User login
Weight-related COVID-19 severity starts in normal BMI range, especially in young
The risk of severe outcomes with COVID-19 increases with excess weight in a linear manner beginning in normal body mass index ranges, with the effect apparently independent of obesity-related diseases such as diabetes, and stronger among younger people and Black persons, new research shows.
“Even a small increase in body mass index above 23 kg/m² is a risk factor for adverse outcomes after infection with SARS-CoV-2,” the authors reported.
“Excess weight is a modifiable risk factor and investment in the treatment of overweight and obesity, and long-term preventive strategies could help reduce the severity of COVID-19 disease,” they wrote.
The findings shed important new light in the ongoing efforts to understand COVID-19 effects, Krishnan Bhaskaran, PhD, said in an interview.
“These results confirm and add detail to the established links between overweight and obesity and COVID-19, and also add new information on risks among people with low BMI levels,” said Dr. Bhaskaran, an epidemiologist at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, who authored an accompanying editorial.
Obesity has been well established as a major risk factor for poor outcomes among people with COVID-19; however, less is known about the risk of severe outcomes over the broader spectrum of excess weight, and its relationship with other factors.
For the prospective, community-based study, Carmen Piernas, PhD, of the University of Oxford (England) and colleagues evaluated data on nearly 7 million individuals registered in the U.K. QResearch database during Jan. 24–April 30, 2020.
Overall, patients had a mean BMI of 27 kg/m². Among them, 13,503 (.20%) were admitted to the hospital during the study period, 1,601 (.02%) were admitted to an ICU and 5,479 (.08%) died after testing positive for SARS-CoV-2.
Risk rises from BMI of 23 kg/m²
In looking at the risk of hospital admission with COVID-19, the authors found a J-shaped relationship with BMI, with the risk increased with a BMI of 20 kg/m² or lower, as well as an increased risk beginning with a BMI of 23 kg/m² – considered normal weight – or higher (hazard ratio, 1.05).
The risk of death from COVID-19 was also J-shaped, however the association with increases in BMI started higher – at 28 kg/m² (adjusted HR 1.04).
In terms of the risk of ICU admission with COVID-19, the curve was not J-shaped, with just a linear association of admission with increasing BMI beginning at 23 kg/m2 (adjusted HR 1.10).
“It was surprising to see that the lowest risk of severe COVID-19 was found at a BMI of 23, and each extra BMI unit was associated with significantly higher risk, but we don’t really know yet what the reason is for this,” Dr. Piernas said in an interview.
The association between increasing BMI and risk of hospital admission for COVID-19 beginning at a BMI of 23 kg/m² was more significant among younger people aged 20-39 years than in those aged 80-100 years, with an adjusted HR for hospital admission per BMI unit above 23 kg/m² of 1.09 versus 1.01 (P < .0001).
In addition, the risk associated with BMI and hospital admission was stronger in people who were Black, compared with those who were White (1.07 vs. 1.04), as was the risk of death due to COVID-19 (1.08 vs. 1.04; P < .0001 for both).
“For the risk of death, Blacks have an 8% higher risk with each extra BMI unit, whereas Whites have a 4% increase, which is half the risk,” Dr. Piernas said.
Notably, the increased risks of hospital admission and ICU due to COVID-19 seen with increases in BMI were slightly lower among people with type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease compared with patients who did not have those comorbidities, suggesting the association with BMI is not explained by those risk factors.
Dr. Piernas speculated that the effect could reflect that people with diabetes or cardiovascular disease already have a preexisting condition which makes them more susceptible to SARS-CoV-2.
Hence, “the association with BMI in this group may not be as strong as the association found among those without those conditions, in which BMI explains a higher proportion of this increased risk, given the absence of these preexisting conditions.”
Similarly, the effect of BMI on COVID-19 outcomes in younger patients may appear stronger because their rates of other comorbidities are much lower than in older patients.
“Among older people, preexisting conditions and perhaps a weaker immune system may explain their much higher rates of severe COVID outcomes,” Dr. Piernas noted.
Furthermore, older patients may have frailty and high comorbidities that could explain their lower rates of ICU admission with COVID-19, Dr. Bhaskaran added in further comments.
The findings overall underscore that excess weight can represent a risk in COVID-19 outcomes that is, importantly, modifiable, and “suggest that supporting people to reach and maintain a healthy weight is likely to help people reduce their risk of experiencing severe outcomes from this disease, now or in any future waves,” he concluded.
Dr. Piernas and Dr. Bhaskaran had no disclosures to report. Coauthors’ disclosures are detailed in the published study.
The risk of severe outcomes with COVID-19 increases with excess weight in a linear manner beginning in normal body mass index ranges, with the effect apparently independent of obesity-related diseases such as diabetes, and stronger among younger people and Black persons, new research shows.
“Even a small increase in body mass index above 23 kg/m² is a risk factor for adverse outcomes after infection with SARS-CoV-2,” the authors reported.
“Excess weight is a modifiable risk factor and investment in the treatment of overweight and obesity, and long-term preventive strategies could help reduce the severity of COVID-19 disease,” they wrote.
The findings shed important new light in the ongoing efforts to understand COVID-19 effects, Krishnan Bhaskaran, PhD, said in an interview.
“These results confirm and add detail to the established links between overweight and obesity and COVID-19, and also add new information on risks among people with low BMI levels,” said Dr. Bhaskaran, an epidemiologist at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, who authored an accompanying editorial.
Obesity has been well established as a major risk factor for poor outcomes among people with COVID-19; however, less is known about the risk of severe outcomes over the broader spectrum of excess weight, and its relationship with other factors.
For the prospective, community-based study, Carmen Piernas, PhD, of the University of Oxford (England) and colleagues evaluated data on nearly 7 million individuals registered in the U.K. QResearch database during Jan. 24–April 30, 2020.
Overall, patients had a mean BMI of 27 kg/m². Among them, 13,503 (.20%) were admitted to the hospital during the study period, 1,601 (.02%) were admitted to an ICU and 5,479 (.08%) died after testing positive for SARS-CoV-2.
Risk rises from BMI of 23 kg/m²
In looking at the risk of hospital admission with COVID-19, the authors found a J-shaped relationship with BMI, with the risk increased with a BMI of 20 kg/m² or lower, as well as an increased risk beginning with a BMI of 23 kg/m² – considered normal weight – or higher (hazard ratio, 1.05).
The risk of death from COVID-19 was also J-shaped, however the association with increases in BMI started higher – at 28 kg/m² (adjusted HR 1.04).
In terms of the risk of ICU admission with COVID-19, the curve was not J-shaped, with just a linear association of admission with increasing BMI beginning at 23 kg/m2 (adjusted HR 1.10).
“It was surprising to see that the lowest risk of severe COVID-19 was found at a BMI of 23, and each extra BMI unit was associated with significantly higher risk, but we don’t really know yet what the reason is for this,” Dr. Piernas said in an interview.
The association between increasing BMI and risk of hospital admission for COVID-19 beginning at a BMI of 23 kg/m² was more significant among younger people aged 20-39 years than in those aged 80-100 years, with an adjusted HR for hospital admission per BMI unit above 23 kg/m² of 1.09 versus 1.01 (P < .0001).
In addition, the risk associated with BMI and hospital admission was stronger in people who were Black, compared with those who were White (1.07 vs. 1.04), as was the risk of death due to COVID-19 (1.08 vs. 1.04; P < .0001 for both).
“For the risk of death, Blacks have an 8% higher risk with each extra BMI unit, whereas Whites have a 4% increase, which is half the risk,” Dr. Piernas said.
Notably, the increased risks of hospital admission and ICU due to COVID-19 seen with increases in BMI were slightly lower among people with type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease compared with patients who did not have those comorbidities, suggesting the association with BMI is not explained by those risk factors.
Dr. Piernas speculated that the effect could reflect that people with diabetes or cardiovascular disease already have a preexisting condition which makes them more susceptible to SARS-CoV-2.
Hence, “the association with BMI in this group may not be as strong as the association found among those without those conditions, in which BMI explains a higher proportion of this increased risk, given the absence of these preexisting conditions.”
Similarly, the effect of BMI on COVID-19 outcomes in younger patients may appear stronger because their rates of other comorbidities are much lower than in older patients.
“Among older people, preexisting conditions and perhaps a weaker immune system may explain their much higher rates of severe COVID outcomes,” Dr. Piernas noted.
Furthermore, older patients may have frailty and high comorbidities that could explain their lower rates of ICU admission with COVID-19, Dr. Bhaskaran added in further comments.
The findings overall underscore that excess weight can represent a risk in COVID-19 outcomes that is, importantly, modifiable, and “suggest that supporting people to reach and maintain a healthy weight is likely to help people reduce their risk of experiencing severe outcomes from this disease, now or in any future waves,” he concluded.
Dr. Piernas and Dr. Bhaskaran had no disclosures to report. Coauthors’ disclosures are detailed in the published study.
The risk of severe outcomes with COVID-19 increases with excess weight in a linear manner beginning in normal body mass index ranges, with the effect apparently independent of obesity-related diseases such as diabetes, and stronger among younger people and Black persons, new research shows.
“Even a small increase in body mass index above 23 kg/m² is a risk factor for adverse outcomes after infection with SARS-CoV-2,” the authors reported.
“Excess weight is a modifiable risk factor and investment in the treatment of overweight and obesity, and long-term preventive strategies could help reduce the severity of COVID-19 disease,” they wrote.
The findings shed important new light in the ongoing efforts to understand COVID-19 effects, Krishnan Bhaskaran, PhD, said in an interview.
“These results confirm and add detail to the established links between overweight and obesity and COVID-19, and also add new information on risks among people with low BMI levels,” said Dr. Bhaskaran, an epidemiologist at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, who authored an accompanying editorial.
Obesity has been well established as a major risk factor for poor outcomes among people with COVID-19; however, less is known about the risk of severe outcomes over the broader spectrum of excess weight, and its relationship with other factors.
For the prospective, community-based study, Carmen Piernas, PhD, of the University of Oxford (England) and colleagues evaluated data on nearly 7 million individuals registered in the U.K. QResearch database during Jan. 24–April 30, 2020.
Overall, patients had a mean BMI of 27 kg/m². Among them, 13,503 (.20%) were admitted to the hospital during the study period, 1,601 (.02%) were admitted to an ICU and 5,479 (.08%) died after testing positive for SARS-CoV-2.
Risk rises from BMI of 23 kg/m²
In looking at the risk of hospital admission with COVID-19, the authors found a J-shaped relationship with BMI, with the risk increased with a BMI of 20 kg/m² or lower, as well as an increased risk beginning with a BMI of 23 kg/m² – considered normal weight – or higher (hazard ratio, 1.05).
The risk of death from COVID-19 was also J-shaped, however the association with increases in BMI started higher – at 28 kg/m² (adjusted HR 1.04).
In terms of the risk of ICU admission with COVID-19, the curve was not J-shaped, with just a linear association of admission with increasing BMI beginning at 23 kg/m2 (adjusted HR 1.10).
“It was surprising to see that the lowest risk of severe COVID-19 was found at a BMI of 23, and each extra BMI unit was associated with significantly higher risk, but we don’t really know yet what the reason is for this,” Dr. Piernas said in an interview.
The association between increasing BMI and risk of hospital admission for COVID-19 beginning at a BMI of 23 kg/m² was more significant among younger people aged 20-39 years than in those aged 80-100 years, with an adjusted HR for hospital admission per BMI unit above 23 kg/m² of 1.09 versus 1.01 (P < .0001).
In addition, the risk associated with BMI and hospital admission was stronger in people who were Black, compared with those who were White (1.07 vs. 1.04), as was the risk of death due to COVID-19 (1.08 vs. 1.04; P < .0001 for both).
“For the risk of death, Blacks have an 8% higher risk with each extra BMI unit, whereas Whites have a 4% increase, which is half the risk,” Dr. Piernas said.
Notably, the increased risks of hospital admission and ICU due to COVID-19 seen with increases in BMI were slightly lower among people with type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease compared with patients who did not have those comorbidities, suggesting the association with BMI is not explained by those risk factors.
Dr. Piernas speculated that the effect could reflect that people with diabetes or cardiovascular disease already have a preexisting condition which makes them more susceptible to SARS-CoV-2.
Hence, “the association with BMI in this group may not be as strong as the association found among those without those conditions, in which BMI explains a higher proportion of this increased risk, given the absence of these preexisting conditions.”
Similarly, the effect of BMI on COVID-19 outcomes in younger patients may appear stronger because their rates of other comorbidities are much lower than in older patients.
“Among older people, preexisting conditions and perhaps a weaker immune system may explain their much higher rates of severe COVID outcomes,” Dr. Piernas noted.
Furthermore, older patients may have frailty and high comorbidities that could explain their lower rates of ICU admission with COVID-19, Dr. Bhaskaran added in further comments.
The findings overall underscore that excess weight can represent a risk in COVID-19 outcomes that is, importantly, modifiable, and “suggest that supporting people to reach and maintain a healthy weight is likely to help people reduce their risk of experiencing severe outcomes from this disease, now or in any future waves,” he concluded.
Dr. Piernas and Dr. Bhaskaran had no disclosures to report. Coauthors’ disclosures are detailed in the published study.
FROM LANCET DIABETES & ENDOCRINOLOGY
Acella recalls NP Thyroid lots found to have reduced potency
In its third voluntary recall in the past year, , this time after routine testing found the pills to be subpotent.
Specifically, the affected lots were found to contain less than 90% of the drug’s two labeled ingredients to treat hypothyroidism: liothyronine (LT3) and/or levothyroxine (LT4).
The affected lots include 15-mg, 30-mg, 60-mg, 90-mg and 120-mg formulations of NP Thyroid tablets, packed in 100-count and 7-count bottles.
The list of the specific recalled lots is published on the Food and Drug Administration website.
Acella reports that, so far, 43 reports of serious adverse events that could be related to the recall have been received.
Symptoms suggesting patients may have received a subpotent batch include the common signs of hypothyroidism, such as fatigue, increased sensitivity to cold, constipation, dry skin, puffy face, hair loss, slow heart rate, depression, swelling of the thyroid gland and/or unexplained weight gain or difficulty losing weight, Acella reports.
“There is reasonable risk of serious injury in newborn infants or pregnant women with hypothyroidism including early miscarriage, fetal hyperthyroidism, and/or impairments to fetal neural and skeletal development,” the company cautions in the recall statement.
Acella adds that toxic cardiac manifestations of hyperthyroidism, including cardiac pain, palpitations or cardiac arrhythmia may occur in elderly patients and patients with underlying cardiac disease.
While Acella is notifying affected parties to discontinue distribution of the recalled products, it advises that patients who are currently taking NP Thyroid from the lots being recalled “should not discontinue use without contacting their healthcare provider for further guidance and/or a replacement prescription.”
In November 2020, a recall of NP Thyroid was issued after FDA testing found subpotent levels, as low as 87% of the labeled amount, of LT4 in some lots.
And earlier, in May 2020, the company recalled 13 lots of the tablets due to excessive potency, with FDA testing showing some tablets contained up to 115% of the labeled amount of LT3.
NP Thyroid is a type of desiccated animal thyroid product that was long the standard of care for hypothyroidism prior to the advent of the synthetic hypothyroidism drug, Synthroid (levothyroxine sodium), now the most commonly used hypothyroidism treatment.
On its website, Acella refers to NP Thyroid as a “natural choice for thyroid therapy,” as desiccated thyroid is commonly referred to.
However, one of the most common concerns about desiccated thyroid is a tendency to have unreliable concentrations of active ingredients, as discussed in American Thyroid Association recommendations.
The “amounts of both T4 and T3 can vary in every batch of desiccated thyroid, making it harder to keep blood levels right,” the ATA states.
“Finally, even desiccated thyroid pills have chemicals (binders) in them to hold the pill together, so they are not completely ‘natural.’ ”
Consumers with questions about the recall are advised to email Acella Pharmaceuticals at recall@acellapharma.com or call 1-888-424-4341, Monday through Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm ET.
In its third voluntary recall in the past year, , this time after routine testing found the pills to be subpotent.
Specifically, the affected lots were found to contain less than 90% of the drug’s two labeled ingredients to treat hypothyroidism: liothyronine (LT3) and/or levothyroxine (LT4).
The affected lots include 15-mg, 30-mg, 60-mg, 90-mg and 120-mg formulations of NP Thyroid tablets, packed in 100-count and 7-count bottles.
The list of the specific recalled lots is published on the Food and Drug Administration website.
Acella reports that, so far, 43 reports of serious adverse events that could be related to the recall have been received.
Symptoms suggesting patients may have received a subpotent batch include the common signs of hypothyroidism, such as fatigue, increased sensitivity to cold, constipation, dry skin, puffy face, hair loss, slow heart rate, depression, swelling of the thyroid gland and/or unexplained weight gain or difficulty losing weight, Acella reports.
“There is reasonable risk of serious injury in newborn infants or pregnant women with hypothyroidism including early miscarriage, fetal hyperthyroidism, and/or impairments to fetal neural and skeletal development,” the company cautions in the recall statement.
Acella adds that toxic cardiac manifestations of hyperthyroidism, including cardiac pain, palpitations or cardiac arrhythmia may occur in elderly patients and patients with underlying cardiac disease.
While Acella is notifying affected parties to discontinue distribution of the recalled products, it advises that patients who are currently taking NP Thyroid from the lots being recalled “should not discontinue use without contacting their healthcare provider for further guidance and/or a replacement prescription.”
