User login
Bringing you the latest news, research and reviews, exclusive interviews, podcasts, quizzes, and more.
Does adherence to a Mediterranean diet reduce the risk of Parkinson’s disease?
Among older adults, adherence to a Mediterranean diet is associated with lower probability of prodromal Parkinson’s disease, according to research published in Movement Disorders.
“Recommending the Mediterranean diet pattern, either to reduce the risk or lessen the effects ... of prodromal Parkinson’s disease, needs to be considered and further explored,” said lead author Maria I. Maraki, PhD, of the department of nutrition and dietetics at Harokopio University in Athens, Greece, and her research colleagues.
Evidence regarding the effect of a Mediterranean diet on Parkinson’s disease risk remains limited, however, and physicians should be cautious in interpreting the data, researchers noted in accompanying editorials.
“There is a puzzling constellation of information and data that cannot be reconciled with a simple model accounting for the role of diet, vascular risk factors, and the neurodegenerative process and mechanisms underlying Parkinson’s disease,” Connie Marras, MD, PhD, and Jose A. Obeso, MD, PhD, said in an editorial. Given Maraki et al.’s findings, “most of us would be glad to accept that such a causal inverse association exists and can therefore be strongly recommended to our patients,” but “further work is needed before definitive conclusions can be reached,” Dr. Marras and Dr. Obeso wrote. Dr. Marras is affiliated with the University Health Network and the University of Toronto. Dr. Obeso is affiliated with University Hospital HM Puerta del Sur, CEU San Pablo University, Móstoles, Spain.
The role of diet
Prior research has suggested that adherence to the Mediterranean diet – characterized by consumption of nonrefined cereals, fruits, vegetables, legumes, potatoes, fish, and olive oil – may be associated with reduced risk of Parkinson’s disease. In addition, studies have found that adherence to the Mediterranean diet may be protective in other diseases, including dementia and cardiovascular disease. Dr. Maraki and her colleagues sought to assess whether adherence to the Mediterranean diet is associated with the likelihood of prodromal Parkinson’s disease or its manifestations. To calculate the probability of prodromal Parkinson’s disease, the investigators used a tool created by the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society (MDS) that takes into account baseline risk factors as well as prodromal markers such as constipation and motor slowing.
They analyzed data from 1,731 participants in the population-based Hellenic Longitudinal Investigation of Aging and Diet (HELIAD) cohort in Greece. Participants, 41% of whom were male, were aged 65 years or older and did not have Parkinson’s disease. They completed a detailed food frequency questionnaire, and the researchers calculated how closely each participant’s diet adhered to the Mediterranean diet. Diet adherence scores ranged from 0 to 55, with higher scores indicating greater adherence.
The median probability of prodromal Parkinson’s disease was 1.9% (range, 0.2%-96.7%), and the probability was lower among those with greater adherence to the Mediterranean diet. This difference was “driven mostly by nonmotor markers of prodromal Parkinson’s disease,” including depression, constipation, urinary dysfunction, and daytime somnolence, the researchers said. “Each unit increase in Mediterranean diet score was associated with a 2% decreased probability for prodromal Parkinson’s disease.” Compared with participants in the lowest quartile of Mediterranean diet adherence, those in the highest quartile had an approximately 21% lower probability for prodromal Parkinson’s disease.
Potential confounding
“This study pushes the prodromal criteria into performing a job they were never designed to do,” which presents potential pitfalls, Ronald B. Postuma, MD, of the department of neurology at Montreal General Hospital in Quebec, said in an accompanying editorial.
While the MDS criteria were designed to assess the likelihood that any person over age 50 years is in a state of prodromal Parkinson’s disease, the present study aimed to evaluate whether a single putative risk factor for Parkinson’s disease is associated with the likelihood of its prodromal state.
In addition, the analysis did not include some of the prodromal markers that are part of the MDS criteria, including olfaction, polysomnographic-proven REM sleep behavior disorder, and dopaminergic functional neuroimaging.
“As pointed out by the researchers, many of the risk factors in the prodromal criteria are potentially confounded by factors other than Parkinson’s disease; for example, one could imagine that older people, men, or farmers (with their higher pesticide exposure) are less likely to follow the Mediterranean diet simply because of different cultural lifestyle patterns,” Dr. Postuma said.
