User login
Quitting smoking just 2 years before lung cancer diagnosis may improve survival
Quitting smoking prior to a lung cancer diagnosis is associated with a survival benefit, even among patients who recently stopped smoking, according to results of a pooled analysis.
The overall survival advantage was significant regardless of how long ago patients had last smoked, including among those who quit within 2 years prior to their diagnosis.
These findings create a “teachable moment” for health care providers in scenarios when patients might be more receptive to a stop-smoking message, according to investigator Aline F. Fares, MD, a clinical research fellow at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Toronto.
“Our study can be summarized to patients as, ‘it’s never too late to quit,’ ” Dr. Fares said.
She presented results from this study at the American Society of Clinical Oncology virtual scientific program during a press briefing in advance of the meeting. This year, ASCO’s annual meeting is split into two parts. The virtual scientific program will be presented online May 29-31. The virtual education program will be available Aug. 8-10.
Results
Dr. Fares presented data on 35,481 patients with a diagnosis of lung cancer who had been enrolled in 17 studies conducted by the International Lung Cancer Consortium. (Data in the presentation were updated from the abstract.)
At diagnosis, 47.5% of the patients were current smokers, 30% were former smokers, and 22.5% were never smokers.
The risk of death from any cause was cut by 20% among former smokers who quit more than 5 years before their lung cancer diagnosis (P < .001). Patients who quit smoking 2-5 years before diagnosis had a 16% reduction in the risk of death, while those who quit within 2 years of diagnosis had a 12% reduced risk (P < .001 for both comparisons).
The overall survival advantage was evident in this pooled analysis regardless of patient sex, disease stage, histology, or amount of smoking as measured in pack-years, according to Dr. Fares. That said, the overall survival advantage appeared to be even greater among heavier smokers (i.e., greater than 30 pack-years) as compared with lighter smokers.
Lung cancer–specific survival was improved by 15% for patients who quit smoking more than 5 years prior to their diagnosis. For those who had quit more recently, there was a nonsignificant trend toward improvement in this outcome.
Overall survival was higher in never smokers in comparison with current smokers, a finding that was expected based on previous studies, according to Dr. Fares.
Implications
These findings could be important to share with individuals who are current smokers at the time of lung cancer screening, according to Maher A. Karam-Hage, MD, medical director of the tobacco treatment program at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
“The power of this data is that it shows quitting makes a difference, and that it can be more impactful the longer you quit before you get diagnosed,” Dr. Karam-Hage said in an interview.
Negative lung cancer screening results sometimes give individuals the false impression that they are “one of the lucky ones” who won’t get lung cancer and don’t have to quit smoking, according to Dr. Karam-Hage, who is studying the comparative effectiveness of different smoking cessation strategies.
“Now, as part of shared decision making, we can provide people with specific numbers before the scan that [suggest] no matter what the scan comes out with, the earlier they quit, the better off they will be,” he said.
In her presentation, Dr. Fares said that lung cancer screening may be an “interesting time” to address smoking cessation, particularly among patients with a heavier smoking history.
“After a lifetime of smoking, patients often feel it’s too late to quit smoking and that the damage has already been done,” she added.
The International Lung Cancer Consortium studies had multiple supporters. Dr. Fares reported having no disclosures related to the research. One researcher reported relationships with AbbVie, AstraZeneca, MedImmune, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche Canada, and Takeda. Dr. Karam-Hage reported having no relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: Fares AF et al. ASCO 2020, Abstract 1512.
This article was updated 5/15/20.
Quitting smoking prior to a lung cancer diagnosis is associated with a survival benefit, even among patients who recently stopped smoking, according to results of a pooled analysis.
The overall survival advantage was significant regardless of how long ago patients had last smoked, including among those who quit within 2 years prior to their diagnosis.
These findings create a “teachable moment” for health care providers in scenarios when patients might be more receptive to a stop-smoking message, according to investigator Aline F. Fares, MD, a clinical research fellow at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Toronto.
“Our study can be summarized to patients as, ‘it’s never too late to quit,’ ” Dr. Fares said.
She presented results from this study at the American Society of Clinical Oncology virtual scientific program during a press briefing in advance of the meeting. This year, ASCO’s annual meeting is split into two parts. The virtual scientific program will be presented online May 29-31. The virtual education program will be available Aug. 8-10.
Results
Dr. Fares presented data on 35,481 patients with a diagnosis of lung cancer who had been enrolled in 17 studies conducted by the International Lung Cancer Consortium. (Data in the presentation were updated from the abstract.)
At diagnosis, 47.5% of the patients were current smokers, 30% were former smokers, and 22.5% were never smokers.
The risk of death from any cause was cut by 20% among former smokers who quit more than 5 years before their lung cancer diagnosis (P < .001). Patients who quit smoking 2-5 years before diagnosis had a 16% reduction in the risk of death, while those who quit within 2 years of diagnosis had a 12% reduced risk (P < .001 for both comparisons).
The overall survival advantage was evident in this pooled analysis regardless of patient sex, disease stage, histology, or amount of smoking as measured in pack-years, according to Dr. Fares. That said, the overall survival advantage appeared to be even greater among heavier smokers (i.e., greater than 30 pack-years) as compared with lighter smokers.
Lung cancer–specific survival was improved by 15% for patients who quit smoking more than 5 years prior to their diagnosis. For those who had quit more recently, there was a nonsignificant trend toward improvement in this outcome.
Overall survival was higher in never smokers in comparison with current smokers, a finding that was expected based on previous studies, according to Dr. Fares.
Implications
These findings could be important to share with individuals who are current smokers at the time of lung cancer screening, according to Maher A. Karam-Hage, MD, medical director of the tobacco treatment program at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
“The power of this data is that it shows quitting makes a difference, and that it can be more impactful the longer you quit before you get diagnosed,” Dr. Karam-Hage said in an interview.
Negative lung cancer screening results sometimes give individuals the false impression that they are “one of the lucky ones” who won’t get lung cancer and don’t have to quit smoking, according to Dr. Karam-Hage, who is studying the comparative effectiveness of different smoking cessation strategies.
“Now, as part of shared decision making, we can provide people with specific numbers before the scan that [suggest] no matter what the scan comes out with, the earlier they quit, the better off they will be,” he said.
In her presentation, Dr. Fares said that lung cancer screening may be an “interesting time” to address smoking cessation, particularly among patients with a heavier smoking history.
“After a lifetime of smoking, patients often feel it’s too late to quit smoking and that the damage has already been done,” she added.
The International Lung Cancer Consortium studies had multiple supporters. Dr. Fares reported having no disclosures related to the research. One researcher reported relationships with AbbVie, AstraZeneca, MedImmune, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche Canada, and Takeda. Dr. Karam-Hage reported having no relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: Fares AF et al. ASCO 2020, Abstract 1512.
This article was updated 5/15/20.
Quitting smoking prior to a lung cancer diagnosis is associated with a survival benefit, even among patients who recently stopped smoking, according to results of a pooled analysis.
The overall survival advantage was significant regardless of how long ago patients had last smoked, including among those who quit within 2 years prior to their diagnosis.
These findings create a “teachable moment” for health care providers in scenarios when patients might be more receptive to a stop-smoking message, according to investigator Aline F. Fares, MD, a clinical research fellow at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Toronto.
“Our study can be summarized to patients as, ‘it’s never too late to quit,’ ” Dr. Fares said.
She presented results from this study at the American Society of Clinical Oncology virtual scientific program during a press briefing in advance of the meeting. This year, ASCO’s annual meeting is split into two parts. The virtual scientific program will be presented online May 29-31. The virtual education program will be available Aug. 8-10.
Results
Dr. Fares presented data on 35,481 patients with a diagnosis of lung cancer who had been enrolled in 17 studies conducted by the International Lung Cancer Consortium. (Data in the presentation were updated from the abstract.)
At diagnosis, 47.5% of the patients were current smokers, 30% were former smokers, and 22.5% were never smokers.
The risk of death from any cause was cut by 20% among former smokers who quit more than 5 years before their lung cancer diagnosis (P < .001). Patients who quit smoking 2-5 years before diagnosis had a 16% reduction in the risk of death, while those who quit within 2 years of diagnosis had a 12% reduced risk (P < .001 for both comparisons).
The overall survival advantage was evident in this pooled analysis regardless of patient sex, disease stage, histology, or amount of smoking as measured in pack-years, according to Dr. Fares. That said, the overall survival advantage appeared to be even greater among heavier smokers (i.e., greater than 30 pack-years) as compared with lighter smokers.
Lung cancer–specific survival was improved by 15% for patients who quit smoking more than 5 years prior to their diagnosis. For those who had quit more recently, there was a nonsignificant trend toward improvement in this outcome.
Overall survival was higher in never smokers in comparison with current smokers, a finding that was expected based on previous studies, according to Dr. Fares.
Implications
These findings could be important to share with individuals who are current smokers at the time of lung cancer screening, according to Maher A. Karam-Hage, MD, medical director of the tobacco treatment program at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
“The power of this data is that it shows quitting makes a difference, and that it can be more impactful the longer you quit before you get diagnosed,” Dr. Karam-Hage said in an interview.
Negative lung cancer screening results sometimes give individuals the false impression that they are “one of the lucky ones” who won’t get lung cancer and don’t have to quit smoking, according to Dr. Karam-Hage, who is studying the comparative effectiveness of different smoking cessation strategies.
“Now, as part of shared decision making, we can provide people with specific numbers before the scan that [suggest] no matter what the scan comes out with, the earlier they quit, the better off they will be,” he said.
In her presentation, Dr. Fares said that lung cancer screening may be an “interesting time” to address smoking cessation, particularly among patients with a heavier smoking history.
“After a lifetime of smoking, patients often feel it’s too late to quit smoking and that the damage has already been done,” she added.
The International Lung Cancer Consortium studies had multiple supporters. Dr. Fares reported having no disclosures related to the research. One researcher reported relationships with AbbVie, AstraZeneca, MedImmune, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche Canada, and Takeda. Dr. Karam-Hage reported having no relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: Fares AF et al. ASCO 2020, Abstract 1512.
This article was updated 5/15/20.
FROM ASCO 2020
Video coaching may relieve anxiety and distress for long-distance cancer caregivers
Anxiety and distress related to caring for a cancer patient who lives far away may be alleviated through an intervention that includes video-based coaching sessions with a nurse practitioner or social worker, a randomized study suggests.
About 20% of long-distance caregivers had a significant reduction in anxiety and 25% had a significant reduction in distress when they received video coaching sessions, attended oncologist visits via video, and had access to a website specifically designed for their needs.
Adding the caregiver to oncologist office visits made the patients feel better supported and didn’t add a significant amount of time to the encounter, said Sara L. Douglas, PhD, RN, of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland.
Taken together, these results suggest that fairly simple technologies can be leveraged to help caregivers cope with psychological strains related to supporting a patient who doesn’t live nearby, Dr. Douglas said.
Distance caregivers, defined as those who live an hour or more away from the patient, can experience high rates of distress and anxiety because they lack first-hand information or may have uncertainty about the patient’s current condition, according to Dr. Douglas and colleagues.
“Caregivers’ high rates of anxiety and distress have been found to have a negative impact not only upon their own health but upon their ability to provide high quality care to the patient,” Dr. Douglas said.
With this in mind, she and her colleagues conducted a 4-month study of distance caregivers. Dr. Douglas presented results from the study at the American Society of Clinical Oncology virtual scientific program during a press briefing in advance of the meeting. This year, ASCO’s annual meeting is split into two parts. The virtual scientific program will be presented online on May 29-31, and the virtual education program will be available Aug. 8-10.
Study details
The study enrolled 441 distance caregivers of cancer patients, and Dr. Douglas presented results in 311 of those caregivers. (Data in the presentation differ from the abstract.) The caregivers were, on average, 47 years of age. Most were female (72%), white (67%), the child of the patient (63%), currently employed (81%), and new to the distance caregiver role (89%).
The caregivers were randomized to one of three study arms.
One arm received the full intervention, which consisted of four video-coaching sessions with an advanced practice nurse or social worker, videoconference office visits with the physician and patient, and access to a website with information for cancer distance caregivers. A second arm received no video coaching but had access to the website and participated in video visits with the physician and patient. The third arm, which only received access to the website, served as the study’s control group.
Results
Dr. Douglas said that the full intervention had the biggest impact on caregivers’ distress and anxiety.
Among distance caregivers who received the full intervention, 19.2% had a significant reduction in anxiety (P = .03), as measured in online surveys before and after the intervention using the PROMIS Anxiety instrument. Furthermore, 24.8% of these caregivers had a significant reduction in distress (P = .02) from preintervention to post intervention, as measured by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer. Overall, distress and anxiety scores decreased in this arm.
Distance caregivers who only had physician-patient video visits and website access had a “moderate” reduction in distress and anxiety, Dr. Douglas said. Among these caregivers, 17.3% had an improvement in anxiety from baseline, and 19.8% had an improvement in distress. Overall, distress scores decreased, but anxiety scores increased slightly in this arm.
In the control arm, 13.1% of caregivers had an improvement in anxiety from baseline, and 18% had an improvement in distress. Overall, both anxiety and distress scores increased in this arm.
“While the full intervention yielded the best results for distance caregivers, we recognize that not all health care systems have the resources to provide individualized coaching sessions to distance caregivers,” Dr. Douglas said. “Therefore, it is worth noting that videoconference office visits alone are found to be of some benefit in improving distress and anxiety in this group of cancer caregivers.”
The study results suggest videoconferencing interventions can improve the emotional well-being of remote caregivers who provide “critical support” for cancer patients, said ASCO President Howard A. “Skip” Burris III, MD.
“As COVID-19 forces separation from loved ones and increases anxiety for people with cancer and their caregivers, providing emotional support virtually is more important than ever,” Dr. Burris said in a news release highlighting the study.
This study was funded by the National Institutes of Health and Case Comprehensive Cancer Center. Dr. Douglas reported having no disclosures. Other researchers involved in the study disclosed relationships with BridgeBio Pharma, Cardinal Health, Apexigen, Roche/Genentech, Seattle Genetics, Tesaro, Array BioPharma, Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Celgene. A full list of Dr. Burris’s financial disclosures is available on the ASCO website.
SOURCE: Douglas SL et al. ASCO 2020, Abstract 12123.
Anxiety and distress related to caring for a cancer patient who lives far away may be alleviated through an intervention that includes video-based coaching sessions with a nurse practitioner or social worker, a randomized study suggests.
