User login
Psilocybin benefits in severe depression observed up to 12 weeks
NEW ORLEANS –
“This is easily the largest study of a psychedelic drug employing modern randomized controlled trial methodology [with] 22 sites and 10 countries, so it’s not your typical phase 2 trial,” the study’s lead author, Guy M. Goodwin, MD, emeritus professor of psychiatry at the University of Oxford, England, said in an interview.
“Importantly, 94% of the patients in the study were psilocybin naive, which is very important for generalizability,” Dr. Goodwin noted.
Long used as psychedelic ‘magic mushrooms,’ psilocybin has gained increased interest in psychiatry in recent years as a potential treatment for severe depression after showing benefits in patients with life-threatening cancers and others with major depressive disorder (MDD).
To put the therapy to test in a more rigorous, randomized trial, Dr. Goodwin and colleagues conducted the phase 2b study of a proprietary synthetic formulation of psilocybin, COMP360 (COMPASS Pathways), recruiting 233 patients with treatment-resistant depression at 22 centers.
The study was presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association.
After a 2-week washout period following the discontinuation of antidepressants, the patients were randomized to one of three groups: A single dose of 25 mg (n = 79), 10 mg (n = 75), or a subtherapeutic comparison of 1 mg (n = 79).
The psilocybin was administered in the presence of specially trained therapists who provided psychological support before, during, and after the 6- to 8-hour session.
Patients were then asked to refrain from antidepressant use for at least 3 weeks following the session, and had periodic follow-up for 12 weeks.
For the primary endpoint, those in the 25-mg group, but not the 10-mg dose, showed a significantly greater reduction in depression from baseline versus the 1-mg group on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale at week 3 (MADRS; -6.6; P < .001).
The benefit was observed at day 2 and week 1 following administration, “confirming the rapid-acting character of the effect,” the investigators reported.
Sustained responses, defined as at least a 50% change from baseline in MADRS total score, were further observed up to week 12 among 20.3% in the 25-mg group and among 5.3% in the 10-mg groups versus 10.1% in the 1-mg group.
On the day of psilocybin treatment, the treatment-emergent side effects that were reported were headache, nausea, and dizziness, with event rates of 83.5% in the 25-mg group, 74.7% in the 10-mg group, and 72.2% in the 1-mg group.
One participant in the 25-mg group experienced acute anxiety and was treated with lorazepam.
The incidence of treatment-emergent serious adverse events from day 2 to week 3 was 6.3% (five patients) in the 25-mg group, 8.0% (six patients) in the 10-mg group, and 1.3% (one patient) in the 1-mg group.
Serious AEs included suicidal ideation and intentional self-injury among two patients each in the 25-mg group, while in the 10-mg group, two had suicidal ideation and one had hospitalization for severe depression.
There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of vital signs or clinical laboratory tests.
Of note, two patients in the 25-mg group had a change from baseline in QTcF >60 msec on day 2. For one patient, the increase was within normal range, and the other had a QTcF interval duration >500 msec on day 2, but levels returned to normal by day 9.
Improvements in context
Dr. Goodwin noted that the improvements were swift and impressive when compared with those of the STAR*D trial, which is the largest prospective study of treatment outcomes in patients with MDD.
“In the STAR*D trial, third- and fourth-step treatments showed low response rates of under 15% and high relapse rates,” Dr. Goodwin said. “By comparison, our response rates at 12 weeks were 20%-25%, so almost double that seen for probably equivalent treatment steps in STAR*D, with a single treatment with 25 mg, and no additional antidepressant, so no side effect burden.
“We hope to follow up enough of these patients [in the new study] to get some idea of relapse rates,” Dr. Goodwin added. “These have been low in comparable studies with MDD patients: We will see.”
Commenting on the research, Balwinder Singh, MD, of the department of psychiatry and psychology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said the study represents a valuable addition to needed evidence on psilocybin – with some caveats.
“This study adds to the emerging evidence base of psilocybin for treatment-resistant depression, at least in the short term,” he said in an interview. “I think the challenge in the real world would be to have access to 6-8 hours of therapy with psilocybin when patients struggle to find good therapists who could provide even weekly therapy for an hour.”
In addition, Dr. Singh questioned the durability of a single dose of psilocybin in the long term, noting a recent study (N Engl J Med. 2021 Apr 15. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2032994) that evaluated two doses of psilocybin (25 mg) 3 weeks apart, and failed to show any significant difference compared with the serotonergic antidepressant escitalopram at 6 weeks.
He further expressed concern about the emergence of suicidal behaviors in some patients, as well as the prolongation of QTc > 60 msec reported in the two patients.
“This is something to be carefully assessed in future studies, due to the risk of arrhythmias,” Dr. Singh said.
The study was sponsored by COMPASS Pathfinder Limited. Dr. Goodwin is chief medical officer for COMPASS Pathways. Dr. Singh had no disclosures to report.
NEW ORLEANS –
“This is easily the largest study of a psychedelic drug employing modern randomized controlled trial methodology [with] 22 sites and 10 countries, so it’s not your typical phase 2 trial,” the study’s lead author, Guy M. Goodwin, MD, emeritus professor of psychiatry at the University of Oxford, England, said in an interview.
“Importantly, 94% of the patients in the study were psilocybin naive, which is very important for generalizability,” Dr. Goodwin noted.
Long used as psychedelic ‘magic mushrooms,’ psilocybin has gained increased interest in psychiatry in recent years as a potential treatment for severe depression after showing benefits in patients with life-threatening cancers and others with major depressive disorder (MDD).
To put the therapy to test in a more rigorous, randomized trial, Dr. Goodwin and colleagues conducted the phase 2b study of a proprietary synthetic formulation of psilocybin, COMP360 (COMPASS Pathways), recruiting 233 patients with treatment-resistant depression at 22 centers.
The study was presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association.
After a 2-week washout period following the discontinuation of antidepressants, the patients were randomized to one of three groups: A single dose of 25 mg (n = 79), 10 mg (n = 75), or a subtherapeutic comparison of 1 mg (n = 79).
The psilocybin was administered in the presence of specially trained therapists who provided psychological support before, during, and after the 6- to 8-hour session.
Patients were then asked to refrain from antidepressant use for at least 3 weeks following the session, and had periodic follow-up for 12 weeks.
For the primary endpoint, those in the 25-mg group, but not the 10-mg dose, showed a significantly greater reduction in depression from baseline versus the 1-mg group on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale at week 3 (MADRS; -6.6; P < .001).
The benefit was observed at day 2 and week 1 following administration, “confirming the rapid-acting character of the effect,” the investigators reported.
Sustained responses, defined as at least a 50% change from baseline in MADRS total score, were further observed up to week 12 among 20.3% in the 25-mg group and among 5.3% in the 10-mg groups versus 10.1% in the 1-mg group.
On the day of psilocybin treatment, the treatment-emergent side effects that were reported were headache, nausea, and dizziness, with event rates of 83.5% in the 25-mg group, 74.7% in the 10-mg group, and 72.2% in the 1-mg group.
One participant in the 25-mg group experienced acute anxiety and was treated with lorazepam.
The incidence of treatment-emergent serious adverse events from day 2 to week 3 was 6.3% (five patients) in the 25-mg group, 8.0% (six patients) in the 10-mg group, and 1.3% (one patient) in the 1-mg group.
Serious AEs included suicidal ideation and intentional self-injury among two patients each in the 25-mg group, while in the 10-mg group, two had suicidal ideation and one had hospitalization for severe depression.
There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of vital signs or clinical laboratory tests.
Of note, two patients in the 25-mg group had a change from baseline in QTcF >60 msec on day 2. For one patient, the increase was within normal range, and the other had a QTcF interval duration >500 msec on day 2, but levels returned to normal by day 9.
Improvements in context
Dr. Goodwin noted that the improvements were swift and impressive when compared with those of the STAR*D trial, which is the largest prospective study of treatment outcomes in patients with MDD.
“In the STAR*D trial, third- and fourth-step treatments showed low response rates of under 15% and high relapse rates,” Dr. Goodwin said. “By comparison, our response rates at 12 weeks were 20%-25%, so almost double that seen for probably equivalent treatment steps in STAR*D, with a single treatment with 25 mg, and no additional antidepressant, so no side effect burden.
“We hope to follow up enough of these patients [in the new study] to get some idea of relapse rates,” Dr. Goodwin added. “These have been low in comparable studies with MDD patients: We will see.”
Commenting on the research, Balwinder Singh, MD, of the department of psychiatry and psychology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said the study represents a valuable addition to needed evidence on psilocybin – with some caveats.
“This study adds to the emerging evidence base of psilocybin for treatment-resistant depression, at least in the short term,” he said in an interview. “I think the challenge in the real world would be to have access to 6-8 hours of therapy with psilocybin when patients struggle to find good therapists who could provide even weekly therapy for an hour.”
In addition, Dr. Singh questioned the durability of a single dose of psilocybin in the long term, noting a recent study (N Engl J Med. 2021 Apr 15. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2032994) that evaluated two doses of psilocybin (25 mg) 3 weeks apart, and failed to show any significant difference compared with the serotonergic antidepressant escitalopram at 6 weeks.
He further expressed concern about the emergence of suicidal behaviors in some patients, as well as the prolongation of QTc > 60 msec reported in the two patients.
“This is something to be carefully assessed in future studies, due to the risk of arrhythmias,” Dr. Singh said.
The study was sponsored by COMPASS Pathfinder Limited. Dr. Goodwin is chief medical officer for COMPASS Pathways. Dr. Singh had no disclosures to report.
NEW ORLEANS –
“This is easily the largest study of a psychedelic drug employing modern randomized controlled trial methodology [with] 22 sites and 10 countries, so it’s not your typical phase 2 trial,” the study’s lead author, Guy M. Goodwin, MD, emeritus professor of psychiatry at the University of Oxford, England, said in an interview.
“Importantly, 94% of the patients in the study were psilocybin naive, which is very important for generalizability,” Dr. Goodwin noted.
Long used as psychedelic ‘magic mushrooms,’ psilocybin has gained increased interest in psychiatry in recent years as a potential treatment for severe depression after showing benefits in patients with life-threatening cancers and others with major depressive disorder (MDD).
To put the therapy to test in a more rigorous, randomized trial, Dr. Goodwin and colleagues conducted the phase 2b study of a proprietary synthetic formulation of psilocybin, COMP360 (COMPASS Pathways), recruiting 233 patients with treatment-resistant depression at 22 centers.
The study was presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association.
After a 2-week washout period following the discontinuation of antidepressants, the patients were randomized to one of three groups: A single dose of 25 mg (n = 79), 10 mg (n = 75), or a subtherapeutic comparison of 1 mg (n = 79).
The psilocybin was administered in the presence of specially trained therapists who provided psychological support before, during, and after the 6- to 8-hour session.
Patients were then asked to refrain from antidepressant use for at least 3 weeks following the session, and had periodic follow-up for 12 weeks.
For the primary endpoint, those in the 25-mg group, but not the 10-mg dose, showed a significantly greater reduction in depression from baseline versus the 1-mg group on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale at week 3 (MADRS; -6.6; P < .001).
The benefit was observed at day 2 and week 1 following administration, “confirming the rapid-acting character of the effect,” the investigators reported.
Sustained responses, defined as at least a 50% change from baseline in MADRS total score, were further observed up to week 12 among 20.3% in the 25-mg group and among 5.3% in the 10-mg groups versus 10.1% in the 1-mg group.
On the day of psilocybin treatment, the treatment-emergent side effects that were reported were headache, nausea, and dizziness, with event rates of 83.5% in the 25-mg group, 74.7% in the 10-mg group, and 72.2% in the 1-mg group.
One participant in the 25-mg group experienced acute anxiety and was treated with lorazepam.
The incidence of treatment-emergent serious adverse events from day 2 to week 3 was 6.3% (five patients) in the 25-mg group, 8.0% (six patients) in the 10-mg group, and 1.3% (one patient) in the 1-mg group.
Serious AEs included suicidal ideation and intentional self-injury among two patients each in the 25-mg group, while in the 10-mg group, two had suicidal ideation and one had hospitalization for severe depression.
There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of vital signs or clinical laboratory tests.
Of note, two patients in the 25-mg group had a change from baseline in QTcF >60 msec on day 2. For one patient, the increase was within normal range, and the other had a QTcF interval duration >500 msec on day 2, but levels returned to normal by day 9.
Improvements in context
Dr. Goodwin noted that the improvements were swift and impressive when compared with those of the STAR*D trial, which is the largest prospective study of treatment outcomes in patients with MDD.
“In the STAR*D trial, third- and fourth-step treatments showed low response rates of under 15% and high relapse rates,” Dr. Goodwin said. “By comparison, our response rates at 12 weeks were 20%-25%, so almost double that seen for probably equivalent treatment steps in STAR*D, with a single treatment with 25 mg, and no additional antidepressant, so no side effect burden.
“We hope to follow up enough of these patients [in the new study] to get some idea of relapse rates,” Dr. Goodwin added. “These have been low in comparable studies with MDD patients: We will see.”
Commenting on the research, Balwinder Singh, MD, of the department of psychiatry and psychology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said the study represents a valuable addition to needed evidence on psilocybin – with some caveats.
“This study adds to the emerging evidence base of psilocybin for treatment-resistant depression, at least in the short term,” he said in an interview. “I think the challenge in the real world would be to have access to 6-8 hours of therapy with psilocybin when patients struggle to find good therapists who could provide even weekly therapy for an hour.”
In addition, Dr. Singh questioned the durability of a single dose of psilocybin in the long term, noting a recent study (N Engl J Med. 2021 Apr 15. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2032994) that evaluated two doses of psilocybin (25 mg) 3 weeks apart, and failed to show any significant difference compared with the serotonergic antidepressant escitalopram at 6 weeks.
He further expressed concern about the emergence of suicidal behaviors in some patients, as well as the prolongation of QTc > 60 msec reported in the two patients.
“This is something to be carefully assessed in future studies, due to the risk of arrhythmias,” Dr. Singh said.
The study was sponsored by COMPASS Pathfinder Limited. Dr. Goodwin is chief medical officer for COMPASS Pathways. Dr. Singh had no disclosures to report.
AT APA 2022
Studies address ibrutinib bleeding risk in patients with CLL receiving Mohs surgery
Patients receiving , new research shows.
“Our cohort of CLL patients on ibrutinib had a two-times greater risk of bleeding complications relative to those on anticoagulants and a nearly 40-times greater risk of bleeding complications relative to those patients on no anticoagulants or CLL therapy,” Kelsey E. Hirotsu, MD, first author of one of two studies on the issue presented at the American College of Mohs Surgery annual meeting, told this news organization.
“It was definitely surprising to see this doubled risk with ibrutinib relative to anticoagulants, and certainly highlights the clinically relevant increased bleeding risk in patients on ibrutinib,” said Dr. Hirotsu, a Mohs micrographic surgery fellow in the department of dermatology, University of California, San Diego (UCSD).
With CLL associated with an increased risk for aggressive skin cancers, particularly squamous cell carcinoma, Mohs surgeons may commonly find themselves treating patients with these unique considerations. Surgical treatment of those cancers can be complicated not only because of potential underlying thrombocytopenia, which occurs in about 5% of untreated CLL patients, but also because of the increased risk for bleeding that is associated with the use of the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib, commonly used for CLL.
While the nature of the increased bleeding-related complications among patients with CLL undergoing Mohs surgery has been documented in some case reports, evidence from larger studies has been lacking.
In one of the studies presented at the ACMS meeting, Dr. Hirotsu and her colleagues evaluated data on patients with CLL who underwent at least one Mohs surgery procedure at UCSD Dermatologic Surgery over 10 years. Of the 362 Mohs cases among 98 patients with CLL, 32 cases had at least one complication. Patients on anticoagulants, including antiplatelet agents, Coumadin, and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), not surprisingly, had higher rates of complications, particularly bleeding.
However, those treated with ibrutinib had the highest rates of complications among all of the patients (40.6%), with all of their complications involving bleeding-related events. In comparison, the complication rates, for instance, of patients treated with antiplatelets were 21.9%; Coumadin, 6.2%; and DOACs, 15.6%.
The incidence of bleeding-related complications among the cases in the ibrutinib-treated patients was 30.2% compared with 13.2% among those on blood thinners and no CLL therapy (relative risk [RR], 2.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-5.11; P = .11). “Although not statistically significant, these results could trend toward significance with larger sample sizes,” Dr. Hirotsu said.
The risk for bleeding among patients on ibrutinib compared with patients on no medications, however, was significant, with a relative risk of 39.0 (95% CI, 2.35-646; P = .011).
Of note, among 12 patients on ibrutinib who experienced bleeding complications, 7 had previously undergone Mohs surgeries when they were not taking ibrutinib and no bleeding complications had occurred in those procedures. “This may further implicate ibrutinib as a cause of the bleeding-related complications,” Dr. Hirotsu said.
In investigating the role of thrombocytopenia at the time of Mohs surgery, the authors found that, among ibrutinib-treated patients who had no complications, 30% had thrombocytopenia, compared with 70% of those who did have bleeding while on ibrutinib at the time of surgery.
“It was interesting that thrombocytopenia is more common in ibrutinib patients with bleeding-related complications, but further research needs to be done to determine the clinical relevance and possible management implications,” Dr. Hirotsu said.
In a separate study presented at the meeting, 37 patients treated with ibrutinib for CLL while undergoing cutaneous surgery that included Mohs surgery and excisions had a significantly increased bleeding complication rate compared with a control group of 64 age- and sex-matched patients with CLL undergoing cutaneous surgery: 6 of 75 procedures (8%) versus 1 of 115 procedures (0.9%; P = .02).
Those with bleeding complications while on ibrutinib were all male, older (mean age, 82.7 vs. 73.0; P = .01), and had lower mean platelet counts (104 K/mcL vs. 150.5 K/mcL; P = .03).
There were no significant differences between the case and control groups in terms of anatomic site, type of procedure (Mohs versus excision), tumor diagnosis, lesion size, or type of reconstruction, while the control group was more likely to be on aspirin or other anticoagulants (P < .0001).
In an interview, senior author Nahid Y. Vidal, MD, a Mohs surgeon and dermatologic oncologist at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said that “the take-home message is that patients on ibrutinib should be considered higher risk for bleeding events, regardless of whether they are having a simpler surgery [excision] or more involved skin surgery procedure [Mohs with flap].”
Holding treatment
To offset the bleeding risk, Dr. Vidal notes that holding the treatment is considered safe and that the manufacturer recommends holding ibrutinib for at least 3-7 days pre- and post surgery, “depending on type of surgery and risk of bleeding.”
“In our institution, with the hematologist/oncologist’s input, we hold ibrutinib for 5 days preop and 3 days post op, and have not had bleed complications in these patients,” she said, noting that there were no bleeding events in the patients in the study when ibrutinib was held.
Likewise, Dr. Hirotsu noted that at her center at UCSD, patients on ibrutinib are asked during the preop call to hold treatment for 3 days before and after Mohs surgery – but are advised to discuss the decision with their hematologist/oncologist for approval.
The measure isn’t always successful in preventing bleeding, however, as seen in a case study describing two patients who experienced bleeding complications following Mohs surgery despite being taken off ibrutinib 3 days prior to the procedure.
The senior author of that study, Kira Minkis, MD, PhD, department of dermatology, Weill Cornell/New York Presbyterian, New York, told this news organization that her team concluded that in those cases ibrutinib perhaps should have been held longer than 3 days.
“In some cases, especially if the Mohs surgery is a large procedure with a more advanced reconstruction, such as a large flap, it might be more prudent to continue it longer than 3 days,” Dr. Minkis said. She noted that the high bleeding risk observed in the studies at ACMS was notable – but not unexpected.
“I’m not that surprised because if you look at the hematologic literature, the risk is indeed pretty significant, so it makes sense that it would also occur with Mohs surgeries,” she said.
She underscored that a 3-day hold of ibrutinib should be considered the minimum, “and in some cases, it should be held up to 7 days prior to surgery, depending on the specific surgery,” with the important caveat of consulting with the patient’s hematology team.