It is also possible that the Mediterranean diet affects prodromal markers such as constipation, sleep, or depression without affecting underlying neurodegenerative disease. In any case, the effect sizes observed in the study were small, and there was no evidence that participants who adhered most closely to a Mediterranean diet had less parkinsonism, Dr. Postuma said.
These limitations do not preclude physicians from recommending the diet for other reasons. “Numerous studies, reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials consistently rank the Mediterranean diet as among the healthiest diets available,” Dr. Postuma said. “So, one can clearly recommend diets such as these, even if not necessarily for Parkinson’s disease prevention.”
Adding insights
The researchers used a Mediterranean diet score that was developed in a population of adults from metropolitan Athens, “an area not unlike the one in which the score is being applied in the HELIAD study,” Christy C. Tangney, PhD, professor of clinical nutrition and preventive medicine and associate dean for research at Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, said in a separate editorial. As expected, the average Mediterranean diet adherence score in this study was higher than that in the Chicago Health and Aging Project (33.2 vs. 28.2).
“If we can identify differences in diet or lifestyle patterns and risk of this latent phase of Parkinson’s disease neurodegeneration, we may be one step closer to identifying preventive measures,” she said. Follow-up reports from HELIAD and other cohorts may allow researchers to assess how changes in dietary patterns relate to changes in Parkinson’s disease markers, the probability of prodromal Parkinson’s disease, and incident Parkinson’s disease, Dr. Tangney said.
The study authors had no conflicts of interest or financial disclosures. The study was supported by a grant from the Alzheimer’s Association, an ESPA‐EU grant cofunded by the European Social Fund and Greek National resources, and a grant from the Ministry for Health and Social Solidarity (Greece). Dr. Maraki and a coauthor have received financial support from the Greek State Scholarships Foundation. Dr. Tangney and Dr. Postuma had no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Maraki MI et al. Mov Disord. 2018 Oct 10. doi: 10.1002/mds.27489.
Among older adults, adherence to a Mediterranean diet is associated with lower probability of prodromal Parkinson’s disease, according to research published in Movement Disorders.
“Recommending the Mediterranean diet pattern, either to reduce the risk or lessen the effects ... of prodromal Parkinson’s disease, needs to be considered and further explored,” said lead author Maria I. Maraki, PhD, of the department of nutrition and dietetics at Harokopio University in Athens, Greece, and her research colleagues.
Evidence regarding the effect of a Mediterranean diet on Parkinson’s disease risk remains limited, however, and physicians should be cautious in interpreting the data, researchers noted in accompanying editorials.
“There is a puzzling constellation of information and data that cannot be reconciled with a simple model accounting for the role of diet, vascular risk factors, and the neurodegenerative process and mechanisms underlying Parkinson’s disease,” Connie Marras, MD, PhD, and Jose A. Obeso, MD, PhD, said in an editorial. Given Maraki et al.’s findings, “most of us would be glad to accept that such a causal inverse association exists and can therefore be strongly recommended to our patients,” but “further work is needed before definitive conclusions can be reached,” Dr. Marras and Dr. Obeso wrote. Dr. Marras is affiliated with the University Health Network and the University of Toronto. Dr. Obeso is affiliated with University Hospital HM Puerta del Sur, CEU San Pablo University, Móstoles, Spain.
The role of diet
Prior research has suggested that adherence to the Mediterranean diet – characterized by consumption of nonrefined cereals, fruits, vegetables, legumes, potatoes, fish, and olive oil – may be associated with reduced risk of Parkinson’s disease. In addition, studies have found that adherence to the Mediterranean diet may be protective in other diseases, including dementia and cardiovascular disease. Dr. Maraki and her colleagues sought to assess whether adherence to the Mediterranean diet is associated with the likelihood of prodromal Parkinson’s disease or its manifestations. To calculate the probability of prodromal Parkinson’s disease, the investigators used a tool created by the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society (MDS) that takes into account baseline risk factors as well as prodromal markers such as constipation and motor slowing.