About 20% of long-distance caregivers had a significant reduction in anxiety and 25% had a significant reduction in distress when they received video coaching sessions, attended oncologist visits via video, and had access to a website specifically designed for their needs.
Adding the caregiver to oncologist office visits made the patients feel better supported and didn’t add a significant amount of time to the encounter, said Sara L. Douglas, PhD, RN, of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland.
Taken together, these results suggest that fairly simple technologies can be leveraged to help caregivers cope with psychological strains related to supporting a patient who doesn’t live nearby, Dr. Douglas said.
Distance caregivers, defined as those who live an hour or more away from the patient, can experience high rates of distress and anxiety because they lack first-hand information or may have uncertainty about the patient’s current condition, according to Dr. Douglas and colleagues.
“Caregivers’ high rates of anxiety and distress have been found to have a negative impact not only upon their own health but upon their ability to provide high quality care to the patient,” Dr. Douglas said.
With this in mind, she and her colleagues conducted a 4-month study of distance caregivers. Dr. Douglas presented results from the study at the American Society of Clinical Oncology virtual scientific program during a press briefing in advance of the meeting. This year, ASCO’s annual meeting is split into two parts. The virtual scientific program will be presented online on May 29-31, and the virtual education program will be available Aug. 8-10.
Study details
The study enrolled 441 distance caregivers of cancer patients, and Dr. Douglas presented results in 311 of those caregivers. (Data in the presentation differ from the abstract.) The caregivers were, on average, 47 years of age. Most were female (72%), white (67%), the child of the patient (63%), currently employed (81%), and new to the distance caregiver role (89%).
The caregivers were randomized to one of three study arms.
One arm received the full intervention, which consisted of four video-coaching sessions with an advanced practice nurse or social worker, videoconference office visits with the physician and patient, and access to a website with information for cancer distance caregivers. A second arm received no video coaching but had access to the website and participated in video visits with the physician and patient. The third arm, which only received access to the website, served as the study’s control group.
Results
Dr. Douglas said that the full intervention had the biggest impact on caregivers’ distress and anxiety.
Among distance caregivers who received the full intervention, 19.2% had a significant reduction in anxiety (P = .03), as measured in online surveys before and after the intervention using the PROMIS Anxiety instrument. Furthermore, 24.8% of these caregivers had a significant reduction in distress (P = .02) from preintervention to post intervention, as measured by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer. Overall, distress and anxiety scores decreased in this arm.
Distance caregivers who only had physician-patient video visits and website access had a “moderate” reduction in distress and anxiety, Dr. Douglas said. Among these caregivers, 17.3% had an improvement in anxiety from baseline, and 19.8% had an improvement in distress. Overall, distress scores decreased, but anxiety scores increased slightly in this arm.
In the control arm, 13.1% of caregivers had an improvement in anxiety from baseline, and 18% had an improvement in distress. Overall, both anxiety and distress scores increased in this arm.
“While the full intervention yielded the best results for distance caregivers, we recognize that not all health care systems have the resources to provide individualized coaching sessions to distance caregivers,” Dr. Douglas said. “Therefore, it is worth noting that videoconference office visits alone are found to be of some benefit in improving distress and anxiety in this group of cancer caregivers.”
The study results suggest videoconferencing interventions can improve the emotional well-being of remote caregivers who provide “critical support” for cancer patients, said ASCO President Howard A. “Skip” Burris III, MD.
“As COVID-19 forces separation from loved ones and increases anxiety for people with cancer and their caregivers, providing emotional support virtually is more important than ever,” Dr. Burris said in a news release highlighting the study.
This study was funded by the National Institutes of Health and Case Comprehensive Cancer Center. Dr. Douglas reported having no disclosures. Other researchers involved in the study disclosed relationships with BridgeBio Pharma, Cardinal Health, Apexigen, Roche/Genentech, Seattle Genetics, Tesaro, Array BioPharma, Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Celgene. A full list of Dr. Burris’s financial disclosures is available on the ASCO website.
SOURCE: Douglas SL et al. ASCO 2020, Abstract 12123.
Anxiety and distress related to caring for a cancer patient who lives far away may be alleviated through an intervention that includes video-based coaching sessions with a nurse practitioner or social worker, a randomized study suggests.
About 20% of long-distance caregivers had a significant reduction in anxiety and 25% had a significant reduction in distress when they received video coaching sessions, attended oncologist visits via video, and had access to a website specifically designed for their needs.
Adding the caregiver to oncologist office visits made the patients feel better supported and didn’t add a significant amount of time to the encounter, said Sara L. Douglas, PhD, RN, of Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland.
Taken together, these results suggest that fairly simple technologies can be leveraged to help caregivers cope with psychological strains related to supporting a patient who doesn’t live nearby, Dr. Douglas said.
Distance caregivers, defined as those who live an hour or more away from the patient, can experience high rates of distress and anxiety because they lack first-hand information or may have uncertainty about the patient’s current condition, according to Dr. Douglas and colleagues.
“Caregivers’ high rates of anxiety and distress have been found to have a negative impact not only upon their own health but upon their ability to provide high quality care to the patient,” Dr. Douglas said.
With this in mind, she and her colleagues conducted a 4-month study of distance caregivers. Dr. Douglas presented results from the study at the American Society of Clinical Oncology virtual scientific program during a press briefing in advance of the meeting. This year, ASCO’s annual meeting is split into two parts. The virtual scientific program will be presented online on May 29-31, and the virtual education program will be available Aug. 8-10.
Study details
The study enrolled 441 distance caregivers of cancer patients, and Dr. Douglas presented results in 311 of those caregivers. (Data in the presentation differ from the abstract.) The caregivers were, on average, 47 years of age. Most were female (72%), white (67%), the child of the patient (63%), currently employed (81%), and new to the distance caregiver role (89%).
The caregivers were randomized to one of three study arms.
One arm received the full intervention, which consisted of four video-coaching sessions with an advanced practice nurse or social worker, videoconference office visits with the physician and patient, and access to a website with information for cancer distance caregivers. A second arm received no video coaching but had access to the website and participated in video visits with the physician and patient. The third arm, which only received access to the website, served as the study’s control group.
Results
Dr. Douglas said that the full intervention had the biggest impact on caregivers’ distress and anxiety.
Among distance caregivers who received the full intervention, 19.2% had a significant reduction in anxiety (P = .03), as measured in online surveys before and after the intervention using the PROMIS Anxiety instrument. Furthermore, 24.8% of these caregivers had a significant reduction in distress (P = .02) from preintervention to post intervention, as measured by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Distress Thermometer. Overall, distress and anxiety scores decreased in this arm.
Distance caregivers who only had physician-patient video visits and website access had a “moderate” reduction in distress and anxiety, Dr. Douglas said. Among these caregivers, 17.3% had an improvement in anxiety from baseline, and 19.8% had an improvement in distress. Overall, distress scores decreased, but anxiety scores increased slightly in this arm.
In the control arm, 13.1% of caregivers had an improvement in anxiety from baseline, and 18% had an improvement in distress. Overall, both anxiety and distress scores increased in this arm.
“While the full intervention yielded the best results for distance caregivers, we recognize that not all health care systems have the resources to provide individualized coaching sessions to distance caregivers,” Dr. Douglas said. “Therefore, it is worth noting that videoconference office visits alone are found to be of some benefit in improving distress and anxiety in this group of cancer caregivers.”
The study results suggest videoconferencing interventions can improve the emotional well-being of remote caregivers who provide “critical support” for cancer patients, said ASCO President Howard A. “Skip” Burris III, MD.
“As COVID-19 forces separation from loved ones and increases anxiety for people with cancer and their caregivers, providing emotional support virtually is more important than ever,” Dr. Burris said in a news release highlighting the study.
This study was funded by the National Institutes of Health and Case Comprehensive Cancer Center. Dr. Douglas reported having no disclosures. Other researchers involved in the study disclosed relationships with BridgeBio Pharma, Cardinal Health, Apexigen, Roche/Genentech, Seattle Genetics, Tesaro, Array BioPharma, Abbvie, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Celgene. A full list of Dr. Burris’s financial disclosures is available on the ASCO website.
SOURCE: Douglas SL et al. ASCO 2020, Abstract 12123.
FROM ASCO 2020
Transplant beats bortezomib-based therapy for MM, but questions remain
While upfront autologous transplantation has bested bortezomib-based intensification therapy in a large, randomized multiple myeloma (MM) trial, investigators and observers say more research will be needed to determine the optimal treatment strategy in the era of novel agents.
Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) extended progression-free survival by almost 15 months compared with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (VMP) intensification therapy for the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, according to results of the randomized, phase 3 trial of 1,503 patients enrolled at 172 centers in the European Myeloma Network.
That finding could provide more fodder for the ongoing debate over the role of upfront autologous HSCT as a gold-standard intensification treatment for patients who can tolerate myeloablative doses of chemotherapy in light of the proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, and monoclonal antibodies that are now available.
However, the study is not without limitations, including the use of bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (VCD) as induction therapy, according to the investigators, led by Michele Cavo, MD, with the Seràgnoli Institute of Hematology at Bologna (Italy) University.
The VCD regimen was one of the most frequently used induction regimens back when the trial was designed, but now it’s considered “less optimal” versus regimens such as bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRD), according to Dr. Cavo and coinvestigators.
Besides, the field is moving forward based on clinical trials of “highly active” daratumumab-based four-drug regimens, which appear to enhance rates of response and minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity when given as induction before autologous HSCT and as consolidation afterward, they said.
“Final results from these studies should be awaited before a shift from routine use of upfront autologous HSCT to delayed HSCT or alternative treatment strategies driven by MRD status can be offered to patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are fit for high-dose chemotherapy,” Dr. Cavo and colleagues noted in their report, available in The Lancet Hematology.
The multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study by Dr. Cavo and coinvestigators, known as EMN02/HO95, included patients up to 65 years of age with symptomatic multiple myeloma, measurable disease, and WHO performance of 0 to 2. Patients were treated with VCD induction therapy, followed by randomization to either VMP or autologous HSCT after high-dose melphalan. In a second randomization, patients were assigned to either VRD consolidation therapy or no consolidation. All patients then received lenalidomide maintenance therapy until progression.
Median progression-free survival was 56.7 months in patients initially randomized to HSCT, compared with 41.9 months for MP (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.85; P = .0001), according to the investigators, who said that finding supports the value of HSCT “even in the era of highly active novel agents.”
Turning to results of the second randomization, Dr. Cavo and colleagues said the VRD consolidation strategy resulted in median progression-free survival that was significantly improved versus no consolidation, at 58.9 months and 45.5 months, respectively (P = .014).
While this is an important study, the added benefit of HSCT intensification therapy is in question given the high rates of MRD being reported for potent, daratumumab-based four-drug combination regimens, according to a related commentary by Omar Nadeem, MD, and Irene M. Ghobrial, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, Boston.
“We are entering an era in which novel combinations have shown unprecedented efficacy and future studies with or without HSCT will be needed to answer these key questions,” wrote Dr. Nadeem and Dr. Ghobrial.
Dr. Cavo and colleagues said the estimated 5-year rate of overall survival in EMN02/HO95 was “comparable” between arms, at 75% for the HSCT strategy and 72% for VMP.
“Although this suggests that delaying HSCT to a later time is not harmful, a substantial proportion of patients may become ineligible for high-dose melphalan at first relapse,” they said, noting that 63% of VMP-treated patients went on to receive salvage HSCT.
Further follow-up could demonstrate a survival advantage, as seen in other studies, they added.
Dr. Cavo reported that he has received honoraria from multiple pharmaceutical companies, and is a member of speakers bureaus for Janssen and Celgene. Dr. Nadeem and Dr. Ghobrial reported serving on the advisory boards of multiple pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Cavo M et al. Lancet Haematol. 2020 Apr 30. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3026(20)30099-5.
While upfront autologous transplantation has bested bortezomib-based intensification therapy in a large, randomized multiple myeloma (MM) trial, investigators and observers say more research will be needed to determine the optimal treatment strategy in the era of novel agents.
Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) extended progression-free survival by almost 15 months compared with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (VMP) intensification therapy for the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, according to results of the randomized, phase 3 trial of 1,503 patients enrolled at 172 centers in the European Myeloma Network.
That finding could provide more fodder for the ongoing debate over the role of upfront autologous HSCT as a gold-standard intensification treatment for patients who can tolerate myeloablative doses of chemotherapy in light of the proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, and monoclonal antibodies that are now available.
However, the study is not without limitations, including the use of bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (VCD) as induction therapy, according to the investigators, led by Michele Cavo, MD, with the Seràgnoli Institute of Hematology at Bologna (Italy) University.
The VCD regimen was one of the most frequently used induction regimens back when the trial was designed, but now it’s considered “less optimal” versus regimens such as bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRD), according to Dr. Cavo and coinvestigators.
Besides, the field is moving forward based on clinical trials of “highly active” daratumumab-based four-drug regimens, which appear to enhance rates of response and minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity when given as induction before autologous HSCT and as consolidation afterward, they said.
“Final results from these studies should be awaited before a shift from routine use of upfront autologous HSCT to delayed HSCT or alternative treatment strategies driven by MRD status can be offered to patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are fit for high-dose chemotherapy,” Dr. Cavo and colleagues noted in their report, available in The Lancet Hematology.
The multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study by Dr. Cavo and coinvestigators, known as EMN02/HO95, included patients up to 65 years of age with symptomatic multiple myeloma, measurable disease, and WHO performance of 0 to 2. Patients were treated with VCD induction therapy, followed by randomization to either VMP or autologous HSCT after high-dose melphalan. In a second randomization, patients were assigned to either VRD consolidation therapy or no consolidation. All patients then received lenalidomide maintenance therapy until progression.
Median progression-free survival was 56.7 months in patients initially randomized to HSCT, compared with 41.9 months for MP (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.85; P = .0001), according to the investigators, who said that finding supports the value of HSCT “even in the era of highly active novel agents.”
Turning to results of the second randomization, Dr. Cavo and colleagues said the VRD consolidation strategy resulted in median progression-free survival that was significantly improved versus no consolidation, at 58.9 months and 45.5 months, respectively (P = .014).
While this is an important study, the added benefit of HSCT intensification therapy is in question given the high rates of MRD being reported for potent, daratumumab-based four-drug combination regimens, according to a related commentary by Omar Nadeem, MD, and Irene M. Ghobrial, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, Boston.
