib is a preferential JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor. Oral ruxolitinib is currently approved for the treatment of myelofibrosis. Topical ruxolitinib cream is also approved in the United States for the treatment of mild-to-moderate AD and, more recently, vitiligo.

Blauvelt and colleagues published the findings from a post hoc analysis of data related to itch responses from two randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, phase 3 studies of patients with mild-to-moderate AD. Topical ruxolitinib applied twice daily led to a significant increase in the proportion of patients achieving at least a 2-point or 4-point reduction in Peak Pruritus Numeric Rating Scale (PP-NRS) within 12 hours of initial application and continued improvements out to week 8. Patients treated with ruxolitinib cream were also significantly more likely to achieve an itch-free state and faster reductions in itch compared with vehicle. Rapid improvement of itch is an important feature for any topical therapy that may be used as needed for AD flares.

Brepocitinib is a preferential JAK1 and tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor. Oral brepocitinib is currently under investigation for several immune-mediated disorders, including dermatomyositis and lupus. Topical brepocitinib cream was also studied in a randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, phase 2 study of patients with mild-to-moderate AD. Brepocitinib cream applied daily or twice daily led to significant decreases in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), increases in the proportion of patients who achieved Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) scores of clear or almost clear, EASI-75 responses, and 2-point or 4-point reductions in PP-NRS. Overall, topical brepocitinib was well tolerated. Though more studies are needed, topical brepocitinib may become an important addition to our toolbox for managing AD and perhaps other chronic inflammatory skin diseases.

Let's move along to yet another novel mechanism studied in AD: ectoine. Ectoine is a naturally derived chemical from some bacteria that can act as an osmolyte and protect organisms from osmotic stress. It is used in some skin care products because it can protect against xerosis and ultraviolet exposure. Alexopoulos and colleagues published the results of a randomized, single-blind, vehicle-controlled study of a novel cream containing 1% ectoine and 0.1% hyaluronic acid (EHA) in children with mild-to-moderate AD. At week 4, application of EHA cream led to significant decreases in SCORing AD (SCORAD) and IGA scores compared with vehicle cream as well all secondary outcome measures. EHA cream was well-tolerated overall, with most adverse events being cutaneous and mild.

All of these topical agents were studied as "reactive" therapies, ie, to be applied to active AD lesions. It would be nice to have approaches that can also prevent AD. Ní Chaoimh and colleagues published findings from the STOP AD trial that examined whether routine application of emollients in the first 8 weeks of life can prevent AD at age 12 months. They found that early emollient use resulted in significantly lower incidence of AD and similar rates of skin infections at age 12 months. Previous studies found mixed results regarding the efficacy of routine application of emollients in newborns. Though more studies are needed, these results are promising and suggest that early life use of emollients could be a cheap, feasible, and effective option to prevent AD.

Author and Disclosure Information

Jonathan Silverberg, MD, PHD, MPH
George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences
Washington, DC

Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Jonathan Silverberg, MD, PHD, MPH
George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences
Washington, DC

Author and Disclosure Information

Jonathan Silverberg, MD, PHD, MPH
George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences
Washington, DC

Dr. Silverberg scans the journals, so you don’t have to!
Dr. Silverberg scans the journals, so you don’t have to!

Jonathan Silverberg, MD, PhD, MPH
Over the past few months, I have commented on cutting-edge data supporting the use of multiple agents that were recently approved for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD), including injectable dupilumab and tralokinumab, oral abrocitinib, baricitinib and upadacitinib, and topical ruxolitinib. In this month's Clinical Edge Journal Scan commentary, I would like to address recent data for several novel topical treatments in AD.

The Janus kinase (JAK) family has become a popular target for novel drug development. There are four JAK subunits, JAK1, JAK2, JAK3, and TYK2, each playing different roles in vital immunologic, hematologic, and homeostatic functions. A wide array of topical JAK-inhibitors has been or are currently being investigated for the treatment of AD, each with different profiles of selectivity across the JAK family.

Ruxolitinib is a preferential JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor. Oral ruxolitinib is currently approved for the treatment of myelofibrosis. Topical ruxolitinib cream is also approved in the United States for the treatment of mild-to-moderate AD and, more recently, vitiligo.

