User login
How Much Does Screen Time Really Affect Child Development?
France did it 5 years ago and now, from January 1, the Dutch have followed suit, banning devices such as mobile phones and tablets in classrooms unless needed during lessons, for medical reasons, or by students with disabilities. The ban aims to limit distractions during the school day.
We could all surely do with some device detox, but the question remains whether too much screen time has an impact on child development. Karen Mansfield, PhD, a postdoctoral researcher on adolescent well-being in the digital age at Oxford University, told this news organization, “The evidence is definitely not set in stone. There have been some recent reviews of screen time effects on children, demonstrating very mixed findings.”
The latest research, said Dr. Mansfield, is still young, lacking consistency in findings, and rife with misinterpretation.
Tiziana Metitieri, a cognitive neuropsychologist at the Meyer Hospital in Florence, Italy, echoed these sentiments, suggesting that the sheer quantity of screen time is an insufficient metric for understanding its impact on cognitive and psychological development. “There are two main reasons for this,” she explained to this news organization. “Firstly, because the current measurements of screen time rely on self-report data, which can be affected by an overestimation or underestimation of objective usage due to social desirability bias. Secondly, because digital experiences differ in terms of content, device used, context, location, and individuals involved.”
Are Politicians in Too Much of a Rush?
UNESCO’s most recent report on technology in education highlighted a correlation between excessive mobile phone use and reduced educational performance and emotional stability.
The OECD report “Empowering Young Children in the Digital Age,” rightly suggested there is a need to improve protection in digital environments, bridge the digital divide, and educate parents and teachers on safe digital practices.
But Dr. Mansfield said, “Currently, policy implementation is racing far ahead of the evidence, with similar suggestions to ban smartphones in schools in the United Kingdom and Canada. However, there is no available evidence on the long-term benefits of banning smartphones. Much of the research behind the OECD and UNESCO policies is observational in nature, which limits causal interpretation more than with interventions.”
While most governments are not pursuing restrictive practices, Dr. Metitieri said that “their approaches are based on their political ideology, often using moral panic as a means to rally support, showing their heartfelt commitment to defending against the invasions of digital technology ruining human civilizations.”
Sakshi Ghai, PhD, Dr. Mansfield’s fellow postdoctoral researcher at Oxford University, reiterated Dr. Metitieri’s concerns, “Screen time as a concept has limitations, and policy guidance needs to be careful when drawing insights from such limited evidence. What do we mean by screen time? How can time spent on different activities be clearly delineated? An oversimplistic focus on screen time may overlook the nuances and complexity of digital media use.”
The Key Is the What and Where
Digital screens can be productive for children, such as when used for educational purposes, be it to join a class over Zoom or partake in extracurricular educational activities. However, Dr. Ghai emphasized the importance of identifying what constitutes reasonable consumption of digital media. “Screens can help disadvantaged children achieve positive educational outcomes, particularly those with learning difficulties,” said Dr. Ghai. “Using media to interact with other children can also bring positive social connections to racially diverse children or those from the LGBTQ community, which reiterates why finding the balance that allows children to reap the benefits of digital technology while safeguarding their mental, physical, and social health, is crucial.”
On the other hand, Dr. Metitieri explained that there is evidence that passive exposure to educational content does not necessarily lead to growth benefits. “The key is the relational environment in which these digital experiences occur,” she said.
Dr. Mansfield said a lot of research describes excessive use of digital media as a form of addiction. “Some studies have attempted to validate and test ‘smartphone addiction’ scales for adolescent. Besides pathologizing an increasingly common activity, such self-report scales are highly subjective, implying serious limitations when attempting to define ‘cut offs’ or diagnostic thresholds.”
Previous efforts to determine benchmarks for screen time usage, focusing on the relationship between historical screen usage and present mental well-being, have overlooked the nature of the digital interaction and the social and technological backdrop. “Effects of screen time on children is a continuously changing, rapidly developing research field, and other contextual factors have been shown to play a greater role on mental health,” explained Dr. Mansfield.
Are School Bans Too Restrictive?
Implementing nationwide policies that warrant a dramatic shift in how we approach activities that have become second nature, such as using a mobile phone, is profoundly difficult, particularly as evidence is inconclusive and inconsistent. “The long-term effects of different types of digital content on children’s learning are yet to be clear, and most education-related research so far has been carried out with college students,” said Dr. Mansfield.
For concerned parents and schools, Dr. Metitieri advised against overly restrictive approaches. “Children and adolescents can find ways around restrictions at home and school, meaning that an overly restrictive approach is limited in its effectiveness,” she said. “The best way to adapt to the changes happening in education, relationships, work, and leisure is through a combination of experiences offline and digital education.”
Mirroring Dr. Metitieri’s outlook, Dr. Mansfield suggested, “Restricting the use of smartphones and other personal devices is one method to reduce distraction, but ultimately, children will need to learn to optimize their use of digital devices.”
Recent Dutch media reports cited government ministers’ consultations with neuropsychiatrist Theo Compernolle, MD, PhD, who compared children’s current smartphone usage patterns to addiction and suggested that such habits may hinder the development of the prefrontal cortex. However, Dr. Mansfield said, “There is no evidence to back up this claim.” Although she acknowledged the potential short-term benefits of a screen time ban in enhancing classroom concentration, she said, “One study directly tested this hypothesis and found no association between social media use and brain development, meaning that any claims of long-term effects remain purely speculative.”
The issue of children’s screen time is complex. Understanding the content and context of screen time, educating parents and teachers, and integrating digital experiences with offline activities seem to be the way forward. While governments contend with the complexities of managing this rather modern challenge, the balance between digital engagement and cognitive development remains a critical topic for continued research and thoughtful policymaking. Dr. Metitieri summed it up, “As adult members of the digital society, it is important for us to educate ourselves on how to effectively use online platforms before sharing our experiences and concerns about the online world with children and adolescents.”
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
France did it 5 years ago and now, from January 1, the Dutch have followed suit, banning devices such as mobile phones and tablets in classrooms unless needed during lessons, for medical reasons, or by students with disabilities. The ban aims to limit distractions during the school day.
We could all surely do with some device detox, but the question remains whether too much screen time has an impact on child development. Karen Mansfield, PhD, a postdoctoral researcher on adolescent well-being in the digital age at Oxford University, told this news organization, “The evidence is definitely not set in stone. There have been some recent reviews of screen time effects on children, demonstrating very mixed findings.”
The latest research, said Dr. Mansfield, is still young, lacking consistency in findings, and rife with misinterpretation.
Tiziana Metitieri, a cognitive neuropsychologist at the Meyer Hospital in Florence, Italy, echoed these sentiments, suggesting that the sheer quantity of screen time is an insufficient metric for understanding its impact on cognitive and psychological development. “There are two main reasons for this,” she explained to this news organization. “Firstly, because the current measurements of screen time rely on self-report data, which can be affected by an overestimation or underestimation of objective usage due to social desirability bias. Secondly, because digital experiences differ in terms of content, device used, context, location, and individuals involved.”
Are Politicians in Too Much of a Rush?
UNESCO’s most recent report on technology in education highlighted a correlation between excessive mobile phone use and reduced educational performance and emotional stability.
The OECD report “Empowering Young Children in the Digital Age,” rightly suggested there is a need to improve protection in digital environments, bridge the digital divide, and educate parents and teachers on safe digital practices.
But Dr. Mansfield said, “Currently, policy implementation is racing far ahead of the evidence, with similar suggestions to ban smartphones in schools in the United Kingdom and Canada. However, there is no available evidence on the long-term benefits of banning smartphones. Much of the research behind the OECD and UNESCO policies is observational in nature, which limits causal interpretation more than with interventions.”
While most governments are not pursuing restrictive practices, Dr. Metitieri said that “their approaches are based on their political ideology, often using moral panic as a means to rally support, showing their heartfelt commitment to defending against the invasions of digital technology ruining human civilizations.”
Sakshi Ghai, PhD, Dr. Mansfield’s fellow postdoctoral researcher at Oxford University, reiterated Dr. Metitieri’s concerns, “Screen time as a concept has limitations, and policy guidance needs to be careful when drawing insights from such limited evidence. What do we mean by screen time? How can time spent on different activities be clearly delineated? An oversimplistic focus on screen time may overlook the nuances and complexity of digital media use.”
The Key Is the What and Where
Digital screens can be productive for children, such as when used for educational purposes, be it to join a class over Zoom or partake in extracurricular educational activities. However, Dr. Ghai emphasized the importance of identifying what constitutes reasonable consumption of digital media. “Screens can help disadvantaged children achieve positive educational outcomes, particularly those with learning difficulties,” said Dr. Ghai. “Using media to interact with other children can also bring positive social connections to racially diverse children or those from the LGBTQ community, which reiterates why finding the balance that allows children to reap the benefits of digital technology while safeguarding their mental, physical, and social health, is crucial.”
On the other hand, Dr. Metitieri explained that there is evidence that passive exposure to educational content does not necessarily lead to growth benefits. “The key is the relational environment in which these digital experiences occur,” she said.
Dr. Mansfield said a lot of research describes excessive use of digital media as a form of addiction. “Some studies have attempted to validate and test ‘smartphone addiction’ scales for adolescent. Besides pathologizing an increasingly common activity, such self-report scales are highly subjective, implying serious limitations when attempting to define ‘cut offs’ or diagnostic thresholds.”
Previous efforts to determine benchmarks for screen time usage, focusing on the relationship between historical screen usage and present mental well-being, have overlooked the nature of the digital interaction and the social and technological backdrop. “Effects of screen time on children is a continuously changing, rapidly developing research field, and other contextual factors have been shown to play a greater role on mental health,” explained Dr. Mansfield.
Are School Bans Too Restrictive?
Implementing nationwide policies that warrant a dramatic shift in how we approach activities that have become second nature, such as using a mobile phone, is profoundly difficult, particularly as evidence is inconclusive and inconsistent. “The long-term effects of different types of digital content on children’s learning are yet to be clear, and most education-related research so far has been carried out with college students,” said Dr. Mansfield.
For concerned parents and schools, Dr. Metitieri advised against overly restrictive approaches. “Children and adolescents can find ways around restrictions at home and school, meaning that an overly restrictive approach is limited in its effectiveness,” she said. “The best way to adapt to the changes happening in education, relationships, work, and leisure is through a combination of experiences offline and digital education.”
Mirroring Dr. Metitieri’s outlook, Dr. Mansfield suggested, “Restricting the use of smartphones and other personal devices is one method to reduce distraction, but ultimately, children will need to learn to optimize their use of digital devices.”
Recent Dutch media reports cited government ministers’ consultations with neuropsychiatrist Theo Compernolle, MD, PhD, who compared children’s current smartphone usage patterns to addiction and suggested that such habits may hinder the development of the prefrontal cortex. However, Dr. Mansfield said, “There is no evidence to back up this claim.” Although she acknowledged the potential short-term benefits of a screen time ban in enhancing classroom concentration, she said, “One study directly tested this hypothesis and found no association between social media use and brain development, meaning that any claims of long-term effects remain purely speculative.”
The issue of children’s screen time is complex. Understanding the content and context of screen time, educating parents and teachers, and integrating digital experiences with offline activities seem to be the way forward. While governments contend with the complexities of managing this rather modern challenge, the balance between digital engagement and cognitive development remains a critical topic for continued research and thoughtful policymaking. Dr. Metitieri summed it up, “As adult members of the digital society, it is important for us to educate ourselves on how to effectively use online platforms before sharing our experiences and concerns about the online world with children and adolescents.”
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
France did it 5 years ago and now, from January 1, the Dutch have followed suit, banning devices such as mobile phones and tablets in classrooms unless needed during lessons, for medical reasons, or by students with disabilities. The ban aims to limit distractions during the school day.
We could all surely do with some device detox, but the question remains whether too much screen time has an impact on child development. Karen Mansfield, PhD, a postdoctoral researcher on adolescent well-being in the digital age at Oxford University, told this news organization, “The evidence is definitely not set in stone. There have been some recent reviews of screen time effects on children, demonstrating very mixed findings.”
The latest research, said Dr. Mansfield, is still young, lacking consistency in findings, and rife with misinterpretation.
Tiziana Metitieri, a cognitive neuropsychologist at the Meyer Hospital in Florence, Italy, echoed these sentiments, suggesting that the sheer quantity of screen time is an insufficient metric for understanding its impact on cognitive and psychological development. “There are two main reasons for this,” she explained to this news organization. “Firstly, because the current measurements of screen time rely on self-report data, which can be affected by an overestimation or underestimation of objective usage due to social desirability bias. Secondly, because digital experiences differ in terms of content, device used, context, location, and individuals involved.”
Are Politicians in Too Much of a Rush?
UNESCO’s most recent report on technology in education highlighted a correlation between excessive mobile phone use and reduced educational performance and emotional stability.
The OECD report “Empowering Young Children in the Digital Age,” rightly suggested there is a need to improve protection in digital environments, bridge the digital divide, and educate parents and teachers on safe digital practices.
But Dr. Mansfield said, “Currently, policy implementation is racing far ahead of the evidence, with similar suggestions to ban smartphones in schools in the United Kingdom and Canada. However, there is no available evidence on the long-term benefits of banning smartphones. Much of the research behind the OECD and UNESCO policies is observational in nature, which limits causal interpretation more than with interventions.”
While most governments are not pursuing restrictive practices, Dr. Metitieri said that “their approaches are based on their political ideology, often using moral panic as a means to rally support, showing their heartfelt commitment to defending against the invasions of digital technology ruining human civilizations.”
Sakshi Ghai, PhD, Dr. Mansfield’s fellow postdoctoral researcher at Oxford University, reiterated Dr. Metitieri’s concerns, “Screen time as a concept has limitations, and policy guidance needs to be careful when drawing insights from such limited evidence. What do we mean by screen time? How can time spent on different activities be clearly delineated? An oversimplistic focus on screen time may overlook the nuances and complexity of digital media use.”
The Key Is the What and Where
Digital screens can be productive for children, such as when used for educational purposes, be it to join a class over Zoom or partake in extracurricular educational activities. However, Dr. Ghai emphasized the importance of identifying what constitutes reasonable consumption of digital media. “Screens can help disadvantaged children achieve positive educational outcomes, particularly those with learning difficulties,” said Dr. Ghai. “Using media to interact with other children can also bring positive social connections to racially diverse children or those from the LGBTQ community, which reiterates why finding the balance that allows children to reap the benefits of digital technology while safeguarding their mental, physical, and social health, is crucial.”
On the other hand, Dr. Metitieri explained that there is evidence that passive exposure to educational content does not necessarily lead to growth benefits. “The key is the relational environment in which these digital experiences occur,” she said.
Dr. Mansfield said a lot of research describes excessive use of digital media as a form of addiction. “Some studies have attempted to validate and test ‘smartphone addiction’ scales for adolescent. Besides pathologizing an increasingly common activity, such self-report scales are highly subjective, implying serious limitations when attempting to define ‘cut offs’ or diagnostic thresholds.”
Previous efforts to determine benchmarks for screen time usage, focusing on the relationship between historical screen usage and present mental well-being, have overlooked the nature of the digital interaction and the social and technological backdrop. “Effects of screen time on children is a continuously changing, rapidly developing research field, and other contextual factors have been shown to play a greater role on mental health,” explained Dr. Mansfield.
Are School Bans Too Restrictive?
Implementing nationwide policies that warrant a dramatic shift in how we approach activities that have become second nature, such as using a mobile phone, is profoundly difficult, particularly as evidence is inconclusive and inconsistent. “The long-term effects of different types of digital content on children’s learning are yet to be clear, and most education-related research so far has been carried out with college students,” said Dr. Mansfield.
For concerned parents and schools, Dr. Metitieri advised against overly restrictive approaches. “Children and adolescents can find ways around restrictions at home and school, meaning that an overly restrictive approach is limited in its effectiveness,” she said. “The best way to adapt to the changes happening in education, relationships, work, and leisure is through a combination of experiences offline and digital education.”
Mirroring Dr. Metitieri’s outlook, Dr. Mansfield suggested, “Restricting the use of smartphones and other personal devices is one method to reduce distraction, but ultimately, children will need to learn to optimize their use of digital devices.”
Recent Dutch media reports cited government ministers’ consultations with neuropsychiatrist Theo Compernolle, MD, PhD, who compared children’s current smartphone usage patterns to addiction and suggested that such habits may hinder the development of the prefrontal cortex. However, Dr. Mansfield said, “There is no evidence to back up this claim.” Although she acknowledged the potential short-term benefits of a screen time ban in enhancing classroom concentration, she said, “One study directly tested this hypothesis and found no association between social media use and brain development, meaning that any claims of long-term effects remain purely speculative.”
The issue of children’s screen time is complex. Understanding the content and context of screen time, educating parents and teachers, and integrating digital experiences with offline activities seem to be the way forward. While governments contend with the complexities of managing this rather modern challenge, the balance between digital engagement and cognitive development remains a critical topic for continued research and thoughtful policymaking. Dr. Metitieri summed it up, “As adult members of the digital society, it is important for us to educate ourselves on how to effectively use online platforms before sharing our experiences and concerns about the online world with children and adolescents.”
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
A1c Helps Stratify Type 2 Diabetes Risk in Teens
A1c level strongly predicts the risk of developing type 2 diabetes among adolescents with overweight or obesity, new data suggested.
In a large California healthcare database over a 10-year period, the incidence of type 2 diabetes was relatively low overall among adolescents with overweight and obesity. However, the risk increased with baseline A1c levels above 6.0% as well as in those with more severe obesity, women, and Asian or Pacific Islanders.
The new findings were published online in JAMA Network Open by pediatric endocrinologist Francis M. Hoe, MD, of Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center, Roseville, California, and colleagues.
Previous studies have examined the incidence of type 2 diabetes among all youth, regardless of weight class. This is one of the first large population studies to examine the incidence and risk for type 2 diabetes by incremental level of A1c in a racially and ethnically diverse group of youth with overweight and obesity, Dr. Hoe told this news organization in an interview.
“This study was only possible to do because Kaiser Permanente Northern California has nearly 1 million pediatric members. The biggest thing we learned is that risk for type 2 diabetes is low in overweight and obese youth, especially those with an HbA1c less than 5.9%,” he said.
Zeroing in on Those at Greatest Risk for Type 2 Diabetes
Currently, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommends screening for type 2 diabetes in adolescents with overweight (body mass index [BMI], 85th percentile or greater) or obesity (≥ 95th) who have at least one additional risk factor, including family history of type 2 diabetes and Native American, Black, or Hispanic ethnicity. About one in four US adolescents qualify by those criteria, the authors noted in the paper.
And, as for adults, ADA recommends subsequent annual diabetes screening in youth identified as having “prediabetes,” that is, a A1c level between 5.7% and 6.5%.
The new study confirmed that adolescents with A1c in the upper end of the prediabetes range were at a greater risk for type 2 diabetes. But those individuals were the minority. Adolescents with overweight/obesity who had baseline A1c levels in the lower end of the prediabetes range, 5.7%-5.8%, accounted for two thirds of those with prediabetes in the study population and had a very low incidence of type 2 diabetes compared with those with higher A1c levels.
“Specifically, we found an annual type 2 diabetes incidence of 0.2% for HbA1c of 5.7%-5.8%, which is much lower than adults. These adolescents will likely benefit from lifestyle intervention. But because their risk of developing type 2 diabetes is lower, they probably don’t need to be screened annually, as currently recommended by the ADA,” Dr. Hoe said.
Similarly, he added, “since obesity severity was associated with a higher risk for type 2 diabetes, increases in BMI percentile should also prompt consideration of repeat diabetes screening.”
Large Database Allows for Detailed Findings
The study population was 74,552 adolescents aged 10-17 years with overweight or obesity, of whom 49.4% were male, 64.6% were younger than 15 years, and 73.1% had obesity. Only 21.6% were White, while 43.6% were Hispanic, 11.1% Black, and 17.6% Asian or Pacific Islander.
Nearly a quarter, 22.9%, had baseline A1c in the prediabetes range of 5.7%-6.4%. Mean A1c rose with BMI category from overweight to moderate to severe obesity (P < .001 for each comparison). Baseline A1c was highest (5.53%) in Black adolescents and lowest in White teens (5.38%), also significant differences by group (P < .001).
Of the total 698 who developed diabetes during the follow-up, 89.7% were classified as having type 2 diabetes, with a median 3.8 years from baseline to diagnosis.
The overall incidence rate of type 2 diabetes during the follow-up was 2.1 per 1000 person-years. As the baseline A1c rose from less than 5.5% to 6.0%, from 6.1% to 6.2%, and from 6.3% to 6.4%, those incidence rates were 0.8, 8.1, 21.8, and 68.9 per 1000 person-years, respectively.
In a multivariate analysis, compared to baseline A1c below 5.5%, increased risk was ninefold for A1c 5.9%-6.0%, 23-fold for 6.1%-6.2%, and 72-fold for 6.3%-6.4%.
The incidence rates were higher in female than in male adolescents (2.4 vs 1.8 per 1000 person-years) and increased by BMI category from 0.6 to 1.3 to 4.3 for those with overweight, moderate obesity, and severe obesity, respectively.
Type 2 diabetes incidence per 1000 person-years also varied by race and ethnicity, ranging from 1.3 for White adolescents to 3.0 for Asian or Pacific Islanders.
“We plan on further exploring the effect of the weight and BMI change over time and how that may affect type 2 diabetes risk,” Dr. Hoe told this news organization.
This study was supported by a grant from the Kaiser Permanente Northern California Community Health program. Dr. Hoe and his coauthors had no further disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
A1c level strongly predicts the risk of developing type 2 diabetes among adolescents with overweight or obesity, new data suggested.
In a large California healthcare database over a 10-year period, the incidence of type 2 diabetes was relatively low overall among adolescents with overweight and obesity. However, the risk increased with baseline A1c levels above 6.0% as well as in those with more severe obesity, women, and Asian or Pacific Islanders.
The new findings were published online in JAMA Network Open by pediatric endocrinologist Francis M. Hoe, MD, of Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center, Roseville, California, and colleagues.
Previous studies have examined the incidence of type 2 diabetes among all youth, regardless of weight class. This is one of the first large population studies to examine the incidence and risk for type 2 diabetes by incremental level of A1c in a racially and ethnically diverse group of youth with overweight and obesity, Dr. Hoe told this news organization in an interview.
“This study was only possible to do because Kaiser Permanente Northern California has nearly 1 million pediatric members. The biggest thing we learned is that risk for type 2 diabetes is low in overweight and obese youth, especially those with an HbA1c less than 5.9%,” he said.