In November 2020, a recall of NP Thyroid was issued after FDA testing found subpotent levels, as low as 87% of the labeled amount, of LT4 in some lots.
And earlier, in May 2020, the company recalled 13 lots of the tablets due to excessive potency, with FDA testing showing some tablets contained up to 115% of the labeled amount of LT3.
NP Thyroid is a type of desiccated animal thyroid product that was long the standard of care for hypothyroidism prior to the advent of the synthetic hypothyroidism drug, Synthroid (levothyroxine sodium), now the most commonly used hypothyroidism treatment.
On its website, Acella refers to NP Thyroid as a “natural choice for thyroid therapy,” as desiccated thyroid is commonly referred to.
However, one of the most common concerns about desiccated thyroid is a tendency to have unreliable concentrations of active ingredients, as discussed in American Thyroid Association recommendations.
The “amounts of both T4 and T3 can vary in every batch of desiccated thyroid, making it harder to keep blood levels right,” the ATA states.
“Finally, even desiccated thyroid pills have chemicals (binders) in them to hold the pill together, so they are not completely ‘natural.’ ”
Consumers with questions about the recall are advised to email Acella Pharmaceuticals at recall@acellapharma.com or call 1-888-424-4341, Monday through Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm ET.
In its third voluntary recall in the past year, , this time after routine testing found the pills to be subpotent.
Specifically, the affected lots were found to contain less than 90% of the drug’s two labeled ingredients to treat hypothyroidism: liothyronine (LT3) and/or levothyroxine (LT4).
The affected lots include 15-mg, 30-mg, 60-mg, 90-mg and 120-mg formulations of NP Thyroid tablets, packed in 100-count and 7-count bottles.
The list of the specific recalled lots is published on the Food and Drug Administration website.
Acella reports that, so far, 43 reports of serious adverse events that could be related to the recall have been received.
Symptoms suggesting patients may have received a subpotent batch include the common signs of hypothyroidism, such as fatigue, increased sensitivity to cold, constipation, dry skin, puffy face, hair loss, slow heart rate, depression, swelling of the thyroid gland and/or unexplained weight gain or difficulty losing weight, Acella reports.
“There is reasonable risk of serious injury in newborn infants or pregnant women with hypothyroidism including early miscarriage, fetal hyperthyroidism, and/or impairments to fetal neural and skeletal development,” the company cautions in the recall statement.
Acella adds that toxic cardiac manifestations of hyperthyroidism, including cardiac pain, palpitations or cardiac arrhythmia may occur in elderly patients and patients with underlying cardiac disease.
While Acella is notifying affected parties to discontinue distribution of the recalled products, it advises that patients who are currently taking NP Thyroid from the lots being recalled “should not discontinue use without contacting their healthcare provider for further guidance and/or a replacement prescription.”
In November 2020, a recall of NP Thyroid was issued after FDA testing found subpotent levels, as low as 87% of the labeled amount, of LT4 in some lots.
And earlier, in May 2020, the company recalled 13 lots of the tablets due to excessive potency, with FDA testing showing some tablets contained up to 115% of the labeled amount of LT3.
NP Thyroid is a type of desiccated animal thyroid product that was long the standard of care for hypothyroidism prior to the advent of the synthetic hypothyroidism drug, Synthroid (levothyroxine sodium), now the most commonly used hypothyroidism treatment.
On its website, Acella refers to NP Thyroid as a “natural choice for thyroid therapy,” as desiccated thyroid is commonly referred to.
However, one of the most common concerns about desiccated thyroid is a tendency to have unreliable concentrations of active ingredients, as discussed in American Thyroid Association recommendations.
The “amounts of both T4 and T3 can vary in every batch of desiccated thyroid, making it harder to keep blood levels right,” the ATA states.
“Finally, even desiccated thyroid pills have chemicals (binders) in them to hold the pill together, so they are not completely ‘natural.’ ”
Consumers with questions about the recall are advised to email Acella Pharmaceuticals at recall@acellapharma.com or call 1-888-424-4341, Monday through Friday from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm ET.
Transgender hormone therapy linked to blood pressure changes
Transgender people treated with gender-affirming hormone therapy show distinctive changes in blood pressure that begin soon after treatment initiation and do not subside over years of treatment, according to the largest and longest observational study to date to look at the issue.
“Many physicians may not be aware of the changes to blood pressure in trans patients who start hormone therapy,” senior author Michael S. Irwig, MD, director of transgender medicine at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, told this news organization.
“The take-away message for physicians is to monitor blood pressure both before and after starting hormone therapy in transgender patients, as over a third of transgender individuals had stage 1 hypertension before starting hormone therapy, and many had their blood pressure increase after starting hormone therapy.”
Mean blood pressure increases in transgender males, decreases in females
In the study, published in Hypertension, Katherine Banks, MD, George Washington University, Washington, and colleagues, followed 470 transgender adult patients for up to 5 years.
The mean systolic blood pressure levels in transgender female patients (male at birth) significantly decreased compared with baseline within a few months of them starting gender-affirming hormone treatment.
Conversely, the systolic blood pressure levels in transgender males (females at birth) who were treated with testosterone increased over the same period.
There were no significant changes in the groups in terms of diastolic blood pressure, consistent with other studies.
“Our study is the first to describe the time course of the blood pressure effects of gender-affirming hormone therapy and to compare the rates of elevated blood pressure and stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension using blood pressure readings from gender-diverse individuals pre- and post–gender-affirming hormone therapy,” the authors note.
Gender-affirming hormone therapy – which has been prescribed to transgender patients for more than 25 years – typically involves a combination of estrogen and an anti-androgen for males transitioning to female, while the therapy for those transitioning to male generally only involves testosterone.
The therapy has previously been linked to various cardiac effects, with evidence showing transgender men have as much as a 5-times greater risk of heart attack versus cisgender women, the authors note.
Although the American Heart Association issued a 2020 Scientific Statement addressing the cardiovascular disease risk, evidence on the effects specifically on blood pressure in transgender patients has been inconsistent.
For the new study, Dr. Banks and colleagues enrolled 247 transgender females and 223 transgender males who were treated between 2007 and 2015 at two medical centers in Washington, D.C. Of the individuals, who had a mean age of 27.8, about 27% were non-White and 16% were Latinx.
They had blood pressure measurements taken at baseline and at follow-up clinical visits for up to 57 months following the initiation of gender-affirming hormone therapy.
Over the follow-up period, the transgender females had decreases in mean systolic blood pressure of 4.0 mm Hg within 2 to 4 months of starting hormone therapy (P < .0001) and mean declines of 6.0 mm Hg were further observed at 11 to 21 months compared with baseline.
In transgender males, the mean systolic blood pressure increased by 2.6 mm Hg at 2 to 4 months (P = .02), and by 2.9 mm Hg at 11 to 21 months after starting therapy.
Furthermore, “although the average increase in systolic blood pressure was 2.6 mm Hg in transgender men within 2 to 4 months, some patients had much higher increases,” Dr. Irwig noted.
As many as 40% of transgender men had stage 1 hypertension after 11 to 21 months of hormone therapy.
The blood pressure changes in transgender males and females were observed across all three racial ethnic groups of Whites, Blacks, and Latinx, and the changes remained consistent throughout the entire follow-up period of approximately 5 years while hormone therapy was continued.
In addition to the changes after therapy initiation, the researchers note that more than one-third of individuals in both groups had stage 1 hypertension even before starting hormone therapy.
The findings are a concern in light of “clear evidence linking hypertension and higher blood pressure with cardiovascular events such as stroke and heart attacks,” Dr. Irwig said.
Protective effects for transgender females?
Transgender females showed as much as a 47% decrease in the prevalence of stage 2 hypertension, from 19% to 10%, within 2 to 4 months of treatment with gender-affirming hormone therapy (P = .001), and the rate declined further to 8% at 11 to 21 months, suggesting a protective effect of the treatment.
“The rate of stage 2 hypertension did drop in transgender feminine individuals, which could be protective and lower their risk for cardiovascular events,” Dr. Irwig said.
“This was not a surprise, as lowering testosterone and the use of spironolactone can lower blood pressure,” he noted.
Exceptions in both groups
Of note, a sizable proportion of patients had blood pressure changes that were in fact the opposite of the patterns seen in the majority of their gender group.
Specifically, while 42% to 53% of the transgender females had systolic blood pressure readings of at least 5 mm Hg lower than their baseline readings, up to 32% had increases of at least 5 mm Hg compared to baseline readings.
Likewise, whereas 41% to 59% of transgender males had increases of at least 5 mm Hg compared with baseline, up to 35% had levels that were at least 5 mm Hg lower than baseline.
“It was a surprise that over a quarter of individuals had changes opposite to the mean changes,” Dr. Irwig said.
The differing blood pressure changes underscore that “more research is needed to determine which formulations of estrogen, testosterone, and antiandrogens are optimal regarding blood pressure and cardiovascular health, especially in older individuals,” the authors note.
Gender-affirming hormone therapy formulations differ
Various formulations for gender-affirming hormone regimens are available, including oral, transdermal, sublingual, and intramuscular preparations.
In the study, 77% to 91% of transgender males were on intramuscular testosterone injections, with the rest on transdermal formulations, and 92% of transgender female patients were started on oral estradiol, with mean doses generally increasing over time.
The study’s results are consistent with evidence from other studies, with 7 of 8 involving transgender males showing mean increases in systolic blood pressure ranging from 1 to 14 mm Hg.
Previous research supports cardiovascular risk
As reported by this news organization, other emerging research on cardiovascular risks to transgender people include a recent study showing more than 10% of transgender males were found to have hematocrit levels that could put them at risk for blood clots.
And further research on transgender youth also shows concerning elevations in lipids and other cardiovascular risks.
The authors have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Transgender people treated with gender-affirming hormone therapy show distinctive changes in blood pressure that begin soon after treatment initiation and do not subside over years of treatment, according to the largest and longest observational study to date to look at the issue.
“Many physicians may not be aware of the changes to blood pressure in trans patients who start hormone therapy,” senior author Michael S. Irwig, MD, director of transgender medicine at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, told this news organization.
“The take-away message for physicians is to monitor blood pressure both before and after starting hormone therapy in transgender patients, as over a third of transgender individuals had stage 1 hypertension before starting hormone therapy, and many had their blood pressure increase after starting hormone therapy.”
Mean blood pressure increases in transgender males, decreases in females
In the study, published in Hypertension, Katherine Banks, MD, George Washington University, Washington, and colleagues, followed 470 transgender adult patients for up to 5 years.
The mean systolic blood pressure levels in transgender female patients (male at birth) significantly decreased compared with baseline within a few months of them starting gender-affirming hormone treatment.
Conversely, the systolic blood pressure levels in transgender males (females at birth) who were treated with testosterone increased over the same period.
There were no significant changes in the groups in terms of diastolic blood pressure, consistent with other studies.
“Our study is the first to describe the time course of the blood pressure effects of gender-affirming hormone therapy and to compare the rates of elevated blood pressure and stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension using blood pressure readings from gender-diverse individuals pre- and post–gender-affirming hormone therapy,” the authors note.
Gender-affirming hormone therapy – which has been prescribed to transgender patients for more than 25 years – typically involves a combination of estrogen and an anti-androgen for males transitioning to female, while the therapy for those transitioning to male generally only involves testosterone.
The therapy has previously been linked to various cardiac effects, with evidence showing transgender men have as much as a 5-times greater risk of heart attack versus cisgender women, the authors note.
Although the American Heart Association issued a 2020 Scientific Statement addressing the cardiovascular disease risk, evidence on the effects specifically on blood pressure in transgender patients has been inconsistent.
For the new study, Dr. Banks and colleagues enrolled 247 transgender females and 223 transgender males who were treated between 2007 and 2015 at two medical centers in Washington, D.C. Of the individuals, who had a mean age of 27.8, about 27% were non-White and 16% were Latinx.
They had blood pressure measurements taken at baseline and at follow-up clinical visits for up to 57 months following the initiation of gender-affirming hormone therapy.
Over the follow-up period, the transgender females had decreases in mean systolic blood pressure of 4.0 mm Hg within 2 to 4 months of starting hormone therapy (P < .0001) and mean declines of 6.0 mm Hg were further observed at 11 to 21 months compared with baseline.
In transgender males, the mean systolic blood pressure increased by 2.6 mm Hg at 2 to 4 months (P = .02), and by 2.9 mm Hg at 11 to 21 months after starting therapy.
Furthermore, “although the average increase in systolic blood pressure was 2.6 mm Hg in transgender men within 2 to 4 months, some patients had much higher increases,” Dr. Irwig noted.
As many as 40% of transgender men had stage 1 hypertension after 11 to 21 months of hormone therapy.
The blood pressure changes in transgender males and females were observed across all three racial ethnic groups of Whites, Blacks, and Latinx, and the changes remained consistent throughout the entire follow-up period of approximately 5 years while hormone therapy was continued.
In addition to the changes after therapy initiation, the researchers note that more than one-third of individuals in both groups had stage 1 hypertension even before starting hormone therapy.
The findings are a concern in light of “clear evidence linking hypertension and higher blood pressure with cardiovascular events such as stroke and heart attacks,” Dr. Irwig said.
Protective effects for transgender females?
Transgender females showed as much as a 47% decrease in the prevalence of stage 2 hypertension, from 19% to 10%, within 2 to 4 months of treatment with gender-affirming hormone therapy (P = .001), and the rate declined further to 8% at 11 to 21 months, suggesting a protective effect of the treatment.
“The rate of stage 2 hypertension did drop in transgender feminine individuals, which could be protective and lower their risk for cardiovascular events,” Dr. Irwig said.
“This was not a surprise, as lowering testosterone and the use of spironolactone can lower blood pressure,” he noted.
Exceptions in both groups
Of note, a sizable proportion of patients had blood pressure changes that were in fact the opposite of the patterns seen in the majority of their gender group.
Specifically, while 42% to 53% of the transgender females had systolic blood pressure readings of at least 5 mm Hg lower than their baseline readings, up to 32% had increases of at least 5 mm Hg compared to baseline readings.
Likewise, whereas 41% to 59% of transgender males had increases of at least 5 mm Hg compared with baseline, up to 35% had levels that were at least 5 mm Hg lower than baseline.
“It was a surprise that over a quarter of individuals had changes opposite to the mean changes,” Dr. Irwig said.
The differing blood pressure changes underscore that “more research is needed to determine which formulations of estrogen, testosterone, and antiandrogens are optimal regarding blood pressure and cardiovascular health, especially in older individuals,” the authors note.
Gender-affirming hormone therapy formulations differ
Various formulations for gender-affirming hormone regimens are available, including oral, transdermal, sublingual, and intramuscular preparations.
In the study, 77% to 91% of transgender males were on intramuscular testosterone injections, with the rest on transdermal formulations, and 92% of transgender female patients were started on oral estradiol, with mean doses generally increasing over time.
The study’s results are consistent with evidence from other studies, with 7 of 8 involving transgender males showing mean increases in systolic blood pressure ranging from 1 to 14 mm Hg.
Previous research supports cardiovascular risk
As reported by this news organization, other emerging research on cardiovascular risks to transgender people include a recent study showing more than 10% of transgender males were found to have hematocrit levels that could put them at risk for blood clots.
And further research on transgender youth also shows concerning elevations in lipids and other cardiovascular risks.
The authors have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Transgender people treated with gender-affirming hormone therapy show distinctive changes in blood pressure that begin soon after treatment initiation and do not subside over years of treatment, according to the largest and longest observational study to date to look at the issue.
“Many physicians may not be aware of the changes to blood pressure in trans patients who start hormone therapy,” senior author Michael S. Irwig, MD, director of transgender medicine at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, told this news organization.
“The take-away message for physicians is to monitor blood pressure both before and after starting hormone therapy in transgender patients, as over a third of transgender individuals had stage 1 hypertension before starting hormone therapy, and many had their blood pressure increase after starting hormone therapy.”
Mean blood pressure increases in transgender males, decreases in females
In the study, published in Hypertension, Katherine Banks, MD, George Washington University, Washington, and colleagues, followed 470 transgender adult patients for up to 5 years.
The mean systolic blood pressure levels in transgender female patients (male at birth) significantly decreased compared with baseline within a few months of them starting gender-affirming hormone treatment.
Conversely, the systolic blood pressure levels in transgender males (females at birth) who were treated with testosterone increased over the same period.
There were no significant changes in the groups in terms of diastolic blood pressure, consistent with other studies.
“Our study is the first to describe the time course of the blood pressure effects of gender-affirming hormone therapy and to compare the rates of elevated blood pressure and stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension using blood pressure readings from gender-diverse individuals pre- and post–gender-affirming hormone therapy,” the authors note.
Gender-affirming hormone therapy – which has been prescribed to transgender patients for more than 25 years – typically involves a combination of estrogen and an anti-androgen for males transitioning to female, while the therapy for those transitioning to male generally only involves testosterone.
The therapy has previously been linked to various cardiac effects, with evidence showing transgender men have as much as a 5-times greater risk of heart attack versus cisgender women, the authors note.
Although the American Heart Association issued a 2020 Scientific Statement addressing the cardiovascular disease risk, evidence on the effects specifically on blood pressure in transgender patients has been inconsistent.
For the new study, Dr. Banks and colleagues enrolled 247 transgender females and 223 transgender males who were treated between 2007 and 2015 at two medical centers in Washington, D.C. Of the individuals, who had a mean age of 27.8, about 27% were non-White and 16% were Latinx.