Blauvelt and colleagues published the findings from a post hoc analysis of data related to itch responses from two randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, phase 3 studies of patients with mild-to-moderate AD. Topical ruxolitinib applied twice daily led to a significant increase in the proportion of patients achieving at least a 2-point or 4-point reduction in Peak Pruritus Numeric Rating Scale (PP-NRS) within 12 hours of initial application and continued improvements out to week 8. Patients treated with ruxolitinib cream were also significantly more likely to achieve an itch-free state and faster reductions in itch compared with vehicle. Rapid improvement of itch is an important feature for any topical therapy that may be used as needed for AD flares.

Brepocitinib is a preferential JAK1 and tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor. Oral brepocitinib is currently under investigation for several immune-mediated disorders, including dermatomyositis and lupus. Topical brepocitinib cream was also studied in a randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, phase 2 study of patients with mild-to-moderate AD. Brepocitinib cream applied daily or twice daily led to significant decreases in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), increases in the proportion of patients who achieved Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) scores of clear or almost clear, EASI-75 responses, and 2-point or 4-point reductions in PP-NRS. Overall, topical brepocitinib was well tolerated. Though more studies are needed, topical brepocitinib may become an important addition to our toolbox for managing AD and perhaps other chronic inflammatory skin diseases.

Let's move along to yet another novel mechanism studied in AD: ectoine. Ectoine is a naturally derived chemical from some bacteria that can act as an osmolyte and protect organisms from osmotic stress. It is used in some skin care products because it can protect against xerosis and ultraviolet exposure. Alexopoulos and colleagues published the results of a randomized, single-blind, vehicle-controlled study of a novel cream containing 1% ectoine and 0.1% hyaluronic acid (EHA) in children with mild-to-moderate AD. At week 4, application of EHA cream led to significant decreases in SCORing AD (SCORAD) and IGA scores compared with vehicle cream as well all secondary outcome measures. EHA cream was well-tolerated overall, with most adverse events being cutaneous and mild.

All of these topical agents were studied as "reactive" therapies, ie, to be applied to active AD lesions. It would be nice to have approaches that can also prevent AD. Ní Chaoimh and colleagues published findings from the STOP AD trial that examined whether routine application of emollients in the first 8 weeks of life can prevent AD at age 12 months. They found that early emollient use resulted in significantly lower incidence of AD and similar rates of skin infections at age 12 months. Previous studies found mixed results regarding the efficacy of routine application of emollients in newborns. Though more studies are needed, these results are promising and suggest that early life use of emollients could be a cheap, feasible, and effective option to prevent AD.

Jonathan Silverberg, MD, PhD, MPH
Over the past few months, I have commented on cutting-edge data supporting the use of multiple agents that were recently approved for the treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD), including injectable dupilumab and tralokinumab, oral abrocitinib, baricitinib and upadacitinib, and topical ruxolitinib. In this month's Clinical Edge Journal Scan commentary, I would like to address recent data for several novel topical treatments in AD.

The Janus kinase (JAK) family has become a popular target for novel drug development. There are four JAK subunits, JAK1, JAK2, JAK3, and TYK2, each playing different roles in vital immunologic, hematologic, and homeostatic functions. A wide array of topical JAK-inhibitors has been or are currently being investigated for the treatment of AD, each with different profiles of selectivity across the JAK family.

Ruxolitinib is a preferential JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor. Oral ruxolitinib is currently approved for the treatment of myelofibrosis. Topical ruxolitinib cream is also approved in the United States for the treatment of mild-to-moderate AD and, more recently, vitiligo.

Blauvelt and colleagues published the findings from a post hoc analysis of data related to itch responses from two randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, phase 3 studies of patients with mild-to-moderate AD. Topical ruxolitinib applied twice daily led to a significant increase in the proportion of patients achieving at least a 2-point or 4-point reduction in Peak Pruritus Numeric Rating Scale (PP-NRS) within 12 hours of initial application and continued improvements out to week 8. Patients treated with ruxolitinib cream were also significantly more likely to achieve an itch-free state and faster reductions in itch compared with vehicle. Rapid improvement of itch is an important feature for any topical therapy that may be used as needed for AD flares.

Brepocitinib is a preferential JAK1 and tyrosine kinase 2 inhibitor. Oral brepocitinib is currently under investigation for several immune-mediated disorders, including dermatomyositis and lupus. Topical brepocitinib cream was also studied in a randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, phase 2 study of patients with mild-to-moderate AD. Brepocitinib cream applied daily or twice daily led to significant decreases in the Eczema Area and Severity Index (EASI), increases in the proportion of patients who achieved Investigator Global Assessment (IGA) scores of clear or almost clear, EASI-75 responses, and 2-point or 4-point reductions in PP-NRS. Overall, topical brepocitinib was well tolerated. Though more studies are needed, topical brepocitinib may become an important addition to our toolbox for managing AD and perhaps other chronic inflammatory skin diseases.