“We are entering an era in which novel combinations have shown unprecedented efficacy and future studies with or without HSCT will be needed to answer these key questions,” wrote Dr. Nadeem and Dr. Ghobrial.
Dr. Cavo and colleagues said the estimated 5-year rate of overall survival in EMN02/HO95 was “comparable” between arms, at 75% for the HSCT strategy and 72% for VMP.
“Although this suggests that delaying HSCT to a later time is not harmful, a substantial proportion of patients may become ineligible for high-dose melphalan at first relapse,” they said, noting that 63% of VMP-treated patients went on to receive salvage HSCT.
Further follow-up could demonstrate a survival advantage, as seen in other studies, they added.
Dr. Cavo reported that he has received honoraria from multiple pharmaceutical companies, and is a member of speakers bureaus for Janssen and Celgene. Dr. Nadeem and Dr. Ghobrial reported serving on the advisory boards of multiple pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Cavo M et al. Lancet Haematol. 2020 Apr 30. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3026(20)30099-5.
While upfront autologous transplantation has bested bortezomib-based intensification therapy in a large, randomized multiple myeloma (MM) trial, investigators and observers say more research will be needed to determine the optimal treatment strategy in the era of novel agents.
Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) extended progression-free survival by almost 15 months compared with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (VMP) intensification therapy for the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, according to results of the randomized, phase 3 trial of 1,503 patients enrolled at 172 centers in the European Myeloma Network.
That finding could provide more fodder for the ongoing debate over the role of upfront autologous HSCT as a gold-standard intensification treatment for patients who can tolerate myeloablative doses of chemotherapy in light of the proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, and monoclonal antibodies that are now available.
However, the study is not without limitations, including the use of bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (VCD) as induction therapy, according to the investigators, led by Michele Cavo, MD, with the Seràgnoli Institute of Hematology at Bologna (Italy) University.
The VCD regimen was one of the most frequently used induction regimens back when the trial was designed, but now it’s considered “less optimal” versus regimens such as bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRD), according to Dr. Cavo and coinvestigators.
Besides, the field is moving forward based on clinical trials of “highly active” daratumumab-based four-drug regimens, which appear to enhance rates of response and minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity when given as induction before autologous HSCT and as consolidation afterward, they said.
“Final results from these studies should be awaited before a shift from routine use of upfront autologous HSCT to delayed HSCT or alternative treatment strategies driven by MRD status can be offered to patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are fit for high-dose chemotherapy,” Dr. Cavo and colleagues noted in their report, available in The Lancet Hematology.
The multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study by Dr. Cavo and coinvestigators, known as EMN02/HO95, included patients up to 65 years of age with symptomatic multiple myeloma, measurable disease, and WHO performance of 0 to 2. Patients were treated with VCD induction therapy, followed by randomization to either VMP or autologous HSCT after high-dose melphalan. In a second randomization, patients were assigned to either VRD consolidation therapy or no consolidation. All patients then received lenalidomide maintenance therapy until progression.
Median progression-free survival was 56.7 months in patients initially randomized to HSCT, compared with 41.9 months for MP (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.85; P = .0001), according to the investigators, who said that finding supports the value of HSCT “even in the era of highly active novel agents.”
Turning to results of the second randomization, Dr. Cavo and colleagues said the VRD consolidation strategy resulted in median progression-free survival that was significantly improved versus no consolidation, at 58.9 months and 45.5 months, respectively (P = .014).
While this is an important study, the added benefit of HSCT intensification therapy is in question given the high rates of MRD being reported for potent, daratumumab-based four-drug combination regimens, according to a related commentary by Omar Nadeem, MD, and Irene M. Ghobrial, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, Boston.
“We are entering an era in which novel combinations have shown unprecedented efficacy and future studies with or without HSCT will be needed to answer these key questions,” wrote Dr. Nadeem and Dr. Ghobrial.
Dr. Cavo and colleagues said the estimated 5-year rate of overall survival in EMN02/HO95 was “comparable” between arms, at 75% for the HSCT strategy and 72% for VMP.
“Although this suggests that delaying HSCT to a later time is not harmful, a substantial proportion of patients may become ineligible for high-dose melphalan at first relapse,” they said, noting that 63% of VMP-treated patients went on to receive salvage HSCT.
Further follow-up could demonstrate a survival advantage, as seen in other studies, they added.
Dr. Cavo reported that he has received honoraria from multiple pharmaceutical companies, and is a member of speakers bureaus for Janssen and Celgene. Dr. Nadeem and Dr. Ghobrial reported serving on the advisory boards of multiple pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Cavo M et al. Lancet Haematol. 2020 Apr 30. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3026(20)30099-5.
FROM THE LANCET HEMATOLOGY
Suicide prevention one key focus of upcoming NIMH strategic plan
Suicide prevention is a high priority for the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) and will be one specific area of focus in the federal agency’s 5-year strategic plan that’s set to be released soon, according to Director Joshua A. Gordon, MD, PhD.
The agency is updating its strategic plan to guide research efforts and priorities over the next 5 years, Dr. Gordon said at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, which was held as a virtual live event.
That strategic plan, which will cover a broader range of priorities, is scheduled to be published “within the next few weeks,” Dr. Gordon said.
Closing the research gap in suicide prevention is a high priority for NIMH, Dr. Gordon said, especially in light of the age-adjusted U.S. suicide rates that have been increasing consistently in men and women for the past 2 decades, as data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show.
“And although we must acknowledge we don’t quite know why, there is lots of speculation and a little bit of data, but not really conclusive stuff,” he said. “We also recognize that, in addition to trying to understand why, we need to try interventions that will reverse this increase.”
Identifying those at risk for suicide is a key focus of research, according to Dr. Gordon, who highlighted results of the ED-SAFE study, describing it as a “mainstay” of approaches to reducing risk through intervention.
In that recent study, an emergency department (ED)-based suicide prevention intervention cut total suicide attempts by 30%, compared with treatment as usual (JAMA Psychiatry. 2017 Jun;74[6]:563-70). That intervention included universal suicide risk screening plus secondary screening by the physician in the ED, discharge resources, and post-ED telephone calls intended to reduce suicide risk.
The ED-SAFE study is an example of taking the lessons learned in psychiatry and bringing them to a “broader swath” of individuals who might be at risk, said Dr. Gordon, a research psychiatrist who was a faculty member at Columbia University, New York, prior to being appointed director of NIMH.
“Of course, we’d like to do this not just in emergency rooms, but in primary care offices as well,” said Dr. Gordon, who noted that ongoing studies are aimed at demonstrating similar results in primary care patient populations, including adults and children.
Beyond this ask-and-you-will-find approach, there are “more modern” methods that involve applying predictive modeling and analytics to large data sets, identifying individuals who might not otherwise be suspected as being at risk and getting them into treatment, according to the director.
In one recent report, investigators said a risk prediction method using a machine learning approach on 3.7 million patients across five U.S. health systems was able to detect 38% of suicide attempts a mean of 2.1 years in advance (JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Mar 25;3[3]:3201262).
Machine learning might be able to detect the risk of suicidal behavior in unselected patients, based on these findings and might facilitate development of clinical decision support tools for risk reduction, the investigators said.
“We’re now studying how to implement these algorithms in real-world practice,” Dr. Gordon said.
Beyond identification, new interventions are needed for suicide reduction, he added, calling ketamine infusion “one of the most promising” recent developments that may help reduce suicidal ideation.
he said. “So the question is, can we use this in real-world practice to reduce suicide risk?”
The NIMH focus on suicide prevention will intensify the agency’s focus on recent initiatives in detecting and preventing suicide behavior and ideation in the juvenile justice system, applied research toward the goal of zero-suicide health care systems, and looking at the safety and feasibility of rapid-acting interventions for severe suicide risk, among others, according to Dr. Gordon, who became director of the agency in 2016.
“We have a number of initiatives aimed at taking what we’ve learned over the past few years, and helping that have a significant public health impact,” Dr. Gordon said.
Dr. Gordon reported no disclosures.
SOURCE: Gordon JA. APA 2020, Abstract.
Suicide prevention is a high priority for the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) and will be one specific area of focus in the federal agency’s 5-year strategic plan that’s set to be released soon, according to Director Joshua A. Gordon, MD, PhD.
The agency is updating its strategic plan to guide research efforts and priorities over the next 5 years, Dr. Gordon said at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, which was held as a virtual live event.
That strategic plan, which will cover a broader range of priorities, is scheduled to be published “within the next few weeks,” Dr. Gordon said.
Closing the research gap in suicide prevention is a high priority for NIMH, Dr. Gordon said, especially in light of the age-adjusted U.S. suicide rates that have been increasing consistently in men and women for the past 2 decades, as data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show.
“And although we must acknowledge we don’t quite know why, there is lots of speculation and a little bit of data, but not really conclusive stuff,” he said. “We also recognize that, in addition to trying to understand why, we need to try interventions that will reverse this increase.”
Identifying those at risk for suicide is a key focus of research, according to Dr. Gordon, who highlighted results of the ED-SAFE study, describing it as a “mainstay” of approaches to reducing risk through intervention.
In that recent study, an emergency department (ED)-based suicide prevention intervention cut total suicide attempts by 30%, compared with treatment as usual (JAMA Psychiatry. 2017 Jun;74[6]:563-70). That intervention included universal suicide risk screening plus secondary screening by the physician in the ED, discharge resources, and post-ED telephone calls intended to reduce suicide risk.
The ED-SAFE study is an example of taking the lessons learned in psychiatry and bringing them to a “broader swath” of individuals who might be at risk, said Dr. Gordon, a research psychiatrist who was a faculty member at Columbia University, New York, prior to being appointed director of NIMH.
“Of course, we’d like to do this not just in emergency rooms, but in primary care offices as well,” said Dr. Gordon, who noted that ongoing studies are aimed at demonstrating similar results in primary care patient populations, including adults and children.
Beyond this ask-and-you-will-find approach, there are “more modern” methods that involve applying predictive modeling and analytics to large data sets, identifying individuals who might not otherwise be suspected as being at risk and getting them into treatment, according to the director.
In one recent report, investigators said a risk prediction method using a machine learning approach on 3.7 million patients across five U.S. health systems was able to detect 38% of suicide attempts a mean of 2.1 years in advance (JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Mar 25;3[3]:3201262).
Machine learning might be able to detect the risk of suicidal behavior in unselected patients, based on these findings and might facilitate development of clinical decision support tools for risk reduction, the investigators said.
“We’re now studying how to implement these algorithms in real-world practice,” Dr. Gordon said.
Beyond identification, new interventions are needed for suicide reduction, he added, calling ketamine infusion “one of the most promising” recent developments that may help reduce suicidal ideation.
he said. “So the question is, can we use this in real-world practice to reduce suicide risk?”
The NIMH focus on suicide prevention will intensify the agency’s focus on recent initiatives in detecting and preventing suicide behavior and ideation in the juvenile justice system, applied research toward the goal of zero-suicide health care systems, and looking at the safety and feasibility of rapid-acting interventions for severe suicide risk, among others, according to Dr. Gordon, who became director of the agency in 2016.
“We have a number of initiatives aimed at taking what we’ve learned over the past few years, and helping that have a significant public health impact,” Dr. Gordon said.
Dr. Gordon reported no disclosures.
SOURCE: Gordon JA. APA 2020, Abstract.
Suicide prevention is a high priority for the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) and will be one specific area of focus in the federal agency’s 5-year strategic plan that’s set to be released soon, according to Director Joshua A. Gordon, MD, PhD.
The agency is updating its strategic plan to guide research efforts and priorities over the next 5 years, Dr. Gordon said at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, which was held as a virtual live event.
That strategic plan, which will cover a broader range of priorities, is scheduled to be published “within the next few weeks,” Dr. Gordon said.
Closing the research gap in suicide prevention is a high priority for NIMH, Dr. Gordon said, especially in light of the age-adjusted U.S. suicide rates that have been increasing consistently in men and women for the past 2 decades, as data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show.
“And although we must acknowledge we don’t quite know why, there is lots of speculation and a little bit of data, but not really conclusive stuff,” he said. “We also recognize that, in addition to trying to understand why, we need to try interventions that will reverse this increase.”
Identifying those at risk for suicide is a key focus of research, according to Dr. Gordon, who highlighted results of the ED-SAFE study, describing it as a “mainstay” of approaches to reducing risk through intervention.
In that recent study, an emergency department (ED)-based suicide prevention intervention cut total suicide attempts by 30%, compared with treatment as usual (JAMA Psychiatry. 2017 Jun;74[6]:563-70). That intervention included universal suicide risk screening plus secondary screening by the physician in the ED, discharge resources, and post-ED telephone calls intended to reduce suicide risk.
The ED-SAFE study is an example of taking the lessons learned in psychiatry and bringing them to a “broader swath” of individuals who might be at risk, said Dr. Gordon, a research psychiatrist who was a faculty member at Columbia University, New York, prior to being appointed director of NIMH.
“Of course, we’d like to do this not just in emergency rooms, but in primary care offices as well,” said Dr. Gordon, who noted that ongoing studies are aimed at demonstrating similar results in primary care patient populations, including adults and children.
Beyond this ask-and-you-will-find approach, there are “more modern” methods that involve applying predictive modeling and analytics to large data sets, identifying individuals who might not otherwise be suspected as being at risk and getting them into treatment, according to the director.
In one recent report, investigators said a risk prediction method using a machine learning approach on 3.7 million patients across five U.S. health systems was able to detect 38% of suicide attempts a mean of 2.1 years in advance (JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Mar 25;3[3]:3201262).
Machine learning might be able to detect the risk of suicidal behavior in unselected patients, based on these findings and might facilitate development of clinical decision support tools for risk reduction, the investigators said.
“We’re now studying how to implement these algorithms in real-world practice,” Dr. Gordon said.
Beyond identification, new interventions are needed for suicide reduction, he added, calling ketamine infusion “one of the most promising” recent developments that may help reduce suicidal ideation.
he said. “So the question is, can we use this in real-world practice to reduce suicide risk?”
The NIMH focus on suicide prevention will intensify the agency’s focus on recent initiatives in detecting and preventing suicide behavior and ideation in the juvenile justice system, applied research toward the goal of zero-suicide health care systems, and looking at the safety and feasibility of rapid-acting interventions for severe suicide risk, among others, according to Dr. Gordon, who became director of the agency in 2016.
