Pediatrics

The Diagnosis: Pigmented Fungiform Papillae of the Tongue

Our patient’s hyperpigmentation was confined to the fungiform papillae, leading to a diagnosis of pigmented fungiform papillae of the tongue (PFPT). A biopsy was not performed, and reassurance was provided regarding the benign nature of this finding, which did not require treatment.

Pigmented fungiform papillae of the tongue is a benign, nonprogressive, asymptomatic pigmentary condition that is most common among patients with skin of color and typically develops within the second or third decade of life.^1,2 The pathogenesis is unclear, but activation of subepithelial melanophages without evidence of inflammation has been implicated.² Although no standard treatment exists, cosmetic improvement with the use of the Q-switched ruby laser has been reported.^3,4 Clinically, PFPT presents as asymptomatic hyperpigmentation confined to the fungiform papillae along the anterior and lateral portions of the tongue.^1,2

Pigmented fungiform papillae of the tongue typically is an isolated finding but rarely can be associated with hyperpigmentation of the nails (as in our patient) or gingiva.² Three different clinical patterns of presentation have been described: (1) a single well-circumscribed collection of pigmented fungiform papillae, (2) few scattered pigmented fungiform papillae admixed with many nonpigmented fungiform papillae, or (3) pigmentation of all fungiform papillae on the dorsal aspect of the tongue.^2,5,6 Pigmented fungiform papillae of the tongue is a clinical diagnosis based on visual recognition. Dermoscopic examination revealing a cobblestonelike or rose petal–like pattern may be helpful in diagnosing PFPT.^2,5-7 Although not typically recommended in the evaluation of PFPT, a biopsy will reveal papillary structures with hyperpigmentation of basilar keratinocytes as well as melanophages in the lamina propria.8 The latter finding suggests a transient inflammatory process despite the hallmark absence of inflammation.⁵ Melanocytic neoplasia and exogenous granules of pigment typically are not seen.⁸

Other conditions that may present with dark-colored macules or papules on the tongue should be considered in the evaluation of a patient with these clinical findings. Black hairy tongue (BHT), or lingua villosa nigra, is a benign finding due to filiform papillae hypertrophy on the dorsum of the tongue.⁹ Food particle debris caught in BHT can lead to porphyrin production by chromogenic bacteria and fungi. These porphyrins result in discoloration ranging from brown-black to yellow and green occurring anteriorly to the circumvallate papillae while usually sparing the tip and lateral sides of the tongue. Dermoscopy can show thin discolored fibers with a hairy appearance. Although normal filiform papillae are less than 1-mm long, 3-mm long papillae are considered diagnostic of BHT.⁹ Treatment includes effective oral hygiene and desquamation measures, which can lead to complete resolution.10

Peutz-Jeghers syndrome is a rare genodermatosis that is characterized by focal hyperpigmentation and multiple gastrointestinal mucosal hamartomatous polyps. Peutz-Jeghers syndrome should be suspected in a patient with discrete, 1- to 5-mm, brown to black macules on the perioral or periocular skin, tongue, genitals, palms, soles, and buccal mucosa with a history of abdominal symptoms.^11,12

Addison disease, or primary adrenal insufficiency, may present with brown hyperpigmentation on chronically sun-exposed areas; regions of friction or pressure; surrounding scar tissue; and mucosal surfaces such as the tongue, inner surface of the lip, and buccal and gingival mucosa.¹³ Addison disease is differentiated from PFPT by a more generalized hyperpigmentation due to increased melanin production as well as the presence of systemic symptoms related to hypocortisolism. The pigmentation seen on the buccal mucosa in Addison disease is patchy and diffuse, and histology reveals basal melanin hyperpigmentation with superficial dermal melanophages.¹³

Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia is an inherited disorder featuring telangiectasia and generally appears in the third decade of life.¹⁴ Telangiectases classically are 1 to 3 mm in diameter with or without slight elevation. Dermoscopic findings include small red clots, lacunae, and serpentine or linear vessels arranged in a radial conformation surrounding a homogenous pink center.¹⁵ These telangiectases typically occur on the skin or mucosa, particularly the face, lips, tongue, nail beds, and nasal mucosa; however, any organ can be affected with arteriovenous malformations. Recurrent epistaxis occurs in more than half of patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia.¹⁴ Histopathology reveals dilated vessels and lacunae near the dermoepidermal junction displacing the epidermis and papillary dermis.¹⁵ It is distinguished from PFPT by the vascular nature of the lesions and by the presence of other characteristic symptoms such as recurrent epistaxis and visceral arteriovenous malformations.

The Diagnosis: Pigmented Fungiform Papillae of the Tongue

Our patient’s hyperpigmentation was confined to the fungiform papillae, leading to a diagnosis of pigmented fungiform papillae of the tongue (PFPT). A biopsy was not performed, and reassurance was provided regarding the benign nature of this finding, which did not require treatment.

Pigmented fungiform papillae of the tongue is a benign, nonprogressive, asymptomatic pigmentary condition that is most common among patients with skin of color and typically develops within the second or third decade of life.^1,2 The pathogenesis is unclear, but activation of subepithelial melanophages without evidence of inflammation has been implicated.² Although no standard treatment exists, cosmetic improvement with the use of the Q-switched ruby laser has been reported.^3,4 Clinically, PFPT presents as asymptomatic hyperpigmentation confined to the fungiform papillae along the anterior and lateral portions of the tongue.^1,2

Pigmented fungiform papillae of the tongue typically is an isolated finding but rarely can be associated with hyperpigmentation of the nails (as in our patient) or gingiva.² Three different clinical patterns of presentation have been described: (1) a single well-circumscribed collection of pigmented fungiform papillae, (2) few scattered pigmented fungiform papillae admixed with many nonpigmented fungiform papillae, or (3) pigmentation of all fungiform papillae on the dorsal aspect of the tongue.^2,5,6 Pigmented fungiform papillae of the tongue is a clinical diagnosis based on visual recognition. Dermoscopic examination revealing a cobblestonelike or rose petal–like pattern may be helpful in diagnosing PFPT.^2,5-7 Although not typically recommended in the evaluation of PFPT, a biopsy will reveal papillary structures with hyperpigmentation of basilar keratinocytes as well as melanophages in the lamina propria.8 The latter finding suggests a transient inflammatory process despite the hallmark absence of inflammation.⁵ Melanocytic neoplasia and exogenous granules of pigment typically are not seen.⁸

Other conditions that may present with dark-colored macules or papules on the tongue should be considered in the evaluation of a patient with these clinical findings. Black hairy tongue (BHT), or lingua villosa nigra, is a benign finding due to filiform papillae hypertrophy on the dorsum of the tongue.⁹ Food particle debris caught in BHT can lead to porphyrin production by chromogenic bacteria and fungi. These porphyrins result in discoloration ranging from brown-black to yellow and green occurring anteriorly to the circumvallate papillae while usually sparing the tip and lateral sides of the tongue. Dermoscopy can show thin discolored fibers with a hairy appearance. Although normal filiform papillae are less than 1-mm long, 3-mm long papillae are considered diagnostic of BHT.⁹ Treatment includes effective oral hygiene and desquamation measures, which can lead to complete resolution.10

Peutz-Jeghers syndrome is a rare genodermatosis that is characterized by focal hyperpigmentation and multiple gastrointestinal mucosal hamartomatous polyps. Peutz-Jeghers syndrome should be suspected in a patient with discrete, 1- to 5-mm, brown to black macules on the perioral or periocular skin, tongue, genitals, palms, soles, and buccal mucosa with a history of abdominal symptoms.^11,12

Addison disease, or primary adrenal insufficiency, may present with brown hyperpigmentation on chronically sun-exposed areas; regions of friction or pressure; surrounding scar tissue; and mucosal surfaces such as the tongue, inner surface of the lip, and buccal and gingival mucosa.¹³ Addison disease is differentiated from PFPT by a more generalized hyperpigmentation due to increased melanin production as well as the presence of systemic symptoms related to hypocortisolism. The pigmentation seen on the buccal mucosa in Addison disease is patchy and diffuse, and histology reveals basal melanin hyperpigmentation with superficial dermal melanophages.¹³

Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia is an inherited disorder featuring telangiectasia and generally appears in the third decade of life.¹⁴ Telangiectases classically are 1 to 3 mm in diameter with or without slight elevation. Dermoscopic findings include small red clots, lacunae, and serpentine or linear vessels arranged in a radial conformation surrounding a homogenous pink center.¹⁵ These telangiectases typically occur on the skin or mucosa, particularly the face, lips, tongue, nail beds, and nasal mucosa; however, any organ can be affected with arteriovenous malformations. Recurrent epistaxis occurs in more than half of patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia.¹⁴ Histopathology reveals dilated vessels and lacunae near the dermoepidermal junction displacing the epidermis and papillary dermis.¹⁵ It is distinguished from PFPT by the vascular nature of the lesions and by the presence of other characteristic symptoms such as recurrent epistaxis and visceral arteriovenous malformations.

The Diagnosis: Pigmented Fungiform Papillae of the Tongue

Our patient’s hyperpigmentation was confined to the fungiform papillae, leading to a diagnosis of pigmented fungiform papillae of the tongue (PFPT). A biopsy was not performed, and reassurance was provided regarding the benign nature of this finding, which did not require treatment.

Pigmented fungiform papillae of the tongue is a benign, nonprogressive, asymptomatic pigmentary condition that is most common among patients with skin of color and typically develops within the second or third decade of life.^1,2 The pathogenesis is unclear, but activation of subepithelial melanophages without evidence of inflammation has been implicated.² Although no standard treatment exists, cosmetic improvement with the use of the Q-switched ruby laser has been reported.^3,4 Clinically, PFPT presents as asymptomatic hyperpigmentation confined to the fungiform papillae along the anterior and lateral portions of the tongue.^1,2

Pigmented fungiform papillae of the tongue typically is an isolated finding but rarely can be associated with hyperpigmentation of the nails (as in our patient) or gingiva.² Three different clinical patterns of presentation have been described: (1) a single well-circumscribed collection of pigmented fungiform papillae, (2) few scattered pigmented fungiform papillae admixed with many nonpigmented fungiform papillae, or (3) pigmentation of all fungiform papillae on the dorsal aspect of the tongue.^2,5,6 Pigmented fungiform papillae of the tongue is a clinical diagnosis based on visual recognition. Dermoscopic examination revealing a cobblestonelike or rose petal–like pattern may be helpful in diagnosing PFPT.^2,5-7 Although not typically recommended in the evaluation of PFPT, a biopsy will reveal papillary structures with hyperpigmentation of basilar keratinocytes as well as melanophages in the lamina propria.8 The latter finding suggests a transient inflammatory process despite the hallmark absence of inflammation.⁵ Melanocytic neoplasia and exogenous granules of pigment typically are not seen.⁸

Other conditions that may present with dark-colored macules or papules on the tongue should be considered in the evaluation of a patient with these clinical findings. Black hairy tongue (BHT), or lingua villosa nigra, is a benign finding due to filiform papillae hypertrophy on the dorsum of the tongue.⁹ Food particle debris caught in BHT can lead to porphyrin production by chromogenic bacteria and fungi. These porphyrins result in discoloration ranging from brown-black to yellow and green occurring anteriorly to the circumvallate papillae while usually sparing the tip and lateral sides of the tongue. Dermoscopy can show thin discolored fibers with a hairy appearance. Although normal filiform papillae are less than 1-mm long, 3-mm long papillae are considered diagnostic of BHT.⁹ Treatment includes effective oral hygiene and desquamation measures, which can lead to complete resolution.10

Peutz-Jeghers syndrome is a rare genodermatosis that is characterized by focal hyperpigmentation and multiple gastrointestinal mucosal hamartomatous polyps. Peutz-Jeghers syndrome should be suspected in a patient with discrete, 1- to 5-mm, brown to black macules on the perioral or periocular skin, tongue, genitals, palms, soles, and buccal mucosa with a history of abdominal symptoms.^11,12

Addison disease, or primary adrenal insufficiency, may present with brown hyperpigmentation on chronically sun-exposed areas; regions of friction or pressure; surrounding scar tissue; and mucosal surfaces such as the tongue, inner surface of the lip, and buccal and gingival mucosa.¹³ Addison disease is differentiated from PFPT by a more generalized hyperpigmentation due to increased melanin production as well as the presence of systemic symptoms related to hypocortisolism. The pigmentation seen on the buccal mucosa in Addison disease is patchy and diffuse, and histology reveals basal melanin hyperpigmentation with superficial dermal melanophages.¹³

Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia is an inherited disorder featuring telangiectasia and generally appears in the third decade of life.¹⁴ Telangiectases classically are 1 to 3 mm in diameter with or without slight elevation. Dermoscopic findings include small red clots, lacunae, and serpentine or linear vessels arranged in a radial conformation surrounding a homogenous pink center.¹⁵ These telangiectases typically occur on the skin or mucosa, particularly the face, lips, tongue, nail beds, and nasal mucosa; however, any organ can be affected with arteriovenous malformations. Recurrent epistaxis occurs in more than half of patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia.¹⁴ Histopathology reveals dilated vessels and lacunae near the dermoepidermal junction displacing the epidermis and papillary dermis.¹⁵ It is distinguished from PFPT by the vascular nature of the lesions and by the presence of other characteristic symptoms such as recurrent epistaxis and visceral arteriovenous malformations.

SAN DIEGO – If approved, a novel topical gel that combines an antibiotic, an antibacterial, and a retinoid would mark an important advance for many patients with moderate-to-severe acne, according to Lawrence F. Eichenfield, MD.

The product, known as IDP-126 and being developed by Ortho Dermatologics, is a fixed dose triple combination of clindamycin 1.2% plus benzoyl peroxide 3.1% and adapalene 0.15% being evaluated in patients nine years of age and older. According to a 2021 press release from the company, results from a second 12-week pivotal phase 3 trial showed a treatment success of 50.5% and 20.5% for IDP-126 and its vehicle, respectively, along with significant changes from baseline in inflammatory lesion count and non-inflammatory lesion count.

olavs/Thinkstock

More recently, researchers led by Linda Stein Gold, MD, conducted a 12-week multicenter, randomized, double-blind study of IDP-126 in 741 children, adolescents, and adults with moderate to severe acne. They reported 52.5% of patients treated with IDP-126 gel achieved treatment success by week 12, with over 70% reduction in inflammatory and noninflammatory lesions.

“This will be interesting to follow as it moves along,” Dr. Eichenfield, chief of pediatric and adolescent dermatology at Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, said at the annual Masters of Aesthetics Symposium in a presentation on the newest topical acne treatments.

“If approved, we probably will be able to decrease our need for systemic therapies in some individuals,” he said. “It’s something that may become important in practices that mix and match between medical and procedural or surgical approaches to acne.”