They had blood pressure measurements taken at baseline and at follow-up clinical visits for up to 57 months following the initiation of gender-affirming hormone therapy.
Over the follow-up period, the transgender females had decreases in mean systolic blood pressure of 4.0 mm Hg within 2 to 4 months of starting hormone therapy (P < .0001) and mean declines of 6.0 mm Hg were further observed at 11 to 21 months compared with baseline.
In transgender males, the mean systolic blood pressure increased by 2.6 mm Hg at 2 to 4 months (P = .02), and by 2.9 mm Hg at 11 to 21 months after starting therapy.
Furthermore, “although the average increase in systolic blood pressure was 2.6 mm Hg in transgender men within 2 to 4 months, some patients had much higher increases,” Dr. Irwig noted.
As many as 40% of transgender men had stage 1 hypertension after 11 to 21 months of hormone therapy.
The blood pressure changes in transgender males and females were observed across all three racial ethnic groups of Whites, Blacks, and Latinx, and the changes remained consistent throughout the entire follow-up period of approximately 5 years while hormone therapy was continued.
In addition to the changes after therapy initiation, the researchers note that more than one-third of individuals in both groups had stage 1 hypertension even before starting hormone therapy.
The findings are a concern in light of “clear evidence linking hypertension and higher blood pressure with cardiovascular events such as stroke and heart attacks,” Dr. Irwig said.
Protective effects for transgender females?
Transgender females showed as much as a 47% decrease in the prevalence of stage 2 hypertension, from 19% to 10%, within 2 to 4 months of treatment with gender-affirming hormone therapy (P = .001), and the rate declined further to 8% at 11 to 21 months, suggesting a protective effect of the treatment.
“The rate of stage 2 hypertension did drop in transgender feminine individuals, which could be protective and lower their risk for cardiovascular events,” Dr. Irwig said.
“This was not a surprise, as lowering testosterone and the use of spironolactone can lower blood pressure,” he noted.
Exceptions in both groups
Of note, a sizable proportion of patients had blood pressure changes that were in fact the opposite of the patterns seen in the majority of their gender group.
Specifically, while 42% to 53% of the transgender females had systolic blood pressure readings of at least 5 mm Hg lower than their baseline readings, up to 32% had increases of at least 5 mm Hg compared to baseline readings.
Likewise, whereas 41% to 59% of transgender males had increases of at least 5 mm Hg compared with baseline, up to 35% had levels that were at least 5 mm Hg lower than baseline.
“It was a surprise that over a quarter of individuals had changes opposite to the mean changes,” Dr. Irwig said.
The differing blood pressure changes underscore that “more research is needed to determine which formulations of estrogen, testosterone, and antiandrogens are optimal regarding blood pressure and cardiovascular health, especially in older individuals,” the authors note.
Gender-affirming hormone therapy formulations differ
Various formulations for gender-affirming hormone regimens are available, including oral, transdermal, sublingual, and intramuscular preparations.
In the study, 77% to 91% of transgender males were on intramuscular testosterone injections, with the rest on transdermal formulations, and 92% of transgender female patients were started on oral estradiol, with mean doses generally increasing over time.
The study’s results are consistent with evidence from other studies, with 7 of 8 involving transgender males showing mean increases in systolic blood pressure ranging from 1 to 14 mm Hg.
Previous research supports cardiovascular risk
As reported by this news organization, other emerging research on cardiovascular risks to transgender people include a recent study showing more than 10% of transgender males were found to have hematocrit levels that could put them at risk for blood clots.
And further research on transgender youth also shows concerning elevations in lipids and other cardiovascular risks.
The authors have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Low-calorie diet linked to improved chemo response in leukemia
Children and adolescents with leukemia who were placed on a restrictive diet and exercise regimen concurrent with starting chemotherapy showed responses to treatment that were better than those historically seen in such patients.
This apparently improved response suggests it is possible to boost treatment efficacy without raising the dose – or toxicity – of chemotherapy.
“To our knowledge, this is the first study in any hematologic malignancy to demonstrate potential benefit from caloric restriction via diet and exercise to augment chemotherapy efficacy and improve disease response, the authors reported.
The findings come from the IDEAL pilot trial, conducted in 40 young patients (mean age, 15 years; range, 10-21 years) diagnosed with high-risk B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL).
The study was published online April 1 in Blood Advances.
The diet and exercise regimen is a departure from current recommendations for patients with leukemia.
“This was a major paradigm shift – until now, many oncologists encouraged ‘comfort foods’ and increased calories to get through the rigor of chemotherapy,” first author Etan Orgel, MD, of Children’s Hospital Los Angeles and the University of Southern California, also in Los Angeles.
The results from this pilot trial suggest that “the era of encouraging comfort food should be in the past; over-nutrition is likely harmful, and diet and exercise are important tools to harness during chemotherapy,” he said.
Dr. Orgel added that childhood ALL was selected because it is the most common cancer of childhood, but the findings could have potential relevance in other cancer types in children as well as adults.
Commenting on the study, Patrick Brown, MD, director of the pediatric leukemia program at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, said the findings are important, albeit preliminary.
“I think the most important contribution of this pilot study is to show that it is possible to change the nutrition and exercise habits of children and adolescents during the initial month of treatment for ALL,” he said in an interview.
“We have to be cautious about the preliminary finding that these changes resulted in deeper remissions – this will need to be confirmed in a larger study,” added Dr. Brown, who was not involved with the research.
Dr. Orgel noted that a prospective, randomized trial, IDEAL-2, is launching later this year to further evaluate the intervention.
Obesity linked to poorer chemotherapy response
Among children and adolescents who start treatment for B-ALL, as many as 40% are overweight or obese, noted the study authors.
Those who are obese have more than a twofold greater risk of having persistent minimal residual disease (MRD) at the end of chemotherapy, considered the strongest patient-level predictor of poor outcome and a common guide for therapy intensification.
The problem is compounded by weight gain that is common during treatment as a result of prolonged chemotherapy and sedentary behavior, they commented.
With studies of obese mice linking calorie and fat restriction to improved survival after chemotherapy, the authors theorized that a calorie- and fat-restrictive diet and exercise could help improve outcomes after chemotherapy in humans.
Participants were enrolled at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles and City of Hope National Medical Center in nearby Duarte. After they were started on chemotherapy, they were placed on a low-carb, low-fat, and low-sugar diet tailored to patient needs and preferences, as well as a moderate daily exercise regimen, and continued on this regimen throughout the 4-week induction phase.
Following the intervention, there were no significant reductions observed in median gain of fat mass at the end of the intervention, compared with baseline (P = .13). However, in the subgroup of patients who were overweight or obese at baseline, the reduction in fat mass was indeed significant versus baseline (+1.5% vs. +9.7% at baseline; P = .02).
Importantly, after adjustment for prognostic factors, adherence to the intervention was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of MRD, compared with recent historical controls who received the same induction therapy at the same institution, but no intervention (odds ratio, 0.30; P = .02).
The intervention was also associated with a lower detectable MRD, compared with the historical controls (OR, 0.16; one-sided P = .002).
“Most importantly, the IDEAL intervention reduced risk of MRD at the end of induction in all patients, irrespective of starting [body mass index] and after accounting for prognostic features,” the authors noted.
Adherence to diet high, exercise low
As many as 82% of study participants achieved the goal of 20% or more caloric deficit throughout the chemotherapy.
“Adherence to the diet was excellent, with caloric deficits and macronutrient goals achieved in nearly all patients, including in the lean group,” the authors reported.
Dr. Orgel added that families embraced the chance to play an active role in the cancer therapy. “In our view, they couldn’t control their disease or their chemotherapy, but this, they could,” he said.
Conversely, adherence to the prescribed exercise was low – just 31.2%, with the inactivity during the first month likely contributed to the similar loss of muscle mass that occurred in both cohorts, Dr. Orgel noted.
“The [low exercise adherence] unfortunately was not a surprise, as it is often difficult to exercise and be active during chemotherapy,” he said.
Key aspects of physical activity will be refined in further studies, Dr. Orgel added.
Insulin sensitivity, adiponectin key factors?
Patients receiving the intervention showed improved insulin sensitivity and reductions in circulating insulin, which are notable in that insulin has been linked to mechanisms that counter chemoresistance, the authors noted.
Furthermore, the decreases in insulin were accompanied by notable elevations in circulating adiponectin, a protein hormone produced and secreted by fat cells.
“Adiponectin was certainly a surprise, as until now it did not appear to play a major role in cancer cell resistance to chemotherapy,” Dr. Orgel said.
“It is too soon to say they are central to the mechanism of the intervention, but the large differences in adiponectin and insulin sensitivity found in children in the trial have definitely highlighted these as important for future study,” he added.
Dr. Orgel, the study coauthors, and Dr. Brown disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Children and adolescents with leukemia who were placed on a restrictive diet and exercise regimen concurrent with starting chemotherapy showed responses to treatment that were better than those historically seen in such patients.
This apparently improved response suggests it is possible to boost treatment efficacy without raising the dose – or toxicity – of chemotherapy.
“To our knowledge, this is the first study in any hematologic malignancy to demonstrate potential benefit from caloric restriction via diet and exercise to augment chemotherapy efficacy and improve disease response, the authors reported.
The findings come from the IDEAL pilot trial, conducted in 40 young patients (mean age, 15 years; range, 10-21 years) diagnosed with high-risk B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL).
The study was published online April 1 in Blood Advances.
The diet and exercise regimen is a departure from current recommendations for patients with leukemia.
“This was a major paradigm shift – until now, many oncologists encouraged ‘comfort foods’ and increased calories to get through the rigor of chemotherapy,” first author Etan Orgel, MD, of Children’s Hospital Los Angeles and the University of Southern California, also in Los Angeles.
The results from this pilot trial suggest that “the era of encouraging comfort food should be in the past; over-nutrition is likely harmful, and diet and exercise are important tools to harness during chemotherapy,” he said.
Dr. Orgel added that childhood ALL was selected because it is the most common cancer of childhood, but the findings could have potential relevance in other cancer types in children as well as adults.
Commenting on the study, Patrick Brown, MD, director of the pediatric leukemia program at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, said the findings are important, albeit preliminary.
“I think the most important contribution of this pilot study is to show that it is possible to change the nutrition and exercise habits of children and adolescents during the initial month of treatment for ALL,” he said in an interview.
“We have to be cautious about the preliminary finding that these changes resulted in deeper remissions – this will need to be confirmed in a larger study,” added Dr. Brown, who was not involved with the research.
Dr. Orgel noted that a prospective, randomized trial, IDEAL-2, is launching later this year to further evaluate the intervention.
Obesity linked to poorer chemotherapy response
Among children and adolescents who start treatment for B-ALL, as many as 40% are overweight or obese, noted the study authors.
Those who are obese have more than a twofold greater risk of having persistent minimal residual disease (MRD) at the end of chemotherapy, considered the strongest patient-level predictor of poor outcome and a common guide for therapy intensification.
The problem is compounded by weight gain that is common during treatment as a result of prolonged chemotherapy and sedentary behavior, they commented.
With studies of obese mice linking calorie and fat restriction to improved survival after chemotherapy, the authors theorized that a calorie- and fat-restrictive diet and exercise could help improve outcomes after chemotherapy in humans.
Participants were enrolled at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles and City of Hope National Medical Center in nearby Duarte. After they were started on chemotherapy, they were placed on a low-carb, low-fat, and low-sugar diet tailored to patient needs and preferences, as well as a moderate daily exercise regimen, and continued on this regimen throughout the 4-week induction phase.
Following the intervention, there were no significant reductions observed in median gain of fat mass at the end of the intervention, compared with baseline (P = .13). However, in the subgroup of patients who were overweight or obese at baseline, the reduction in fat mass was indeed significant versus baseline (+1.5% vs. +9.7% at baseline; P = .02).
Importantly, after adjustment for prognostic factors, adherence to the intervention was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of MRD, compared with recent historical controls who received the same induction therapy at the same institution, but no intervention (odds ratio, 0.30; P = .02).
The intervention was also associated with a lower detectable MRD, compared with the historical controls (OR, 0.16; one-sided P = .002).
“Most importantly, the IDEAL intervention reduced risk of MRD at the end of induction in all patients, irrespective of starting [body mass index] and after accounting for prognostic features,” the authors noted.
Adherence to diet high, exercise low
As many as 82% of study participants achieved the goal of 20% or more caloric deficit throughout the chemotherapy.
“Adherence to the diet was excellent, with caloric deficits and macronutrient goals achieved in nearly all patients, including in the lean group,” the authors reported.
Dr. Orgel added that families embraced the chance to play an active role in the cancer therapy. “In our view, they couldn’t control their disease or their chemotherapy, but this, they could,” he said.
Conversely, adherence to the prescribed exercise was low – just 31.2%, with the inactivity during the first month likely contributed to the similar loss of muscle mass that occurred in both cohorts, Dr. Orgel noted.
“The [low exercise adherence] unfortunately was not a surprise, as it is often difficult to exercise and be active during chemotherapy,” he said.
Key aspects of physical activity will be refined in further studies, Dr. Orgel added.
Insulin sensitivity, adiponectin key factors?
Patients receiving the intervention showed improved insulin sensitivity and reductions in circulating insulin, which are notable in that insulin has been linked to mechanisms that counter chemoresistance, the authors noted.
Furthermore, the decreases in insulin were accompanied by notable elevations in circulating adiponectin, a protein hormone produced and secreted by fat cells.
“Adiponectin was certainly a surprise, as until now it did not appear to play a major role in cancer cell resistance to chemotherapy,” Dr. Orgel said.
“It is too soon to say they are central to the mechanism of the intervention, but the large differences in adiponectin and insulin sensitivity found in children in the trial have definitely highlighted these as important for future study,” he added.
Dr. Orgel, the study coauthors, and Dr. Brown disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Children and adolescents with leukemia who were placed on a restrictive diet and exercise regimen concurrent with starting chemotherapy showed responses to treatment that were better than those historically seen in such patients.
This apparently improved response suggests it is possible to boost treatment efficacy without raising the dose – or toxicity – of chemotherapy.
“To our knowledge, this is the first study in any hematologic malignancy to demonstrate potential benefit from caloric restriction via diet and exercise to augment chemotherapy efficacy and improve disease response, the authors reported.
The findings come from the IDEAL pilot trial, conducted in 40 young patients (mean age, 15 years; range, 10-21 years) diagnosed with high-risk B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL).
The study was published online April 1 in Blood Advances.
The diet and exercise regimen is a departure from current recommendations for patients with leukemia.
“This was a major paradigm shift – until now, many oncologists encouraged ‘comfort foods’ and increased calories to get through the rigor of chemotherapy,” first author Etan Orgel, MD, of Children’s Hospital Los Angeles and the University of Southern California, also in Los Angeles.
The results from this pilot trial suggest that “the era of encouraging comfort food should be in the past; over-nutrition is likely harmful, and diet and exercise are important tools to harness during chemotherapy,” he said.
Dr. Orgel added that childhood ALL was selected because it is the most common cancer of childhood, but the findings could have potential relevance in other cancer types in children as well as adults.
Commenting on the study, Patrick Brown, MD, director of the pediatric leukemia program at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, said the findings are important, albeit preliminary.
“I think the most important contribution of this pilot study is to show that it is possible to change the nutrition and exercise habits of children and adolescents during the initial month of treatment for ALL,” he said in an interview.
“We have to be cautious about the preliminary finding that these changes resulted in deeper remissions – this will need to be confirmed in a larger study,” added Dr. Brown, who was not involved with the research.
Dr. Orgel noted that a prospective, randomized trial, IDEAL-2, is launching later this year to further evaluate the intervention.
Obesity linked to poorer chemotherapy response
Among children and adolescents who start treatment for B-ALL, as many as 40% are overweight or obese, noted the study authors.
Those who are obese have more than a twofold greater risk of having persistent minimal residual disease (MRD) at the end of chemotherapy, considered the strongest patient-level predictor of poor outcome and a common guide for therapy intensification.
The problem is compounded by weight gain that is common during treatment as a result of prolonged chemotherapy and sedentary behavior, they commented.
With studies of obese mice linking calorie and fat restriction to improved survival after chemotherapy, the authors theorized that a calorie- and fat-restrictive diet and exercise could help improve outcomes after chemotherapy in humans.
Participants were enrolled at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles and City of Hope National Medical Center in nearby Duarte. After they were started on chemotherapy, they were placed on a low-carb, low-fat, and low-sugar diet tailored to patient needs and preferences, as well as a moderate daily exercise regimen, and continued on this regimen throughout the 4-week induction phase.
Following the intervention, there were no significant reductions observed in median gain of fat mass at the end of the intervention, compared with baseline (P = .13). However, in the subgroup of patients who were overweight or obese at baseline, the reduction in fat mass was indeed significant versus baseline (+1.5% vs. +9.7% at baseline; P = .02).
Importantly, after adjustment for prognostic factors, adherence to the intervention was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of MRD, compared with recent historical controls who received the same induction therapy at the same institution, but no intervention (odds ratio, 0.30; P = .02).
The intervention was also associated with a lower detectable MRD, compared with the historical controls (OR, 0.16; one-sided P = .002).
“Most importantly, the IDEAL intervention reduced risk of MRD at the end of induction in all patients, irrespective of starting [body mass index] and after accounting for prognostic features,” the authors noted.
Adherence to diet high, exercise low
As many as 82% of study participants achieved the goal of 20% or more caloric deficit throughout the chemotherapy.