“We have a number of initiatives aimed at taking what we’ve learned over the past few years, and helping that have a significant public health impact,” Dr. Gordon said.
Dr. Gordon reported no disclosures.
SOURCE: Gordon JA. APA 2020, Abstract.
FROM APA 2020
NSDUH data might underestimate substance use by pregnant women
New study suggests rate of alcohol use might be almost 19%
The use of alcohol, tobacco products, and drugs by pregnant women is a substantial problem that may be more prevalent than previously thought, according to researcher Kimberly Yonkers, MD.
Higher levels of substance use during pregnancy means more negative impacts on maternal and fetal, neonatal, and child health. However, one bit of good news is that pregnant women still are less likely than nonpregnant women to engage in such behavior, said Dr. Yonkers, director of psychological medicine and the Center for Wellbeing of Women and Mothers at Yale University, New Haven, Conn.
Dr. Yonkers said in a featured presentation at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, which was held as a virtual live event.
Tobacco predominates among substances of concern used by pregnant women, with 11.6% reporting past-month use in 2018, according to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Dr. Yonkers said. Alcohol was next, with 9.9% of pregnant women reporting use in the past month, followed by drugs at 5.4%, of which marijuana was the most common.
Those numbers may jump much higher when focusing on substance use that’s biologically verified, she added, referring to a recent three-center cross-sectional study she and her colleagues published in Addiction (2019 Jun 19. doi: 10.1111/add.14651). In that study, alcohol use was as high as 18.9% among pregnant women who either had positive urine or self-reported use. Similarly, rates of nicotine or nicotine byproduct detected were 27% at one center in the study, and tetrahydrocannabinol reached 29.4% at that same center.
“These numbers are impressive,” Dr. Yonkers told attendees at the meeting. “So what we may be seeing in terms of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, as valuable as it is, is in all likelihood it underestimates the use of substances in pregnancy.”
Substance use goes down in pregnancy as some women become more mindful of perinatal health, though unfortunately, that abstinence is offset by a dramatic rise in substance use in the 6-12 months’ post partum, research suggests.
Interestingly, big differences are found in both abstinence and relapse rates, with some data sets showing that, while alcohol is stopped fairly early, cigarettes are stopped much later, if at all.
On the postpartum side of the equation, relapse rates look similar for cigarettes, alcohol, and marijuana, but for some reason, cocaine relapse rates are much lower “That’s kind of nice, and we’d like to be able to understand what it is about this whole process that enabled that relative period of wellness,” Dr. Yonkers said.
Opioid use disorder is rising among pregnant women, just like it is in the general population, and 50% – or possibly even as high as 80% – of babies born to these women will experience neonatal opioid withdrawal, Dr. Yonkers said.
Maternal mortality in the United States increased by 34% from 2008 to 2016; while that’s a sobering statistic, Dr. Yonkers said, opioid-related maternal mortality doubled over that same time period.
“We really have to be mindful that we’re not just talking about taking care of kids and offspring, but we have to take care of moms – it’s really critical,” she said.
With the increasing legalization of cannabis, it’s expected that a lot more cannabis-exposed pregnancies will be seen in clinical practice, and some studies are starting to show an increase in prevalence in the preconception, prenatal, and postpartum period.
While some people feel that cannabis is benign, more data are needed, according to Dr. Yonkers, who said that cannabis and its metabolites cross the blood/placenta and blood/milk barriers, and that cannabinoid receptors are “very important” to fertility, implantation, and fetal development. One study recently published linked cannabis use in pregnancy to significant increases in preterm birth rates (JAMA. 2019 Jun 18;322[2]:145-52).
“We don’t really have a context for this, so we don’t really know what’s going to have an impact, and what’s not,” Dr. Yonkers said.
While both standard and novel treatments could help in the quest to achieve and maintain well-being in this unique patient population, Dr. Yonkers said that health equity and universal approaches to care might be needed to more comprehensively address the problem, which means taking a close look at how much money women have, the resources available to them, and where they live.
In many communities, eliminating inequalities in care will be critical to successfully addressing substance use issues in pregnant women, agreed Maureen Sayres Van Niel, MD, a specialist in women’s psychiatry in Boston and president of the Women’s Caucus of the APA.
“What we see is such a disparity in the delivery of care to women who are poor and living in communities where the socioeconomic and financial problems are very severe,” Dr. Van Niel said in an interview. “Unless we address these disparities, women will not be getting the kind of health care that they really need to have in the perinatal period.”
Dr. Yonkers reported a disclosure related to UpToDate.
New study suggests rate of alcohol use might be almost 19%
New study suggests rate of alcohol use might be almost 19%
The use of alcohol, tobacco products, and drugs by pregnant women is a substantial problem that may be more prevalent than previously thought, according to researcher Kimberly Yonkers, MD.
Higher levels of substance use during pregnancy means more negative impacts on maternal and fetal, neonatal, and child health. However, one bit of good news is that pregnant women still are less likely than nonpregnant women to engage in such behavior, said Dr. Yonkers, director of psychological medicine and the Center for Wellbeing of Women and Mothers at Yale University, New Haven, Conn.
Dr. Yonkers said in a featured presentation at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, which was held as a virtual live event.
Tobacco predominates among substances of concern used by pregnant women, with 11.6% reporting past-month use in 2018, according to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Dr. Yonkers said. Alcohol was next, with 9.9% of pregnant women reporting use in the past month, followed by drugs at 5.4%, of which marijuana was the most common.
Those numbers may jump much higher when focusing on substance use that’s biologically verified, she added, referring to a recent three-center cross-sectional study she and her colleagues published in Addiction (2019 Jun 19. doi: 10.1111/add.14651). In that study, alcohol use was as high as 18.9% among pregnant women who either had positive urine or self-reported use. Similarly, rates of nicotine or nicotine byproduct detected were 27% at one center in the study, and tetrahydrocannabinol reached 29.4% at that same center.
“These numbers are impressive,” Dr. Yonkers told attendees at the meeting. “So what we may be seeing in terms of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, as valuable as it is, is in all likelihood it underestimates the use of substances in pregnancy.”
Substance use goes down in pregnancy as some women become more mindful of perinatal health, though unfortunately, that abstinence is offset by a dramatic rise in substance use in the 6-12 months’ post partum, research suggests.
Interestingly, big differences are found in both abstinence and relapse rates, with some data sets showing that, while alcohol is stopped fairly early, cigarettes are stopped much later, if at all.
On the postpartum side of the equation, relapse rates look similar for cigarettes, alcohol, and marijuana, but for some reason, cocaine relapse rates are much lower “That’s kind of nice, and we’d like to be able to understand what it is about this whole process that enabled that relative period of wellness,” Dr. Yonkers said.
Opioid use disorder is rising among pregnant women, just like it is in the general population, and 50% – or possibly even as high as 80% – of babies born to these women will experience neonatal opioid withdrawal, Dr. Yonkers said.
Maternal mortality in the United States increased by 34% from 2008 to 2016; while that’s a sobering statistic, Dr. Yonkers said, opioid-related maternal mortality doubled over that same time period.
“We really have to be mindful that we’re not just talking about taking care of kids and offspring, but we have to take care of moms – it’s really critical,” she said.
With the increasing legalization of cannabis, it’s expected that a lot more cannabis-exposed pregnancies will be seen in clinical practice, and some studies are starting to show an increase in prevalence in the preconception, prenatal, and postpartum period.
While some people feel that cannabis is benign, more data are needed, according to Dr. Yonkers, who said that cannabis and its metabolites cross the blood/placenta and blood/milk barriers, and that cannabinoid receptors are “very important” to fertility, implantation, and fetal development. One study recently published linked cannabis use in pregnancy to significant increases in preterm birth rates (JAMA. 2019 Jun 18;322[2]:145-52).
“We don’t really have a context for this, so we don’t really know what’s going to have an impact, and what’s not,” Dr. Yonkers said.
While both standard and novel treatments could help in the quest to achieve and maintain well-being in this unique patient population, Dr. Yonkers said that health equity and universal approaches to care might be needed to more comprehensively address the problem, which means taking a close look at how much money women have, the resources available to them, and where they live.
In many communities, eliminating inequalities in care will be critical to successfully addressing substance use issues in pregnant women, agreed Maureen Sayres Van Niel, MD, a specialist in women’s psychiatry in Boston and president of the Women’s Caucus of the APA.
“What we see is such a disparity in the delivery of care to women who are poor and living in communities where the socioeconomic and financial problems are very severe,” Dr. Van Niel said in an interview. “Unless we address these disparities, women will not be getting the kind of health care that they really need to have in the perinatal period.”
Dr. Yonkers reported a disclosure related to UpToDate.
The use of alcohol, tobacco products, and drugs by pregnant women is a substantial problem that may be more prevalent than previously thought, according to researcher Kimberly Yonkers, MD.
Higher levels of substance use during pregnancy means more negative impacts on maternal and fetal, neonatal, and child health. However, one bit of good news is that pregnant women still are less likely than nonpregnant women to engage in such behavior, said Dr. Yonkers, director of psychological medicine and the Center for Wellbeing of Women and Mothers at Yale University, New Haven, Conn.
Dr. Yonkers said in a featured presentation at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, which was held as a virtual live event.
Tobacco predominates among substances of concern used by pregnant women, with 11.6% reporting past-month use in 2018, according to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Dr. Yonkers said. Alcohol was next, with 9.9% of pregnant women reporting use in the past month, followed by drugs at 5.4%, of which marijuana was the most common.
Those numbers may jump much higher when focusing on substance use that’s biologically verified, she added, referring to a recent three-center cross-sectional study she and her colleagues published in Addiction (2019 Jun 19. doi: 10.1111/add.14651). In that study, alcohol use was as high as 18.9% among pregnant women who either had positive urine or self-reported use. Similarly, rates of nicotine or nicotine byproduct detected were 27% at one center in the study, and tetrahydrocannabinol reached 29.4% at that same center.
“These numbers are impressive,” Dr. Yonkers told attendees at the meeting. “So what we may be seeing in terms of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, as valuable as it is, is in all likelihood it underestimates the use of substances in pregnancy.”
Substance use goes down in pregnancy as some women become more mindful of perinatal health, though unfortunately, that abstinence is offset by a dramatic rise in substance use in the 6-12 months’ post partum, research suggests.
Interestingly, big differences are found in both abstinence and relapse rates, with some data sets showing that, while alcohol is stopped fairly early, cigarettes are stopped much later, if at all.
On the postpartum side of the equation, relapse rates look similar for cigarettes, alcohol, and marijuana, but for some reason, cocaine relapse rates are much lower “That’s kind of nice, and we’d like to be able to understand what it is about this whole process that enabled that relative period of wellness,” Dr. Yonkers said.
Opioid use disorder is rising among pregnant women, just like it is in the general population, and 50% – or possibly even as high as 80% – of babies born to these women will experience neonatal opioid withdrawal, Dr. Yonkers said.
Maternal mortality in the United States increased by 34% from 2008 to 2016; while that’s a sobering statistic, Dr. Yonkers said, opioid-related maternal mortality doubled over that same time period.
“We really have to be mindful that we’re not just talking about taking care of kids and offspring, but we have to take care of moms – it’s really critical,” she said.
With the increasing legalization of cannabis, it’s expected that a lot more cannabis-exposed pregnancies will be seen in clinical practice, and some studies are starting to show an increase in prevalence in the preconception, prenatal, and postpartum period.
While some people feel that cannabis is benign, more data are needed, according to Dr. Yonkers, who said that cannabis and its metabolites cross the blood/placenta and blood/milk barriers, and that cannabinoid receptors are “very important” to fertility, implantation, and fetal development. One study recently published linked cannabis use in pregnancy to significant increases in preterm birth rates (JAMA. 2019 Jun 18;322[2]:145-52).
“We don’t really have a context for this, so we don’t really know what’s going to have an impact, and what’s not,” Dr. Yonkers said.
While both standard and novel treatments could help in the quest to achieve and maintain well-being in this unique patient population, Dr. Yonkers said that health equity and universal approaches to care might be needed to more comprehensively address the problem, which means taking a close look at how much money women have, the resources available to them, and where they live.
In many communities, eliminating inequalities in care will be critical to successfully addressing substance use issues in pregnant women, agreed Maureen Sayres Van Niel, MD, a specialist in women’s psychiatry in Boston and president of the Women’s Caucus of the APA.
“What we see is such a disparity in the delivery of care to women who are poor and living in communities where the socioeconomic and financial problems are very severe,” Dr. Van Niel said in an interview. “Unless we address these disparities, women will not be getting the kind of health care that they really need to have in the perinatal period.”
Dr. Yonkers reported a disclosure related to UpToDate.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM APA 2020
Reframing AUD as treatable may reduce stigma
As alcohol-related death and disease rates rise, framing alcohol use disorder as a treatable disease with neurobiologic underpinnings might help reduce the stigma that many patients endure, according to George F. Koob, PhD, director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA).
“Alcohol misuse and alcohol use disorder (AUD) have not gone away during the opioid crisis, and [they have] not gone away during the current (COVID-19) pandemic,” Dr. Koob said in a presentation at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, which was held as a virtual live event.
There are at least 14 million individuals in the United States with AUD now, compared with 2 million with opioid use disorder, Dr. Koob said.
– just like hypertension or diabetes are treatable chronic conditions.
However, framing AUD as a treatable chronic condition is just one of many issues that need to be addressed, he said, adding that rates of screening and referral for AUD need to be increased among patients with other mental health conditions.
Psychiatrists can play a key role in reducing that screening and treatment gap, though concerningly, data suggest fewer than half of psychiatric patients with substance use disorders (SUDs) are being diagnosed or treated, said Andrew J. Saxon, MD, director of the Center of Excellence in Substance Abuse Treatment and Education (CESATE) VA Puget Sound Health Care System in Seattle.
Only about 9% of psychiatrist office visits from 2012 to 2015 involved a substance use disorder diagnosis or prescribed medication, whereas at least 20% of adults with mental health conditions also have an SUD, according to authors of a recent study in Psychiatric Services (2018 Jan 16. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201700457).
Better efforts are needed to improve training or somehow better incentivize psychiatrists to screen for alcohol use disorder and make sure patients get treatment for addiction, Dr. Saxon said in an interview.