Dr. Eichenfield highlighted other products for the topical treatment of acne:

• Trifarotene cream 0.005% (Aklief). In 2019, Food and Drug Administration approval made trifarotene cream the first new retinoid indicated for acne in several decades. It is indicated for the topical treatment of acne vulgaris in patients age 9 and older and has been studied in acne of the face, chest, and back.
• Tazarotene lotion 0.045% (Arazlo). The 0.1% formulation of tazarotene is commonly used for acne, but it can cause skin irritation, dryness, and erythema. The new 0.045% formulation was developed in a three-dimensional mesh matrix, with ingredients from an oil-in-water emulsion. “Many of the new acne products come with a background of vehicle delivery systems that minimize the concentration gradient, so it decreases irritation,” said Dr. Eichenfield, one of the authors of a 2021 review article on the management of acne vulgaris in JAMA. “This has very good efficacy without the traditional irritation of other tazarotene products,” Dr. Eichenfield said.
• Minocycline 4% topical foam (Amzeeq). The 2019 U.S. approval marked the first and so far only topical minocycline prescription treatment for acne. “Its hydrophobic composition allows for stable and efficient delivery of inherently unstable pharmaceutical ingredients,” he said. “It’s generally well tolerated.”
• Clascoterone cream 1% (Winlevi). This first-in-class topical androgen receptor inhibitor is approved for the treatment of acne in patients 12 years and older. It competes with dihydrotestosterone and selectively targets androgen receptors in sebocytes and hair papilla cells. “It is safe for use in men, has been studied on the face and trunk, and has been shown to inhibit sebum production, reduce secretion of inflammatory cytokines, and inhibit inflammatory pathways,” Dr. Eichenfield said.
• Micro-encapsulated benzoyl peroxide 3% and tretinoin 0.1% cream (Twyneo). This is a once-daily fixed-dose combination of tretinoin and benzoyl peroxide indicated for the treatment of acne vulgaris in patients age 9 and older. According to a press release from Sol-Gel, the manufacturer, silica (silicon dioxide) core shell structures separate micro-encapsulate tretinoin crystals and benzoyl peroxide crystals, enabling inclusion of the two active ingredients in the cream.

Dr. Eichenfield disclosed that he has been an investigator and/or consultant for Almirall, Cassiopea, Dermata, Galderma, and Ortho Dermatologics.

SAN DIEGO – If approved, a novel topical gel that combines an antibiotic, an antibacterial, and a retinoid would mark an important advance for many patients with moderate-to-severe acne, according to Lawrence F. Eichenfield, MD.

The product, known as IDP-126 and being developed by Ortho Dermatologics, is a fixed dose triple combination of clindamycin 1.2% plus benzoyl peroxide 3.1% and adapalene 0.15% being evaluated in patients nine years of age and older. According to a 2021 press release from the company, results from a second 12-week pivotal phase 3 trial showed a treatment success of 50.5% and 20.5% for IDP-126 and its vehicle, respectively, along with significant changes from baseline in inflammatory lesion count and non-inflammatory lesion count.

olavs/Thinkstock

More recently, researchers led by Linda Stein Gold, MD, conducted a 12-week multicenter, randomized, double-blind study of IDP-126 in 741 children, adolescents, and adults with moderate to severe acne. They reported 52.5% of patients treated with IDP-126 gel achieved treatment success by week 12, with over 70% reduction in inflammatory and noninflammatory lesions.

“This will be interesting to follow as it moves along,” Dr. Eichenfield, chief of pediatric and adolescent dermatology at Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, said at the annual Masters of Aesthetics Symposium in a presentation on the newest topical acne treatments.

“If approved, we probably will be able to decrease our need for systemic therapies in some individuals,” he said. “It’s something that may become important in practices that mix and match between medical and procedural or surgical approaches to acne.”

Dr. Eichenfield highlighted other products for the topical treatment of acne:

• Trifarotene cream 0.005% (Aklief). In 2019, Food and Drug Administration approval made trifarotene cream the first new retinoid indicated for acne in several decades. It is indicated for the topical treatment of acne vulgaris in patients age 9 and older and has been studied in acne of the face, chest, and back.
• Tazarotene lotion 0.045% (Arazlo). The 0.1% formulation of tazarotene is commonly used for acne, but it can cause skin irritation, dryness, and erythema. The new 0.045% formulation was developed in a three-dimensional mesh matrix, with ingredients from an oil-in-water emulsion. “Many of the new acne products come with a background of vehicle delivery systems that minimize the concentration gradient, so it decreases irritation,” said Dr. Eichenfield, one of the authors of a 2021 review article on the management of acne vulgaris in JAMA. “This has very good efficacy without the traditional irritation of other tazarotene products,” Dr. Eichenfield said.
• Minocycline 4% topical foam (Amzeeq). The 2019 U.S. approval marked the first and so far only topical minocycline prescription treatment for acne. “Its hydrophobic composition allows for stable and efficient delivery of inherently unstable pharmaceutical ingredients,” he said. “It’s generally well tolerated.”
• Clascoterone cream 1% (Winlevi). This first-in-class topical androgen receptor inhibitor is approved for the treatment of acne in patients 12 years and older. It competes with dihydrotestosterone and selectively targets androgen receptors in sebocytes and hair papilla cells. “It is safe for use in men, has been studied on the face and trunk, and has been shown to inhibit sebum production, reduce secretion of inflammatory cytokines, and inhibit inflammatory pathways,” Dr. Eichenfield said.
• Micro-encapsulated benzoyl peroxide 3% and tretinoin 0.1% cream (Twyneo). This is a once-daily fixed-dose combination of tretinoin and benzoyl peroxide indicated for the treatment of acne vulgaris in patients age 9 and older. According to a press release from Sol-Gel, the manufacturer, silica (silicon dioxide) core shell structures separate micro-encapsulate tretinoin crystals and benzoyl peroxide crystals, enabling inclusion of the two active ingredients in the cream.

Dr. Eichenfield disclosed that he has been an investigator and/or consultant for Almirall, Cassiopea, Dermata, Galderma, and Ortho Dermatologics.

SAN DIEGO – If approved, a novel topical gel that combines an antibiotic, an antibacterial, and a retinoid would mark an important advance for many patients with moderate-to-severe acne, according to Lawrence F. Eichenfield, MD.

The product, known as IDP-126 and being developed by Ortho Dermatologics, is a fixed dose triple combination of clindamycin 1.2% plus benzoyl peroxide 3.1% and adapalene 0.15% being evaluated in patients nine years of age and older. According to a 2021 press release from the company, results from a second 12-week pivotal phase 3 trial showed a treatment success of 50.5% and 20.5% for IDP-126 and its vehicle, respectively, along with significant changes from baseline in inflammatory lesion count and non-inflammatory lesion count.

olavs/Thinkstock

More recently, researchers led by Linda Stein Gold, MD, conducted a 12-week multicenter, randomized, double-blind study of IDP-126 in 741 children, adolescents, and adults with moderate to severe acne. They reported 52.5% of patients treated with IDP-126 gel achieved treatment success by week 12, with over 70% reduction in inflammatory and noninflammatory lesions.

“This will be interesting to follow as it moves along,” Dr. Eichenfield, chief of pediatric and adolescent dermatology at Rady Children’s Hospital, San Diego, said at the annual Masters of Aesthetics Symposium in a presentation on the newest topical acne treatments.

“If approved, we probably will be able to decrease our need for systemic therapies in some individuals,” he said. “It’s something that may become important in practices that mix and match between medical and procedural or surgical approaches to acne.”

Dr. Eichenfield highlighted other products for the topical treatment of acne:

• Trifarotene cream 0.005% (Aklief). In 2019, Food and Drug Administration approval made trifarotene cream the first new retinoid indicated for acne in several decades. It is indicated for the topical treatment of acne vulgaris in patients age 9 and older and has been studied in acne of the face, chest, and back.
• Tazarotene lotion 0.045% (Arazlo). The 0.1% formulation of tazarotene is commonly used for acne, but it can cause skin irritation, dryness, and erythema. The new 0.045% formulation was developed in a three-dimensional mesh matrix, with ingredients from an oil-in-water emulsion. “Many of the new acne products come with a background of vehicle delivery systems that minimize the concentration gradient, so it decreases irritation,” said Dr. Eichenfield, one of the authors of a 2021 review article on the management of acne vulgaris in JAMA. “This has very good efficacy without the traditional irritation of other tazarotene products,” Dr. Eichenfield said.
• Minocycline 4% topical foam (Amzeeq). The 2019 U.S. approval marked the first and so far only topical minocycline prescription treatment for acne. “Its hydrophobic composition allows for stable and efficient delivery of inherently unstable pharmaceutical ingredients,” he said. “It’s generally well tolerated.”
• Clascoterone cream 1% (Winlevi). This first-in-class topical androgen receptor inhibitor is approved for the treatment of acne in patients 12 years and older. It competes with dihydrotestosterone and selectively targets androgen receptors in sebocytes and hair papilla cells. “It is safe for use in men, has been studied on the face and trunk, and has been shown to inhibit sebum production, reduce secretion of inflammatory cytokines, and inhibit inflammatory pathways,” Dr. Eichenfield said.
• Micro-encapsulated benzoyl peroxide 3% and tretinoin 0.1% cream (Twyneo). This is a once-daily fixed-dose combination of tretinoin and benzoyl peroxide indicated for the treatment of acne vulgaris in patients age 9 and older. According to a press release from Sol-Gel, the manufacturer, silica (silicon dioxide) core shell structures separate micro-encapsulate tretinoin crystals and benzoyl peroxide crystals, enabling inclusion of the two active ingredients in the cream.

Dr. Eichenfield disclosed that he has been an investigator and/or consultant for Almirall, Cassiopea, Dermata, Galderma, and Ortho Dermatologics.

In children with cystic fibrosis (CF) and homozygous for the F508 mutation, the combination of lumacaftor and ivacaftor appears generally safe, and biomarker data suggest its efficacy, according to results from a new open-label phase 3 trial.

In September, the Food and Drug Administration approved lumacaftor/ivacaftor for patients aged 1 years and above. Waiting in the wings is the triple combination of elexacaftor, tezacaftor, and ivacaftor (ETI), which is available for patients with at least one copy of the F508 mutation aged 6 and over. ETI is also being tested in younger patients.

One driving factor for early treatment is countering the malnutrition that can occur among CF patients because of poor pancreatic insufficiency and chronic inflammation. “We’ve known for many years that (being) at or above average body weight and height predict better lung function. And we’ve known for quite a while that the height-for-age percentile, in preschool years, actually predicts your lung function later, and how long you’re going to live, so nutrition is incredibly important,” said study author Susanna McColley, MD, in an interview. It’s also difficult to use lung function tests in young children, since even adults can find them challenging, she said.

“FEV₁ [forced expiratory volume in 1 second] is the strongest predictor of survival, and then nutrition is the highest predictor of FEV₁, so that’s kind of the construct. They had similar improvement in the functional measures of their pancreas and in the measures of inflammation in the gut. I think the story here is that starting a modulator early has a likelihood to have positive health effects that go forward. We can’t say that from the data in the paper. It’s a 24-week study, but looking at the pancreatic and intestinal functioning and also the fact that there was a decrease in sweat chloride is important,” said Dr. McColley, who is a professor of pediatrics in pulmonary and sleep medicine at Northwestern University, Chicago.

The study adds more evidence that earlier treatment in CF may lead to better outcomes, but the digestive improvements are an overlooked factor, according to Dr. McColley. “Even with early treatment, and even with pancreatic enzymes and supplements taken to digest food, it’s a huge burden. When they come in and say that digestion seems better, there is less bloating, things like that, these are the things that aren’t captured so much in the clinical trial data, but they’re meaningful to families,” she said.

Single-agent ivacaftor is available for children as young as 4 months, but is limited to patients with the G551D gating mutation. Most young children with CF can only be treated for symptoms.

The lack of new safety signals in the new study is reassuring, and the research presents some hope to young children who are not yet eligible to receive ETI, according to Carlos Milla, MD, who is a pediatric pulmonary physician at Stanford (Calif.) University. “We already know that the next version of this drug is much more efficacious, the triple-combination therapy. It’s a little bit like we’re falling behind when it comes to treating these young kids because we are offering right now what we know is a less effective drug as opposed to the ones that are available now down to age 6, and hopefully sometime soon down to age 2. It’s better [than] to have no treatment at all, so it’s a good start,” said Dr. Milla.

“I think this is a great bridge for babies while they’re waiting to grow up to be old enough to get [triple combination therapy] and will prevent some of the complications until they can get the even more highly effective therapy in the future,” said Jennifer Taylor-Cousar, MD, who was asked to comment on the study. Dr. Taylor-Cousar is codirector of the Adult CF Program at National Jewish Health, Denver.

She also noted that the therapy could rapidly become more important. Since the approval of elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor in 2019, pregnancies in women with CF have increased markedly. There were 310 such pregnancies in 2019, and 675 in 2020 after the combination became generally available in November of 2019. Many of the resulting babies had false-negative CF diagnoses because the mother was taking the triple combination and the medication crossed the placenta and prevented disease progression. The drugs are present in breast milk, but when breastfeeding isn’t possible, newborns are left without a therapeutic option. “There was no approval for babies who had two copies of F508. This helps tremendously with that albeit small population, although I suspect it may grow larger over the upcoming years as we continue to see so many pregnancies in women with CF because they are so much healthier,” said Dr. Taylor-Cousar.

The study was a phase 3, open-label trial with a cohort aged 18-24 months (cohort 1, n = 14) and another aged 12-18 months (cohort 2, n = 46). Participants received a 15-day treatment with a dose based on weight at screening. Participants then underwent a 24-week treatment period with a dose determined by pharmacokinetic data collected during the initial treatment, the authors wrote in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.

A total of 95.7% of children experienced adverse events during the 24-week treatment period; 52.2% of events were mild, and 39.1% were moderate. The most frequent adverse events were cough (34.8%), infective exacerbation of CF (21.7%), pyrexia (21.7%), and vomiting (17.4%); 10.9% had elevations of alanine aminotransferase and/or aspartate aminotransferase higher than three times the upper limit of normal, and one (2.2%) had concentrations of both high enough that the study drug was discontinued.

There were significant reductions in sweat chloride concentration at week 24, suggesting strong efficacy (–29.1 mmol/L; 95% confidence interval, –34.8 to –23.4 mmol/L). Body mass, weight, and length remained normal during the 24-week treatment period, and there were trends towards improvement in biomarkers of pancreatic function and intestinal inflammation, including fecal elastase-1 (+73.1mcg/g; 95% CI, 29.40-116.80 mcg/g), serum immunoreactive trypsinogen (–295.50 mcg/g; 95% CI, –416.60 to –174.50 mcg/g), and fecal calprotectin (–106.63 mg/kg; 95% CI, –180.60 to –32.66 mg/kg)

Dr. McColley, Dr. Taylor-Cousar, and Dr. Milla have no relevant financial disclosures. The study was funded by Merck.

In children with cystic fibrosis (CF) and homozygous for the F508 mutation, the combination of lumacaftor and ivacaftor appears generally safe, and biomarker data suggest its efficacy, according to results from a new open-label phase 3 trial.

In September, the Food and Drug Administration approved lumacaftor/ivacaftor for patients aged 1 years and above. Waiting in the wings is the triple combination of elexacaftor, tezacaftor, and ivacaftor (ETI), which is available for patients with at least one copy of the F508 mutation aged 6 and over. ETI is also being tested in younger patients.

One driving factor for early treatment is countering the malnutrition that can occur among CF patients because of poor pancreatic insufficiency and chronic inflammation. “We’ve known for many years that (being) at or above average body weight and height predict better lung function. And we’ve known for quite a while that the height-for-age percentile, in preschool years, actually predicts your lung function later, and how long you’re going to live, so nutrition is incredibly important,” said study author Susanna McColley, MD, in an interview. It’s also difficult to use lung function tests in young children, since even adults can find them challenging, she said.