“Adherence to the diet was excellent, with caloric deficits and macronutrient goals achieved in nearly all patients, including in the lean group,” the authors reported.
Dr. Orgel added that families embraced the chance to play an active role in the cancer therapy. “In our view, they couldn’t control their disease or their chemotherapy, but this, they could,” he said.
Conversely, adherence to the prescribed exercise was low – just 31.2%, with the inactivity during the first month likely contributed to the similar loss of muscle mass that occurred in both cohorts, Dr. Orgel noted.
“The [low exercise adherence] unfortunately was not a surprise, as it is often difficult to exercise and be active during chemotherapy,” he said.
Key aspects of physical activity will be refined in further studies, Dr. Orgel added.
Insulin sensitivity, adiponectin key factors?
Patients receiving the intervention showed improved insulin sensitivity and reductions in circulating insulin, which are notable in that insulin has been linked to mechanisms that counter chemoresistance, the authors noted.
Furthermore, the decreases in insulin were accompanied by notable elevations in circulating adiponectin, a protein hormone produced and secreted by fat cells.
“Adiponectin was certainly a surprise, as until now it did not appear to play a major role in cancer cell resistance to chemotherapy,” Dr. Orgel said.
“It is too soon to say they are central to the mechanism of the intervention, but the large differences in adiponectin and insulin sensitivity found in children in the trial have definitely highlighted these as important for future study,” he added.
Dr. Orgel, the study coauthors, and Dr. Brown disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Don’t screen for vitamin D in general population, says USPSTF
Seven years after concluding that evidence was insufficient to recommend screening for vitamin D deficiency in the general population, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has revisited the issue – and come up with the same conclusion.
Overall, “the current evidence is inadequate to determine whether screening for and treatment of asymptomatic low 25(OH)D levels improve clinical outcomes in community dwelling adults,” the task force concluded in its statement, recommending an “I” for insufficient.
The statement was published online April 13 in JAMA.
In the absence of screening recommendations, clinicians may be best advised to instead focus on diet and supplementation for those considered at risk, said Anne R. Cappola, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
“Rather than posing the question of screening the general population for vitamin D deficiency, let’s focus on ensuring that everyone consumes the age-based recommended daily allowance of vitamin D instead,” Dr. Cappola, a coauthor of the accompanying editorial, said in an interview.
No studies have directly evaluated benefits of screening
The latest USPSTF recommendation is based on a systematic review of the benefits and harms of screening and early treatment for vitamin D deficiency in asymptomatic, community-dwelling nonpregnant adults aged 18 or older in the primary care setting with no signs or symptoms of deficiency.
The review found no studies that directly evaluated the benefits of screening for vitamin D deficiency.
However, 26 randomized clinical trials and one nested case-control study evaluated the effectiveness of treatment of vitamin D deficiency with supplementation.
And while observational studies have linked lower vitamin D levels with a multitude of conditions and risks, evidence of any benefit was inconsistent, with none identified for most major outcomes in asymptomatic adults – the focus of the Task Force recommendation.
“Among asymptomatic, community-dwelling populations with low vitamin D levels, the evidence suggests that treatment with vitamin D has no effect on mortality or the incidence of fractures, falls, depression, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer, or adverse events,” the review authors stress.
“The evidence is inconclusive about the effect of treatment on physical functioning and infection.”
One in four are vitamin D deficient
In terms of the further question of the potential harms of vitamin D screening of asymptomatic individuals, a key concern is the potential for misclassification and over- or underdiagnosis due to inconsistent cutoffs and variability of different screening assays, the review concluded.
However, with the rare exception of vitamin D toxicity from supplementation well above sufficient levels, treatment with vitamin D supplementation appears relatively safe.
With a lack of consensus even over the basic cutoff for vitamin D deficiency, the National Academy of Medicine determined in 2011 that hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) levels below 20 ng/mL are deficient for bone health, with no evidence of different thresholds for any other health condition.
Based on that cutoff, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), reported in 2014 that 25% of the U.S. population over the age of 1 was vitamin D deficient, with 18% of the population having 25(OH)D levels of 12-19 ng/mL and 5% having very low levels (< 12 ng/mL).
More work needed to determine groups at risk
While the task force report did not delve into testing or treatment recommendations for symptomatic adults, key established risk factors that may help clinicians identify those who are vitamin D deficient include obesity, receiving little or no UVB light exposure, and older age.
In general, obesity is associated with a 1.3- to 2-fold risk of being vitamin D deficient based on the criteria used, while non-Hispanic Blacks are 2-10 times more likely to be deficient compared with non-Hispanic White patients, the task force noted.
However, the implications of vitamin D deficiency in certain populations can vary. For instance, non-Hispanic Black people, despite having a higher prevalence of lower vitamin D levels compared with White people, in fact, have lower reported rates of fractures.
To address the various issues and gain a better understanding of the complexities of vitamin D deficiency, the task force calls for further research in key areas.
“More research is needed to determine whether total serum 25(OH)D levels are the best measure of vitamin D deficiency and whether the best measure of vitamin D deficiency varies by subgroups defined by race, ethnicity, or sex,” the authors indicated.
Furthermore, “more research is needed to determine the cutoff that defines vitamin D deficiency and whether that cutoff varies by specific clinical outcome or by subgroups defined by race, ethnicity, or sex.”
No support for population-based screening in guidelines
With the lack of conclusive evidence, no organizations currently recommend population-based screening for vitamin D deficiency in asymptomatic patients, and the American Society for Clinical Pathology endorses this stance.
The Endocrine Society and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists meanwhile do recommend screening for vitamin D deficiency in patients considered at risk.
Data show there was as much as an 80-fold increase in Medicare reimbursement volumes for vitamin D testing among clinicians from 2000 to 2010; however, that rate may have leveled off after the National Academy of Medicine reported on set deficiency levels, said Sherri-Ann M. Burnett-Bowie, MD, MPH, Dr. Cappola’s editorial coauthor.
Dr. Burnett-Bowie noted that she regularly tests her patients’ vitamin D levels, however most of her patients have osteoporosis or fractures.
“I do screen them for vitamin D deficiency since optimizing their vitamin D will improve calcium absorption, which is important for treating their osteoporosis,” Dr. Burnett-Bowie, of the endocrine division, department of medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, said in an interview.
In terms of broader testing of asymptomatic patients in the general population, however, any changes in screening will likely be contingent on developments in the effects of treatment, she said.
“Given the challenge in finding benefits of vitamin D supplementation in those who are deficient, it will likely be more challenging to find benefits from wider screening,” she concluded.
The USPSTF and editorialists reported having no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Seven years after concluding that evidence was insufficient to recommend screening for vitamin D deficiency in the general population, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has revisited the issue – and come up with the same conclusion.
Overall, “the current evidence is inadequate to determine whether screening for and treatment of asymptomatic low 25(OH)D levels improve clinical outcomes in community dwelling adults,” the task force concluded in its statement, recommending an “I” for insufficient.
The statement was published online April 13 in JAMA.
In the absence of screening recommendations, clinicians may be best advised to instead focus on diet and supplementation for those considered at risk, said Anne R. Cappola, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
“Rather than posing the question of screening the general population for vitamin D deficiency, let’s focus on ensuring that everyone consumes the age-based recommended daily allowance of vitamin D instead,” Dr. Cappola, a coauthor of the accompanying editorial, said in an interview.
No studies have directly evaluated benefits of screening
The latest USPSTF recommendation is based on a systematic review of the benefits and harms of screening and early treatment for vitamin D deficiency in asymptomatic, community-dwelling nonpregnant adults aged 18 or older in the primary care setting with no signs or symptoms of deficiency.
The review found no studies that directly evaluated the benefits of screening for vitamin D deficiency.
However, 26 randomized clinical trials and one nested case-control study evaluated the effectiveness of treatment of vitamin D deficiency with supplementation.
And while observational studies have linked lower vitamin D levels with a multitude of conditions and risks, evidence of any benefit was inconsistent, with none identified for most major outcomes in asymptomatic adults – the focus of the Task Force recommendation.
“Among asymptomatic, community-dwelling populations with low vitamin D levels, the evidence suggests that treatment with vitamin D has no effect on mortality or the incidence of fractures, falls, depression, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer, or adverse events,” the review authors stress.
“The evidence is inconclusive about the effect of treatment on physical functioning and infection.”
One in four are vitamin D deficient
In terms of the further question of the potential harms of vitamin D screening of asymptomatic individuals, a key concern is the potential for misclassification and over- or underdiagnosis due to inconsistent cutoffs and variability of different screening assays, the review concluded.
However, with the rare exception of vitamin D toxicity from supplementation well above sufficient levels, treatment with vitamin D supplementation appears relatively safe.
With a lack of consensus even over the basic cutoff for vitamin D deficiency, the National Academy of Medicine determined in 2011 that hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) levels below 20 ng/mL are deficient for bone health, with no evidence of different thresholds for any other health condition.
Based on that cutoff, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), reported in 2014 that 25% of the U.S. population over the age of 1 was vitamin D deficient, with 18% of the population having 25(OH)D levels of 12-19 ng/mL and 5% having very low levels (< 12 ng/mL).
More work needed to determine groups at risk
While the task force report did not delve into testing or treatment recommendations for symptomatic adults, key established risk factors that may help clinicians identify those who are vitamin D deficient include obesity, receiving little or no UVB light exposure, and older age.
In general, obesity is associated with a 1.3- to 2-fold risk of being vitamin D deficient based on the criteria used, while non-Hispanic Blacks are 2-10 times more likely to be deficient compared with non-Hispanic White patients, the task force noted.
However, the implications of vitamin D deficiency in certain populations can vary. For instance, non-Hispanic Black people, despite having a higher prevalence of lower vitamin D levels compared with White people, in fact, have lower reported rates of fractures.
To address the various issues and gain a better understanding of the complexities of vitamin D deficiency, the task force calls for further research in key areas.
“More research is needed to determine whether total serum 25(OH)D levels are the best measure of vitamin D deficiency and whether the best measure of vitamin D deficiency varies by subgroups defined by race, ethnicity, or sex,” the authors indicated.
Furthermore, “more research is needed to determine the cutoff that defines vitamin D deficiency and whether that cutoff varies by specific clinical outcome or by subgroups defined by race, ethnicity, or sex.”
No support for population-based screening in guidelines
With the lack of conclusive evidence, no organizations currently recommend population-based screening for vitamin D deficiency in asymptomatic patients, and the American Society for Clinical Pathology endorses this stance.
The Endocrine Society and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists meanwhile do recommend screening for vitamin D deficiency in patients considered at risk.
Data show there was as much as an 80-fold increase in Medicare reimbursement volumes for vitamin D testing among clinicians from 2000 to 2010; however, that rate may have leveled off after the National Academy of Medicine reported on set deficiency levels, said Sherri-Ann M. Burnett-Bowie, MD, MPH, Dr. Cappola’s editorial coauthor.
Dr. Burnett-Bowie noted that she regularly tests her patients’ vitamin D levels, however most of her patients have osteoporosis or fractures.
“I do screen them for vitamin D deficiency since optimizing their vitamin D will improve calcium absorption, which is important for treating their osteoporosis,” Dr. Burnett-Bowie, of the endocrine division, department of medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, said in an interview.
In terms of broader testing of asymptomatic patients in the general population, however, any changes in screening will likely be contingent on developments in the effects of treatment, she said.
“Given the challenge in finding benefits of vitamin D supplementation in those who are deficient, it will likely be more challenging to find benefits from wider screening,” she concluded.
The USPSTF and editorialists reported having no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Seven years after concluding that evidence was insufficient to recommend screening for vitamin D deficiency in the general population, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has revisited the issue – and come up with the same conclusion.
Overall, “the current evidence is inadequate to determine whether screening for and treatment of asymptomatic low 25(OH)D levels improve clinical outcomes in community dwelling adults,” the task force concluded in its statement, recommending an “I” for insufficient.
The statement was published online April 13 in JAMA.
In the absence of screening recommendations, clinicians may be best advised to instead focus on diet and supplementation for those considered at risk, said Anne R. Cappola, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
“Rather than posing the question of screening the general population for vitamin D deficiency, let’s focus on ensuring that everyone consumes the age-based recommended daily allowance of vitamin D instead,” Dr. Cappola, a coauthor of the accompanying editorial, said in an interview.
No studies have directly evaluated benefits of screening
The latest USPSTF recommendation is based on a systematic review of the benefits and harms of screening and early treatment for vitamin D deficiency in asymptomatic, community-dwelling nonpregnant adults aged 18 or older in the primary care setting with no signs or symptoms of deficiency.
The review found no studies that directly evaluated the benefits of screening for vitamin D deficiency.
However, 26 randomized clinical trials and one nested case-control study evaluated the effectiveness of treatment of vitamin D deficiency with supplementation.
And while observational studies have linked lower vitamin D levels with a multitude of conditions and risks, evidence of any benefit was inconsistent, with none identified for most major outcomes in asymptomatic adults – the focus of the Task Force recommendation.
“Among asymptomatic, community-dwelling populations with low vitamin D levels, the evidence suggests that treatment with vitamin D has no effect on mortality or the incidence of fractures, falls, depression, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer, or adverse events,” the review authors stress.
“The evidence is inconclusive about the effect of treatment on physical functioning and infection.”
One in four are vitamin D deficient
In terms of the further question of the potential harms of vitamin D screening of asymptomatic individuals, a key concern is the potential for misclassification and over- or underdiagnosis due to inconsistent cutoffs and variability of different screening assays, the review concluded.
However, with the rare exception of vitamin D toxicity from supplementation well above sufficient levels, treatment with vitamin D supplementation appears relatively safe.
With a lack of consensus even over the basic cutoff for vitamin D deficiency, the National Academy of Medicine determined in 2011 that hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D) levels below 20 ng/mL are deficient for bone health, with no evidence of different thresholds for any other health condition.
Based on that cutoff, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), reported in 2014 that 25% of the U.S. population over the age of 1 was vitamin D deficient, with 18% of the population having 25(OH)D levels of 12-19 ng/mL and 5% having very low levels (< 12 ng/mL).
More work needed to determine groups at risk
While the task force report did not delve into testing or treatment recommendations for symptomatic adults, key established risk factors that may help clinicians identify those who are vitamin D deficient include obesity, receiving little or no UVB light exposure, and older age.
In general, obesity is associated with a 1.3- to 2-fold risk of being vitamin D deficient based on the criteria used, while non-Hispanic Blacks are 2-10 times more likely to be deficient compared with non-Hispanic White patients, the task force noted.
However, the implications of vitamin D deficiency in certain populations can vary. For instance, non-Hispanic Black people, despite having a higher prevalence of lower vitamin D levels compared with White people, in fact, have lower reported rates of fractures.
To address the various issues and gain a better understanding of the complexities of vitamin D deficiency, the task force calls for further research in key areas.
“More research is needed to determine whether total serum 25(OH)D levels are the best measure of vitamin D deficiency and whether the best measure of vitamin D deficiency varies by subgroups defined by race, ethnicity, or sex,” the authors indicated.
Furthermore, “more research is needed to determine the cutoff that defines vitamin D deficiency and whether that cutoff varies by specific clinical outcome or by subgroups defined by race, ethnicity, or sex.”
No support for population-based screening in guidelines
With the lack of conclusive evidence, no organizations currently recommend population-based screening for vitamin D deficiency in asymptomatic patients, and the American Society for Clinical Pathology endorses this stance.
The Endocrine Society and the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists meanwhile do recommend screening for vitamin D deficiency in patients considered at risk.
Data show there was as much as an 80-fold increase in Medicare reimbursement volumes for vitamin D testing among clinicians from 2000 to 2010; however, that rate may have leveled off after the National Academy of Medicine reported on set deficiency levels, said Sherri-Ann M. Burnett-Bowie, MD, MPH, Dr. Cappola’s editorial coauthor.
Dr. Burnett-Bowie noted that she regularly tests her patients’ vitamin D levels, however most of her patients have osteoporosis or fractures.
“I do screen them for vitamin D deficiency since optimizing their vitamin D will improve calcium absorption, which is important for treating their osteoporosis,” Dr. Burnett-Bowie, of the endocrine division, department of medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, said in an interview.
In terms of broader testing of asymptomatic patients in the general population, however, any changes in screening will likely be contingent on developments in the effects of treatment, she said.
“Given the challenge in finding benefits of vitamin D supplementation in those who are deficient, it will likely be more challenging to find benefits from wider screening,” she concluded.
The USPSTF and editorialists reported having no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Pregnancy after pioneering treatment for early menopause
A novel therapy combining platelet-rich plasma (PRP) with follicle-stimulating hormone that is injected directly into the ovaries has the potential to restore ovarian function for women who experience early menopause, possibly allowing for pregnancy without the need for donor eggs.
“The resumption of ovarian function in our participants means women with early menopause could have the opportunity to pursue pregnancy through IVF [in vitro fertilization] using their own eggs,” the authors of the groundbreaking pilot study report.
In the small study, published online March 29 in Menopause, menstruation resumed within a mean of about 5 weeks for 11 of 12 patients with early menopause who were treated with the technique. One patient achieved a clinical pregnancy.
In commenting on the study, Stephanie S. Faubion, MD, medical director of the North American Menopause Society, was cautious in her interpretation, noting the need for more research in larger samples.
“Any pregnancy that results from a regenerative therapy is novel,” she told this news organization. “Still, we are a long way away from this being a standard therapy for women with premature ovarian insufficiency.”