“Multidisciplinary decision-making is necessary for these cases, and the interruption of therapy should always be discussed with their hematology team,” she added. That said, Dr. Minkis noted that “I’ve never had a hematologist who had any concerns for withholding ibrutinib even for a week around the time of a surgery.”
Dr. Hirotsu, Dr. Vidal, and Dr. Minkis reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Patients receiving , new research shows.
“Our cohort of CLL patients on ibrutinib had a two-times greater risk of bleeding complications relative to those on anticoagulants and a nearly 40-times greater risk of bleeding complications relative to those patients on no anticoagulants or CLL therapy,” Kelsey E. Hirotsu, MD, first author of one of two studies on the issue presented at the American College of Mohs Surgery annual meeting, told this news organization.
“It was definitely surprising to see this doubled risk with ibrutinib relative to anticoagulants, and certainly highlights the clinically relevant increased bleeding risk in patients on ibrutinib,” said Dr. Hirotsu, a Mohs micrographic surgery fellow in the department of dermatology, University of California, San Diego (UCSD).
With CLL associated with an increased risk for aggressive skin cancers, particularly squamous cell carcinoma, Mohs surgeons may commonly find themselves treating patients with these unique considerations. Surgical treatment of those cancers can be complicated not only because of potential underlying thrombocytopenia, which occurs in about 5% of untreated CLL patients, but also because of the increased risk for bleeding that is associated with the use of the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib, commonly used for CLL.
While the nature of the increased bleeding-related complications among patients with CLL undergoing Mohs surgery has been documented in some case reports, evidence from larger studies has been lacking.
In one of the studies presented at the ACMS meeting, Dr. Hirotsu and her colleagues evaluated data on patients with CLL who underwent at least one Mohs surgery procedure at UCSD Dermatologic Surgery over 10 years. Of the 362 Mohs cases among 98 patients with CLL, 32 cases had at least one complication. Patients on anticoagulants, including antiplatelet agents, Coumadin, and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), not surprisingly, had higher rates of complications, particularly bleeding.
However, those treated with ibrutinib had the highest rates of complications among all of the patients (40.6%), with all of their complications involving bleeding-related events. In comparison, the complication rates, for instance, of patients treated with antiplatelets were 21.9%; Coumadin, 6.2%; and DOACs, 15.6%.
The incidence of bleeding-related complications among the cases in the ibrutinib-treated patients was 30.2% compared with 13.2% among those on blood thinners and no CLL therapy (relative risk [RR], 2.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-5.11; P = .11). “Although not statistically significant, these results could trend toward significance with larger sample sizes,” Dr. Hirotsu said.
The risk for bleeding among patients on ibrutinib compared with patients on no medications, however, was significant, with a relative risk of 39.0 (95% CI, 2.35-646; P = .011).
Of note, among 12 patients on ibrutinib who experienced bleeding complications, 7 had previously undergone Mohs surgeries when they were not taking ibrutinib and no bleeding complications had occurred in those procedures. “This may further implicate ibrutinib as a cause of the bleeding-related complications,” Dr. Hirotsu said.
In investigating the role of thrombocytopenia at the time of Mohs surgery, the authors found that, among ibrutinib-treated patients who had no complications, 30% had thrombocytopenia, compared with 70% of those who did have bleeding while on ibrutinib at the time of surgery.
“It was interesting that thrombocytopenia is more common in ibrutinib patients with bleeding-related complications, but further research needs to be done to determine the clinical relevance and possible management implications,” Dr. Hirotsu said.
In a separate study presented at the meeting, 37 patients treated with ibrutinib for CLL while undergoing cutaneous surgery that included Mohs surgery and excisions had a significantly increased bleeding complication rate compared with a control group of 64 age- and sex-matched patients with CLL undergoing cutaneous surgery: 6 of 75 procedures (8%) versus 1 of 115 procedures (0.9%; P = .02).
Those with bleeding complications while on ibrutinib were all male, older (mean age, 82.7 vs. 73.0; P = .01), and had lower mean platelet counts (104 K/mcL vs. 150.5 K/mcL; P = .03).
There were no significant differences between the case and control groups in terms of anatomic site, type of procedure (Mohs versus excision), tumor diagnosis, lesion size, or type of reconstruction, while the control group was more likely to be on aspirin or other anticoagulants (P < .0001).
In an interview, senior author Nahid Y. Vidal, MD, a Mohs surgeon and dermatologic oncologist at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said that “the take-home message is that patients on ibrutinib should be considered higher risk for bleeding events, regardless of whether they are having a simpler surgery [excision] or more involved skin surgery procedure [Mohs with flap].”
Holding treatment
To offset the bleeding risk, Dr. Vidal notes that holding the treatment is considered safe and that the manufacturer recommends holding ibrutinib for at least 3-7 days pre- and post surgery, “depending on type of surgery and risk of bleeding.”
“In our institution, with the hematologist/oncologist’s input, we hold ibrutinib for 5 days preop and 3 days post op, and have not had bleed complications in these patients,” she said, noting that there were no bleeding events in the patients in the study when ibrutinib was held.
Likewise, Dr. Hirotsu noted that at her center at UCSD, patients on ibrutinib are asked during the preop call to hold treatment for 3 days before and after Mohs surgery – but are advised to discuss the decision with their hematologist/oncologist for approval.
The measure isn’t always successful in preventing bleeding, however, as seen in a case study describing two patients who experienced bleeding complications following Mohs surgery despite being taken off ibrutinib 3 days prior to the procedure.
The senior author of that study, Kira Minkis, MD, PhD, department of dermatology, Weill Cornell/New York Presbyterian, New York, told this news organization that her team concluded that in those cases ibrutinib perhaps should have been held longer than 3 days.
“In some cases, especially if the Mohs surgery is a large procedure with a more advanced reconstruction, such as a large flap, it might be more prudent to continue it longer than 3 days,” Dr. Minkis said. She noted that the high bleeding risk observed in the studies at ACMS was notable – but not unexpected.
“I’m not that surprised because if you look at the hematologic literature, the risk is indeed pretty significant, so it makes sense that it would also occur with Mohs surgeries,” she said.
She underscored that a 3-day hold of ibrutinib should be considered the minimum, “and in some cases, it should be held up to 7 days prior to surgery, depending on the specific surgery,” with the important caveat of consulting with the patient’s hematology team.
“Multidisciplinary decision-making is necessary for these cases, and the interruption of therapy should always be discussed with their hematology team,” she added. That said, Dr. Minkis noted that “I’ve never had a hematologist who had any concerns for withholding ibrutinib even for a week around the time of a surgery.”
Dr. Hirotsu, Dr. Vidal, and Dr. Minkis reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Patients receiving , new research shows.
“Our cohort of CLL patients on ibrutinib had a two-times greater risk of bleeding complications relative to those on anticoagulants and a nearly 40-times greater risk of bleeding complications relative to those patients on no anticoagulants or CLL therapy,” Kelsey E. Hirotsu, MD, first author of one of two studies on the issue presented at the American College of Mohs Surgery annual meeting, told this news organization.
“It was definitely surprising to see this doubled risk with ibrutinib relative to anticoagulants, and certainly highlights the clinically relevant increased bleeding risk in patients on ibrutinib,” said Dr. Hirotsu, a Mohs micrographic surgery fellow in the department of dermatology, University of California, San Diego (UCSD).
With CLL associated with an increased risk for aggressive skin cancers, particularly squamous cell carcinoma, Mohs surgeons may commonly find themselves treating patients with these unique considerations. Surgical treatment of those cancers can be complicated not only because of potential underlying thrombocytopenia, which occurs in about 5% of untreated CLL patients, but also because of the increased risk for bleeding that is associated with the use of the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib, commonly used for CLL.
While the nature of the increased bleeding-related complications among patients with CLL undergoing Mohs surgery has been documented in some case reports, evidence from larger studies has been lacking.
In one of the studies presented at the ACMS meeting, Dr. Hirotsu and her colleagues evaluated data on patients with CLL who underwent at least one Mohs surgery procedure at UCSD Dermatologic Surgery over 10 years. Of the 362 Mohs cases among 98 patients with CLL, 32 cases had at least one complication. Patients on anticoagulants, including antiplatelet agents, Coumadin, and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), not surprisingly, had higher rates of complications, particularly bleeding.
However, those treated with ibrutinib had the highest rates of complications among all of the patients (40.6%), with all of their complications involving bleeding-related events. In comparison, the complication rates, for instance, of patients treated with antiplatelets were 21.9%; Coumadin, 6.2%; and DOACs, 15.6%.
The incidence of bleeding-related complications among the cases in the ibrutinib-treated patients was 30.2% compared with 13.2% among those on blood thinners and no CLL therapy (relative risk [RR], 2.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-5.11; P = .11). “Although not statistically significant, these results could trend toward significance with larger sample sizes,” Dr. Hirotsu said.
The risk for bleeding among patients on ibrutinib compared with patients on no medications, however, was significant, with a relative risk of 39.0 (95% CI, 2.35-646; P = .011).
Of note, among 12 patients on ibrutinib who experienced bleeding complications, 7 had previously undergone Mohs surgeries when they were not taking ibrutinib and no bleeding complications had occurred in those procedures. “This may further implicate ibrutinib as a cause of the bleeding-related complications,” Dr. Hirotsu said.
In investigating the role of thrombocytopenia at the time of Mohs surgery, the authors found that, among ibrutinib-treated patients who had no complications, 30% had thrombocytopenia, compared with 70% of those who did have bleeding while on ibrutinib at the time of surgery.
“It was interesting that thrombocytopenia is more common in ibrutinib patients with bleeding-related complications, but further research needs to be done to determine the clinical relevance and possible management implications,” Dr. Hirotsu said.
In a separate study presented at the meeting, 37 patients treated with ibrutinib for CLL while undergoing cutaneous surgery that included Mohs surgery and excisions had a significantly increased bleeding complication rate compared with a control group of 64 age- and sex-matched patients with CLL undergoing cutaneous surgery: 6 of 75 procedures (8%) versus 1 of 115 procedures (0.9%; P = .02).
Those with bleeding complications while on ibrutinib were all male, older (mean age, 82.7 vs. 73.0; P = .01), and had lower mean platelet counts (104 K/mcL vs. 150.5 K/mcL; P = .03).
There were no significant differences between the case and control groups in terms of anatomic site, type of procedure (Mohs versus excision), tumor diagnosis, lesion size, or type of reconstruction, while the control group was more likely to be on aspirin or other anticoagulants (P < .0001).
In an interview, senior author Nahid Y. Vidal, MD, a Mohs surgeon and dermatologic oncologist at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., said that “the take-home message is that patients on ibrutinib should be considered higher risk for bleeding events, regardless of whether they are having a simpler surgery [excision] or more involved skin surgery procedure [Mohs with flap].”
Holding treatment
To offset the bleeding risk, Dr. Vidal notes that holding the treatment is considered safe and that the manufacturer recommends holding ibrutinib for at least 3-7 days pre- and post surgery, “depending on type of surgery and risk of bleeding.”
“In our institution, with the hematologist/oncologist’s input, we hold ibrutinib for 5 days preop and 3 days post op, and have not had bleed complications in these patients,” she said, noting that there were no bleeding events in the patients in the study when ibrutinib was held.
Likewise, Dr. Hirotsu noted that at her center at UCSD, patients on ibrutinib are asked during the preop call to hold treatment for 3 days before and after Mohs surgery – but are advised to discuss the decision with their hematologist/oncologist for approval.
The measure isn’t always successful in preventing bleeding, however, as seen in a case study describing two patients who experienced bleeding complications following Mohs surgery despite being taken off ibrutinib 3 days prior to the procedure.
The senior author of that study, Kira Minkis, MD, PhD, department of dermatology, Weill Cornell/New York Presbyterian, New York, told this news organization that her team concluded that in those cases ibrutinib perhaps should have been held longer than 3 days.
“In some cases, especially if the Mohs surgery is a large procedure with a more advanced reconstruction, such as a large flap, it might be more prudent to continue it longer than 3 days,” Dr. Minkis said. She noted that the high bleeding risk observed in the studies at ACMS was notable – but not unexpected.
“I’m not that surprised because if you look at the hematologic literature, the risk is indeed pretty significant, so it makes sense that it would also occur with Mohs surgeries,” she said.
She underscored that a 3-day hold of ibrutinib should be considered the minimum, “and in some cases, it should be held up to 7 days prior to surgery, depending on the specific surgery,” with the important caveat of consulting with the patient’s hematology team.
“Multidisciplinary decision-making is necessary for these cases, and the interruption of therapy should always be discussed with their hematology team,” she added. That said, Dr. Minkis noted that “I’ve never had a hematologist who had any concerns for withholding ibrutinib even for a week around the time of a surgery.”
Dr. Hirotsu, Dr. Vidal, and Dr. Minkis reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM THE ACMS ANNUAL MEETING
Long COVID neuropsychiatric deficits greater than expected
NEW ORLEANS – , adding to mounting evidence of the significant toll the chronic condition can have on mental health.
“Many clinicians have observed the symptoms we describe in this study, however this report is among the first which identify the specific deficits using neuropsychological testing to better characterize the syndrome,” Sean T. Lynch, MD, first author of a study on the issue presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, said in an interview.
Dr. Lynch, of the department of psychiatry, Westchester Medical Center Health System, Valhalla, N.Y., and his colleagues enrolled 60 participants who had experienced acute COVID-19 disease 6-8 months earlier and had undergone neuropsychological, psychiatric, medical, functional, and quality-of-life assessments. Results from the study were published online in the Journal of the Academy of Consultation–Liaison Psychiatry (2022 Jan 25. doi: 10.1016/j.jaclp.2022.01.003).
Among the study participants, 32 were seeking treatment for brain fog in a clinical program for survivors of COVID-19, while the remaining 28 were part of an ongoing longitudinal investigation of neuropsychological, medical, and psychiatric sequelae of COVID-19, but were not seeking care for the persistent symptoms.
Assessments for neurocognitive impairment included a battery of tests used in infectious and other diseases, including the Test of Premorbid Function, the Patient Assessment of Own Function, the Trail Making Test parts A and B, the Stroop Color and Word Test, and others.
Overall, the battery of assessments showed that 37 (62%) of participants had neuropsychological test impairment, with results below the 16th percentile in two tests, while 16 (27%) showed scores indicative of severe impairment (below the second percentile in at least one test and below the 16th percentile in one test).
Those reporting brain fog had scores that were even lower than expected on tests of attention, processing speed, memory, and executive function. And among those reporting brain fog, significantly more had scores reflecting severe impairment compared with the controls (38% vs. 14%; P < .04).
“Based on what we’ve observed in our patients and what others have previously reported, we did expect to find some impairment in this study sample,” Dr. Lynch noted.
“However, we were surprised to find that 27% of the study sample had extremely low neuropsychological test scores, meaning that they scored at least two standard deviations below the expected score on at least one neuropsychological test based on their age and level of education.”
The brain fog group also reported significantly higher levels of depression, fatigue, PTSD, and functional difficulties, and lower quality of life.
Severe impairment on the neuropsychological tests correlated with the extent of acute COVID-19 symptoms, as well as depression scores, number of medical comorbidities, and subjective cognitive complaints.
An analysis of serum levels of the inflammatory markers among 50 of the 60 participants showed that 45% of the patients had an elevated IL-6, 20% had elevated TNF-alpha, and 41% had elevated CRP, compared with reference ranges.
IL-6 levels were found to correlate with acute COVID-19 symptoms, the number of medical comorbidities, fatigue, and measures of executive function, while C-reactive protein (CRP) correlated with current COVID-19 symptoms and depression scores.
In terms of clinical factors that might predict low neuropsychological test scores, Dr. Lynch noted that the “markers that we found to be significant included severity of acute COVID-19 illness, current post-COVID-19 symptoms, measures of depression and anxiety, level of fatigue, and number of medical comorbidities.”
Dr. Lynch noted that the ongoing study will include up to 18-month follow-ups that are currently underway. “The [follow-ups] will examine if symptoms improve over time and evaluate if any intervention that took place was successful,” he said.
Survey supports findings
The detrimental effects of mental health symptoms in long COVID were further supported in another study at the APA meeting, an online survey of 787 survivors of acute COVID-19.
In the community survey, presented by Michael Van Ameringen, MD, a professor in the department of psychiatry and behavioral neurosciences at McMaster University, in Hamilton, Ont., all respondents (100%) reported having persistent symptoms of the virus, and as many as 68% indicated that they had not returned to normal functioning, despite only 15% of the respondents having been hospitalized with COVID-19.
A large proportion showed significant depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and the most commonly reported persistent symptoms were fatigue in 75.9% of respondents, brain fog in 67.9%, concentration difficulties in 61.1%, and weakness in 51.2%.
As many as 88.2% of patients said they experienced persistent neurocognitive symptoms, with poor memory and concentration; 56% reported problems with word finding; and 54.1% had slowed thinking.
The respondents showed high rates of anxiety (41.7%) as well as depression (61.4%) as determined by scores above 9 on the Generalized Anxiety Disorder–7 (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaires (PHQ-9).
As many as 40.5% of respondents showed probable PTSD, with scores above 30 on the PTSD checklist (PCL-5). Their mean resilience score on the Brief Resilient Coping Scale was 13.5, suggesting low resilience.
Among the respondents, 43.3% said they had received past treatment for mental health, while 33.5% were currently receiving mental health treatment.
Dr. Van Ameringen noted the important limitation of the study being an online survey with no control group, but said the responses nevertheless raise the question of the role of prior psychiatric disorders in long COVID.
“In our sample, 40% of respondents had a past psychiatric history, so you wonder if that also makes you vulnerable to long COVID,” he said in an interview.
“About a third were getting psychiatric help, but I think the more impaired you are, the more likely you are to seek help.”
Those who were hospitalized with COVID-19 were at a higher risk of PTSD compared with those not hospitalized (P < .001), as were those under the age of 30 (P < .05) or between 31 and 50 vs. over 50 (P < .01).
Dr. Van Ameringen noted that the survey’s high rate of subjects who had not returned to normal functioning was especially striking.
“This is not a minor issue – these are people who are no longer functioning in society,” he said.
In pandemics, the brain tends to be ‘overlooked’
Further addressing the neurological effects of COVID-19 at the APA meeting, Avindra Nath, MD, clinical director of the National Institutes of Neurologic Disorders and Stroke in Bethesda, Md., noted that the persisting cognitive and psychiatric symptoms after illness, such as brain fog and depression and anxiety, are not necessarily unique to COVID-19.
“We have seen this before,” he said. “There have been at least seven or eight human coronaviruses, and the interesting thing is each one affects the brain and causes neurological complications.”
The effects are classified differently and have slightly different receptors, “but the consequences are the same.”
Of note, however, research published in The Lancet Psychiatry (2021 May. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366[21]00084-5) revealed that symptoms such as dementia, mood, and anxiety are significantly higher after COVID-19 compared with other respiratory infections, with the differences increasing at 180 days since the index event.
Dr. Nath noted that, over the decades, he has observed that in pandemics “the brain tends to get overlooked.” He explained that “what can be most important in the end is what happened in the brain, because those are the things that really cause the long-term consequences.”
“These patients are depressed; they have dementia, they have brain fog, and even now that we recognize these issues, we haven’t done a very good job of studying them,” he said. “There’s so much we still don’t know, and a lot of patients are left with these symptoms and nowhere to go.”
Dr. Lynch, Dr. Van Ameringen, and Dr. Nath had no disclosures to report.
NEW ORLEANS – , adding to mounting evidence of the significant toll the chronic condition can have on mental health.
“Many clinicians have observed the symptoms we describe in this study, however this report is among the first which identify the specific deficits using neuropsychological testing to better characterize the syndrome,” Sean T. Lynch, MD, first author of a study on the issue presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, said in an interview.