“What we have is a lack of subspecialists in addiction psychiatry,” said Dr. Saxon, former director of the addiction psychiatry residency program at the University of Washington. “That becomes self-perpetuating, because we don’t have the knowledge experts to train the residents, and therefore, the residency programs don’t provide a rich enough experience.”
Changes in alcohol-related deaths
A new report (Alcoholism Clin Exper Res. 2020 Jan;44[1]:178-87) highlights the gravity of the AUD problem, showing that alcohol-related deaths have doubled over the past few decades, Dr. Koob said in his presentation.
Among individuals 16 years of age or older, the number of alcohol-related deaths in the United States rose from 35,914 in 1999 to 72,558 (or about 2.6% of all U.S. deaths) in 2017, according to that report, which was based on U.S. mortality data from the National Center for Health Statistics. The largest increase was seen in non-Hispanic white females, according to the investigators.
Alcohol is playing a more prominent role in “deaths of despair,” said Dr. Koob, noting that it contributes to about one-quarter of suicides and up to 20% of drug overdoses. “Probably even more salient is that half of liver disease in the United States is now caused by alcohol,” he added.
Misuse of alcohol is correlated with poor mental health, an observation that Dr. Koob said was particularly relevant to the current COVID-19 pandemic, he said, since alcohol is commonly used to cope with stress and symptoms of mental health conditions.
“In the end, it makes the prognosis worse,” he said.
Addressing AUD stigma
A better understanding of the neurobiology of addiction may reduce the stigma associated with AUD, helping reframe the issue as a “health condition, rather than as a moral failing,” Dr. Koob said.
Stigma remains a major barrier to AUD treatment, he added, explaining that factors contributing to stigma include shame patients may feel for what they perceive as a personal failure, and lack of knowledge about treatment options.
Separating AUD treatment from primary care exacerbates that problem, perpetuating the sense that AUD is somehow a “different” kind of issue, he said.
Health care clinicians in primary care can help alleviate the stigma by engaging in screening and offering referral to treatment, he said, adding that the NIAAA offers a navigator website designed to help individuals negotiate the process of choosing a treatment approach for AUD.
Language matters, according to Dr. Koob, who suggested using nonstigmatizing “person-first” terminology to refer to affected individuals not as alcoholics, but as “persons with AUD.”
Challenges ahead for AUD
There’s still a lot of work to be done to understand differences in alcohol pathology between men and women, especially as gaps narrow between the sexes for AUD incidence, early-onset drinking, frequency and intensity of drinking, and self-reported consequences, Dr. Koob said.
Age differences are also important to study. On one hand, older individuals appear to be more sensitive to the effects of alcohol, he said, because of metabolism changes, neurocognitive decline, and “inflamm-aging,” or the chronic and low level inflammatory state associated with aging.
Adolescents are also an increased-risk population of research interest, since brain wiring connections are “particularly sensitive” to alcohol in the teen years, potentially setting up changes in vulnerability to AUD that last into adulthood.
Other challenges include the unmet need for better and more individualized AUD treatments, the issue of alcohol tolerance, which Dr. Koob said has been “ignored for many years” by researchers, the contribution of pain to AUD, and the way that dysregulated sleep contributes to AUD, and vice versa.
Research likewise remains “challenging” regarding conditions that are frequently found in conjunction with AUD, such as major depressive episodes, anxiety disorders, and posttraumatic stress disorder: “These are all areas that we’re intensely interested in as comorbidities with AUD,” Dr. Koob said.
Dr. Koob reported no disclosures.
SOURCE: Koob GF. APA 2020, Abstract.
As alcohol-related death and disease rates rise, framing alcohol use disorder as a treatable disease with neurobiologic underpinnings might help reduce the stigma that many patients endure, according to George F. Koob, PhD, director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA).
“Alcohol misuse and alcohol use disorder (AUD) have not gone away during the opioid crisis, and [they have] not gone away during the current (COVID-19) pandemic,” Dr. Koob said in a presentation at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, which was held as a virtual live event.
There are at least 14 million individuals in the United States with AUD now, compared with 2 million with opioid use disorder, Dr. Koob said.
– just like hypertension or diabetes are treatable chronic conditions.
However, framing AUD as a treatable chronic condition is just one of many issues that need to be addressed, he said, adding that rates of screening and referral for AUD need to be increased among patients with other mental health conditions.
Psychiatrists can play a key role in reducing that screening and treatment gap, though concerningly, data suggest fewer than half of psychiatric patients with substance use disorders (SUDs) are being diagnosed or treated, said Andrew J. Saxon, MD, director of the Center of Excellence in Substance Abuse Treatment and Education (CESATE) VA Puget Sound Health Care System in Seattle.
Only about 9% of psychiatrist office visits from 2012 to 2015 involved a substance use disorder diagnosis or prescribed medication, whereas at least 20% of adults with mental health conditions also have an SUD, according to authors of a recent study in Psychiatric Services (2018 Jan 16. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201700457).
Better efforts are needed to improve training or somehow better incentivize psychiatrists to screen for alcohol use disorder and make sure patients get treatment for addiction, Dr. Saxon said in an interview.
“What we have is a lack of subspecialists in addiction psychiatry,” said Dr. Saxon, former director of the addiction psychiatry residency program at the University of Washington. “That becomes self-perpetuating, because we don’t have the knowledge experts to train the residents, and therefore, the residency programs don’t provide a rich enough experience.”
Changes in alcohol-related deaths
A new report (Alcoholism Clin Exper Res. 2020 Jan;44[1]:178-87) highlights the gravity of the AUD problem, showing that alcohol-related deaths have doubled over the past few decades, Dr. Koob said in his presentation.
Among individuals 16 years of age or older, the number of alcohol-related deaths in the United States rose from 35,914 in 1999 to 72,558 (or about 2.6% of all U.S. deaths) in 2017, according to that report, which was based on U.S. mortality data from the National Center for Health Statistics. The largest increase was seen in non-Hispanic white females, according to the investigators.
Alcohol is playing a more prominent role in “deaths of despair,” said Dr. Koob, noting that it contributes to about one-quarter of suicides and up to 20% of drug overdoses. “Probably even more salient is that half of liver disease in the United States is now caused by alcohol,” he added.
Misuse of alcohol is correlated with poor mental health, an observation that Dr. Koob said was particularly relevant to the current COVID-19 pandemic, he said, since alcohol is commonly used to cope with stress and symptoms of mental health conditions.
“In the end, it makes the prognosis worse,” he said.
Addressing AUD stigma
A better understanding of the neurobiology of addiction may reduce the stigma associated with AUD, helping reframe the issue as a “health condition, rather than as a moral failing,” Dr. Koob said.
Stigma remains a major barrier to AUD treatment, he added, explaining that factors contributing to stigma include shame patients may feel for what they perceive as a personal failure, and lack of knowledge about treatment options.
Separating AUD treatment from primary care exacerbates that problem, perpetuating the sense that AUD is somehow a “different” kind of issue, he said.
Health care clinicians in primary care can help alleviate the stigma by engaging in screening and offering referral to treatment, he said, adding that the NIAAA offers a navigator website designed to help individuals negotiate the process of choosing a treatment approach for AUD.
Language matters, according to Dr. Koob, who suggested using nonstigmatizing “person-first” terminology to refer to affected individuals not as alcoholics, but as “persons with AUD.”
Challenges ahead for AUD
There’s still a lot of work to be done to understand differences in alcohol pathology between men and women, especially as gaps narrow between the sexes for AUD incidence, early-onset drinking, frequency and intensity of drinking, and self-reported consequences, Dr. Koob said.
Age differences are also important to study. On one hand, older individuals appear to be more sensitive to the effects of alcohol, he said, because of metabolism changes, neurocognitive decline, and “inflamm-aging,” or the chronic and low level inflammatory state associated with aging.
Adolescents are also an increased-risk population of research interest, since brain wiring connections are “particularly sensitive” to alcohol in the teen years, potentially setting up changes in vulnerability to AUD that last into adulthood.
Other challenges include the unmet need for better and more individualized AUD treatments, the issue of alcohol tolerance, which Dr. Koob said has been “ignored for many years” by researchers, the contribution of pain to AUD, and the way that dysregulated sleep contributes to AUD, and vice versa.
Research likewise remains “challenging” regarding conditions that are frequently found in conjunction with AUD, such as major depressive episodes, anxiety disorders, and posttraumatic stress disorder: “These are all areas that we’re intensely interested in as comorbidities with AUD,” Dr. Koob said.
Dr. Koob reported no disclosures.
SOURCE: Koob GF. APA 2020, Abstract.
As alcohol-related death and disease rates rise, framing alcohol use disorder as a treatable disease with neurobiologic underpinnings might help reduce the stigma that many patients endure, according to George F. Koob, PhD, director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA).
“Alcohol misuse and alcohol use disorder (AUD) have not gone away during the opioid crisis, and [they have] not gone away during the current (COVID-19) pandemic,” Dr. Koob said in a presentation at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, which was held as a virtual live event.
There are at least 14 million individuals in the United States with AUD now, compared with 2 million with opioid use disorder, Dr. Koob said.
– just like hypertension or diabetes are treatable chronic conditions.
However, framing AUD as a treatable chronic condition is just one of many issues that need to be addressed, he said, adding that rates of screening and referral for AUD need to be increased among patients with other mental health conditions.
Psychiatrists can play a key role in reducing that screening and treatment gap, though concerningly, data suggest fewer than half of psychiatric patients with substance use disorders (SUDs) are being diagnosed or treated, said Andrew J. Saxon, MD, director of the Center of Excellence in Substance Abuse Treatment and Education (CESATE) VA Puget Sound Health Care System in Seattle.
Only about 9% of psychiatrist office visits from 2012 to 2015 involved a substance use disorder diagnosis or prescribed medication, whereas at least 20% of adults with mental health conditions also have an SUD, according to authors of a recent study in Psychiatric Services (2018 Jan 16. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201700457).
Better efforts are needed to improve training or somehow better incentivize psychiatrists to screen for alcohol use disorder and make sure patients get treatment for addiction, Dr. Saxon said in an interview.
“What we have is a lack of subspecialists in addiction psychiatry,” said Dr. Saxon, former director of the addiction psychiatry residency program at the University of Washington. “That becomes self-perpetuating, because we don’t have the knowledge experts to train the residents, and therefore, the residency programs don’t provide a rich enough experience.”
Changes in alcohol-related deaths
A new report (Alcoholism Clin Exper Res. 2020 Jan;44[1]:178-87) highlights the gravity of the AUD problem, showing that alcohol-related deaths have doubled over the past few decades, Dr. Koob said in his presentation.
Among individuals 16 years of age or older, the number of alcohol-related deaths in the United States rose from 35,914 in 1999 to 72,558 (or about 2.6% of all U.S. deaths) in 2017, according to that report, which was based on U.S. mortality data from the National Center for Health Statistics. The largest increase was seen in non-Hispanic white females, according to the investigators.
Alcohol is playing a more prominent role in “deaths of despair,” said Dr. Koob, noting that it contributes to about one-quarter of suicides and up to 20% of drug overdoses. “Probably even more salient is that half of liver disease in the United States is now caused by alcohol,” he added.
Misuse of alcohol is correlated with poor mental health, an observation that Dr. Koob said was particularly relevant to the current COVID-19 pandemic, he said, since alcohol is commonly used to cope with stress and symptoms of mental health conditions.
“In the end, it makes the prognosis worse,” he said.
Addressing AUD stigma
A better understanding of the neurobiology of addiction may reduce the stigma associated with AUD, helping reframe the issue as a “health condition, rather than as a moral failing,” Dr. Koob said.
Stigma remains a major barrier to AUD treatment, he added, explaining that factors contributing to stigma include shame patients may feel for what they perceive as a personal failure, and lack of knowledge about treatment options.
Separating AUD treatment from primary care exacerbates that problem, perpetuating the sense that AUD is somehow a “different” kind of issue, he said.
Health care clinicians in primary care can help alleviate the stigma by engaging in screening and offering referral to treatment, he said, adding that the NIAAA offers a navigator website designed to help individuals negotiate the process of choosing a treatment approach for AUD.
Language matters, according to Dr. Koob, who suggested using nonstigmatizing “person-first” terminology to refer to affected individuals not as alcoholics, but as “persons with AUD.”
Challenges ahead for AUD
There’s still a lot of work to be done to understand differences in alcohol pathology between men and women, especially as gaps narrow between the sexes for AUD incidence, early-onset drinking, frequency and intensity of drinking, and self-reported consequences, Dr. Koob said.
Age differences are also important to study. On one hand, older individuals appear to be more sensitive to the effects of alcohol, he said, because of metabolism changes, neurocognitive decline, and “inflamm-aging,” or the chronic and low level inflammatory state associated with aging.
Adolescents are also an increased-risk population of research interest, since brain wiring connections are “particularly sensitive” to alcohol in the teen years, potentially setting up changes in vulnerability to AUD that last into adulthood.
Other challenges include the unmet need for better and more individualized AUD treatments, the issue of alcohol tolerance, which Dr. Koob said has been “ignored for many years” by researchers, the contribution of pain to AUD, and the way that dysregulated sleep contributes to AUD, and vice versa.
Research likewise remains “challenging” regarding conditions that are frequently found in conjunction with AUD, such as major depressive episodes, anxiety disorders, and posttraumatic stress disorder: “These are all areas that we’re intensely interested in as comorbidities with AUD,” Dr. Koob said.
Dr. Koob reported no disclosures.
SOURCE: Koob GF. APA 2020, Abstract.
FROM APA 2020
Anti-NMDAR encephalitis or primary psychiatric disorder?
New insights and ‘red flags’ provide clues to diagnosis
It remains difficult to distinguish anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis from a primary psychiatric disorder, but recent studies have identified clinical features and proposed screening criteria that could make it easier to identify these patients who would benefit from immunotherapy, according to an expert in the neurologic disease.
Most patients with confirmed anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis will experience substantial improvement after treatment with immunotherapy and other modalities, said Josep Dalmau, MD, PhD, professor at the Catalan Institute for Research and Advanced Studies at the University of Barcelona and adjunct professor of neurology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
“In our experience, being aggressive with immune therapy ... the patients do quite well, which means that basically 85%-90% of the patients substantially improved over the next few months,” Dr. Dalmau said at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, which was held as a virtual live event.
Identified for the first time a little more than a decade ago, anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis is a rare, immune-mediated disease that is usually found in children and young adults and is more common among women. It is frequently associated with ovarian tumors and teratomas, said Dr. Dalmau, and in about 90% of cases, patients will have prominent psychiatric and behavioral symptoms.