“FEV₁ [forced expiratory volume in 1 second] is the strongest predictor of survival, and then nutrition is the highest predictor of FEV₁, so that’s kind of the construct. They had similar improvement in the functional measures of their pancreas and in the measures of inflammation in the gut. I think the story here is that starting a modulator early has a likelihood to have positive health effects that go forward. We can’t say that from the data in the paper. It’s a 24-week study, but looking at the pancreatic and intestinal functioning and also the fact that there was a decrease in sweat chloride is important,” said Dr. McColley, who is a professor of pediatrics in pulmonary and sleep medicine at Northwestern University, Chicago.

The study adds more evidence that earlier treatment in CF may lead to better outcomes, but the digestive improvements are an overlooked factor, according to Dr. McColley. “Even with early treatment, and even with pancreatic enzymes and supplements taken to digest food, it’s a huge burden. When they come in and say that digestion seems better, there is less bloating, things like that, these are the things that aren’t captured so much in the clinical trial data, but they’re meaningful to families,” she said.

Single-agent ivacaftor is available for children as young as 4 months, but is limited to patients with the G551D gating mutation. Most young children with CF can only be treated for symptoms.

The lack of new safety signals in the new study is reassuring, and the research presents some hope to young children who are not yet eligible to receive ETI, according to Carlos Milla, MD, who is a pediatric pulmonary physician at Stanford (Calif.) University. “We already know that the next version of this drug is much more efficacious, the triple-combination therapy. It’s a little bit like we’re falling behind when it comes to treating these young kids because we are offering right now what we know is a less effective drug as opposed to the ones that are available now down to age 6, and hopefully sometime soon down to age 2. It’s better [than] to have no treatment at all, so it’s a good start,” said Dr. Milla.

“I think this is a great bridge for babies while they’re waiting to grow up to be old enough to get [triple combination therapy] and will prevent some of the complications until they can get the even more highly effective therapy in the future,” said Jennifer Taylor-Cousar, MD, who was asked to comment on the study. Dr. Taylor-Cousar is codirector of the Adult CF Program at National Jewish Health, Denver.

She also noted that the therapy could rapidly become more important. Since the approval of elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor in 2019, pregnancies in women with CF have increased markedly. There were 310 such pregnancies in 2019, and 675 in 2020 after the combination became generally available in November of 2019. Many of the resulting babies had false-negative CF diagnoses because the mother was taking the triple combination and the medication crossed the placenta and prevented disease progression. The drugs are present in breast milk, but when breastfeeding isn’t possible, newborns are left without a therapeutic option. “There was no approval for babies who had two copies of F508. This helps tremendously with that albeit small population, although I suspect it may grow larger over the upcoming years as we continue to see so many pregnancies in women with CF because they are so much healthier,” said Dr. Taylor-Cousar.

The study was a phase 3, open-label trial with a cohort aged 18-24 months (cohort 1, n = 14) and another aged 12-18 months (cohort 2, n = 46). Participants received a 15-day treatment with a dose based on weight at screening. Participants then underwent a 24-week treatment period with a dose determined by pharmacokinetic data collected during the initial treatment, the authors wrote in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.

A total of 95.7% of children experienced adverse events during the 24-week treatment period; 52.2% of events were mild, and 39.1% were moderate. The most frequent adverse events were cough (34.8%), infective exacerbation of CF (21.7%), pyrexia (21.7%), and vomiting (17.4%); 10.9% had elevations of alanine aminotransferase and/or aspartate aminotransferase higher than three times the upper limit of normal, and one (2.2%) had concentrations of both high enough that the study drug was discontinued.

There were significant reductions in sweat chloride concentration at week 24, suggesting strong efficacy (–29.1 mmol/L; 95% confidence interval, –34.8 to –23.4 mmol/L). Body mass, weight, and length remained normal during the 24-week treatment period, and there were trends towards improvement in biomarkers of pancreatic function and intestinal inflammation, including fecal elastase-1 (+73.1mcg/g; 95% CI, 29.40-116.80 mcg/g), serum immunoreactive trypsinogen (–295.50 mcg/g; 95% CI, –416.60 to –174.50 mcg/g), and fecal calprotectin (–106.63 mg/kg; 95% CI, –180.60 to –32.66 mg/kg)

Dr. McColley, Dr. Taylor-Cousar, and Dr. Milla have no relevant financial disclosures. The study was funded by Merck.

In children with cystic fibrosis (CF) and homozygous for the F508 mutation, the combination of lumacaftor and ivacaftor appears generally safe, and biomarker data suggest its efficacy, according to results from a new open-label phase 3 trial.

In September, the Food and Drug Administration approved lumacaftor/ivacaftor for patients aged 1 years and above. Waiting in the wings is the triple combination of elexacaftor, tezacaftor, and ivacaftor (ETI), which is available for patients with at least one copy of the F508 mutation aged 6 and over. ETI is also being tested in younger patients.

One driving factor for early treatment is countering the malnutrition that can occur among CF patients because of poor pancreatic insufficiency and chronic inflammation. “We’ve known for many years that (being) at or above average body weight and height predict better lung function. And we’ve known for quite a while that the height-for-age percentile, in preschool years, actually predicts your lung function later, and how long you’re going to live, so nutrition is incredibly important,” said study author Susanna McColley, MD, in an interview. It’s also difficult to use lung function tests in young children, since even adults can find them challenging, she said.

“FEV₁ [forced expiratory volume in 1 second] is the strongest predictor of survival, and then nutrition is the highest predictor of FEV₁, so that’s kind of the construct. They had similar improvement in the functional measures of their pancreas and in the measures of inflammation in the gut. I think the story here is that starting a modulator early has a likelihood to have positive health effects that go forward. We can’t say that from the data in the paper. It’s a 24-week study, but looking at the pancreatic and intestinal functioning and also the fact that there was a decrease in sweat chloride is important,” said Dr. McColley, who is a professor of pediatrics in pulmonary and sleep medicine at Northwestern University, Chicago.

The study adds more evidence that earlier treatment in CF may lead to better outcomes, but the digestive improvements are an overlooked factor, according to Dr. McColley. “Even with early treatment, and even with pancreatic enzymes and supplements taken to digest food, it’s a huge burden. When they come in and say that digestion seems better, there is less bloating, things like that, these are the things that aren’t captured so much in the clinical trial data, but they’re meaningful to families,” she said.

Single-agent ivacaftor is available for children as young as 4 months, but is limited to patients with the G551D gating mutation. Most young children with CF can only be treated for symptoms.

The lack of new safety signals in the new study is reassuring, and the research presents some hope to young children who are not yet eligible to receive ETI, according to Carlos Milla, MD, who is a pediatric pulmonary physician at Stanford (Calif.) University. “We already know that the next version of this drug is much more efficacious, the triple-combination therapy. It’s a little bit like we’re falling behind when it comes to treating these young kids because we are offering right now what we know is a less effective drug as opposed to the ones that are available now down to age 6, and hopefully sometime soon down to age 2. It’s better [than] to have no treatment at all, so it’s a good start,” said Dr. Milla.

“I think this is a great bridge for babies while they’re waiting to grow up to be old enough to get [triple combination therapy] and will prevent some of the complications until they can get the even more highly effective therapy in the future,” said Jennifer Taylor-Cousar, MD, who was asked to comment on the study. Dr. Taylor-Cousar is codirector of the Adult CF Program at National Jewish Health, Denver.

She also noted that the therapy could rapidly become more important. Since the approval of elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor in 2019, pregnancies in women with CF have increased markedly. There were 310 such pregnancies in 2019, and 675 in 2020 after the combination became generally available in November of 2019. Many of the resulting babies had false-negative CF diagnoses because the mother was taking the triple combination and the medication crossed the placenta and prevented disease progression. The drugs are present in breast milk, but when breastfeeding isn’t possible, newborns are left without a therapeutic option. “There was no approval for babies who had two copies of F508. This helps tremendously with that albeit small population, although I suspect it may grow larger over the upcoming years as we continue to see so many pregnancies in women with CF because they are so much healthier,” said Dr. Taylor-Cousar.

The study was a phase 3, open-label trial with a cohort aged 18-24 months (cohort 1, n = 14) and another aged 12-18 months (cohort 2, n = 46). Participants received a 15-day treatment with a dose based on weight at screening. Participants then underwent a 24-week treatment period with a dose determined by pharmacokinetic data collected during the initial treatment, the authors wrote in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.

A total of 95.7% of children experienced adverse events during the 24-week treatment period; 52.2% of events were mild, and 39.1% were moderate. The most frequent adverse events were cough (34.8%), infective exacerbation of CF (21.7%), pyrexia (21.7%), and vomiting (17.4%); 10.9% had elevations of alanine aminotransferase and/or aspartate aminotransferase higher than three times the upper limit of normal, and one (2.2%) had concentrations of both high enough that the study drug was discontinued.

There were significant reductions in sweat chloride concentration at week 24, suggesting strong efficacy (–29.1 mmol/L; 95% confidence interval, –34.8 to –23.4 mmol/L). Body mass, weight, and length remained normal during the 24-week treatment period, and there were trends towards improvement in biomarkers of pancreatic function and intestinal inflammation, including fecal elastase-1 (+73.1mcg/g; 95% CI, 29.40-116.80 mcg/g), serum immunoreactive trypsinogen (–295.50 mcg/g; 95% CI, –416.60 to –174.50 mcg/g), and fecal calprotectin (–106.63 mg/kg; 95% CI, –180.60 to –32.66 mg/kg)

Dr. McColley, Dr. Taylor-Cousar, and Dr. Milla have no relevant financial disclosures. The study was funded by Merck.

As a toddler undergoing treatment at McMaster Children’s Hospital in Hamilton, Ont., Caroline Diorio, MD, couldn’t grasp what the nice doctors scurrying in and out of her room were doing. She just knew they were taking care of her.

Dr. Diorio had pediatric immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), a type of platelet disorder in which the immune system attacks blood platelets for usually unknown reasons.

“I remember very much how worried my parents were,” recalled Dr. Diorio, now a hematologist-oncologist at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “And I remember how the tone of the doctor’s voice and the way the doctors communicated provided so much reassurance to my parents.”

Dr. Diorio’s ITP resolved within a few years, but her experience left a lasting impression.

“From that moment on, I don’t remember a time that I didn’t want to be a doctor,” she said. “I had these really formative experiences with doctors who were so lovely, and I thought, ‘I want to do that.’ ”

Though she considered other specialties in medical school at the University of Toronto, Dr. Diorio kept feeling drawn back to pediatric oncology and hematology.

“I have always loved the commitment that parents have to their kids and the team approach that exists,” she said. “Hematology/oncology allowed me to take care of really sick kids but also have this long-term relationship with them and their parents, which I really value and love.”

Dr. Diorio even completed her residency at McMaster alongside one of the same physicians who had cared for her as a child, Ronald Duncan Barr, MD. “It sort of all came full circle,” she said.

Today, Dr. Diorio draws inspiration from memories of her childhood experience. “I try to recreate that and provide as much kindness and compassion as I can for patients and their families, to help when people are in this incredibly vulnerable situation,” she said.

But she takes that even further by researching new therapies for patients who have run out of options, particularly those with T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL).

For B-cell ALL and several other blood cancers, an effective option is CAR T-cell therapy, in which physicians collect T-cells from the patient, re-engineer the T cells in the lab so they recognize the proteins expressed on the surface of cancerous cells – called blasts – and then introduce the modified T-cells back into the patient. Once infused, the re-engineered T-cells attack the blasts with the tell-tale proteins.

But with T-ALL, T-cells themselves are infected with cancer, so autologous CAR T-cell therapy is not currently an option, and no allogeneic CAR T-cell therapies have been approved. Dr. Diorio is part of a cutting-edge research team led by David T. Teachey, MD, striving for breakthroughs. “She’s a brilliant clinician, extremely smart and hard-working, exceptional work ethic, great interaction with patients and families with a great bedside manner,” Dr. Teachey said of Dr. Diorio. “She’s just a superstar all around.”

Dr. Teachey first piqued Dr. Diorio’s interest in researching innovative T-ALL therapies when she arrived at CHOP as a hematology/oncology fellow in 2018 and pursued a master of science degree in translational research under his tutelage at the University of Pennsylvania. Then, for a time, the COVID-19 pandemic shut down most research.

“Caroline pivoted and was at the front line, collecting samples and helping with research on SARS-CoV-2 very early in the pandemic,” Dr. Teachey said. “She was able to then pivot back, taking the skills she learned from that work in the pandemic and applying it to what she was doing in the CAR T-cell space and T-ALL.”

Extraordinary gains in pediatric cancer over the past several decades mean that more than 80% of children diagnosed with cancer today will become long-term survivors. “The 20% of the time that we don’t get the result we want is obviously devastating,” Dr. Diorio said. “However, that’s incredibly motivating to try to make better treatments.”

Her current focus is finding a way to use CAR T-cell therapy in children with T-ALL. About 85% of children with T-ALL do well with standard first-line treatments of chemotherapy, but the 15% who relapse or have chemo-refractory disease have a far lower survival rate – less than 30%, Dr. Diorio said.

The problem with autologous CAR T-cell therapy in T-ALL is twofold: It’s difficult to sort out healthy T cells from the cancerous T cells, and the target current re-engineered T-cells go after is on healthy cells, too.

“What happens is a problem called fratricide – basically the CAR T-cells are killing their brothers,” she said. So Dr. Diorio and her colleagues are trying to modify CAR T-cell strategies to target different markers. One target they’re investigating is CD7, but using CRISPR to gene-edit out CD7 from healthy cells requires making two cuts in the DNA.

“Any time you break DNA, you have to repair it, and any time you repair it, there’s a chance of making a mistake,” Dr. Diorio said. So she used a different technique, cytosine-based editing, which requires only one cut. “You put in what you want, and it’s much more precise and less error-prone.” Cytosine-based editing also preserves T cells’ vitality; too many cuts impair T-cell growth, but that doesn’t happen with cytosine-based editing. In August of 2022, Dr. Diorio published a study demonstrating this technique while the team has continued looking for other targets that show up on cancer cells but not on healthy T-cells.

“I’m not invested in one particular strategy,” Dr. Diorio said. “I’m invested in finding a strategy that works for the maximum number of patients.”

That pragmatic approach may be why Dr. Teachey describes her as an out-of-the-box thinker.

“She brings novel ideas to the table, and not everybody who’s a physician-scientist has that ability to really think about taking things in the bench to the bedside and then back again,” Dr. Teachey said. “It’s knowing what questions are important to ask for our patients and how to study those and the research base, so that you can improve treatments for kids with leukemia.”

Their research looks promising so far. Clinical trials are in development for the CD7-targeted CAR T, and they’re collaborating with others on clinical trials for CAR-T targeting another protein, CD38. In the midst of it all, Dr. Diorio remains focused on her patients.

“It’s really a privilege to see the incredible grace people have in these very difficult circumstances,” Dr. Diorio said. “I find it really motivating to try to make things easier for people, and I try to spend every day looking for better treatments so people don’t have to go through that.”