Zeroing in on Those at Greatest Risk for Type 2 Diabetes
Currently, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommends screening for type 2 diabetes in adolescents with overweight (body mass index [BMI], 85th percentile or greater) or obesity (≥ 95th) who have at least one additional risk factor, including family history of type 2 diabetes and Native American, Black, or Hispanic ethnicity. About one in four US adolescents qualify by those criteria, the authors noted in the paper.
And, as for adults, ADA recommends subsequent annual diabetes screening in youth identified as having “prediabetes,” that is, a A1c level between 5.7% and 6.5%.
The new study confirmed that adolescents with A1c in the upper end of the prediabetes range were at a greater risk for type 2 diabetes. But those individuals were the minority. Adolescents with overweight/obesity who had baseline A1c levels in the lower end of the prediabetes range, 5.7%-5.8%, accounted for two thirds of those with prediabetes in the study population and had a very low incidence of type 2 diabetes compared with those with higher A1c levels.
“Specifically, we found an annual type 2 diabetes incidence of 0.2% for HbA1c of 5.7%-5.8%, which is much lower than adults. These adolescents will likely benefit from lifestyle intervention. But because their risk of developing type 2 diabetes is lower, they probably don’t need to be screened annually, as currently recommended by the ADA,” Dr. Hoe said.
Similarly, he added, “since obesity severity was associated with a higher risk for type 2 diabetes, increases in BMI percentile should also prompt consideration of repeat diabetes screening.”
Large Database Allows for Detailed Findings
The study population was 74,552 adolescents aged 10-17 years with overweight or obesity, of whom 49.4% were male, 64.6% were younger than 15 years, and 73.1% had obesity. Only 21.6% were White, while 43.6% were Hispanic, 11.1% Black, and 17.6% Asian or Pacific Islander.
Nearly a quarter, 22.9%, had baseline A1c in the prediabetes range of 5.7%-6.4%. Mean A1c rose with BMI category from overweight to moderate to severe obesity (P < .001 for each comparison). Baseline A1c was highest (5.53%) in Black adolescents and lowest in White teens (5.38%), also significant differences by group (P < .001).
Of the total 698 who developed diabetes during the follow-up, 89.7% were classified as having type 2 diabetes, with a median 3.8 years from baseline to diagnosis.
The overall incidence rate of type 2 diabetes during the follow-up was 2.1 per 1000 person-years. As the baseline A1c rose from less than 5.5% to 6.0%, from 6.1% to 6.2%, and from 6.3% to 6.4%, those incidence rates were 0.8, 8.1, 21.8, and 68.9 per 1000 person-years, respectively.
In a multivariate analysis, compared to baseline A1c below 5.5%, increased risk was ninefold for A1c 5.9%-6.0%, 23-fold for 6.1%-6.2%, and 72-fold for 6.3%-6.4%.
The incidence rates were higher in female than in male adolescents (2.4 vs 1.8 per 1000 person-years) and increased by BMI category from 0.6 to 1.3 to 4.3 for those with overweight, moderate obesity, and severe obesity, respectively.
Type 2 diabetes incidence per 1000 person-years also varied by race and ethnicity, ranging from 1.3 for White adolescents to 3.0 for Asian or Pacific Islanders.
“We plan on further exploring the effect of the weight and BMI change over time and how that may affect type 2 diabetes risk,” Dr. Hoe told this news organization.
This study was supported by a grant from the Kaiser Permanente Northern California Community Health program. Dr. Hoe and his coauthors had no further disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
A1c level strongly predicts the risk of developing type 2 diabetes among adolescents with overweight or obesity, new data suggested.
In a large California healthcare database over a 10-year period, the incidence of type 2 diabetes was relatively low overall among adolescents with overweight and obesity. However, the risk increased with baseline A1c levels above 6.0% as well as in those with more severe obesity, women, and Asian or Pacific Islanders.
The new findings were published online in JAMA Network Open by pediatric endocrinologist Francis M. Hoe, MD, of Kaiser Permanente Roseville Medical Center, Roseville, California, and colleagues.
Previous studies have examined the incidence of type 2 diabetes among all youth, regardless of weight class. This is one of the first large population studies to examine the incidence and risk for type 2 diabetes by incremental level of A1c in a racially and ethnically diverse group of youth with overweight and obesity, Dr. Hoe told this news organization in an interview.
“This study was only possible to do because Kaiser Permanente Northern California has nearly 1 million pediatric members. The biggest thing we learned is that risk for type 2 diabetes is low in overweight and obese youth, especially those with an HbA1c less than 5.9%,” he said.
Zeroing in on Those at Greatest Risk for Type 2 Diabetes
Currently, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommends screening for type 2 diabetes in adolescents with overweight (body mass index [BMI], 85th percentile or greater) or obesity (≥ 95th) who have at least one additional risk factor, including family history of type 2 diabetes and Native American, Black, or Hispanic ethnicity. About one in four US adolescents qualify by those criteria, the authors noted in the paper.
And, as for adults, ADA recommends subsequent annual diabetes screening in youth identified as having “prediabetes,” that is, a A1c level between 5.7% and 6.5%.
The new study confirmed that adolescents with A1c in the upper end of the prediabetes range were at a greater risk for type 2 diabetes. But those individuals were the minority. Adolescents with overweight/obesity who had baseline A1c levels in the lower end of the prediabetes range, 5.7%-5.8%, accounted for two thirds of those with prediabetes in the study population and had a very low incidence of type 2 diabetes compared with those with higher A1c levels.
“Specifically, we found an annual type 2 diabetes incidence of 0.2% for HbA1c of 5.7%-5.8%, which is much lower than adults. These adolescents will likely benefit from lifestyle intervention. But because their risk of developing type 2 diabetes is lower, they probably don’t need to be screened annually, as currently recommended by the ADA,” Dr. Hoe said.
Similarly, he added, “since obesity severity was associated with a higher risk for type 2 diabetes, increases in BMI percentile should also prompt consideration of repeat diabetes screening.”
Large Database Allows for Detailed Findings
The study population was 74,552 adolescents aged 10-17 years with overweight or obesity, of whom 49.4% were male, 64.6% were younger than 15 years, and 73.1% had obesity. Only 21.6% were White, while 43.6% were Hispanic, 11.1% Black, and 17.6% Asian or Pacific Islander.
Nearly a quarter, 22.9%, had baseline A1c in the prediabetes range of 5.7%-6.4%. Mean A1c rose with BMI category from overweight to moderate to severe obesity (P < .001 for each comparison). Baseline A1c was highest (5.53%) in Black adolescents and lowest in White teens (5.38%), also significant differences by group (P < .001).
Of the total 698 who developed diabetes during the follow-up, 89.7% were classified as having type 2 diabetes, with a median 3.8 years from baseline to diagnosis.
The overall incidence rate of type 2 diabetes during the follow-up was 2.1 per 1000 person-years. As the baseline A1c rose from less than 5.5% to 6.0%, from 6.1% to 6.2%, and from 6.3% to 6.4%, those incidence rates were 0.8, 8.1, 21.8, and 68.9 per 1000 person-years, respectively.
In a multivariate analysis, compared to baseline A1c below 5.5%, increased risk was ninefold for A1c 5.9%-6.0%, 23-fold for 6.1%-6.2%, and 72-fold for 6.3%-6.4%.
The incidence rates were higher in female than in male adolescents (2.4 vs 1.8 per 1000 person-years) and increased by BMI category from 0.6 to 1.3 to 4.3 for those with overweight, moderate obesity, and severe obesity, respectively.
Type 2 diabetes incidence per 1000 person-years also varied by race and ethnicity, ranging from 1.3 for White adolescents to 3.0 for Asian or Pacific Islanders.
“We plan on further exploring the effect of the weight and BMI change over time and how that may affect type 2 diabetes risk,” Dr. Hoe told this news organization.
This study was supported by a grant from the Kaiser Permanente Northern California Community Health program. Dr. Hoe and his coauthors had no further disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM JAMA NETWORK OPEN
ADHD Symptoms Linked With Physical Comorbidities
Investigators from the French Health and Medical Research Institute (INSERM), University of Bordeaux, and Charles Perrens Hospital, alongside their Canadian, British, and Swedish counterparts, have shown that attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or attention-deficit disorder without hyperactivity is linked with physical health problems. Cédric Galéra, MD, PhD, child and adolescent psychiatrist and epidemiologist at the Bordeaux Population Health Research Center (INSERM/University of Bordeaux) and the Charles Perrens Hospital, explained these findings to this news organization.
A Bilateral Association
ADHD is a neurodevelopmental condition that develops in childhood and is characterized by high levels of inattention or agitation and impulsiveness. Some studies have revealed a link between ADHD and medical comorbidities, but these studies were carried out on small patient samples and were cross-sectional.
A new longitudinal study published in Lancet Child and Adolescent Health has shown a reciprocal link between ADHD and physical health problems. The researchers conducted statistical analyses to measure the links between ADHD symptoms and subsequent development of certain physical conditions and, conversely, between physical problems during childhood and subsequent development of ADHD symptoms.
Children From Quebec
The study was conducted by a team headed by Dr. Galéra in collaboration with teams from Britain, Sweden, and Canada. “We studied a Quebec-based cohort of 2000 children aged between 5 months and 17 years,” said Dr. Galéra.
“The researchers in Quebec sent interviewers to question parents at home. And once the children were able to answer for themselves, from adolescence, they were asked to answer the questions directly,” he added.
The children were assessed on the severity of their ADHD symptoms as well as their physical condition (general well-being, any conditions diagnosed, etc.).
Dental Caries, Excess Weight
“We were able to show links between ADHD in childhood and physical health problems in adolescence. There is a greater risk for dental caries, infections, injuries, wounds, sleep disorders, and excess weight.
“Accounting for socioeconomic status and mental health problems such as anxiety and depression or medical treatments, we observed that dental caries, wounds, excess weight, and restless legs syndrome were the conditions that cropped up time and time again,” said Dr. Galéra.
On the other hand, the researchers noted that certain physical health issues in childhood were linked with the onset of ADHD at a later stage. “We discovered that asthma in early childhood, injuries, sleep disturbances, epilepsy, and excess weight were associated with ADHD. Taking all above-referenced features into account, we were left with just wounds and injuries as well as restless legs syndrome as being linked to ADHD,” Dr. Galéra concluded.
For Dr. Galéra, the study illustrates the direction and timing of the links between physical problems and ADHD. “This reflects the link between physical and mental health. It’s important that all healthcare professionals be alert to this. Psychiatrists and mental health professionals must be vigilant about the physical health risks, and pediatricians and family physicians must be aware of the fact that children can present with physical conditions that will later be linked with ADHD. Each of them must be able to refer their young patients to their medical colleagues to ensure that these people receive the best care,” he emphasized.
The team will continue to study this cohort to see which problems emerge in adulthood. They also wish to study the Elfe cohort, a French longitudinal study of children.
This article was translated from the Medscape French edition. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Investigators from the French Health and Medical Research Institute (INSERM), University of Bordeaux, and Charles Perrens Hospital, alongside their Canadian, British, and Swedish counterparts, have shown that attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or attention-deficit disorder without hyperactivity is linked with physical health problems. Cédric Galéra, MD, PhD, child and adolescent psychiatrist and epidemiologist at the Bordeaux Population Health Research Center (INSERM/University of Bordeaux) and the Charles Perrens Hospital, explained these findings to this news organization.
A Bilateral Association
ADHD is a neurodevelopmental condition that develops in childhood and is characterized by high levels of inattention or agitation and impulsiveness. Some studies have revealed a link between ADHD and medical comorbidities, but these studies were carried out on small patient samples and were cross-sectional.
A new longitudinal study published in Lancet Child and Adolescent Health has shown a reciprocal link between ADHD and physical health problems. The researchers conducted statistical analyses to measure the links between ADHD symptoms and subsequent development of certain physical conditions and, conversely, between physical problems during childhood and subsequent development of ADHD symptoms.
Children From Quebec
The study was conducted by a team headed by Dr. Galéra in collaboration with teams from Britain, Sweden, and Canada. “We studied a Quebec-based cohort of 2000 children aged between 5 months and 17 years,” said Dr. Galéra.
“The researchers in Quebec sent interviewers to question parents at home. And once the children were able to answer for themselves, from adolescence, they were asked to answer the questions directly,” he added.
The children were assessed on the severity of their ADHD symptoms as well as their physical condition (general well-being, any conditions diagnosed, etc.).
Dental Caries, Excess Weight
“We were able to show links between ADHD in childhood and physical health problems in adolescence. There is a greater risk for dental caries, infections, injuries, wounds, sleep disorders, and excess weight.
“Accounting for socioeconomic status and mental health problems such as anxiety and depression or medical treatments, we observed that dental caries, wounds, excess weight, and restless legs syndrome were the conditions that cropped up time and time again,” said Dr. Galéra.
On the other hand, the researchers noted that certain physical health issues in childhood were linked with the onset of ADHD at a later stage. “We discovered that asthma in early childhood, injuries, sleep disturbances, epilepsy, and excess weight were associated with ADHD. Taking all above-referenced features into account, we were left with just wounds and injuries as well as restless legs syndrome as being linked to ADHD,” Dr. Galéra concluded.
For Dr. Galéra, the study illustrates the direction and timing of the links between physical problems and ADHD. “This reflects the link between physical and mental health. It’s important that all healthcare professionals be alert to this. Psychiatrists and mental health professionals must be vigilant about the physical health risks, and pediatricians and family physicians must be aware of the fact that children can present with physical conditions that will later be linked with ADHD. Each of them must be able to refer their young patients to their medical colleagues to ensure that these people receive the best care,” he emphasized.
The team will continue to study this cohort to see which problems emerge in adulthood. They also wish to study the Elfe cohort, a French longitudinal study of children.
This article was translated from the Medscape French edition. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Investigators from the French Health and Medical Research Institute (INSERM), University of Bordeaux, and Charles Perrens Hospital, alongside their Canadian, British, and Swedish counterparts, have shown that attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or attention-deficit disorder without hyperactivity is linked with physical health problems. Cédric Galéra, MD, PhD, child and adolescent psychiatrist and epidemiologist at the Bordeaux Population Health Research Center (INSERM/University of Bordeaux) and the Charles Perrens Hospital, explained these findings to this news organization.
A Bilateral Association
ADHD is a neurodevelopmental condition that develops in childhood and is characterized by high levels of inattention or agitation and impulsiveness. Some studies have revealed a link between ADHD and medical comorbidities, but these studies were carried out on small patient samples and were cross-sectional.
A new longitudinal study published in Lancet Child and Adolescent Health has shown a reciprocal link between ADHD and physical health problems. The researchers conducted statistical analyses to measure the links between ADHD symptoms and subsequent development of certain physical conditions and, conversely, between physical problems during childhood and subsequent development of ADHD symptoms.
Children From Quebec
The study was conducted by a team headed by Dr. Galéra in collaboration with teams from Britain, Sweden, and Canada. “We studied a Quebec-based cohort of 2000 children aged between 5 months and 17 years,” said Dr. Galéra.
“The researchers in Quebec sent interviewers to question parents at home. And once the children were able to answer for themselves, from adolescence, they were asked to answer the questions directly,” he added.
The children were assessed on the severity of their ADHD symptoms as well as their physical condition (general well-being, any conditions diagnosed, etc.).
Dental Caries, Excess Weight
“We were able to show links between ADHD in childhood and physical health problems in adolescence. There is a greater risk for dental caries, infections, injuries, wounds, sleep disorders, and excess weight.
“Accounting for socioeconomic status and mental health problems such as anxiety and depression or medical treatments, we observed that dental caries, wounds, excess weight, and restless legs syndrome were the conditions that cropped up time and time again,” said Dr. Galéra.
On the other hand, the researchers noted that certain physical health issues in childhood were linked with the onset of ADHD at a later stage. “We discovered that asthma in early childhood, injuries, sleep disturbances, epilepsy, and excess weight were associated with ADHD. Taking all above-referenced features into account, we were left with just wounds and injuries as well as restless legs syndrome as being linked to ADHD,” Dr. Galéra concluded.
For Dr. Galéra, the study illustrates the direction and timing of the links between physical problems and ADHD. “This reflects the link between physical and mental health. It’s important that all healthcare professionals be alert to this. Psychiatrists and mental health professionals must be vigilant about the physical health risks, and pediatricians and family physicians must be aware of the fact that children can present with physical conditions that will later be linked with ADHD. Each of them must be able to refer their young patients to their medical colleagues to ensure that these people receive the best care,” he emphasized.
The team will continue to study this cohort to see which problems emerge in adulthood. They also wish to study the Elfe cohort, a French longitudinal study of children.
This article was translated from the Medscape French edition. A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Magnesium Sulfate for Fetal Neuroprotection in Preterm Birth
Introduction: The Many Lanes of Research on Magnesium Sulfate
The research that improves human health in the most expedient and most impactful ways is multitiered, with basic or fundamental research, translational research, interventional studies, and retrospective research often occurring simultaneously. There should be no “single lane” of research and one type of research does not preclude the other.
Too often, we fall short in one of these lanes. While we have achieved many moonshots in obstetrics and maternal-fetal medicine, we have tended not to place a high priority on basic research, which can provide a strong understanding of the biology of major diseases and conditions affecting women and their offspring. When conducted with proper commitment and funding, such research can lead to biologically directed therapy.
Within our specialty, research on how we can effectively prevent preterm birth, prematurity, and preeclampsia has taken a long road, with various types of therapies being tried, but none being overwhelmingly effective — with an ongoing need for more basic or fundamental research. Nevertheless, we can benefit and gain great insights from retrospective and interventional studies associated with clinical therapies used to treat premature labor and preeclampsia when these therapies have an unanticipated and important secondary benefit.
This month our Master Class is focused on the neuroprotection of prematurity. Magnesium sulfate is a valuable tool for the treatment of both premature labor and preeclampsia, and more recently, also for neuroprotection of the fetus. Interestingly, this use stemmed from researchers looking retrospectively at outcomes in women who received the compound for other reasons. It took many years for researchers to prove its neuroprotective value through interventional trials, while researchers simultaneously strove to understand on a basic biologic level how magnesium sulfate works to prevent outcomes such as cerebral palsy.
Basic research underway today continues to improve our understanding of its precise mechanisms of action. Combined with other tiers of research — including more interventional studies and more translational research — we can improve its utility for the neuroprotection of prematurity. Alternatively, ongoing research may lead to different, even more effective treatments.
Our guest author is Irina Burd, MD, PhD, Sylvan Freiman, MD Endowed Professor and Chair of the department of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine.* Dr. Burd is also a physician-scientist. She recounts the important story of magnesium sulfate and what is currently known about its biologic plausibility in neuroprotection — including through her own studies – as well as what may be coming in the future.
E. Albert Reece, MD, PhD, MBA, a maternal-fetal medicine specialist, is dean emeritus of the University of Maryland School of Medicine, former university executive vice president; currently the endowed professor and director of the Center for Advanced Research Training and Innovation (CARTI), and senior scientist in the Center for Birth Defects Research. Dr. Reece reported no relevant disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at [email protected].
Magnesium Sulfate for Fetal Neuroprotection in Preterm Birth
Without a doubt, magnesium sulfate (MgSO4) given before anticipated preterm birth reduces the risk of cerebral palsy. It is a valuable tool for fetal neuroprotection at a time when there are no proven alternatives. Yet without the persistent research that occurred over more than 20 years, it may not have won the endorsement of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists in 2010 and worked its way into routine practice.
Its history is worthy of reflection. It took years of observational trials (not all of which showed neuroprotective effects), six randomized controlled trials (none of which met their primary endpoint), three meta-analyses, and a Cochrane Database Systematic Review to arrive at the conclusion that antenatal magnesium sulfate therapy given to women at risk of preterm birth has definitive neuroprotective benefit.
This history also holds lessons for our specialty given the dearth of drugs approved for use in pregnancy and the recent withdrawal from the market of Makena — one of only nine drugs to ever be approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in pregnancy — after a second trial showed lack of benefit in preventing recurrent preterm birth. The story of MgSO4 tells us it’s acceptable to have major stumbling blocks: At one point, MgSO4 was considered to be not only not helpful, but harmful, causing neonatal death. Further research disproved this initial finding.
Moreover, the MgSO4 story is one that remains unfinished, as my laboratory and other researchers work to better understand its biologic plausibility and to discover additional neuroprotective agents for anticipated preterm birth that may further reduce the risk of cerebral palsy. This leading cause of chronic childhood disability is estimated by the United Cerebral Palsy Foundation to affect approximately 800,000 people in the United States.
Origins and Biologic Plausibility
The MgSO4 story is rooted in the late seventeenth century discovery by physician Nehemiah Grew that the compound was the key component of the then-famous medicinal spring waters in Epsom, England.1 MgSO4 was first used for eclampsia in 1906,2 and was first reported in the American literature for eclampsia in 1925.3 In 1959, its effect as a tocolytic agent was reported.4
More than 30 years later, in 1995, an observational study coauthored by Karin B. Nelson, MD, and Judith K. Grether, PhD of the National Institutes of Health, showed a reduced risk of cerebral palsy in very-low-birth-weight infants (VLBW).5 The report marked a turning point in research interest on neuroprotection for anticipated preterm birth.
The precise molecular mechanisms of action of MgSO4 for neuroprotection are still not well understood. However, research findings from the University of Maryland and other institutions have provided biologic plausibility for its use to prevent cerebral palsy. Our current thinking is that it involves the prevention of periventricular white matter injury and/or the prevention of oxidative stress and a neuronal injury mechanism called excitotoxicity.
Periventricular white matter injury involving injury to preoligodendrocytes before 32 weeks’ gestation is the most prevalent injury seen in cerebral palsy; preoligodendrocytes are precursors of myelinating oligodendrocytes, which constitute a major glial population in the white matter. Our research in a mouse model demonstrated that the intrauterine inflammation frequently associated with preterm birth can lead to neuronal injury as well as white matter damage, and that MgSO4 may ameliorate both.6,7
Excitotoxicity results from excessive stimulation of N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) glutamatergic receptors on preoligodendrocytes and a rush of calcium through the voltage-gated channels. This calcium influx leads to the production of nitric oxide, oxidative stress, and subsequent mitochondrial damage and cell death. As a bivalent ion, MgSO4 sits in the voltage-gated channels of the NMDA receptors and reduces glutamatergic signaling, thus serving as a calcium antagonist and modulating calcium influx (See Figure).