Dr. Lynch, of the department of psychiatry, Westchester Medical Center Health System, Valhalla, N.Y., and his colleagues enrolled 60 participants who had experienced acute COVID-19 disease 6-8 months earlier and had undergone neuropsychological, psychiatric, medical, functional, and quality-of-life assessments. Results from the study were published online in the Journal of the Academy of Consultation–Liaison Psychiatry (2022 Jan 25. doi: 10.1016/j.jaclp.2022.01.003).
Among the study participants, 32 were seeking treatment for brain fog in a clinical program for survivors of COVID-19, while the remaining 28 were part of an ongoing longitudinal investigation of neuropsychological, medical, and psychiatric sequelae of COVID-19, but were not seeking care for the persistent symptoms.
Assessments for neurocognitive impairment included a battery of tests used in infectious and other diseases, including the Test of Premorbid Function, the Patient Assessment of Own Function, the Trail Making Test parts A and B, the Stroop Color and Word Test, and others.
Overall, the battery of assessments showed that 37 (62%) of participants had neuropsychological test impairment, with results below the 16th percentile in two tests, while 16 (27%) showed scores indicative of severe impairment (below the second percentile in at least one test and below the 16th percentile in one test).
Those reporting brain fog had scores that were even lower than expected on tests of attention, processing speed, memory, and executive function. And among those reporting brain fog, significantly more had scores reflecting severe impairment compared with the controls (38% vs. 14%; P < .04).
“Based on what we’ve observed in our patients and what others have previously reported, we did expect to find some impairment in this study sample,” Dr. Lynch noted.
“However, we were surprised to find that 27% of the study sample had extremely low neuropsychological test scores, meaning that they scored at least two standard deviations below the expected score on at least one neuropsychological test based on their age and level of education.”
The brain fog group also reported significantly higher levels of depression, fatigue, PTSD, and functional difficulties, and lower quality of life.
Severe impairment on the neuropsychological tests correlated with the extent of acute COVID-19 symptoms, as well as depression scores, number of medical comorbidities, and subjective cognitive complaints.
An analysis of serum levels of the inflammatory markers among 50 of the 60 participants showed that 45% of the patients had an elevated IL-6, 20% had elevated TNF-alpha, and 41% had elevated CRP, compared with reference ranges.
IL-6 levels were found to correlate with acute COVID-19 symptoms, the number of medical comorbidities, fatigue, and measures of executive function, while C-reactive protein (CRP) correlated with current COVID-19 symptoms and depression scores.
In terms of clinical factors that might predict low neuropsychological test scores, Dr. Lynch noted that the “markers that we found to be significant included severity of acute COVID-19 illness, current post-COVID-19 symptoms, measures of depression and anxiety, level of fatigue, and number of medical comorbidities.”
Dr. Lynch noted that the ongoing study will include up to 18-month follow-ups that are currently underway. “The [follow-ups] will examine if symptoms improve over time and evaluate if any intervention that took place was successful,” he said.
Survey supports findings
The detrimental effects of mental health symptoms in long COVID were further supported in another study at the APA meeting, an online survey of 787 survivors of acute COVID-19.
In the community survey, presented by Michael Van Ameringen, MD, a professor in the department of psychiatry and behavioral neurosciences at McMaster University, in Hamilton, Ont., all respondents (100%) reported having persistent symptoms of the virus, and as many as 68% indicated that they had not returned to normal functioning, despite only 15% of the respondents having been hospitalized with COVID-19.
A large proportion showed significant depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and the most commonly reported persistent symptoms were fatigue in 75.9% of respondents, brain fog in 67.9%, concentration difficulties in 61.1%, and weakness in 51.2%.
As many as 88.2% of patients said they experienced persistent neurocognitive symptoms, with poor memory and concentration; 56% reported problems with word finding; and 54.1% had slowed thinking.
The respondents showed high rates of anxiety (41.7%) as well as depression (61.4%) as determined by scores above 9 on the Generalized Anxiety Disorder–7 (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaires (PHQ-9).
As many as 40.5% of respondents showed probable PTSD, with scores above 30 on the PTSD checklist (PCL-5). Their mean resilience score on the Brief Resilient Coping Scale was 13.5, suggesting low resilience.
Among the respondents, 43.3% said they had received past treatment for mental health, while 33.5% were currently receiving mental health treatment.
Dr. Van Ameringen noted the important limitation of the study being an online survey with no control group, but said the responses nevertheless raise the question of the role of prior psychiatric disorders in long COVID.
“In our sample, 40% of respondents had a past psychiatric history, so you wonder if that also makes you vulnerable to long COVID,” he said in an interview.
“About a third were getting psychiatric help, but I think the more impaired you are, the more likely you are to seek help.”
Those who were hospitalized with COVID-19 were at a higher risk of PTSD compared with those not hospitalized (P < .001), as were those under the age of 30 (P < .05) or between 31 and 50 vs. over 50 (P < .01).
Dr. Van Ameringen noted that the survey’s high rate of subjects who had not returned to normal functioning was especially striking.
“This is not a minor issue – these are people who are no longer functioning in society,” he said.
In pandemics, the brain tends to be ‘overlooked’
Further addressing the neurological effects of COVID-19 at the APA meeting, Avindra Nath, MD, clinical director of the National Institutes of Neurologic Disorders and Stroke in Bethesda, Md., noted that the persisting cognitive and psychiatric symptoms after illness, such as brain fog and depression and anxiety, are not necessarily unique to COVID-19.
“We have seen this before,” he said. “There have been at least seven or eight human coronaviruses, and the interesting thing is each one affects the brain and causes neurological complications.”
The effects are classified differently and have slightly different receptors, “but the consequences are the same.”
Of note, however, research published in The Lancet Psychiatry (2021 May. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366[21]00084-5) revealed that symptoms such as dementia, mood, and anxiety are significantly higher after COVID-19 compared with other respiratory infections, with the differences increasing at 180 days since the index event.
Dr. Nath noted that, over the decades, he has observed that in pandemics “the brain tends to get overlooked.” He explained that “what can be most important in the end is what happened in the brain, because those are the things that really cause the long-term consequences.”
“These patients are depressed; they have dementia, they have brain fog, and even now that we recognize these issues, we haven’t done a very good job of studying them,” he said. “There’s so much we still don’t know, and a lot of patients are left with these symptoms and nowhere to go.”
Dr. Lynch, Dr. Van Ameringen, and Dr. Nath had no disclosures to report.
NEW ORLEANS – , adding to mounting evidence of the significant toll the chronic condition can have on mental health.
“Many clinicians have observed the symptoms we describe in this study, however this report is among the first which identify the specific deficits using neuropsychological testing to better characterize the syndrome,” Sean T. Lynch, MD, first author of a study on the issue presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, said in an interview.
Dr. Lynch, of the department of psychiatry, Westchester Medical Center Health System, Valhalla, N.Y., and his colleagues enrolled 60 participants who had experienced acute COVID-19 disease 6-8 months earlier and had undergone neuropsychological, psychiatric, medical, functional, and quality-of-life assessments. Results from the study were published online in the Journal of the Academy of Consultation–Liaison Psychiatry (2022 Jan 25. doi: 10.1016/j.jaclp.2022.01.003).
Among the study participants, 32 were seeking treatment for brain fog in a clinical program for survivors of COVID-19, while the remaining 28 were part of an ongoing longitudinal investigation of neuropsychological, medical, and psychiatric sequelae of COVID-19, but were not seeking care for the persistent symptoms.
Assessments for neurocognitive impairment included a battery of tests used in infectious and other diseases, including the Test of Premorbid Function, the Patient Assessment of Own Function, the Trail Making Test parts A and B, the Stroop Color and Word Test, and others.
Overall, the battery of assessments showed that 37 (62%) of participants had neuropsychological test impairment, with results below the 16th percentile in two tests, while 16 (27%) showed scores indicative of severe impairment (below the second percentile in at least one test and below the 16th percentile in one test).
Those reporting brain fog had scores that were even lower than expected on tests of attention, processing speed, memory, and executive function. And among those reporting brain fog, significantly more had scores reflecting severe impairment compared with the controls (38% vs. 14%; P < .04).
“Based on what we’ve observed in our patients and what others have previously reported, we did expect to find some impairment in this study sample,” Dr. Lynch noted.
“However, we were surprised to find that 27% of the study sample had extremely low neuropsychological test scores, meaning that they scored at least two standard deviations below the expected score on at least one neuropsychological test based on their age and level of education.”
The brain fog group also reported significantly higher levels of depression, fatigue, PTSD, and functional difficulties, and lower quality of life.
Severe impairment on the neuropsychological tests correlated with the extent of acute COVID-19 symptoms, as well as depression scores, number of medical comorbidities, and subjective cognitive complaints.
An analysis of serum levels of the inflammatory markers among 50 of the 60 participants showed that 45% of the patients had an elevated IL-6, 20% had elevated TNF-alpha, and 41% had elevated CRP, compared with reference ranges.
IL-6 levels were found to correlate with acute COVID-19 symptoms, the number of medical comorbidities, fatigue, and measures of executive function, while C-reactive protein (CRP) correlated with current COVID-19 symptoms and depression scores.
In terms of clinical factors that might predict low neuropsychological test scores, Dr. Lynch noted that the “markers that we found to be significant included severity of acute COVID-19 illness, current post-COVID-19 symptoms, measures of depression and anxiety, level of fatigue, and number of medical comorbidities.”
Dr. Lynch noted that the ongoing study will include up to 18-month follow-ups that are currently underway. “The [follow-ups] will examine if symptoms improve over time and evaluate if any intervention that took place was successful,” he said.
Survey supports findings
The detrimental effects of mental health symptoms in long COVID were further supported in another study at the APA meeting, an online survey of 787 survivors of acute COVID-19.
In the community survey, presented by Michael Van Ameringen, MD, a professor in the department of psychiatry and behavioral neurosciences at McMaster University, in Hamilton, Ont., all respondents (100%) reported having persistent symptoms of the virus, and as many as 68% indicated that they had not returned to normal functioning, despite only 15% of the respondents having been hospitalized with COVID-19.
A large proportion showed significant depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and the most commonly reported persistent symptoms were fatigue in 75.9% of respondents, brain fog in 67.9%, concentration difficulties in 61.1%, and weakness in 51.2%.
As many as 88.2% of patients said they experienced persistent neurocognitive symptoms, with poor memory and concentration; 56% reported problems with word finding; and 54.1% had slowed thinking.
The respondents showed high rates of anxiety (41.7%) as well as depression (61.4%) as determined by scores above 9 on the Generalized Anxiety Disorder–7 (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaires (PHQ-9).
As many as 40.5% of respondents showed probable PTSD, with scores above 30 on the PTSD checklist (PCL-5). Their mean resilience score on the Brief Resilient Coping Scale was 13.5, suggesting low resilience.
Among the respondents, 43.3% said they had received past treatment for mental health, while 33.5% were currently receiving mental health treatment.
Dr. Van Ameringen noted the important limitation of the study being an online survey with no control group, but said the responses nevertheless raise the question of the role of prior psychiatric disorders in long COVID.
“In our sample, 40% of respondents had a past psychiatric history, so you wonder if that also makes you vulnerable to long COVID,” he said in an interview.
“About a third were getting psychiatric help, but I think the more impaired you are, the more likely you are to seek help.”
Those who were hospitalized with COVID-19 were at a higher risk of PTSD compared with those not hospitalized (P < .001), as were those under the age of 30 (P < .05) or between 31 and 50 vs. over 50 (P < .01).
Dr. Van Ameringen noted that the survey’s high rate of subjects who had not returned to normal functioning was especially striking.
“This is not a minor issue – these are people who are no longer functioning in society,” he said.
In pandemics, the brain tends to be ‘overlooked’
Further addressing the neurological effects of COVID-19 at the APA meeting, Avindra Nath, MD, clinical director of the National Institutes of Neurologic Disorders and Stroke in Bethesda, Md., noted that the persisting cognitive and psychiatric symptoms after illness, such as brain fog and depression and anxiety, are not necessarily unique to COVID-19.
“We have seen this before,” he said. “There have been at least seven or eight human coronaviruses, and the interesting thing is each one affects the brain and causes neurological complications.”
The effects are classified differently and have slightly different receptors, “but the consequences are the same.”
Of note, however, research published in The Lancet Psychiatry (2021 May. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366[21]00084-5) revealed that symptoms such as dementia, mood, and anxiety are significantly higher after COVID-19 compared with other respiratory infections, with the differences increasing at 180 days since the index event.
Dr. Nath noted that, over the decades, he has observed that in pandemics “the brain tends to get overlooked.” He explained that “what can be most important in the end is what happened in the brain, because those are the things that really cause the long-term consequences.”
“These patients are depressed; they have dementia, they have brain fog, and even now that we recognize these issues, we haven’t done a very good job of studying them,” he said. “There’s so much we still don’t know, and a lot of patients are left with these symptoms and nowhere to go.”
Dr. Lynch, Dr. Van Ameringen, and Dr. Nath had no disclosures to report.
AT APA 2022
Depressed patients respond faster to IV ketamine than intranasal ketamine
NEW ORLEANS – New research reveals that patients with treatment-resistant depression who were treated with repeated intravenous ketamine show no significant differences in achieving response or remission, compared with those receiving the intranasal formulation of the drug, esketamine – although fewer treatments appear necessary with the intravenous formulation.
“ although at the end, the responses are similar,” said first author Balwinder Singh, MD, of the department of psychiatry and psychology, Mayo Clinic, in Rochester, Minn.
The findings were presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association.
Commenting on the study, Roger S. McIntyre, MD, underscored that “this is an important study that addresses the priority questions that everyone wants to know – not only for clinical reasons, but economic reasons.” Dr. McIntyre, a professor of psychiatry and pharmacology at the University of Toronto, and head of the university’s mood disorders psychopharmacology unit, said that “there are implications not only for clinical outcomes and cost, but also implementation because IV is obviously more demanding and complicated.”
As intravenous ketamine increasingly gained interest as a rapid-acting treatment for patients with severe, treatment-resistant depression, the introduction of a more convenient intranasal formulation was seen as a welcome improvement and received approval from the Food and Drug Administration in 2019. However, while the approval ushered in more coverage by insurance companies, the treatment can still be expensive. Intravenous ketamine does not have FDA approval.
With a lack of studies in the real-world setting comparing efficacy of the two formulations, Dr. Singh and his colleagues conducted the observational study, evaluating the responses of 62 adults with treatment-resistant depression who had received either up to six IV ketamine infusions of 0.5 mg/kg, infused over 40 minutes, or up to eight intranasal esketamine treatments of 56/84 mg, as approved by the FDA, at the Mayo Clinic Depression Center.
Of the patients, who had a mean age of 47 years, 59 had major depression and 3 had bipolar depression. Among them, 76% (47) received intravenous ketamine and 24% (15) received esketamine, which Dr. Singh noted reflected the higher number of patients included before esketamine received FDA approval. The patients had similar comorbidity profiles, with the intravenous ketamine group having a higher body mass index at baseline.
Overall, the patients all had significant improvement in their depression at the end of the acute phase of 4 weeks, with a mean change in on the 16-Item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-SR) scale of –8.6 from baseline (P < .001).
The overall remission rate was 38.7% and overall response rate was 58.1%. Those receiving intravenous ketamine had response and remission rates of 57.4% and 42.6%, versus response and remission rates of 60.0% and 26.7% among the esketamine group, which Dr. Singh said were not significant differences (P > .05).
However, the mean number of treatments necessary to achieve response in the intravenous ketamine group was just 2.3 versus 4.6 with esketamine, and the mean number of treatments to achieve remission were 2.5 versus 6.3, respectively (P = .008).
After a multivariate adjustment, the time to response was determined to be faster with intravenous ketamine versus esketamine (hazard ratio, 2.61; P = .05) and the time to remission was also faster (HR, 5.0; P = .02).
“What this means is you would need fewer treatments to achieve a response or remission with IV ketamine, so there could be an acceleration of patients’ antidepressant response,” Dr. Singh explained.
There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of side effects, and most patients tolerated the treatments well.
Dr. Singh noted the limitation of the study is that it was observational and included a small sample size. Nevertheless, when asked which he would choose if starting treatment when insurance was not an issue, Dr. Singh replied: “I would take patient preference into account, but certainly IV seems to have an advantage.”
Dr. McIntyre noted that, though small, the study’s setting in a real world clinical environment is important.
“Obviously this is observational and not controlled, but the strength is that this involved a real-world cohort of patients and real world applications,” he said. “It’s difficult to have a true comparator head-to-head trial, so that makes this all the more important because it takes into consideration all of the complexities of real world patients.”
Dr. McIntyre emphasized that the study is not “the last word on the story because we need to see a larger sample and replication. But certainly they make an argument that IV ketamine may have an advantage over the speed of onset with intranasal ketamine, which will need to be either replicated or refuted, but it’s a great starting point in the conversation.”
Navigating patient preference
Robert Meisner, MD, founding medical director of the McLean Ketamine Service, Division of Psychiatric Neurotherapeutics, McLean Hospital, Harvard Medical School, in Boston, noted that wide-ranging factors may influence patient as well as clinician decisions about which ketamine treatment approach to use.
“When a patient appears to be equally well-suited for both interventions, I continue to be surprised by why one patient will indicate a preference for intranasal esketamine, while another will lean toward IV racemic ketamine,” he said in an interview.
“Some patients find esketamine’s clear and consistent protocol optimal for scheduling and navigating the logistics of daily life; others value the flexibility offered by certain evidence-based, racemic (IV) protocols,” he said. “Predicting who will prefer each treatment, even with the apparent temporal advantage with IV ketamine, is extremely difficult.”
Likewise, in terms of clinician preference, Dr. Meisner notes that key concerns may sway decisions.
“If I’m concerned with labile pressures or hypertension, for example, or if I have a patient with, say, Erlos Danlos Syndrome without a clear subtype, and hence, some risk of undiscovered aneurysmal vascular disease, I may lean toward racemic IV ketamine.”
On the other hand, “some patients find the simplicity and predictability of the maintenance esketamine protocol comforting and psychologically stabilizing,” he added. “Yet others find that their work or family’s erratic demands on their time make one of the evidence-based racemic regimens preferable – inasmuch as it integrates more flexibility and allows them to remain more fully engaged in the basic activities or work and family.”
Dr. Meisner noted the caveat that efforts to decide which method to use are often complicated by substantial misinformation.
“I can’t emphasize how much misinformation continues to abound regarding appropriate (evidence-based) and safe use of ketamine and esketamine,” he said. “Especially on the IV racemic side, there simply is no substantive evidence base for many of the claims that some providers are preaching.”
The confusion, driven in part by social media, “has diffused into sectors of the field and industry that one might assume are relatively immune (i.e., allied physicians, sophisticated payers, etc),” he added.
“In short, two mantra continue to apply,” Dr. Meisner said. “One – if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is; and two – in pharmacology and interventional psychiatry, we see remarkable progress and potential, but there simply is no such thing as a magic bullet.”
Dr. Singh and Dr. Meisner had no disclosures to report. Dr. McIntyre has received research grant support from Canadian Institutes of Health Research/Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases/National Natural Science Foundation of China, and speaker/consultation fees from Lundbeck, Janssen, Alkermes,Neumora Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Sage, Biogen, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Purdue, Pfizer, Otsuka, Takeda, Neurocrine, Sunovion, Bausch Health, Axsome, Novo Nordisk, Kris, Sanofi, Eisai, Intra-Cellular, NewBridge Pharmaceuticals, Abbvie, and Atai Life Sciences. Dr. McIntyre is a CEO of Braxia Scientific.
NEW ORLEANS – New research reveals that patients with treatment-resistant depression who were treated with repeated intravenous ketamine show no significant differences in achieving response or remission, compared with those receiving the intranasal formulation of the drug, esketamine – although fewer treatments appear necessary with the intravenous formulation.
“ although at the end, the responses are similar,” said first author Balwinder Singh, MD, of the department of psychiatry and psychology, Mayo Clinic, in Rochester, Minn.
The findings were presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association.