Dr. Diorio has no disclosures. Dr. Teachey has served on the advisory boards of BEAM, Jazz, Janssen, and Sobi and has received research funding from BEAM, Jazz, Servier, and Neoimmune Tech. He has multiple patents pending on CAR-T therapy.

As a toddler undergoing treatment at McMaster Children’s Hospital in Hamilton, Ont., Caroline Diorio, MD, couldn’t grasp what the nice doctors scurrying in and out of her room were doing. She just knew they were taking care of her.

Dr. Diorio had pediatric immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), a type of platelet disorder in which the immune system attacks blood platelets for usually unknown reasons.

“I remember very much how worried my parents were,” recalled Dr. Diorio, now a hematologist-oncologist at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “And I remember how the tone of the doctor’s voice and the way the doctors communicated provided so much reassurance to my parents.”

Dr. Diorio’s ITP resolved within a few years, but her experience left a lasting impression.

“From that moment on, I don’t remember a time that I didn’t want to be a doctor,” she said. “I had these really formative experiences with doctors who were so lovely, and I thought, ‘I want to do that.’ ”

Though she considered other specialties in medical school at the University of Toronto, Dr. Diorio kept feeling drawn back to pediatric oncology and hematology.

“I have always loved the commitment that parents have to their kids and the team approach that exists,” she said. “Hematology/oncology allowed me to take care of really sick kids but also have this long-term relationship with them and their parents, which I really value and love.”

Dr. Diorio even completed her residency at McMaster alongside one of the same physicians who had cared for her as a child, Ronald Duncan Barr, MD. “It sort of all came full circle,” she said.

Today, Dr. Diorio draws inspiration from memories of her childhood experience. “I try to recreate that and provide as much kindness and compassion as I can for patients and their families, to help when people are in this incredibly vulnerable situation,” she said.

But she takes that even further by researching new therapies for patients who have run out of options, particularly those with T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL).

For B-cell ALL and several other blood cancers, an effective option is CAR T-cell therapy, in which physicians collect T-cells from the patient, re-engineer the T cells in the lab so they recognize the proteins expressed on the surface of cancerous cells – called blasts – and then introduce the modified T-cells back into the patient. Once infused, the re-engineered T-cells attack the blasts with the tell-tale proteins.

But with T-ALL, T-cells themselves are infected with cancer, so autologous CAR T-cell therapy is not currently an option, and no allogeneic CAR T-cell therapies have been approved. Dr. Diorio is part of a cutting-edge research team led by David T. Teachey, MD, striving for breakthroughs. “She’s a brilliant clinician, extremely smart and hard-working, exceptional work ethic, great interaction with patients and families with a great bedside manner,” Dr. Teachey said of Dr. Diorio. “She’s just a superstar all around.”

Dr. Teachey first piqued Dr. Diorio’s interest in researching innovative T-ALL therapies when she arrived at CHOP as a hematology/oncology fellow in 2018 and pursued a master of science degree in translational research under his tutelage at the University of Pennsylvania. Then, for a time, the COVID-19 pandemic shut down most research.

“Caroline pivoted and was at the front line, collecting samples and helping with research on SARS-CoV-2 very early in the pandemic,” Dr. Teachey said. “She was able to then pivot back, taking the skills she learned from that work in the pandemic and applying it to what she was doing in the CAR T-cell space and T-ALL.”

Extraordinary gains in pediatric cancer over the past several decades mean that more than 80% of children diagnosed with cancer today will become long-term survivors. “The 20% of the time that we don’t get the result we want is obviously devastating,” Dr. Diorio said. “However, that’s incredibly motivating to try to make better treatments.”

Her current focus is finding a way to use CAR T-cell therapy in children with T-ALL. About 85% of children with T-ALL do well with standard first-line treatments of chemotherapy, but the 15% who relapse or have chemo-refractory disease have a far lower survival rate – less than 30%, Dr. Diorio said.

The problem with autologous CAR T-cell therapy in T-ALL is twofold: It’s difficult to sort out healthy T cells from the cancerous T cells, and the target current re-engineered T-cells go after is on healthy cells, too.

“What happens is a problem called fratricide – basically the CAR T-cells are killing their brothers,” she said. So Dr. Diorio and her colleagues are trying to modify CAR T-cell strategies to target different markers. One target they’re investigating is CD7, but using CRISPR to gene-edit out CD7 from healthy cells requires making two cuts in the DNA.

“Any time you break DNA, you have to repair it, and any time you repair it, there’s a chance of making a mistake,” Dr. Diorio said. So she used a different technique, cytosine-based editing, which requires only one cut. “You put in what you want, and it’s much more precise and less error-prone.” Cytosine-based editing also preserves T cells’ vitality; too many cuts impair T-cell growth, but that doesn’t happen with cytosine-based editing. In August of 2022, Dr. Diorio published a study demonstrating this technique while the team has continued looking for other targets that show up on cancer cells but not on healthy T-cells.

“I’m not invested in one particular strategy,” Dr. Diorio said. “I’m invested in finding a strategy that works for the maximum number of patients.”

That pragmatic approach may be why Dr. Teachey describes her as an out-of-the-box thinker.

“She brings novel ideas to the table, and not everybody who’s a physician-scientist has that ability to really think about taking things in the bench to the bedside and then back again,” Dr. Teachey said. “It’s knowing what questions are important to ask for our patients and how to study those and the research base, so that you can improve treatments for kids with leukemia.”

Their research looks promising so far. Clinical trials are in development for the CD7-targeted CAR T, and they’re collaborating with others on clinical trials for CAR-T targeting another protein, CD38. In the midst of it all, Dr. Diorio remains focused on her patients.

“It’s really a privilege to see the incredible grace people have in these very difficult circumstances,” Dr. Diorio said. “I find it really motivating to try to make things easier for people, and I try to spend every day looking for better treatments so people don’t have to go through that.”

Dr. Diorio has no disclosures. Dr. Teachey has served on the advisory boards of BEAM, Jazz, Janssen, and Sobi and has received research funding from BEAM, Jazz, Servier, and Neoimmune Tech. He has multiple patents pending on CAR-T therapy.

As a toddler undergoing treatment at McMaster Children’s Hospital in Hamilton, Ont., Caroline Diorio, MD, couldn’t grasp what the nice doctors scurrying in and out of her room were doing. She just knew they were taking care of her.

Dr. Diorio had pediatric immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), a type of platelet disorder in which the immune system attacks blood platelets for usually unknown reasons.

“I remember very much how worried my parents were,” recalled Dr. Diorio, now a hematologist-oncologist at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “And I remember how the tone of the doctor’s voice and the way the doctors communicated provided so much reassurance to my parents.”

Dr. Diorio’s ITP resolved within a few years, but her experience left a lasting impression.

“From that moment on, I don’t remember a time that I didn’t want to be a doctor,” she said. “I had these really formative experiences with doctors who were so lovely, and I thought, ‘I want to do that.’ ”

Though she considered other specialties in medical school at the University of Toronto, Dr. Diorio kept feeling drawn back to pediatric oncology and hematology.

“I have always loved the commitment that parents have to their kids and the team approach that exists,” she said. “Hematology/oncology allowed me to take care of really sick kids but also have this long-term relationship with them and their parents, which I really value and love.”

Dr. Diorio even completed her residency at McMaster alongside one of the same physicians who had cared for her as a child, Ronald Duncan Barr, MD. “It sort of all came full circle,” she said.

Today, Dr. Diorio draws inspiration from memories of her childhood experience. “I try to recreate that and provide as much kindness and compassion as I can for patients and their families, to help when people are in this incredibly vulnerable situation,” she said.

But she takes that even further by researching new therapies for patients who have run out of options, particularly those with T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL).

For B-cell ALL and several other blood cancers, an effective option is CAR T-cell therapy, in which physicians collect T-cells from the patient, re-engineer the T cells in the lab so they recognize the proteins expressed on the surface of cancerous cells – called blasts – and then introduce the modified T-cells back into the patient. Once infused, the re-engineered T-cells attack the blasts with the tell-tale proteins.

But with T-ALL, T-cells themselves are infected with cancer, so autologous CAR T-cell therapy is not currently an option, and no allogeneic CAR T-cell therapies have been approved. Dr. Diorio is part of a cutting-edge research team led by David T. Teachey, MD, striving for breakthroughs. “She’s a brilliant clinician, extremely smart and hard-working, exceptional work ethic, great interaction with patients and families with a great bedside manner,” Dr. Teachey said of Dr. Diorio. “She’s just a superstar all around.”

Dr. Teachey first piqued Dr. Diorio’s interest in researching innovative T-ALL therapies when she arrived at CHOP as a hematology/oncology fellow in 2018 and pursued a master of science degree in translational research under his tutelage at the University of Pennsylvania. Then, for a time, the COVID-19 pandemic shut down most research.

“Caroline pivoted and was at the front line, collecting samples and helping with research on SARS-CoV-2 very early in the pandemic,” Dr. Teachey said. “She was able to then pivot back, taking the skills she learned from that work in the pandemic and applying it to what she was doing in the CAR T-cell space and T-ALL.”

Extraordinary gains in pediatric cancer over the past several decades mean that more than 80% of children diagnosed with cancer today will become long-term survivors. “The 20% of the time that we don’t get the result we want is obviously devastating,” Dr. Diorio said. “However, that’s incredibly motivating to try to make better treatments.”

Her current focus is finding a way to use CAR T-cell therapy in children with T-ALL. About 85% of children with T-ALL do well with standard first-line treatments of chemotherapy, but the 15% who relapse or have chemo-refractory disease have a far lower survival rate – less than 30%, Dr. Diorio said.

The problem with autologous CAR T-cell therapy in T-ALL is twofold: It’s difficult to sort out healthy T cells from the cancerous T cells, and the target current re-engineered T-cells go after is on healthy cells, too.

“What happens is a problem called fratricide – basically the CAR T-cells are killing their brothers,” she said. So Dr. Diorio and her colleagues are trying to modify CAR T-cell strategies to target different markers. One target they’re investigating is CD7, but using CRISPR to gene-edit out CD7 from healthy cells requires making two cuts in the DNA.

“Any time you break DNA, you have to repair it, and any time you repair it, there’s a chance of making a mistake,” Dr. Diorio said. So she used a different technique, cytosine-based editing, which requires only one cut. “You put in what you want, and it’s much more precise and less error-prone.” Cytosine-based editing also preserves T cells’ vitality; too many cuts impair T-cell growth, but that doesn’t happen with cytosine-based editing. In August of 2022, Dr. Diorio published a study demonstrating this technique while the team has continued looking for other targets that show up on cancer cells but not on healthy T-cells.

“I’m not invested in one particular strategy,” Dr. Diorio said. “I’m invested in finding a strategy that works for the maximum number of patients.”

That pragmatic approach may be why Dr. Teachey describes her as an out-of-the-box thinker.

“She brings novel ideas to the table, and not everybody who’s a physician-scientist has that ability to really think about taking things in the bench to the bedside and then back again,” Dr. Teachey said. “It’s knowing what questions are important to ask for our patients and how to study those and the research base, so that you can improve treatments for kids with leukemia.”

Their research looks promising so far. Clinical trials are in development for the CD7-targeted CAR T, and they’re collaborating with others on clinical trials for CAR-T targeting another protein, CD38. In the midst of it all, Dr. Diorio remains focused on her patients.

“It’s really a privilege to see the incredible grace people have in these very difficult circumstances,” Dr. Diorio said. “I find it really motivating to try to make things easier for people, and I try to spend every day looking for better treatments so people don’t have to go through that.”

Dr. Diorio has no disclosures. Dr. Teachey has served on the advisory boards of BEAM, Jazz, Janssen, and Sobi and has received research funding from BEAM, Jazz, Servier, and Neoimmune Tech. He has multiple patents pending on CAR-T therapy.

An updated Cochrane Review on infant skincare interventions for preventing atopic dermatitis (AD) and food allergy has reaffirmed previous study findings indicating a lack of benefit, and strengthened the suggestion of harm associated with early use of emollients.

The document, published in November 2022, updates a February 2021 version, said Robert Boyle, MD, PhD, senior author of the Cochrane Review and a pediatric allergist at Imperial College London. “The differences were slight,” he told this news organization. “Mainly, we had a little more data about food allergy outcomes, which slightly strengthened the concern about a possible increase in food allergy with emollients; and we had some new genetic information, which allowed us to add some further interaction analyses and confirm that chromosome 11 intergenic variant rs2212434 doesn’t seem to impact the effect – or lack of effect – of emollient on eczema development.”

The updated Cochrane Review concludes that, “based on low‐ to moderate-certainty evidence, skin care interventions such as emollients during the first year of life in healthy infants are probably not effective for preventing eczema; may increase risk of food allergy; and probably increase risk of skin infection.”

The latest publication should strengthen clinicians’ confidence in not recommending emollient use for preventing AD in at-risk infants – however, that message is being diluted by a stream of contradictory conclusions from poor-quality systematic reviews, say Dr. Boyle and two coauthors. “It’s a systematic problem of people churning out endless systematic reviews without much rigor,” explained the lead author Maeve Kelleher, MD, from Children’s Health Ireland, Crumlin. There have been “misleading systematic reviews published, often in high-ranking journals,” agreed Dr. Boyle.

“I have been an advocate of systematic reviews for the last 20 years, but they have gone completely out of control,” added Hywel Williams, MD, PhD, another of the Cochrane Review coauthors, who is professor of dermato-epidemiology and codirector of the Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, at Nottingham (England) University Hospitals NHS Trust. In an editorial, published last year, Dr. Williams even posed the question: “Are Dermatology Systematic Reviews Spinning Out of Control?” in which he blamed “the misrepresentation of study results” – which he calls “the sin of spin” – for degrading the quality of science in dermatology.

“The field has become a ‘sausage machine’ industry that undermines the value of systematic reviews in providing a summary of the best evidence to inform patient care,” he wrote. “Fewer systematic reviews are needed in dermatology,” but “better ones” are needed, he continued, calling for all systematic reviews to be registered prospectively, and reported according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.

Earlier this year, in a letter to the editor, Dr. Kelleher, Dr. Boyle, Dr. Williams, and several others outlined their concerns after a systemic review and meta-analysis was published, “which came to very different conclusions” than their Cochrane Review.

“It is quite common to see non-Cochrane reviews published in leading specialty journals, which interpret data in a more positive light than Cochrane reviews, which have assessed a similar dataset/topic,” Dr. Boyle said in the interview.

Such concerns also apply to the publication of another systematic review that was recently published. “Overall, early application of emollients is an effective strategy for preventing AD development in high-risk infants,” reported senior author Xiaojing Kang, MD, PhD, from People’s Hospital of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, Urumchi, China, and coauthors, who could not be reached for comment. In their discussion, the authors cite several criticisms of the Cochrane Review: that it included two meeting abstracts and two “ineligible” studies; did not do subgroup analysis of high-risk infants; did not look at different types of emollients; and did not examine the risk of food sensitization.

“A Cochrane Review can be quite a large and complex document to negotiate for those who are not very familiar with Cochrane’s methodology,” said Dr. Boyle. He dismissed the criticism, saying “we did do subgroup analysis of high risk infants, we did look at different types of emollient, and we did look at food sensitization and food allergy risk. We only included eligible studies. … Certainly we would include abstracts of trials, which are not reported in any other form, in order to capture as complete a picture.”