Pilot study: Platelet-rich plasma combination with FSH
Early menopause is the cessation of ovarian function at or before the age of 45 years. It is estimated that 12.2% of women experience early menopause. For these women, currently, the only chance of becoming pregnant is with donor eggs.
PRP, an autologous plasma preparation containing more than 10 times the concentration of growth factors and active metabolites than normal plasma, has recently been shown to have the potential to restore the menstrual cycles in perimenopausal women, allowing IVF. It has also been shown to benefit women with premature ovarian insufficiency (POI). However, there have been few reports of pregnancies or live births.
Chao Chin Hsu, MD, PhD, of the National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, and colleagues investigated whether the combination of the activated PRP treatment with gondatrophins such as FSH could provide a more robust effect so as to sufficiently stimulate follicles. They used the intraovarian injection of the combination to treat a 38-year-old woman with POI.
The effort was successful, and the woman gave birth to healthy twins.
To further evaluate the approach, the authors conducted a pilot study involving 12 women with early menopause (mean age, 44.4 years) between November 2018 and November 2019.
The women received intraovarian injection with PRP prepared from 40 mL of autologous peripheral blood combined with recombinant FSH.
Following the treatment, 11 of the 12 women experienced resumption of menstruation within a mean of 37 days. For seven patients, menstruation resumed within a month; for three, it resumed within about 2 months; and for one, it resumed after approximately 3 months.
Of note, the menstrual cycles were mostly irregular, with an interval of about 45.6 days.
The women’s average serum FSH level dropped significantly from 70.5 IU/L at baseline to 26.2 IU/L within days of treatment, as did the average luteinizing hormone level (34.8 before and 14.3 IU/L after treatment), indicative of improved ovary function.
For six participants, 10 oocyte retrieval procedures were performed after a mean of about 2 months. Thirteen mature eggs were retrieved, and fertilization via intracytoplasmic sperm injection was attempted, resulting in 10 fertilized oocytes.
Cleavage-stage embryos were transferred into two of the participants. One achieved a clinical pregnancy, defined as a pregnancy that was confirmed by ultrasound and by the presence of a fetal heartbeat. The pregnancy ended in miscarriage at 7 weeks’ gestation.
The length of controlled ovarian stimulation necessary for follicle growth ranged from 8 to 14 days, which the authors note is similar to that seen with women of normal reproductive age.
“Although the use of PRP in reproductive medicine is considered experimental, we demonstrated the restoration of ovarian function in early menopausal women who adopted whole dimension subcortical ovarian injection of PRP/gonadotropin,” the authors write.
“Most remarkably, an early menopausal woman achieved pregnancy after the treatment followed by IVF with her mature ovulating follicle,” they report.
Mechanisms, caveats
The mechanisms thought to underlie the success of the approach include increases in ovarian vascularization and stromal cell proliferation and reductions in oxidative stress and cell death in ovaries, the authors explain.
Key caveats with the treatment include the fact that anesthesia and laparoscopy are required, and precise administration is required at 15 injection sites in 1-2 mm of the ovarian subcortical area, which can be difficult to achieve, Dr. Hsu said in an interview.
“If a new instrument could be developed in which physicians can carry out this treatment through a vaginal approach, like the transvaginal retrieval of eggs in IVF treatments,” the approach could become more acceptable, Dr. Hsu added.
The authors call for studies with larger sample sizes and say it will also be interesting to determine effects in different groups: For example, women with cancer who have undergone chemotherapy.
Dr. Faubion, who is director of the Mayo Clinic Women’s Health, Rochester, Minn., says the causes of early menopause could be important in determining the treatment’s efficacy.
“[The therapy’s] success may depend on the reason the woman experienced early menopause: For instance, due to chemotherapy, radiation, virus, autoimmune disease, genetic mutation, or other cause,” she said.
She also noted that cost could be an important factor.
“I don’t see a cost estimate, but it will be substantial,” she said. “So, even if the success rate improves as this technique is further studied, cost and the invasive nature of the treatment may prove to be substantial barriers to this therapy becoming mainstream,” she said.
The authors and Dr. Faubion have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
A novel therapy combining platelet-rich plasma (PRP) with follicle-stimulating hormone that is injected directly into the ovaries has the potential to restore ovarian function for women who experience early menopause, possibly allowing for pregnancy without the need for donor eggs.
“The resumption of ovarian function in our participants means women with early menopause could have the opportunity to pursue pregnancy through IVF [in vitro fertilization] using their own eggs,” the authors of the groundbreaking pilot study report.
In the small study, published online March 29 in Menopause, menstruation resumed within a mean of about 5 weeks for 11 of 12 patients with early menopause who were treated with the technique. One patient achieved a clinical pregnancy.
In commenting on the study, Stephanie S. Faubion, MD, medical director of the North American Menopause Society, was cautious in her interpretation, noting the need for more research in larger samples.
“Any pregnancy that results from a regenerative therapy is novel,” she told this news organization. “Still, we are a long way away from this being a standard therapy for women with premature ovarian insufficiency.”
Pilot study: Platelet-rich plasma combination with FSH
Early menopause is the cessation of ovarian function at or before the age of 45 years. It is estimated that 12.2% of women experience early menopause. For these women, currently, the only chance of becoming pregnant is with donor eggs.
PRP, an autologous plasma preparation containing more than 10 times the concentration of growth factors and active metabolites than normal plasma, has recently been shown to have the potential to restore the menstrual cycles in perimenopausal women, allowing IVF. It has also been shown to benefit women with premature ovarian insufficiency (POI). However, there have been few reports of pregnancies or live births.
Chao Chin Hsu, MD, PhD, of the National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, and colleagues investigated whether the combination of the activated PRP treatment with gondatrophins such as FSH could provide a more robust effect so as to sufficiently stimulate follicles. They used the intraovarian injection of the combination to treat a 38-year-old woman with POI.
The effort was successful, and the woman gave birth to healthy twins.
To further evaluate the approach, the authors conducted a pilot study involving 12 women with early menopause (mean age, 44.4 years) between November 2018 and November 2019.
The women received intraovarian injection with PRP prepared from 40 mL of autologous peripheral blood combined with recombinant FSH.
Following the treatment, 11 of the 12 women experienced resumption of menstruation within a mean of 37 days. For seven patients, menstruation resumed within a month; for three, it resumed within about 2 months; and for one, it resumed after approximately 3 months.
Of note, the menstrual cycles were mostly irregular, with an interval of about 45.6 days.
The women’s average serum FSH level dropped significantly from 70.5 IU/L at baseline to 26.2 IU/L within days of treatment, as did the average luteinizing hormone level (34.8 before and 14.3 IU/L after treatment), indicative of improved ovary function.
For six participants, 10 oocyte retrieval procedures were performed after a mean of about 2 months. Thirteen mature eggs were retrieved, and fertilization via intracytoplasmic sperm injection was attempted, resulting in 10 fertilized oocytes.
Cleavage-stage embryos were transferred into two of the participants. One achieved a clinical pregnancy, defined as a pregnancy that was confirmed by ultrasound and by the presence of a fetal heartbeat. The pregnancy ended in miscarriage at 7 weeks’ gestation.
The length of controlled ovarian stimulation necessary for follicle growth ranged from 8 to 14 days, which the authors note is similar to that seen with women of normal reproductive age.
“Although the use of PRP in reproductive medicine is considered experimental, we demonstrated the restoration of ovarian function in early menopausal women who adopted whole dimension subcortical ovarian injection of PRP/gonadotropin,” the authors write.
“Most remarkably, an early menopausal woman achieved pregnancy after the treatment followed by IVF with her mature ovulating follicle,” they report.
Mechanisms, caveats
The mechanisms thought to underlie the success of the approach include increases in ovarian vascularization and stromal cell proliferation and reductions in oxidative stress and cell death in ovaries, the authors explain.
Key caveats with the treatment include the fact that anesthesia and laparoscopy are required, and precise administration is required at 15 injection sites in 1-2 mm of the ovarian subcortical area, which can be difficult to achieve, Dr. Hsu said in an interview.
“If a new instrument could be developed in which physicians can carry out this treatment through a vaginal approach, like the transvaginal retrieval of eggs in IVF treatments,” the approach could become more acceptable, Dr. Hsu added.
The authors call for studies with larger sample sizes and say it will also be interesting to determine effects in different groups: For example, women with cancer who have undergone chemotherapy.
Dr. Faubion, who is director of the Mayo Clinic Women’s Health, Rochester, Minn., says the causes of early menopause could be important in determining the treatment’s efficacy.
“[The therapy’s] success may depend on the reason the woman experienced early menopause: For instance, due to chemotherapy, radiation, virus, autoimmune disease, genetic mutation, or other cause,” she said.
She also noted that cost could be an important factor.
“I don’t see a cost estimate, but it will be substantial,” she said. “So, even if the success rate improves as this technique is further studied, cost and the invasive nature of the treatment may prove to be substantial barriers to this therapy becoming mainstream,” she said.
The authors and Dr. Faubion have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
A novel therapy combining platelet-rich plasma (PRP) with follicle-stimulating hormone that is injected directly into the ovaries has the potential to restore ovarian function for women who experience early menopause, possibly allowing for pregnancy without the need for donor eggs.
“The resumption of ovarian function in our participants means women with early menopause could have the opportunity to pursue pregnancy through IVF [in vitro fertilization] using their own eggs,” the authors of the groundbreaking pilot study report.
In the small study, published online March 29 in Menopause, menstruation resumed within a mean of about 5 weeks for 11 of 12 patients with early menopause who were treated with the technique. One patient achieved a clinical pregnancy.
In commenting on the study, Stephanie S. Faubion, MD, medical director of the North American Menopause Society, was cautious in her interpretation, noting the need for more research in larger samples.
“Any pregnancy that results from a regenerative therapy is novel,” she told this news organization. “Still, we are a long way away from this being a standard therapy for women with premature ovarian insufficiency.”
Pilot study: Platelet-rich plasma combination with FSH
Early menopause is the cessation of ovarian function at or before the age of 45 years. It is estimated that 12.2% of women experience early menopause. For these women, currently, the only chance of becoming pregnant is with donor eggs.
PRP, an autologous plasma preparation containing more than 10 times the concentration of growth factors and active metabolites than normal plasma, has recently been shown to have the potential to restore the menstrual cycles in perimenopausal women, allowing IVF. It has also been shown to benefit women with premature ovarian insufficiency (POI). However, there have been few reports of pregnancies or live births.
Chao Chin Hsu, MD, PhD, of the National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, and colleagues investigated whether the combination of the activated PRP treatment with gondatrophins such as FSH could provide a more robust effect so as to sufficiently stimulate follicles. They used the intraovarian injection of the combination to treat a 38-year-old woman with POI.
The effort was successful, and the woman gave birth to healthy twins.
To further evaluate the approach, the authors conducted a pilot study involving 12 women with early menopause (mean age, 44.4 years) between November 2018 and November 2019.
The women received intraovarian injection with PRP prepared from 40 mL of autologous peripheral blood combined with recombinant FSH.
Following the treatment, 11 of the 12 women experienced resumption of menstruation within a mean of 37 days. For seven patients, menstruation resumed within a month; for three, it resumed within about 2 months; and for one, it resumed after approximately 3 months.
Of note, the menstrual cycles were mostly irregular, with an interval of about 45.6 days.
The women’s average serum FSH level dropped significantly from 70.5 IU/L at baseline to 26.2 IU/L within days of treatment, as did the average luteinizing hormone level (34.8 before and 14.3 IU/L after treatment), indicative of improved ovary function.
For six participants, 10 oocyte retrieval procedures were performed after a mean of about 2 months. Thirteen mature eggs were retrieved, and fertilization via intracytoplasmic sperm injection was attempted, resulting in 10 fertilized oocytes.
Cleavage-stage embryos were transferred into two of the participants. One achieved a clinical pregnancy, defined as a pregnancy that was confirmed by ultrasound and by the presence of a fetal heartbeat. The pregnancy ended in miscarriage at 7 weeks’ gestation.
The length of controlled ovarian stimulation necessary for follicle growth ranged from 8 to 14 days, which the authors note is similar to that seen with women of normal reproductive age.
“Although the use of PRP in reproductive medicine is considered experimental, we demonstrated the restoration of ovarian function in early menopausal women who adopted whole dimension subcortical ovarian injection of PRP/gonadotropin,” the authors write.
“Most remarkably, an early menopausal woman achieved pregnancy after the treatment followed by IVF with her mature ovulating follicle,” they report.
Mechanisms, caveats
The mechanisms thought to underlie the success of the approach include increases in ovarian vascularization and stromal cell proliferation and reductions in oxidative stress and cell death in ovaries, the authors explain.
Key caveats with the treatment include the fact that anesthesia and laparoscopy are required, and precise administration is required at 15 injection sites in 1-2 mm of the ovarian subcortical area, which can be difficult to achieve, Dr. Hsu said in an interview.
“If a new instrument could be developed in which physicians can carry out this treatment through a vaginal approach, like the transvaginal retrieval of eggs in IVF treatments,” the approach could become more acceptable, Dr. Hsu added.
The authors call for studies with larger sample sizes and say it will also be interesting to determine effects in different groups: For example, women with cancer who have undergone chemotherapy.
Dr. Faubion, who is director of the Mayo Clinic Women’s Health, Rochester, Minn., says the causes of early menopause could be important in determining the treatment’s efficacy.
“[The therapy’s] success may depend on the reason the woman experienced early menopause: For instance, due to chemotherapy, radiation, virus, autoimmune disease, genetic mutation, or other cause,” she said.
She also noted that cost could be an important factor.
“I don’t see a cost estimate, but it will be substantial,” she said. “So, even if the success rate improves as this technique is further studied, cost and the invasive nature of the treatment may prove to be substantial barriers to this therapy becoming mainstream,” she said.
The authors and Dr. Faubion have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Cardiovascular risks elevated in transgender youth
Cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors are increased among transgender youths, compared with youths who are not transgender. Elevations in lipid levels and body mass index (BMI) also occur in adult transgender patients, new research shows.
“This is the first study of its size in the United States of which we are aware that looks at the odds of youth with a diagnosis of gender dysphoria having medical diagnoses that relate to overall metabolic and cardiovascular health,” first author Anna Valentine, MD, of Children’s Hospital Colorado, Aurora, said in a press statement.
Although previous studies have shown that among transgender adults, BMI is higher and there is an increased risk for cardiovascular events, such as stroke or heart attack, compared with nontransgender people, research on adolescent transgender patients has been lacking.
With a recent survey showing that nearly 2% of adolescents identify as transgender, interest in health outcomes among younger patients is high.
To investigate, Dr. Valentine, and colleagues evaluated data from the PEDSnet pediatric database on 4,177 youths who had received a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. The participants had been enrolled at six sites from 2009 to 2019. The researchers compared these patients in a ratio of 1:4 with 16,664 control persons who had not been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. They reported their findings as a poster at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.
For the propensity-score analysis, participants were matched according to year of birth, age at last visit, site, race, ethnicity, insurance status, and duration in the database.
In both the transgender and control groups, about 66% were female at birth, 73% were White, and 9% Hispanic. For both groups, the average age was 16.2 years at the last visit. The average duration in the database was 7 years.
Study didn’t distinguish between those receiving and those not receiving gender-affirming hormones
In the retrospective study, among those who identified as transgender, the rates of diagnoses of dyslipidemia (odds ratio, 1.6; P < .0001) and metabolic syndrome (OR, 1.9; P = .0086) were significantly higher, compared with those without gender dysphoria.
Among the transgender male patients (born female) but not transgender female patients (born male), rates of diagnoses of overweight/obesity (OR, 1.7; P < .0001) and polycystic ovary syndrome were higher (OR, 1.9, P = .0006), compared with controls.
Gender-affirming hormone therapy, such as with testosterone or estradiol, is among the suspected culprits for the cardiovascular effects. However, importantly, this study did not differentiate between patients who had received estradiol or testosterone for gender affirmation and those who had not, Dr. Valentine said.
“We don’t know [whether gender-affirming hormone therapy is a cause], as we have not looked at this yet,” she said in an interview. “We are looking at that in our next analyses and will be including that in our future publication.
“We’ll also be looking at the relationship between having overweight/obesity and the other diagnoses that influence cardiovascular health (high blood pressure, liver dysfunction, and abnormal cholesterol), as that could certainly be playing a role as well,” she said.
For many transgender patients, gender-affirming hormone therapy is lifelong. One question that needs to be evaluated concerns whether the dose of such therapy has a role on cardiovascular effects and if so, whether adjustments could be made without compromising the therapeutic effect, Dr. Valentine noted.
“This is an important question, and future research is needed to evaluate whether doses [of gender-affirming hormones] are related to cardiometabolic outcomes,” she said.
Potential confounders in the study include the fact that rates of overweight and obesity are higher among youths with gender dysphoria. This can in itself can increase the risk for other disorders, Dr. Valentine noted.
Furthermore, rates of mental health comorbidities are higher among youths with gender dysphoria. One consequence of this may be that they engage in less physical activity, she said.
Hormone therapy, health care disparities, or both could explain risk
In commenting on the study, Joshua D. Safer, MD, executive director of the Center for Transgender Medicine and Surgery, the Mount Sinai Health System, New York, said that although similar cardiovascular effects are known to occur in transgender adults as well, they may or may not be hormone related. Other factors can increase the risk.
“With transgender adults, any differences in lipids or cardiac risk factors relative to cisgender people might be attributable either to hormone therapy or to health care disparities,” he said in an interview.