Commenting on the study, Roger S. McIntyre, MD, underscored that “this is an important study that addresses the priority questions that everyone wants to know – not only for clinical reasons, but economic reasons.” Dr. McIntyre, a professor of psychiatry and pharmacology at the University of Toronto, and head of the university’s mood disorders psychopharmacology unit, said that “there are implications not only for clinical outcomes and cost, but also implementation because IV is obviously more demanding and complicated.”
As intravenous ketamine increasingly gained interest as a rapid-acting treatment for patients with severe, treatment-resistant depression, the introduction of a more convenient intranasal formulation was seen as a welcome improvement and received approval from the Food and Drug Administration in 2019. However, while the approval ushered in more coverage by insurance companies, the treatment can still be expensive. Intravenous ketamine does not have FDA approval.
With a lack of studies in the real-world setting comparing efficacy of the two formulations, Dr. Singh and his colleagues conducted the observational study, evaluating the responses of 62 adults with treatment-resistant depression who had received either up to six IV ketamine infusions of 0.5 mg/kg, infused over 40 minutes, or up to eight intranasal esketamine treatments of 56/84 mg, as approved by the FDA, at the Mayo Clinic Depression Center.
Of the patients, who had a mean age of 47 years, 59 had major depression and 3 had bipolar depression. Among them, 76% (47) received intravenous ketamine and 24% (15) received esketamine, which Dr. Singh noted reflected the higher number of patients included before esketamine received FDA approval. The patients had similar comorbidity profiles, with the intravenous ketamine group having a higher body mass index at baseline.
Overall, the patients all had significant improvement in their depression at the end of the acute phase of 4 weeks, with a mean change in on the 16-Item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-SR) scale of –8.6 from baseline (P < .001).
The overall remission rate was 38.7% and overall response rate was 58.1%. Those receiving intravenous ketamine had response and remission rates of 57.4% and 42.6%, versus response and remission rates of 60.0% and 26.7% among the esketamine group, which Dr. Singh said were not significant differences (P > .05).
However, the mean number of treatments necessary to achieve response in the intravenous ketamine group was just 2.3 versus 4.6 with esketamine, and the mean number of treatments to achieve remission were 2.5 versus 6.3, respectively (P = .008).
After a multivariate adjustment, the time to response was determined to be faster with intravenous ketamine versus esketamine (hazard ratio, 2.61; P = .05) and the time to remission was also faster (HR, 5.0; P = .02).
“What this means is you would need fewer treatments to achieve a response or remission with IV ketamine, so there could be an acceleration of patients’ antidepressant response,” Dr. Singh explained.
There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of side effects, and most patients tolerated the treatments well.
Dr. Singh noted the limitation of the study is that it was observational and included a small sample size. Nevertheless, when asked which he would choose if starting treatment when insurance was not an issue, Dr. Singh replied: “I would take patient preference into account, but certainly IV seems to have an advantage.”
Dr. McIntyre noted that, though small, the study’s setting in a real world clinical environment is important.
“Obviously this is observational and not controlled, but the strength is that this involved a real-world cohort of patients and real world applications,” he said. “It’s difficult to have a true comparator head-to-head trial, so that makes this all the more important because it takes into consideration all of the complexities of real world patients.”
Dr. McIntyre emphasized that the study is not “the last word on the story because we need to see a larger sample and replication. But certainly they make an argument that IV ketamine may have an advantage over the speed of onset with intranasal ketamine, which will need to be either replicated or refuted, but it’s a great starting point in the conversation.”
Navigating patient preference
Robert Meisner, MD, founding medical director of the McLean Ketamine Service, Division of Psychiatric Neurotherapeutics, McLean Hospital, Harvard Medical School, in Boston, noted that wide-ranging factors may influence patient as well as clinician decisions about which ketamine treatment approach to use.
“When a patient appears to be equally well-suited for both interventions, I continue to be surprised by why one patient will indicate a preference for intranasal esketamine, while another will lean toward IV racemic ketamine,” he said in an interview.
“Some patients find esketamine’s clear and consistent protocol optimal for scheduling and navigating the logistics of daily life; others value the flexibility offered by certain evidence-based, racemic (IV) protocols,” he said. “Predicting who will prefer each treatment, even with the apparent temporal advantage with IV ketamine, is extremely difficult.”
Likewise, in terms of clinician preference, Dr. Meisner notes that key concerns may sway decisions.
“If I’m concerned with labile pressures or hypertension, for example, or if I have a patient with, say, Erlos Danlos Syndrome without a clear subtype, and hence, some risk of undiscovered aneurysmal vascular disease, I may lean toward racemic IV ketamine.”
On the other hand, “some patients find the simplicity and predictability of the maintenance esketamine protocol comforting and psychologically stabilizing,” he added. “Yet others find that their work or family’s erratic demands on their time make one of the evidence-based racemic regimens preferable – inasmuch as it integrates more flexibility and allows them to remain more fully engaged in the basic activities or work and family.”
Dr. Meisner noted the caveat that efforts to decide which method to use are often complicated by substantial misinformation.
“I can’t emphasize how much misinformation continues to abound regarding appropriate (evidence-based) and safe use of ketamine and esketamine,” he said. “Especially on the IV racemic side, there simply is no substantive evidence base for many of the claims that some providers are preaching.”
The confusion, driven in part by social media, “has diffused into sectors of the field and industry that one might assume are relatively immune (i.e., allied physicians, sophisticated payers, etc),” he added.
“In short, two mantra continue to apply,” Dr. Meisner said. “One – if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is; and two – in pharmacology and interventional psychiatry, we see remarkable progress and potential, but there simply is no such thing as a magic bullet.”
Dr. Singh and Dr. Meisner had no disclosures to report. Dr. McIntyre has received research grant support from Canadian Institutes of Health Research/Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases/National Natural Science Foundation of China, and speaker/consultation fees from Lundbeck, Janssen, Alkermes,Neumora Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Sage, Biogen, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Purdue, Pfizer, Otsuka, Takeda, Neurocrine, Sunovion, Bausch Health, Axsome, Novo Nordisk, Kris, Sanofi, Eisai, Intra-Cellular, NewBridge Pharmaceuticals, Abbvie, and Atai Life Sciences. Dr. McIntyre is a CEO of Braxia Scientific.
NEW ORLEANS – New research reveals that patients with treatment-resistant depression who were treated with repeated intravenous ketamine show no significant differences in achieving response or remission, compared with those receiving the intranasal formulation of the drug, esketamine – although fewer treatments appear necessary with the intravenous formulation.
“ although at the end, the responses are similar,” said first author Balwinder Singh, MD, of the department of psychiatry and psychology, Mayo Clinic, in Rochester, Minn.
The findings were presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association.
Commenting on the study, Roger S. McIntyre, MD, underscored that “this is an important study that addresses the priority questions that everyone wants to know – not only for clinical reasons, but economic reasons.” Dr. McIntyre, a professor of psychiatry and pharmacology at the University of Toronto, and head of the university’s mood disorders psychopharmacology unit, said that “there are implications not only for clinical outcomes and cost, but also implementation because IV is obviously more demanding and complicated.”
As intravenous ketamine increasingly gained interest as a rapid-acting treatment for patients with severe, treatment-resistant depression, the introduction of a more convenient intranasal formulation was seen as a welcome improvement and received approval from the Food and Drug Administration in 2019. However, while the approval ushered in more coverage by insurance companies, the treatment can still be expensive. Intravenous ketamine does not have FDA approval.
With a lack of studies in the real-world setting comparing efficacy of the two formulations, Dr. Singh and his colleagues conducted the observational study, evaluating the responses of 62 adults with treatment-resistant depression who had received either up to six IV ketamine infusions of 0.5 mg/kg, infused over 40 minutes, or up to eight intranasal esketamine treatments of 56/84 mg, as approved by the FDA, at the Mayo Clinic Depression Center.
Of the patients, who had a mean age of 47 years, 59 had major depression and 3 had bipolar depression. Among them, 76% (47) received intravenous ketamine and 24% (15) received esketamine, which Dr. Singh noted reflected the higher number of patients included before esketamine received FDA approval. The patients had similar comorbidity profiles, with the intravenous ketamine group having a higher body mass index at baseline.
Overall, the patients all had significant improvement in their depression at the end of the acute phase of 4 weeks, with a mean change in on the 16-Item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-SR) scale of –8.6 from baseline (P < .001).
The overall remission rate was 38.7% and overall response rate was 58.1%. Those receiving intravenous ketamine had response and remission rates of 57.4% and 42.6%, versus response and remission rates of 60.0% and 26.7% among the esketamine group, which Dr. Singh said were not significant differences (P > .05).
However, the mean number of treatments necessary to achieve response in the intravenous ketamine group was just 2.3 versus 4.6 with esketamine, and the mean number of treatments to achieve remission were 2.5 versus 6.3, respectively (P = .008).
After a multivariate adjustment, the time to response was determined to be faster with intravenous ketamine versus esketamine (hazard ratio, 2.61; P = .05) and the time to remission was also faster (HR, 5.0; P = .02).
“What this means is you would need fewer treatments to achieve a response or remission with IV ketamine, so there could be an acceleration of patients’ antidepressant response,” Dr. Singh explained.
There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of side effects, and most patients tolerated the treatments well.
Dr. Singh noted the limitation of the study is that it was observational and included a small sample size. Nevertheless, when asked which he would choose if starting treatment when insurance was not an issue, Dr. Singh replied: “I would take patient preference into account, but certainly IV seems to have an advantage.”
Dr. McIntyre noted that, though small, the study’s setting in a real world clinical environment is important.
“Obviously this is observational and not controlled, but the strength is that this involved a real-world cohort of patients and real world applications,” he said. “It’s difficult to have a true comparator head-to-head trial, so that makes this all the more important because it takes into consideration all of the complexities of real world patients.”
Dr. McIntyre emphasized that the study is not “the last word on the story because we need to see a larger sample and replication. But certainly they make an argument that IV ketamine may have an advantage over the speed of onset with intranasal ketamine, which will need to be either replicated or refuted, but it’s a great starting point in the conversation.”
Navigating patient preference
Robert Meisner, MD, founding medical director of the McLean Ketamine Service, Division of Psychiatric Neurotherapeutics, McLean Hospital, Harvard Medical School, in Boston, noted that wide-ranging factors may influence patient as well as clinician decisions about which ketamine treatment approach to use.
“When a patient appears to be equally well-suited for both interventions, I continue to be surprised by why one patient will indicate a preference for intranasal esketamine, while another will lean toward IV racemic ketamine,” he said in an interview.
“Some patients find esketamine’s clear and consistent protocol optimal for scheduling and navigating the logistics of daily life; others value the flexibility offered by certain evidence-based, racemic (IV) protocols,” he said. “Predicting who will prefer each treatment, even with the apparent temporal advantage with IV ketamine, is extremely difficult.”
Likewise, in terms of clinician preference, Dr. Meisner notes that key concerns may sway decisions.
“If I’m concerned with labile pressures or hypertension, for example, or if I have a patient with, say, Erlos Danlos Syndrome without a clear subtype, and hence, some risk of undiscovered aneurysmal vascular disease, I may lean toward racemic IV ketamine.”
On the other hand, “some patients find the simplicity and predictability of the maintenance esketamine protocol comforting and psychologically stabilizing,” he added. “Yet others find that their work or family’s erratic demands on their time make one of the evidence-based racemic regimens preferable – inasmuch as it integrates more flexibility and allows them to remain more fully engaged in the basic activities or work and family.”
Dr. Meisner noted the caveat that efforts to decide which method to use are often complicated by substantial misinformation.
“I can’t emphasize how much misinformation continues to abound regarding appropriate (evidence-based) and safe use of ketamine and esketamine,” he said. “Especially on the IV racemic side, there simply is no substantive evidence base for many of the claims that some providers are preaching.”
The confusion, driven in part by social media, “has diffused into sectors of the field and industry that one might assume are relatively immune (i.e., allied physicians, sophisticated payers, etc),” he added.
“In short, two mantra continue to apply,” Dr. Meisner said. “One – if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is; and two – in pharmacology and interventional psychiatry, we see remarkable progress and potential, but there simply is no such thing as a magic bullet.”
Dr. Singh and Dr. Meisner had no disclosures to report. Dr. McIntyre has received research grant support from Canadian Institutes of Health Research/Global Alliance for Chronic Diseases/National Natural Science Foundation of China, and speaker/consultation fees from Lundbeck, Janssen, Alkermes,Neumora Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Sage, Biogen, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Purdue, Pfizer, Otsuka, Takeda, Neurocrine, Sunovion, Bausch Health, Axsome, Novo Nordisk, Kris, Sanofi, Eisai, Intra-Cellular, NewBridge Pharmaceuticals, Abbvie, and Atai Life Sciences. Dr. McIntyre is a CEO of Braxia Scientific.
AT APA 2022
Lithium lowers osteoporosis risk in bipolar patients…and orthopedists take notice
NEW ORLEANS –
“Our findings emphasize that bone health should be a priority in the clinical management of bipolar disorder, and that the potential bone-protective effects of lithium should be subjected to further study – both in the context of osteoporosis and bipolar disorder,” said Soren D. Ostergaard, MD, PhD, the study’s first author and a professor in the psychosis research unit, Aarhus (Denmark) University Hospital – Psychiatry.
For the retrospective cohort study, presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, and also published recently in JAMA Psychiatry, the authors reviewed data on 22,912 patients treated for bipolar disorder in Denmark between 1996 and 2019, and compared each patient with 5 age- and sex-matched controls, amounting to 114,560 individuals in the general population.
Of the patients with bipolar disorder, 38.2% were treated with lithium, while 73.6% received an antipsychotic drug; 16.8% received valproate and 33.1% received lamotrigine.
With a median follow-up of 7.7 years, the incidence of osteoporosis per 1,000 person-years was 8.70 among patients with bipolar disorder, compared with an incidence of 7.84 among controls, (hazard rate ratio, 1.15).
The association of bipolar disorder with osteoporosis was notably more pronounced among males (HRR, 1.42) compared with females (HRR, 1.07).
Notably, those with bipolar disorder treated with lithium showed a significantly reduced risk of osteoporosis compared with patients not receiving lithium (HRR, 0.62), after adjustment for factors including age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, use of systemic corticosteroids, use of sedative medication, and eating disorder diagnosis. No similar reductions in osteoporosis risk were observed among those treated with antipsychotics, valproate or lamotrigine.
Of note, the reduced risk of osteoporosis with lithium appeared after about year 2 of treatment (HR, 0.77) and remained steady at more than 4 years (HR, 0.76). A higher cumulative lithium dose was meanwhile associated with a greater decrease in the risk of osteoporosis (P < .001).
Results confirm prior research
The results are consistent with previous smaller studies indicating that people with bipolar disorders shown an increased risk of low bone density, osteopenia, and even fracture.
The higher risk of osteoporosis in bipolar disorder may be explained by lifestyle factors, Dr. Ostergaard noted in an interview.
“It could be the depressive and manic phases in bipolar disorder, but generally speaking, both phases can lead to an unhealthy lifestyle and that’s likely what drives the association between bipolar disorder and osteoporosis,” he said. “Increases in behaviors such as smoking and alcohol consumption may be factors as well. Similar findings are seen with depression.”
While more needs to be understood, Dr. Ostergaard speculated that higher rates of such behaviors in men with bipolar disorder may explain the higher osteoporosis risk observed in men.
In general, however, the increased risk underscores the importance of raising awareness of bone health among patients with bipolar disorder, the authors concluded.
“Specifically, guiding patients toward a lifestyle supporting bone health (no smoking, reduced alcohol consumption, healthy diet, and exercising) and monitoring bone density via dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans among those with additional risk factors seems warranted,” they wrote.
The implications of the lithium findings are trickier to determine, Dr. Ostergaard said.
“The evidence for lithium in bipolar disorder are well established, and our findings don’t really add to that,” he said. “The main thing is it suggests there might be some advantages of lithium that we’re not really aware of.”
Findings important for orthopedists
The unique properties observed with lithium have caught the attention of some in orthopedics, and researchers with the University of Toronto – having found intriguing bone healing with lithium in preclinical rodent studies – are currently conducting a first-of-its-kind multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial evaluating the potential effects of lithium in the healing of bone fractures.
Diane Nam, MD, of the division of orthopedic surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, and lead investigator on the study, said in an interview that “I’m not surprised by [Dr. Ostergaard’s] paper because it’s consistent with what we have observed about the positive effects on bone healing.”
Dr. Nam and associates have already established administration parameters for their clinical study, determining that optimal effects in fracture healing appear to require that lithium treatment not begin at the time of fracture, but 2 weeks afterward, when new bone is ready to be laid down at the fracture site. In their trial, low daily doses of lithium (at 300 mg) are given only for a duration of 2 weeks.
“While our current trial is intended for a healthy, nonosteoporotic adult population, we have also demonstrated in our preclinical studies that lithium is just as effective in improving fracture healing in an osteoporotic model when the timing of administration is slightly delayed,” she said. “How this is relevant and translatable in patients with bipolar disorder requires further study.”
Dr. Nam said her research team thinks that “not only will the fracture heal faster, but it will heal reliably as delayed or impaired fracture healing remains a significant orthopedic problem.”
While details are not yet available, a preliminary analysis has shown results “going in a positive direction,” enough for the team to be granted funding for the multicenter trial.
Dr. Ostergaard and Dr. Nam reported no disclosures or conflicts.
NEW ORLEANS –
“Our findings emphasize that bone health should be a priority in the clinical management of bipolar disorder, and that the potential bone-protective effects of lithium should be subjected to further study – both in the context of osteoporosis and bipolar disorder,” said Soren D. Ostergaard, MD, PhD, the study’s first author and a professor in the psychosis research unit, Aarhus (Denmark) University Hospital – Psychiatry.
For the retrospective cohort study, presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, and also published recently in JAMA Psychiatry, the authors reviewed data on 22,912 patients treated for bipolar disorder in Denmark between 1996 and 2019, and compared each patient with 5 age- and sex-matched controls, amounting to 114,560 individuals in the general population.
Of the patients with bipolar disorder, 38.2% were treated with lithium, while 73.6% received an antipsychotic drug; 16.8% received valproate and 33.1% received lamotrigine.
With a median follow-up of 7.7 years, the incidence of osteoporosis per 1,000 person-years was 8.70 among patients with bipolar disorder, compared with an incidence of 7.84 among controls, (hazard rate ratio, 1.15).
The association of bipolar disorder with osteoporosis was notably more pronounced among males (HRR, 1.42) compared with females (HRR, 1.07).
Notably, those with bipolar disorder treated with lithium showed a significantly reduced risk of osteoporosis compared with patients not receiving lithium (HRR, 0.62), after adjustment for factors including age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, use of systemic corticosteroids, use of sedative medication, and eating disorder diagnosis. No similar reductions in osteoporosis risk were observed among those treated with antipsychotics, valproate or lamotrigine.
Of note, the reduced risk of osteoporosis with lithium appeared after about year 2 of treatment (HR, 0.77) and remained steady at more than 4 years (HR, 0.76). A higher cumulative lithium dose was meanwhile associated with a greater decrease in the risk of osteoporosis (P < .001).
Results confirm prior research
The results are consistent with previous smaller studies indicating that people with bipolar disorders shown an increased risk of low bone density, osteopenia, and even fracture.
The higher risk of osteoporosis in bipolar disorder may be explained by lifestyle factors, Dr. Ostergaard noted in an interview.
“It could be the depressive and manic phases in bipolar disorder, but generally speaking, both phases can lead to an unhealthy lifestyle and that’s likely what drives the association between bipolar disorder and osteoporosis,” he said. “Increases in behaviors such as smoking and alcohol consumption may be factors as well. Similar findings are seen with depression.”
While more needs to be understood, Dr. Ostergaard speculated that higher rates of such behaviors in men with bipolar disorder may explain the higher osteoporosis risk observed in men.
In general, however, the increased risk underscores the importance of raising awareness of bone health among patients with bipolar disorder, the authors concluded.
“Specifically, guiding patients toward a lifestyle supporting bone health (no smoking, reduced alcohol consumption, healthy diet, and exercising) and monitoring bone density via dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans among those with additional risk factors seems warranted,” they wrote.