Ultimately, Dr. Boyle said, the discrepancy in conclusions between such systematic reviews and the Cochrane Review relates to quality of methodology. “Our Cochrane review was an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis, meaning that authors of the main trials in this area shared their original datasets with us,” he said in the interview. “This is the ‘gold standard’ in systematic reviews, and allowed us to check data/ query inconsistencies and to apply a single-analysis methodology across all studies. It also allowed us to undertake some analyses, which are just not possible in aggregate data analysis based on published work without IPD.”

The most recently published systematic review had no registered protocol, “so, there is no transparency about the methods used,” he noted. “It is free and simple to register a protocol – multiple websites such as PROSPERO, open science framework, and zenodo allow this,” he said “In the journal I edit, we use availability of a registered protocol as a marker of quality. We find that systematic reviews with no registered protocol are almost universally poor quality.”

Dr. Williams is a founding member and coordinating editor of the Cochrane Skin Group 1998 to 2017. Dr. Boyle was paid by Cochrane for senior editor work, until recently, and had no other relevant disclosures. Dr. Kelleher had no relevant disclosures.

An updated Cochrane Review on infant skincare interventions for preventing atopic dermatitis (AD) and food allergy has reaffirmed previous study findings indicating a lack of benefit, and strengthened the suggestion of harm associated with early use of emollients.

The document, published in November 2022, updates a February 2021 version, said Robert Boyle, MD, PhD, senior author of the Cochrane Review and a pediatric allergist at Imperial College London. “The differences were slight,” he told this news organization. “Mainly, we had a little more data about food allergy outcomes, which slightly strengthened the concern about a possible increase in food allergy with emollients; and we had some new genetic information, which allowed us to add some further interaction analyses and confirm that chromosome 11 intergenic variant rs2212434 doesn’t seem to impact the effect – or lack of effect – of emollient on eczema development.”

The updated Cochrane Review concludes that, “based on low‐ to moderate-certainty evidence, skin care interventions such as emollients during the first year of life in healthy infants are probably not effective for preventing eczema; may increase risk of food allergy; and probably increase risk of skin infection.”

The latest publication should strengthen clinicians’ confidence in not recommending emollient use for preventing AD in at-risk infants – however, that message is being diluted by a stream of contradictory conclusions from poor-quality systematic reviews, say Dr. Boyle and two coauthors. “It’s a systematic problem of people churning out endless systematic reviews without much rigor,” explained the lead author Maeve Kelleher, MD, from Children’s Health Ireland, Crumlin. There have been “misleading systematic reviews published, often in high-ranking journals,” agreed Dr. Boyle.

“I have been an advocate of systematic reviews for the last 20 years, but they have gone completely out of control,” added Hywel Williams, MD, PhD, another of the Cochrane Review coauthors, who is professor of dermato-epidemiology and codirector of the Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, at Nottingham (England) University Hospitals NHS Trust. In an editorial, published last year, Dr. Williams even posed the question: “Are Dermatology Systematic Reviews Spinning Out of Control?” in which he blamed “the misrepresentation of study results” – which he calls “the sin of spin” – for degrading the quality of science in dermatology.

“The field has become a ‘sausage machine’ industry that undermines the value of systematic reviews in providing a summary of the best evidence to inform patient care,” he wrote. “Fewer systematic reviews are needed in dermatology,” but “better ones” are needed, he continued, calling for all systematic reviews to be registered prospectively, and reported according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.

Earlier this year, in a letter to the editor, Dr. Kelleher, Dr. Boyle, Dr. Williams, and several others outlined their concerns after a systemic review and meta-analysis was published, “which came to very different conclusions” than their Cochrane Review.

“It is quite common to see non-Cochrane reviews published in leading specialty journals, which interpret data in a more positive light than Cochrane reviews, which have assessed a similar dataset/topic,” Dr. Boyle said in the interview.

Such concerns also apply to the publication of another systematic review that was recently published. “Overall, early application of emollients is an effective strategy for preventing AD development in high-risk infants,” reported senior author Xiaojing Kang, MD, PhD, from People’s Hospital of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, Urumchi, China, and coauthors, who could not be reached for comment. In their discussion, the authors cite several criticisms of the Cochrane Review: that it included two meeting abstracts and two “ineligible” studies; did not do subgroup analysis of high-risk infants; did not look at different types of emollients; and did not examine the risk of food sensitization.

“A Cochrane Review can be quite a large and complex document to negotiate for those who are not very familiar with Cochrane’s methodology,” said Dr. Boyle. He dismissed the criticism, saying “we did do subgroup analysis of high risk infants, we did look at different types of emollient, and we did look at food sensitization and food allergy risk. We only included eligible studies. … Certainly we would include abstracts of trials, which are not reported in any other form, in order to capture as complete a picture.”

Ultimately, Dr. Boyle said, the discrepancy in conclusions between such systematic reviews and the Cochrane Review relates to quality of methodology. “Our Cochrane review was an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis, meaning that authors of the main trials in this area shared their original datasets with us,” he said in the interview. “This is the ‘gold standard’ in systematic reviews, and allowed us to check data/ query inconsistencies and to apply a single-analysis methodology across all studies. It also allowed us to undertake some analyses, which are just not possible in aggregate data analysis based on published work without IPD.”

The most recently published systematic review had no registered protocol, “so, there is no transparency about the methods used,” he noted. “It is free and simple to register a protocol – multiple websites such as PROSPERO, open science framework, and zenodo allow this,” he said “In the journal I edit, we use availability of a registered protocol as a marker of quality. We find that systematic reviews with no registered protocol are almost universally poor quality.”

Dr. Williams is a founding member and coordinating editor of the Cochrane Skin Group 1998 to 2017. Dr. Boyle was paid by Cochrane for senior editor work, until recently, and had no other relevant disclosures. Dr. Kelleher had no relevant disclosures.

An updated Cochrane Review on infant skincare interventions for preventing atopic dermatitis (AD) and food allergy has reaffirmed previous study findings indicating a lack of benefit, and strengthened the suggestion of harm associated with early use of emollients.

The document, published in November 2022, updates a February 2021 version, said Robert Boyle, MD, PhD, senior author of the Cochrane Review and a pediatric allergist at Imperial College London. “The differences were slight,” he told this news organization. “Mainly, we had a little more data about food allergy outcomes, which slightly strengthened the concern about a possible increase in food allergy with emollients; and we had some new genetic information, which allowed us to add some further interaction analyses and confirm that chromosome 11 intergenic variant rs2212434 doesn’t seem to impact the effect – or lack of effect – of emollient on eczema development.”

The updated Cochrane Review concludes that, “based on low‐ to moderate-certainty evidence, skin care interventions such as emollients during the first year of life in healthy infants are probably not effective for preventing eczema; may increase risk of food allergy; and probably increase risk of skin infection.”

The latest publication should strengthen clinicians’ confidence in not recommending emollient use for preventing AD in at-risk infants – however, that message is being diluted by a stream of contradictory conclusions from poor-quality systematic reviews, say Dr. Boyle and two coauthors. “It’s a systematic problem of people churning out endless systematic reviews without much rigor,” explained the lead author Maeve Kelleher, MD, from Children’s Health Ireland, Crumlin. There have been “misleading systematic reviews published, often in high-ranking journals,” agreed Dr. Boyle.

“I have been an advocate of systematic reviews for the last 20 years, but they have gone completely out of control,” added Hywel Williams, MD, PhD, another of the Cochrane Review coauthors, who is professor of dermato-epidemiology and codirector of the Centre of Evidence Based Dermatology, at Nottingham (England) University Hospitals NHS Trust. In an editorial, published last year, Dr. Williams even posed the question: “Are Dermatology Systematic Reviews Spinning Out of Control?” in which he blamed “the misrepresentation of study results” – which he calls “the sin of spin” – for degrading the quality of science in dermatology.

“The field has become a ‘sausage machine’ industry that undermines the value of systematic reviews in providing a summary of the best evidence to inform patient care,” he wrote. “Fewer systematic reviews are needed in dermatology,” but “better ones” are needed, he continued, calling for all systematic reviews to be registered prospectively, and reported according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.

Earlier this year, in a letter to the editor, Dr. Kelleher, Dr. Boyle, Dr. Williams, and several others outlined their concerns after a systemic review and meta-analysis was published, “which came to very different conclusions” than their Cochrane Review.

“It is quite common to see non-Cochrane reviews published in leading specialty journals, which interpret data in a more positive light than Cochrane reviews, which have assessed a similar dataset/topic,” Dr. Boyle said in the interview.

Such concerns also apply to the publication of another systematic review that was recently published. “Overall, early application of emollients is an effective strategy for preventing AD development in high-risk infants,” reported senior author Xiaojing Kang, MD, PhD, from People’s Hospital of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, Urumchi, China, and coauthors, who could not be reached for comment. In their discussion, the authors cite several criticisms of the Cochrane Review: that it included two meeting abstracts and two “ineligible” studies; did not do subgroup analysis of high-risk infants; did not look at different types of emollients; and did not examine the risk of food sensitization.

“A Cochrane Review can be quite a large and complex document to negotiate for those who are not very familiar with Cochrane’s methodology,” said Dr. Boyle. He dismissed the criticism, saying “we did do subgroup analysis of high risk infants, we did look at different types of emollient, and we did look at food sensitization and food allergy risk. We only included eligible studies. … Certainly we would include abstracts of trials, which are not reported in any other form, in order to capture as complete a picture.”

Ultimately, Dr. Boyle said, the discrepancy in conclusions between such systematic reviews and the Cochrane Review relates to quality of methodology. “Our Cochrane review was an individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis, meaning that authors of the main trials in this area shared their original datasets with us,” he said in the interview. “This is the ‘gold standard’ in systematic reviews, and allowed us to check data/ query inconsistencies and to apply a single-analysis methodology across all studies. It also allowed us to undertake some analyses, which are just not possible in aggregate data analysis based on published work without IPD.”

The most recently published systematic review had no registered protocol, “so, there is no transparency about the methods used,” he noted. “It is free and simple to register a protocol – multiple websites such as PROSPERO, open science framework, and zenodo allow this,” he said “In the journal I edit, we use availability of a registered protocol as a marker of quality. We find that systematic reviews with no registered protocol are almost universally poor quality.”

Dr. Williams is a founding member and coordinating editor of the Cochrane Skin Group 1998 to 2017. Dr. Boyle was paid by Cochrane for senior editor work, until recently, and had no other relevant disclosures. Dr. Kelleher had no relevant disclosures.

The homicide rate among children in the United States rose by more than 4% per year since 2013 but jumped nearly 28% from 2019 to 2020, new data show.

Although long-term trends varied by region and demographics, with some groups and areas seeing declines in killings, the increases were the highest among Black children and boys aged 11-17, according to the researchers, who attribute the surge in violent deaths to a recent rise in firearm-related killings in children. Gun violence is now the leading cause of death for children in the United States, claiming what the American Academy of Pediatrics has equated to a classroomful of lives each day.

“There are troubling recent rate increases among several groups, warranting immediate attention, with some racial and ethnic disparities persisting for more than 20 years,” said Rebecca F. Wilson, PhD, of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who helped conduct the study.

Dr. Wilson and her colleagues, whose findings appear in JAMA Pediatrics, examined data on 38,362 homicide victims in the United States aged 0-17 years who were killed between 1999 and 2020.

The nation’s overall homicide rate for youth fell by 5.6% per year from 2007 to 2013 before reversing course. Between 2013 and 2020, the overall rate rose 4.3% annually.

The figures show that not all children are affected equally. The rate of child homicide has fallen significantly for girls, infants, and children ages 5 years and under – whose deaths often result from caregiver neglect or violence – as well as Asian or Pacific Islanders, Whites, and those living in the Northeast.

But the child homicide rate in the South increased 6.4% per year between 2013 and 2020, while that of children in both rural America and in cities is also rising after years of decline, according to the researchers.

The suspected perpetrator was known in about 64% of child killings. Nearly 80% of those perpetrators were male.

Dr. Wilson and her colleagues also note that the COVID-19 pandemic appears to have precipitated a wave of gun-related violence among children – a link borne out by another recent paper in JAMA Pediatrics. (Recent data suggest that intentional firearm injuries are often misclassified as accidental.)

The study found that gun-related injuries in youth remained elevated through 2021, with non-Hispanic Black children and those with public insurance making up greater proportions of victims during the pandemic. The researchers identified 1,815 firearm injuries per month before the pandemic and 2,759 per month during the outbreak, a 52% increase.

Although the two studies look at different data, both show that Black children are most affected by gun violence, experts said.

“This demonstrates a critical issue for the medical, public health, and legal communities: While homicide is often presented as a criminal justice problem, it is increasingly a racial justice problem,” said Katherine E. Hoops, MD, of the Center for Gun Violence Solutions at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore.

In an editorial about the homicide study, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, called the violent deaths “preventable and unacceptable.” Eliminating such deaths “must be among our first priorities,” they wrote.

The editorial authors also noted that researchers know relatively little about nonfatal violent injuries such as those involving firearms. “These injuries are important not only because they may have life-altering consequences for children and families but also because understanding only the most severe form of any health condition (death) will hamper our ability to design and evaluate prevention strategies,” they wrote.

Dr. Wilson’s group identified different causes of youth homicide for different age groups – and the potential interventions for each differ. Although the youngest children are more likely to die from abuse or neglect, those aged 6-10 years were most likely to die by firearm, often associated with abuse that ends in suicide. Meanwhile, adolescents aged 11-17 were more subject to peer violence.

For Dr. Hoops, “each of these differences has important policy implications, including the need for policies that address structural racism, poverty, and systematic disadvantage – but also firearm safe storage to prevent youth violence and suicide [and] reduction of access to lethal means, such as through extreme risk protective orders when someone is at risk of harming themselves or others.”

Dr. Wilson agreed. “We know child homicides are preventable,” she said. “The rate decrease for some groups is encouraging, yet more can be done to protect all children.”

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

The homicide rate among children in the United States rose by more than 4% per year since 2013 but jumped nearly 28% from 2019 to 2020, new data show.

Although long-term trends varied by region and demographics, with some groups and areas seeing declines in killings, the increases were the highest among Black children and boys aged 11-17, according to the researchers, who attribute the surge in violent deaths to a recent rise in firearm-related killings in children. Gun violence is now the leading cause of death for children in the United States, claiming what the American Academy of Pediatrics has equated to a classroomful of lives each day.

“There are troubling recent rate increases among several groups, warranting immediate attention, with some racial and ethnic disparities persisting for more than 20 years,” said Rebecca F. Wilson, PhD, of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who helped conduct the study.

Dr. Wilson and her colleagues, whose findings appear in JAMA Pediatrics, examined data on 38,362 homicide victims in the United States aged 0-17 years who were killed between 1999 and 2020.

The nation’s overall homicide rate for youth fell by 5.6% per year from 2007 to 2013 before reversing course. Between 2013 and 2020, the overall rate rose 4.3% annually.

The figures show that not all children are affected equally. The rate of child homicide has fallen significantly for girls, infants, and children ages 5 years and under – whose deaths often result from caregiver neglect or violence – as well as Asian or Pacific Islanders, Whites, and those living in the Northeast.

But the child homicide rate in the South increased 6.4% per year between 2013 and 2020, while that of children in both rural America and in cities is also rising after years of decline, according to the researchers.