In vitro research in our laboratory has also shown that MgSO4 may dampen inflammatory reactions driven by intrauterine infections, which, like preterm birth, increase the risk of cerebral palsy and adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes.8 MgSO4 appears to do so by blocking the voltage-gated P2X7 receptor in umbilical vein endothelial cells, thus blocking endothelial secretion of the proinflammatory cytokine interleukin (IL)–1beta. Much more research is needed to determine whether MgSO4 could help prevent cerebral palsy through this mechanism.
The Long Route of Research
The 1995 Nelson-Grether study compared VLBW (< 1500 g) infants who survived and developed moderate/severe cerebral palsy within 3 years to randomly selected VLBW controls with respect to whether their mothers had received MgSO4 to prevent seizures in preeclampsia or as a tocolytic agent.5 In a population of more than 155,000 children born between 1983 and 1985, in utero exposure to MgSO4 was reported in 7.1% of 42 VLBW infants with cerebral palsy and 36% of 75 VLBW controls (odds ratio [OR], 0.14; 95% CI, 0.05-0.51). In women without preeclampsia the OR increased to 0.25.
This motivating study had been preceded by several observational studies showing that infants born to women with preeclampsia who received MgSO4 had significantly lower risks of developing intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) and germinal matrix hemorrhage (GMH). In one of these studies, published in 1992, Karl C. Kuban, MD, and coauthors reported that “maternal receipt of magnesium sulfate was associated with diminished risk of GMH-IVH even in those babies born to mothers who apparently did not have preeclampsia.”9
In the several years following the 1995 Nelson-Grether study, several other case-control/observational studies were reported, with conflicting conclusions, and investigators around the world began designing and conducting needed randomized controlled trials.
The six published randomized controlled trials looking at MgSO4 and neuroprotection varied in their inclusion and exclusion criteria, their recruitment and enrollment style, the gestational ages for MgSO4 administration, loading and maintenance doses, how cerebral palsy or neuroprotection was assessed, and other factors (See Table for RCT characteristics and main outcomes).10-14 One of the trials aimed primarily at evaluating the efficacy of MgSO4 for preventing preeclampsia.
Again, none of the randomized controlled trials demonstrated statistical significance for their primary outcomes or concluded that there was a significant neuroprotective effect for cerebral palsy. Rather, most suggested benefit through secondary analyses. Moreover, as mentioned earlier, research that proceeded after the first published randomized controlled trial — the Magnesium and Neurologic Endpoints (MAGnet) trial — was suspended early when an interim analysis showed a significantly increased risk of mortality in MgSO4-exposed fetuses. All told, it wasn’t until researchers obtained unpublished data and conducted meta-analyses and systematic reviews that a significant effect of MgSO4 on cerebral palsy could be seen.
The three systematic reviews and the Cochrane review, each of which used slightly different methodologies, were published in rapid succession in 2009. One review calculated a relative risk of cerebral palsy of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.55-0.91) — and a relative risk for the combined outcome of death and cerebral palsy at 0.85 (95% CI, 0.74-0.98) — when women at risk of preterm birth were given MgSO4.15 The number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one case of cerebral palsy was 63, investigators determined, and the NNT to prevent one case of cerebral palsy or infant death was 44.
Another review estimated the NNT for prevention of one case of cerebral palsy at 52 when MgSO4 is given at less than 34 weeks’ gestation, and similarly concluded that MgSO4 is associated with a significantly “reduced risk of moderate/severe CP and substantial gross motor dysfunction without any statistically significant effect on the risk of total pediatric mortality.”16
A third review, from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network (MFMU), estimated an NNT of 46 to prevent one case of cerebral palsy in infants exposed to MgSO4 before 30 weeks, and an NNT of 56 when exposure occurs before 32-34 weeks.17
The Cochrane Review, meanwhile, reported a relative reduction in the risk of cerebral palsy of 0.68 (95% CI, 0.54-0.87) when antenatal MgSO4 is given at less than 37 weeks’ gestation, as well as a significant reduction in the rate of substantial gross motor dysfunction (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44-0.85).18 The NNT to avoid one case of cerebral palsy, researchers reported, was 63.
Moving Forward
The NNTs calculated in these reviews — ranging from 44 to 63 — are convincing, and are comparable with evidence-based medicine data for prevention of other common diseases.19 For instance, the NNT for a life saved when aspirin is given immediately after a heart attack is 42. Statins given for 5 years in people with known heart disease have an NNT of 83 to save one life, an NNT of 39 to prevent one nonfatal heart attack, and an NNT of 125 to prevent one stroke. For oral anticoagulants used in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation for primary stroke prevention, the NNTs to prevent one stroke, and one death, are 22 and 42, respectively.19
In its 2010 Committee Opinion on Magnesium Sulfate Before Anticipated Preterm Birth for Neuroprotection (reaffirmed in 2020), the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists left it to institutions to develop their own guidelines “regarding inclusion criteria, treatment regimens, concurrent tocolysis, and monitoring in accordance with one of the larger trials.”20
Not surprisingly, most if not all hospitals have chosen a higher dose of MgSO4 administered up to 31 weeks’ gestation in keeping with the protocols employed in the NICHD-sponsored BEAM trial (See Table).
The hope moving forward is to expand treatment options for neuroprotection in cases of imminent preterm birth. Researchers have been assessing the ability of melatonin to provide neuroprotection in cases of growth restriction and neonatal asphyxia. Melatonin has anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties and is known to mediate neuronal generation and synaptic plasticity.21
N-acetyl-L-cysteine is another potential neuroprotective agent. It acts as an antioxidant, a precursor to glutathione, and a modulator of the glutamate system and has been studied as a neuroprotective agent in cases of maternal chorioamnionitis.21 Both melatonin and N-acetyl-L-cysteine are regarded as safe in pregnancy, but much more clinical study is needed to prove their neuroprotective potential when given shortly before birth or earlier.
Dr. Burd is the Sylvan Freiman, MD Endowed Professor and Chair of the department of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore. She has no conflicts of interest.
References
1. Clio Med. 1984;19(1-2):1-21.
2. Medicinsk Rev. (Bergen) 1906;32:264-272.
3. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;174(4):1390-1391.
4. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1959;78(1):27-32.
5. Pediatrics. 1995;95(2):263-269.
6. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201(3):279.e1-279.e8.
7. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(3):292.e1-292.e9.
8. Pediatr Res. 2020;87(3):463-471.
9. J Child Neurol. 1992;7(1):70-76.
10. Lancet. 1997;350:1517-1518.
11. JAMA. 2003;290:2669-2676.
12. BJOG. 2007;114(3):310-318.
13. Lancet. 2002;359(9321):1877-1890.
14. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:895-905.
15. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113(6):1327-1333.
16. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200(6):595-609.
17. Obstet Gynecol 2009;114:354-364.
18. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jan 21:(1):CD004661.
19. www.thennt.com.
20. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115:669-671.
21. Front Synaptic Neurosci. 2012;13:680899.
*This story was corrected on June 10, 2024.
Introduction: The Many Lanes of Research on Magnesium Sulfate
The research that improves human health in the most expedient and most impactful ways is multitiered, with basic or fundamental research, translational research, interventional studies, and retrospective research often occurring simultaneously. There should be no “single lane” of research and one type of research does not preclude the other.
Too often, we fall short in one of these lanes. While we have achieved many moonshots in obstetrics and maternal-fetal medicine, we have tended not to place a high priority on basic research, which can provide a strong understanding of the biology of major diseases and conditions affecting women and their offspring. When conducted with proper commitment and funding, such research can lead to biologically directed therapy.
Within our specialty, research on how we can effectively prevent preterm birth, prematurity, and preeclampsia has taken a long road, with various types of therapies being tried, but none being overwhelmingly effective — with an ongoing need for more basic or fundamental research. Nevertheless, we can benefit and gain great insights from retrospective and interventional studies associated with clinical therapies used to treat premature labor and preeclampsia when these therapies have an unanticipated and important secondary benefit.
This month our Master Class is focused on the neuroprotection of prematurity. Magnesium sulfate is a valuable tool for the treatment of both premature labor and preeclampsia, and more recently, also for neuroprotection of the fetus. Interestingly, this use stemmed from researchers looking retrospectively at outcomes in women who received the compound for other reasons. It took many years for researchers to prove its neuroprotective value through interventional trials, while researchers simultaneously strove to understand on a basic biologic level how magnesium sulfate works to prevent outcomes such as cerebral palsy.
Basic research underway today continues to improve our understanding of its precise mechanisms of action. Combined with other tiers of research — including more interventional studies and more translational research — we can improve its utility for the neuroprotection of prematurity. Alternatively, ongoing research may lead to different, even more effective treatments.
Our guest author is Irina Burd, MD, PhD, Sylvan Freiman, MD Endowed Professor and Chair of the department of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine.* Dr. Burd is also a physician-scientist. She recounts the important story of magnesium sulfate and what is currently known about its biologic plausibility in neuroprotection — including through her own studies – as well as what may be coming in the future.
E. Albert Reece, MD, PhD, MBA, a maternal-fetal medicine specialist, is dean emeritus of the University of Maryland School of Medicine, former university executive vice president; currently the endowed professor and director of the Center for Advanced Research Training and Innovation (CARTI), and senior scientist in the Center for Birth Defects Research. Dr. Reece reported no relevant disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at [email protected].
Magnesium Sulfate for Fetal Neuroprotection in Preterm Birth
Without a doubt, magnesium sulfate (MgSO4) given before anticipated preterm birth reduces the risk of cerebral palsy. It is a valuable tool for fetal neuroprotection at a time when there are no proven alternatives. Yet without the persistent research that occurred over more than 20 years, it may not have won the endorsement of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists in 2010 and worked its way into routine practice.
Its history is worthy of reflection. It took years of observational trials (not all of which showed neuroprotective effects), six randomized controlled trials (none of which met their primary endpoint), three meta-analyses, and a Cochrane Database Systematic Review to arrive at the conclusion that antenatal magnesium sulfate therapy given to women at risk of preterm birth has definitive neuroprotective benefit.
This history also holds lessons for our specialty given the dearth of drugs approved for use in pregnancy and the recent withdrawal from the market of Makena — one of only nine drugs to ever be approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in pregnancy — after a second trial showed lack of benefit in preventing recurrent preterm birth. The story of MgSO4 tells us it’s acceptable to have major stumbling blocks: At one point, MgSO4 was considered to be not only not helpful, but harmful, causing neonatal death. Further research disproved this initial finding.
Moreover, the MgSO4 story is one that remains unfinished, as my laboratory and other researchers work to better understand its biologic plausibility and to discover additional neuroprotective agents for anticipated preterm birth that may further reduce the risk of cerebral palsy. This leading cause of chronic childhood disability is estimated by the United Cerebral Palsy Foundation to affect approximately 800,000 people in the United States.
Origins and Biologic Plausibility
The MgSO4 story is rooted in the late seventeenth century discovery by physician Nehemiah Grew that the compound was the key component of the then-famous medicinal spring waters in Epsom, England.1 MgSO4 was first used for eclampsia in 1906,2 and was first reported in the American literature for eclampsia in 1925.3 In 1959, its effect as a tocolytic agent was reported.4
More than 30 years later, in 1995, an observational study coauthored by Karin B. Nelson, MD, and Judith K. Grether, PhD of the National Institutes of Health, showed a reduced risk of cerebral palsy in very-low-birth-weight infants (VLBW).5 The report marked a turning point in research interest on neuroprotection for anticipated preterm birth.
The precise molecular mechanisms of action of MgSO4 for neuroprotection are still not well understood. However, research findings from the University of Maryland and other institutions have provided biologic plausibility for its use to prevent cerebral palsy. Our current thinking is that it involves the prevention of periventricular white matter injury and/or the prevention of oxidative stress and a neuronal injury mechanism called excitotoxicity.
Periventricular white matter injury involving injury to preoligodendrocytes before 32 weeks’ gestation is the most prevalent injury seen in cerebral palsy; preoligodendrocytes are precursors of myelinating oligodendrocytes, which constitute a major glial population in the white matter. Our research in a mouse model demonstrated that the intrauterine inflammation frequently associated with preterm birth can lead to neuronal injury as well as white matter damage, and that MgSO4 may ameliorate both.6,7
Excitotoxicity results from excessive stimulation of N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) glutamatergic receptors on preoligodendrocytes and a rush of calcium through the voltage-gated channels. This calcium influx leads to the production of nitric oxide, oxidative stress, and subsequent mitochondrial damage and cell death. As a bivalent ion, MgSO4 sits in the voltage-gated channels of the NMDA receptors and reduces glutamatergic signaling, thus serving as a calcium antagonist and modulating calcium influx (See Figure).
In vitro research in our laboratory has also shown that MgSO4 may dampen inflammatory reactions driven by intrauterine infections, which, like preterm birth, increase the risk of cerebral palsy and adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes.8 MgSO4 appears to do so by blocking the voltage-gated P2X7 receptor in umbilical vein endothelial cells, thus blocking endothelial secretion of the proinflammatory cytokine interleukin (IL)–1beta. Much more research is needed to determine whether MgSO4 could help prevent cerebral palsy through this mechanism.
The Long Route of Research
The 1995 Nelson-Grether study compared VLBW (< 1500 g) infants who survived and developed moderate/severe cerebral palsy within 3 years to randomly selected VLBW controls with respect to whether their mothers had received MgSO4 to prevent seizures in preeclampsia or as a tocolytic agent.5 In a population of more than 155,000 children born between 1983 and 1985, in utero exposure to MgSO4 was reported in 7.1% of 42 VLBW infants with cerebral palsy and 36% of 75 VLBW controls (odds ratio [OR], 0.14; 95% CI, 0.05-0.51). In women without preeclampsia the OR increased to 0.25.
This motivating study had been preceded by several observational studies showing that infants born to women with preeclampsia who received MgSO4 had significantly lower risks of developing intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) and germinal matrix hemorrhage (GMH). In one of these studies, published in 1992, Karl C. Kuban, MD, and coauthors reported that “maternal receipt of magnesium sulfate was associated with diminished risk of GMH-IVH even in those babies born to mothers who apparently did not have preeclampsia.”9
In the several years following the 1995 Nelson-Grether study, several other case-control/observational studies were reported, with conflicting conclusions, and investigators around the world began designing and conducting needed randomized controlled trials.
The six published randomized controlled trials looking at MgSO4 and neuroprotection varied in their inclusion and exclusion criteria, their recruitment and enrollment style, the gestational ages for MgSO4 administration, loading and maintenance doses, how cerebral palsy or neuroprotection was assessed, and other factors (See Table for RCT characteristics and main outcomes).10-14 One of the trials aimed primarily at evaluating the efficacy of MgSO4 for preventing preeclampsia.
Again, none of the randomized controlled trials demonstrated statistical significance for their primary outcomes or concluded that there was a significant neuroprotective effect for cerebral palsy. Rather, most suggested benefit through secondary analyses. Moreover, as mentioned earlier, research that proceeded after the first published randomized controlled trial — the Magnesium and Neurologic Endpoints (MAGnet) trial — was suspended early when an interim analysis showed a significantly increased risk of mortality in MgSO4-exposed fetuses. All told, it wasn’t until researchers obtained unpublished data and conducted meta-analyses and systematic reviews that a significant effect of MgSO4 on cerebral palsy could be seen.
The three systematic reviews and the Cochrane review, each of which used slightly different methodologies, were published in rapid succession in 2009. One review calculated a relative risk of cerebral palsy of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.55-0.91) — and a relative risk for the combined outcome of death and cerebral palsy at 0.85 (95% CI, 0.74-0.98) — when women at risk of preterm birth were given MgSO4.15 The number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one case of cerebral palsy was 63, investigators determined, and the NNT to prevent one case of cerebral palsy or infant death was 44.
Another review estimated the NNT for prevention of one case of cerebral palsy at 52 when MgSO4 is given at less than 34 weeks’ gestation, and similarly concluded that MgSO4 is associated with a significantly “reduced risk of moderate/severe CP and substantial gross motor dysfunction without any statistically significant effect on the risk of total pediatric mortality.”16
A third review, from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network (MFMU), estimated an NNT of 46 to prevent one case of cerebral palsy in infants exposed to MgSO4 before 30 weeks, and an NNT of 56 when exposure occurs before 32-34 weeks.17
The Cochrane Review, meanwhile, reported a relative reduction in the risk of cerebral palsy of 0.68 (95% CI, 0.54-0.87) when antenatal MgSO4 is given at less than 37 weeks’ gestation, as well as a significant reduction in the rate of substantial gross motor dysfunction (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44-0.85).18 The NNT to avoid one case of cerebral palsy, researchers reported, was 63.
Moving Forward
The NNTs calculated in these reviews — ranging from 44 to 63 — are convincing, and are comparable with evidence-based medicine data for prevention of other common diseases.19 For instance, the NNT for a life saved when aspirin is given immediately after a heart attack is 42. Statins given for 5 years in people with known heart disease have an NNT of 83 to save one life, an NNT of 39 to prevent one nonfatal heart attack, and an NNT of 125 to prevent one stroke. For oral anticoagulants used in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation for primary stroke prevention, the NNTs to prevent one stroke, and one death, are 22 and 42, respectively.19
In its 2010 Committee Opinion on Magnesium Sulfate Before Anticipated Preterm Birth for Neuroprotection (reaffirmed in 2020), the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists left it to institutions to develop their own guidelines “regarding inclusion criteria, treatment regimens, concurrent tocolysis, and monitoring in accordance with one of the larger trials.”20
Not surprisingly, most if not all hospitals have chosen a higher dose of MgSO4 administered up to 31 weeks’ gestation in keeping with the protocols employed in the NICHD-sponsored BEAM trial (See Table).
The hope moving forward is to expand treatment options for neuroprotection in cases of imminent preterm birth. Researchers have been assessing the ability of melatonin to provide neuroprotection in cases of growth restriction and neonatal asphyxia. Melatonin has anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties and is known to mediate neuronal generation and synaptic plasticity.21
N-acetyl-L-cysteine is another potential neuroprotective agent. It acts as an antioxidant, a precursor to glutathione, and a modulator of the glutamate system and has been studied as a neuroprotective agent in cases of maternal chorioamnionitis.21 Both melatonin and N-acetyl-L-cysteine are regarded as safe in pregnancy, but much more clinical study is needed to prove their neuroprotective potential when given shortly before birth or earlier.
Dr. Burd is the Sylvan Freiman, MD Endowed Professor and Chair of the department of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore. She has no conflicts of interest.
References
1. Clio Med. 1984;19(1-2):1-21.
2. Medicinsk Rev. (Bergen) 1906;32:264-272.
3. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;174(4):1390-1391.
4. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1959;78(1):27-32.
5. Pediatrics. 1995;95(2):263-269.
6. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201(3):279.e1-279.e8.
7. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(3):292.e1-292.e9.
8. Pediatr Res. 2020;87(3):463-471.
9. J Child Neurol. 1992;7(1):70-76.
10. Lancet. 1997;350:1517-1518.
11. JAMA. 2003;290:2669-2676.
12. BJOG. 2007;114(3):310-318.
13. Lancet. 2002;359(9321):1877-1890.
14. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:895-905.
15. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113(6):1327-1333.
16. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200(6):595-609.
17. Obstet Gynecol 2009;114:354-364.
18. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jan 21:(1):CD004661.
19. www.thennt.com.
20. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115:669-671.
21. Front Synaptic Neurosci. 2012;13:680899.
*This story was corrected on June 10, 2024.
Introduction: The Many Lanes of Research on Magnesium Sulfate
The research that improves human health in the most expedient and most impactful ways is multitiered, with basic or fundamental research, translational research, interventional studies, and retrospective research often occurring simultaneously. There should be no “single lane” of research and one type of research does not preclude the other.
Too often, we fall short in one of these lanes. While we have achieved many moonshots in obstetrics and maternal-fetal medicine, we have tended not to place a high priority on basic research, which can provide a strong understanding of the biology of major diseases and conditions affecting women and their offspring. When conducted with proper commitment and funding, such research can lead to biologically directed therapy.
Within our specialty, research on how we can effectively prevent preterm birth, prematurity, and preeclampsia has taken a long road, with various types of therapies being tried, but none being overwhelmingly effective — with an ongoing need for more basic or fundamental research. Nevertheless, we can benefit and gain great insights from retrospective and interventional studies associated with clinical therapies used to treat premature labor and preeclampsia when these therapies have an unanticipated and important secondary benefit.
This month our Master Class is focused on the neuroprotection of prematurity. Magnesium sulfate is a valuable tool for the treatment of both premature labor and preeclampsia, and more recently, also for neuroprotection of the fetus. Interestingly, this use stemmed from researchers looking retrospectively at outcomes in women who received the compound for other reasons. It took many years for researchers to prove its neuroprotective value through interventional trials, while researchers simultaneously strove to understand on a basic biologic level how magnesium sulfate works to prevent outcomes such as cerebral palsy.
Basic research underway today continues to improve our understanding of its precise mechanisms of action. Combined with other tiers of research — including more interventional studies and more translational research — we can improve its utility for the neuroprotection of prematurity. Alternatively, ongoing research may lead to different, even more effective treatments.
Our guest author is Irina Burd, MD, PhD, Sylvan Freiman, MD Endowed Professor and Chair of the department of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine.* Dr. Burd is also a physician-scientist. She recounts the important story of magnesium sulfate and what is currently known about its biologic plausibility in neuroprotection — including through her own studies – as well as what may be coming in the future.
E. Albert Reece, MD, PhD, MBA, a maternal-fetal medicine specialist, is dean emeritus of the University of Maryland School of Medicine, former university executive vice president; currently the endowed professor and director of the Center for Advanced Research Training and Innovation (CARTI), and senior scientist in the Center for Birth Defects Research. Dr. Reece reported no relevant disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at [email protected].
Magnesium Sulfate for Fetal Neuroprotection in Preterm Birth
Without a doubt, magnesium sulfate (MgSO4) given before anticipated preterm birth reduces the risk of cerebral palsy. It is a valuable tool for fetal neuroprotection at a time when there are no proven alternatives. Yet without the persistent research that occurred over more than 20 years, it may not have won the endorsement of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists in 2010 and worked its way into routine practice.
Its history is worthy of reflection. It took years of observational trials (not all of which showed neuroprotective effects), six randomized controlled trials (none of which met their primary endpoint), three meta-analyses, and a Cochrane Database Systematic Review to arrive at the conclusion that antenatal magnesium sulfate therapy given to women at risk of preterm birth has definitive neuroprotective benefit.