They analyzed data from 1,731 participants in the population-based Hellenic Longitudinal Investigation of Aging and Diet (HELIAD) cohort in Greece. Participants, 41% of whom were male, were aged 65 years or older and did not have Parkinson’s disease. They completed a detailed food frequency questionnaire, and the researchers calculated how closely each participant’s diet adhered to the Mediterranean diet. Diet adherence scores ranged from 0 to 55, with higher scores indicating greater adherence.
The median probability of prodromal Parkinson’s disease was 1.9% (range, 0.2%-96.7%), and the probability was lower among those with greater adherence to the Mediterranean diet. This difference was “driven mostly by nonmotor markers of prodromal Parkinson’s disease,” including depression, constipation, urinary dysfunction, and daytime somnolence, the researchers said. “Each unit increase in Mediterranean diet score was associated with a 2% decreased probability for prodromal Parkinson’s disease.” Compared with participants in the lowest quartile of Mediterranean diet adherence, those in the highest quartile had an approximately 21% lower probability for prodromal Parkinson’s disease.
Potential confounding
“This study pushes the prodromal criteria into performing a job they were never designed to do,” which presents potential pitfalls, Ronald B. Postuma, MD, of the department of neurology at Montreal General Hospital in Quebec, said in an accompanying editorial.
While the MDS criteria were designed to assess the likelihood that any person over age 50 years is in a state of prodromal Parkinson’s disease, the present study aimed to evaluate whether a single putative risk factor for Parkinson’s disease is associated with the likelihood of its prodromal state.
In addition, the analysis did not include some of the prodromal markers that are part of the MDS criteria, including olfaction, polysomnographic-proven REM sleep behavior disorder, and dopaminergic functional neuroimaging.
“As pointed out by the researchers, many of the risk factors in the prodromal criteria are potentially confounded by factors other than Parkinson’s disease; for example, one could imagine that older people, men, or farmers (with their higher pesticide exposure) are less likely to follow the Mediterranean diet simply because of different cultural lifestyle patterns,” Dr. Postuma said.
It is also possible that the Mediterranean diet affects prodromal markers such as constipation, sleep, or depression without affecting underlying neurodegenerative disease. In any case, the effect sizes observed in the study were small, and there was no evidence that participants who adhered most closely to a Mediterranean diet had less parkinsonism, Dr. Postuma said.
These limitations do not preclude physicians from recommending the diet for other reasons. “Numerous studies, reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials consistently rank the Mediterranean diet as among the healthiest diets available,” Dr. Postuma said. “So, one can clearly recommend diets such as these, even if not necessarily for Parkinson’s disease prevention.”
Adding insights
The researchers used a Mediterranean diet score that was developed in a population of adults from metropolitan Athens, “an area not unlike the one in which the score is being applied in the HELIAD study,” Christy C. Tangney, PhD, professor of clinical nutrition and preventive medicine and associate dean for research at Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, said in a separate editorial. As expected, the average Mediterranean diet adherence score in this study was higher than that in the Chicago Health and Aging Project (33.2 vs. 28.2).
“If we can identify differences in diet or lifestyle patterns and risk of this latent phase of Parkinson’s disease neurodegeneration, we may be one step closer to identifying preventive measures,” she said. Follow-up reports from HELIAD and other cohorts may allow researchers to assess how changes in dietary patterns relate to changes in Parkinson’s disease markers, the probability of prodromal Parkinson’s disease, and incident Parkinson’s disease, Dr. Tangney said.
The study authors had no conflicts of interest or financial disclosures. The study was supported by a grant from the Alzheimer’s Association, an ESPA‐EU grant cofunded by the European Social Fund and Greek National resources, and a grant from the Ministry for Health and Social Solidarity (Greece). Dr. Maraki and a coauthor have received financial support from the Greek State Scholarships Foundation. Dr. Tangney and Dr. Postuma had no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Maraki MI et al. Mov Disord. 2018 Oct 10. doi: 10.1002/mds.27489.
Among older adults, adherence to a Mediterranean diet is associated with lower probability of prodromal Parkinson’s disease, according to research published in Movement Disorders.