The suspected perpetrator was known in about 64% of child killings. Nearly 80% of those perpetrators were male.

Dr. Wilson and her colleagues also note that the COVID-19 pandemic appears to have precipitated a wave of gun-related violence among children – a link borne out by another recent paper in JAMA Pediatrics. (Recent data suggest that intentional firearm injuries are often misclassified as accidental.)

The study found that gun-related injuries in youth remained elevated through 2021, with non-Hispanic Black children and those with public insurance making up greater proportions of victims during the pandemic. The researchers identified 1,815 firearm injuries per month before the pandemic and 2,759 per month during the outbreak, a 52% increase.

Although the two studies look at different data, both show that Black children are most affected by gun violence, experts said.

“This demonstrates a critical issue for the medical, public health, and legal communities: While homicide is often presented as a criminal justice problem, it is increasingly a racial justice problem,” said Katherine E. Hoops, MD, of the Center for Gun Violence Solutions at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore.

In an editorial about the homicide study, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, called the violent deaths “preventable and unacceptable.” Eliminating such deaths “must be among our first priorities,” they wrote.

The editorial authors also noted that researchers know relatively little about nonfatal violent injuries such as those involving firearms. “These injuries are important not only because they may have life-altering consequences for children and families but also because understanding only the most severe form of any health condition (death) will hamper our ability to design and evaluate prevention strategies,” they wrote.

Dr. Wilson’s group identified different causes of youth homicide for different age groups – and the potential interventions for each differ. Although the youngest children are more likely to die from abuse or neglect, those aged 6-10 years were most likely to die by firearm, often associated with abuse that ends in suicide. Meanwhile, adolescents aged 11-17 were more subject to peer violence.

For Dr. Hoops, “each of these differences has important policy implications, including the need for policies that address structural racism, poverty, and systematic disadvantage – but also firearm safe storage to prevent youth violence and suicide [and] reduction of access to lethal means, such as through extreme risk protective orders when someone is at risk of harming themselves or others.”

Dr. Wilson agreed. “We know child homicides are preventable,” she said. “The rate decrease for some groups is encouraging, yet more can be done to protect all children.”

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

The homicide rate among children in the United States rose by more than 4% per year since 2013 but jumped nearly 28% from 2019 to 2020, new data show.

Although long-term trends varied by region and demographics, with some groups and areas seeing declines in killings, the increases were the highest among Black children and boys aged 11-17, according to the researchers, who attribute the surge in violent deaths to a recent rise in firearm-related killings in children. Gun violence is now the leading cause of death for children in the United States, claiming what the American Academy of Pediatrics has equated to a classroomful of lives each day.

“There are troubling recent rate increases among several groups, warranting immediate attention, with some racial and ethnic disparities persisting for more than 20 years,” said Rebecca F. Wilson, PhD, of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who helped conduct the study.

Dr. Wilson and her colleagues, whose findings appear in JAMA Pediatrics, examined data on 38,362 homicide victims in the United States aged 0-17 years who were killed between 1999 and 2020.

The nation’s overall homicide rate for youth fell by 5.6% per year from 2007 to 2013 before reversing course. Between 2013 and 2020, the overall rate rose 4.3% annually.

The figures show that not all children are affected equally. The rate of child homicide has fallen significantly for girls, infants, and children ages 5 years and under – whose deaths often result from caregiver neglect or violence – as well as Asian or Pacific Islanders, Whites, and those living in the Northeast.

But the child homicide rate in the South increased 6.4% per year between 2013 and 2020, while that of children in both rural America and in cities is also rising after years of decline, according to the researchers.

The suspected perpetrator was known in about 64% of child killings. Nearly 80% of those perpetrators were male.

Dr. Wilson and her colleagues also note that the COVID-19 pandemic appears to have precipitated a wave of gun-related violence among children – a link borne out by another recent paper in JAMA Pediatrics. (Recent data suggest that intentional firearm injuries are often misclassified as accidental.)

The study found that gun-related injuries in youth remained elevated through 2021, with non-Hispanic Black children and those with public insurance making up greater proportions of victims during the pandemic. The researchers identified 1,815 firearm injuries per month before the pandemic and 2,759 per month during the outbreak, a 52% increase.

Although the two studies look at different data, both show that Black children are most affected by gun violence, experts said.

“This demonstrates a critical issue for the medical, public health, and legal communities: While homicide is often presented as a criminal justice problem, it is increasingly a racial justice problem,” said Katherine E. Hoops, MD, of the Center for Gun Violence Solutions at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore.

In an editorial about the homicide study, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, called the violent deaths “preventable and unacceptable.” Eliminating such deaths “must be among our first priorities,” they wrote.

The editorial authors also noted that researchers know relatively little about nonfatal violent injuries such as those involving firearms. “These injuries are important not only because they may have life-altering consequences for children and families but also because understanding only the most severe form of any health condition (death) will hamper our ability to design and evaluate prevention strategies,” they wrote.

Dr. Wilson’s group identified different causes of youth homicide for different age groups – and the potential interventions for each differ. Although the youngest children are more likely to die from abuse or neglect, those aged 6-10 years were most likely to die by firearm, often associated with abuse that ends in suicide. Meanwhile, adolescents aged 11-17 were more subject to peer violence.

For Dr. Hoops, “each of these differences has important policy implications, including the need for policies that address structural racism, poverty, and systematic disadvantage – but also firearm safe storage to prevent youth violence and suicide [and] reduction of access to lethal means, such as through extreme risk protective orders when someone is at risk of harming themselves or others.”

Dr. Wilson agreed. “We know child homicides are preventable,” she said. “The rate decrease for some groups is encouraging, yet more can be done to protect all children.”

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

In a new updated report, the American Academy of Pediatrics urges pediatricians to understand signs of exploitation and labor/sex trafficking and learn how to support children and adolescents who are targeted.

“It’s incredibly scary when you encounter someone you worry is a victim, and you don’t know how to help them, and they’re not saying what’s going on,” pediatrician and report coauthor Dana Kaplan, MD, of Staten Island (N.Y.) University Hospital, said in an interview. “Every case is so unique and different: There’s no algorithm of ‘If A, then B, then C.’ You have to approach each person as an individual, and it takes time to make sure you’re thinking things through about how to provide what’s needed.”

The AAP published the clinical report, which is intended to provide guidance to pediatricians, in the January 2023 issue of Pediatrics. The organization previously tackled this topic in a 2017 clinical report, and Dr. Kaplan said the new report includes updated recommendations.

As the new report notes, there aren’t reliable estimates of exploited children in the United States, although millions are thought to be trafficked and subjected to forced labor around the world. “By virtue of their young age, children and adolescents are vulnerable to manipulation and exploitation, because they have limited life experiences, a need for attachment and acceptance, an immature prefrontal cortex ... and limited options for action,” the report says.

Dr. Kaplan puts it this way: “By the nature of being a child, you’re vulnerable.”

Still, health care professionals often aren’t trained in regard to human trafficking, the report says, even though it’s clear that they “must remain alert for the possibility.”

Dr. Kaplan, who has special training in child abuse and often sees children at risk, cautioned that children usually don’t directly say that they need help. “That’s generally not the case. They don’t articulate what’s going on around them as unsafe, or concerning, or dangerous. If you go and see a doctor for 10 minutes, are you going to tell them everything?

Instead, clinicians must often rely on their own observations. The report lists multiple possible signs of exploitation.

• The patient is accompanied by a domineering adult who does not allow the child to answer questions or accompanied by an unrelated adult. Inconsistent information is provided by the patient or companion. There’s a delay in seeking medical care.
• The patient has multiple sexually transmitted infections, previous pregnancy or termination, and/or frequent visits for emergency contraception. There are signs of prior sexual abuse, assault, or other maltreatment.
• The patient is withdrawn, fearful, hostile, or has a suspicious demeanor. The patient is constantly checking his or her phone and appears anxious or afraid.

What should clinicians do if they suspect exploitation? The report recommends that health care organizations develop guidelines for workers to follow. For her part, Dr. Kaplan advises colleagues to let patients lead conversations and not dig too deeply into their lives.

“Don’t turn into an investigator. This is not [Law & Order] SVU,” she said. “Stay focused on what you’re trained to do – provide health care.”

That doesn’t mean clinicians should ignore signs of trouble. It’s crucial to develop trust with the patient over time, she said, and turn to a specialist in your community or institution if you have suspicions.

And be careful to not portray victims as perpetrators. The new report emphasizes that “it’s important for health care providers to emphasize to authorities that the patient is a victim of exploitation who needs services rather than a juvenile offender.”

The report also highlights the importance of creating an environment that supports clinicians themselves: “Self-care for the clinician is critical in preventing and addressing secondary traumatic stress. A work environment that fosters peer support, encourages open discussion of work-related stress, and implements reasonable work-life balance policies can help protect providers from secondary stress and its consequences.”

Resources for clinicians include the National Human Trafficking Hotline, the federal Office of Trafficking in Persons, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s domestic refugee screening guidelines.

The study has no external funding. The authors report no disclosures.

In a new updated report, the American Academy of Pediatrics urges pediatricians to understand signs of exploitation and labor/sex trafficking and learn how to support children and adolescents who are targeted.

“It’s incredibly scary when you encounter someone you worry is a victim, and you don’t know how to help them, and they’re not saying what’s going on,” pediatrician and report coauthor Dana Kaplan, MD, of Staten Island (N.Y.) University Hospital, said in an interview. “Every case is so unique and different: There’s no algorithm of ‘If A, then B, then C.’ You have to approach each person as an individual, and it takes time to make sure you’re thinking things through about how to provide what’s needed.”

The AAP published the clinical report, which is intended to provide guidance to pediatricians, in the January 2023 issue of Pediatrics. The organization previously tackled this topic in a 2017 clinical report, and Dr. Kaplan said the new report includes updated recommendations.

As the new report notes, there aren’t reliable estimates of exploited children in the United States, although millions are thought to be trafficked and subjected to forced labor around the world. “By virtue of their young age, children and adolescents are vulnerable to manipulation and exploitation, because they have limited life experiences, a need for attachment and acceptance, an immature prefrontal cortex ... and limited options for action,” the report says.

Dr. Kaplan puts it this way: “By the nature of being a child, you’re vulnerable.”

Still, health care professionals often aren’t trained in regard to human trafficking, the report says, even though it’s clear that they “must remain alert for the possibility.”

Dr. Kaplan, who has special training in child abuse and often sees children at risk, cautioned that children usually don’t directly say that they need help. “That’s generally not the case. They don’t articulate what’s going on around them as unsafe, or concerning, or dangerous. If you go and see a doctor for 10 minutes, are you going to tell them everything?

Instead, clinicians must often rely on their own observations. The report lists multiple possible signs of exploitation.

• The patient is accompanied by a domineering adult who does not allow the child to answer questions or accompanied by an unrelated adult. Inconsistent information is provided by the patient or companion. There’s a delay in seeking medical care.
• The patient has multiple sexually transmitted infections, previous pregnancy or termination, and/or frequent visits for emergency contraception. There are signs of prior sexual abuse, assault, or other maltreatment.
• The patient is withdrawn, fearful, hostile, or has a suspicious demeanor. The patient is constantly checking his or her phone and appears anxious or afraid.

What should clinicians do if they suspect exploitation? The report recommends that health care organizations develop guidelines for workers to follow. For her part, Dr. Kaplan advises colleagues to let patients lead conversations and not dig too deeply into their lives.

“Don’t turn into an investigator. This is not [Law & Order] SVU,” she said. “Stay focused on what you’re trained to do – provide health care.”

That doesn’t mean clinicians should ignore signs of trouble. It’s crucial to develop trust with the patient over time, she said, and turn to a specialist in your community or institution if you have suspicions.

And be careful to not portray victims as perpetrators. The new report emphasizes that “it’s important for health care providers to emphasize to authorities that the patient is a victim of exploitation who needs services rather than a juvenile offender.”

The report also highlights the importance of creating an environment that supports clinicians themselves: “Self-care for the clinician is critical in preventing and addressing secondary traumatic stress. A work environment that fosters peer support, encourages open discussion of work-related stress, and implements reasonable work-life balance policies can help protect providers from secondary stress and its consequences.”

Resources for clinicians include the National Human Trafficking Hotline, the federal Office of Trafficking in Persons, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s domestic refugee screening guidelines.

The study has no external funding. The authors report no disclosures.

In a new updated report, the American Academy of Pediatrics urges pediatricians to understand signs of exploitation and labor/sex trafficking and learn how to support children and adolescents who are targeted.

“It’s incredibly scary when you encounter someone you worry is a victim, and you don’t know how to help them, and they’re not saying what’s going on,” pediatrician and report coauthor Dana Kaplan, MD, of Staten Island (N.Y.) University Hospital, said in an interview. “Every case is so unique and different: There’s no algorithm of ‘If A, then B, then C.’ You have to approach each person as an individual, and it takes time to make sure you’re thinking things through about how to provide what’s needed.”

The AAP published the clinical report, which is intended to provide guidance to pediatricians, in the January 2023 issue of Pediatrics. The organization previously tackled this topic in a 2017 clinical report, and Dr. Kaplan said the new report includes updated recommendations.

As the new report notes, there aren’t reliable estimates of exploited children in the United States, although millions are thought to be trafficked and subjected to forced labor around the world. “By virtue of their young age, children and adolescents are vulnerable to manipulation and exploitation, because they have limited life experiences, a need for attachment and acceptance, an immature prefrontal cortex ... and limited options for action,” the report says.

Dr. Kaplan puts it this way: “By the nature of being a child, you’re vulnerable.”

Still, health care professionals often aren’t trained in regard to human trafficking, the report says, even though it’s clear that they “must remain alert for the possibility.”

Dr. Kaplan, who has special training in child abuse and often sees children at risk, cautioned that children usually don’t directly say that they need help. “That’s generally not the case. They don’t articulate what’s going on around them as unsafe, or concerning, or dangerous. If you go and see a doctor for 10 minutes, are you going to tell them everything?

Instead, clinicians must often rely on their own observations. The report lists multiple possible signs of exploitation.

• The patient is accompanied by a domineering adult who does not allow the child to answer questions or accompanied by an unrelated adult. Inconsistent information is provided by the patient or companion. There’s a delay in seeking medical care.
• The patient has multiple sexually transmitted infections, previous pregnancy or termination, and/or frequent visits for emergency contraception. There are signs of prior sexual abuse, assault, or other maltreatment.
• The patient is withdrawn, fearful, hostile, or has a suspicious demeanor. The patient is constantly checking his or her phone and appears anxious or afraid.

What should clinicians do if they suspect exploitation? The report recommends that health care organizations develop guidelines for workers to follow. For her part, Dr. Kaplan advises colleagues to let patients lead conversations and not dig too deeply into their lives.

“Don’t turn into an investigator. This is not [Law & Order] SVU,” she said. “Stay focused on what you’re trained to do – provide health care.”

That doesn’t mean clinicians should ignore signs of trouble. It’s crucial to develop trust with the patient over time, she said, and turn to a specialist in your community or institution if you have suspicions.

And be careful to not portray victims as perpetrators. The new report emphasizes that “it’s important for health care providers to emphasize to authorities that the patient is a victim of exploitation who needs services rather than a juvenile offender.”