The implications of the lithium findings are trickier to determine, Dr. Ostergaard said.
“The evidence for lithium in bipolar disorder are well established, and our findings don’t really add to that,” he said. “The main thing is it suggests there might be some advantages of lithium that we’re not really aware of.”
Findings important for orthopedists
The unique properties observed with lithium have caught the attention of some in orthopedics, and researchers with the University of Toronto – having found intriguing bone healing with lithium in preclinical rodent studies – are currently conducting a first-of-its-kind multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial evaluating the potential effects of lithium in the healing of bone fractures.
Diane Nam, MD, of the division of orthopedic surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, and lead investigator on the study, said in an interview that “I’m not surprised by [Dr. Ostergaard’s] paper because it’s consistent with what we have observed about the positive effects on bone healing.”
Dr. Nam and associates have already established administration parameters for their clinical study, determining that optimal effects in fracture healing appear to require that lithium treatment not begin at the time of fracture, but 2 weeks afterward, when new bone is ready to be laid down at the fracture site. In their trial, low daily doses of lithium (at 300 mg) are given only for a duration of 2 weeks.
“While our current trial is intended for a healthy, nonosteoporotic adult population, we have also demonstrated in our preclinical studies that lithium is just as effective in improving fracture healing in an osteoporotic model when the timing of administration is slightly delayed,” she said. “How this is relevant and translatable in patients with bipolar disorder requires further study.”
Dr. Nam said her research team thinks that “not only will the fracture heal faster, but it will heal reliably as delayed or impaired fracture healing remains a significant orthopedic problem.”
While details are not yet available, a preliminary analysis has shown results “going in a positive direction,” enough for the team to be granted funding for the multicenter trial.
Dr. Ostergaard and Dr. Nam reported no disclosures or conflicts.
NEW ORLEANS –
“Our findings emphasize that bone health should be a priority in the clinical management of bipolar disorder, and that the potential bone-protective effects of lithium should be subjected to further study – both in the context of osteoporosis and bipolar disorder,” said Soren D. Ostergaard, MD, PhD, the study’s first author and a professor in the psychosis research unit, Aarhus (Denmark) University Hospital – Psychiatry.
For the retrospective cohort study, presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychiatric Association, and also published recently in JAMA Psychiatry, the authors reviewed data on 22,912 patients treated for bipolar disorder in Denmark between 1996 and 2019, and compared each patient with 5 age- and sex-matched controls, amounting to 114,560 individuals in the general population.
Of the patients with bipolar disorder, 38.2% were treated with lithium, while 73.6% received an antipsychotic drug; 16.8% received valproate and 33.1% received lamotrigine.
With a median follow-up of 7.7 years, the incidence of osteoporosis per 1,000 person-years was 8.70 among patients with bipolar disorder, compared with an incidence of 7.84 among controls, (hazard rate ratio, 1.15).
The association of bipolar disorder with osteoporosis was notably more pronounced among males (HRR, 1.42) compared with females (HRR, 1.07).
Notably, those with bipolar disorder treated with lithium showed a significantly reduced risk of osteoporosis compared with patients not receiving lithium (HRR, 0.62), after adjustment for factors including age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, use of systemic corticosteroids, use of sedative medication, and eating disorder diagnosis. No similar reductions in osteoporosis risk were observed among those treated with antipsychotics, valproate or lamotrigine.
Of note, the reduced risk of osteoporosis with lithium appeared after about year 2 of treatment (HR, 0.77) and remained steady at more than 4 years (HR, 0.76). A higher cumulative lithium dose was meanwhile associated with a greater decrease in the risk of osteoporosis (P < .001).
Results confirm prior research
The results are consistent with previous smaller studies indicating that people with bipolar disorders shown an increased risk of low bone density, osteopenia, and even fracture.
The higher risk of osteoporosis in bipolar disorder may be explained by lifestyle factors, Dr. Ostergaard noted in an interview.
“It could be the depressive and manic phases in bipolar disorder, but generally speaking, both phases can lead to an unhealthy lifestyle and that’s likely what drives the association between bipolar disorder and osteoporosis,” he said. “Increases in behaviors such as smoking and alcohol consumption may be factors as well. Similar findings are seen with depression.”
While more needs to be understood, Dr. Ostergaard speculated that higher rates of such behaviors in men with bipolar disorder may explain the higher osteoporosis risk observed in men.
In general, however, the increased risk underscores the importance of raising awareness of bone health among patients with bipolar disorder, the authors concluded.
“Specifically, guiding patients toward a lifestyle supporting bone health (no smoking, reduced alcohol consumption, healthy diet, and exercising) and monitoring bone density via dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scans among those with additional risk factors seems warranted,” they wrote.
The implications of the lithium findings are trickier to determine, Dr. Ostergaard said.
“The evidence for lithium in bipolar disorder are well established, and our findings don’t really add to that,” he said. “The main thing is it suggests there might be some advantages of lithium that we’re not really aware of.”
Findings important for orthopedists
The unique properties observed with lithium have caught the attention of some in orthopedics, and researchers with the University of Toronto – having found intriguing bone healing with lithium in preclinical rodent studies – are currently conducting a first-of-its-kind multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial evaluating the potential effects of lithium in the healing of bone fractures.
Diane Nam, MD, of the division of orthopedic surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, and lead investigator on the study, said in an interview that “I’m not surprised by [Dr. Ostergaard’s] paper because it’s consistent with what we have observed about the positive effects on bone healing.”
Dr. Nam and associates have already established administration parameters for their clinical study, determining that optimal effects in fracture healing appear to require that lithium treatment not begin at the time of fracture, but 2 weeks afterward, when new bone is ready to be laid down at the fracture site. In their trial, low daily doses of lithium (at 300 mg) are given only for a duration of 2 weeks.
“While our current trial is intended for a healthy, nonosteoporotic adult population, we have also demonstrated in our preclinical studies that lithium is just as effective in improving fracture healing in an osteoporotic model when the timing of administration is slightly delayed,” she said. “How this is relevant and translatable in patients with bipolar disorder requires further study.”
Dr. Nam said her research team thinks that “not only will the fracture heal faster, but it will heal reliably as delayed or impaired fracture healing remains a significant orthopedic problem.”
While details are not yet available, a preliminary analysis has shown results “going in a positive direction,” enough for the team to be granted funding for the multicenter trial.
Dr. Ostergaard and Dr. Nam reported no disclosures or conflicts.
AT APA 2022
Topical tranexamic acid reduces postop bleeding following Mohs surgery
The use of adjunctive , in a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial.
The findings suggest that “topical TXA application is an inexpensive and easy topical preventative measure to consider adding to the wound care of granulating defects in the setting of Mohs micrographic surgery,” first author Brianna Castillo, MD, chief dermatology resident at the University of Missouri, Columbia, told this news organization.
The study results were presented at the annual meeting of the American College of Mohs Surgery.
In wound healing by second intent after Mohs micrographic surgery, postoperative bleeding is common and can lead to patient distress, as well as return visits or emergency care, resulting in additional health care costs, Dr. Castillo said.
Topical TXA, an antifibrinolytic, synthetic lysine analogue that prevents blood clots from breaking down, is commonly used in surgical settings including cardiothoracic, orthopedic, gynecologic, oral, and trauma surgery, showing no increased risk of thrombotic events. However, its use is relatively new in dermatology.
TXA is approved by the Food and Drug Administration only as an oral formulation for menorrhagia in women and as a short-term preventative measure for hemophilia; however, other formulations are available for topical and subcutaneous uses, Dr. Castillo noted.
To evaluate the potential benefits of the treatment in postsurgical Mohs microsurgery bleeding, Dr. Castillo and colleagues enrolled 124 patients undergoing the surgery between October 2020 and December 2021 who had surgical defects deemed appropriate for second intention healing.
The patients were randomized to groups of 62 patients each to receive normal saline-soaked Telfa pads applied to the wound bed upon completion of surgery or TXA 25 mg/mL at a volume of 1 mL/cm2-soaked Telfa pads to the wound bed upon completion of the surgery.
In both groups, a standard pressure dressing was placed on top of the Telfa pads.
Most participants were men (90 vs. 34 patients), 45 were taking antiplatelet therapy, and 20 were taking anticoagulants, and in all cases, patients were similarly randomized in the two groups. Most of the surgical defects were on the head and neck or an extremity, and most (74) were under 2 cm.
All patients were provided with instructions to apply pressure to their wounds and to report bleeding complications. They were interviewed by phone 3 days following their surgeries regarding postoperative bleeding and any potential issues relating to the TXA treatment.
In follow-up interviews, six patients in the placebo group (9.7%) reported active bleeding from their wounds within 48 hours of surgery, with one patient requiring an intervention, while there were no reports of bleeding in the TXA group (P = .028). No side effects were reported in either group.
In the setting of Mohs micrographic surgery, subcutaneous TXA has previously been studied as an intraoperative hemostatic agent, with bleeding measured prior to the second layer or closure, Dr. Castillo explained. However, “no studies have evaluated topical TXA with the aim to reduce postoperative bleeding in the setting of Mohs micrographic surgery,” she said.
Dr. Castillo noted that topical TXA is relatively inexpensive and typically available in hospital pharmacies. “It’s only about $7 per vial of 10 ccs and we do dilute it,” she noted during the session. “It has a pretty good shelf-life and does not have to be refrigerated.”
“We have implemented this into our practice at the University of Missouri,” she added.
Commenting on the study, M. Laurin Council, MD, associate professor of dermatology in the division of dermatology, department of internal medicine, Washington University, St. Louis, noted that second intention healing is “an excellent option for certain patients after skin cancer removal.
“One problem with this method, however, is that postsurgical wounds may bleed in the hours after a procedure, [and] this can be incredibly distressing to patients and their families,” she told this news organization.
“The study presented here shows great promise for the drug TXA for preventing postsurgical bleeding in this subset of patients,” said Dr. Council, director of dermatologic surgery and director of micrographic surgery and the dermatologic oncology fellowship at Washington University.
Commenting that “the results are impressive,” she noted the study had some limitations. “This is a small pilot study, and we don’t know about confounding factors in each group, such as the proportion of patients who are on blood thinners or who have low platelets, and therefore trouble clotting, for example.”
The authors have reported no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Council has consulted for AbbVie, Castle Biosciences, and Sanofi-Genzyme/Regeneron; however, the consulting was not relevant to the current study.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The use of adjunctive , in a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial.
The findings suggest that “topical TXA application is an inexpensive and easy topical preventative measure to consider adding to the wound care of granulating defects in the setting of Mohs micrographic surgery,” first author Brianna Castillo, MD, chief dermatology resident at the University of Missouri, Columbia, told this news organization.
The study results were presented at the annual meeting of the American College of Mohs Surgery.
In wound healing by second intent after Mohs micrographic surgery, postoperative bleeding is common and can lead to patient distress, as well as return visits or emergency care, resulting in additional health care costs, Dr. Castillo said.
Topical TXA, an antifibrinolytic, synthetic lysine analogue that prevents blood clots from breaking down, is commonly used in surgical settings including cardiothoracic, orthopedic, gynecologic, oral, and trauma surgery, showing no increased risk of thrombotic events. However, its use is relatively new in dermatology.
TXA is approved by the Food and Drug Administration only as an oral formulation for menorrhagia in women and as a short-term preventative measure for hemophilia; however, other formulations are available for topical and subcutaneous uses, Dr. Castillo noted.
To evaluate the potential benefits of the treatment in postsurgical Mohs microsurgery bleeding, Dr. Castillo and colleagues enrolled 124 patients undergoing the surgery between October 2020 and December 2021 who had surgical defects deemed appropriate for second intention healing.
The patients were randomized to groups of 62 patients each to receive normal saline-soaked Telfa pads applied to the wound bed upon completion of surgery or TXA 25 mg/mL at a volume of 1 mL/cm2-soaked Telfa pads to the wound bed upon completion of the surgery.
In both groups, a standard pressure dressing was placed on top of the Telfa pads.
Most participants were men (90 vs. 34 patients), 45 were taking antiplatelet therapy, and 20 were taking anticoagulants, and in all cases, patients were similarly randomized in the two groups. Most of the surgical defects were on the head and neck or an extremity, and most (74) were under 2 cm.
All patients were provided with instructions to apply pressure to their wounds and to report bleeding complications. They were interviewed by phone 3 days following their surgeries regarding postoperative bleeding and any potential issues relating to the TXA treatment.
In follow-up interviews, six patients in the placebo group (9.7%) reported active bleeding from their wounds within 48 hours of surgery, with one patient requiring an intervention, while there were no reports of bleeding in the TXA group (P = .028). No side effects were reported in either group.
In the setting of Mohs micrographic surgery, subcutaneous TXA has previously been studied as an intraoperative hemostatic agent, with bleeding measured prior to the second layer or closure, Dr. Castillo explained. However, “no studies have evaluated topical TXA with the aim to reduce postoperative bleeding in the setting of Mohs micrographic surgery,” she said.
Dr. Castillo noted that topical TXA is relatively inexpensive and typically available in hospital pharmacies. “It’s only about $7 per vial of 10 ccs and we do dilute it,” she noted during the session. “It has a pretty good shelf-life and does not have to be refrigerated.”
“We have implemented this into our practice at the University of Missouri,” she added.
Commenting on the study, M. Laurin Council, MD, associate professor of dermatology in the division of dermatology, department of internal medicine, Washington University, St. Louis, noted that second intention healing is “an excellent option for certain patients after skin cancer removal.
“One problem with this method, however, is that postsurgical wounds may bleed in the hours after a procedure, [and] this can be incredibly distressing to patients and their families,” she told this news organization.
“The study presented here shows great promise for the drug TXA for preventing postsurgical bleeding in this subset of patients,” said Dr. Council, director of dermatologic surgery and director of micrographic surgery and the dermatologic oncology fellowship at Washington University.
Commenting that “the results are impressive,” she noted the study had some limitations. “This is a small pilot study, and we don’t know about confounding factors in each group, such as the proportion of patients who are on blood thinners or who have low platelets, and therefore trouble clotting, for example.”
The authors have reported no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Council has consulted for AbbVie, Castle Biosciences, and Sanofi-Genzyme/Regeneron; however, the consulting was not relevant to the current study.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The use of adjunctive , in a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial.
The findings suggest that “topical TXA application is an inexpensive and easy topical preventative measure to consider adding to the wound care of granulating defects in the setting of Mohs micrographic surgery,” first author Brianna Castillo, MD, chief dermatology resident at the University of Missouri, Columbia, told this news organization.
The study results were presented at the annual meeting of the American College of Mohs Surgery.
In wound healing by second intent after Mohs micrographic surgery, postoperative bleeding is common and can lead to patient distress, as well as return visits or emergency care, resulting in additional health care costs, Dr. Castillo said.
Topical TXA, an antifibrinolytic, synthetic lysine analogue that prevents blood clots from breaking down, is commonly used in surgical settings including cardiothoracic, orthopedic, gynecologic, oral, and trauma surgery, showing no increased risk of thrombotic events. However, its use is relatively new in dermatology.
TXA is approved by the Food and Drug Administration only as an oral formulation for menorrhagia in women and as a short-term preventative measure for hemophilia; however, other formulations are available for topical and subcutaneous uses, Dr. Castillo noted.
To evaluate the potential benefits of the treatment in postsurgical Mohs microsurgery bleeding, Dr. Castillo and colleagues enrolled 124 patients undergoing the surgery between October 2020 and December 2021 who had surgical defects deemed appropriate for second intention healing.
The patients were randomized to groups of 62 patients each to receive normal saline-soaked Telfa pads applied to the wound bed upon completion of surgery or TXA 25 mg/mL at a volume of 1 mL/cm2-soaked Telfa pads to the wound bed upon completion of the surgery.
In both groups, a standard pressure dressing was placed on top of the Telfa pads.
Most participants were men (90 vs. 34 patients), 45 were taking antiplatelet therapy, and 20 were taking anticoagulants, and in all cases, patients were similarly randomized in the two groups. Most of the surgical defects were on the head and neck or an extremity, and most (74) were under 2 cm.
All patients were provided with instructions to apply pressure to their wounds and to report bleeding complications. They were interviewed by phone 3 days following their surgeries regarding postoperative bleeding and any potential issues relating to the TXA treatment.
In follow-up interviews, six patients in the placebo group (9.7%) reported active bleeding from their wounds within 48 hours of surgery, with one patient requiring an intervention, while there were no reports of bleeding in the TXA group (P = .028). No side effects were reported in either group.
In the setting of Mohs micrographic surgery, subcutaneous TXA has previously been studied as an intraoperative hemostatic agent, with bleeding measured prior to the second layer or closure, Dr. Castillo explained. However, “no studies have evaluated topical TXA with the aim to reduce postoperative bleeding in the setting of Mohs micrographic surgery,” she said.
Dr. Castillo noted that topical TXA is relatively inexpensive and typically available in hospital pharmacies. “It’s only about $7 per vial of 10 ccs and we do dilute it,” she noted during the session. “It has a pretty good shelf-life and does not have to be refrigerated.”
“We have implemented this into our practice at the University of Missouri,” she added.
Commenting on the study, M. Laurin Council, MD, associate professor of dermatology in the division of dermatology, department of internal medicine, Washington University, St. Louis, noted that second intention healing is “an excellent option for certain patients after skin cancer removal.
“One problem with this method, however, is that postsurgical wounds may bleed in the hours after a procedure, [and] this can be incredibly distressing to patients and their families,” she told this news organization.
“The study presented here shows great promise for the drug TXA for preventing postsurgical bleeding in this subset of patients,” said Dr. Council, director of dermatologic surgery and director of micrographic surgery and the dermatologic oncology fellowship at Washington University.
Commenting that “the results are impressive,” she noted the study had some limitations. “This is a small pilot study, and we don’t know about confounding factors in each group, such as the proportion of patients who are on blood thinners or who have low platelets, and therefore trouble clotting, for example.”
The authors have reported no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Council has consulted for AbbVie, Castle Biosciences, and Sanofi-Genzyme/Regeneron; however, the consulting was not relevant to the current study.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM THE ACMS ANNUAL MEETING
Bupivacaine following Mohs surgery reduces opioid use, study finds
An injection of a randomized trial shows.
“Single-dose, in-office bupivacaine administration immediately following reconstructions known to be high risk for pain reduces postoperative narcotic use and acute pain during the time period when our patients have the highest levels of pain,” said first author Vanessa B. Voss, MD, of the University of Missouri–Columbia, who presented the findings at the annual meeting of the American College of Mohs Surgery.
“It was well tolerated, there were no adverse effects, and we recommend the consideration of using this in Mohs micrographic surgery reconstructions that are at the highest risk for pain,” she said.
Recent research has shown that Mohs micrographic surgeons have the highest rates of opioid prescribing of all dermatologists, with about 11% of patients undergoing a Mohs procedure prescribed the drugs for postoperative use, Dr. Voss explained.
Yet, with the ongoing opioid epidemic and even short courses of postoperative opioids placing patients at risk for addiction, the pressure is on to find alternative, nonaddictive strategies for the treatment of acute postoperative pain.
Bupivacaine is commonly used intraoperatively with other types of surgeries to reduce postoperative pain, with a favorable duration of action lasting up to 7 hours, compared with just 2-3 hours with lidocaine. And while its use in Mohs surgery is typically also intraoperative, along with lidocaine, the unique postoperative treatment approach in Mohs surgery has not been well studied, Dr. Voss noted.
To investigate, Dr. Voss and colleagues conducted the prospective, multicenter randomized trial, enrolling 174 patients undergoing Mohs micrographic surgery for skin cancer.
Patients were receiving complex flap reconstructions that have been specifically designated in an American Academy of Dermatology position statement to be high risk for pain following Mohs surgeries, and hence, more likely to involve prescriptions for opioids. These include reconstruction flaps of the scalp, ear, nose or lip, a wedge repair of the ear or lip, or a Mustarde cheek rotation flap.