“The data are mixed. It may be that most differences relate to lack of access to care and to mistreatment by society,” he said. “Even studies that focus on hormones see a worsened situation for trans women versus trans men.”
Other recent research that shows potential cardiovascular effects among adult transgender men includes a study of more than 1,000 transgender men (born female) who received testosterone. That study, which was also presented at the ENDO meeting and was reported by this news organization, found an increased risk for high hematocrit levels, which could lead to a thrombotic event.
However, a study published in Pediatrics, which was also reported by this news organization, that included 611 transgender youths who had taken gender-affirming hormone therapy for more than a year found no increased risk for thrombosis, even in the presence of thrombosis risk factors, including obesity, tobacco use, and family history of thrombosis. However, the senior author of that study pointed out that the duration of follow-up in that study was relatively short, which may have been why they did not find an increased risk for thrombosis.
Dr. Safer noted that transgender youths and adults alike face a host of cultural factors that could play a role in increased cardiovascular risks.
“For adults, the major candidate explanations for worse BMI and cardiac risk factors are societal mistreatment, and for trans women specifically, progestins. For youth, the major candidate explanations are societal mistreatment and lack of access to athletics,” he said.
The authors and Dr. Safer disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors are increased among transgender youths, compared with youths who are not transgender. Elevations in lipid levels and body mass index (BMI) also occur in adult transgender patients, new research shows.
“This is the first study of its size in the United States of which we are aware that looks at the odds of youth with a diagnosis of gender dysphoria having medical diagnoses that relate to overall metabolic and cardiovascular health,” first author Anna Valentine, MD, of Children’s Hospital Colorado, Aurora, said in a press statement.
Although previous studies have shown that among transgender adults, BMI is higher and there is an increased risk for cardiovascular events, such as stroke or heart attack, compared with nontransgender people, research on adolescent transgender patients has been lacking.
With a recent survey showing that nearly 2% of adolescents identify as transgender, interest in health outcomes among younger patients is high.
To investigate, Dr. Valentine, and colleagues evaluated data from the PEDSnet pediatric database on 4,177 youths who had received a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. The participants had been enrolled at six sites from 2009 to 2019. The researchers compared these patients in a ratio of 1:4 with 16,664 control persons who had not been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. They reported their findings as a poster at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.
For the propensity-score analysis, participants were matched according to year of birth, age at last visit, site, race, ethnicity, insurance status, and duration in the database.
In both the transgender and control groups, about 66% were female at birth, 73% were White, and 9% Hispanic. For both groups, the average age was 16.2 years at the last visit. The average duration in the database was 7 years.
Study didn’t distinguish between those receiving and those not receiving gender-affirming hormones
In the retrospective study, among those who identified as transgender, the rates of diagnoses of dyslipidemia (odds ratio, 1.6; P < .0001) and metabolic syndrome (OR, 1.9; P = .0086) were significantly higher, compared with those without gender dysphoria.
Among the transgender male patients (born female) but not transgender female patients (born male), rates of diagnoses of overweight/obesity (OR, 1.7; P < .0001) and polycystic ovary syndrome were higher (OR, 1.9, P = .0006), compared with controls.
Gender-affirming hormone therapy, such as with testosterone or estradiol, is among the suspected culprits for the cardiovascular effects. However, importantly, this study did not differentiate between patients who had received estradiol or testosterone for gender affirmation and those who had not, Dr. Valentine said.
“We don’t know [whether gender-affirming hormone therapy is a cause], as we have not looked at this yet,” she said in an interview. “We are looking at that in our next analyses and will be including that in our future publication.
“We’ll also be looking at the relationship between having overweight/obesity and the other diagnoses that influence cardiovascular health (high blood pressure, liver dysfunction, and abnormal cholesterol), as that could certainly be playing a role as well,” she said.
For many transgender patients, gender-affirming hormone therapy is lifelong. One question that needs to be evaluated concerns whether the dose of such therapy has a role on cardiovascular effects and if so, whether adjustments could be made without compromising the therapeutic effect, Dr. Valentine noted.
“This is an important question, and future research is needed to evaluate whether doses [of gender-affirming hormones] are related to cardiometabolic outcomes,” she said.
Potential confounders in the study include the fact that rates of overweight and obesity are higher among youths with gender dysphoria. This can in itself can increase the risk for other disorders, Dr. Valentine noted.
Furthermore, rates of mental health comorbidities are higher among youths with gender dysphoria. One consequence of this may be that they engage in less physical activity, she said.
Hormone therapy, health care disparities, or both could explain risk
In commenting on the study, Joshua D. Safer, MD, executive director of the Center for Transgender Medicine and Surgery, the Mount Sinai Health System, New York, said that although similar cardiovascular effects are known to occur in transgender adults as well, they may or may not be hormone related. Other factors can increase the risk.
“With transgender adults, any differences in lipids or cardiac risk factors relative to cisgender people might be attributable either to hormone therapy or to health care disparities,” he said in an interview.
“The data are mixed. It may be that most differences relate to lack of access to care and to mistreatment by society,” he said. “Even studies that focus on hormones see a worsened situation for trans women versus trans men.”
Other recent research that shows potential cardiovascular effects among adult transgender men includes a study of more than 1,000 transgender men (born female) who received testosterone. That study, which was also presented at the ENDO meeting and was reported by this news organization, found an increased risk for high hematocrit levels, which could lead to a thrombotic event.
However, a study published in Pediatrics, which was also reported by this news organization, that included 611 transgender youths who had taken gender-affirming hormone therapy for more than a year found no increased risk for thrombosis, even in the presence of thrombosis risk factors, including obesity, tobacco use, and family history of thrombosis. However, the senior author of that study pointed out that the duration of follow-up in that study was relatively short, which may have been why they did not find an increased risk for thrombosis.
Dr. Safer noted that transgender youths and adults alike face a host of cultural factors that could play a role in increased cardiovascular risks.
“For adults, the major candidate explanations for worse BMI and cardiac risk factors are societal mistreatment, and for trans women specifically, progestins. For youth, the major candidate explanations are societal mistreatment and lack of access to athletics,” he said.
The authors and Dr. Safer disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors are increased among transgender youths, compared with youths who are not transgender. Elevations in lipid levels and body mass index (BMI) also occur in adult transgender patients, new research shows.
“This is the first study of its size in the United States of which we are aware that looks at the odds of youth with a diagnosis of gender dysphoria having medical diagnoses that relate to overall metabolic and cardiovascular health,” first author Anna Valentine, MD, of Children’s Hospital Colorado, Aurora, said in a press statement.
Although previous studies have shown that among transgender adults, BMI is higher and there is an increased risk for cardiovascular events, such as stroke or heart attack, compared with nontransgender people, research on adolescent transgender patients has been lacking.
With a recent survey showing that nearly 2% of adolescents identify as transgender, interest in health outcomes among younger patients is high.
To investigate, Dr. Valentine, and colleagues evaluated data from the PEDSnet pediatric database on 4,177 youths who had received a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. The participants had been enrolled at six sites from 2009 to 2019. The researchers compared these patients in a ratio of 1:4 with 16,664 control persons who had not been diagnosed with gender dysphoria. They reported their findings as a poster at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.
For the propensity-score analysis, participants were matched according to year of birth, age at last visit, site, race, ethnicity, insurance status, and duration in the database.
In both the transgender and control groups, about 66% were female at birth, 73% were White, and 9% Hispanic. For both groups, the average age was 16.2 years at the last visit. The average duration in the database was 7 years.
Study didn’t distinguish between those receiving and those not receiving gender-affirming hormones
In the retrospective study, among those who identified as transgender, the rates of diagnoses of dyslipidemia (odds ratio, 1.6; P < .0001) and metabolic syndrome (OR, 1.9; P = .0086) were significantly higher, compared with those without gender dysphoria.
Among the transgender male patients (born female) but not transgender female patients (born male), rates of diagnoses of overweight/obesity (OR, 1.7; P < .0001) and polycystic ovary syndrome were higher (OR, 1.9, P = .0006), compared with controls.
Gender-affirming hormone therapy, such as with testosterone or estradiol, is among the suspected culprits for the cardiovascular effects. However, importantly, this study did not differentiate between patients who had received estradiol or testosterone for gender affirmation and those who had not, Dr. Valentine said.
“We don’t know [whether gender-affirming hormone therapy is a cause], as we have not looked at this yet,” she said in an interview. “We are looking at that in our next analyses and will be including that in our future publication.
“We’ll also be looking at the relationship between having overweight/obesity and the other diagnoses that influence cardiovascular health (high blood pressure, liver dysfunction, and abnormal cholesterol), as that could certainly be playing a role as well,” she said.
For many transgender patients, gender-affirming hormone therapy is lifelong. One question that needs to be evaluated concerns whether the dose of such therapy has a role on cardiovascular effects and if so, whether adjustments could be made without compromising the therapeutic effect, Dr. Valentine noted.
“This is an important question, and future research is needed to evaluate whether doses [of gender-affirming hormones] are related to cardiometabolic outcomes,” she said.
Potential confounders in the study include the fact that rates of overweight and obesity are higher among youths with gender dysphoria. This can in itself can increase the risk for other disorders, Dr. Valentine noted.
Furthermore, rates of mental health comorbidities are higher among youths with gender dysphoria. One consequence of this may be that they engage in less physical activity, she said.
Hormone therapy, health care disparities, or both could explain risk
In commenting on the study, Joshua D. Safer, MD, executive director of the Center for Transgender Medicine and Surgery, the Mount Sinai Health System, New York, said that although similar cardiovascular effects are known to occur in transgender adults as well, they may or may not be hormone related. Other factors can increase the risk.
“With transgender adults, any differences in lipids or cardiac risk factors relative to cisgender people might be attributable either to hormone therapy or to health care disparities,” he said in an interview.
“The data are mixed. It may be that most differences relate to lack of access to care and to mistreatment by society,” he said. “Even studies that focus on hormones see a worsened situation for trans women versus trans men.”
Other recent research that shows potential cardiovascular effects among adult transgender men includes a study of more than 1,000 transgender men (born female) who received testosterone. That study, which was also presented at the ENDO meeting and was reported by this news organization, found an increased risk for high hematocrit levels, which could lead to a thrombotic event.
However, a study published in Pediatrics, which was also reported by this news organization, that included 611 transgender youths who had taken gender-affirming hormone therapy for more than a year found no increased risk for thrombosis, even in the presence of thrombosis risk factors, including obesity, tobacco use, and family history of thrombosis. However, the senior author of that study pointed out that the duration of follow-up in that study was relatively short, which may have been why they did not find an increased risk for thrombosis.
Dr. Safer noted that transgender youths and adults alike face a host of cultural factors that could play a role in increased cardiovascular risks.
“For adults, the major candidate explanations for worse BMI and cardiac risk factors are societal mistreatment, and for trans women specifically, progestins. For youth, the major candidate explanations are societal mistreatment and lack of access to athletics,” he said.
The authors and Dr. Safer disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Combo thyroid hormones as good as levothyroxine for hypothyroidism
Patients with hypothyroidism treated with the three most common pharmacologic strategies of levothyroxine (LT4) alone, LT4 in combination with triiodothyronine (T3), or desiccated thyroid extract showed no differences in thyroid symptoms or secondary outcomes in a double-blind, randomized study.
“There are now proven good treatment options for the more than 1 in 10 patients with hypothyroidism who continue to experience symptoms of fatigue, mental fogginess, weight gain, and other symptoms despite taking levothyroxine,” first author Thanh Duc Hoang, DO, an endocrinologist at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, in Bethesda, Md., said in a press statement.
The findings were presented at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.
Commenting on the study, Alan P. Farwell, MD, said these new results are a valuable contribution to the understanding of treatment effects. “I think this is an interesting and important study and further studies are needed to clarify the optimal way to treat hypothyroidism,” said Dr. Farwell, who is director of endocrine clinics at Boston University.
Importantly, “the findings are different than studies where the patients are aware of what medication they are receiving,” he stressed in an interview, underscoring the importance of the double-blind design of the trial.
But Anne Cappola, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pointed out that “the study was small and unlikely to have the statistical power to detect differences that could have been clinically important.”
Nevertheless, she too agreed that the double-blind study design is key: “My experience with patients is [the effects] are affected by patients’ perceptions about their thyroid medication. That is why studies designed so that patients do not know which treatment they are receiving are so important in this area.”
Randomized, double-blind comparison
Prior to the widespread availability of the current gold standard hypothyroidism treatment of LT4, the condition was typically treated with desiccated (animal) thyroid extract. And with many patients continuing to have a preference for this therapeutic approach, it is still commonly used.
Additionally, some patients treated with LT4 alone report greater improvements in symptoms with the addition of T3 – despite studies showing no benefits from the two together – leading to many clinicians commonly trying the combination approach.
To compare the efficacy of the three approaches in a prospective, double-blind, cross-over fashion, 75 patients received three therapeutic approaches each for 3 months: desiccated thyroid extract, an LT4/T3 combination, or LT4 alone.
After each 3-month treatment, patients completed a 36-point thyroid symptom questionnaire.
There was no significant differences in symptom relief, the primary outcome, between the three treatments (P = .32).
Overall, 45% of patients indicated they preferred desiccated thyroid as their first choice of treatment, 32% preferred LT4/T3 as their first choice, and 23% preferred LT4 alone.
For the secondary endpoints of weight, general health, depression (assessed using the Beck Depression Inventory), memory (Wechsler Memory Scale), lipids, and thyroid function, again, there were no significant differences between groups in any of the measures.
When switched to desiccated thyroid, many felt ‘much better’
A further exploratory analysis revealed that those who experienced symptoms while taking LT4 alone reported greater alleviation of symptoms with the other two treatments.
“As a whole group, there was no significant difference between the three treatment arms,” Dr. Hoang explained in an interview.
“However, with the subgroup analysis based on the scores of symptom questionnaires, we found that symptomatic patients on LT4 improved while being treated with LT4/T3 or desiccated thyroid,” he said.
Reports of improvements in switching to desiccated thyroid were notable, Dr. Hoang added. “Many patients when switched from LT4 to desiccated thyroid extract said they felt much better, [with] more energy, less mental fogginess, a better outlook, less flair of lupus symptoms, easier to lose weight, etc.”
The study also showed more patients with Hashimoto’s disease preferred desiccated thyroid extract and LT4/T3, compared with LT4 alone, however, the differences were not significant.
Treatment adjustments a helpful first step
Dr. Farwell noted that his approach when patients are still reporting symptoms despite LT4 treatment is to first try tweaking the dose.
“In my own practice, I prefer to adjust LT4 dosing first, and on occasion add T3, with a goal of getting both hormone levels in the upper half of the normal range,” he said. “I find that to be a better approach than desiccated thyroid extract. T3 should be taken twice a day due to its half-life.”
The approach is generally successful, he added. “Even those that come in asking for desiccated thyroid extract whom I am able to convince to try LT4/T3 end up being happy with their treatment in the end.
“The key is that you need to spend time discussing the options with patients and come to a consensus as to the therapy that will best resolve their symptoms and that they are most comfortable with,” he concluded.
In response to mounting evidence of different hypothyroidism treatment responses according to various subgroups of patients, experts recently called for the initiation of more thorough clinical trials on the issue of combination therapy, as recently reported by this news organization.
Dr. Hoang reported being a speaker for Acella Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Farwell and Dr. Cappola reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Patients with hypothyroidism treated with the three most common pharmacologic strategies of levothyroxine (LT4) alone, LT4 in combination with triiodothyronine (T3), or desiccated thyroid extract showed no differences in thyroid symptoms or secondary outcomes in a double-blind, randomized study.
“There are now proven good treatment options for the more than 1 in 10 patients with hypothyroidism who continue to experience symptoms of fatigue, mental fogginess, weight gain, and other symptoms despite taking levothyroxine,” first author Thanh Duc Hoang, DO, an endocrinologist at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, in Bethesda, Md., said in a press statement.
The findings were presented at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.
Commenting on the study, Alan P. Farwell, MD, said these new results are a valuable contribution to the understanding of treatment effects. “I think this is an interesting and important study and further studies are needed to clarify the optimal way to treat hypothyroidism,” said Dr. Farwell, who is director of endocrine clinics at Boston University.
Importantly, “the findings are different than studies where the patients are aware of what medication they are receiving,” he stressed in an interview, underscoring the importance of the double-blind design of the trial.
But Anne Cappola, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pointed out that “the study was small and unlikely to have the statistical power to detect differences that could have been clinically important.”
Nevertheless, she too agreed that the double-blind study design is key: “My experience with patients is [the effects] are affected by patients’ perceptions about their thyroid medication. That is why studies designed so that patients do not know which treatment they are receiving are so important in this area.”
Randomized, double-blind comparison
Prior to the widespread availability of the current gold standard hypothyroidism treatment of LT4, the condition was typically treated with desiccated (animal) thyroid extract. And with many patients continuing to have a preference for this therapeutic approach, it is still commonly used.
Additionally, some patients treated with LT4 alone report greater improvements in symptoms with the addition of T3 – despite studies showing no benefits from the two together – leading to many clinicians commonly trying the combination approach.
To compare the efficacy of the three approaches in a prospective, double-blind, cross-over fashion, 75 patients received three therapeutic approaches each for 3 months: desiccated thyroid extract, an LT4/T3 combination, or LT4 alone.
After each 3-month treatment, patients completed a 36-point thyroid symptom questionnaire.