The report also highlights the importance of creating an environment that supports clinicians themselves: “Self-care for the clinician is critical in preventing and addressing secondary traumatic stress. A work environment that fosters peer support, encourages open discussion of work-related stress, and implements reasonable work-life balance policies can help protect providers from secondary stress and its consequences.”

Resources for clinicians include the National Human Trafficking Hotline, the federal Office of Trafficking in Persons, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s domestic refugee screening guidelines.

The study has no external funding. The authors report no disclosures.

The Ohio measles outbreak continues to expand, with cases now totaling 81 – a 37% increase in the course of just 2 weeks.

The lead health official where the outbreak is occurring said the driving force behind the spread is vaccine hesitancy. Most of the children infected were unvaccinated but were old enough to get the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) shot, which is 97% effective at preventing measles.

“I think these are individuals who are making a decision not to protect their children against vaccine-preventable diseases, and some of them are making a specific decision not to use the MMR vaccine,” Columbus Public Health Commissioner Mysheika W. Roberts, MD, told JAMA.

She said that parents’ refusal to vaccinate their children was due to a misconception that the vaccine causes autism.

“We’re sounding the alarm that if your child is of age and not vaccinated, they should get vaccinated ASAP,” Dr. Roberts said, noting that she hasn’t seen that happening more.

Health officials have predicted the outbreak, which started in November, will last at least several months. Measles is so contagious that 9 out of 10 unvaccinated people in a room will become infected if exposed.

All of the infections have been in children. According to the Columbus Public Health measles dashboard, of the 81 confirmed cases:

• 29 children have been hospitalized.
• 22 cases are among children under 1 year old.
• No deaths have been reported.

Dr. Roberts said the hospitalized children have had symptoms including dehydration, diarrhea, and pneumonia. Some have had to go to the intensive care unit.

Measles infection causes a rash and a fever that can spike beyond 104° F. Sometimes, the illness can lead to brain swelling, brain damage, and even death, the CDC says.

One of the most recent cases was an infant too young to be vaccinated who lives 45 miles away from where the outbreak began, the Dayton Daily News reported. That’s the first case in Clark County in more than 20 years. At least 10% of kindergartners’ parents in the region’s elementary schools opted out of vaccines because of religious or moral objections.

“We knew this was coming. It was a matter of when, not if,” Yamini Teegala, MD, chief medical officer at Rocking Horse Community Health Center in Springfield, told the Dayton Daily News.

This is the second measles outbreak this year. Minnesota tallied 22 cases since June in an unrelated outbreak, JAMA reported.

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

The Ohio measles outbreak continues to expand, with cases now totaling 81 – a 37% increase in the course of just 2 weeks.

The lead health official where the outbreak is occurring said the driving force behind the spread is vaccine hesitancy. Most of the children infected were unvaccinated but were old enough to get the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) shot, which is 97% effective at preventing measles.

“I think these are individuals who are making a decision not to protect their children against vaccine-preventable diseases, and some of them are making a specific decision not to use the MMR vaccine,” Columbus Public Health Commissioner Mysheika W. Roberts, MD, told JAMA.

She said that parents’ refusal to vaccinate their children was due to a misconception that the vaccine causes autism.

“We’re sounding the alarm that if your child is of age and not vaccinated, they should get vaccinated ASAP,” Dr. Roberts said, noting that she hasn’t seen that happening more.

Health officials have predicted the outbreak, which started in November, will last at least several months. Measles is so contagious that 9 out of 10 unvaccinated people in a room will become infected if exposed.

All of the infections have been in children. According to the Columbus Public Health measles dashboard, of the 81 confirmed cases:

• 29 children have been hospitalized.
• 22 cases are among children under 1 year old.
• No deaths have been reported.

Dr. Roberts said the hospitalized children have had symptoms including dehydration, diarrhea, and pneumonia. Some have had to go to the intensive care unit.

Measles infection causes a rash and a fever that can spike beyond 104° F. Sometimes, the illness can lead to brain swelling, brain damage, and even death, the CDC says.

One of the most recent cases was an infant too young to be vaccinated who lives 45 miles away from where the outbreak began, the Dayton Daily News reported. That’s the first case in Clark County in more than 20 years. At least 10% of kindergartners’ parents in the region’s elementary schools opted out of vaccines because of religious or moral objections.

“We knew this was coming. It was a matter of when, not if,” Yamini Teegala, MD, chief medical officer at Rocking Horse Community Health Center in Springfield, told the Dayton Daily News.

This is the second measles outbreak this year. Minnesota tallied 22 cases since June in an unrelated outbreak, JAMA reported.

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

The Ohio measles outbreak continues to expand, with cases now totaling 81 – a 37% increase in the course of just 2 weeks.

The lead health official where the outbreak is occurring said the driving force behind the spread is vaccine hesitancy. Most of the children infected were unvaccinated but were old enough to get the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) shot, which is 97% effective at preventing measles.

“I think these are individuals who are making a decision not to protect their children against vaccine-preventable diseases, and some of them are making a specific decision not to use the MMR vaccine,” Columbus Public Health Commissioner Mysheika W. Roberts, MD, told JAMA.

She said that parents’ refusal to vaccinate their children was due to a misconception that the vaccine causes autism.

“We’re sounding the alarm that if your child is of age and not vaccinated, they should get vaccinated ASAP,” Dr. Roberts said, noting that she hasn’t seen that happening more.

Health officials have predicted the outbreak, which started in November, will last at least several months. Measles is so contagious that 9 out of 10 unvaccinated people in a room will become infected if exposed.

All of the infections have been in children. According to the Columbus Public Health measles dashboard, of the 81 confirmed cases:

• 29 children have been hospitalized.
• 22 cases are among children under 1 year old.
• No deaths have been reported.

Dr. Roberts said the hospitalized children have had symptoms including dehydration, diarrhea, and pneumonia. Some have had to go to the intensive care unit.

Measles infection causes a rash and a fever that can spike beyond 104° F. Sometimes, the illness can lead to brain swelling, brain damage, and even death, the CDC says.

One of the most recent cases was an infant too young to be vaccinated who lives 45 miles away from where the outbreak began, the Dayton Daily News reported. That’s the first case in Clark County in more than 20 years. At least 10% of kindergartners’ parents in the region’s elementary schools opted out of vaccines because of religious or moral objections.

“We knew this was coming. It was a matter of when, not if,” Yamini Teegala, MD, chief medical officer at Rocking Horse Community Health Center in Springfield, told the Dayton Daily News.

This is the second measles outbreak this year. Minnesota tallied 22 cases since June in an unrelated outbreak, JAMA reported.

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

I have assumed that being a parent has always been an anxiety-producing experience. Even back when the neonatal mortality rate was orders of magnitude greater than we are experiencing now, I suspect that each birth was still accompanied by a period of angst. However, as families no longer felt the need to produce more children to replace those lost to illness, each surviving child fell under the glare of an ever brightening spotlight.

Raising a child no longer became just something that came naturally, learned from one’s parents. Philosophers and eventually physicians felt obligated to advise parents on the best practices. My parents turned to Dr. Benjamin Spock’s classic work when they had a question, but I never got the feeling that they took his words as gospel.

By the time I started in practice the condition of being a parent was morphing into a verb. Books on “parenting” were beginning to fill the shelves of libraries and bookstores. Frustrated by what I saw as poorly conceived instruction manuals I succumbed to the temptation to spread my “better” advice for anxiety-tormented parents by writing books on how to feed picky eaters, or how to get erratic sleepers to sleep, or how to get a misbehaving child to understand the simple concept of “No!”

Back in the pre-Internet days I was competing for the attention of anxiety-driven parents not just with other self-described experts sitting at word processors, but with grandmothers, aunts, and the ladies next door. The book publishing market has cooled but the demand for advice on how to be the best parent has heated up. Into the void, enabled by the Internet, has erupted the phenomenon of social-media mom groups.

The lady next door and the mothers with strollers meeting informally at the playground are a tiny blip on the radar screen compared with the abundance of other mothers eager to listen and comment on social media–based mom groups unlimited by either geographic or temporal time restraints.

Unfortunately, as a recent article in the Wall Street Journal suggests, these support groups can often have a dark side. Researchers from Pepperdine University found in a small survey of a homogenous population of women that stress, as measured by saliva cortisol levels, increased with increasing use of “mom-centric social media” sites.

Citing anecdotal observations by mothers who did not participate in the study, the WSJ article describes episodes of shaming over topics such as steroid use in eczema and vaccine hesitancy. One mother described how she found group discussions about breastfeeding “particularly anxiety-producing.”

I have limited experience with online support groups but I have been surprised by how rude and condescending some of the contributors can be to what I could consider to be emotionally neutral subjects such as outboard motor oil pressure. I can imagine that when it comes to subjects in which there is no one best answer, the relative anonymity of the Internet provides cover for language that can be hurtful and stress inducing for someone already feeling isolated and anxious about being a parent.

Although this Pepperdine study is small, I suspect that a larger study would support the authors’ observations. For us as providers, it suggests that we need to find where parents are getting their information when we are trying to help those who seem particularly distressed. We should caution them that, while sharing information with peers can be reassuring and helpful at times, mom groups can be toxic as well. It also means that we should be careful in recommending social media sites – even those for which we have had good feedback.

And, most importantly, we must continue to work hard to make ourselves available to provide sensible and sensitive answers to those questions that are anxiety-producing for new parents.
 

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Other than a Littman stethoscope he accepted as a first-year medical student in 1966, Dr. Wilkoff reports having nothing to disclose. Email him at [email protected].

I have assumed that being a parent has always been an anxiety-producing experience. Even back when the neonatal mortality rate was orders of magnitude greater than we are experiencing now, I suspect that each birth was still accompanied by a period of angst. However, as families no longer felt the need to produce more children to replace those lost to illness, each surviving child fell under the glare of an ever brightening spotlight.

Raising a child no longer became just something that came naturally, learned from one’s parents. Philosophers and eventually physicians felt obligated to advise parents on the best practices. My parents turned to Dr. Benjamin Spock’s classic work when they had a question, but I never got the feeling that they took his words as gospel.

By the time I started in practice the condition of being a parent was morphing into a verb. Books on “parenting” were beginning to fill the shelves of libraries and bookstores. Frustrated by what I saw as poorly conceived instruction manuals I succumbed to the temptation to spread my “better” advice for anxiety-tormented parents by writing books on how to feed picky eaters, or how to get erratic sleepers to sleep, or how to get a misbehaving child to understand the simple concept of “No!”

Back in the pre-Internet days I was competing for the attention of anxiety-driven parents not just with other self-described experts sitting at word processors, but with grandmothers, aunts, and the ladies next door. The book publishing market has cooled but the demand for advice on how to be the best parent has heated up. Into the void, enabled by the Internet, has erupted the phenomenon of social-media mom groups.

The lady next door and the mothers with strollers meeting informally at the playground are a tiny blip on the radar screen compared with the abundance of other mothers eager to listen and comment on social media–based mom groups unlimited by either geographic or temporal time restraints.

Unfortunately, as a recent article in the Wall Street Journal suggests, these support groups can often have a dark side. Researchers from Pepperdine University found in a small survey of a homogenous population of women that stress, as measured by saliva cortisol levels, increased with increasing use of “mom-centric social media” sites.

Citing anecdotal observations by mothers who did not participate in the study, the WSJ article describes episodes of shaming over topics such as steroid use in eczema and vaccine hesitancy. One mother described how she found group discussions about breastfeeding “particularly anxiety-producing.”

I have limited experience with online support groups but I have been surprised by how rude and condescending some of the contributors can be to what I could consider to be emotionally neutral subjects such as outboard motor oil pressure. I can imagine that when it comes to subjects in which there is no one best answer, the relative anonymity of the Internet provides cover for language that can be hurtful and stress inducing for someone already feeling isolated and anxious about being a parent.

Although this Pepperdine study is small, I suspect that a larger study would support the authors’ observations. For us as providers, it suggests that we need to find where parents are getting their information when we are trying to help those who seem particularly distressed. We should caution them that, while sharing information with peers can be reassuring and helpful at times, mom groups can be toxic as well. It also means that we should be careful in recommending social media sites – even those for which we have had good feedback.

And, most importantly, we must continue to work hard to make ourselves available to provide sensible and sensitive answers to those questions that are anxiety-producing for new parents.
 

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Other than a Littman stethoscope he accepted as a first-year medical student in 1966, Dr. Wilkoff reports having nothing to disclose. Email him at [email protected].

I have assumed that being a parent has always been an anxiety-producing experience. Even back when the neonatal mortality rate was orders of magnitude greater than we are experiencing now, I suspect that each birth was still accompanied by a period of angst. However, as families no longer felt the need to produce more children to replace those lost to illness, each surviving child fell under the glare of an ever brightening spotlight.

Raising a child no longer became just something that came naturally, learned from one’s parents. Philosophers and eventually physicians felt obligated to advise parents on the best practices. My parents turned to Dr. Benjamin Spock’s classic work when they had a question, but I never got the feeling that they took his words as gospel.

By the time I started in practice the condition of being a parent was morphing into a verb. Books on “parenting” were beginning to fill the shelves of libraries and bookstores. Frustrated by what I saw as poorly conceived instruction manuals I succumbed to the temptation to spread my “better” advice for anxiety-tormented parents by writing books on how to feed picky eaters, or how to get erratic sleepers to sleep, or how to get a misbehaving child to understand the simple concept of “No!”

Back in the pre-Internet days I was competing for the attention of anxiety-driven parents not just with other self-described experts sitting at word processors, but with grandmothers, aunts, and the ladies next door. The book publishing market has cooled but the demand for advice on how to be the best parent has heated up. Into the void, enabled by the Internet, has erupted the phenomenon of social-media mom groups.

The lady next door and the mothers with strollers meeting informally at the playground are a tiny blip on the radar screen compared with the abundance of other mothers eager to listen and comment on social media–based mom groups unlimited by either geographic or temporal time restraints.

Unfortunately, as a recent article in the Wall Street Journal suggests, these support groups can often have a dark side. Researchers from Pepperdine University found in a small survey of a homogenous population of women that stress, as measured by saliva cortisol levels, increased with increasing use of “mom-centric social media” sites.

Citing anecdotal observations by mothers who did not participate in the study, the WSJ article describes episodes of shaming over topics such as steroid use in eczema and vaccine hesitancy. One mother described how she found group discussions about breastfeeding “particularly anxiety-producing.”

I have limited experience with online support groups but I have been surprised by how rude and condescending some of the contributors can be to what I could consider to be emotionally neutral subjects such as outboard motor oil pressure. I can imagine that when it comes to subjects in which there is no one best answer, the relative anonymity of the Internet provides cover for language that can be hurtful and stress inducing for someone already feeling isolated and anxious about being a parent.

Although this Pepperdine study is small, I suspect that a larger study would support the authors’ observations. For us as providers, it suggests that we need to find where parents are getting their information when we are trying to help those who seem particularly distressed. We should caution them that, while sharing information with peers can be reassuring and helpful at times, mom groups can be toxic as well. It also means that we should be careful in recommending social media sites – even those for which we have had good feedback.

And, most importantly, we must continue to work hard to make ourselves available to provide sensible and sensitive answers to those questions that are anxiety-producing for new parents.
 

Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Other than a Littman stethoscope he accepted as a first-year medical student in 1966, Dr. Wilkoff reports having nothing to disclose. Email him at [email protected].