The mean age of the patients was about 69 years, and about 65% were male. The two groups had no significant differences in demographics, tumor types, or repairs. They were randomized to receive either local injections of bupivacaine 0.5% (with no epinephrine) or placebo with sterile saline injection immediately following the procedure, with the total amount of injection standardized and dependent upon the flap surface area, ranging from 2.5 to 5 cm3.
For postoperative pain, all patients were prescribed acetaminophen 1,000 mg alternating with ibuprofen 400 mg, and tramadol, with instructions to only use tramadol as needed for breakthrough pain.
The reported use of narcotic analgesics by participants was significantly higher among those receiving placebo versus bupivacaine in the first 24 hours following surgery (odds ratio, 2.18; P = .03), as well as in the second 24 hours (OR, 2.18; P = .08) and at 48 hours combined (OR, 2.58; P < .01).
Those in the bupivacaine group also reported lower average pain scores, on a scale of 0-10, during the first 8-hour interval (mean difference, 1.6; P < .001). Importantly, overall, reports of pain medication use and the percentage of patients reporting pain under control were similar between groups, despite lower opioid use in the bupivacaine group.
“The percentage of patients reporting their pain to be under control was similar at all time intervals in both groups, so this means the bupivacaine group had their pain well-controlled despite fewer narcotics, with significant reductions in opioid use,” Dr. Voss noted.
Bupivacaine, though generally regarded as safe, has a reputation for being the most cardiotoxic of the local anesthetic agents; however, there were no such side effects reported in the study. Dr. Voss said the likely explanation is the use of low doses.
“In our study, we had no cardiotoxic effects when using up to 5 cc of 0.5%, which equates to 25 mg per patient,” she explained. This is considered a “very low dose,” since the maximum in the Food and Drug Administration pamphlet for local infiltration is 175 mg per patient every 3 hours, “yet is sufficient for reducing pain/narcotic use.”
She added that “surgeons must be careful to avoid accidental intravascular injection, which could increase risks of systemic toxicity, but this is very rare in the reconstruction settings described.”
Overall, the study suggests a potentially beneficial and unique nonopioid approach that is currently lacking for Mohs procedures associated with a high level of pain. “These findings offer a very effective intervention to reduce postoperative opioid use in this subset of patients,” Dr. Voss told this news organization. “There is not any other intervention that I am aware of to address this, although further study into other long-acting anesthetics may demonstrate similar effects.”
Commenting on the study, Justin J. Leitenberger, MD, session moderator, said that these “data could be impactful for reducing pain as well as the need for opioid medication after dermatologic surgery, both of which would be significant for our patients and public health outcomes.”
Among the challenges in treating pain following Mohs surgeries is that “every patient has a different pain threshold and expectation after surgery,” said Dr. Leitenberger, assistant professor of medicine and dermatology and codirector of dermatologic surgery, Mohs micrographic surgery, and laser and cosmetic surgery at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
“Patients undergoing larger repairs in tense areas of skin can experience increased pain and require prescription pain medication,” he said. “Bupivacaine, in this study, shows promise to provide longer lasting pain control from the surgical appointment and easier bridging to nonopioid pain control.”
Regarding the potential cardiotoxicities associated with the drug, Dr. Leitenberger agreed that the risks are low, and added that many surgeons have, in fact, switched to full use of bupivacaine, as opposed to combination with lidocaine, apparently without problems. “This is a small dose locally to the area after a procedure and I agree that the risks are minuscule,” he said.
“Of note, during national lidocaine shortages over the past few years, many practices transitioned to exclusive use of bupivacaine for the entire Mohs procedure, and [anecdotally], this transition did not result in toxicities that were reported,” Dr. Leitenberger said.
Commenting further, Vishal Patel, MD, assistant professor of dermatology and hematology/oncology at George Washington University and director of cutaneous oncology at the GW Cancer Center, both in Washington, also agreed that the benefits appear important. “The benefit from using bupivacaine is encouraging on multiple levels,” he said in an interview.
“Given all that we know about opioids and their negative side effect profile as well as their limited help in cutaneous surgery pain control, the use of long-acting anesthetics is an innovative and reasonable approach to provide pain control in the immediate postoperative window when patients tend to have the most pain,” said Dr. Patel, who is also director of dermatologic surgery at George Washington University.
“After this window, acetaminophen and ibuprofen, which have been shown when used in tandem in an alternating schedule to be superior to opioids, provides an effective pain regimen,” he said. “For larger and more pain-sensitive patients, this appears to be a promising combination.”
Dr. Voss, Dr. Leitenberger, and Dr. Patel have reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
An injection of a randomized trial shows.
“Single-dose, in-office bupivacaine administration immediately following reconstructions known to be high risk for pain reduces postoperative narcotic use and acute pain during the time period when our patients have the highest levels of pain,” said first author Vanessa B. Voss, MD, of the University of Missouri–Columbia, who presented the findings at the annual meeting of the American College of Mohs Surgery.
“It was well tolerated, there were no adverse effects, and we recommend the consideration of using this in Mohs micrographic surgery reconstructions that are at the highest risk for pain,” she said.
Recent research has shown that Mohs micrographic surgeons have the highest rates of opioid prescribing of all dermatologists, with about 11% of patients undergoing a Mohs procedure prescribed the drugs for postoperative use, Dr. Voss explained.
Yet, with the ongoing opioid epidemic and even short courses of postoperative opioids placing patients at risk for addiction, the pressure is on to find alternative, nonaddictive strategies for the treatment of acute postoperative pain.
Bupivacaine is commonly used intraoperatively with other types of surgeries to reduce postoperative pain, with a favorable duration of action lasting up to 7 hours, compared with just 2-3 hours with lidocaine. And while its use in Mohs surgery is typically also intraoperative, along with lidocaine, the unique postoperative treatment approach in Mohs surgery has not been well studied, Dr. Voss noted.
To investigate, Dr. Voss and colleagues conducted the prospective, multicenter randomized trial, enrolling 174 patients undergoing Mohs micrographic surgery for skin cancer.
Patients were receiving complex flap reconstructions that have been specifically designated in an American Academy of Dermatology position statement to be high risk for pain following Mohs surgeries, and hence, more likely to involve prescriptions for opioids. These include reconstruction flaps of the scalp, ear, nose or lip, a wedge repair of the ear or lip, or a Mustarde cheek rotation flap.
The mean age of the patients was about 69 years, and about 65% were male. The two groups had no significant differences in demographics, tumor types, or repairs. They were randomized to receive either local injections of bupivacaine 0.5% (with no epinephrine) or placebo with sterile saline injection immediately following the procedure, with the total amount of injection standardized and dependent upon the flap surface area, ranging from 2.5 to 5 cm3.
For postoperative pain, all patients were prescribed acetaminophen 1,000 mg alternating with ibuprofen 400 mg, and tramadol, with instructions to only use tramadol as needed for breakthrough pain.
The reported use of narcotic analgesics by participants was significantly higher among those receiving placebo versus bupivacaine in the first 24 hours following surgery (odds ratio, 2.18; P = .03), as well as in the second 24 hours (OR, 2.18; P = .08) and at 48 hours combined (OR, 2.58; P < .01).
Those in the bupivacaine group also reported lower average pain scores, on a scale of 0-10, during the first 8-hour interval (mean difference, 1.6; P < .001). Importantly, overall, reports of pain medication use and the percentage of patients reporting pain under control were similar between groups, despite lower opioid use in the bupivacaine group.
“The percentage of patients reporting their pain to be under control was similar at all time intervals in both groups, so this means the bupivacaine group had their pain well-controlled despite fewer narcotics, with significant reductions in opioid use,” Dr. Voss noted.
Bupivacaine, though generally regarded as safe, has a reputation for being the most cardiotoxic of the local anesthetic agents; however, there were no such side effects reported in the study. Dr. Voss said the likely explanation is the use of low doses.
“In our study, we had no cardiotoxic effects when using up to 5 cc of 0.5%, which equates to 25 mg per patient,” she explained. This is considered a “very low dose,” since the maximum in the Food and Drug Administration pamphlet for local infiltration is 175 mg per patient every 3 hours, “yet is sufficient for reducing pain/narcotic use.”
She added that “surgeons must be careful to avoid accidental intravascular injection, which could increase risks of systemic toxicity, but this is very rare in the reconstruction settings described.”
Overall, the study suggests a potentially beneficial and unique nonopioid approach that is currently lacking for Mohs procedures associated with a high level of pain. “These findings offer a very effective intervention to reduce postoperative opioid use in this subset of patients,” Dr. Voss told this news organization. “There is not any other intervention that I am aware of to address this, although further study into other long-acting anesthetics may demonstrate similar effects.”
Commenting on the study, Justin J. Leitenberger, MD, session moderator, said that these “data could be impactful for reducing pain as well as the need for opioid medication after dermatologic surgery, both of which would be significant for our patients and public health outcomes.”
Among the challenges in treating pain following Mohs surgeries is that “every patient has a different pain threshold and expectation after surgery,” said Dr. Leitenberger, assistant professor of medicine and dermatology and codirector of dermatologic surgery, Mohs micrographic surgery, and laser and cosmetic surgery at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
“Patients undergoing larger repairs in tense areas of skin can experience increased pain and require prescription pain medication,” he said. “Bupivacaine, in this study, shows promise to provide longer lasting pain control from the surgical appointment and easier bridging to nonopioid pain control.”
Regarding the potential cardiotoxicities associated with the drug, Dr. Leitenberger agreed that the risks are low, and added that many surgeons have, in fact, switched to full use of bupivacaine, as opposed to combination with lidocaine, apparently without problems. “This is a small dose locally to the area after a procedure and I agree that the risks are minuscule,” he said.
“Of note, during national lidocaine shortages over the past few years, many practices transitioned to exclusive use of bupivacaine for the entire Mohs procedure, and [anecdotally], this transition did not result in toxicities that were reported,” Dr. Leitenberger said.
Commenting further, Vishal Patel, MD, assistant professor of dermatology and hematology/oncology at George Washington University and director of cutaneous oncology at the GW Cancer Center, both in Washington, also agreed that the benefits appear important. “The benefit from using bupivacaine is encouraging on multiple levels,” he said in an interview.
“Given all that we know about opioids and their negative side effect profile as well as their limited help in cutaneous surgery pain control, the use of long-acting anesthetics is an innovative and reasonable approach to provide pain control in the immediate postoperative window when patients tend to have the most pain,” said Dr. Patel, who is also director of dermatologic surgery at George Washington University.
“After this window, acetaminophen and ibuprofen, which have been shown when used in tandem in an alternating schedule to be superior to opioids, provides an effective pain regimen,” he said. “For larger and more pain-sensitive patients, this appears to be a promising combination.”
Dr. Voss, Dr. Leitenberger, and Dr. Patel have reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
An injection of a randomized trial shows.
“Single-dose, in-office bupivacaine administration immediately following reconstructions known to be high risk for pain reduces postoperative narcotic use and acute pain during the time period when our patients have the highest levels of pain,” said first author Vanessa B. Voss, MD, of the University of Missouri–Columbia, who presented the findings at the annual meeting of the American College of Mohs Surgery.
“It was well tolerated, there were no adverse effects, and we recommend the consideration of using this in Mohs micrographic surgery reconstructions that are at the highest risk for pain,” she said.
Recent research has shown that Mohs micrographic surgeons have the highest rates of opioid prescribing of all dermatologists, with about 11% of patients undergoing a Mohs procedure prescribed the drugs for postoperative use, Dr. Voss explained.
Yet, with the ongoing opioid epidemic and even short courses of postoperative opioids placing patients at risk for addiction, the pressure is on to find alternative, nonaddictive strategies for the treatment of acute postoperative pain.
Bupivacaine is commonly used intraoperatively with other types of surgeries to reduce postoperative pain, with a favorable duration of action lasting up to 7 hours, compared with just 2-3 hours with lidocaine. And while its use in Mohs surgery is typically also intraoperative, along with lidocaine, the unique postoperative treatment approach in Mohs surgery has not been well studied, Dr. Voss noted.
To investigate, Dr. Voss and colleagues conducted the prospective, multicenter randomized trial, enrolling 174 patients undergoing Mohs micrographic surgery for skin cancer.
Patients were receiving complex flap reconstructions that have been specifically designated in an American Academy of Dermatology position statement to be high risk for pain following Mohs surgeries, and hence, more likely to involve prescriptions for opioids. These include reconstruction flaps of the scalp, ear, nose or lip, a wedge repair of the ear or lip, or a Mustarde cheek rotation flap.
The mean age of the patients was about 69 years, and about 65% were male. The two groups had no significant differences in demographics, tumor types, or repairs. They were randomized to receive either local injections of bupivacaine 0.5% (with no epinephrine) or placebo with sterile saline injection immediately following the procedure, with the total amount of injection standardized and dependent upon the flap surface area, ranging from 2.5 to 5 cm3.
For postoperative pain, all patients were prescribed acetaminophen 1,000 mg alternating with ibuprofen 400 mg, and tramadol, with instructions to only use tramadol as needed for breakthrough pain.
The reported use of narcotic analgesics by participants was significantly higher among those receiving placebo versus bupivacaine in the first 24 hours following surgery (odds ratio, 2.18; P = .03), as well as in the second 24 hours (OR, 2.18; P = .08) and at 48 hours combined (OR, 2.58; P < .01).
Those in the bupivacaine group also reported lower average pain scores, on a scale of 0-10, during the first 8-hour interval (mean difference, 1.6; P < .001). Importantly, overall, reports of pain medication use and the percentage of patients reporting pain under control were similar between groups, despite lower opioid use in the bupivacaine group.
“The percentage of patients reporting their pain to be under control was similar at all time intervals in both groups, so this means the bupivacaine group had their pain well-controlled despite fewer narcotics, with significant reductions in opioid use,” Dr. Voss noted.
Bupivacaine, though generally regarded as safe, has a reputation for being the most cardiotoxic of the local anesthetic agents; however, there were no such side effects reported in the study. Dr. Voss said the likely explanation is the use of low doses.
“In our study, we had no cardiotoxic effects when using up to 5 cc of 0.5%, which equates to 25 mg per patient,” she explained. This is considered a “very low dose,” since the maximum in the Food and Drug Administration pamphlet for local infiltration is 175 mg per patient every 3 hours, “yet is sufficient for reducing pain/narcotic use.”
She added that “surgeons must be careful to avoid accidental intravascular injection, which could increase risks of systemic toxicity, but this is very rare in the reconstruction settings described.”
Overall, the study suggests a potentially beneficial and unique nonopioid approach that is currently lacking for Mohs procedures associated with a high level of pain. “These findings offer a very effective intervention to reduce postoperative opioid use in this subset of patients,” Dr. Voss told this news organization. “There is not any other intervention that I am aware of to address this, although further study into other long-acting anesthetics may demonstrate similar effects.”
Commenting on the study, Justin J. Leitenberger, MD, session moderator, said that these “data could be impactful for reducing pain as well as the need for opioid medication after dermatologic surgery, both of which would be significant for our patients and public health outcomes.”
Among the challenges in treating pain following Mohs surgeries is that “every patient has a different pain threshold and expectation after surgery,” said Dr. Leitenberger, assistant professor of medicine and dermatology and codirector of dermatologic surgery, Mohs micrographic surgery, and laser and cosmetic surgery at Oregon Health & Science University, Portland.
“Patients undergoing larger repairs in tense areas of skin can experience increased pain and require prescription pain medication,” he said. “Bupivacaine, in this study, shows promise to provide longer lasting pain control from the surgical appointment and easier bridging to nonopioid pain control.”
Regarding the potential cardiotoxicities associated with the drug, Dr. Leitenberger agreed that the risks are low, and added that many surgeons have, in fact, switched to full use of bupivacaine, as opposed to combination with lidocaine, apparently without problems. “This is a small dose locally to the area after a procedure and I agree that the risks are minuscule,” he said.
“Of note, during national lidocaine shortages over the past few years, many practices transitioned to exclusive use of bupivacaine for the entire Mohs procedure, and [anecdotally], this transition did not result in toxicities that were reported,” Dr. Leitenberger said.
Commenting further, Vishal Patel, MD, assistant professor of dermatology and hematology/oncology at George Washington University and director of cutaneous oncology at the GW Cancer Center, both in Washington, also agreed that the benefits appear important. “The benefit from using bupivacaine is encouraging on multiple levels,” he said in an interview.
“Given all that we know about opioids and their negative side effect profile as well as their limited help in cutaneous surgery pain control, the use of long-acting anesthetics is an innovative and reasonable approach to provide pain control in the immediate postoperative window when patients tend to have the most pain,” said Dr. Patel, who is also director of dermatologic surgery at George Washington University.
“After this window, acetaminophen and ibuprofen, which have been shown when used in tandem in an alternating schedule to be superior to opioids, provides an effective pain regimen,” he said. “For larger and more pain-sensitive patients, this appears to be a promising combination.”
Dr. Voss, Dr. Leitenberger, and Dr. Patel have reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM ACMS 2022
Keeping thyroid hormone treatment on target is key for the heart
A new study highlights the importance of avoiding both exogenous hyperthyroidism and exogenous hypothyroidism to decrease cardiovascular risk and death among patients receiving thyroid hormone treatment.
“Our findings suggest that clinicians should make every effort to maintain euthyroidism in patients on thyroid hormone treatment, regardless of underlying cardiovascular risk, particularly in vulnerable populations, such as older adults,” senior author Maria Papaleontiou, MD, said in an interview.
Commenting on the study, David S. Cooper, MD, of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, agreed that the findings are significant.
“Both undertreatment and overtreatment were associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes, meaning that patients’ thyroid function needs to be monitored, and levothyroxine adjusted if need be, on an ongoing basis,” he told this news organization.
Getting the balance right: a tricky task
Variations in thyroid hormone levels falling above or below target ranges are common with thyroid hormone therapy, as a wide array of factors can prompt the need to regularly adjust dosing to maintain “index” levels. And while guidelines from the American Thyroid Association (ATA) recommend maintaining serum thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) levels in the normal ranges during treatment, the task is tricky.
“Despite these [ATA] guidelines, prior studies in adults with hypothyroidism have shown that up to 30% are undertreated and up to 48% are overtreated,” said Dr. Papaleontiou, an assistant professor in the Division of Metabolism, Endocrinology at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
In a previous study, Dr. Papaleontiou and colleagues showed that the intensity of thyroid hormone treatment is a modifiable risk factor for incident atrial fibrillation and stroke, however, less is understood about the association with cardiovascular mortality.
For the new study, published in JAMA Network Open, Josh M. Evron, MD, of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and colleagues further investigated the issue in a large, retrospective cohort of 705,307 adults in the Veterans Health Administration Corporate Data Warehouse treated with thyroid hormone during 2004-2017 who had a median follow-up of 4 years.
They investigated the roles of TSH as well as free thyroxine (FT4) levels among 701,929 adults in the group with data on TSH and 373,981 patients with FT4 measurements.
The mean age of participants was 67 years and 88.7% were male.
Over the course of the study, 10.8% of patients (75,963) died of cardiovascular causes.
Compared with patients with normal thyroid levels, those with exogenous hyperthyroidism related to thyroid hormone treatment had an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality, specifically including when TSH levels were below 0.1 mIU/L (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.39) and when FT4 levels were above 1.9 ng/dL (AHR, 1.29), independent of factors including age, sex, and traditional cardiovascular risk factors, including hypertension, smoking, and previous cardiovascular disease or arrhythmia.
In addition, the increased risk of cardiovascular mortality was observed with exogenous hypothyroidism, specifically among those with TSH levels above 20 mIU/L (AHR, 2.67) and FT4 levels below 0.7 ng/dL (AHR, 1.56), after multivariate adjustment.
Of note, the risk of cardiovascular mortality was dose-dependent, with the risk increasing progressively with the lower and higher TSH levels, compared with normal levels.
The increased mortality risk in relation to TSH levels was more pronounced among older patients, compared with FT4 associations, the authors note.
“From a clinical perspective, older adults, and particularly the oldest old (aged 85 years), appear to be the most vulnerable, with increased risk of cardiovascular mortality with both exogenous hyperthyroidism and hypothyroidism,” they report.