Patients develop IgG antibodies against the GluN1 subunit of the NMDA receptor. These autoantibodies represent not only a diagnostic marker of the disease, but are also pathogenic, altering NMDA receptor–related synaptic transmission, Dr. Dalmau said.
In several recent studies, investigators have attempted to cobble together a distinct phenotype on anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis to aid psychiatrists who might encounter patients with the disease, he said.
In one of the most recent studies, researchers combed the medical literature and found that, among 544 individuals with the disease, the most common psychiatric symptoms were agitation, seen in 59%, and psychotic symptoms (particularly visual-auditory hallucinations and disorganized behavior) in 54%; catatonia was seen in 42% of adults and 35% of children.
according to a report from researchers in Berlin, Dr. Dalmau added. By picking up on those clinical signs, which included seizures, catatonia, autonomic instability, or hyperkinesia, the time from symptom onset to diagnosis could be cut in half, the researchers found.
There’s also a handy acronym that could serve as a mnemonic to pick up on “diagnostic clues” of anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis among patients with new-onset psychiatric symptoms, Dr. Dalmau said.
That acronym, published in a review article by Dr. Dalmau and colleagues, is SEARCH For NMDAR-A, covering, in order: sleep dysfunction, excitement, agitation, rapid onset, child and young adult predominance, history of psychiatric disease (absent), fluctuating catatonia, negative and positive symptoms, memory deficit, decreased verbal output, antipsychotic intolerance, rule out neuroleptic malignant syndrome, and of course, antibodies (though the final “A” also stands for additional testing, including magnetic resonance imaging, cerebrospinal fluid studies, and electroencephalogram).
While the disease can be lethal, Dr. Dalmau said most patients respond to immunotherapy, and if applicable, treatment of the underlying tumor can help. The most common first-line treatments include steroids, intravenous immunoglobulin, and plasma exchange, he said, while second-line treatments include the monoclonal anti-CD20 antibody rituximab and cyclophosphamide.
Beyond immunotherapy, patients may benefit from supportive care and psychiatric treatment. Benzodiazepines are well tolerated, but Dr. Dalmau said antipsychotic intolerance is frequent, and electroconvulsive therapy has “mixed results” in these patients.
The recovery process can take months and may be complicated by hypersomnia, hyperphagia, and hypersexuality, he added.
“Some patients improve dramatically in 1 month, but this is uncommon, really,” he said, adding that an early recovery may be a “red flag” that the underlying condition is something other than anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis.
Dr. Dalmau provided disclosures related to Cellex Foundation, Safra Foundation, Caixa Health Project Foundation, and Sage Therapeutics.
SOURCE: Dalmau J. APA 2020, Abstract.
New insights and ‘red flags’ provide clues to diagnosis
New insights and ‘red flags’ provide clues to diagnosis
It remains difficult to distinguish anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis from a primary psychiatric disorder, but recent studies have identified clinical features and proposed screening criteria that could make it easier to identify these patients who would benefit from immunotherapy, according to an expert in the neurologic disease.
Most patients with confirmed anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis will experience substantial improvement after treatment with immunotherapy and other modalities, said Josep Dalmau, MD, PhD, professor at the Catalan Institute for Research and Advanced Studies at the University of Barcelona and adjunct professor of neurology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
“In our experience, being aggressive with immune therapy ... the patients do quite well, which means that basically 85%-90% of the patients substantially improved over the next few months,” Dr. Dalmau said at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, which was held as a virtual live event.
Identified for the first time a little more than a decade ago, anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis is a rare, immune-mediated disease that is usually found in children and young adults and is more common among women. It is frequently associated with ovarian tumors and teratomas, said Dr. Dalmau, and in about 90% of cases, patients will have prominent psychiatric and behavioral symptoms.
Patients develop IgG antibodies against the GluN1 subunit of the NMDA receptor. These autoantibodies represent not only a diagnostic marker of the disease, but are also pathogenic, altering NMDA receptor–related synaptic transmission, Dr. Dalmau said.
In several recent studies, investigators have attempted to cobble together a distinct phenotype on anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis to aid psychiatrists who might encounter patients with the disease, he said.
In one of the most recent studies, researchers combed the medical literature and found that, among 544 individuals with the disease, the most common psychiatric symptoms were agitation, seen in 59%, and psychotic symptoms (particularly visual-auditory hallucinations and disorganized behavior) in 54%; catatonia was seen in 42% of adults and 35% of children.
according to a report from researchers in Berlin, Dr. Dalmau added. By picking up on those clinical signs, which included seizures, catatonia, autonomic instability, or hyperkinesia, the time from symptom onset to diagnosis could be cut in half, the researchers found.
There’s also a handy acronym that could serve as a mnemonic to pick up on “diagnostic clues” of anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis among patients with new-onset psychiatric symptoms, Dr. Dalmau said.
That acronym, published in a review article by Dr. Dalmau and colleagues, is SEARCH For NMDAR-A, covering, in order: sleep dysfunction, excitement, agitation, rapid onset, child and young adult predominance, history of psychiatric disease (absent), fluctuating catatonia, negative and positive symptoms, memory deficit, decreased verbal output, antipsychotic intolerance, rule out neuroleptic malignant syndrome, and of course, antibodies (though the final “A” also stands for additional testing, including magnetic resonance imaging, cerebrospinal fluid studies, and electroencephalogram).
While the disease can be lethal, Dr. Dalmau said most patients respond to immunotherapy, and if applicable, treatment of the underlying tumor can help. The most common first-line treatments include steroids, intravenous immunoglobulin, and plasma exchange, he said, while second-line treatments include the monoclonal anti-CD20 antibody rituximab and cyclophosphamide.
Beyond immunotherapy, patients may benefit from supportive care and psychiatric treatment. Benzodiazepines are well tolerated, but Dr. Dalmau said antipsychotic intolerance is frequent, and electroconvulsive therapy has “mixed results” in these patients.
The recovery process can take months and may be complicated by hypersomnia, hyperphagia, and hypersexuality, he added.
“Some patients improve dramatically in 1 month, but this is uncommon, really,” he said, adding that an early recovery may be a “red flag” that the underlying condition is something other than anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis.
Dr. Dalmau provided disclosures related to Cellex Foundation, Safra Foundation, Caixa Health Project Foundation, and Sage Therapeutics.
SOURCE: Dalmau J. APA 2020, Abstract.
It remains difficult to distinguish anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis from a primary psychiatric disorder, but recent studies have identified clinical features and proposed screening criteria that could make it easier to identify these patients who would benefit from immunotherapy, according to an expert in the neurologic disease.
Most patients with confirmed anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis will experience substantial improvement after treatment with immunotherapy and other modalities, said Josep Dalmau, MD, PhD, professor at the Catalan Institute for Research and Advanced Studies at the University of Barcelona and adjunct professor of neurology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
“In our experience, being aggressive with immune therapy ... the patients do quite well, which means that basically 85%-90% of the patients substantially improved over the next few months,” Dr. Dalmau said at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, which was held as a virtual live event.
Identified for the first time a little more than a decade ago, anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis is a rare, immune-mediated disease that is usually found in children and young adults and is more common among women. It is frequently associated with ovarian tumors and teratomas, said Dr. Dalmau, and in about 90% of cases, patients will have prominent psychiatric and behavioral symptoms.
Patients develop IgG antibodies against the GluN1 subunit of the NMDA receptor. These autoantibodies represent not only a diagnostic marker of the disease, but are also pathogenic, altering NMDA receptor–related synaptic transmission, Dr. Dalmau said.
In several recent studies, investigators have attempted to cobble together a distinct phenotype on anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis to aid psychiatrists who might encounter patients with the disease, he said.
In one of the most recent studies, researchers combed the medical literature and found that, among 544 individuals with the disease, the most common psychiatric symptoms were agitation, seen in 59%, and psychotic symptoms (particularly visual-auditory hallucinations and disorganized behavior) in 54%; catatonia was seen in 42% of adults and 35% of children.
according to a report from researchers in Berlin, Dr. Dalmau added. By picking up on those clinical signs, which included seizures, catatonia, autonomic instability, or hyperkinesia, the time from symptom onset to diagnosis could be cut in half, the researchers found.
There’s also a handy acronym that could serve as a mnemonic to pick up on “diagnostic clues” of anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis among patients with new-onset psychiatric symptoms, Dr. Dalmau said.
That acronym, published in a review article by Dr. Dalmau and colleagues, is SEARCH For NMDAR-A, covering, in order: sleep dysfunction, excitement, agitation, rapid onset, child and young adult predominance, history of psychiatric disease (absent), fluctuating catatonia, negative and positive symptoms, memory deficit, decreased verbal output, antipsychotic intolerance, rule out neuroleptic malignant syndrome, and of course, antibodies (though the final “A” also stands for additional testing, including magnetic resonance imaging, cerebrospinal fluid studies, and electroencephalogram).
While the disease can be lethal, Dr. Dalmau said most patients respond to immunotherapy, and if applicable, treatment of the underlying tumor can help. The most common first-line treatments include steroids, intravenous immunoglobulin, and plasma exchange, he said, while second-line treatments include the monoclonal anti-CD20 antibody rituximab and cyclophosphamide.
Beyond immunotherapy, patients may benefit from supportive care and psychiatric treatment. Benzodiazepines are well tolerated, but Dr. Dalmau said antipsychotic intolerance is frequent, and electroconvulsive therapy has “mixed results” in these patients.
The recovery process can take months and may be complicated by hypersomnia, hyperphagia, and hypersexuality, he added.
“Some patients improve dramatically in 1 month, but this is uncommon, really,” he said, adding that an early recovery may be a “red flag” that the underlying condition is something other than anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis.
Dr. Dalmau provided disclosures related to Cellex Foundation, Safra Foundation, Caixa Health Project Foundation, and Sage Therapeutics.
SOURCE: Dalmau J. APA 2020, Abstract.
FROM APA 2020
COVID-19: Telemedicine boosting access but is not a panacea
The recent surge in telemedicine services fueled by the COVID-19 pandemic has improved access to psychiatry care and may have set the stage for even more dramatic forays into virtual care in the future. However, not all patients want video visits, and it is not clear that the way telepsychiatry is practiced right now will be the best model for clinical practice once the crisis abates, speakers said at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, which was held as a virtual live event.
The COVID-19 pandemic has effectively “democratized” telepsychiatry, a mode of health care delivery that previously was thought of as “overly complex” and limited to a few specialists, said Avrim Fishkind, MD, CEO/consultant in emergency psychiatry and psychiatric emergency services design at Empathic Soul Health in Houston.
“In a blink of an eye, every psychiatrist and every mental health professional now can see themselves – and many have been forced into – becoming telepsychiatrists,” Dr. Fishkind said in a presentation at the meeting.
“Access to you is fantastic ... and your no-show rates decrease dramatically when people have flexibility to talk to you when they want to schedule and where they want to schedule.”
On the other hand, telepsychiatry should not be viewed as a panacea, cautioned Patrice A. Harris, MD, a child and adolescent psychiatrist and current president of the American Medical Association. The AMA has advocated for the more flexible federal regulations and payment policies that have helped boost telemedicine adoption during the crisis.
“Not every regulation that was relaxed, and not everything we are doing now in the midst of this pandemic, should be continued,” Dr. Harris said in a question-and-answer session earlier in the conference.
“I don’t want us all to say, ‘Wow, we had this experience, and it worked,’ and then continue to do it in the exact same way,” she added. “I know that we, the APA, and AMA, will be there to have a thoughtful, science-based, data-driven conversation about the next move regarding telemedicine and telehealth after we get through this pandemic.”
Telepsychiatry has nevertheless proven very versatile and applicable to a broad swath of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to Dr. Fishkind. “I start from the position that I can see every patient this way, and I have to find a reason why I can’t,” said Dr. Fishkind, who also is lead telepsychiatrist at the Harris Center in Houston and a past president of the American Association for Emergency Psychiatry.
Telemedicine services can be as good as office visits, if not better, he told attendees at the virtual meeting. For example, a virtual visit can obviate the need for an in-person evaluation of a child with autism for whom an in-person visit would be challenging for the patient and parent alike.
However, Dr. Fishkind acknowledged that telepsychiatry is not for everyone: “I don’t want to say it’s heaven on earth. There are some patients who do refuse to be seen this way.”
What happens next in telepsychiatry is anyone’s guess, though Dr. Fishkind said he envisions an online “wheel of access” model of psychiatric services delivery.
In this portal-style model, the psychiatric patient might log in, answer a few automated questions, and then, based on their responses, they would be routed to a social worker or nurse navigator at the center of that services wheel.
In turn, the navigator might route the patient to one of the services on the spokes of the wheel, such as a psychiatrist consult, video-based or online cognitive-behavioral therapy, peer forums, group therapy, a pharmacist, or to other clinicians and interventions.
“Patients would have instant access to all of the things that we always want them to have access to – but now, by using virtual technologies, they could actually get them,” said Dr. Fishkind.
Dr. Fishkind reported no financial conflicts.
SOURCE: Fishkind A. APA 2020, Abstract.
The recent surge in telemedicine services fueled by the COVID-19 pandemic has improved access to psychiatry care and may have set the stage for even more dramatic forays into virtual care in the future. However, not all patients want video visits, and it is not clear that the way telepsychiatry is practiced right now will be the best model for clinical practice once the crisis abates, speakers said at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, which was held as a virtual live event.
The COVID-19 pandemic has effectively “democratized” telepsychiatry, a mode of health care delivery that previously was thought of as “overly complex” and limited to a few specialists, said Avrim Fishkind, MD, CEO/consultant in emergency psychiatry and psychiatric emergency services design at Empathic Soul Health in Houston.
“In a blink of an eye, every psychiatrist and every mental health professional now can see themselves – and many have been forced into – becoming telepsychiatrists,” Dr. Fishkind said in a presentation at the meeting.
“Access to you is fantastic ... and your no-show rates decrease dramatically when people have flexibility to talk to you when they want to schedule and where they want to schedule.”
On the other hand, telepsychiatry should not be viewed as a panacea, cautioned Patrice A. Harris, MD, a child and adolescent psychiatrist and current president of the American Medical Association. The AMA has advocated for the more flexible federal regulations and payment policies that have helped boost telemedicine adoption during the crisis.
“Not every regulation that was relaxed, and not everything we are doing now in the midst of this pandemic, should be continued,” Dr. Harris said in a question-and-answer session earlier in the conference.