This history also holds lessons for our specialty given the dearth of drugs approved for use in pregnancy and the recent withdrawal from the market of Makena — one of only nine drugs to ever be approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in pregnancy — after a second trial showed lack of benefit in preventing recurrent preterm birth. The story of MgSO4 tells us it’s acceptable to have major stumbling blocks: At one point, MgSO4 was considered to be not only not helpful, but harmful, causing neonatal death. Further research disproved this initial finding.
Moreover, the MgSO4 story is one that remains unfinished, as my laboratory and other researchers work to better understand its biologic plausibility and to discover additional neuroprotective agents for anticipated preterm birth that may further reduce the risk of cerebral palsy. This leading cause of chronic childhood disability is estimated by the United Cerebral Palsy Foundation to affect approximately 800,000 people in the United States.
Origins and Biologic Plausibility
The MgSO4 story is rooted in the late seventeenth century discovery by physician Nehemiah Grew that the compound was the key component of the then-famous medicinal spring waters in Epsom, England.1 MgSO4 was first used for eclampsia in 1906,2 and was first reported in the American literature for eclampsia in 1925.3 In 1959, its effect as a tocolytic agent was reported.4
More than 30 years later, in 1995, an observational study coauthored by Karin B. Nelson, MD, and Judith K. Grether, PhD of the National Institutes of Health, showed a reduced risk of cerebral palsy in very-low-birth-weight infants (VLBW).5 The report marked a turning point in research interest on neuroprotection for anticipated preterm birth.
The precise molecular mechanisms of action of MgSO4 for neuroprotection are still not well understood. However, research findings from the University of Maryland and other institutions have provided biologic plausibility for its use to prevent cerebral palsy. Our current thinking is that it involves the prevention of periventricular white matter injury and/or the prevention of oxidative stress and a neuronal injury mechanism called excitotoxicity.
Periventricular white matter injury involving injury to preoligodendrocytes before 32 weeks’ gestation is the most prevalent injury seen in cerebral palsy; preoligodendrocytes are precursors of myelinating oligodendrocytes, which constitute a major glial population in the white matter. Our research in a mouse model demonstrated that the intrauterine inflammation frequently associated with preterm birth can lead to neuronal injury as well as white matter damage, and that MgSO4 may ameliorate both.6,7
Excitotoxicity results from excessive stimulation of N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) glutamatergic receptors on preoligodendrocytes and a rush of calcium through the voltage-gated channels. This calcium influx leads to the production of nitric oxide, oxidative stress, and subsequent mitochondrial damage and cell death. As a bivalent ion, MgSO4 sits in the voltage-gated channels of the NMDA receptors and reduces glutamatergic signaling, thus serving as a calcium antagonist and modulating calcium influx (See Figure).
In vitro research in our laboratory has also shown that MgSO4 may dampen inflammatory reactions driven by intrauterine infections, which, like preterm birth, increase the risk of cerebral palsy and adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes.8 MgSO4 appears to do so by blocking the voltage-gated P2X7 receptor in umbilical vein endothelial cells, thus blocking endothelial secretion of the proinflammatory cytokine interleukin (IL)–1beta. Much more research is needed to determine whether MgSO4 could help prevent cerebral palsy through this mechanism.
The Long Route of Research
The 1995 Nelson-Grether study compared VLBW (< 1500 g) infants who survived and developed moderate/severe cerebral palsy within 3 years to randomly selected VLBW controls with respect to whether their mothers had received MgSO4 to prevent seizures in preeclampsia or as a tocolytic agent.5 In a population of more than 155,000 children born between 1983 and 1985, in utero exposure to MgSO4 was reported in 7.1% of 42 VLBW infants with cerebral palsy and 36% of 75 VLBW controls (odds ratio [OR], 0.14; 95% CI, 0.05-0.51). In women without preeclampsia the OR increased to 0.25.
This motivating study had been preceded by several observational studies showing that infants born to women with preeclampsia who received MgSO4 had significantly lower risks of developing intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) and germinal matrix hemorrhage (GMH). In one of these studies, published in 1992, Karl C. Kuban, MD, and coauthors reported that “maternal receipt of magnesium sulfate was associated with diminished risk of GMH-IVH even in those babies born to mothers who apparently did not have preeclampsia.”9
In the several years following the 1995 Nelson-Grether study, several other case-control/observational studies were reported, with conflicting conclusions, and investigators around the world began designing and conducting needed randomized controlled trials.
The six published randomized controlled trials looking at MgSO4 and neuroprotection varied in their inclusion and exclusion criteria, their recruitment and enrollment style, the gestational ages for MgSO4 administration, loading and maintenance doses, how cerebral palsy or neuroprotection was assessed, and other factors (See Table for RCT characteristics and main outcomes).10-14 One of the trials aimed primarily at evaluating the efficacy of MgSO4 for preventing preeclampsia.
Again, none of the randomized controlled trials demonstrated statistical significance for their primary outcomes or concluded that there was a significant neuroprotective effect for cerebral palsy. Rather, most suggested benefit through secondary analyses. Moreover, as mentioned earlier, research that proceeded after the first published randomized controlled trial — the Magnesium and Neurologic Endpoints (MAGnet) trial — was suspended early when an interim analysis showed a significantly increased risk of mortality in MgSO4-exposed fetuses. All told, it wasn’t until researchers obtained unpublished data and conducted meta-analyses and systematic reviews that a significant effect of MgSO4 on cerebral palsy could be seen.
The three systematic reviews and the Cochrane review, each of which used slightly different methodologies, were published in rapid succession in 2009. One review calculated a relative risk of cerebral palsy of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.55-0.91) — and a relative risk for the combined outcome of death and cerebral palsy at 0.85 (95% CI, 0.74-0.98) — when women at risk of preterm birth were given MgSO4.15 The number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one case of cerebral palsy was 63, investigators determined, and the NNT to prevent one case of cerebral palsy or infant death was 44.
Another review estimated the NNT for prevention of one case of cerebral palsy at 52 when MgSO4 is given at less than 34 weeks’ gestation, and similarly concluded that MgSO4 is associated with a significantly “reduced risk of moderate/severe CP and substantial gross motor dysfunction without any statistically significant effect on the risk of total pediatric mortality.”16
A third review, from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network (MFMU), estimated an NNT of 46 to prevent one case of cerebral palsy in infants exposed to MgSO4 before 30 weeks, and an NNT of 56 when exposure occurs before 32-34 weeks.17
The Cochrane Review, meanwhile, reported a relative reduction in the risk of cerebral palsy of 0.68 (95% CI, 0.54-0.87) when antenatal MgSO4 is given at less than 37 weeks’ gestation, as well as a significant reduction in the rate of substantial gross motor dysfunction (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44-0.85).18 The NNT to avoid one case of cerebral palsy, researchers reported, was 63.
Moving Forward
The NNTs calculated in these reviews — ranging from 44 to 63 — are convincing, and are comparable with evidence-based medicine data for prevention of other common diseases.19 For instance, the NNT for a life saved when aspirin is given immediately after a heart attack is 42. Statins given for 5 years in people with known heart disease have an NNT of 83 to save one life, an NNT of 39 to prevent one nonfatal heart attack, and an NNT of 125 to prevent one stroke. For oral anticoagulants used in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation for primary stroke prevention, the NNTs to prevent one stroke, and one death, are 22 and 42, respectively.19
In its 2010 Committee Opinion on Magnesium Sulfate Before Anticipated Preterm Birth for Neuroprotection (reaffirmed in 2020), the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists left it to institutions to develop their own guidelines “regarding inclusion criteria, treatment regimens, concurrent tocolysis, and monitoring in accordance with one of the larger trials.”20
Not surprisingly, most if not all hospitals have chosen a higher dose of MgSO4 administered up to 31 weeks’ gestation in keeping with the protocols employed in the NICHD-sponsored BEAM trial (See Table).
The hope moving forward is to expand treatment options for neuroprotection in cases of imminent preterm birth. Researchers have been assessing the ability of melatonin to provide neuroprotection in cases of growth restriction and neonatal asphyxia. Melatonin has anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties and is known to mediate neuronal generation and synaptic plasticity.21
N-acetyl-L-cysteine is another potential neuroprotective agent. It acts as an antioxidant, a precursor to glutathione, and a modulator of the glutamate system and has been studied as a neuroprotective agent in cases of maternal chorioamnionitis.21 Both melatonin and N-acetyl-L-cysteine are regarded as safe in pregnancy, but much more clinical study is needed to prove their neuroprotective potential when given shortly before birth or earlier.
Dr. Burd is the Sylvan Freiman, MD Endowed Professor and Chair of the department of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore. She has no conflicts of interest.
References
1. Clio Med. 1984;19(1-2):1-21.
2. Medicinsk Rev. (Bergen) 1906;32:264-272.
3. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;174(4):1390-1391.
4. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1959;78(1):27-32.
5. Pediatrics. 1995;95(2):263-269.
6. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;201(3):279.e1-279.e8.
7. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;202(3):292.e1-292.e9.
8. Pediatr Res. 2020;87(3):463-471.
9. J Child Neurol. 1992;7(1):70-76.
10. Lancet. 1997;350:1517-1518.
11. JAMA. 2003;290:2669-2676.
12. BJOG. 2007;114(3):310-318.
13. Lancet. 2002;359(9321):1877-1890.
14. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:895-905.
15. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113(6):1327-1333.
16. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200(6):595-609.
17. Obstet Gynecol 2009;114:354-364.
18. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jan 21:(1):CD004661.
19. www.thennt.com.
20. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115:669-671.
21. Front Synaptic Neurosci. 2012;13:680899.
*This story was corrected on June 10, 2024.
Efficacy of Topical Clascoterone for Acne Increased Over Time, Analysis Shows
TOPLINE:
METHODOLOGY:
- A 1% cream formulation of clascoterone, a topical androgen receptor inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of acne vulgaris in patients aged 12 years and older based on results from two identical phase 3 12-week trials, NCT02608450 and NCT02608476, and a long-term extension (LTE) study.
- The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the integrated efficacy of clascoterone cream 1% (Winlevi) in the intention-to-treat population of patients from all three trials.
- In the pivotal trials, investigators randomized patients with acne 1:1 to receive clascoterone cream 1% or vehicle twice daily for 12 weeks. Participants were eligible to enter the LTE study, in which patients applied clascoterone to the face, and if they wanted to, the trunk for up to 9 more months.
- To assess combined efficacy, researchers evaluated the proportion of patients who achieved an Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) of 0 or 1.
TAKEAWAY:
- Of the 1143 patients from the pivotal trials who completed 12 weeks of treatment, 576 were in the clascoterone group and 567 were in the vehicle group. Of the 600 patients who entered the LTE study, 311 were in the clascoterone group and 289 were in the vehicle group. Of these, 343 completed the LTE study.
- At week 12, the proportion of patients who achieved treatment success was higher in the clascoterone group than in the vehicle group (19.9% vs 7.7%, respectively; P < .0001).
- In the LTE study, the proportion of patients previously treated with clascoterone who achieved a facial IGA of 0/1 increased from 13.5% at extension day 0 to 29.9% at extension day 274, while the proportion of patients previously treated with vehicle and switched to clascoterone who achieved a facial IGA of 0/1 increased from 6.2% at extension day 0 to 30.4% at extension day 274.
- Similarly, the proportion of patients in the LTE study with a truncal IGA of 0/1 increased from 4.9% at extension day 0 to 31.7% on extension day 274.
IN PRACTICE:
“Clinicians may consider counseling patients that treatment persistence is required to maximize the efficacy of clascoterone treatment,” the authors concluded.
SOURCE:
Lawrence F. Eichenfield, MD, of the departments of dermatology and pediatrics at the University of California and Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, California, led the research. The study was published in the January 2024 issue of the Journal of Drugs in Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
There was a high patient discontinuation rate before and during the LET study. Also, no assessment was made as to how clascoterone affected patients’ quality of life.
DISCLOSURES:
Clascoterone manufacturer Cassiopea funded the studies. Dr. Eichenfield and fellow investigators Adelaide A. Hebert, MD, and Linda Stein Gold, MD, received compensation from Cassiopea as advisers and disclosed ties to many other pharmaceutical companies.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
METHODOLOGY:
- A 1% cream formulation of clascoterone, a topical androgen receptor inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of acne vulgaris in patients aged 12 years and older based on results from two identical phase 3 12-week trials, NCT02608450 and NCT02608476, and a long-term extension (LTE) study.
- The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the integrated efficacy of clascoterone cream 1% (Winlevi) in the intention-to-treat population of patients from all three trials.
- In the pivotal trials, investigators randomized patients with acne 1:1 to receive clascoterone cream 1% or vehicle twice daily for 12 weeks. Participants were eligible to enter the LTE study, in which patients applied clascoterone to the face, and if they wanted to, the trunk for up to 9 more months.
- To assess combined efficacy, researchers evaluated the proportion of patients who achieved an Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) of 0 or 1.
TAKEAWAY:
- Of the 1143 patients from the pivotal trials who completed 12 weeks of treatment, 576 were in the clascoterone group and 567 were in the vehicle group. Of the 600 patients who entered the LTE study, 311 were in the clascoterone group and 289 were in the vehicle group. Of these, 343 completed the LTE study.
- At week 12, the proportion of patients who achieved treatment success was higher in the clascoterone group than in the vehicle group (19.9% vs 7.7%, respectively; P < .0001).
- In the LTE study, the proportion of patients previously treated with clascoterone who achieved a facial IGA of 0/1 increased from 13.5% at extension day 0 to 29.9% at extension day 274, while the proportion of patients previously treated with vehicle and switched to clascoterone who achieved a facial IGA of 0/1 increased from 6.2% at extension day 0 to 30.4% at extension day 274.
- Similarly, the proportion of patients in the LTE study with a truncal IGA of 0/1 increased from 4.9% at extension day 0 to 31.7% on extension day 274.
IN PRACTICE:
“Clinicians may consider counseling patients that treatment persistence is required to maximize the efficacy of clascoterone treatment,” the authors concluded.
SOURCE:
Lawrence F. Eichenfield, MD, of the departments of dermatology and pediatrics at the University of California and Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, California, led the research. The study was published in the January 2024 issue of the Journal of Drugs in Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
There was a high patient discontinuation rate before and during the LET study. Also, no assessment was made as to how clascoterone affected patients’ quality of life.
DISCLOSURES:
Clascoterone manufacturer Cassiopea funded the studies. Dr. Eichenfield and fellow investigators Adelaide A. Hebert, MD, and Linda Stein Gold, MD, received compensation from Cassiopea as advisers and disclosed ties to many other pharmaceutical companies.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
METHODOLOGY:
- A 1% cream formulation of clascoterone, a topical androgen receptor inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of acne vulgaris in patients aged 12 years and older based on results from two identical phase 3 12-week trials, NCT02608450 and NCT02608476, and a long-term extension (LTE) study.
- The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the integrated efficacy of clascoterone cream 1% (Winlevi) in the intention-to-treat population of patients from all three trials.
- In the pivotal trials, investigators randomized patients with acne 1:1 to receive clascoterone cream 1% or vehicle twice daily for 12 weeks. Participants were eligible to enter the LTE study, in which patients applied clascoterone to the face, and if they wanted to, the trunk for up to 9 more months.
- To assess combined efficacy, researchers evaluated the proportion of patients who achieved an Investigator’s Global Assessment (IGA) of 0 or 1.
TAKEAWAY:
- Of the 1143 patients from the pivotal trials who completed 12 weeks of treatment, 576 were in the clascoterone group and 567 were in the vehicle group. Of the 600 patients who entered the LTE study, 311 were in the clascoterone group and 289 were in the vehicle group. Of these, 343 completed the LTE study.
- At week 12, the proportion of patients who achieved treatment success was higher in the clascoterone group than in the vehicle group (19.9% vs 7.7%, respectively; P < .0001).
- In the LTE study, the proportion of patients previously treated with clascoterone who achieved a facial IGA of 0/1 increased from 13.5% at extension day 0 to 29.9% at extension day 274, while the proportion of patients previously treated with vehicle and switched to clascoterone who achieved a facial IGA of 0/1 increased from 6.2% at extension day 0 to 30.4% at extension day 274.
- Similarly, the proportion of patients in the LTE study with a truncal IGA of 0/1 increased from 4.9% at extension day 0 to 31.7% on extension day 274.
IN PRACTICE:
“Clinicians may consider counseling patients that treatment persistence is required to maximize the efficacy of clascoterone treatment,” the authors concluded.
SOURCE:
Lawrence F. Eichenfield, MD, of the departments of dermatology and pediatrics at the University of California and Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, California, led the research. The study was published in the January 2024 issue of the Journal of Drugs in Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
There was a high patient discontinuation rate before and during the LET study. Also, no assessment was made as to how clascoterone affected patients’ quality of life.
DISCLOSURES:
Clascoterone manufacturer Cassiopea funded the studies. Dr. Eichenfield and fellow investigators Adelaide A. Hebert, MD, and Linda Stein Gold, MD, received compensation from Cassiopea as advisers and disclosed ties to many other pharmaceutical companies.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Researchers Take Aim at Genetic Influence on Asthma and Allergy
The impact of maternal factors on allergy and asthma is the subject of new research in the wake of a grant from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases to a team at Indiana University School of Medicine, according to a university press release.
Researchers led by Joan Cook-Mills, PhD, will examine the mechanisms behind the development of asthma, food allergies, and allergic diseases in children whose mothers had allergies.
“Research from the Cook-Mills lab revealed mothers with allergies have elevated levels of a specific lipid within the eicosanoid class of lipids, suggesting this lipid may have a potential influence on their offspring also developing allergies,” according to the press release.
A 5-year grant for $3.9 million was awarded to extend work by the Cook-Mills lab, and the research will focus on four areas, according to the university:
The potential impact of higher levels of lipid from mothers’ lungs may affect infants’ risk for allergy and whether this lipid is transmitted to infants during pregnancy or breastfeeding.
The potential impact of elevated levels of a specific eicosanoid in mothers with allergies promotes the creation of more dendritic cells by fetal bone marrow and how this might affect allergy risk for infants.
, potentially leading to altered lung bacteria, which can affect immune cell responses to allergies and asthma.
The potential impact of elevated eicosanoids on whether the altered lung microbiome “actively changes the production of this eicosanoid in the lungs of allergic mothers,” according to the press release.
“Allergies and asthma cause a significant burden of disease in our pediatric population, which is further complicated by limited therapies and interventions to combat these diseases, let alone prevent their development,” Anne C. Coates, MD, a pediatric pulmonologist at Maine Medical Center, Portland, said in an interview.
“The work by Cook-Mills and her colleagues will expand our understanding of the role maternal health may have on allergies and asthma and opportunities to mitigate it,” she said. The key implications of the research are the potential to facilitate the development of future clinical studies and trials that could yield novel targeted treatments for significant allergies, Dr. Coates told this news organization.
The research by Cook-Mills and her team had “the potential for the development of transformative approaches to allergy prevention and management, which could improve the health and quality of life for scores of individuals worldwide,” she said.
Dr. Coates had no financial conflicts to disclose but served on the Editorial Advisory Board of Chest Physician.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
The impact of maternal factors on allergy and asthma is the subject of new research in the wake of a grant from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases to a team at Indiana University School of Medicine, according to a university press release.
Researchers led by Joan Cook-Mills, PhD, will examine the mechanisms behind the development of asthma, food allergies, and allergic diseases in children whose mothers had allergies.
“Research from the Cook-Mills lab revealed mothers with allergies have elevated levels of a specific lipid within the eicosanoid class of lipids, suggesting this lipid may have a potential influence on their offspring also developing allergies,” according to the press release.
A 5-year grant for $3.9 million was awarded to extend work by the Cook-Mills lab, and the research will focus on four areas, according to the university:
The potential impact of higher levels of lipid from mothers’ lungs may affect infants’ risk for allergy and whether this lipid is transmitted to infants during pregnancy or breastfeeding.
The potential impact of elevated levels of a specific eicosanoid in mothers with allergies promotes the creation of more dendritic cells by fetal bone marrow and how this might affect allergy risk for infants.
, potentially leading to altered lung bacteria, which can affect immune cell responses to allergies and asthma.
The potential impact of elevated eicosanoids on whether the altered lung microbiome “actively changes the production of this eicosanoid in the lungs of allergic mothers,” according to the press release.
“Allergies and asthma cause a significant burden of disease in our pediatric population, which is further complicated by limited therapies and interventions to combat these diseases, let alone prevent their development,” Anne C. Coates, MD, a pediatric pulmonologist at Maine Medical Center, Portland, said in an interview.
“The work by Cook-Mills and her colleagues will expand our understanding of the role maternal health may have on allergies and asthma and opportunities to mitigate it,” she said. The key implications of the research are the potential to facilitate the development of future clinical studies and trials that could yield novel targeted treatments for significant allergies, Dr. Coates told this news organization.
The research by Cook-Mills and her team had “the potential for the development of transformative approaches to allergy prevention and management, which could improve the health and quality of life for scores of individuals worldwide,” she said.
Dr. Coates had no financial conflicts to disclose but served on the Editorial Advisory Board of Chest Physician.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
The impact of maternal factors on allergy and asthma is the subject of new research in the wake of a grant from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases to a team at Indiana University School of Medicine, according to a university press release.
Researchers led by Joan Cook-Mills, PhD, will examine the mechanisms behind the development of asthma, food allergies, and allergic diseases in children whose mothers had allergies.
“Research from the Cook-Mills lab revealed mothers with allergies have elevated levels of a specific lipid within the eicosanoid class of lipids, suggesting this lipid may have a potential influence on their offspring also developing allergies,” according to the press release.
A 5-year grant for $3.9 million was awarded to extend work by the Cook-Mills lab, and the research will focus on four areas, according to the university:
The potential impact of higher levels of lipid from mothers’ lungs may affect infants’ risk for allergy and whether this lipid is transmitted to infants during pregnancy or breastfeeding.
The potential impact of elevated levels of a specific eicosanoid in mothers with allergies promotes the creation of more dendritic cells by fetal bone marrow and how this might affect allergy risk for infants.
, potentially leading to altered lung bacteria, which can affect immune cell responses to allergies and asthma.
The potential impact of elevated eicosanoids on whether the altered lung microbiome “actively changes the production of this eicosanoid in the lungs of allergic mothers,” according to the press release.
“Allergies and asthma cause a significant burden of disease in our pediatric population, which is further complicated by limited therapies and interventions to combat these diseases, let alone prevent their development,” Anne C. Coates, MD, a pediatric pulmonologist at Maine Medical Center, Portland, said in an interview.