There was no significant differences in symptom relief, the primary outcome, between the three treatments (P = .32).
Overall, 45% of patients indicated they preferred desiccated thyroid as their first choice of treatment, 32% preferred LT4/T3 as their first choice, and 23% preferred LT4 alone.
For the secondary endpoints of weight, general health, depression (assessed using the Beck Depression Inventory), memory (Wechsler Memory Scale), lipids, and thyroid function, again, there were no significant differences between groups in any of the measures.
When switched to desiccated thyroid, many felt ‘much better’
A further exploratory analysis revealed that those who experienced symptoms while taking LT4 alone reported greater alleviation of symptoms with the other two treatments.
“As a whole group, there was no significant difference between the three treatment arms,” Dr. Hoang explained in an interview.
“However, with the subgroup analysis based on the scores of symptom questionnaires, we found that symptomatic patients on LT4 improved while being treated with LT4/T3 or desiccated thyroid,” he said.
Reports of improvements in switching to desiccated thyroid were notable, Dr. Hoang added. “Many patients when switched from LT4 to desiccated thyroid extract said they felt much better, [with] more energy, less mental fogginess, a better outlook, less flair of lupus symptoms, easier to lose weight, etc.”
The study also showed more patients with Hashimoto’s disease preferred desiccated thyroid extract and LT4/T3, compared with LT4 alone, however, the differences were not significant.
Treatment adjustments a helpful first step
Dr. Farwell noted that his approach when patients are still reporting symptoms despite LT4 treatment is to first try tweaking the dose.
“In my own practice, I prefer to adjust LT4 dosing first, and on occasion add T3, with a goal of getting both hormone levels in the upper half of the normal range,” he said. “I find that to be a better approach than desiccated thyroid extract. T3 should be taken twice a day due to its half-life.”
The approach is generally successful, he added. “Even those that come in asking for desiccated thyroid extract whom I am able to convince to try LT4/T3 end up being happy with their treatment in the end.
“The key is that you need to spend time discussing the options with patients and come to a consensus as to the therapy that will best resolve their symptoms and that they are most comfortable with,” he concluded.
In response to mounting evidence of different hypothyroidism treatment responses according to various subgroups of patients, experts recently called for the initiation of more thorough clinical trials on the issue of combination therapy, as recently reported by this news organization.
Dr. Hoang reported being a speaker for Acella Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Farwell and Dr. Cappola reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Patients with hypothyroidism treated with the three most common pharmacologic strategies of levothyroxine (LT4) alone, LT4 in combination with triiodothyronine (T3), or desiccated thyroid extract showed no differences in thyroid symptoms or secondary outcomes in a double-blind, randomized study.
“There are now proven good treatment options for the more than 1 in 10 patients with hypothyroidism who continue to experience symptoms of fatigue, mental fogginess, weight gain, and other symptoms despite taking levothyroxine,” first author Thanh Duc Hoang, DO, an endocrinologist at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, in Bethesda, Md., said in a press statement.
The findings were presented at the annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.
Commenting on the study, Alan P. Farwell, MD, said these new results are a valuable contribution to the understanding of treatment effects. “I think this is an interesting and important study and further studies are needed to clarify the optimal way to treat hypothyroidism,” said Dr. Farwell, who is director of endocrine clinics at Boston University.
Importantly, “the findings are different than studies where the patients are aware of what medication they are receiving,” he stressed in an interview, underscoring the importance of the double-blind design of the trial.
But Anne Cappola, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pointed out that “the study was small and unlikely to have the statistical power to detect differences that could have been clinically important.”
Nevertheless, she too agreed that the double-blind study design is key: “My experience with patients is [the effects] are affected by patients’ perceptions about their thyroid medication. That is why studies designed so that patients do not know which treatment they are receiving are so important in this area.”
Randomized, double-blind comparison
Prior to the widespread availability of the current gold standard hypothyroidism treatment of LT4, the condition was typically treated with desiccated (animal) thyroid extract. And with many patients continuing to have a preference for this therapeutic approach, it is still commonly used.
Additionally, some patients treated with LT4 alone report greater improvements in symptoms with the addition of T3 – despite studies showing no benefits from the two together – leading to many clinicians commonly trying the combination approach.
To compare the efficacy of the three approaches in a prospective, double-blind, cross-over fashion, 75 patients received three therapeutic approaches each for 3 months: desiccated thyroid extract, an LT4/T3 combination, or LT4 alone.
After each 3-month treatment, patients completed a 36-point thyroid symptom questionnaire.
There was no significant differences in symptom relief, the primary outcome, between the three treatments (P = .32).
Overall, 45% of patients indicated they preferred desiccated thyroid as their first choice of treatment, 32% preferred LT4/T3 as their first choice, and 23% preferred LT4 alone.
For the secondary endpoints of weight, general health, depression (assessed using the Beck Depression Inventory), memory (Wechsler Memory Scale), lipids, and thyroid function, again, there were no significant differences between groups in any of the measures.
When switched to desiccated thyroid, many felt ‘much better’
A further exploratory analysis revealed that those who experienced symptoms while taking LT4 alone reported greater alleviation of symptoms with the other two treatments.
“As a whole group, there was no significant difference between the three treatment arms,” Dr. Hoang explained in an interview.
“However, with the subgroup analysis based on the scores of symptom questionnaires, we found that symptomatic patients on LT4 improved while being treated with LT4/T3 or desiccated thyroid,” he said.
Reports of improvements in switching to desiccated thyroid were notable, Dr. Hoang added. “Many patients when switched from LT4 to desiccated thyroid extract said they felt much better, [with] more energy, less mental fogginess, a better outlook, less flair of lupus symptoms, easier to lose weight, etc.”
The study also showed more patients with Hashimoto’s disease preferred desiccated thyroid extract and LT4/T3, compared with LT4 alone, however, the differences were not significant.
Treatment adjustments a helpful first step
Dr. Farwell noted that his approach when patients are still reporting symptoms despite LT4 treatment is to first try tweaking the dose.
“In my own practice, I prefer to adjust LT4 dosing first, and on occasion add T3, with a goal of getting both hormone levels in the upper half of the normal range,” he said. “I find that to be a better approach than desiccated thyroid extract. T3 should be taken twice a day due to its half-life.”
The approach is generally successful, he added. “Even those that come in asking for desiccated thyroid extract whom I am able to convince to try LT4/T3 end up being happy with their treatment in the end.
“The key is that you need to spend time discussing the options with patients and come to a consensus as to the therapy that will best resolve their symptoms and that they are most comfortable with,” he concluded.
In response to mounting evidence of different hypothyroidism treatment responses according to various subgroups of patients, experts recently called for the initiation of more thorough clinical trials on the issue of combination therapy, as recently reported by this news organization.
Dr. Hoang reported being a speaker for Acella Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Farwell and Dr. Cappola reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
1 in 3 on levothyroxine take meds that interfere with thyroid tests
, potentially compromising treatment decisions, new research shows.
“We know from previous studies that thyroid hormone use is common in older adults and that there are a multitude of medications that can interfere with thyroid function tests in different ways,” senior author Maria Papaleontiou, MD, told Medscape Medical News.
“However, to our knowledge, the extent of concurrent use of thyroid hormone and interfering medications in older adults, age 65 years and older, has not been previously explored,” added Dr. Papaleontiou, of the Division of Metabolism, Endocrinology and Diabetes, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
The findings were presented as a poster during virtual ENDO 2021, the Endocrine Society’s annual meeting.
Commenting on the study, Thanh Duc Hoang, DO, an endocrinologist with the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, in Bethesda, Md., said: “It is important for clinicians to be aware of various interactions and interferences of medications affecting the accuracy of thyroid function tests.”
“If patients are not able to discontinue the medications shortly before the bloodwork, the clinicians may consider ordering different thyroid tests or assays that avoid the interferences,” he told Medscape Medical News.
32% of patients taking meds that could interfere with tests
In evaluating data on 538,137 patients treated with thyroid hormones from the Corporate Data Warehouse of the Veterans Health Administration, spanning 2004-2017, first author Rachel Beeson, MD, and colleagues with the University of Michigan found most patients in the study were men (96.5%), White (77.1%), and had two or more comorbidities (62.6%).
Of this total, 170,261 (31.6%) patients treated with thyroid hormones, over a median follow-up of 56 months, were taking at least one drug that could potentially interfere with thyroid function tests.
Among the drugs with potential thyroid test interference, about 28% of patients were taking prednisone or prednisolone, 8% were taking amiodarone, and 1.42% were taking phenytoin. Other reported drugs that could potentially interfere included carbamazepine (0.91%), phenobarbital (0.15%), lithium (0.40%), and tamoxifen (0.11%).
Multivariate analysis showed that characteristics associated with those most likely to have concurrent medication use included non-Whites (OR, 1.18 vs Whites), Hispanic ethnicity (OR 1.11 vs non-Hispanic), female sex (OR 1.12 vs males), and presence of comorbidities (eg, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score ≥ 2, OR, 2.47 vs score of 0).
Meanwhile, older patients age 85 years and over had a lower likelihood of concurrent medications interfering with thyroid tests (OR, 0.47 vs age 65-74 years).
The findings are concerning given the wide use of levothyroxine to treat hypothyroidism, which is the most widely prescribed drug in the United States.
“Our findings not only highlight the complexity of thyroid hormone management in older adults in the context of polypharmacy and multimorbidity, but they also draw attention to vulnerable groups for this practice, which included female patients, non-Whites, patients of Hispanic ethnicity, and patients with comorbidities,” Dr. Papaleontiou said.
Nature of interference possibilities varies
Medications or supplements can interfere with thyroid function tests in a variety of ways, she explained. “Some medications could lead to a decrease in the absorption of levothyroxine, others may affect how well the pill dissolves.”
In addition, certain medications can affect the circulation of thyroid hormone in the blood and how it binds with proteins, or they can lead to decreasing thyroid hormone levels due to a variety of interactions.
And in contrast, “What is even more challenging is that some medications or supplements may appear to affect thyroid function based on lab tests when in reality they don’t actually affect thyroid function and may lead to dose adjustments unnecessarily,” Dr. Papaleontiou noted.
Recommendations to counter interference
Current recommendations to try to counter the effects of polypharmacy on thyroid treatment include advising patients to take thyroid hormones on an empty stomach at least 30-60 minutes prior to eating for optimal absorption.
If the patient is taking medications known to interfere with absorption of thyroid hormones, the recommendation is to space those out by at least 4 hours.
“The big challenge in older adults is that many of them do experience polypharmacy, being at risk for multiple drug-drug interactions,” Dr. Papaleontiou said.
“Physicians and patients should be vigilant and communicate closely every time there is initiation of a new medication or supplement to consider whether there may be interference.”
The authors have reported no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Hoang has reported being a speaker for Acella Pharmaceuticals.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
, potentially compromising treatment decisions, new research shows.
“We know from previous studies that thyroid hormone use is common in older adults and that there are a multitude of medications that can interfere with thyroid function tests in different ways,” senior author Maria Papaleontiou, MD, told Medscape Medical News.
“However, to our knowledge, the extent of concurrent use of thyroid hormone and interfering medications in older adults, age 65 years and older, has not been previously explored,” added Dr. Papaleontiou, of the Division of Metabolism, Endocrinology and Diabetes, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
The findings were presented as a poster during virtual ENDO 2021, the Endocrine Society’s annual meeting.
Commenting on the study, Thanh Duc Hoang, DO, an endocrinologist with the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, in Bethesda, Md., said: “It is important for clinicians to be aware of various interactions and interferences of medications affecting the accuracy of thyroid function tests.”
“If patients are not able to discontinue the medications shortly before the bloodwork, the clinicians may consider ordering different thyroid tests or assays that avoid the interferences,” he told Medscape Medical News.
32% of patients taking meds that could interfere with tests
In evaluating data on 538,137 patients treated with thyroid hormones from the Corporate Data Warehouse of the Veterans Health Administration, spanning 2004-2017, first author Rachel Beeson, MD, and colleagues with the University of Michigan found most patients in the study were men (96.5%), White (77.1%), and had two or more comorbidities (62.6%).
Of this total, 170,261 (31.6%) patients treated with thyroid hormones, over a median follow-up of 56 months, were taking at least one drug that could potentially interfere with thyroid function tests.
Among the drugs with potential thyroid test interference, about 28% of patients were taking prednisone or prednisolone, 8% were taking amiodarone, and 1.42% were taking phenytoin. Other reported drugs that could potentially interfere included carbamazepine (0.91%), phenobarbital (0.15%), lithium (0.40%), and tamoxifen (0.11%).
Multivariate analysis showed that characteristics associated with those most likely to have concurrent medication use included non-Whites (OR, 1.18 vs Whites), Hispanic ethnicity (OR 1.11 vs non-Hispanic), female sex (OR 1.12 vs males), and presence of comorbidities (eg, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score ≥ 2, OR, 2.47 vs score of 0).
Meanwhile, older patients age 85 years and over had a lower likelihood of concurrent medications interfering with thyroid tests (OR, 0.47 vs age 65-74 years).
The findings are concerning given the wide use of levothyroxine to treat hypothyroidism, which is the most widely prescribed drug in the United States.
“Our findings not only highlight the complexity of thyroid hormone management in older adults in the context of polypharmacy and multimorbidity, but they also draw attention to vulnerable groups for this practice, which included female patients, non-Whites, patients of Hispanic ethnicity, and patients with comorbidities,” Dr. Papaleontiou said.
Nature of interference possibilities varies
Medications or supplements can interfere with thyroid function tests in a variety of ways, she explained. “Some medications could lead to a decrease in the absorption of levothyroxine, others may affect how well the pill dissolves.”
In addition, certain medications can affect the circulation of thyroid hormone in the blood and how it binds with proteins, or they can lead to decreasing thyroid hormone levels due to a variety of interactions.
And in contrast, “What is even more challenging is that some medications or supplements may appear to affect thyroid function based on lab tests when in reality they don’t actually affect thyroid function and may lead to dose adjustments unnecessarily,” Dr. Papaleontiou noted.
Recommendations to counter interference
Current recommendations to try to counter the effects of polypharmacy on thyroid treatment include advising patients to take thyroid hormones on an empty stomach at least 30-60 minutes prior to eating for optimal absorption.
If the patient is taking medications known to interfere with absorption of thyroid hormones, the recommendation is to space those out by at least 4 hours.
“The big challenge in older adults is that many of them do experience polypharmacy, being at risk for multiple drug-drug interactions,” Dr. Papaleontiou said.
“Physicians and patients should be vigilant and communicate closely every time there is initiation of a new medication or supplement to consider whether there may be interference.”
The authors have reported no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Hoang has reported being a speaker for Acella Pharmaceuticals.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
, potentially compromising treatment decisions, new research shows.
“We know from previous studies that thyroid hormone use is common in older adults and that there are a multitude of medications that can interfere with thyroid function tests in different ways,” senior author Maria Papaleontiou, MD, told Medscape Medical News.
“However, to our knowledge, the extent of concurrent use of thyroid hormone and interfering medications in older adults, age 65 years and older, has not been previously explored,” added Dr. Papaleontiou, of the Division of Metabolism, Endocrinology and Diabetes, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
The findings were presented as a poster during virtual ENDO 2021, the Endocrine Society’s annual meeting.
Commenting on the study, Thanh Duc Hoang, DO, an endocrinologist with the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, in Bethesda, Md., said: “It is important for clinicians to be aware of various interactions and interferences of medications affecting the accuracy of thyroid function tests.”
“If patients are not able to discontinue the medications shortly before the bloodwork, the clinicians may consider ordering different thyroid tests or assays that avoid the interferences,” he told Medscape Medical News.
32% of patients taking meds that could interfere with tests
In evaluating data on 538,137 patients treated with thyroid hormones from the Corporate Data Warehouse of the Veterans Health Administration, spanning 2004-2017, first author Rachel Beeson, MD, and colleagues with the University of Michigan found most patients in the study were men (96.5%), White (77.1%), and had two or more comorbidities (62.6%).
Of this total, 170,261 (31.6%) patients treated with thyroid hormones, over a median follow-up of 56 months, were taking at least one drug that could potentially interfere with thyroid function tests.
Among the drugs with potential thyroid test interference, about 28% of patients were taking prednisone or prednisolone, 8% were taking amiodarone, and 1.42% were taking phenytoin. Other reported drugs that could potentially interfere included carbamazepine (0.91%), phenobarbital (0.15%), lithium (0.40%), and tamoxifen (0.11%).
Multivariate analysis showed that characteristics associated with those most likely to have concurrent medication use included non-Whites (OR, 1.18 vs Whites), Hispanic ethnicity (OR 1.11 vs non-Hispanic), female sex (OR 1.12 vs males), and presence of comorbidities (eg, Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score ≥ 2, OR, 2.47 vs score of 0).
Meanwhile, older patients age 85 years and over had a lower likelihood of concurrent medications interfering with thyroid tests (OR, 0.47 vs age 65-74 years).
The findings are concerning given the wide use of levothyroxine to treat hypothyroidism, which is the most widely prescribed drug in the United States.
“Our findings not only highlight the complexity of thyroid hormone management in older adults in the context of polypharmacy and multimorbidity, but they also draw attention to vulnerable groups for this practice, which included female patients, non-Whites, patients of Hispanic ethnicity, and patients with comorbidities,” Dr. Papaleontiou said.
Nature of interference possibilities varies
Medications or supplements can interfere with thyroid function tests in a variety of ways, she explained. “Some medications could lead to a decrease in the absorption of levothyroxine, others may affect how well the pill dissolves.”