“I don’t want us all to say, ‘Wow, we had this experience, and it worked,’ and then continue to do it in the exact same way,” she added. “I know that we, the APA, and AMA, will be there to have a thoughtful, science-based, data-driven conversation about the next move regarding telemedicine and telehealth after we get through this pandemic.”
Telepsychiatry has nevertheless proven very versatile and applicable to a broad swath of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to Dr. Fishkind. “I start from the position that I can see every patient this way, and I have to find a reason why I can’t,” said Dr. Fishkind, who also is lead telepsychiatrist at the Harris Center in Houston and a past president of the American Association for Emergency Psychiatry.
Telemedicine services can be as good as office visits, if not better, he told attendees at the virtual meeting. For example, a virtual visit can obviate the need for an in-person evaluation of a child with autism for whom an in-person visit would be challenging for the patient and parent alike.
However, Dr. Fishkind acknowledged that telepsychiatry is not for everyone: “I don’t want to say it’s heaven on earth. There are some patients who do refuse to be seen this way.”
What happens next in telepsychiatry is anyone’s guess, though Dr. Fishkind said he envisions an online “wheel of access” model of psychiatric services delivery.
In this portal-style model, the psychiatric patient might log in, answer a few automated questions, and then, based on their responses, they would be routed to a social worker or nurse navigator at the center of that services wheel.
In turn, the navigator might route the patient to one of the services on the spokes of the wheel, such as a psychiatrist consult, video-based or online cognitive-behavioral therapy, peer forums, group therapy, a pharmacist, or to other clinicians and interventions.
“Patients would have instant access to all of the things that we always want them to have access to – but now, by using virtual technologies, they could actually get them,” said Dr. Fishkind.
Dr. Fishkind reported no financial conflicts.
SOURCE: Fishkind A. APA 2020, Abstract.
The recent surge in telemedicine services fueled by the COVID-19 pandemic has improved access to psychiatry care and may have set the stage for even more dramatic forays into virtual care in the future. However, not all patients want video visits, and it is not clear that the way telepsychiatry is practiced right now will be the best model for clinical practice once the crisis abates, speakers said at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, which was held as a virtual live event.
The COVID-19 pandemic has effectively “democratized” telepsychiatry, a mode of health care delivery that previously was thought of as “overly complex” and limited to a few specialists, said Avrim Fishkind, MD, CEO/consultant in emergency psychiatry and psychiatric emergency services design at Empathic Soul Health in Houston.
“In a blink of an eye, every psychiatrist and every mental health professional now can see themselves – and many have been forced into – becoming telepsychiatrists,” Dr. Fishkind said in a presentation at the meeting.
“Access to you is fantastic ... and your no-show rates decrease dramatically when people have flexibility to talk to you when they want to schedule and where they want to schedule.”
On the other hand, telepsychiatry should not be viewed as a panacea, cautioned Patrice A. Harris, MD, a child and adolescent psychiatrist and current president of the American Medical Association. The AMA has advocated for the more flexible federal regulations and payment policies that have helped boost telemedicine adoption during the crisis.
“Not every regulation that was relaxed, and not everything we are doing now in the midst of this pandemic, should be continued,” Dr. Harris said in a question-and-answer session earlier in the conference.
“I don’t want us all to say, ‘Wow, we had this experience, and it worked,’ and then continue to do it in the exact same way,” she added. “I know that we, the APA, and AMA, will be there to have a thoughtful, science-based, data-driven conversation about the next move regarding telemedicine and telehealth after we get through this pandemic.”
Telepsychiatry has nevertheless proven very versatile and applicable to a broad swath of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to Dr. Fishkind. “I start from the position that I can see every patient this way, and I have to find a reason why I can’t,” said Dr. Fishkind, who also is lead telepsychiatrist at the Harris Center in Houston and a past president of the American Association for Emergency Psychiatry.
Telemedicine services can be as good as office visits, if not better, he told attendees at the virtual meeting. For example, a virtual visit can obviate the need for an in-person evaluation of a child with autism for whom an in-person visit would be challenging for the patient and parent alike.
However, Dr. Fishkind acknowledged that telepsychiatry is not for everyone: “I don’t want to say it’s heaven on earth. There are some patients who do refuse to be seen this way.”
What happens next in telepsychiatry is anyone’s guess, though Dr. Fishkind said he envisions an online “wheel of access” model of psychiatric services delivery.
In this portal-style model, the psychiatric patient might log in, answer a few automated questions, and then, based on their responses, they would be routed to a social worker or nurse navigator at the center of that services wheel.
In turn, the navigator might route the patient to one of the services on the spokes of the wheel, such as a psychiatrist consult, video-based or online cognitive-behavioral therapy, peer forums, group therapy, a pharmacist, or to other clinicians and interventions.
“Patients would have instant access to all of the things that we always want them to have access to – but now, by using virtual technologies, they could actually get them,” said Dr. Fishkind.
Dr. Fishkind reported no financial conflicts.
SOURCE: Fishkind A. APA 2020, Abstract.
FROM APA 2020
COVID-19: Psychiatrists ‘more than a match’ for crisis moment
Tackling the COVID-19 crisis will require psychiatrists to muster the courage to lead, establish trust, and ultimately provide psychiatric care with competence, honesty, and compassion, said Patrice A. Harris, MD, an Atlanta-based psychiatrist who is president of the American Medical Association.
Leaders in psychiatry are uniquely positioned to combat a wave of disease misinformation, address inequities in care, and meet the logistical challenges of safely meeting patient needs as the outbreak continues, Dr. Harris said at the American Psychiatric Association annual meeting, which was held as a virtual live event.
“I believe you, we, are more than a match for this moment – a moment that requires our leadership and requires us to hold other leaders accountable as we fight this pandemic,” she said in remarks to online attendees.
Using trust to fight myths
Misinformation about COVID-19 has been “spreading rapidly, even intentionally, due to fear or political agendas,” said Dr. Harris, who became the 174th president of the AMA in June 2019.
Others believe the coronavirus crisis is a new way to force vaccinations on people who don’t want them, added Dr. Harris.
Myths, rumors, and conspiracy theories lead to “more illness and death,” she said, at a time when most Americans say they’ve lost trust in the federal government and even in other American citizens.
“Fortunately, people still trust us – their doctors,” she added. “We fight for science, we call out quackery and snake oil when we see it, [and] we are willing to counter the propaganda of the antiscience voice.”
Physicians are ranked among the most trusted professions because they are committed to seeing, acknowledging, and sharing patients’ human experience, “and of course, I believe we do that as psychiatrists more than most,” Dr. Harris said.
Fighting COVID-19 at the AMA level
During the pandemic, the AMA has advocated for adequate testing and supplies, adequate insurance coverage, and changes to current procedural technology (CPT) codes to streamline novel coronavirus testing. The AMA has also developed a free COVID-19 resource center on the JAMA Network website, Dr. Harris said, as well as guidance on protecting medical students responding to the pandemic.
The safety of health care clinicians remains a central issue for the AMA at a time when masks and other personal protective equipment (PPE) remain in short supply.
In a recent letter to Vice President Mike Pence, who is leading the White House’s coronavirus task force, AMA Executive Vice President and CEO James L. Madara, MD, urged the Trump administration to undertake a Manhattan Project–like effort to expand capacity for needed supplies.
“We will continue to call on the White House, and APA has as well, to make sure these needs are met,” Dr. Harris said.
COVID-19 and inequities in care
Because the pandemic has had dramatic effects on African American communities across the United States, AMA Chief Health Equity Officer Aletha Maybank, MD, has made recent media appearances to highlight care inequities and what can be done about them.
Meanwhile, the AMA and other physician associations have urged the Trump Administration to collect, analyze, and make available COVID-19 data by race and ethnicity: “We can’t fix a problem until we identify a problem,” Dr. Harris said in her address to the APA.
Relying on science
In a virtual address hosted by the National Press Club earlier in April, Dr. Harris made an appeal for “relying on the science and evidence” to inform COVID-19–related decisions.
Elected officials need to “affirm science, evidence, and fact in their words and actions,” while media need to be vigilant in citing credible sources and challenging those who “chose to trade in misinformation,” she said in that address.
Speaking at the APA virtual meeting, Dr. Harris spoke of an “assault on science for several years” that inspired the National Press Club address. “We wanted to remind the public of its responsibility to focus on science and the evidence, for us to turn the tide against COVID-19,” she explained.
Physician care and self-care
While the AMA urges social distancing, Dr. Harris used the term “physical distancing” in her APA address. Physical distancing emphasizes the need for stay-at-home and shelter-in-place restrictions, while recognizing the need for maintaining meaningful social interactions, she explained.
Social media use represents one “opportunity” to bridge that gap when physical proximity is not an option, she added.
Dr. Harris also stressed the need for physicians to “take time out and practice self-care” to ensure that they are recharged and able to provide optimal patient care.
“We need to be there for others, but we have to put our own masks on first,” she said.
Dr. Harris reported no financial relationships with commercial interests.
SOURCE: Harris PA. APA 2020 Virtual Meeting.
Tackling the COVID-19 crisis will require psychiatrists to muster the courage to lead, establish trust, and ultimately provide psychiatric care with competence, honesty, and compassion, said Patrice A. Harris, MD, an Atlanta-based psychiatrist who is president of the American Medical Association.
Leaders in psychiatry are uniquely positioned to combat a wave of disease misinformation, address inequities in care, and meet the logistical challenges of safely meeting patient needs as the outbreak continues, Dr. Harris said at the American Psychiatric Association annual meeting, which was held as a virtual live event.
“I believe you, we, are more than a match for this moment – a moment that requires our leadership and requires us to hold other leaders accountable as we fight this pandemic,” she said in remarks to online attendees.
Using trust to fight myths
Misinformation about COVID-19 has been “spreading rapidly, even intentionally, due to fear or political agendas,” said Dr. Harris, who became the 174th president of the AMA in June 2019.
Others believe the coronavirus crisis is a new way to force vaccinations on people who don’t want them, added Dr. Harris.
Myths, rumors, and conspiracy theories lead to “more illness and death,” she said, at a time when most Americans say they’ve lost trust in the federal government and even in other American citizens.
“Fortunately, people still trust us – their doctors,” she added. “We fight for science, we call out quackery and snake oil when we see it, [and] we are willing to counter the propaganda of the antiscience voice.”
Physicians are ranked among the most trusted professions because they are committed to seeing, acknowledging, and sharing patients’ human experience, “and of course, I believe we do that as psychiatrists more than most,” Dr. Harris said.
Fighting COVID-19 at the AMA level
During the pandemic, the AMA has advocated for adequate testing and supplies, adequate insurance coverage, and changes to current procedural technology (CPT) codes to streamline novel coronavirus testing. The AMA has also developed a free COVID-19 resource center on the JAMA Network website, Dr. Harris said, as well as guidance on protecting medical students responding to the pandemic.
The safety of health care clinicians remains a central issue for the AMA at a time when masks and other personal protective equipment (PPE) remain in short supply.
In a recent letter to Vice President Mike Pence, who is leading the White House’s coronavirus task force, AMA Executive Vice President and CEO James L. Madara, MD, urged the Trump administration to undertake a Manhattan Project–like effort to expand capacity for needed supplies.
“We will continue to call on the White House, and APA has as well, to make sure these needs are met,” Dr. Harris said.
COVID-19 and inequities in care
Because the pandemic has had dramatic effects on African American communities across the United States, AMA Chief Health Equity Officer Aletha Maybank, MD, has made recent media appearances to highlight care inequities and what can be done about them.
Meanwhile, the AMA and other physician associations have urged the Trump Administration to collect, analyze, and make available COVID-19 data by race and ethnicity: “We can’t fix a problem until we identify a problem,” Dr. Harris said in her address to the APA.
Relying on science
In a virtual address hosted by the National Press Club earlier in April, Dr. Harris made an appeal for “relying on the science and evidence” to inform COVID-19–related decisions.
Elected officials need to “affirm science, evidence, and fact in their words and actions,” while media need to be vigilant in citing credible sources and challenging those who “chose to trade in misinformation,” she said in that address.
Speaking at the APA virtual meeting, Dr. Harris spoke of an “assault on science for several years” that inspired the National Press Club address. “We wanted to remind the public of its responsibility to focus on science and the evidence, for us to turn the tide against COVID-19,” she explained.
Physician care and self-care
While the AMA urges social distancing, Dr. Harris used the term “physical distancing” in her APA address. Physical distancing emphasizes the need for stay-at-home and shelter-in-place restrictions, while recognizing the need for maintaining meaningful social interactions, she explained.
Social media use represents one “opportunity” to bridge that gap when physical proximity is not an option, she added.
Dr. Harris also stressed the need for physicians to “take time out and practice self-care” to ensure that they are recharged and able to provide optimal patient care.
“We need to be there for others, but we have to put our own masks on first,” she said.
Dr. Harris reported no financial relationships with commercial interests.
SOURCE: Harris PA. APA 2020 Virtual Meeting.
Tackling the COVID-19 crisis will require psychiatrists to muster the courage to lead, establish trust, and ultimately provide psychiatric care with competence, honesty, and compassion, said Patrice A. Harris, MD, an Atlanta-based psychiatrist who is president of the American Medical Association.
Leaders in psychiatry are uniquely positioned to combat a wave of disease misinformation, address inequities in care, and meet the logistical challenges of safely meeting patient needs as the outbreak continues, Dr. Harris said at the American Psychiatric Association annual meeting, which was held as a virtual live event.
“I believe you, we, are more than a match for this moment – a moment that requires our leadership and requires us to hold other leaders accountable as we fight this pandemic,” she said in remarks to online attendees.
Using trust to fight myths
Misinformation about COVID-19 has been “spreading rapidly, even intentionally, due to fear or political agendas,” said Dr. Harris, who became the 174th president of the AMA in June 2019.
Others believe the coronavirus crisis is a new way to force vaccinations on people who don’t want them, added Dr. Harris.
Myths, rumors, and conspiracy theories lead to “more illness and death,” she said, at a time when most Americans say they’ve lost trust in the federal government and even in other American citizens.
“Fortunately, people still trust us – their doctors,” she added. “We fight for science, we call out quackery and snake oil when we see it, [and] we are willing to counter the propaganda of the antiscience voice.”