“The work by Cook-Mills and her colleagues will expand our understanding of the role maternal health may have on allergies and asthma and opportunities to mitigate it,” she said. The key implications of the research are the potential to facilitate the development of future clinical studies and trials that could yield novel targeted treatments for significant allergies, Dr. Coates told this news organization.
The research by Cook-Mills and her team had “the potential for the development of transformative approaches to allergy prevention and management, which could improve the health and quality of life for scores of individuals worldwide,” she said.
Dr. Coates had no financial conflicts to disclose but served on the Editorial Advisory Board of Chest Physician.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Gestational Diabetes Treatment Moves Forward With Uncertainty And Hope
FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA — , but researchers at the biennial meeting of the Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group of North America expressed hope for more clarity in the near future and the ability to someday individualize treatment to account for what is increasingly viewed as a heterogeneous condition.
Until studies in 2015 and 2018 cast doubt on glyburide, “we used to have 80% [of our GDM patients] on glyburide, and 20% on insulin,” Maisa Feghali, MD, of the University of Pittsburgh, said during a discussion period. “Now we have 95% on insulin and 5% on oral hypoglycemics. I rely on insulin because I don’t have a better option, and I rely on research efforts [underway to provide better options]” in the future.
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends insulin as the preferred first-line pharmacologic therapy for GDM when pharmacologic therapy is needed, with metformin as an option when patients decline or cannot safely use insulin. Glyburide, ACOG said in its 2018 practice bulletin on GDM (Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131[2]:e49-64), should not be recommended as a first-line pharmacologic therapy.
The Society of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, on the other hand, has accepted metformin as a “reasonable and safe” first-line alternative to insulin — while recognizing that half of women will still require insulin to achieve glycemic control — and does not rule out consideration of glyburide. In its 2018 statement on the pharmacologic treatment of GDM, the society said that the evidence of benefit of one oral agent over another remains limited.
“When you have dueling guidelines, it means the data are not that clear,” George Saade, MD, professor and chair of obstetrics and gynecology at the Eastern Virginia School of Medicine, Norfolk, said in a presentation on GDM. An upcoming $12 million multicenter study to be led by the Ohio State University College of Medicine — coined the DECIDE trial — should provide clarity, he said.
The trial, funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, which funds comparative clinical effectiveness research designed to be broadly applicable to practice, will enroll and randomize over 1500 pregnant individuals with GDM to either oral metformin or insulin and will follow mothers and children until 2 years after delivery.
The study’s primary and secondary hypotheses, respectively, are that metformin is not inferior to insulin in reducing a composite adverse neonatal outcome (large for gestational age, neonatal hypoglycemia and/or hyperbilirubemia) and that metformin does not result in increased child body mass index at 2 years, compared with insulin. It will also look at patient-reported factors associated with metformin use compared to insulin use — factors that “are important ... to enable clinical implementation of study findings,” said Dr. Saade, who played a role in designing the study over the past several years.
The study will take a pragmatic, real-world approach by ensuring racial and ethnic, socioeconomic, urban and rural, and geographic diversity at both large academic and community-based sites across the United States.
The trial, to be led by Mark Landon, MD, and Kartik Venkatesh, MD, PhD, of Ohio State University, will be the first large trial in the United States to both directly compare the ability of oral hypoglycemics and insulin to prevent GDM-associated pregnancy complications, and to follow children for 2 years, Dr. Saade said. “Prior research was either outside the United States, not randomized, not adequately powered, or had no long-term child follow-up,” he added after the meeting.
The State Of Knowledge About Oral Hypoglycemics
The trial was envisioned several years ago as a three-arm comparative trial including the sulfonylurea glyburide, but data published in recent years has increasingly “not favored” glyburide, and many providers “have stopped using it,” Dr. Saade said during and after the meeting. At this point, “it would not be useful to include it” in a pragmatic trial, he said.
Glyburide became the number one agent after a seminal trial published in 2000 (N Engl J Med. 2000;343:1134-8) showed equivalent glycemic control in about 400 women with GDM who were randomized to receive insulin or glyburide. While the trial was not powered to evaluate other outcomes, there were no significant differences in neonatal complications.
In 2015, a large retrospective population-based study (JAMA Pediatr. 2015;169[5]:452-8) of more than 9,000 women with GDM showed higher risks of neonatal intensive care admission, neonatal hypoglycemia, and large-for-gestational age with glyburide compared with insulin. “It prompted a pause in thinking,” Dr. Saade recalled at the DPSG meeting. After that, several meta-analyses/systematic reviews compared the two treatments, showing varying and sometimes conflicting degrees of difference in neonatal outcomes.
In 2018, a French noninferiority randomized controlled trial (JAMA 2018;319[17]:1773-80) did not show that glyburide is not inferior to insulin in the prevention of perinatal outcomes (macrosomia, neonatal hypoglycemia, and hyperbilirubinemia). “If you add this trial to the systematic reviews, it would probably would shift more in favor of insulin,” Dr. Saade said, noting that the trial’s supplementary data included a higher rate of maternal hypoglycemia with glyburide. “I feel personally now, with all the data, that glyburide is inferior to insulin.”
A 2021 network meta-analysis (BMC Endocr Disord. 2021;21:199) that looked at glycemic control and neonatal outcomes in GDM treated with glyburide, metformin, or insulin, also offers valuable insight, Dr. Saade said. The meta-analysis used a Bayesian framework and presents results as a ranking estimated probability of a treatment being the best or worst — or in between — for different outcomes (glycemic control and neonatal outcomes), which “is one of the best ways to look at data these days,” he said.
“It tells us how likely [it is for one agent] to be better than others. Will it work most of the time? More than 60% of the time?” Dr. Saade explained. For example, the analysis “tell us that for large for gestational age, glyburide has a 94% chance of being the worst, metformin has an 80% change of being the best, and insulin a 76% chance of being in between.”
Overall, the 2021 analysis suggests that “glyburide is the most likely to be worst in most outcomes and that there is equipoise between metformin and insulin,” he said.
Meta-analyses of pharmacologic treatment of GDM have been challenged, he said, by inconsistent reporting in trials of GDM diagnostic criteria, severity of hyperglycemia, and small sample sizes (and wide confidence intervals). Criteria for supplemental insulin are also often “unclear” in trials, Dr. Saade said, as is involvement of social determinants of health and the “care package” enveloping pharmacologic interventions.
Dr. Saade, Dr. Landon, and other researchers have also lamented over the years that there is limited long-term follow-up of exposed offspring.
The Challenge of Heterogeneity
In another presentation on GDM, Maisa Feghali, MD, MS, emphasized that GDM is a heterogeneous condition, with clinical hyperglycemia not capturing individual variation in underlying physiologic processes. A 2016 study (Diabetes Care. 2016;39[6]:1052-5) assessing insulin sensitivity and secretion in 800-plus women at 24-30 weeks’ gestation found that about 50% of those with GDM had predominant insulin resistance, 30% had predominant insulin secretion deficit, and 20% were mixed.
Those with predominant insulin resistance had higher BMI, higher fasting glucose, larger infants, and greater risk of GDM-associated adverse outcomes, “suggesting that the risk is not universal or equivalent,” said Dr. Feghali, assistant professor in the department of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive sciences at the University of Pittsburgh and the UPCM Magee-Women’s Hospital.
A 2019 multicenter European study (Diabetologia. 2019;62[11]:2118-28) found an even higher proportion of GDM involving predominant insulin resistance and, similarly, a greater risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in these women than in insulin-sensitive women with GDM, “again suggesting that there’s probably some benefit to looking deeper at physiology to understand individual risk,” she said.
Research published decades ago showed that insulin sensitivity decreases by over 50% during pregnancy, and “what we’ve come to recognize is there [can be] insulin secretion deficiency that’s not able to surmount or overcome the insulin resistance that develops during advanced gestation,” she said. “We need to think not at the population level but at the individual level.”
Dr. Feghali is leading the MATCh-GDM (Metabolic Analysis for Treatment Choice in GDM) study, which has been randomizing women to receive either usual, unmatched treatment or treatment matched to GDM mechanism — metformin for predominant insulin resistance, glyburide, or insulin for predominant insulin secretion defects, and one of the three for combined mechanisms. Data are not available yet.
There is still more to be learned about the pharmacologic effects of oral hypoglycemics, she noted, pointing to a 2020 study (Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2020;107[6]:1362-72) that randomized women to glyburide, metformin, or glyburide/metformin combination therapy and measured insulin sensitivity, beta-cell responsivity, and disposition index. (The latter describes the overall metabolic state and is a product of insulin sensitivity and total beta-cell responsivity.)
“Somewhat surprisingly, they found metformin performed better than glyburide,” shifting the overall disposition index closer to normal, Dr. Feghali said. “But not surprisingly, they found the combination worked best.”
Total beta-cell responsivity occurred in 56% of the glyburide group and 74% of the combination group. Improvements in insulin sensitivity occurred in 84% of the metformin group and 74% of the combination group. Surprisingly, there was “a decrease in first-phase insulin secretion” with glyburide, noted Dr. Feghali — a finding that means “the glyburide story has turned out to be a little more complicated.” With metformin, there was a positive change in insulin secretion as well as insulin sensitivity.
The authors’ conclusion, she noted, “is that there’s potential in thinking about metformin first, as the primary treatment, and then adding glyburide after that.”
Future Use Of Incretin Mimetics, and Intensive Targets in Overweight/Obesity
Dr. Feghali wonders whether incretin hormone mimetics — such as glucagonlike peptide–1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP) — could play a future role in GDM treatment, helping to increase insulin secretion.
She is currently recruiting for a pilot study on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in GDM of exenatide, a FDA-approved GLP-1 agonist that has been shown not to cross the placenta and that should, research suggests, lower the risk of maternal hypoglycemia and limit the risk of excessive fetal growth, “overcoming some of the concerns we have with glyburide,” Dr. Feghali said.
A recent study of the gut-generated incretin response during an oral glucose tolerance test in pregnant women with and without GDM showed that post-load GLP-1 and GIP were higher in women with GDM, and that the GLP-1 secretion was associated with insulin secretion only in those with GDM (J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2022;107(6):e2425-30). “In those with normal OGTT, insulin secretion was independent of GLP-1,” she said. “This study suggests there’s a potential role for incretin mimetics in GDM.”
Also regarding the individualization of GDM treatment, patients who are overweight or obese in the prepregnancy setting and have gestational diabetes represent a different phenotype, she noted, with higher fasting and postprandial blood glucose compared to normal-weight counterparts despite higher doses of medication.
“After controlling for gestational weight gain and glycemic control, we see there’s an independent effect of prepregnancy obesity specifically for an increased risk of macrosomia, preterm birth, and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy,” said Dr. Feghali, referring to a 2015 retrospective study of GDM and obesity (Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126:316-25). “It suggests that we might think about redrawing the line, not on diagnosis and screening but on treatment.”
The randomized, controlled Intensive Glycemic Targets in Overweight and Obese Women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (iGDM) trial, is now recruiting at multiple centers, including at Dr. Feghali’s University of Pittsburgh, and will investigate the effect of intensive glycemic targets (fasting < 90 mg/dL, 1-hour postprandial < 120 mg/dL) versus standard glycemic targets (fasting < 95 mg/dL, 1-hour postprandial < 140 mg/dL), she said.
In another presentation on GDM, Monica Longo, MD, PhD, of the Inova Health System in Fairfax, Va., said researchers are also looking at whether nutritional supplements such as myo-inositol can reduce the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in GDM, and whether probiotics can improve insulin sensitivity in some patients.
Data on newer insulin analogs in pregnancy are lacking, she noted. “Preliminary data has shown no malformations in infants, but there is some increase in hypoglycemia-related admissions to the NICU,” she said. “It’s worth it [to research more].”
FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA — , but researchers at the biennial meeting of the Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group of North America expressed hope for more clarity in the near future and the ability to someday individualize treatment to account for what is increasingly viewed as a heterogeneous condition.
Until studies in 2015 and 2018 cast doubt on glyburide, “we used to have 80% [of our GDM patients] on glyburide, and 20% on insulin,” Maisa Feghali, MD, of the University of Pittsburgh, said during a discussion period. “Now we have 95% on insulin and 5% on oral hypoglycemics. I rely on insulin because I don’t have a better option, and I rely on research efforts [underway to provide better options]” in the future.
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends insulin as the preferred first-line pharmacologic therapy for GDM when pharmacologic therapy is needed, with metformin as an option when patients decline or cannot safely use insulin. Glyburide, ACOG said in its 2018 practice bulletin on GDM (Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131[2]:e49-64), should not be recommended as a first-line pharmacologic therapy.
The Society of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, on the other hand, has accepted metformin as a “reasonable and safe” first-line alternative to insulin — while recognizing that half of women will still require insulin to achieve glycemic control — and does not rule out consideration of glyburide. In its 2018 statement on the pharmacologic treatment of GDM, the society said that the evidence of benefit of one oral agent over another remains limited.
“When you have dueling guidelines, it means the data are not that clear,” George Saade, MD, professor and chair of obstetrics and gynecology at the Eastern Virginia School of Medicine, Norfolk, said in a presentation on GDM. An upcoming $12 million multicenter study to be led by the Ohio State University College of Medicine — coined the DECIDE trial — should provide clarity, he said.
The trial, funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, which funds comparative clinical effectiveness research designed to be broadly applicable to practice, will enroll and randomize over 1500 pregnant individuals with GDM to either oral metformin or insulin and will follow mothers and children until 2 years after delivery.
The study’s primary and secondary hypotheses, respectively, are that metformin is not inferior to insulin in reducing a composite adverse neonatal outcome (large for gestational age, neonatal hypoglycemia and/or hyperbilirubemia) and that metformin does not result in increased child body mass index at 2 years, compared with insulin. It will also look at patient-reported factors associated with metformin use compared to insulin use — factors that “are important ... to enable clinical implementation of study findings,” said Dr. Saade, who played a role in designing the study over the past several years.
The study will take a pragmatic, real-world approach by ensuring racial and ethnic, socioeconomic, urban and rural, and geographic diversity at both large academic and community-based sites across the United States.
The trial, to be led by Mark Landon, MD, and Kartik Venkatesh, MD, PhD, of Ohio State University, will be the first large trial in the United States to both directly compare the ability of oral hypoglycemics and insulin to prevent GDM-associated pregnancy complications, and to follow children for 2 years, Dr. Saade said. “Prior research was either outside the United States, not randomized, not adequately powered, or had no long-term child follow-up,” he added after the meeting.
The State Of Knowledge About Oral Hypoglycemics
The trial was envisioned several years ago as a three-arm comparative trial including the sulfonylurea glyburide, but data published in recent years has increasingly “not favored” glyburide, and many providers “have stopped using it,” Dr. Saade said during and after the meeting. At this point, “it would not be useful to include it” in a pragmatic trial, he said.
Glyburide became the number one agent after a seminal trial published in 2000 (N Engl J Med. 2000;343:1134-8) showed equivalent glycemic control in about 400 women with GDM who were randomized to receive insulin or glyburide. While the trial was not powered to evaluate other outcomes, there were no significant differences in neonatal complications.
In 2015, a large retrospective population-based study (JAMA Pediatr. 2015;169[5]:452-8) of more than 9,000 women with GDM showed higher risks of neonatal intensive care admission, neonatal hypoglycemia, and large-for-gestational age with glyburide compared with insulin. “It prompted a pause in thinking,” Dr. Saade recalled at the DPSG meeting. After that, several meta-analyses/systematic reviews compared the two treatments, showing varying and sometimes conflicting degrees of difference in neonatal outcomes.
In 2018, a French noninferiority randomized controlled trial (JAMA 2018;319[17]:1773-80) did not show that glyburide is not inferior to insulin in the prevention of perinatal outcomes (macrosomia, neonatal hypoglycemia, and hyperbilirubinemia). “If you add this trial to the systematic reviews, it would probably would shift more in favor of insulin,” Dr. Saade said, noting that the trial’s supplementary data included a higher rate of maternal hypoglycemia with glyburide. “I feel personally now, with all the data, that glyburide is inferior to insulin.”
A 2021 network meta-analysis (BMC Endocr Disord. 2021;21:199) that looked at glycemic control and neonatal outcomes in GDM treated with glyburide, metformin, or insulin, also offers valuable insight, Dr. Saade said. The meta-analysis used a Bayesian framework and presents results as a ranking estimated probability of a treatment being the best or worst — or in between — for different outcomes (glycemic control and neonatal outcomes), which “is one of the best ways to look at data these days,” he said.
“It tells us how likely [it is for one agent] to be better than others. Will it work most of the time? More than 60% of the time?” Dr. Saade explained. For example, the analysis “tell us that for large for gestational age, glyburide has a 94% chance of being the worst, metformin has an 80% change of being the best, and insulin a 76% chance of being in between.”
Overall, the 2021 analysis suggests that “glyburide is the most likely to be worst in most outcomes and that there is equipoise between metformin and insulin,” he said.
Meta-analyses of pharmacologic treatment of GDM have been challenged, he said, by inconsistent reporting in trials of GDM diagnostic criteria, severity of hyperglycemia, and small sample sizes (and wide confidence intervals). Criteria for supplemental insulin are also often “unclear” in trials, Dr. Saade said, as is involvement of social determinants of health and the “care package” enveloping pharmacologic interventions.
Dr. Saade, Dr. Landon, and other researchers have also lamented over the years that there is limited long-term follow-up of exposed offspring.
The Challenge of Heterogeneity
In another presentation on GDM, Maisa Feghali, MD, MS, emphasized that GDM is a heterogeneous condition, with clinical hyperglycemia not capturing individual variation in underlying physiologic processes. A 2016 study (Diabetes Care. 2016;39[6]:1052-5) assessing insulin sensitivity and secretion in 800-plus women at 24-30 weeks’ gestation found that about 50% of those with GDM had predominant insulin resistance, 30% had predominant insulin secretion deficit, and 20% were mixed.
Those with predominant insulin resistance had higher BMI, higher fasting glucose, larger infants, and greater risk of GDM-associated adverse outcomes, “suggesting that the risk is not universal or equivalent,” said Dr. Feghali, assistant professor in the department of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive sciences at the University of Pittsburgh and the UPCM Magee-Women’s Hospital.
A 2019 multicenter European study (Diabetologia. 2019;62[11]:2118-28) found an even higher proportion of GDM involving predominant insulin resistance and, similarly, a greater risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in these women than in insulin-sensitive women with GDM, “again suggesting that there’s probably some benefit to looking deeper at physiology to understand individual risk,” she said.
Research published decades ago showed that insulin sensitivity decreases by over 50% during pregnancy, and “what we’ve come to recognize is there [can be] insulin secretion deficiency that’s not able to surmount or overcome the insulin resistance that develops during advanced gestation,” she said. “We need to think not at the population level but at the individual level.”
Dr. Feghali is leading the MATCh-GDM (Metabolic Analysis for Treatment Choice in GDM) study, which has been randomizing women to receive either usual, unmatched treatment or treatment matched to GDM mechanism — metformin for predominant insulin resistance, glyburide, or insulin for predominant insulin secretion defects, and one of the three for combined mechanisms. Data are not available yet.
There is still more to be learned about the pharmacologic effects of oral hypoglycemics, she noted, pointing to a 2020 study (Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2020;107[6]:1362-72) that randomized women to glyburide, metformin, or glyburide/metformin combination therapy and measured insulin sensitivity, beta-cell responsivity, and disposition index. (The latter describes the overall metabolic state and is a product of insulin sensitivity and total beta-cell responsivity.)
“Somewhat surprisingly, they found metformin performed better than glyburide,” shifting the overall disposition index closer to normal, Dr. Feghali said. “But not surprisingly, they found the combination worked best.”
Total beta-cell responsivity occurred in 56% of the glyburide group and 74% of the combination group. Improvements in insulin sensitivity occurred in 84% of the metformin group and 74% of the combination group. Surprisingly, there was “a decrease in first-phase insulin secretion” with glyburide, noted Dr. Feghali — a finding that means “the glyburide story has turned out to be a little more complicated.” With metformin, there was a positive change in insulin secretion as well as insulin sensitivity.
The authors’ conclusion, she noted, “is that there’s potential in thinking about metformin first, as the primary treatment, and then adding glyburide after that.”
Future Use Of Incretin Mimetics, and Intensive Targets in Overweight/Obesity
Dr. Feghali wonders whether incretin hormone mimetics — such as glucagonlike peptide–1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP) — could play a future role in GDM treatment, helping to increase insulin secretion.
She is currently recruiting for a pilot study on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in GDM of exenatide, a FDA-approved GLP-1 agonist that has been shown not to cross the placenta and that should, research suggests, lower the risk of maternal hypoglycemia and limit the risk of excessive fetal growth, “overcoming some of the concerns we have with glyburide,” Dr. Feghali said.
A recent study of the gut-generated incretin response during an oral glucose tolerance test in pregnant women with and without GDM showed that post-load GLP-1 and GIP were higher in women with GDM, and that the GLP-1 secretion was associated with insulin secretion only in those with GDM (J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2022;107(6):e2425-30). “In those with normal OGTT, insulin secretion was independent of GLP-1,” she said. “This study suggests there’s a potential role for incretin mimetics in GDM.”
Also regarding the individualization of GDM treatment, patients who are overweight or obese in the prepregnancy setting and have gestational diabetes represent a different phenotype, she noted, with higher fasting and postprandial blood glucose compared to normal-weight counterparts despite higher doses of medication.
“After controlling for gestational weight gain and glycemic control, we see there’s an independent effect of prepregnancy obesity specifically for an increased risk of macrosomia, preterm birth, and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy,” said Dr. Feghali, referring to a 2015 retrospective study of GDM and obesity (Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126:316-25). “It suggests that we might think about redrawing the line, not on diagnosis and screening but on treatment.”
The randomized, controlled Intensive Glycemic Targets in Overweight and Obese Women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (iGDM) trial, is now recruiting at multiple centers, including at Dr. Feghali’s University of Pittsburgh, and will investigate the effect of intensive glycemic targets (fasting < 90 mg/dL, 1-hour postprandial < 120 mg/dL) versus standard glycemic targets (fasting < 95 mg/dL, 1-hour postprandial < 140 mg/dL), she said.
In another presentation on GDM, Monica Longo, MD, PhD, of the Inova Health System in Fairfax, Va., said researchers are also looking at whether nutritional supplements such as myo-inositol can reduce the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in GDM, and whether probiotics can improve insulin sensitivity in some patients.
Data on newer insulin analogs in pregnancy are lacking, she noted. “Preliminary data has shown no malformations in infants, but there is some increase in hypoglycemia-related admissions to the NICU,” she said. “It’s worth it [to research more].”
FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA — , but researchers at the biennial meeting of the Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group of North America expressed hope for more clarity in the near future and the ability to someday individualize treatment to account for what is increasingly viewed as a heterogeneous condition.
Until studies in 2015 and 2018 cast doubt on glyburide, “we used to have 80% [of our GDM patients] on glyburide, and 20% on insulin,” Maisa Feghali, MD, of the University of Pittsburgh, said during a discussion period. “Now we have 95% on insulin and 5% on oral hypoglycemics. I rely on insulin because I don’t have a better option, and I rely on research efforts [underway to provide better options]” in the future.
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends insulin as the preferred first-line pharmacologic therapy for GDM when pharmacologic therapy is needed, with metformin as an option when patients decline or cannot safely use insulin. Glyburide, ACOG said in its 2018 practice bulletin on GDM (Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131[2]:e49-64), should not be recommended as a first-line pharmacologic therapy.
The Society of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, on the other hand, has accepted metformin as a “reasonable and safe” first-line alternative to insulin — while recognizing that half of women will still require insulin to achieve glycemic control — and does not rule out consideration of glyburide. In its 2018 statement on the pharmacologic treatment of GDM, the society said that the evidence of benefit of one oral agent over another remains limited.
“When you have dueling guidelines, it means the data are not that clear,” George Saade, MD, professor and chair of obstetrics and gynecology at the Eastern Virginia School of Medicine, Norfolk, said in a presentation on GDM. An upcoming $12 million multicenter study to be led by the Ohio State University College of Medicine — coined the DECIDE trial — should provide clarity, he said.
The trial, funded by the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, which funds comparative clinical effectiveness research designed to be broadly applicable to practice, will enroll and randomize over 1500 pregnant individuals with GDM to either oral metformin or insulin and will follow mothers and children until 2 years after delivery.
The study’s primary and secondary hypotheses, respectively, are that metformin is not inferior to insulin in reducing a composite adverse neonatal outcome (large for gestational age, neonatal hypoglycemia and/or hyperbilirubemia) and that metformin does not result in increased child body mass index at 2 years, compared with insulin. It will also look at patient-reported factors associated with metformin use compared to insulin use — factors that “are important ... to enable clinical implementation of study findings,” said Dr. Saade, who played a role in designing the study over the past several years.
The study will take a pragmatic, real-world approach by ensuring racial and ethnic, socioeconomic, urban and rural, and geographic diversity at both large academic and community-based sites across the United States.
The trial, to be led by Mark Landon, MD, and Kartik Venkatesh, MD, PhD, of Ohio State University, will be the first large trial in the United States to both directly compare the ability of oral hypoglycemics and insulin to prevent GDM-associated pregnancy complications, and to follow children for 2 years, Dr. Saade said. “Prior research was either outside the United States, not randomized, not adequately powered, or had no long-term child follow-up,” he added after the meeting.
The State Of Knowledge About Oral Hypoglycemics
The trial was envisioned several years ago as a three-arm comparative trial including the sulfonylurea glyburide, but data published in recent years has increasingly “not favored” glyburide, and many providers “have stopped using it,” Dr. Saade said during and after the meeting. At this point, “it would not be useful to include it” in a pragmatic trial, he said.
Glyburide became the number one agent after a seminal trial published in 2000 (N Engl J Med. 2000;343:1134-8) showed equivalent glycemic control in about 400 women with GDM who were randomized to receive insulin or glyburide. While the trial was not powered to evaluate other outcomes, there were no significant differences in neonatal complications.
In 2015, a large retrospective population-based study (JAMA Pediatr. 2015;169[5]:452-8) of more than 9,000 women with GDM showed higher risks of neonatal intensive care admission, neonatal hypoglycemia, and large-for-gestational age with glyburide compared with insulin. “It prompted a pause in thinking,” Dr. Saade recalled at the DPSG meeting. After that, several meta-analyses/systematic reviews compared the two treatments, showing varying and sometimes conflicting degrees of difference in neonatal outcomes.
In 2018, a French noninferiority randomized controlled trial (JAMA 2018;319[17]:1773-80) did not show that glyburide is not inferior to insulin in the prevention of perinatal outcomes (macrosomia, neonatal hypoglycemia, and hyperbilirubinemia). “If you add this trial to the systematic reviews, it would probably would shift more in favor of insulin,” Dr. Saade said, noting that the trial’s supplementary data included a higher rate of maternal hypoglycemia with glyburide. “I feel personally now, with all the data, that glyburide is inferior to insulin.”
A 2021 network meta-analysis (BMC Endocr Disord. 2021;21:199) that looked at glycemic control and neonatal outcomes in GDM treated with glyburide, metformin, or insulin, also offers valuable insight, Dr. Saade said. The meta-analysis used a Bayesian framework and presents results as a ranking estimated probability of a treatment being the best or worst — or in between — for different outcomes (glycemic control and neonatal outcomes), which “is one of the best ways to look at data these days,” he said.
“It tells us how likely [it is for one agent] to be better than others. Will it work most of the time? More than 60% of the time?” Dr. Saade explained. For example, the analysis “tell us that for large for gestational age, glyburide has a 94% chance of being the worst, metformin has an 80% change of being the best, and insulin a 76% chance of being in between.”
Overall, the 2021 analysis suggests that “glyburide is the most likely to be worst in most outcomes and that there is equipoise between metformin and insulin,” he said.
Meta-analyses of pharmacologic treatment of GDM have been challenged, he said, by inconsistent reporting in trials of GDM diagnostic criteria, severity of hyperglycemia, and small sample sizes (and wide confidence intervals). Criteria for supplemental insulin are also often “unclear” in trials, Dr. Saade said, as is involvement of social determinants of health and the “care package” enveloping pharmacologic interventions.
Dr. Saade, Dr. Landon, and other researchers have also lamented over the years that there is limited long-term follow-up of exposed offspring.
The Challenge of Heterogeneity
In another presentation on GDM, Maisa Feghali, MD, MS, emphasized that GDM is a heterogeneous condition, with clinical hyperglycemia not capturing individual variation in underlying physiologic processes. A 2016 study (Diabetes Care. 2016;39[6]:1052-5) assessing insulin sensitivity and secretion in 800-plus women at 24-30 weeks’ gestation found that about 50% of those with GDM had predominant insulin resistance, 30% had predominant insulin secretion deficit, and 20% were mixed.
Those with predominant insulin resistance had higher BMI, higher fasting glucose, larger infants, and greater risk of GDM-associated adverse outcomes, “suggesting that the risk is not universal or equivalent,” said Dr. Feghali, assistant professor in the department of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive sciences at the University of Pittsburgh and the UPCM Magee-Women’s Hospital.
A 2019 multicenter European study (Diabetologia. 2019;62[11]:2118-28) found an even higher proportion of GDM involving predominant insulin resistance and, similarly, a greater risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in these women than in insulin-sensitive women with GDM, “again suggesting that there’s probably some benefit to looking deeper at physiology to understand individual risk,” she said.
Research published decades ago showed that insulin sensitivity decreases by over 50% during pregnancy, and “what we’ve come to recognize is there [can be] insulin secretion deficiency that’s not able to surmount or overcome the insulin resistance that develops during advanced gestation,” she said. “We need to think not at the population level but at the individual level.”
Dr. Feghali is leading the MATCh-GDM (Metabolic Analysis for Treatment Choice in GDM) study, which has been randomizing women to receive either usual, unmatched treatment or treatment matched to GDM mechanism — metformin for predominant insulin resistance, glyburide, or insulin for predominant insulin secretion defects, and one of the three for combined mechanisms. Data are not available yet.
There is still more to be learned about the pharmacologic effects of oral hypoglycemics, she noted, pointing to a 2020 study (Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2020;107[6]:1362-72) that randomized women to glyburide, metformin, or glyburide/metformin combination therapy and measured insulin sensitivity, beta-cell responsivity, and disposition index. (The latter describes the overall metabolic state and is a product of insulin sensitivity and total beta-cell responsivity.)
“Somewhat surprisingly, they found metformin performed better than glyburide,” shifting the overall disposition index closer to normal, Dr. Feghali said. “But not surprisingly, they found the combination worked best.”
Total beta-cell responsivity occurred in 56% of the glyburide group and 74% of the combination group. Improvements in insulin sensitivity occurred in 84% of the metformin group and 74% of the combination group. Surprisingly, there was “a decrease in first-phase insulin secretion” with glyburide, noted Dr. Feghali — a finding that means “the glyburide story has turned out to be a little more complicated.” With metformin, there was a positive change in insulin secretion as well as insulin sensitivity.
The authors’ conclusion, she noted, “is that there’s potential in thinking about metformin first, as the primary treatment, and then adding glyburide after that.”
Future Use Of Incretin Mimetics, and Intensive Targets in Overweight/Obesity
Dr. Feghali wonders whether incretin hormone mimetics — such as glucagonlike peptide–1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP) — could play a future role in GDM treatment, helping to increase insulin secretion.
She is currently recruiting for a pilot study on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in GDM of exenatide, a FDA-approved GLP-1 agonist that has been shown not to cross the placenta and that should, research suggests, lower the risk of maternal hypoglycemia and limit the risk of excessive fetal growth, “overcoming some of the concerns we have with glyburide,” Dr. Feghali said.
A recent study of the gut-generated incretin response during an oral glucose tolerance test in pregnant women with and without GDM showed that post-load GLP-1 and GIP were higher in women with GDM, and that the GLP-1 secretion was associated with insulin secretion only in those with GDM (J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2022;107(6):e2425-30). “In those with normal OGTT, insulin secretion was independent of GLP-1,” she said. “This study suggests there’s a potential role for incretin mimetics in GDM.”
Also regarding the individualization of GDM treatment, patients who are overweight or obese in the prepregnancy setting and have gestational diabetes represent a different phenotype, she noted, with higher fasting and postprandial blood glucose compared to normal-weight counterparts despite higher doses of medication.
“After controlling for gestational weight gain and glycemic control, we see there’s an independent effect of prepregnancy obesity specifically for an increased risk of macrosomia, preterm birth, and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy,” said Dr. Feghali, referring to a 2015 retrospective study of GDM and obesity (Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126:316-25). “It suggests that we might think about redrawing the line, not on diagnosis and screening but on treatment.”
The randomized, controlled Intensive Glycemic Targets in Overweight and Obese Women with Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (iGDM) trial, is now recruiting at multiple centers, including at Dr. Feghali’s University of Pittsburgh, and will investigate the effect of intensive glycemic targets (fasting < 90 mg/dL, 1-hour postprandial < 120 mg/dL) versus standard glycemic targets (fasting < 95 mg/dL, 1-hour postprandial < 140 mg/dL), she said.
In another presentation on GDM, Monica Longo, MD, PhD, of the Inova Health System in Fairfax, Va., said researchers are also looking at whether nutritional supplements such as myo-inositol can reduce the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes in GDM, and whether probiotics can improve insulin sensitivity in some patients.
Data on newer insulin analogs in pregnancy are lacking, she noted. “Preliminary data has shown no malformations in infants, but there is some increase in hypoglycemia-related admissions to the NICU,” she said. “It’s worth it [to research more].”
FROM DPSG-NA 2023
A 4-month-old male was referred for a 3-week history of an itchy generalized rash that started on the neck
Diagnosis: Infection-induced psoriasis (guttate-type, induced by streptococcal intertrigo)
Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory disorder characterized by well-defined, scaly, erythematous plaques. Guttate psoriasis is a distinct variant of psoriasis that is more common in children and adolescents. Guttate psoriasis usually presents with multiple, scattered, small, drop-like (“guttate”), scaly, erythematous papules and plaques.
The pathophysiology of psoriasis involves an interplay between genetic and environmental factors. Guttate psoriasis is a chronic T-cell–mediated inflammatory disease in which there is an altered balance between T-helper-1 (TH1) and TH2 cells, transcription factor genes, and their products. HLA B-13, B-17, and Cw6 are human leukocyte antigen alleles implicated in genetic susceptibility. It is hypothesized that streptococcal infection precipitates guttate psoriasis by streptococcal superantigen–driven activation of cutaneous lymphocyte-associated antigen (CLA)–positive lymphocytes. It has been shown that streptococcal exotoxins and streptococcal M proteins act as superantigens.
Diagnosis is often made clinically based on characteristic physical findings and a possible preceding history of streptococcal infection. In patients with streptococcal infection, culture from an appropriate site and measurement of serum antistreptococcal antibody titers (for example, anti-DNase, antihyaluronidase and antistreptolysin-O) can help. A skin biopsy is usually not necessary but may be considered.
This patient presented with intertrigo of the neck and axillae at the time of presentation with the papulosquamous rash. Culture of the intertrigo yielded 4+ Group A beta streptococcus.
Treatment
Although there is currently no cure for guttate psoriasis, various treatment options can relieve symptoms and clear skin lesions, and infection-triggered lesions may remit, usually within several months. However, guttate psoriasis may persist and progress to chronic plaque psoriasis. Many treatment options are based mainly on clinical trials targeted for plaque psoriasis treatment.
For mild psoriasis, topical corticosteroids are first-line treatment. Other topical steroids include vitamin D analogs (calcipotriene), topical retinoids (tazarotene), topical calcineurin inhibitors (tacrolimus and pimecrolimus), and newer non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents (roflumilast or tapinarof), neither approved yet in this young age group. In more severe cases, phototherapy with UVB light, traditional systemic immunosuppressive agents (methotrexate, cyclosporine) or targeted biologic therapies may be considered.
Differential Diagnosis
The differential diagnosis may include generalized intertrigo, pityriasis rubra pilaris, tinea corporis, atopic dermatitis, and staphylococcal scalded skin syndrome. Guttate psoriasis can be distinguished by history and physical exam. Further studies such as potassium hydroxide (KOH) scrapings may be helpful in ruling out the other disorders.
Intertrigo is an inflammatory condition of the flexural surfaces irritated by warm temperatures, friction, moisture, and poor ventilation that is commonly associated with Candida infection and/or streptococcal infection. Candidal intertrigo can present with erythematous patches or plaques in an intertriginous area that may develop erosions, macerations, fissures, crust, and weeping. Satellite papules and pustules are pathognomonic for Candida species. Streptococcal intertrigo usually presents with bright red color and may be painful or pruritic. Perianal streptococcal infection is reported as a trigger of guttate psoriasis in pediatric patients.
Pityriasis rubra pilaris is a rare inflammatory papulosquamous disorder with an unknown etiology. Red-orange papules and plaques, hyperkeratotic follicular papules, and palmoplantar hyperkeratosis are primary features. Diagnosis is based on clinical and histopathology. Pityriasis rubra pilaris is self-limited and asymptomatic in many cases. Treatment may not be required, but combination therapy with topical agents includes emollients, keratolytic agents (for example, urea, salicylic acid, alpha-hydroxy acids), topical corticosteroids, tazarotene, and topical calcineurin inhibitors. Systemic agents include oral retinoids and methotrexate.
Atopic dermatitis is a chronic inflammatory skin disease that involves genetic and environmental factors, leading to abnormalities in the epidermis and the immune system presenting with its typical morphology and distribution. The morphology of eczematous lesions is distinct from papulosquamous lesions of psoriasis.
Staphylococcal scalded skin syndrome is a toxin-mediated skin disorder which presents with denuded, peeling skin due to epidermolytic exotoxin producing Staphylococcus species. Fever, erythematous rash, malaise, skin pain, and irritability presents initially. Progressive desquamation with accentuation in folds is typical, with progression usually within 1-2 days. Systemic antibiotics covering Staphylococcus should be administered early. Emollients and nonadherent dressings should be applied to affected areas to promote healing. Supportive care includes dehydration management, temperature regulation, and nutrition. Skin desquamation usually occurs within 5 days with resolution within 2 weeks.
This infant displayed streptococcal intertrigo which triggered an early presentation of guttate psoriasis. The patient was managed with completion of a course of oral cephalexin, midstrength topical corticosteroids to the truncal lesions, and mild topical corticosteroids to the face and diaper area with good clinical response.
Danny Lee and Samuel Le serve as research fellows in the Pediatric Dermatology Division of the Department of Dermatology at the University of California San Diego and Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego. Dr. Eichenfield is Distinguished Professor of Dermatology and Pediatrics and Vice-Chair of the Department of Dermatology at the University of California San Diego and Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego. The authors have no relevant financial disclosures.
Suggested Reading
Leung AK et al. Childhood guttate psoriasis: An updated review. Drugs Context. 2023 Oct 23:12:2023-8-2. doi: 10.7573/dic.2023-8-2.
Galili E et al. New-onset guttate psoriasis: A long-term follow-up study. Dermatology. 2023;239(2):188-194. doi: 10.1159/000527737.
Duffin KC et al. Advances and controversies in our understanding of guttate and plaque psoriasis. J Rheumatol. 2023 Nov;50(Suppl 2):4-7. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.2023-0500.
Saleh D, Tanner LS. Guttate Psoriasis. [Updated 2023 Jul 31]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island, FL: StatPearls Publishing; 2023 Jan-. Available from: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK482498/
Dupire G et al. Antistreptococcal interventions for guttate and chronic plaque psoriasis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Mar 5;3(3):CD011571. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011571.pub2.
Diagnosis: Infection-induced psoriasis (guttate-type, induced by streptococcal intertrigo)
Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory disorder characterized by well-defined, scaly, erythematous plaques. Guttate psoriasis is a distinct variant of psoriasis that is more common in children and adolescents. Guttate psoriasis usually presents with multiple, scattered, small, drop-like (“guttate”), scaly, erythematous papules and plaques.
The pathophysiology of psoriasis involves an interplay between genetic and environmental factors. Guttate psoriasis is a chronic T-cell–mediated inflammatory disease in which there is an altered balance between T-helper-1 (TH1) and TH2 cells, transcription factor genes, and their products. HLA B-13, B-17, and Cw6 are human leukocyte antigen alleles implicated in genetic susceptibility. It is hypothesized that streptococcal infection precipitates guttate psoriasis by streptococcal superantigen–driven activation of cutaneous lymphocyte-associated antigen (CLA)–positive lymphocytes. It has been shown that streptococcal exotoxins and streptococcal M proteins act as superantigens.
Diagnosis is often made clinically based on characteristic physical findings and a possible preceding history of streptococcal infection. In patients with streptococcal infection, culture from an appropriate site and measurement of serum antistreptococcal antibody titers (for example, anti-DNase, antihyaluronidase and antistreptolysin-O) can help. A skin biopsy is usually not necessary but may be considered.
This patient presented with intertrigo of the neck and axillae at the time of presentation with the papulosquamous rash. Culture of the intertrigo yielded 4+ Group A beta streptococcus.
Treatment
Although there is currently no cure for guttate psoriasis, various treatment options can relieve symptoms and clear skin lesions, and infection-triggered lesions may remit, usually within several months. However, guttate psoriasis may persist and progress to chronic plaque psoriasis. Many treatment options are based mainly on clinical trials targeted for plaque psoriasis treatment.
For mild psoriasis, topical corticosteroids are first-line treatment. Other topical steroids include vitamin D analogs (calcipotriene), topical retinoids (tazarotene), topical calcineurin inhibitors (tacrolimus and pimecrolimus), and newer non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents (roflumilast or tapinarof), neither approved yet in this young age group. In more severe cases, phototherapy with UVB light, traditional systemic immunosuppressive agents (methotrexate, cyclosporine) or targeted biologic therapies may be considered.
Differential Diagnosis
The differential diagnosis may include generalized intertrigo, pityriasis rubra pilaris, tinea corporis, atopic dermatitis, and staphylococcal scalded skin syndrome. Guttate psoriasis can be distinguished by history and physical exam. Further studies such as potassium hydroxide (KOH) scrapings may be helpful in ruling out the other disorders.
Intertrigo is an inflammatory condition of the flexural surfaces irritated by warm temperatures, friction, moisture, and poor ventilation that is commonly associated with Candida infection and/or streptococcal infection. Candidal intertrigo can present with erythematous patches or plaques in an intertriginous area that may develop erosions, macerations, fissures, crust, and weeping. Satellite papules and pustules are pathognomonic for Candida species. Streptococcal intertrigo usually presents with bright red color and may be painful or pruritic. Perianal streptococcal infection is reported as a trigger of guttate psoriasis in pediatric patients.
Pityriasis rubra pilaris is a rare inflammatory papulosquamous disorder with an unknown etiology. Red-orange papules and plaques, hyperkeratotic follicular papules, and palmoplantar hyperkeratosis are primary features. Diagnosis is based on clinical and histopathology. Pityriasis rubra pilaris is self-limited and asymptomatic in many cases. Treatment may not be required, but combination therapy with topical agents includes emollients, keratolytic agents (for example, urea, salicylic acid, alpha-hydroxy acids), topical corticosteroids, tazarotene, and topical calcineurin inhibitors. Systemic agents include oral retinoids and methotrexate.
Atopic dermatitis is a chronic inflammatory skin disease that involves genetic and environmental factors, leading to abnormalities in the epidermis and the immune system presenting with its typical morphology and distribution. The morphology of eczematous lesions is distinct from papulosquamous lesions of psoriasis.
Staphylococcal scalded skin syndrome is a toxin-mediated skin disorder which presents with denuded, peeling skin due to epidermolytic exotoxin producing Staphylococcus species. Fever, erythematous rash, malaise, skin pain, and irritability presents initially. Progressive desquamation with accentuation in folds is typical, with progression usually within 1-2 days. Systemic antibiotics covering Staphylococcus should be administered early. Emollients and nonadherent dressings should be applied to affected areas to promote healing. Supportive care includes dehydration management, temperature regulation, and nutrition. Skin desquamation usually occurs within 5 days with resolution within 2 weeks.
This infant displayed streptococcal intertrigo which triggered an early presentation of guttate psoriasis. The patient was managed with completion of a course of oral cephalexin, midstrength topical corticosteroids to the truncal lesions, and mild topical corticosteroids to the face and diaper area with good clinical response.
Danny Lee and Samuel Le serve as research fellows in the Pediatric Dermatology Division of the Department of Dermatology at the University of California San Diego and Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego. Dr. Eichenfield is Distinguished Professor of Dermatology and Pediatrics and Vice-Chair of the Department of Dermatology at the University of California San Diego and Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego. The authors have no relevant financial disclosures.
Suggested Reading
Leung AK et al. Childhood guttate psoriasis: An updated review. Drugs Context. 2023 Oct 23:12:2023-8-2. doi: 10.7573/dic.2023-8-2.