In addition, certain medications can affect the circulation of thyroid hormone in the blood and how it binds with proteins, or they can lead to decreasing thyroid hormone levels due to a variety of interactions.
And in contrast, “What is even more challenging is that some medications or supplements may appear to affect thyroid function based on lab tests when in reality they don’t actually affect thyroid function and may lead to dose adjustments unnecessarily,” Dr. Papaleontiou noted.
Recommendations to counter interference
Current recommendations to try to counter the effects of polypharmacy on thyroid treatment include advising patients to take thyroid hormones on an empty stomach at least 30-60 minutes prior to eating for optimal absorption.
If the patient is taking medications known to interfere with absorption of thyroid hormones, the recommendation is to space those out by at least 4 hours.
“The big challenge in older adults is that many of them do experience polypharmacy, being at risk for multiple drug-drug interactions,” Dr. Papaleontiou said.
“Physicians and patients should be vigilant and communicate closely every time there is initiation of a new medication or supplement to consider whether there may be interference.”
The authors have reported no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Hoang has reported being a speaker for Acella Pharmaceuticals.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Sun exposure linked to reduced pediatric MS risk
, research shows. The use of sunscreen does not appear to affect the risk.
“This is the first study, as far as we are aware, to investigate the effect of sun exposure in pediatric MS,” first author Prince Sebastian, of the ANU Medical School, Australian National University, Canberra, said during a presentation at the meeting held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
“In order to reduce the incidence of MS, parents should be encouraged to allow their children to spend at least 30 minutes outdoors in the sun every day, while using adequate sun protection,” Mr. Sebastian said.
“This is especially important for children with a family history of MS,” he said. As the findings show, “you can use adequate sun protection and still get the benefit of sun exposure in terms of MS risk reduction.”
Low sun exposure, exposure to ultraviolet light, and vitamin D have been well established as modifiable risk factors for MS in adults. However, research is lacking on the effect of these factors upon patients younger than 18 years who have pediatric MS, a less common form of the disease. Pediatric MS constitutes about 5% of all MS cases.
To investigate the issue, Mr. Sebastian and colleagues evaluated data on 332 patients with pediatric MS who were between the ages of 4 and 22 years. The patients were enrolled at 16 MS centers around the United States. They were compared by sex and age with 534 control persons aged 3-22 years who did not have MS.
For the patients with MS, the median disease duration was 7.3 months, and 63% were female. The median age of the patients was 15.9 years.
Compared with those who did not have MS, patients with MS were significantly less likely to have been exposed to cigarette smoke (17.8% vs. 14.2%). They were significantly more likely to be overweight (23.8% vs. 14.2%), and the median anti-VCA level was higher (3.7 vs. 2.2).
Those who were exposed to the sun during the most recent summer for a duration of 30 minutes to 1 hour daily, as determined on the basis of self-report or parent report, had a 2.6-fold reduced risk of having MS, compared with those who spent less than 30 minutes outdoors daily (odds ratio, 0.39; P < .05), after adjusting for age, sex, birth season, the child’s skin color, the mother’s education, smoke exposure, being overweight, and Epstein-Barr virus infection.
Sun exposure for 1-2 hours daily was associated with a 7.4-fold reduced risk for MS, compared with exposure of 30 minutes or less (OR, 0.13; P < .001).
The odds were similar for those with 2-3 hours of sun exposure (OR, 0.21; P < .001) and for those with more than 3 hours of daily exposure (OR, 0.14; P < .001), versus less than 30 minutes.
Mr. Sebastian and his team also assessed the role of summer ambient levels of UV light and whether such exposure conferred a similar degree of protection. The risk for MS was lower among those who were exposed to higher summer ambient UV levels than among those exposed to lower levels (OR, 0.80; P = .046).
He noted, “Based on the results, individuals residing in Florida (28° N) would have 20% lower odds of MS, compared with an individual residing in New York (40° N).”
Interestingly, median rates of the use of sun protection were similar for the participants with MS and those without MS (OR, 0.95), suggesting that the use of sunscreen did not reduce the protective effect of sun exposure.
“We predicted that greater use of protection would limit effective sun exposure and would therefore increase MS risk,” Mr. Sebastian said, “but we don’t see that, and it’s probably because someone who uses sun protection likely gets more sun exposure anyway.”
“Our results suggest that you can use adequate sun protection and still get most of the benefit in terms of MS prevention, which is quite encouraging,” he added.
For those with MS, median serum 25(OH)D levels were higher (27.7 ng/mL vs. 23.7 ng/mL; P < .001), but Mr. Sebastian noted that this difference was likely attributable to the use of vitamin D supplementation after an MS diagnosis. An important limitation of the study was a lack of data on supplementation.
Stronger effect of frequent sun protection
Previous studies have shown a link between sun exposure and MS. A study published in 2018 compared 2,251 patients with MS with 4,028 control persons who did not have MS. The participants were in Canada, Italy, and Norway.
In that study, for most of the patients with MS, the age of onset was older than 18 years. In that study, there was a nearly 50% increased risk among those with the lowest degree of summer sun exposure in comparison with those who had the highest level of exposure (risk ratio, 1.47).
Contrary to the current study, that study did show an effect of the use of sun protection – those with the lowest degree of sun exposure during summer and winter and the highest use of sun protection had the highest risk for MS. They had a 76% increased risk, compared with those who had the highest degree of sun exposure and the least use of sun protection (RR, 1.76).
Sandra Magalhaes, PhD, of the University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, Canada, who was first author on that study, noted that the new study of pediatric MS adds valuable evidence on the issue.
“This study is important, as it adds to the etiological literature on MS implicating relevance of sun exposure,” Dr. Magalhaes said.
“We have a number of studies that have demonstrated an important effect of reduced levels of sun exposure and increased risk of MS. However, these studies focus on adult-onset MS populations; rather, the new study adds to the existing literature, as it also implicates sun exposure in etiology of pediatric-onset MS,” she said.
Notably, their previous work, unlike the current study, showed that, among those who experienced low levels of sun exposure, the risk for MS was higher for those who used sunscreen frequently.
“Overall, in their limited time outdoors, use of sunscreen may further increase risk of MS, which makes sense, since limited time outdoors in less sun, adding sun protection means [exposure to] even less sun.”
The findings of both studies support the bulk of research indicating that sun exposure is beneficial with regard to MS.
“There is a need for promoting balanced safe sun practices to reduce disease burden, especially in countries and cultures where children spend a lot of time indoors,” Dr. Magalhaes said. “Sun exposure has a number of important physiological roles, including vitamin D synthesis but also immune system functioning.”
Mr. Sebastian and Dr. Magalhaes have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
, research shows. The use of sunscreen does not appear to affect the risk.
“This is the first study, as far as we are aware, to investigate the effect of sun exposure in pediatric MS,” first author Prince Sebastian, of the ANU Medical School, Australian National University, Canberra, said during a presentation at the meeting held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
“In order to reduce the incidence of MS, parents should be encouraged to allow their children to spend at least 30 minutes outdoors in the sun every day, while using adequate sun protection,” Mr. Sebastian said.
“This is especially important for children with a family history of MS,” he said. As the findings show, “you can use adequate sun protection and still get the benefit of sun exposure in terms of MS risk reduction.”
Low sun exposure, exposure to ultraviolet light, and vitamin D have been well established as modifiable risk factors for MS in adults. However, research is lacking on the effect of these factors upon patients younger than 18 years who have pediatric MS, a less common form of the disease. Pediatric MS constitutes about 5% of all MS cases.
To investigate the issue, Mr. Sebastian and colleagues evaluated data on 332 patients with pediatric MS who were between the ages of 4 and 22 years. The patients were enrolled at 16 MS centers around the United States. They were compared by sex and age with 534 control persons aged 3-22 years who did not have MS.
For the patients with MS, the median disease duration was 7.3 months, and 63% were female. The median age of the patients was 15.9 years.
Compared with those who did not have MS, patients with MS were significantly less likely to have been exposed to cigarette smoke (17.8% vs. 14.2%). They were significantly more likely to be overweight (23.8% vs. 14.2%), and the median anti-VCA level was higher (3.7 vs. 2.2).
Those who were exposed to the sun during the most recent summer for a duration of 30 minutes to 1 hour daily, as determined on the basis of self-report or parent report, had a 2.6-fold reduced risk of having MS, compared with those who spent less than 30 minutes outdoors daily (odds ratio, 0.39; P < .05), after adjusting for age, sex, birth season, the child’s skin color, the mother’s education, smoke exposure, being overweight, and Epstein-Barr virus infection.
Sun exposure for 1-2 hours daily was associated with a 7.4-fold reduced risk for MS, compared with exposure of 30 minutes or less (OR, 0.13; P < .001).
The odds were similar for those with 2-3 hours of sun exposure (OR, 0.21; P < .001) and for those with more than 3 hours of daily exposure (OR, 0.14; P < .001), versus less than 30 minutes.
Mr. Sebastian and his team also assessed the role of summer ambient levels of UV light and whether such exposure conferred a similar degree of protection. The risk for MS was lower among those who were exposed to higher summer ambient UV levels than among those exposed to lower levels (OR, 0.80; P = .046).
He noted, “Based on the results, individuals residing in Florida (28° N) would have 20% lower odds of MS, compared with an individual residing in New York (40° N).”
Interestingly, median rates of the use of sun protection were similar for the participants with MS and those without MS (OR, 0.95), suggesting that the use of sunscreen did not reduce the protective effect of sun exposure.
“We predicted that greater use of protection would limit effective sun exposure and would therefore increase MS risk,” Mr. Sebastian said, “but we don’t see that, and it’s probably because someone who uses sun protection likely gets more sun exposure anyway.”
“Our results suggest that you can use adequate sun protection and still get most of the benefit in terms of MS prevention, which is quite encouraging,” he added.
For those with MS, median serum 25(OH)D levels were higher (27.7 ng/mL vs. 23.7 ng/mL; P < .001), but Mr. Sebastian noted that this difference was likely attributable to the use of vitamin D supplementation after an MS diagnosis. An important limitation of the study was a lack of data on supplementation.
Stronger effect of frequent sun protection
Previous studies have shown a link between sun exposure and MS. A study published in 2018 compared 2,251 patients with MS with 4,028 control persons who did not have MS. The participants were in Canada, Italy, and Norway.
In that study, for most of the patients with MS, the age of onset was older than 18 years. In that study, there was a nearly 50% increased risk among those with the lowest degree of summer sun exposure in comparison with those who had the highest level of exposure (risk ratio, 1.47).
Contrary to the current study, that study did show an effect of the use of sun protection – those with the lowest degree of sun exposure during summer and winter and the highest use of sun protection had the highest risk for MS. They had a 76% increased risk, compared with those who had the highest degree of sun exposure and the least use of sun protection (RR, 1.76).
Sandra Magalhaes, PhD, of the University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, Canada, who was first author on that study, noted that the new study of pediatric MS adds valuable evidence on the issue.
“This study is important, as it adds to the etiological literature on MS implicating relevance of sun exposure,” Dr. Magalhaes said.
“We have a number of studies that have demonstrated an important effect of reduced levels of sun exposure and increased risk of MS. However, these studies focus on adult-onset MS populations; rather, the new study adds to the existing literature, as it also implicates sun exposure in etiology of pediatric-onset MS,” she said.
Notably, their previous work, unlike the current study, showed that, among those who experienced low levels of sun exposure, the risk for MS was higher for those who used sunscreen frequently.
“Overall, in their limited time outdoors, use of sunscreen may further increase risk of MS, which makes sense, since limited time outdoors in less sun, adding sun protection means [exposure to] even less sun.”
The findings of both studies support the bulk of research indicating that sun exposure is beneficial with regard to MS.
“There is a need for promoting balanced safe sun practices to reduce disease burden, especially in countries and cultures where children spend a lot of time indoors,” Dr. Magalhaes said. “Sun exposure has a number of important physiological roles, including vitamin D synthesis but also immune system functioning.”
Mr. Sebastian and Dr. Magalhaes have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
, research shows. The use of sunscreen does not appear to affect the risk.
“This is the first study, as far as we are aware, to investigate the effect of sun exposure in pediatric MS,” first author Prince Sebastian, of the ANU Medical School, Australian National University, Canberra, said during a presentation at the meeting held by the Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.
“In order to reduce the incidence of MS, parents should be encouraged to allow their children to spend at least 30 minutes outdoors in the sun every day, while using adequate sun protection,” Mr. Sebastian said.
“This is especially important for children with a family history of MS,” he said. As the findings show, “you can use adequate sun protection and still get the benefit of sun exposure in terms of MS risk reduction.”
Low sun exposure, exposure to ultraviolet light, and vitamin D have been well established as modifiable risk factors for MS in adults. However, research is lacking on the effect of these factors upon patients younger than 18 years who have pediatric MS, a less common form of the disease. Pediatric MS constitutes about 5% of all MS cases.
To investigate the issue, Mr. Sebastian and colleagues evaluated data on 332 patients with pediatric MS who were between the ages of 4 and 22 years. The patients were enrolled at 16 MS centers around the United States. They were compared by sex and age with 534 control persons aged 3-22 years who did not have MS.
For the patients with MS, the median disease duration was 7.3 months, and 63% were female. The median age of the patients was 15.9 years.
Compared with those who did not have MS, patients with MS were significantly less likely to have been exposed to cigarette smoke (17.8% vs. 14.2%). They were significantly more likely to be overweight (23.8% vs. 14.2%), and the median anti-VCA level was higher (3.7 vs. 2.2).
Those who were exposed to the sun during the most recent summer for a duration of 30 minutes to 1 hour daily, as determined on the basis of self-report or parent report, had a 2.6-fold reduced risk of having MS, compared with those who spent less than 30 minutes outdoors daily (odds ratio, 0.39; P < .05), after adjusting for age, sex, birth season, the child’s skin color, the mother’s education, smoke exposure, being overweight, and Epstein-Barr virus infection.
Sun exposure for 1-2 hours daily was associated with a 7.4-fold reduced risk for MS, compared with exposure of 30 minutes or less (OR, 0.13; P < .001).
The odds were similar for those with 2-3 hours of sun exposure (OR, 0.21; P < .001) and for those with more than 3 hours of daily exposure (OR, 0.14; P < .001), versus less than 30 minutes.
Mr. Sebastian and his team also assessed the role of summer ambient levels of UV light and whether such exposure conferred a similar degree of protection. The risk for MS was lower among those who were exposed to higher summer ambient UV levels than among those exposed to lower levels (OR, 0.80; P = .046).
He noted, “Based on the results, individuals residing in Florida (28° N) would have 20% lower odds of MS, compared with an individual residing in New York (40° N).”
Interestingly, median rates of the use of sun protection were similar for the participants with MS and those without MS (OR, 0.95), suggesting that the use of sunscreen did not reduce the protective effect of sun exposure.
“We predicted that greater use of protection would limit effective sun exposure and would therefore increase MS risk,” Mr. Sebastian said, “but we don’t see that, and it’s probably because someone who uses sun protection likely gets more sun exposure anyway.”
“Our results suggest that you can use adequate sun protection and still get most of the benefit in terms of MS prevention, which is quite encouraging,” he added.
For those with MS, median serum 25(OH)D levels were higher (27.7 ng/mL vs. 23.7 ng/mL; P < .001), but Mr. Sebastian noted that this difference was likely attributable to the use of vitamin D supplementation after an MS diagnosis. An important limitation of the study was a lack of data on supplementation.
Stronger effect of frequent sun protection
Previous studies have shown a link between sun exposure and MS. A study published in 2018 compared 2,251 patients with MS with 4,028 control persons who did not have MS. The participants were in Canada, Italy, and Norway.
In that study, for most of the patients with MS, the age of onset was older than 18 years. In that study, there was a nearly 50% increased risk among those with the lowest degree of summer sun exposure in comparison with those who had the highest level of exposure (risk ratio, 1.47).
Contrary to the current study, that study did show an effect of the use of sun protection – those with the lowest degree of sun exposure during summer and winter and the highest use of sun protection had the highest risk for MS. They had a 76% increased risk, compared with those who had the highest degree of sun exposure and the least use of sun protection (RR, 1.76).
Sandra Magalhaes, PhD, of the University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, Canada, who was first author on that study, noted that the new study of pediatric MS adds valuable evidence on the issue.
“This study is important, as it adds to the etiological literature on MS implicating relevance of sun exposure,” Dr. Magalhaes said.
“We have a number of studies that have demonstrated an important effect of reduced levels of sun exposure and increased risk of MS. However, these studies focus on adult-onset MS populations; rather, the new study adds to the existing literature, as it also implicates sun exposure in etiology of pediatric-onset MS,” she said.
Notably, their previous work, unlike the current study, showed that, among those who experienced low levels of sun exposure, the risk for MS was higher for those who used sunscreen frequently.
“Overall, in their limited time outdoors, use of sunscreen may further increase risk of MS, which makes sense, since limited time outdoors in less sun, adding sun protection means [exposure to] even less sun.”
The findings of both studies support the bulk of research indicating that sun exposure is beneficial with regard to MS.
“There is a need for promoting balanced safe sun practices to reduce disease burden, especially in countries and cultures where children spend a lot of time indoors,” Dr. Magalhaes said. “Sun exposure has a number of important physiological roles, including vitamin D synthesis but also immune system functioning.”
Mr. Sebastian and Dr. Magalhaes have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM ACTRIMS FORUM 2021