To the Editor:

Juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM) is an autoimmune disorder with childhood onset that predominantly affects the muscles and skin, among other organs. Since the recognition of dermatomyositis (DM) more than 100 years ago, a variety of clinical diagnostic criteria have been utilized. Classically, DM presents with muscle weakness and a pathognomonic cutaneous macular, violaceous, erythematous eruption. The juvenile variant is defined by onset prior to 16 years of age. Histologically, these entities are indistinguishable and demonstrate an interface dermatitis with epidermal atrophy. Clinically, JDM has a higher incidence of calcinosis cutis and is not associated with an increased risk for malignancy in contrast to the adult-onset variant.¹ Panniculitis is a rare but serious complication in a subset of patients with DM and may represent a precursor to calcinosis cutis.² We describe a case of JDM-associated panniculitis that was difficult to control with prednisone and rituximab.

A 21-year-old woman with fever, fatigue, muscle pain, and new-onset swelling of 2 weeks’ duration was admitted to the hospital. She had a 5-year history of intermittent muscle weakness and concomitant rash. Prior to presentation, she had been hospitalized twice for fever of unknown origin, and the source remained undetermined. Physical examination revealed prominent facial and periorbital edema. There was tender nonpitting edema present on all 4 extremities and hyperpigmented indurated nodules on the shins (Figure 1). A full laboratory and imaging workup was performed for autoantibodies and infectious etiologies. The complete blood cell count was notable for pancytopenia, and a thorough infectious workup was negative. Creatine kinase level was within reference range. A biopsy of the right shin was performed, and histopathology revealed a lobular panniculitis with fat necrosis and mixed inflammation with neutrophils with perieccrine involvement as well as an interface dermatitis (Figure 2). Periodic acid–Schiff, Grocott methenamine-silver, and Gram stains were negative. Myositis-specific antibody testing revealed anti-p155/140 autoantibodies, and magnetic resonance imaging did not reveal active myositis within the visualized muscles, consistent with stable nonprogressing DM. A diagnosis of JDM with panniculitis was made. The patient was started on oral prednisone. Subsequently, a trial of rituximab was initiated. Although the patient’s symptoms initially improved, the response was not sustained on rituximab, and the patient was continued on systemic steroids with initiation of cyclosporine.

Juvenile dermatomyositis is an autoimmune disorder with childhood onset that involves systemic inflammation of the muscles, skin, and internal organs. It often can present diagnostic and therapeutic challenges.^2,3 Bohan and Peter^4,5 clinical criteria may help identify potential patients with JDM, but magnetic resonance imaging, electromyography, and muscle biopsy often are required to confirm the diagnosis.⁶ Skin manifestations include heliotrope rash; V sign; shawl sign; Gottron papules; periorbital edema; and infrequently panniculitis, the subcutaneous inflammation of adipose tissue.^3,7

Although panniculitis is found in approximately 10% of skin biopsies in patients with DM, our patient presented with anti-p155/140 antibodies.^8-10 Fat involvement in these patients traditionally manifests as lipodystrophy. Panniculitis also may precede calcinosis cutis, a debilitating skin change that may occur in approximately 46% of patients with JDM and can cause severe morbidity.^2,6,9

Subcutaneous edema rarely is described in DM-panniculitis, present in only 6% of 86 DM patients in one study.⁷ The pathophysiology of DM may be due to antibodies that target endothelial cells and activate complement, resulting in the membranolytic attack complex. This leads to microischemia, and microinfarction of the muscle fibers has been suggested to result in edema of the subcutaneous tissue in severe cases.^7,11 Microinfarction has been found to be present 2.3 times more often in edematous DM compared with nonedematous DM.⁷ Subcutaneous edema may be an isolated presentation of DM that arises more quickly with severe disease activity. As such, recommendations have been made to consider edema in future classification schemes.⁷

Because of the severity of edematous and/or subcutaneous DM, aggressive therapy may be required. First-line therapy consists of corticosteroids with additional immunosuppressants and immunomodulatory agents if adequate response is not achieved.^3,12 The effectiveness of rituximab in DM has been suggested.^2,12,13 The Rituximab in Myositis (RIM) trial (N=200) was the first double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial to assess rituximab’s efficacy in refractory compared with early-onset inflammatory myopathies. Although outcomes were similar in both groups, 83% of patients overall, including the JDM subset, met the definition of improvement.¹² In re-examining the RIM trial data and other cases using rituximab to treat inflammatory myopathies, an overall response rate of 78.3% was observed, with 52.1% of patients with DM reporting improvement in skin lesions (N=458, pooled from 48 studies).¹³ Further analysis of the RIM data revealed that panniculitis affected 10.4% of patients with JDM at baseline, which decreased to 6.8% at 36 weeks of rituximab therapy (N=48).¹²

As exhibited in our patient, subcutaneous tissue involvement, including calcinosis cutis and panniculitis, is seen more often in JDM than adult DM.^2,6 However, panniculitis in anti-p155/140 patients is rare. Our patient also had antibody positivity, which likely predisposed her to a more severe course. Despite not having sustained improvement on rituximab, initiating aggressive therapy earlier in the disease course may be beneficial, and our patient continues with alternative therapies.

To the Editor:

Juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM) is an autoimmune disorder with childhood onset that predominantly affects the muscles and skin, among other organs. Since the recognition of dermatomyositis (DM) more than 100 years ago, a variety of clinical diagnostic criteria have been utilized. Classically, DM presents with muscle weakness and a pathognomonic cutaneous macular, violaceous, erythematous eruption. The juvenile variant is defined by onset prior to 16 years of age. Histologically, these entities are indistinguishable and demonstrate an interface dermatitis with epidermal atrophy. Clinically, JDM has a higher incidence of calcinosis cutis and is not associated with an increased risk for malignancy in contrast to the adult-onset variant.¹ Panniculitis is a rare but serious complication in a subset of patients with DM and may represent a precursor to calcinosis cutis.² We describe a case of JDM-associated panniculitis that was difficult to control with prednisone and rituximab.

A 21-year-old woman with fever, fatigue, muscle pain, and new-onset swelling of 2 weeks’ duration was admitted to the hospital. She had a 5-year history of intermittent muscle weakness and concomitant rash. Prior to presentation, she had been hospitalized twice for fever of unknown origin, and the source remained undetermined. Physical examination revealed prominent facial and periorbital edema. There was tender nonpitting edema present on all 4 extremities and hyperpigmented indurated nodules on the shins (Figure 1). A full laboratory and imaging workup was performed for autoantibodies and infectious etiologies. The complete blood cell count was notable for pancytopenia, and a thorough infectious workup was negative. Creatine kinase level was within reference range. A biopsy of the right shin was performed, and histopathology revealed a lobular panniculitis with fat necrosis and mixed inflammation with neutrophils with perieccrine involvement as well as an interface dermatitis (Figure 2). Periodic acid–Schiff, Grocott methenamine-silver, and Gram stains were negative. Myositis-specific antibody testing revealed anti-p155/140 autoantibodies, and magnetic resonance imaging did not reveal active myositis within the visualized muscles, consistent with stable nonprogressing DM. A diagnosis of JDM with panniculitis was made. The patient was started on oral prednisone. Subsequently, a trial of rituximab was initiated. Although the patient’s symptoms initially improved, the response was not sustained on rituximab, and the patient was continued on systemic steroids with initiation of cyclosporine.

Juvenile dermatomyositis is an autoimmune disorder with childhood onset that involves systemic inflammation of the muscles, skin, and internal organs. It often can present diagnostic and therapeutic challenges.^2,3 Bohan and Peter^4,5 clinical criteria may help identify potential patients with JDM, but magnetic resonance imaging, electromyography, and muscle biopsy often are required to confirm the diagnosis.⁶ Skin manifestations include heliotrope rash; V sign; shawl sign; Gottron papules; periorbital edema; and infrequently panniculitis, the subcutaneous inflammation of adipose tissue.^3,7

Although panniculitis is found in approximately 10% of skin biopsies in patients with DM, our patient presented with anti-p155/140 antibodies.^8-10 Fat involvement in these patients traditionally manifests as lipodystrophy. Panniculitis also may precede calcinosis cutis, a debilitating skin change that may occur in approximately 46% of patients with JDM and can cause severe morbidity.^2,6,9

Subcutaneous edema rarely is described in DM-panniculitis, present in only 6% of 86 DM patients in one study.⁷ The pathophysiology of DM may be due to antibodies that target endothelial cells and activate complement, resulting in the membranolytic attack complex. This leads to microischemia, and microinfarction of the muscle fibers has been suggested to result in edema of the subcutaneous tissue in severe cases.^7,11 Microinfarction has been found to be present 2.3 times more often in edematous DM compared with nonedematous DM.⁷ Subcutaneous edema may be an isolated presentation of DM that arises more quickly with severe disease activity. As such, recommendations have been made to consider edema in future classification schemes.⁷

Because of the severity of edematous and/or subcutaneous DM, aggressive therapy may be required. First-line therapy consists of corticosteroids with additional immunosuppressants and immunomodulatory agents if adequate response is not achieved.^3,12 The effectiveness of rituximab in DM has been suggested.^2,12,13 The Rituximab in Myositis (RIM) trial (N=200) was the first double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial to assess rituximab’s efficacy in refractory compared with early-onset inflammatory myopathies. Although outcomes were similar in both groups, 83% of patients overall, including the JDM subset, met the definition of improvement.¹² In re-examining the RIM trial data and other cases using rituximab to treat inflammatory myopathies, an overall response rate of 78.3% was observed, with 52.1% of patients with DM reporting improvement in skin lesions (N=458, pooled from 48 studies).¹³ Further analysis of the RIM data revealed that panniculitis affected 10.4% of patients with JDM at baseline, which decreased to 6.8% at 36 weeks of rituximab therapy (N=48).¹²

As exhibited in our patient, subcutaneous tissue involvement, including calcinosis cutis and panniculitis, is seen more often in JDM than adult DM.^2,6 However, panniculitis in anti-p155/140 patients is rare. Our patient also had antibody positivity, which likely predisposed her to a more severe course. Despite not having sustained improvement on rituximab, initiating aggressive therapy earlier in the disease course may be beneficial, and our patient continues with alternative therapies.

To the Editor:

Juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM) is an autoimmune disorder with childhood onset that predominantly affects the muscles and skin, among other organs. Since the recognition of dermatomyositis (DM) more than 100 years ago, a variety of clinical diagnostic criteria have been utilized. Classically, DM presents with muscle weakness and a pathognomonic cutaneous macular, violaceous, erythematous eruption. The juvenile variant is defined by onset prior to 16 years of age. Histologically, these entities are indistinguishable and demonstrate an interface dermatitis with epidermal atrophy. Clinically, JDM has a higher incidence of calcinosis cutis and is not associated with an increased risk for malignancy in contrast to the adult-onset variant.¹ Panniculitis is a rare but serious complication in a subset of patients with DM and may represent a precursor to calcinosis cutis.² We describe a case of JDM-associated panniculitis that was difficult to control with prednisone and rituximab.

A 21-year-old woman with fever, fatigue, muscle pain, and new-onset swelling of 2 weeks’ duration was admitted to the hospital. She had a 5-year history of intermittent muscle weakness and concomitant rash. Prior to presentation, she had been hospitalized twice for fever of unknown origin, and the source remained undetermined. Physical examination revealed prominent facial and periorbital edema. There was tender nonpitting edema present on all 4 extremities and hyperpigmented indurated nodules on the shins (Figure 1). A full laboratory and imaging workup was performed for autoantibodies and infectious etiologies. The complete blood cell count was notable for pancytopenia, and a thorough infectious workup was negative. Creatine kinase level was within reference range. A biopsy of the right shin was performed, and histopathology revealed a lobular panniculitis with fat necrosis and mixed inflammation with neutrophils with perieccrine involvement as well as an interface dermatitis (Figure 2). Periodic acid–Schiff, Grocott methenamine-silver, and Gram stains were negative. Myositis-specific antibody testing revealed anti-p155/140 autoantibodies, and magnetic resonance imaging did not reveal active myositis within the visualized muscles, consistent with stable nonprogressing DM. A diagnosis of JDM with panniculitis was made. The patient was started on oral prednisone. Subsequently, a trial of rituximab was initiated. Although the patient’s symptoms initially improved, the response was not sustained on rituximab, and the patient was continued on systemic steroids with initiation of cyclosporine.

Juvenile dermatomyositis is an autoimmune disorder with childhood onset that involves systemic inflammation of the muscles, skin, and internal organs. It often can present diagnostic and therapeutic challenges.^2,3 Bohan and Peter^4,5 clinical criteria may help identify potential patients with JDM, but magnetic resonance imaging, electromyography, and muscle biopsy often are required to confirm the diagnosis.⁶ Skin manifestations include heliotrope rash; V sign; shawl sign; Gottron papules; periorbital edema; and infrequently panniculitis, the subcutaneous inflammation of adipose tissue.^3,7

Although panniculitis is found in approximately 10% of skin biopsies in patients with DM, our patient presented with anti-p155/140 antibodies.^8-10 Fat involvement in these patients traditionally manifests as lipodystrophy. Panniculitis also may precede calcinosis cutis, a debilitating skin change that may occur in approximately 46% of patients with JDM and can cause severe morbidity.^2,6,9

Subcutaneous edema rarely is described in DM-panniculitis, present in only 6% of 86 DM patients in one study.⁷ The pathophysiology of DM may be due to antibodies that target endothelial cells and activate complement, resulting in the membranolytic attack complex. This leads to microischemia, and microinfarction of the muscle fibers has been suggested to result in edema of the subcutaneous tissue in severe cases.^7,11 Microinfarction has been found to be present 2.3 times more often in edematous DM compared with nonedematous DM.⁷ Subcutaneous edema may be an isolated presentation of DM that arises more quickly with severe disease activity. As such, recommendations have been made to consider edema in future classification schemes.⁷

Because of the severity of edematous and/or subcutaneous DM, aggressive therapy may be required. First-line therapy consists of corticosteroids with additional immunosuppressants and immunomodulatory agents if adequate response is not achieved.^3,12 The effectiveness of rituximab in DM has been suggested.^2,12,13 The Rituximab in Myositis (RIM) trial (N=200) was the first double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial to assess rituximab’s efficacy in refractory compared with early-onset inflammatory myopathies. Although outcomes were similar in both groups, 83% of patients overall, including the JDM subset, met the definition of improvement.¹² In re-examining the RIM trial data and other cases using rituximab to treat inflammatory myopathies, an overall response rate of 78.3% was observed, with 52.1% of patients with DM reporting improvement in skin lesions (N=458, pooled from 48 studies).¹³ Further analysis of the RIM data revealed that panniculitis affected 10.4% of patients with JDM at baseline, which decreased to 6.8% at 36 weeks of rituximab therapy (N=48).¹²

As exhibited in our patient, subcutaneous tissue involvement, including calcinosis cutis and panniculitis, is seen more often in JDM than adult DM.^2,6 However, panniculitis in anti-p155/140 patients is rare. Our patient also had antibody positivity, which likely predisposed her to a more severe course. Despite not having sustained improvement on rituximab, initiating aggressive therapy earlier in the disease course may be beneficial, and our patient continues with alternative therapies.