Let's move along to yet another novel mechanism studied in AD: ectoine. Ectoine is a naturally derived chemical from some bacteria that can act as an osmolyte and protect organisms from osmotic stress. It is used in some skin care products because it can protect against xerosis and ultraviolet exposure. Alexopoulos and colleagues published the results of a randomized, single-blind, vehicle-controlled study of a novel cream containing 1% ectoine and 0.1% hyaluronic acid (EHA) in children with mild-to-moderate AD. At week 4, application of EHA cream led to significant decreases in SCORing AD (SCORAD) and IGA scores compared with vehicle cream as well all secondary outcome measures. EHA cream was well-tolerated overall, with most adverse events being cutaneous and mild.

All of these topical agents were studied as "reactive" therapies, ie, to be applied to active AD lesions. It would be nice to have approaches that can also prevent AD. Ní Chaoimh and colleagues published findings from the STOP AD trial that examined whether routine application of emollients in the first 8 weeks of life can prevent AD at age 12 months. They found that early emollient use resulted in significantly lower incidence of AD and similar rates of skin infections at age 12 months. Previous studies found mixed results regarding the efficacy of routine application of emollients in newborns. Though more studies are needed, these results are promising and suggest that early life use of emollients could be a cheap, feasible, and effective option to prevent AD.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Atopic Dermatitis October 2022
Gate On Date
Un-Gate On Date
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Activity Salesforce Deliverable ID
325140.4
Activity ID
77941
Product Name
Clinical Edge Journal Scan
Product ID
124
Supporter Name /ID
RINVOQ [ 5260 ]

Hypertensive disorder during pregnancy increases risk for elevated blood pressure in offspring

Article Type
Changed

Key clinical point: Offspring who were exposed in utero to any subtype of hypertensive disorders during pregnancy (HDP) were at an increased risk for higher blood pressure (BP) than those with no exposure.

 

Major finding: In utero exposure vs no exposure to HDP was associated with higher systolic BP (mean difference 2.46 mm Hg; 95% CI 1.88-3.03 mm Hg) in offspring. Higher systolic BP was also observed in offspring exposed vs not exposed in utero to HDP subtypes, including pregnancy-associated hypertension, preeclampsia, gestational hypertension, and chronic hypertension.

 

Study details: Findings are from a systematic review and meta-analysis of 24 cohort studies including 3839 offspring who were exposed to HDP in utero and 57,977 offspring from normotensive mothers.

 

Disclosures: This study was partly supported by Sichuan Science and Technology Program, China. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

 

Source: Yu H et al. Association between hypertensive disorders during pregnancy and elevated blood pressure in offspring: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2022 (Sep 12). Doi: 10.1111/jch.14577

 

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: Offspring who were exposed in utero to any subtype of hypertensive disorders during pregnancy (HDP) were at an increased risk for higher blood pressure (BP) than those with no exposure.

 

Major finding: In utero exposure vs no exposure to HDP was associated with higher systolic BP (mean difference 2.46 mm Hg; 95% CI 1.88-3.03 mm Hg) in offspring. Higher systolic BP was also observed in offspring exposed vs not exposed in utero to HDP subtypes, including pregnancy-associated hypertension, preeclampsia, gestational hypertension, and chronic hypertension.

 

Study details: Findings are from a systematic review and meta-analysis of 24 cohort studies including 3839 offspring who were exposed to HDP in utero and 57,977 offspring from normotensive mothers.

 

Disclosures: This study was partly supported by Sichuan Science and Technology Program, China. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

 

Source: Yu H et al. Association between hypertensive disorders during pregnancy and elevated blood pressure in offspring: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2022 (Sep 12). Doi: 10.1111/jch.14577

 

Key clinical point: Offspring who were exposed in utero to any subtype of hypertensive disorders during pregnancy (HDP) were at an increased risk for higher blood pressure (BP) than those with no exposure.

 

Major finding: In utero exposure vs no exposure to HDP was associated with higher systolic BP (mean difference 2.46 mm Hg; 95% CI 1.88-3.03 mm Hg) in offspring. Higher systolic BP was also observed in offspring exposed vs not exposed in utero to HDP subtypes, including pregnancy-associated hypertension, preeclampsia, gestational hypertension, and chronic hypertension.

 

Study details: Findings are from a systematic review and meta-analysis of 24 cohort studies including 3839 offspring who were exposed to HDP in utero and 57,977 offspring from normotensive mothers.