Physicians are ranked among the most trusted professions because they are committed to seeing, acknowledging, and sharing patients’ human experience, “and of course, I believe we do that as psychiatrists more than most,” Dr. Harris said.
Fighting COVID-19 at the AMA level
During the pandemic, the AMA has advocated for adequate testing and supplies, adequate insurance coverage, and changes to current procedural technology (CPT) codes to streamline novel coronavirus testing. The AMA has also developed a free COVID-19 resource center on the JAMA Network website, Dr. Harris said, as well as guidance on protecting medical students responding to the pandemic.
The safety of health care clinicians remains a central issue for the AMA at a time when masks and other personal protective equipment (PPE) remain in short supply.
In a recent letter to Vice President Mike Pence, who is leading the White House’s coronavirus task force, AMA Executive Vice President and CEO James L. Madara, MD, urged the Trump administration to undertake a Manhattan Project–like effort to expand capacity for needed supplies.
“We will continue to call on the White House, and APA has as well, to make sure these needs are met,” Dr. Harris said.
COVID-19 and inequities in care
Because the pandemic has had dramatic effects on African American communities across the United States, AMA Chief Health Equity Officer Aletha Maybank, MD, has made recent media appearances to highlight care inequities and what can be done about them.
Meanwhile, the AMA and other physician associations have urged the Trump Administration to collect, analyze, and make available COVID-19 data by race and ethnicity: “We can’t fix a problem until we identify a problem,” Dr. Harris said in her address to the APA.
Relying on science
In a virtual address hosted by the National Press Club earlier in April, Dr. Harris made an appeal for “relying on the science and evidence” to inform COVID-19–related decisions.
Elected officials need to “affirm science, evidence, and fact in their words and actions,” while media need to be vigilant in citing credible sources and challenging those who “chose to trade in misinformation,” she said in that address.
Speaking at the APA virtual meeting, Dr. Harris spoke of an “assault on science for several years” that inspired the National Press Club address. “We wanted to remind the public of its responsibility to focus on science and the evidence, for us to turn the tide against COVID-19,” she explained.
Physician care and self-care
While the AMA urges social distancing, Dr. Harris used the term “physical distancing” in her APA address. Physical distancing emphasizes the need for stay-at-home and shelter-in-place restrictions, while recognizing the need for maintaining meaningful social interactions, she explained.
Social media use represents one “opportunity” to bridge that gap when physical proximity is not an option, she added.
Dr. Harris also stressed the need for physicians to “take time out and practice self-care” to ensure that they are recharged and able to provide optimal patient care.
“We need to be there for others, but we have to put our own masks on first,” she said.
Dr. Harris reported no financial relationships with commercial interests.
SOURCE: Harris PA. APA 2020 Virtual Meeting.
FROM APA 2020
Get triage plans in place before COVID-19 surge hits, critical care experts say
, according to authors of recent reports that offer advice on how to prepare for surges in demand.
Even modest numbers of critically ill COVID-19 patients have already rapidly overwhelmed existing hospital capacity in hard-hit areas including Italy, Spain, and New York City, said authors of an expert panel report released in CHEST.
“The ethical burden this places on hospitals, health systems, and society is enormous,” said Ryan C. Maves, MD, FCCP, of the Naval Medical Center in San Diego, lead author of the expert panel report from the Task Force for Mass Critical Care and the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST).
Triage decisions could be especially daunting for resource-intensive therapies such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), as physicians may be forced to decide when and if to offer such support after demand outstrips a hospital’s ability to provide it.
“ECMO requires a lot of specialized capability to initiate on a patient, and then, it requires a lot of specialized capability to maintain and do safely,” said Steven P. Keller, MD, of the division of emergency critical care medicine in the department of emergency medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston.
Those resource requirements can present a challenge to health care systems already overtaxed by COVID-19, according to Dr. Keller, coauthor of a guidance document in Annals of the American Thoracic Society. The guidance suggests a pandemic approach to ECMO response that’s tiered depending on the intensity of the surge over usual hospital volumes.
Mild surges call for a focus on increasing ECMO capacity, while a moderate surge may indicate a need to focus on allocating scarce resources, and a major surge may signal the need to limit or defer use of scarce resources, according to the guidance.
“If your health care system is stretched from a resource standpoint, at what point do you say, ‘we don’t even have the capability to even safely do ECMO, and so, perhaps we should not even be offering the support’?” Dr. Keller said in an interview. “That’s what we tried to get at in the paper – helping institutions think about how to prepare for that pandemic, and then when to make decisions on when it should and should not be offered.”
Critical care guidance for COVID-19
The guidance from the Task Force for Mass Critical Care and CHEST offers nine specific actions that authors suggest as part of a framework for communities to establish the infrastructure needed to triage critical care resources and “equitably” meet the needs of the largest number of COVID-19 patients.
“It is the goal of the task force to minimize the need for allocation of scarce resources as much as possible,” the authors stated.
The framework starts with surge planning that includes an inventory of intensive care unit resources such as ventilators, beds, supplies, and staff that could be marshaled to meet a surge in demand, followed by establishing “identification triggers” for triage initiation by a regional authority, should clinical demand reach a crisis stage.
The next step is preparing the triage system, which includes creating a committee at the regional level, identifying members of tertiary triage teams and the support structures they will need, and preparing and distributing training materials.
Agreeing on a triage protocol is important to ensure equitable targeting of resources, and how to allocate limited life-sustaining measures needs to be considered, according to the panel of experts. They also recommend adaptations to the standards of care such as modification of end-of-life care policies, support for health care workers, family, and the public, and consideration of pediatric issues including transport, concentration of care at specific centers, and potential increases in age thresholds to accommodate surges.
Barriers to triage?
When asked about potential barriers to rolling out a triage plan, Dr. Maves said the first is acknowledging the possible need for such a plan: “It is a difficult concept for most in critical care to accept – the idea that we may not be able to provide an individual patient with interventions that we consider routine,” he said.
Beyond acknowledging need, other potential barriers to successful implementation include the limited evidence base to support development of these protocols, as well as the need to address public trust.
“If a triage system is perceived as unjust or biased, or if people think that triage favors or excludes certain groups unfairly, it will undermine any system,” Dr. Maves said. “Making sure the public both understands and has input into system development is critical if we are going to be able to make this work.”
Dr. Maves and coauthors reported that some of the authors of their guidance are United States government employees or military service members, and that their opinions and assertions do not reflect the official views or position of those institutions. Dr. Keller reported no disclosures related to the ECMO guidance.
chestphysiciannews@chestnet.org
SOURCES: Maves RC et al. Chest. 2020 Apr 11. pii: S0012-3692(20)30691-7. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.03.063; Seethara R and Keller SP. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2020 Apr 15. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202003-233PS.
, according to authors of recent reports that offer advice on how to prepare for surges in demand.
Even modest numbers of critically ill COVID-19 patients have already rapidly overwhelmed existing hospital capacity in hard-hit areas including Italy, Spain, and New York City, said authors of an expert panel report released in CHEST.
“The ethical burden this places on hospitals, health systems, and society is enormous,” said Ryan C. Maves, MD, FCCP, of the Naval Medical Center in San Diego, lead author of the expert panel report from the Task Force for Mass Critical Care and the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST).
Triage decisions could be especially daunting for resource-intensive therapies such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), as physicians may be forced to decide when and if to offer such support after demand outstrips a hospital’s ability to provide it.
“ECMO requires a lot of specialized capability to initiate on a patient, and then, it requires a lot of specialized capability to maintain and do safely,” said Steven P. Keller, MD, of the division of emergency critical care medicine in the department of emergency medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston.
Those resource requirements can present a challenge to health care systems already overtaxed by COVID-19, according to Dr. Keller, coauthor of a guidance document in Annals of the American Thoracic Society. The guidance suggests a pandemic approach to ECMO response that’s tiered depending on the intensity of the surge over usual hospital volumes.
Mild surges call for a focus on increasing ECMO capacity, while a moderate surge may indicate a need to focus on allocating scarce resources, and a major surge may signal the need to limit or defer use of scarce resources, according to the guidance.
“If your health care system is stretched from a resource standpoint, at what point do you say, ‘we don’t even have the capability to even safely do ECMO, and so, perhaps we should not even be offering the support’?” Dr. Keller said in an interview. “That’s what we tried to get at in the paper – helping institutions think about how to prepare for that pandemic, and then when to make decisions on when it should and should not be offered.”
Critical care guidance for COVID-19
The guidance from the Task Force for Mass Critical Care and CHEST offers nine specific actions that authors suggest as part of a framework for communities to establish the infrastructure needed to triage critical care resources and “equitably” meet the needs of the largest number of COVID-19 patients.
“It is the goal of the task force to minimize the need for allocation of scarce resources as much as possible,” the authors stated.
The framework starts with surge planning that includes an inventory of intensive care unit resources such as ventilators, beds, supplies, and staff that could be marshaled to meet a surge in demand, followed by establishing “identification triggers” for triage initiation by a regional authority, should clinical demand reach a crisis stage.
The next step is preparing the triage system, which includes creating a committee at the regional level, identifying members of tertiary triage teams and the support structures they will need, and preparing and distributing training materials.
Agreeing on a triage protocol is important to ensure equitable targeting of resources, and how to allocate limited life-sustaining measures needs to be considered, according to the panel of experts. They also recommend adaptations to the standards of care such as modification of end-of-life care policies, support for health care workers, family, and the public, and consideration of pediatric issues including transport, concentration of care at specific centers, and potential increases in age thresholds to accommodate surges.
Barriers to triage?
When asked about potential barriers to rolling out a triage plan, Dr. Maves said the first is acknowledging the possible need for such a plan: “It is a difficult concept for most in critical care to accept – the idea that we may not be able to provide an individual patient with interventions that we consider routine,” he said.
Beyond acknowledging need, other potential barriers to successful implementation include the limited evidence base to support development of these protocols, as well as the need to address public trust.
“If a triage system is perceived as unjust or biased, or if people think that triage favors or excludes certain groups unfairly, it will undermine any system,” Dr. Maves said. “Making sure the public both understands and has input into system development is critical if we are going to be able to make this work.”
Dr. Maves and coauthors reported that some of the authors of their guidance are United States government employees or military service members, and that their opinions and assertions do not reflect the official views or position of those institutions. Dr. Keller reported no disclosures related to the ECMO guidance.
chestphysiciannews@chestnet.org
SOURCES: Maves RC et al. Chest. 2020 Apr 11. pii: S0012-3692(20)30691-7. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.03.063; Seethara R and Keller SP. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2020 Apr 15. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202003-233PS.
, according to authors of recent reports that offer advice on how to prepare for surges in demand.
Even modest numbers of critically ill COVID-19 patients have already rapidly overwhelmed existing hospital capacity in hard-hit areas including Italy, Spain, and New York City, said authors of an expert panel report released in CHEST.
“The ethical burden this places on hospitals, health systems, and society is enormous,” said Ryan C. Maves, MD, FCCP, of the Naval Medical Center in San Diego, lead author of the expert panel report from the Task Force for Mass Critical Care and the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST).
Triage decisions could be especially daunting for resource-intensive therapies such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), as physicians may be forced to decide when and if to offer such support after demand outstrips a hospital’s ability to provide it.
“ECMO requires a lot of specialized capability to initiate on a patient, and then, it requires a lot of specialized capability to maintain and do safely,” said Steven P. Keller, MD, of the division of emergency critical care medicine in the department of emergency medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston.
Those resource requirements can present a challenge to health care systems already overtaxed by COVID-19, according to Dr. Keller, coauthor of a guidance document in Annals of the American Thoracic Society. The guidance suggests a pandemic approach to ECMO response that’s tiered depending on the intensity of the surge over usual hospital volumes.
Mild surges call for a focus on increasing ECMO capacity, while a moderate surge may indicate a need to focus on allocating scarce resources, and a major surge may signal the need to limit or defer use of scarce resources, according to the guidance.
“If your health care system is stretched from a resource standpoint, at what point do you say, ‘we don’t even have the capability to even safely do ECMO, and so, perhaps we should not even be offering the support’?” Dr. Keller said in an interview. “That’s what we tried to get at in the paper – helping institutions think about how to prepare for that pandemic, and then when to make decisions on when it should and should not be offered.”
Critical care guidance for COVID-19
The guidance from the Task Force for Mass Critical Care and CHEST offers nine specific actions that authors suggest as part of a framework for communities to establish the infrastructure needed to triage critical care resources and “equitably” meet the needs of the largest number of COVID-19 patients.
“It is the goal of the task force to minimize the need for allocation of scarce resources as much as possible,” the authors stated.
The framework starts with surge planning that includes an inventory of intensive care unit resources such as ventilators, beds, supplies, and staff that could be marshaled to meet a surge in demand, followed by establishing “identification triggers” for triage initiation by a regional authority, should clinical demand reach a crisis stage.
The next step is preparing the triage system, which includes creating a committee at the regional level, identifying members of tertiary triage teams and the support structures they will need, and preparing and distributing training materials.
Agreeing on a triage protocol is important to ensure equitable targeting of resources, and how to allocate limited life-sustaining measures needs to be considered, according to the panel of experts. They also recommend adaptations to the standards of care such as modification of end-of-life care policies, support for health care workers, family, and the public, and consideration of pediatric issues including transport, concentration of care at specific centers, and potential increases in age thresholds to accommodate surges.
Barriers to triage?
When asked about potential barriers to rolling out a triage plan, Dr. Maves said the first is acknowledging the possible need for such a plan: “It is a difficult concept for most in critical care to accept – the idea that we may not be able to provide an individual patient with interventions that we consider routine,” he said.
Beyond acknowledging need, other potential barriers to successful implementation include the limited evidence base to support development of these protocols, as well as the need to address public trust.
“If a triage system is perceived as unjust or biased, or if people think that triage favors or excludes certain groups unfairly, it will undermine any system,” Dr. Maves said. “Making sure the public both understands and has input into system development is critical if we are going to be able to make this work.”
Dr. Maves and coauthors reported that some of the authors of their guidance are United States government employees or military service members, and that their opinions and assertions do not reflect the official views or position of those institutions. Dr. Keller reported no disclosures related to the ECMO guidance.
chestphysiciannews@chestnet.org
SOURCES: Maves RC et al. Chest. 2020 Apr 11. pii: S0012-3692(20)30691-7. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.03.063; Seethara R and Keller SP. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2020 Apr 15. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202003-233PS.
FROM CHEST AND ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN THORACIC SOCIETY