Galili E et al. New-onset guttate psoriasis: A long-term follow-up study. Dermatology. 2023;239(2):188-194. doi: 10.1159/000527737.
Duffin KC et al. Advances and controversies in our understanding of guttate and plaque psoriasis. J Rheumatol. 2023 Nov;50(Suppl 2):4-7. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.2023-0500.
Saleh D, Tanner LS. Guttate Psoriasis. [Updated 2023 Jul 31]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island, FL: StatPearls Publishing; 2023 Jan-. Available from: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK482498/
Dupire G et al. Antistreptococcal interventions for guttate and chronic plaque psoriasis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Mar 5;3(3):CD011571. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011571.pub2.
Diagnosis: Infection-induced psoriasis (guttate-type, induced by streptococcal intertrigo)
Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory disorder characterized by well-defined, scaly, erythematous plaques. Guttate psoriasis is a distinct variant of psoriasis that is more common in children and adolescents. Guttate psoriasis usually presents with multiple, scattered, small, drop-like (“guttate”), scaly, erythematous papules and plaques.
The pathophysiology of psoriasis involves an interplay between genetic and environmental factors. Guttate psoriasis is a chronic T-cell–mediated inflammatory disease in which there is an altered balance between T-helper-1 (TH1) and TH2 cells, transcription factor genes, and their products. HLA B-13, B-17, and Cw6 are human leukocyte antigen alleles implicated in genetic susceptibility. It is hypothesized that streptococcal infection precipitates guttate psoriasis by streptococcal superantigen–driven activation of cutaneous lymphocyte-associated antigen (CLA)–positive lymphocytes. It has been shown that streptococcal exotoxins and streptococcal M proteins act as superantigens.
Diagnosis is often made clinically based on characteristic physical findings and a possible preceding history of streptococcal infection. In patients with streptococcal infection, culture from an appropriate site and measurement of serum antistreptococcal antibody titers (for example, anti-DNase, antihyaluronidase and antistreptolysin-O) can help. A skin biopsy is usually not necessary but may be considered.
This patient presented with intertrigo of the neck and axillae at the time of presentation with the papulosquamous rash. Culture of the intertrigo yielded 4+ Group A beta streptococcus.
Treatment
Although there is currently no cure for guttate psoriasis, various treatment options can relieve symptoms and clear skin lesions, and infection-triggered lesions may remit, usually within several months. However, guttate psoriasis may persist and progress to chronic plaque psoriasis. Many treatment options are based mainly on clinical trials targeted for plaque psoriasis treatment.
For mild psoriasis, topical corticosteroids are first-line treatment. Other topical steroids include vitamin D analogs (calcipotriene), topical retinoids (tazarotene), topical calcineurin inhibitors (tacrolimus and pimecrolimus), and newer non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents (roflumilast or tapinarof), neither approved yet in this young age group. In more severe cases, phototherapy with UVB light, traditional systemic immunosuppressive agents (methotrexate, cyclosporine) or targeted biologic therapies may be considered.
Differential Diagnosis
The differential diagnosis may include generalized intertrigo, pityriasis rubra pilaris, tinea corporis, atopic dermatitis, and staphylococcal scalded skin syndrome. Guttate psoriasis can be distinguished by history and physical exam. Further studies such as potassium hydroxide (KOH) scrapings may be helpful in ruling out the other disorders.
Intertrigo is an inflammatory condition of the flexural surfaces irritated by warm temperatures, friction, moisture, and poor ventilation that is commonly associated with Candida infection and/or streptococcal infection. Candidal intertrigo can present with erythematous patches or plaques in an intertriginous area that may develop erosions, macerations, fissures, crust, and weeping. Satellite papules and pustules are pathognomonic for Candida species. Streptococcal intertrigo usually presents with bright red color and may be painful or pruritic. Perianal streptococcal infection is reported as a trigger of guttate psoriasis in pediatric patients.
Pityriasis rubra pilaris is a rare inflammatory papulosquamous disorder with an unknown etiology. Red-orange papules and plaques, hyperkeratotic follicular papules, and palmoplantar hyperkeratosis are primary features. Diagnosis is based on clinical and histopathology. Pityriasis rubra pilaris is self-limited and asymptomatic in many cases. Treatment may not be required, but combination therapy with topical agents includes emollients, keratolytic agents (for example, urea, salicylic acid, alpha-hydroxy acids), topical corticosteroids, tazarotene, and topical calcineurin inhibitors. Systemic agents include oral retinoids and methotrexate.
Atopic dermatitis is a chronic inflammatory skin disease that involves genetic and environmental factors, leading to abnormalities in the epidermis and the immune system presenting with its typical morphology and distribution. The morphology of eczematous lesions is distinct from papulosquamous lesions of psoriasis.
Staphylococcal scalded skin syndrome is a toxin-mediated skin disorder which presents with denuded, peeling skin due to epidermolytic exotoxin producing Staphylococcus species. Fever, erythematous rash, malaise, skin pain, and irritability presents initially. Progressive desquamation with accentuation in folds is typical, with progression usually within 1-2 days. Systemic antibiotics covering Staphylococcus should be administered early. Emollients and nonadherent dressings should be applied to affected areas to promote healing. Supportive care includes dehydration management, temperature regulation, and nutrition. Skin desquamation usually occurs within 5 days with resolution within 2 weeks.
This infant displayed streptococcal intertrigo which triggered an early presentation of guttate psoriasis. The patient was managed with completion of a course of oral cephalexin, midstrength topical corticosteroids to the truncal lesions, and mild topical corticosteroids to the face and diaper area with good clinical response.
Danny Lee and Samuel Le serve as research fellows in the Pediatric Dermatology Division of the Department of Dermatology at the University of California San Diego and Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego. Dr. Eichenfield is Distinguished Professor of Dermatology and Pediatrics and Vice-Chair of the Department of Dermatology at the University of California San Diego and Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego. The authors have no relevant financial disclosures.
Suggested Reading
Leung AK et al. Childhood guttate psoriasis: An updated review. Drugs Context. 2023 Oct 23:12:2023-8-2. doi: 10.7573/dic.2023-8-2.
Galili E et al. New-onset guttate psoriasis: A long-term follow-up study. Dermatology. 2023;239(2):188-194. doi: 10.1159/000527737.
Duffin KC et al. Advances and controversies in our understanding of guttate and plaque psoriasis. J Rheumatol. 2023 Nov;50(Suppl 2):4-7. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.2023-0500.
Saleh D, Tanner LS. Guttate Psoriasis. [Updated 2023 Jul 31]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island, FL: StatPearls Publishing; 2023 Jan-. Available from: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK482498/
Dupire G et al. Antistreptococcal interventions for guttate and chronic plaque psoriasis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Mar 5;3(3):CD011571. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011571.pub2.
On physical exam, there was an erythematous patch with overlying areas of macerations on the neck and axilla. The trunk, extremities, and diaper area had multiple psoriasiform erythematous thin plaques with overlying scales.
Suicide II
How might you discuss a suicidal ideation, an anxiety-provoking topic, with your patients and their parents? After a positive screen, there will be times when you decide your patient should go to an emergency department for an urgent evaluation. However, most of the time you will be able to help the family identify strategies to lower risk and improve safety and resilience, while waiting for a thorough psychiatric evaluation.
Bring in the Parents: Modeling Validation, Structure, and Optimism
If you have identified some degree of suicide risk in your patient, either with a screening instrument or in your clinical interview, ask your patient if you can bring their parents into the conversation. They may resist, and if so, find out why they are hesitant. Are they worried about causing their parents some distress? Are they concerned their parents will be surprised? Disappointed? Scared? Angry? Acknowledge how hard it can be to find a way to talk about such emotional material with parents. What is their communication like with their parents usually? Do they talk every night at dinner or rarely? Are their interactions usually lighthearted or playful? Brief? Irritable and angry? Have they talked about or managed difficult times before as a family? How did that go? Did they feel they ended up supporting an anxious or depressed single parent? Was their parent harsh and punitive? Since involving the parent is essential, if you become concerned that a conversation with the parent would truly increase the risk of suicide, perhaps because of reports of violence at home, then you may need to send your patient to the emergency department so they can be assessed in a safe setting where a clinical team can evaluate your patient while involving more (or different) members of the family.
Most of the time, your patient will describe a situation that will simply be uncomfortable or stressful for their parent. Don’t be dismissive of their concerns. Instead, acknowledge that talking about their inner life will feel hard. Validate that their parents will be sad, worried, and stressed to hear about what they are feeling. Then offer that parents always prefer to know what is happening with their child so they can help, even if that means only being present to bear it alongside them. You can remind them that you will be there, too, to reassure their parents that this is a common problem and that you can face it and help it to get better together. Find out if they would like you to take the lead in speaking about it, but do not let them wait in the waiting room. Discussing the topic with you with both parents and patient in the room will help even those families that are not great communicators to begin to be more connected, even if you do most of the talking. While you need to bring their symptoms and suicidality to their parents’ attention, find out if there are any details they would rather not share. Perhaps they are struggling with questions of gender identity or sexual orientation, or are thinking of giving up an activity their parents may be very invested in. While any future treatment will prioritize honest communication within the family, communication about their emerging identity should not be rushed, and especially not in the setting of concerns about suicide risk.
With the information you do gather, there are often steps you can take to lower the stress level. The parents’ awareness of their suffering, perhaps acknowledging a broken heart, excessive academic pressure, or a major disappointment may suggest steps to lower the stress level. A mental health referral might introduce a sense of hope. A reminder of their meaningful connection to a parent, a team, a religion, or an activity may also remind the adolescent of a positive view of their future.
Introducing the Topic
When you bring parents into the room, let them know that there is something important and difficult that you need to discuss with them together. Ask if they have noted any changes in their child’s behavior, school performance, or demeanor. Have they had any worries about their teenager? If they have, affirm that they are picking up on something real, and ask more about it. If they have not, offer that their child has been doing a valiant job of soldiering through their days while managing some strong and difficult thoughts and feelings. Walk them through some of what you have learned from your patient, always inviting your patient to affirm or add to what you are detailing. Most parents are keenly aware of the prevalence of suicidal thoughts during adolescence. Bring it into the open, and offer that the next steps are going to be to add more adults to their child’s orbit to help diagnose and treat any underlying psychiatric illness. Reassure them that you are confident that psychiatric illnesses are treatable, even curable. Reassure them that one of the best safety measures is good communication and connectedness with parents.
Help Parents to Be Good Listeners
Some parents may respond with heightened anxiety and need for reassurance from their child. Others may try to talk their child out of their suicidal thoughts. But your year is going so well! You got a great grade in calculus! Gently model validation: Acknowledge to the parents that it is understandable to feel worried or to look for a rational argument against suicide. Offer that feelings don’t usually respond to logic, but do improve with support and time. It may be better for everyone to treat this topic more like the weather so it is easier to talk about and manage. No one gets defensive or distressed if it’s raining, they just put on the right gear. Has the parent ever felt depressed? Did they ever have suicidal ideation growing up? Can they agree to check in at regular times? Could the child speak up if they are feeling badly? Can all agree that parents should check in if their child seems more down? Help them to acknowledge how hard it is to bear strong feelings, but that it is always better together.
Identify Coping Strategies
In front of parents, ask your patient if anything helps when they are feeling at their worst. If they can’t identify anything, offer some possibilities: a walk outside together? making art or music? being out in nature? snuggling with a beloved pet? a set of jumping jacks to get their heart rate up? a favorite playlist? Talking to a particular friend or relative? Make a list. Prioritize activities that are healthy and connect them to others when they are feeling their worst.
Focus on the Basics
Make a concrete and practical plan for steps they can all take to improve well-being. Start with strategies to ensure restful sleep at night, regular exercise, and healthy nutrition. Depression and anxiety often interfere with these functions, so families can work together to support them even while waiting for assessment by a psychiatrist. Help them identify modest rules or routines (consistent bedtime, no screens in the bedroom, a daily walk after dinner) that parents can set that will make a difference.
Set Up Speed Bumps
Talk together about setting up some speed bumps to support their child’s safety. Find out if there are firearms in the home. Be crystal clear that they should be locked, preferably with ammunition, in a separate secure place. Their child should have no knowledge of how to access them, or they should be stored out of the home for the time being.
Parents should lock any medications that could be dangerous in overdose (including in homes if the adolescent will be visiting). Educate them about Tylenol and any prescription medications in their home that should be locked. This part of a conversation is always stressful. Acknowledge that, and remind everyone that, these are important strategies. It should be always be easier to ask their parent for help if they are feeling terrible than it is to access something dangerous.
Acknowledge the Strain
Finally, it is important to acknowledge how hard it is for your patient to bear these feelings, and that speaking up about them may feel like the last thing they want to do. Applaud them for their strength while reminding them that they need to share if they feel worse. Likewise, model for parents that feeling stressed and worried in this circumstance is normal. They should think about how to take good care of themselves. The same well-being strategies you reviewed for their child can work for them too! They may want to focus on sleep or exercise, enhance their nourishing social connections, protect time for beloved hobbies. Everyone should hear that they should never worry alone. If someone feels more worried, bring it to their parent, therapist, psychiatrist, spouse, or to you. They should trust their instincts if they think it is time to go to the emergency department. With supportive open communication, they will strengthen the protective connections which in turn will see the family through the course of the treatable illnesses that cause suicidal thoughts.
Lastly, this is difficult work for any physician. As psychiatrists, we worry about higher-risk teenagers when we decide that hospitalization carries a bigger risk than benefit. Pediatricians see many more teenagers with suicidal ideation and even though the statistical risk is very low, no one knows how to predict any individual teenager’s behavior. Therefore, pediatricians face the direct stress of the clinical work and the deeper stress of knowing there is always some uncertainty in medicine.
Dr. Swick is physician in chief at Ohana, Center for Child and Adolescent Behavioral Health, Community Hospital of the Monterey (Calif.) Peninsula. Dr. Jellinek is professor emeritus of psychiatry and pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston. Email them at [email protected].
How might you discuss a suicidal ideation, an anxiety-provoking topic, with your patients and their parents? After a positive screen, there will be times when you decide your patient should go to an emergency department for an urgent evaluation. However, most of the time you will be able to help the family identify strategies to lower risk and improve safety and resilience, while waiting for a thorough psychiatric evaluation.
Bring in the Parents: Modeling Validation, Structure, and Optimism
If you have identified some degree of suicide risk in your patient, either with a screening instrument or in your clinical interview, ask your patient if you can bring their parents into the conversation. They may resist, and if so, find out why they are hesitant. Are they worried about causing their parents some distress? Are they concerned their parents will be surprised? Disappointed? Scared? Angry? Acknowledge how hard it can be to find a way to talk about such emotional material with parents. What is their communication like with their parents usually? Do they talk every night at dinner or rarely? Are their interactions usually lighthearted or playful? Brief? Irritable and angry? Have they talked about or managed difficult times before as a family? How did that go? Did they feel they ended up supporting an anxious or depressed single parent? Was their parent harsh and punitive? Since involving the parent is essential, if you become concerned that a conversation with the parent would truly increase the risk of suicide, perhaps because of reports of violence at home, then you may need to send your patient to the emergency department so they can be assessed in a safe setting where a clinical team can evaluate your patient while involving more (or different) members of the family.
Most of the time, your patient will describe a situation that will simply be uncomfortable or stressful for their parent. Don’t be dismissive of their concerns. Instead, acknowledge that talking about their inner life will feel hard. Validate that their parents will be sad, worried, and stressed to hear about what they are feeling. Then offer that parents always prefer to know what is happening with their child so they can help, even if that means only being present to bear it alongside them. You can remind them that you will be there, too, to reassure their parents that this is a common problem and that you can face it and help it to get better together. Find out if they would like you to take the lead in speaking about it, but do not let them wait in the waiting room. Discussing the topic with you with both parents and patient in the room will help even those families that are not great communicators to begin to be more connected, even if you do most of the talking. While you need to bring their symptoms and suicidality to their parents’ attention, find out if there are any details they would rather not share. Perhaps they are struggling with questions of gender identity or sexual orientation, or are thinking of giving up an activity their parents may be very invested in. While any future treatment will prioritize honest communication within the family, communication about their emerging identity should not be rushed, and especially not in the setting of concerns about suicide risk.
With the information you do gather, there are often steps you can take to lower the stress level. The parents’ awareness of their suffering, perhaps acknowledging a broken heart, excessive academic pressure, or a major disappointment may suggest steps to lower the stress level. A mental health referral might introduce a sense of hope. A reminder of their meaningful connection to a parent, a team, a religion, or an activity may also remind the adolescent of a positive view of their future.
Introducing the Topic
When you bring parents into the room, let them know that there is something important and difficult that you need to discuss with them together. Ask if they have noted any changes in their child’s behavior, school performance, or demeanor. Have they had any worries about their teenager? If they have, affirm that they are picking up on something real, and ask more about it. If they have not, offer that their child has been doing a valiant job of soldiering through their days while managing some strong and difficult thoughts and feelings. Walk them through some of what you have learned from your patient, always inviting your patient to affirm or add to what you are detailing. Most parents are keenly aware of the prevalence of suicidal thoughts during adolescence. Bring it into the open, and offer that the next steps are going to be to add more adults to their child’s orbit to help diagnose and treat any underlying psychiatric illness. Reassure them that you are confident that psychiatric illnesses are treatable, even curable. Reassure them that one of the best safety measures is good communication and connectedness with parents.
Help Parents to Be Good Listeners
Some parents may respond with heightened anxiety and need for reassurance from their child. Others may try to talk their child out of their suicidal thoughts. But your year is going so well! You got a great grade in calculus! Gently model validation: Acknowledge to the parents that it is understandable to feel worried or to look for a rational argument against suicide. Offer that feelings don’t usually respond to logic, but do improve with support and time. It may be better for everyone to treat this topic more like the weather so it is easier to talk about and manage. No one gets defensive or distressed if it’s raining, they just put on the right gear. Has the parent ever felt depressed? Did they ever have suicidal ideation growing up? Can they agree to check in at regular times? Could the child speak up if they are feeling badly? Can all agree that parents should check in if their child seems more down? Help them to acknowledge how hard it is to bear strong feelings, but that it is always better together.
Identify Coping Strategies
In front of parents, ask your patient if anything helps when they are feeling at their worst. If they can’t identify anything, offer some possibilities: a walk outside together? making art or music? being out in nature? snuggling with a beloved pet? a set of jumping jacks to get their heart rate up? a favorite playlist? Talking to a particular friend or relative? Make a list. Prioritize activities that are healthy and connect them to others when they are feeling their worst.
Focus on the Basics
Make a concrete and practical plan for steps they can all take to improve well-being. Start with strategies to ensure restful sleep at night, regular exercise, and healthy nutrition. Depression and anxiety often interfere with these functions, so families can work together to support them even while waiting for assessment by a psychiatrist. Help them identify modest rules or routines (consistent bedtime, no screens in the bedroom, a daily walk after dinner) that parents can set that will make a difference.
Set Up Speed Bumps
Talk together about setting up some speed bumps to support their child’s safety. Find out if there are firearms in the home. Be crystal clear that they should be locked, preferably with ammunition, in a separate secure place. Their child should have no knowledge of how to access them, or they should be stored out of the home for the time being.
Parents should lock any medications that could be dangerous in overdose (including in homes if the adolescent will be visiting). Educate them about Tylenol and any prescription medications in their home that should be locked. This part of a conversation is always stressful. Acknowledge that, and remind everyone that, these are important strategies. It should be always be easier to ask their parent for help if they are feeling terrible than it is to access something dangerous.
Acknowledge the Strain
Finally, it is important to acknowledge how hard it is for your patient to bear these feelings, and that speaking up about them may feel like the last thing they want to do. Applaud them for their strength while reminding them that they need to share if they feel worse. Likewise, model for parents that feeling stressed and worried in this circumstance is normal. They should think about how to take good care of themselves. The same well-being strategies you reviewed for their child can work for them too! They may want to focus on sleep or exercise, enhance their nourishing social connections, protect time for beloved hobbies. Everyone should hear that they should never worry alone. If someone feels more worried, bring it to their parent, therapist, psychiatrist, spouse, or to you. They should trust their instincts if they think it is time to go to the emergency department. With supportive open communication, they will strengthen the protective connections which in turn will see the family through the course of the treatable illnesses that cause suicidal thoughts.
Lastly, this is difficult work for any physician. As psychiatrists, we worry about higher-risk teenagers when we decide that hospitalization carries a bigger risk than benefit. Pediatricians see many more teenagers with suicidal ideation and even though the statistical risk is very low, no one knows how to predict any individual teenager’s behavior. Therefore, pediatricians face the direct stress of the clinical work and the deeper stress of knowing there is always some uncertainty in medicine.
Dr. Swick is physician in chief at Ohana, Center for Child and Adolescent Behavioral Health, Community Hospital of the Monterey (Calif.) Peninsula. Dr. Jellinek is professor emeritus of psychiatry and pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston. Email them at [email protected].
How might you discuss a suicidal ideation, an anxiety-provoking topic, with your patients and their parents? After a positive screen, there will be times when you decide your patient should go to an emergency department for an urgent evaluation. However, most of the time you will be able to help the family identify strategies to lower risk and improve safety and resilience, while waiting for a thorough psychiatric evaluation.
Bring in the Parents: Modeling Validation, Structure, and Optimism
If you have identified some degree of suicide risk in your patient, either with a screening instrument or in your clinical interview, ask your patient if you can bring their parents into the conversation. They may resist, and if so, find out why they are hesitant. Are they worried about causing their parents some distress? Are they concerned their parents will be surprised? Disappointed? Scared? Angry? Acknowledge how hard it can be to find a way to talk about such emotional material with parents. What is their communication like with their parents usually? Do they talk every night at dinner or rarely? Are their interactions usually lighthearted or playful? Brief? Irritable and angry? Have they talked about or managed difficult times before as a family? How did that go? Did they feel they ended up supporting an anxious or depressed single parent? Was their parent harsh and punitive? Since involving the parent is essential, if you become concerned that a conversation with the parent would truly increase the risk of suicide, perhaps because of reports of violence at home, then you may need to send your patient to the emergency department so they can be assessed in a safe setting where a clinical team can evaluate your patient while involving more (or different) members of the family.