 

Disclosures: This study was partly supported by Sichuan Science and Technology Program, China. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

 

Source: Yu H et al. Association between hypertensive disorders during pregnancy and elevated blood pressure in offspring: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2022 (Sep 12). Doi: 10.1111/jch.14577

 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Obstetric Emergencies October 2022
Gate On Date
Un-Gate On Date
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article

Obstetrics injuries and management during shoulder dystocia

Article Type
Changed

Key clinical point: The risk for brachial plexus strain, injury, or tear can be minimized with prompt identification of shoulder dystocia (SD) accompanied by cessation of axial fetal head traction, while accurate obstetrical maneuvers can avoid permanent obstetric brachial palsy (OBP) or cerebral morbidity.

 

Major finding: SD was mostly unilateral anterior, with only 0.9% of cases diagnosed as the more difficult bilateral SD and 2% as recurrent SD. The majority (87.4%) of SD cases were managed by McRobert’s maneuver; the other management procedures included Barnum’s procedure (7.9%), Wood’s maneuver (3.9%), and Menticoglou procedure (0.4%). Only 7.5% of newborns were diagnosed with transient form of Duchenne Erb obstetrics brachioparesis (OBP), none with permanent OBP, and only 1 with cerebral morbidity.

 

Study details: This retrospective study analyzed the data of 45,687 singleton deliveries (vaginal deliveries, 78.9%; cesarean sections, 21.1%). Overall, 0.7% of vaginally delivered neonates had fetal SD.

Disclosures: No source of funding was reported. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

 

Source: Habek D et al. Obstetrics injuries during shoulder dystocia in a tertiary perinatal center. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2022;278:33-37 (Sep 10). Doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.09.009

Publications
Topics
Sections

Key clinical point: The risk for brachial plexus strain, injury, or tear can be minimized with prompt identification of shoulder dystocia (SD) accompanied by cessation of axial fetal head traction, while accurate obstetrical maneuvers can avoid permanent obstetric brachial palsy (OBP) or cerebral morbidity.

 

Major finding: SD was mostly unilateral anterior, with only 0.9% of cases diagnosed as the more difficult bilateral SD and 2% as recurrent SD. The majority (87.4%) of SD cases were managed by McRobert’s maneuver; the other management procedures included Barnum’s procedure (7.9%), Wood’s maneuver (3.9%), and Menticoglou procedure (0.4%). Only 7.5% of newborns were diagnosed with transient form of Duchenne Erb obstetrics brachioparesis (OBP), none with permanent OBP, and only 1 with cerebral morbidity.

 

Study details: This retrospective study analyzed the data of 45,687 singleton deliveries (vaginal deliveries, 78.9%; cesarean sections, 21.1%). Overall, 0.7% of vaginally delivered neonates had fetal SD.

Disclosures: No source of funding was reported. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

 

Source: Habek D et al. Obstetrics injuries during shoulder dystocia in a tertiary perinatal center. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2022;278:33-37 (Sep 10). Doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.09.009

Key clinical point: The risk for brachial plexus strain, injury, or tear can be minimized with prompt identification of shoulder dystocia (SD) accompanied by cessation of axial fetal head traction, while accurate obstetrical maneuvers can avoid permanent obstetric brachial palsy (OBP) or cerebral morbidity.

 

Major finding: SD was mostly unilateral anterior, with only 0.9% of cases diagnosed as the more difficult bilateral SD and 2% as recurrent SD. The majority (87.4%) of SD cases were managed by McRobert’s maneuver; the other management procedures included Barnum’s procedure (7.9%), Wood’s maneuver (3.9%), and Menticoglou procedure (0.4%). Only 7.5% of newborns were diagnosed with transient form of Duchenne Erb obstetrics brachioparesis (OBP), none with permanent OBP, and only 1 with cerebral morbidity.

 

Study details: This retrospective study analyzed the data of 45,687 singleton deliveries (vaginal deliveries, 78.9%; cesarean sections, 21.1%). Overall, 0.7% of vaginally delivered neonates had fetal SD.

Disclosures: No source of funding was reported. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

 

Source: Habek D et al. Obstetrics injuries during shoulder dystocia in a tertiary perinatal center. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2022;278:33-37 (Sep 10). Doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.09.009

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article Series
Clinical Edge Journal Scan: Obstetric Emergencies October 2022
Gate On Date
Un-Gate On Date
Use ProPublica
CFC Schedule Remove Status
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article