Among key limitations is that women, who make up the majority of patients with thyroid disease, are under-represented in the predominantly male population of the Veterans Health Administration.
Nevertheless, “because the risk of cardiovascular disease is higher for men than for women, and because more than 70,000 women were included in this cohort, the results of this study are highly clinically relevant,” the authors note.
Addressing over- and under-treatment will avoid harm
The results are also important considering the status of levothyroxine (for hypothyroidism) as consistently ranking among the top three prescription medications in the United States.
And with the common occurrence of exogenous hyperthyroidism or hypothyroidism, the findings have important implications.
“Addressing over- and under-treatment of hypothyroidism promptly will help reduce patient harm, particularly in vulnerable populations such as older adults who are at higher risk for adverse effects,” Dr. Papaleontiou said.
Dr. Cooper further commented that the findings underscore the need to be aware of treatment adjustments and targets that may vary according to patient age.
“In older persons, over 65-70, the target TSH may be higher [for example, 2-4 mIU/L] than in younger persons, and in patients above ages 70 or 80, serum TSH levels may be allowed to rise even further into the 4-6 mIU/L range,” he explained.
“The older the patient, the higher the chance for an adverse cardiovascular outcome if the TSH is subnormal due to iatrogenic thyrotoxicosis,” Dr. Cooper explained.
“In contrast, in younger individuals, an elevated TSH, indicating mild [subclinical] hypothyroidism may be associated with increased cardiovascular risk, especially with serum TSH levels greater than 7 mIU/L.”
The authors have reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
A new study highlights the importance of avoiding both exogenous hyperthyroidism and exogenous hypothyroidism to decrease cardiovascular risk and death among patients receiving thyroid hormone treatment.
“Our findings suggest that clinicians should make every effort to maintain euthyroidism in patients on thyroid hormone treatment, regardless of underlying cardiovascular risk, particularly in vulnerable populations, such as older adults,” senior author Maria Papaleontiou, MD, said in an interview.
Commenting on the study, David S. Cooper, MD, of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, agreed that the findings are significant.
“Both undertreatment and overtreatment were associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes, meaning that patients’ thyroid function needs to be monitored, and levothyroxine adjusted if need be, on an ongoing basis,” he told this news organization.
Getting the balance right: a tricky task
Variations in thyroid hormone levels falling above or below target ranges are common with thyroid hormone therapy, as a wide array of factors can prompt the need to regularly adjust dosing to maintain “index” levels. And while guidelines from the American Thyroid Association (ATA) recommend maintaining serum thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) levels in the normal ranges during treatment, the task is tricky.
“Despite these [ATA] guidelines, prior studies in adults with hypothyroidism have shown that up to 30% are undertreated and up to 48% are overtreated,” said Dr. Papaleontiou, an assistant professor in the Division of Metabolism, Endocrinology at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
In a previous study, Dr. Papaleontiou and colleagues showed that the intensity of thyroid hormone treatment is a modifiable risk factor for incident atrial fibrillation and stroke, however, less is understood about the association with cardiovascular mortality.
For the new study, published in JAMA Network Open, Josh M. Evron, MD, of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and colleagues further investigated the issue in a large, retrospective cohort of 705,307 adults in the Veterans Health Administration Corporate Data Warehouse treated with thyroid hormone during 2004-2017 who had a median follow-up of 4 years.
They investigated the roles of TSH as well as free thyroxine (FT4) levels among 701,929 adults in the group with data on TSH and 373,981 patients with FT4 measurements.
The mean age of participants was 67 years and 88.7% were male.
Over the course of the study, 10.8% of patients (75,963) died of cardiovascular causes.
Compared with patients with normal thyroid levels, those with exogenous hyperthyroidism related to thyroid hormone treatment had an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality, specifically including when TSH levels were below 0.1 mIU/L (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.39) and when FT4 levels were above 1.9 ng/dL (AHR, 1.29), independent of factors including age, sex, and traditional cardiovascular risk factors, including hypertension, smoking, and previous cardiovascular disease or arrhythmia.
In addition, the increased risk of cardiovascular mortality was observed with exogenous hypothyroidism, specifically among those with TSH levels above 20 mIU/L (AHR, 2.67) and FT4 levels below 0.7 ng/dL (AHR, 1.56), after multivariate adjustment.
Of note, the risk of cardiovascular mortality was dose-dependent, with the risk increasing progressively with the lower and higher TSH levels, compared with normal levels.
The increased mortality risk in relation to TSH levels was more pronounced among older patients, compared with FT4 associations, the authors note.
“From a clinical perspective, older adults, and particularly the oldest old (aged 85 years), appear to be the most vulnerable, with increased risk of cardiovascular mortality with both exogenous hyperthyroidism and hypothyroidism,” they report.
Among key limitations is that women, who make up the majority of patients with thyroid disease, are under-represented in the predominantly male population of the Veterans Health Administration.
Nevertheless, “because the risk of cardiovascular disease is higher for men than for women, and because more than 70,000 women were included in this cohort, the results of this study are highly clinically relevant,” the authors note.
Addressing over- and under-treatment will avoid harm
The results are also important considering the status of levothyroxine (for hypothyroidism) as consistently ranking among the top three prescription medications in the United States.
And with the common occurrence of exogenous hyperthyroidism or hypothyroidism, the findings have important implications.
“Addressing over- and under-treatment of hypothyroidism promptly will help reduce patient harm, particularly in vulnerable populations such as older adults who are at higher risk for adverse effects,” Dr. Papaleontiou said.
Dr. Cooper further commented that the findings underscore the need to be aware of treatment adjustments and targets that may vary according to patient age.
“In older persons, over 65-70, the target TSH may be higher [for example, 2-4 mIU/L] than in younger persons, and in patients above ages 70 or 80, serum TSH levels may be allowed to rise even further into the 4-6 mIU/L range,” he explained.
“The older the patient, the higher the chance for an adverse cardiovascular outcome if the TSH is subnormal due to iatrogenic thyrotoxicosis,” Dr. Cooper explained.
“In contrast, in younger individuals, an elevated TSH, indicating mild [subclinical] hypothyroidism may be associated with increased cardiovascular risk, especially with serum TSH levels greater than 7 mIU/L.”
The authors have reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
A new study highlights the importance of avoiding both exogenous hyperthyroidism and exogenous hypothyroidism to decrease cardiovascular risk and death among patients receiving thyroid hormone treatment.
“Our findings suggest that clinicians should make every effort to maintain euthyroidism in patients on thyroid hormone treatment, regardless of underlying cardiovascular risk, particularly in vulnerable populations, such as older adults,” senior author Maria Papaleontiou, MD, said in an interview.
Commenting on the study, David S. Cooper, MD, of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, agreed that the findings are significant.
“Both undertreatment and overtreatment were associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes, meaning that patients’ thyroid function needs to be monitored, and levothyroxine adjusted if need be, on an ongoing basis,” he told this news organization.
Getting the balance right: a tricky task
Variations in thyroid hormone levels falling above or below target ranges are common with thyroid hormone therapy, as a wide array of factors can prompt the need to regularly adjust dosing to maintain “index” levels. And while guidelines from the American Thyroid Association (ATA) recommend maintaining serum thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) levels in the normal ranges during treatment, the task is tricky.
“Despite these [ATA] guidelines, prior studies in adults with hypothyroidism have shown that up to 30% are undertreated and up to 48% are overtreated,” said Dr. Papaleontiou, an assistant professor in the Division of Metabolism, Endocrinology at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
In a previous study, Dr. Papaleontiou and colleagues showed that the intensity of thyroid hormone treatment is a modifiable risk factor for incident atrial fibrillation and stroke, however, less is understood about the association with cardiovascular mortality.
For the new study, published in JAMA Network Open, Josh M. Evron, MD, of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and colleagues further investigated the issue in a large, retrospective cohort of 705,307 adults in the Veterans Health Administration Corporate Data Warehouse treated with thyroid hormone during 2004-2017 who had a median follow-up of 4 years.
They investigated the roles of TSH as well as free thyroxine (FT4) levels among 701,929 adults in the group with data on TSH and 373,981 patients with FT4 measurements.
The mean age of participants was 67 years and 88.7% were male.
Over the course of the study, 10.8% of patients (75,963) died of cardiovascular causes.
Compared with patients with normal thyroid levels, those with exogenous hyperthyroidism related to thyroid hormone treatment had an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality, specifically including when TSH levels were below 0.1 mIU/L (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.39) and when FT4 levels were above 1.9 ng/dL (AHR, 1.29), independent of factors including age, sex, and traditional cardiovascular risk factors, including hypertension, smoking, and previous cardiovascular disease or arrhythmia.
In addition, the increased risk of cardiovascular mortality was observed with exogenous hypothyroidism, specifically among those with TSH levels above 20 mIU/L (AHR, 2.67) and FT4 levels below 0.7 ng/dL (AHR, 1.56), after multivariate adjustment.
Of note, the risk of cardiovascular mortality was dose-dependent, with the risk increasing progressively with the lower and higher TSH levels, compared with normal levels.
The increased mortality risk in relation to TSH levels was more pronounced among older patients, compared with FT4 associations, the authors note.
“From a clinical perspective, older adults, and particularly the oldest old (aged 85 years), appear to be the most vulnerable, with increased risk of cardiovascular mortality with both exogenous hyperthyroidism and hypothyroidism,” they report.
Among key limitations is that women, who make up the majority of patients with thyroid disease, are under-represented in the predominantly male population of the Veterans Health Administration.
Nevertheless, “because the risk of cardiovascular disease is higher for men than for women, and because more than 70,000 women were included in this cohort, the results of this study are highly clinically relevant,” the authors note.
Addressing over- and under-treatment will avoid harm
The results are also important considering the status of levothyroxine (for hypothyroidism) as consistently ranking among the top three prescription medications in the United States.
And with the common occurrence of exogenous hyperthyroidism or hypothyroidism, the findings have important implications.
“Addressing over- and under-treatment of hypothyroidism promptly will help reduce patient harm, particularly in vulnerable populations such as older adults who are at higher risk for adverse effects,” Dr. Papaleontiou said.
Dr. Cooper further commented that the findings underscore the need to be aware of treatment adjustments and targets that may vary according to patient age.
“In older persons, over 65-70, the target TSH may be higher [for example, 2-4 mIU/L] than in younger persons, and in patients above ages 70 or 80, serum TSH levels may be allowed to rise even further into the 4-6 mIU/L range,” he explained.
“The older the patient, the higher the chance for an adverse cardiovascular outcome if the TSH is subnormal due to iatrogenic thyrotoxicosis,” Dr. Cooper explained.
“In contrast, in younger individuals, an elevated TSH, indicating mild [subclinical] hypothyroidism may be associated with increased cardiovascular risk, especially with serum TSH levels greater than 7 mIU/L.”
The authors have reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Polypectomy clipping success is based on anticoagulant type
A subanalysis of anticoagulant types reveals that, despite no overall benefit for prophylactic polypectomy clipping, there are differences by subgroup: There was a significantly lower bleeding in patients on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and higher bleeding risk in patients on warfarin.
“In DOAC users, prophylactic clipping was associated with a 64% relative risk reduction in 30-day PPB [postpolypectomy bleeding],” versus no clipping, reported the authors of the study, published in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
The removal of colonic polyps is known to carry a high risk of hemorrhage, and the use of antithrombotic medications, including DOACs and warfarin, are well-established as key risk factors for the bleeding.
However, data on the effectiveness of prophylactic hemoclips in preventing PPB is inconsistent, with one meta-analysis only showing a benefit in colonic lesions that are larger than 20 mm and proximal to the hepatic flexure, and other studies failing to show any significant benefits.
To further investigate the effects among patients treated with anticoagulants, first author Louis H.S. Lau, MBChB, an assistant clinical professor in the department of medicine and therapeutics at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, and colleagues enrolled 547 patients with 1,485 polyps who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy while being treated with an oral anticoagulant between 2012 and 2020.
The percentages of warfarin and DOAC users were similar between the groups, at about 50% each.
Overall, PPB occurred in 30 out of the 285 patients (10.6%) who had clipping and 11 out of the 262 patients (4.2%) who did not have clipping. The mean polyp size among patients with PPB was about 8-9 mm, and the mean time to bleeding was between 7 and 9 days.
In the propensity-weighted analysis, there was no statistically significant difference in bleeding among those who did and did not receive clipping (odds ratio, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-1.95; P = .497).
However, a subgroup per-patient analysis did show prophylactic clipping was associated with a significantly lower 30-day PPB risk among patients treated with DOACs (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16-0.82; P = .015), but a significantly higher bleeding risk in patients taking warfarin (OR, 2.98; P = .003), and in those with heparin bridging (OR, 1.69; P = .023).
The subanalysis showed no benefit of prophylactic clipping among the largest polyps, which differed in size across the subgroups (<10 mm vs. 10-20 mm vs. 20 mm).
Of note, the overall analysis showed a significantly higher risk of PPB with hot resection polypectomy using electrocautery (OR, 9.76; 95% CI, 3.94-32.60; P < .001), compared with cold biopsy or snare polypectomy.
The authors noted several limitations to their study, including the relatively high rate of bleeding overall (7.5%), which could be related to the more frequent use of hot snare in their cohort earlier in the study.
Effects caused by DOACs’ rapid onset?
In speculating on the reasons for the different risks observed between DOACs and warfarin, the authors suggested that “a possible explanation could be the rapid onset of action and steady pharmacokinetics of DOAC, reducing the necessity of heparin bridging in most cases.”
Meanwhile, the increased bleeding observed with warfarin despite clipping could be “related to the intrinsic properties of warfarin,” they added.
“Because of its slow onset of action, a larger proportion of patients will receive heparin bridging, which was previously reported to be a significant risk factor of PPB,” they noted. “Moreover, due to the substantial fluctuation in anticoagulation effect during warfarin titration, it may provoke delayed bleeding after the endoclips fall off subsequently.”
Unique focus on anticoagulant-treated patients
Senior author Raymond Shing-Yan Tang, MD, an assistant professor in the department of medicine and therapeutics, faculty of medicine, at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, noted that the study’s unique focus on patients treated with anticoagulants is important.
“Prior studies evaluating the effectiveness of prophylactic clipping in preventing postpolypectomy bleeding included a more heterogeneous patient population with both nonanticoagulated and anticoagulated patients,” Dr. Tang said in an interview.
“The strengths of our study were that it was a dedicated study that included only patients on oral anticoagulants, including warfarin and DOACs, and had a relatively larger sample size when compared to prior studies,” he said.
While most guidelines recommend prophylactic clipping in patients undergoing polypectomy for colonic lesions larger than 20 mm and proximal to the hepatic flexure, a variety of factors may ultimately guide decisions, Dr. Tang noted.
“In clinical practice, the decision to use prophylactic clipping after polypectomy in patients on anticoagulation is often individualized at the discretion of the endoscopist,” he said.
Anticoagulation question is important, but study has limitations
In commenting on the study, Heiko Pohl, MD, a professor of medicine at Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, N.H., noted that, while this study is important, it has some key limitations.
“The question the study raises is relevant – we really have no good idea whether this subset of patients that are anticoagulated should always be clipped,” he said in an interview.
However, he noted potential limitations in the methodology.
“It’s difficult to control for all important factors in a propensity trial,” he said, adding “there could be some unmeasured confounders that could not be accounted for due to the retrospective design.”
Nevertheless, Dr. Pohl agreed that the relatively rapid action of DOACs could help explain the effects.
“DOACs may have a high risk of bleeding sooner [than warfarin] to begin with, and therefore the clipping makes sense, so that may be the mechanistic idea,” he said. “But it’s difficult to generalize, because there have been no previous studies that have shown benefits from clipping for smaller polyps, even among patients on anticoagulants.”
The authors had no disclosures to report. Dr. Pohl has received grants from Steris and Cosmo Pharmaceuticals.
A subanalysis of anticoagulant types reveals that, despite no overall benefit for prophylactic polypectomy clipping, there are differences by subgroup: There was a significantly lower bleeding in patients on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and higher bleeding risk in patients on warfarin.
“In DOAC users, prophylactic clipping was associated with a 64% relative risk reduction in 30-day PPB [postpolypectomy bleeding],” versus no clipping, reported the authors of the study, published in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
The removal of colonic polyps is known to carry a high risk of hemorrhage, and the use of antithrombotic medications, including DOACs and warfarin, are well-established as key risk factors for the bleeding.
However, data on the effectiveness of prophylactic hemoclips in preventing PPB is inconsistent, with one meta-analysis only showing a benefit in colonic lesions that are larger than 20 mm and proximal to the hepatic flexure, and other studies failing to show any significant benefits.
To further investigate the effects among patients treated with anticoagulants, first author Louis H.S. Lau, MBChB, an assistant clinical professor in the department of medicine and therapeutics at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, and colleagues enrolled 547 patients with 1,485 polyps who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy while being treated with an oral anticoagulant between 2012 and 2020.
The percentages of warfarin and DOAC users were similar between the groups, at about 50% each.
Overall, PPB occurred in 30 out of the 285 patients (10.6%) who had clipping and 11 out of the 262 patients (4.2%) who did not have clipping. The mean polyp size among patients with PPB was about 8-9 mm, and the mean time to bleeding was between 7 and 9 days.
In the propensity-weighted analysis, there was no statistically significant difference in bleeding among those who did and did not receive clipping (odds ratio, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-1.95; P = .497).
However, a subgroup per-patient analysis did show prophylactic clipping was associated with a significantly lower 30-day PPB risk among patients treated with DOACs (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16-0.82; P = .015), but a significantly higher bleeding risk in patients taking warfarin (OR, 2.98; P = .003), and in those with heparin bridging (OR, 1.69; P = .023).
The subanalysis showed no benefit of prophylactic clipping among the largest polyps, which differed in size across the subgroups (<10 mm vs. 10-20 mm vs. 20 mm).
Of note, the overall analysis showed a significantly higher risk of PPB with hot resection polypectomy using electrocautery (OR, 9.76; 95% CI, 3.94-32.60; P < .001), compared with cold biopsy or snare polypectomy.
The authors noted several limitations to their study, including the relatively high rate of bleeding overall (7.5%), which could be related to the more frequent use of hot snare in their cohort earlier in the study.
Effects caused by DOACs’ rapid onset?
In speculating on the reasons for the different risks observed between DOACs and warfarin, the authors suggested that “a possible explanation could be the rapid onset of action and steady pharmacokinetics of DOAC, reducing the necessity of heparin bridging in most cases.”
Meanwhile, the increased bleeding observed with warfarin despite clipping could be “related to the intrinsic properties of warfarin,” they added.
“Because of its slow onset of action, a larger proportion of patients will receive heparin bridging, which was previously reported to be a significant risk factor of PPB,” they noted. “Moreover, due to the substantial fluctuation in anticoagulation effect during warfarin titration, it may provoke delayed bleeding after the endoclips fall off subsequently.”
Unique focus on anticoagulant-treated patients
Senior author Raymond Shing-Yan Tang, MD, an assistant professor in the department of medicine and therapeutics, faculty of medicine, at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, noted that the study’s unique focus on patients treated with anticoagulants is important.
“Prior studies evaluating the effectiveness of prophylactic clipping in preventing postpolypectomy bleeding included a more heterogeneous patient population with both nonanticoagulated and anticoagulated patients,” Dr. Tang said in an interview.
“The strengths of our study were that it was a dedicated study that included only patients on oral anticoagulants, including warfarin and DOACs, and had a relatively larger sample size when compared to prior studies,” he said.
While most guidelines recommend prophylactic clipping in patients undergoing polypectomy for colonic lesions larger than 20 mm and proximal to the hepatic flexure, a variety of factors may ultimately guide decisions, Dr. Tang noted.
“In clinical practice, the decision to use prophylactic clipping after polypectomy in patients on anticoagulation is often individualized at the discretion of the endoscopist,” he said.
Anticoagulation question is important, but study has limitations
In commenting on the study, Heiko Pohl, MD, a professor of medicine at Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, N.H., noted that, while this study is important, it has some key limitations.