Most of the time, your patient will describe a situation that will simply be uncomfortable or stressful for their parent. Don’t be dismissive of their concerns. Instead, acknowledge that talking about their inner life will feel hard. Validate that their parents will be sad, worried, and stressed to hear about what they are feeling. Then offer that parents always prefer to know what is happening with their child so they can help, even if that means only being present to bear it alongside them. You can remind them that you will be there, too, to reassure their parents that this is a common problem and that you can face it and help it to get better together. Find out if they would like you to take the lead in speaking about it, but do not let them wait in the waiting room. Discussing the topic with you with both parents and patient in the room will help even those families that are not great communicators to begin to be more connected, even if you do most of the talking. While you need to bring their symptoms and suicidality to their parents’ attention, find out if there are any details they would rather not share. Perhaps they are struggling with questions of gender identity or sexual orientation, or are thinking of giving up an activity their parents may be very invested in. While any future treatment will prioritize honest communication within the family, communication about their emerging identity should not be rushed, and especially not in the setting of concerns about suicide risk.
With the information you do gather, there are often steps you can take to lower the stress level. The parents’ awareness of their suffering, perhaps acknowledging a broken heart, excessive academic pressure, or a major disappointment may suggest steps to lower the stress level. A mental health referral might introduce a sense of hope. A reminder of their meaningful connection to a parent, a team, a religion, or an activity may also remind the adolescent of a positive view of their future.
Introducing the Topic
When you bring parents into the room, let them know that there is something important and difficult that you need to discuss with them together. Ask if they have noted any changes in their child’s behavior, school performance, or demeanor. Have they had any worries about their teenager? If they have, affirm that they are picking up on something real, and ask more about it. If they have not, offer that their child has been doing a valiant job of soldiering through their days while managing some strong and difficult thoughts and feelings. Walk them through some of what you have learned from your patient, always inviting your patient to affirm or add to what you are detailing. Most parents are keenly aware of the prevalence of suicidal thoughts during adolescence. Bring it into the open, and offer that the next steps are going to be to add more adults to their child’s orbit to help diagnose and treat any underlying psychiatric illness. Reassure them that you are confident that psychiatric illnesses are treatable, even curable. Reassure them that one of the best safety measures is good communication and connectedness with parents.
Help Parents to Be Good Listeners
Some parents may respond with heightened anxiety and need for reassurance from their child. Others may try to talk their child out of their suicidal thoughts. But your year is going so well! You got a great grade in calculus! Gently model validation: Acknowledge to the parents that it is understandable to feel worried or to look for a rational argument against suicide. Offer that feelings don’t usually respond to logic, but do improve with support and time. It may be better for everyone to treat this topic more like the weather so it is easier to talk about and manage. No one gets defensive or distressed if it’s raining, they just put on the right gear. Has the parent ever felt depressed? Did they ever have suicidal ideation growing up? Can they agree to check in at regular times? Could the child speak up if they are feeling badly? Can all agree that parents should check in if their child seems more down? Help them to acknowledge how hard it is to bear strong feelings, but that it is always better together.
Identify Coping Strategies
In front of parents, ask your patient if anything helps when they are feeling at their worst. If they can’t identify anything, offer some possibilities: a walk outside together? making art or music? being out in nature? snuggling with a beloved pet? a set of jumping jacks to get their heart rate up? a favorite playlist? Talking to a particular friend or relative? Make a list. Prioritize activities that are healthy and connect them to others when they are feeling their worst.
Focus on the Basics
Make a concrete and practical plan for steps they can all take to improve well-being. Start with strategies to ensure restful sleep at night, regular exercise, and healthy nutrition. Depression and anxiety often interfere with these functions, so families can work together to support them even while waiting for assessment by a psychiatrist. Help them identify modest rules or routines (consistent bedtime, no screens in the bedroom, a daily walk after dinner) that parents can set that will make a difference.
Set Up Speed Bumps
Talk together about setting up some speed bumps to support their child’s safety. Find out if there are firearms in the home. Be crystal clear that they should be locked, preferably with ammunition, in a separate secure place. Their child should have no knowledge of how to access them, or they should be stored out of the home for the time being.
Parents should lock any medications that could be dangerous in overdose (including in homes if the adolescent will be visiting). Educate them about Tylenol and any prescription medications in their home that should be locked. This part of a conversation is always stressful. Acknowledge that, and remind everyone that, these are important strategies. It should be always be easier to ask their parent for help if they are feeling terrible than it is to access something dangerous.
Acknowledge the Strain
Finally, it is important to acknowledge how hard it is for your patient to bear these feelings, and that speaking up about them may feel like the last thing they want to do. Applaud them for their strength while reminding them that they need to share if they feel worse. Likewise, model for parents that feeling stressed and worried in this circumstance is normal. They should think about how to take good care of themselves. The same well-being strategies you reviewed for their child can work for them too! They may want to focus on sleep or exercise, enhance their nourishing social connections, protect time for beloved hobbies. Everyone should hear that they should never worry alone. If someone feels more worried, bring it to their parent, therapist, psychiatrist, spouse, or to you. They should trust their instincts if they think it is time to go to the emergency department. With supportive open communication, they will strengthen the protective connections which in turn will see the family through the course of the treatable illnesses that cause suicidal thoughts.
Lastly, this is difficult work for any physician. As psychiatrists, we worry about higher-risk teenagers when we decide that hospitalization carries a bigger risk than benefit. Pediatricians see many more teenagers with suicidal ideation and even though the statistical risk is very low, no one knows how to predict any individual teenager’s behavior. Therefore, pediatricians face the direct stress of the clinical work and the deeper stress of knowing there is always some uncertainty in medicine.
Dr. Swick is physician in chief at Ohana, Center for Child and Adolescent Behavioral Health, Community Hospital of the Monterey (Calif.) Peninsula. Dr. Jellinek is professor emeritus of psychiatry and pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston. Email them at [email protected].
A Tale of Two Babies and the ‘Family Tragedy’ of Congenital Syphilis
Delivered at 34 weeks’ gestation, Baby “Alex” had an enlarged liver and spleen on his initial newborn exam, poor tone, and a diffuse, peeling rash. Baby “Aaliyah” was born at term and appeared healthy. By 1 month of age, she was gaining weight poorly and developed copious nasal drainage and a salmon-colored rash on the soles of her feet.
The connection? Both babies were ultimately diagnosed with congenital syphilis. Infections in both babies could have been prevented if their mothers had been tested for syphilis and treated during pregnancy. Alex’s mom had no prenatal care. Aaliyah’s mom had tested negative for syphilis during her first trimester but had not been re-tested, despite sharing with her health care provider that she had a new sexual partner.
Alex and Aaliyah are representative of what Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Chief Medical Officer Debra Houry, MD, MPH, calls a “family tragedy.” Cases of congenital syphilis are rising rapidly in the United States, reaching a 30-year high in 2021.1 Cases increased by 755% between 2012 and 2021, from 335 in 2012 to 2,865 in 2021. In 2022, cases rose again: 3,761 cases of congenital syphilis were reported, including 231 stillbirths and 51 infant deaths. Infants with congenital syphilis are at risk for lifelong complications, including deafness, blindness, and intellectual disability.
Most of these cases were preventable. Congenital syphilis is rare when pregnant people complete adequate treatment at least 30 days before delivery. In 2022, lack of testing or timely testing contributed to 36.8% of congenital syphilis cases. Nearly 40% of birth parents of infected babies received inadequate treatment during pregnancy, and 11.2% received no treatment or treatment was not documented.
, suggesting ongoing barriers to care related to social determinants of health. In 2021, the highest rates of congenital syphilis were among babies born to individuals who were non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native (384 cases per 100,000 live births), non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (192 cases per 100,000 live births), and non-Hispanic Black or African American (169 cases per 100,000 live births). Six states had rates of congenital syphilis that exceeded 160 cases per 100,000 population, including Arizona, New Mexico, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, and Oklahoma. That is more than twice the national rate of 77.9 cases/100,000.
Reducing the Risk
To reduce rates of congenital syphilis in all people, barriers to testing must be eliminated. The CDC recommends that all pregnant people be tested early in pregnancy, with repeat testing at 28 weeks and at delivery for those at increased risk for infection based on individual risk factors or residence in a high-prevalence community. Rapid syphilis testing and treatment during pregnancy is recommended in settings such as emergency departments, syringe service programs, prisons/jails, and maternal and child health programs to minimize missed opportunities for care.
While pediatric clinicians rarely care for pregnant patients, they also have an essential role to play in reducing the adverse health outcomes associated with congenital syphilis. No infant should be discharged from the newborn nursery without confirming that the birth parent was tested for syphilis at least once and was treated appropriately if positive. Appropriate treatment during pregnancy is a single dose of benzathine penicillin G for primary, secondary, or early latent syphilis. Late-latent syphilis or syphilis of unknown duration is treated with three doses of benzathine penicillin G spaced 7-9 days apart. If the doses are given further than 9 days apart, treatment is considered inadequate, and the series of doses must be restarted. Benzathine penicillin G remains in short supply in the United States, but is the only drug recommended to treat syphilis during pregnancy.
Collaboration between obstetrical and newborn care providers is essential. Those who care for newborns need easy access to birthing parents’ syphilis treatment results. As more health care facilities implement routine syphilis testing at delivery, rapid syphilis testing must be available to avoid prolonging newborn hospital stays.
Pediatricians need to maintain an index of suspicion for congenital syphilis, regardless of maternal history, because symptomatic congenital syphilis can mimic a variety of infectious and noninfectious conditions. Most infected infants look normal at birth. While the majority of cases of congenital syphilis are identified in the newborn period, a 2021 paper published in Pediatrics described 84 infants born between 2014 and 2018 who were diagnosed beyond a month of age.2 These represented 2.2% of all infants born with congenital syphilis. Common symptoms included rash, snuffles, and hepatomegaly. Sixty-nine percent of infants who had long bone radiographs obtained had findings consistent with congenital syphilis. Typical imaging findings include periostitis and demineralization of the metaphysis and diaphysis of long bones, although fractures can also occur. Case reports describe infants who presented with fractures and were initially evaluated for nonaccidental trauma.3
Another critical approach is to treat syphilis in people of childbearing age before pregnancy occurs. The CDC recommends syphilis testing for sexually active females 18-44 years of age and living in communities with high rates of syphilis. County-specific specific rates of syphilis rates are available at https://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/atlas/syphilis/. Point-of-care tests are now available for syphilis and may facilitate timely treatment.
Additional resources describing syphilis testing and treatment are available from the CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Dr. Bryant is a pediatrician specializing in infectious diseases at the University of Louisville (Ky.) and Norton Children’s Hospital, also in Louisville. She is a member of the AAP’s Committee on Infectious Diseases and one of the lead authors of the AAP’s Recommendations for Prevention and Control of Influenza in Children, 2022-2023. The opinions expressed in this article are her own. Dr. Bryant discloses that she has served as an investigator on clinical trials funded by Pfizer, Enanta, and Gilead. Email her at [email protected]. (Also [email protected].)
References
1. McDonald R et al. Vital Signs: Missed Opportunities for Preventing Congenital Syphilis — United States, 2022. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2023 Nov 17;72(46):1269-74. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7246e1.
2. Kimball A et al. Congenital Syphilis Diagnosed Beyond the Neonatal Period in the United States: 2014-2018. Pediatrics. 2021 Sep;148(3):e2020049080. doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-049080.
3. Jacobs K et al. Congenital Syphilis Misdiagnosed as Suspected Nonaccidental Trauma. Pediatrics. 2019 Oct;144(4):e20191564. doi: 10.1542/peds.2019-1564.
Delivered at 34 weeks’ gestation, Baby “Alex” had an enlarged liver and spleen on his initial newborn exam, poor tone, and a diffuse, peeling rash. Baby “Aaliyah” was born at term and appeared healthy. By 1 month of age, she was gaining weight poorly and developed copious nasal drainage and a salmon-colored rash on the soles of her feet.
The connection? Both babies were ultimately diagnosed with congenital syphilis. Infections in both babies could have been prevented if their mothers had been tested for syphilis and treated during pregnancy. Alex’s mom had no prenatal care. Aaliyah’s mom had tested negative for syphilis during her first trimester but had not been re-tested, despite sharing with her health care provider that she had a new sexual partner.
Alex and Aaliyah are representative of what Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Chief Medical Officer Debra Houry, MD, MPH, calls a “family tragedy.” Cases of congenital syphilis are rising rapidly in the United States, reaching a 30-year high in 2021.1 Cases increased by 755% between 2012 and 2021, from 335 in 2012 to 2,865 in 2021. In 2022, cases rose again: 3,761 cases of congenital syphilis were reported, including 231 stillbirths and 51 infant deaths. Infants with congenital syphilis are at risk for lifelong complications, including deafness, blindness, and intellectual disability.
Most of these cases were preventable. Congenital syphilis is rare when pregnant people complete adequate treatment at least 30 days before delivery. In 2022, lack of testing or timely testing contributed to 36.8% of congenital syphilis cases. Nearly 40% of birth parents of infected babies received inadequate treatment during pregnancy, and 11.2% received no treatment or treatment was not documented.
, suggesting ongoing barriers to care related to social determinants of health. In 2021, the highest rates of congenital syphilis were among babies born to individuals who were non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native (384 cases per 100,000 live births), non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (192 cases per 100,000 live births), and non-Hispanic Black or African American (169 cases per 100,000 live births). Six states had rates of congenital syphilis that exceeded 160 cases per 100,000 population, including Arizona, New Mexico, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, and Oklahoma. That is more than twice the national rate of 77.9 cases/100,000.
Reducing the Risk
To reduce rates of congenital syphilis in all people, barriers to testing must be eliminated. The CDC recommends that all pregnant people be tested early in pregnancy, with repeat testing at 28 weeks and at delivery for those at increased risk for infection based on individual risk factors or residence in a high-prevalence community. Rapid syphilis testing and treatment during pregnancy is recommended in settings such as emergency departments, syringe service programs, prisons/jails, and maternal and child health programs to minimize missed opportunities for care.
While pediatric clinicians rarely care for pregnant patients, they also have an essential role to play in reducing the adverse health outcomes associated with congenital syphilis. No infant should be discharged from the newborn nursery without confirming that the birth parent was tested for syphilis at least once and was treated appropriately if positive. Appropriate treatment during pregnancy is a single dose of benzathine penicillin G for primary, secondary, or early latent syphilis. Late-latent syphilis or syphilis of unknown duration is treated with three doses of benzathine penicillin G spaced 7-9 days apart. If the doses are given further than 9 days apart, treatment is considered inadequate, and the series of doses must be restarted. Benzathine penicillin G remains in short supply in the United States, but is the only drug recommended to treat syphilis during pregnancy.
Collaboration between obstetrical and newborn care providers is essential. Those who care for newborns need easy access to birthing parents’ syphilis treatment results. As more health care facilities implement routine syphilis testing at delivery, rapid syphilis testing must be available to avoid prolonging newborn hospital stays.
Pediatricians need to maintain an index of suspicion for congenital syphilis, regardless of maternal history, because symptomatic congenital syphilis can mimic a variety of infectious and noninfectious conditions. Most infected infants look normal at birth. While the majority of cases of congenital syphilis are identified in the newborn period, a 2021 paper published in Pediatrics described 84 infants born between 2014 and 2018 who were diagnosed beyond a month of age.2 These represented 2.2% of all infants born with congenital syphilis. Common symptoms included rash, snuffles, and hepatomegaly. Sixty-nine percent of infants who had long bone radiographs obtained had findings consistent with congenital syphilis. Typical imaging findings include periostitis and demineralization of the metaphysis and diaphysis of long bones, although fractures can also occur. Case reports describe infants who presented with fractures and were initially evaluated for nonaccidental trauma.3
Another critical approach is to treat syphilis in people of childbearing age before pregnancy occurs. The CDC recommends syphilis testing for sexually active females 18-44 years of age and living in communities with high rates of syphilis. County-specific specific rates of syphilis rates are available at https://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/atlas/syphilis/. Point-of-care tests are now available for syphilis and may facilitate timely treatment.
Additional resources describing syphilis testing and treatment are available from the CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Dr. Bryant is a pediatrician specializing in infectious diseases at the University of Louisville (Ky.) and Norton Children’s Hospital, also in Louisville. She is a member of the AAP’s Committee on Infectious Diseases and one of the lead authors of the AAP’s Recommendations for Prevention and Control of Influenza in Children, 2022-2023. The opinions expressed in this article are her own. Dr. Bryant discloses that she has served as an investigator on clinical trials funded by Pfizer, Enanta, and Gilead. Email her at [email protected]. (Also [email protected].)
References
1. McDonald R et al. Vital Signs: Missed Opportunities for Preventing Congenital Syphilis — United States, 2022. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2023 Nov 17;72(46):1269-74. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7246e1.
2. Kimball A et al. Congenital Syphilis Diagnosed Beyond the Neonatal Period in the United States: 2014-2018. Pediatrics. 2021 Sep;148(3):e2020049080. doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-049080.
3. Jacobs K et al. Congenital Syphilis Misdiagnosed as Suspected Nonaccidental Trauma. Pediatrics. 2019 Oct;144(4):e20191564. doi: 10.1542/peds.2019-1564.
Delivered at 34 weeks’ gestation, Baby “Alex” had an enlarged liver and spleen on his initial newborn exam, poor tone, and a diffuse, peeling rash. Baby “Aaliyah” was born at term and appeared healthy. By 1 month of age, she was gaining weight poorly and developed copious nasal drainage and a salmon-colored rash on the soles of her feet.
The connection? Both babies were ultimately diagnosed with congenital syphilis. Infections in both babies could have been prevented if their mothers had been tested for syphilis and treated during pregnancy. Alex’s mom had no prenatal care. Aaliyah’s mom had tested negative for syphilis during her first trimester but had not been re-tested, despite sharing with her health care provider that she had a new sexual partner.
Alex and Aaliyah are representative of what Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Chief Medical Officer Debra Houry, MD, MPH, calls a “family tragedy.” Cases of congenital syphilis are rising rapidly in the United States, reaching a 30-year high in 2021.1 Cases increased by 755% between 2012 and 2021, from 335 in 2012 to 2,865 in 2021. In 2022, cases rose again: 3,761 cases of congenital syphilis were reported, including 231 stillbirths and 51 infant deaths. Infants with congenital syphilis are at risk for lifelong complications, including deafness, blindness, and intellectual disability.
Most of these cases were preventable. Congenital syphilis is rare when pregnant people complete adequate treatment at least 30 days before delivery. In 2022, lack of testing or timely testing contributed to 36.8% of congenital syphilis cases. Nearly 40% of birth parents of infected babies received inadequate treatment during pregnancy, and 11.2% received no treatment or treatment was not documented.
, suggesting ongoing barriers to care related to social determinants of health. In 2021, the highest rates of congenital syphilis were among babies born to individuals who were non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native (384 cases per 100,000 live births), non-Hispanic Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (192 cases per 100,000 live births), and non-Hispanic Black or African American (169 cases per 100,000 live births). Six states had rates of congenital syphilis that exceeded 160 cases per 100,000 population, including Arizona, New Mexico, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, and Oklahoma. That is more than twice the national rate of 77.9 cases/100,000.
Reducing the Risk
To reduce rates of congenital syphilis in all people, barriers to testing must be eliminated. The CDC recommends that all pregnant people be tested early in pregnancy, with repeat testing at 28 weeks and at delivery for those at increased risk for infection based on individual risk factors or residence in a high-prevalence community. Rapid syphilis testing and treatment during pregnancy is recommended in settings such as emergency departments, syringe service programs, prisons/jails, and maternal and child health programs to minimize missed opportunities for care.
While pediatric clinicians rarely care for pregnant patients, they also have an essential role to play in reducing the adverse health outcomes associated with congenital syphilis. No infant should be discharged from the newborn nursery without confirming that the birth parent was tested for syphilis at least once and was treated appropriately if positive. Appropriate treatment during pregnancy is a single dose of benzathine penicillin G for primary, secondary, or early latent syphilis. Late-latent syphilis or syphilis of unknown duration is treated with three doses of benzathine penicillin G spaced 7-9 days apart. If the doses are given further than 9 days apart, treatment is considered inadequate, and the series of doses must be restarted. Benzathine penicillin G remains in short supply in the United States, but is the only drug recommended to treat syphilis during pregnancy.
Collaboration between obstetrical and newborn care providers is essential. Those who care for newborns need easy access to birthing parents’ syphilis treatment results. As more health care facilities implement routine syphilis testing at delivery, rapid syphilis testing must be available to avoid prolonging newborn hospital stays.
Pediatricians need to maintain an index of suspicion for congenital syphilis, regardless of maternal history, because symptomatic congenital syphilis can mimic a variety of infectious and noninfectious conditions. Most infected infants look normal at birth. While the majority of cases of congenital syphilis are identified in the newborn period, a 2021 paper published in Pediatrics described 84 infants born between 2014 and 2018 who were diagnosed beyond a month of age.2 These represented 2.2% of all infants born with congenital syphilis. Common symptoms included rash, snuffles, and hepatomegaly. Sixty-nine percent of infants who had long bone radiographs obtained had findings consistent with congenital syphilis. Typical imaging findings include periostitis and demineralization of the metaphysis and diaphysis of long bones, although fractures can also occur. Case reports describe infants who presented with fractures and were initially evaluated for nonaccidental trauma.3
Another critical approach is to treat syphilis in people of childbearing age before pregnancy occurs. The CDC recommends syphilis testing for sexually active females 18-44 years of age and living in communities with high rates of syphilis. County-specific specific rates of syphilis rates are available at https://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/atlas/syphilis/. Point-of-care tests are now available for syphilis and may facilitate timely treatment.
Additional resources describing syphilis testing and treatment are available from the CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Dr. Bryant is a pediatrician specializing in infectious diseases at the University of Louisville (Ky.) and Norton Children’s Hospital, also in Louisville. She is a member of the AAP’s Committee on Infectious Diseases and one of the lead authors of the AAP’s Recommendations for Prevention and Control of Influenza in Children, 2022-2023. The opinions expressed in this article are her own. Dr. Bryant discloses that she has served as an investigator on clinical trials funded by Pfizer, Enanta, and Gilead. Email her at [email protected]. (Also [email protected].)
References
1. McDonald R et al. Vital Signs: Missed Opportunities for Preventing Congenital Syphilis — United States, 2022. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2023 Nov 17;72(46):1269-74. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7246e1.
2. Kimball A et al. Congenital Syphilis Diagnosed Beyond the Neonatal Period in the United States: 2014-2018. Pediatrics. 2021 Sep;148(3):e2020049080. doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-049080.
3. Jacobs K et al. Congenital Syphilis Misdiagnosed as Suspected Nonaccidental Trauma. Pediatrics. 2019 Oct;144(4):e20191564. doi: 10.1542/peds.2019-1564.