“The question the study raises is relevant – we really have no good idea whether this subset of patients that are anticoagulated should always be clipped,” he said in an interview.
However, he noted potential limitations in the methodology.
“It’s difficult to control for all important factors in a propensity trial,” he said, adding “there could be some unmeasured confounders that could not be accounted for due to the retrospective design.”
Nevertheless, Dr. Pohl agreed that the relatively rapid action of DOACs could help explain the effects.
“DOACs may have a high risk of bleeding sooner [than warfarin] to begin with, and therefore the clipping makes sense, so that may be the mechanistic idea,” he said. “But it’s difficult to generalize, because there have been no previous studies that have shown benefits from clipping for smaller polyps, even among patients on anticoagulants.”
The authors had no disclosures to report. Dr. Pohl has received grants from Steris and Cosmo Pharmaceuticals.
A subanalysis of anticoagulant types reveals that, despite no overall benefit for prophylactic polypectomy clipping, there are differences by subgroup: There was a significantly lower bleeding in patients on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and higher bleeding risk in patients on warfarin.
“In DOAC users, prophylactic clipping was associated with a 64% relative risk reduction in 30-day PPB [postpolypectomy bleeding],” versus no clipping, reported the authors of the study, published in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
The removal of colonic polyps is known to carry a high risk of hemorrhage, and the use of antithrombotic medications, including DOACs and warfarin, are well-established as key risk factors for the bleeding.
However, data on the effectiveness of prophylactic hemoclips in preventing PPB is inconsistent, with one meta-analysis only showing a benefit in colonic lesions that are larger than 20 mm and proximal to the hepatic flexure, and other studies failing to show any significant benefits.
To further investigate the effects among patients treated with anticoagulants, first author Louis H.S. Lau, MBChB, an assistant clinical professor in the department of medicine and therapeutics at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, and colleagues enrolled 547 patients with 1,485 polyps who underwent colonoscopic polypectomy while being treated with an oral anticoagulant between 2012 and 2020.
The percentages of warfarin and DOAC users were similar between the groups, at about 50% each.
Overall, PPB occurred in 30 out of the 285 patients (10.6%) who had clipping and 11 out of the 262 patients (4.2%) who did not have clipping. The mean polyp size among patients with PPB was about 8-9 mm, and the mean time to bleeding was between 7 and 9 days.
In the propensity-weighted analysis, there was no statistically significant difference in bleeding among those who did and did not receive clipping (odds ratio, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-1.95; P = .497).
However, a subgroup per-patient analysis did show prophylactic clipping was associated with a significantly lower 30-day PPB risk among patients treated with DOACs (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16-0.82; P = .015), but a significantly higher bleeding risk in patients taking warfarin (OR, 2.98; P = .003), and in those with heparin bridging (OR, 1.69; P = .023).
The subanalysis showed no benefit of prophylactic clipping among the largest polyps, which differed in size across the subgroups (<10 mm vs. 10-20 mm vs. 20 mm).
Of note, the overall analysis showed a significantly higher risk of PPB with hot resection polypectomy using electrocautery (OR, 9.76; 95% CI, 3.94-32.60; P < .001), compared with cold biopsy or snare polypectomy.
The authors noted several limitations to their study, including the relatively high rate of bleeding overall (7.5%), which could be related to the more frequent use of hot snare in their cohort earlier in the study.
Effects caused by DOACs’ rapid onset?
In speculating on the reasons for the different risks observed between DOACs and warfarin, the authors suggested that “a possible explanation could be the rapid onset of action and steady pharmacokinetics of DOAC, reducing the necessity of heparin bridging in most cases.”
Meanwhile, the increased bleeding observed with warfarin despite clipping could be “related to the intrinsic properties of warfarin,” they added.
“Because of its slow onset of action, a larger proportion of patients will receive heparin bridging, which was previously reported to be a significant risk factor of PPB,” they noted. “Moreover, due to the substantial fluctuation in anticoagulation effect during warfarin titration, it may provoke delayed bleeding after the endoclips fall off subsequently.”
Unique focus on anticoagulant-treated patients
Senior author Raymond Shing-Yan Tang, MD, an assistant professor in the department of medicine and therapeutics, faculty of medicine, at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, noted that the study’s unique focus on patients treated with anticoagulants is important.
“Prior studies evaluating the effectiveness of prophylactic clipping in preventing postpolypectomy bleeding included a more heterogeneous patient population with both nonanticoagulated and anticoagulated patients,” Dr. Tang said in an interview.
“The strengths of our study were that it was a dedicated study that included only patients on oral anticoagulants, including warfarin and DOACs, and had a relatively larger sample size when compared to prior studies,” he said.
While most guidelines recommend prophylactic clipping in patients undergoing polypectomy for colonic lesions larger than 20 mm and proximal to the hepatic flexure, a variety of factors may ultimately guide decisions, Dr. Tang noted.
“In clinical practice, the decision to use prophylactic clipping after polypectomy in patients on anticoagulation is often individualized at the discretion of the endoscopist,” he said.
Anticoagulation question is important, but study has limitations
In commenting on the study, Heiko Pohl, MD, a professor of medicine at Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, N.H., noted that, while this study is important, it has some key limitations.
“The question the study raises is relevant – we really have no good idea whether this subset of patients that are anticoagulated should always be clipped,” he said in an interview.
However, he noted potential limitations in the methodology.
“It’s difficult to control for all important factors in a propensity trial,” he said, adding “there could be some unmeasured confounders that could not be accounted for due to the retrospective design.”
Nevertheless, Dr. Pohl agreed that the relatively rapid action of DOACs could help explain the effects.
“DOACs may have a high risk of bleeding sooner [than warfarin] to begin with, and therefore the clipping makes sense, so that may be the mechanistic idea,” he said. “But it’s difficult to generalize, because there have been no previous studies that have shown benefits from clipping for smaller polyps, even among patients on anticoagulants.”
The authors had no disclosures to report. Dr. Pohl has received grants from Steris and Cosmo Pharmaceuticals.
FROM GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY
Obesity interactions complex in acute pancreatitis
Obesity, in combination with other risk factors, is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in acute pancreatitis (AP); however, body mass index (BMI) alone is not a successful predictor of disease severity, new research shows.
“As there was no agreement or consistency between BMI and AP severity, it can be concluded that AP severity cannot be predicted successfully by examining BMI only,” reported the authors in research published recently in Pancreatology.
The course of acute pancreatitis is typically mild in the majority (80%-85%) of cases; however, in severe cases, permanent organ failure can occur, with much worse outcomes and mortality rates of up to 35%.
Research has previously shown not only a link between obesity and acute pancreatitis but also an increased risk for complications and in-hospital mortality in obese patients with severe cases of acute pancreatitis – though a wide range of factors and comorbidities may complicate the association.
To more closely evaluate the course and outcomes of acute pancreatitis based on BMI classification, study authors led by Ali Tuzun Ince, MD, of the department of internal medicine, Gastroenterology Clinic of Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul, analyzed retrospective data from 2010 to 2020 on 1,334 adult patients (720 female, 614 male) who were diagnosed with acute pancreatitis per the Revised Atlanta Classification (RAC) criteria.
The patients were stratified based on their BMI as normal weight, overweight, or obese and whether they had mild, moderate, or severe (with permanent organ failure) acute pancreatitis.
In terms of acute pancreatitis severity, based on RAC criteria, 57.1% of patients had mild disease, 20.4% had moderate disease, and 22.5% had severe disease.
The overall mortality rate was 9.9% (n = 132); half of these patients were obese, and 87% had severe acute pancreatitis.
The overall rate of complications was 42.9%, including 20.8% in the normal weight group, 40.6% in the overweight group, and 38.6% in the obese group.
Patients in the overweight and obese groups also had higher mortality rates (3.7% and 4.9%, respectively), interventional procedures (36% and 39%, respectively), and length of hospital stay (11.6% and 9.8%, respectively), compared with the normal-weight group.
Other factors that were significantly associated with an increased mortality risk, in addition to obesity (P = .046), included old age (P = .000), male sex (P = .05), alcohol use (P = .014), low hematocrit (P = .044), high C-reactive protein (P = .024), moderate to severe and severe acute pancreatitis (P = .02 and P < .001, respectively), and any complications (P < .001).
Risk factors associated with increased admission to the ICU differed from those for mortality, and included female gender (P = .024), smoking (P = .021), hypertriglyceridemia (P = .047), idiopathic etiology (P = .023), and moderate to severe and severe acute pancreatitis (P < .001).
Of note, there were no significant associations between BMI and either the RAC score or Balthazar CT severity index (Balthazar CTSI) groups.
Specifically, among patients considered to have severe acute pancreatitis per Balthazar CTSI, 6.3% were of normal weight, 5% were overweight, and 7.1% were obese.
“In addition, since agreement and consistency between BMI and Balthazar score cannot be determined, the Balthazar score cannot be estimated from BMI,” the authors reported.
While the prediction of prognosis in acute pancreatitis is gaining interest, the findings underscore the role of combined factors, they added.
“Although many scoring systems are currently in use attempt to estimate the severity [in acute pancreatitis], none is 100% accurate yet,” the authors noted. “Each risk factor exacerbates the course of disease. Therefore, it would be better to consider the combined effects of risk factors.”
That being said, the findings show “mortality is increased significantly by the combined presence of risk factors such as male sex, OB [obesity], alcohol, MSAP [moderate to severe acute pancreatitis] and SAP [severe acute pancreatitis], all kinds of complications, old age, low Hct, and high CRP,” they wrote.
Obesity’s complex interactions
Commenting on the study, Vijay P. Singh, MD, a professor of medicine in the division of gastroenterology and hepatology at the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Ariz., agreed that the complexities risk factors, particularly with obesity, can be tricky to detangle.
“Broadly, the study confirms several previous reports from different parts of the world that obesity was associated with increased mortality in acute pancreatitis,” he said in an interview.
“However, obesity had two complex interactions, the first that obesity is also associated with increased diabetes, and hypertriglyceridemia, which may themselves be risk factors for severity,” he explained.
“The second one is that intermediary severity markers [e.g., Balthazar score on imaging] did not correlate with the BMI categories.”
Dr. Singh noted that is “likely because therapies like IV fluids that may get more intense in predicted severe disease alter the natural course of pancreatitis.”
The findings are a reminder that “BMI is only a number that attempts to quantify fat,” Dr. Singh said, noting that BMI doesn’t address either the location of fat, such as being in close proximity to the pancreas, or fat composition, such as the proportion of unsaturated fat.
“When the unsaturated fat proportion is higher, the pancreatitis is worse, even at smaller total fat amounts [for example, at a lower BMI],” he said. “Taking these aspects into account may help in risk assessment.”
The authors and Dr. Singh had no disclosures to report.
Obesity, in combination with other risk factors, is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in acute pancreatitis (AP); however, body mass index (BMI) alone is not a successful predictor of disease severity, new research shows.
“As there was no agreement or consistency between BMI and AP severity, it can be concluded that AP severity cannot be predicted successfully by examining BMI only,” reported the authors in research published recently in Pancreatology.
The course of acute pancreatitis is typically mild in the majority (80%-85%) of cases; however, in severe cases, permanent organ failure can occur, with much worse outcomes and mortality rates of up to 35%.
Research has previously shown not only a link between obesity and acute pancreatitis but also an increased risk for complications and in-hospital mortality in obese patients with severe cases of acute pancreatitis – though a wide range of factors and comorbidities may complicate the association.
To more closely evaluate the course and outcomes of acute pancreatitis based on BMI classification, study authors led by Ali Tuzun Ince, MD, of the department of internal medicine, Gastroenterology Clinic of Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul, analyzed retrospective data from 2010 to 2020 on 1,334 adult patients (720 female, 614 male) who were diagnosed with acute pancreatitis per the Revised Atlanta Classification (RAC) criteria.
The patients were stratified based on their BMI as normal weight, overweight, or obese and whether they had mild, moderate, or severe (with permanent organ failure) acute pancreatitis.
In terms of acute pancreatitis severity, based on RAC criteria, 57.1% of patients had mild disease, 20.4% had moderate disease, and 22.5% had severe disease.
The overall mortality rate was 9.9% (n = 132); half of these patients were obese, and 87% had severe acute pancreatitis.
The overall rate of complications was 42.9%, including 20.8% in the normal weight group, 40.6% in the overweight group, and 38.6% in the obese group.
Patients in the overweight and obese groups also had higher mortality rates (3.7% and 4.9%, respectively), interventional procedures (36% and 39%, respectively), and length of hospital stay (11.6% and 9.8%, respectively), compared with the normal-weight group.
Other factors that were significantly associated with an increased mortality risk, in addition to obesity (P = .046), included old age (P = .000), male sex (P = .05), alcohol use (P = .014), low hematocrit (P = .044), high C-reactive protein (P = .024), moderate to severe and severe acute pancreatitis (P = .02 and P < .001, respectively), and any complications (P < .001).
Risk factors associated with increased admission to the ICU differed from those for mortality, and included female gender (P = .024), smoking (P = .021), hypertriglyceridemia (P = .047), idiopathic etiology (P = .023), and moderate to severe and severe acute pancreatitis (P < .001).
Of note, there were no significant associations between BMI and either the RAC score or Balthazar CT severity index (Balthazar CTSI) groups.
Specifically, among patients considered to have severe acute pancreatitis per Balthazar CTSI, 6.3% were of normal weight, 5% were overweight, and 7.1% were obese.
“In addition, since agreement and consistency between BMI and Balthazar score cannot be determined, the Balthazar score cannot be estimated from BMI,” the authors reported.
While the prediction of prognosis in acute pancreatitis is gaining interest, the findings underscore the role of combined factors, they added.
“Although many scoring systems are currently in use attempt to estimate the severity [in acute pancreatitis], none is 100% accurate yet,” the authors noted. “Each risk factor exacerbates the course of disease. Therefore, it would be better to consider the combined effects of risk factors.”
That being said, the findings show “mortality is increased significantly by the combined presence of risk factors such as male sex, OB [obesity], alcohol, MSAP [moderate to severe acute pancreatitis] and SAP [severe acute pancreatitis], all kinds of complications, old age, low Hct, and high CRP,” they wrote.
Obesity’s complex interactions
Commenting on the study, Vijay P. Singh, MD, a professor of medicine in the division of gastroenterology and hepatology at the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Ariz., agreed that the complexities risk factors, particularly with obesity, can be tricky to detangle.
“Broadly, the study confirms several previous reports from different parts of the world that obesity was associated with increased mortality in acute pancreatitis,” he said in an interview.
“However, obesity had two complex interactions, the first that obesity is also associated with increased diabetes, and hypertriglyceridemia, which may themselves be risk factors for severity,” he explained.
“The second one is that intermediary severity markers [e.g., Balthazar score on imaging] did not correlate with the BMI categories.”
Dr. Singh noted that is “likely because therapies like IV fluids that may get more intense in predicted severe disease alter the natural course of pancreatitis.”
The findings are a reminder that “BMI is only a number that attempts to quantify fat,” Dr. Singh said, noting that BMI doesn’t address either the location of fat, such as being in close proximity to the pancreas, or fat composition, such as the proportion of unsaturated fat.
“When the unsaturated fat proportion is higher, the pancreatitis is worse, even at smaller total fat amounts [for example, at a lower BMI],” he said. “Taking these aspects into account may help in risk assessment.”
The authors and Dr. Singh had no disclosures to report.
Obesity, in combination with other risk factors, is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in acute pancreatitis (AP); however, body mass index (BMI) alone is not a successful predictor of disease severity, new research shows.
“As there was no agreement or consistency between BMI and AP severity, it can be concluded that AP severity cannot be predicted successfully by examining BMI only,” reported the authors in research published recently in Pancreatology.
The course of acute pancreatitis is typically mild in the majority (80%-85%) of cases; however, in severe cases, permanent organ failure can occur, with much worse outcomes and mortality rates of up to 35%.
Research has previously shown not only a link between obesity and acute pancreatitis but also an increased risk for complications and in-hospital mortality in obese patients with severe cases of acute pancreatitis – though a wide range of factors and comorbidities may complicate the association.
To more closely evaluate the course and outcomes of acute pancreatitis based on BMI classification, study authors led by Ali Tuzun Ince, MD, of the department of internal medicine, Gastroenterology Clinic of Bezmialem Vakif University, Istanbul, analyzed retrospective data from 2010 to 2020 on 1,334 adult patients (720 female, 614 male) who were diagnosed with acute pancreatitis per the Revised Atlanta Classification (RAC) criteria.
The patients were stratified based on their BMI as normal weight, overweight, or obese and whether they had mild, moderate, or severe (with permanent organ failure) acute pancreatitis.
In terms of acute pancreatitis severity, based on RAC criteria, 57.1% of patients had mild disease, 20.4% had moderate disease, and 22.5% had severe disease.
The overall mortality rate was 9.9% (n = 132); half of these patients were obese, and 87% had severe acute pancreatitis.
The overall rate of complications was 42.9%, including 20.8% in the normal weight group, 40.6% in the overweight group, and 38.6% in the obese group.
Patients in the overweight and obese groups also had higher mortality rates (3.7% and 4.9%, respectively), interventional procedures (36% and 39%, respectively), and length of hospital stay (11.6% and 9.8%, respectively), compared with the normal-weight group.
Other factors that were significantly associated with an increased mortality risk, in addition to obesity (P = .046), included old age (P = .000), male sex (P = .05), alcohol use (P = .014), low hematocrit (P = .044), high C-reactive protein (P = .024), moderate to severe and severe acute pancreatitis (P = .02 and P < .001, respectively), and any complications (P < .001).
Risk factors associated with increased admission to the ICU differed from those for mortality, and included female gender (P = .024), smoking (P = .021), hypertriglyceridemia (P = .047), idiopathic etiology (P = .023), and moderate to severe and severe acute pancreatitis (P < .001).
Of note, there were no significant associations between BMI and either the RAC score or Balthazar CT severity index (Balthazar CTSI) groups.
Specifically, among patients considered to have severe acute pancreatitis per Balthazar CTSI, 6.3% were of normal weight, 5% were overweight, and 7.1% were obese.
“In addition, since agreement and consistency between BMI and Balthazar score cannot be determined, the Balthazar score cannot be estimated from BMI,” the authors reported.
While the prediction of prognosis in acute pancreatitis is gaining interest, the findings underscore the role of combined factors, they added.
“Although many scoring systems are currently in use attempt to estimate the severity [in acute pancreatitis], none is 100% accurate yet,” the authors noted. “Each risk factor exacerbates the course of disease. Therefore, it would be better to consider the combined effects of risk factors.”
That being said, the findings show “mortality is increased significantly by the combined presence of risk factors such as male sex, OB [obesity], alcohol, MSAP [moderate to severe acute pancreatitis] and SAP [severe acute pancreatitis], all kinds of complications, old age, low Hct, and high CRP,” they wrote.
Obesity’s complex interactions
Commenting on the study, Vijay P. Singh, MD, a professor of medicine in the division of gastroenterology and hepatology at the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, Ariz., agreed that the complexities risk factors, particularly with obesity, can be tricky to detangle.
“Broadly, the study confirms several previous reports from different parts of the world that obesity was associated with increased mortality in acute pancreatitis,” he said in an interview.
“However, obesity had two complex interactions, the first that obesity is also associated with increased diabetes, and hypertriglyceridemia, which may themselves be risk factors for severity,” he explained.
“The second one is that intermediary severity markers [e.g., Balthazar score on imaging] did not correlate with the BMI categories.”
Dr. Singh noted that is “likely because therapies like IV fluids that may get more intense in predicted severe disease alter the natural course of pancreatitis.”
The findings are a reminder that “BMI is only a number that attempts to quantify fat,” Dr. Singh said, noting that BMI doesn’t address either the location of fat, such as being in close proximity to the pancreas, or fat composition, such as the proportion of unsaturated fat.
“When the unsaturated fat proportion is higher, the pancreatitis is worse, even at smaller total fat amounts [for example, at a lower BMI],” he said. “Taking these aspects into account may help in risk assessment.”
The authors and Dr. Singh had no disclosures to report.
FROM PANCREATOLOGY