“Recommending the Mediterranean diet pattern, either to reduce the risk or lessen the effects ... of prodromal Parkinson’s disease, needs to be considered and further explored,” said lead author Maria I. Maraki, PhD, of the department of nutrition and dietetics at Harokopio University in Athens, Greece, and her research colleagues.
Evidence regarding the effect of a Mediterranean diet on Parkinson’s disease risk remains limited, however, and physicians should be cautious in interpreting the data, researchers noted in accompanying editorials.
“There is a puzzling constellation of information and data that cannot be reconciled with a simple model accounting for the role of diet, vascular risk factors, and the neurodegenerative process and mechanisms underlying Parkinson’s disease,” Connie Marras, MD, PhD, and Jose A. Obeso, MD, PhD, said in an editorial. Given Maraki et al.’s findings, “most of us would be glad to accept that such a causal inverse association exists and can therefore be strongly recommended to our patients,” but “further work is needed before definitive conclusions can be reached,” Dr. Marras and Dr. Obeso wrote. Dr. Marras is affiliated with the University Health Network and the University of Toronto. Dr. Obeso is affiliated with University Hospital HM Puerta del Sur, CEU San Pablo University, Móstoles, Spain.
The role of diet
Prior research has suggested that adherence to the Mediterranean diet – characterized by consumption of nonrefined cereals, fruits, vegetables, legumes, potatoes, fish, and olive oil – may be associated with reduced risk of Parkinson’s disease. In addition, studies have found that adherence to the Mediterranean diet may be protective in other diseases, including dementia and cardiovascular disease. Dr. Maraki and her colleagues sought to assess whether adherence to the Mediterranean diet is associated with the likelihood of prodromal Parkinson’s disease or its manifestations. To calculate the probability of prodromal Parkinson’s disease, the investigators used a tool created by the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society (MDS) that takes into account baseline risk factors as well as prodromal markers such as constipation and motor slowing.
They analyzed data from 1,731 participants in the population-based Hellenic Longitudinal Investigation of Aging and Diet (HELIAD) cohort in Greece. Participants, 41% of whom were male, were aged 65 years or older and did not have Parkinson’s disease. They completed a detailed food frequency questionnaire, and the researchers calculated how closely each participant’s diet adhered to the Mediterranean diet. Diet adherence scores ranged from 0 to 55, with higher scores indicating greater adherence.
The median probability of prodromal Parkinson’s disease was 1.9% (range, 0.2%-96.7%), and the probability was lower among those with greater adherence to the Mediterranean diet. This difference was “driven mostly by nonmotor markers of prodromal Parkinson’s disease,” including depression, constipation, urinary dysfunction, and daytime somnolence, the researchers said. “Each unit increase in Mediterranean diet score was associated with a 2% decreased probability for prodromal Parkinson’s disease.” Compared with participants in the lowest quartile of Mediterranean diet adherence, those in the highest quartile had an approximately 21% lower probability for prodromal Parkinson’s disease.
Potential confounding
“This study pushes the prodromal criteria into performing a job they were never designed to do,” which presents potential pitfalls, Ronald B. Postuma, MD, of the department of neurology at Montreal General Hospital in Quebec, said in an accompanying editorial.
While the MDS criteria were designed to assess the likelihood that any person over age 50 years is in a state of prodromal Parkinson’s disease, the present study aimed to evaluate whether a single putative risk factor for Parkinson’s disease is associated with the likelihood of its prodromal state.
In addition, the analysis did not include some of the prodromal markers that are part of the MDS criteria, including olfaction, polysomnographic-proven REM sleep behavior disorder, and dopaminergic functional neuroimaging.
“As pointed out by the researchers, many of the risk factors in the prodromal criteria are potentially confounded by factors other than Parkinson’s disease; for example, one could imagine that older people, men, or farmers (with their higher pesticide exposure) are less likely to follow the Mediterranean diet simply because of different cultural lifestyle patterns,” Dr. Postuma said.
It is also possible that the Mediterranean diet affects prodromal markers such as constipation, sleep, or depression without affecting underlying neurodegenerative disease. In any case, the effect sizes observed in the study were small, and there was no evidence that participants who adhered most closely to a Mediterranean diet had less parkinsonism, Dr. Postuma said.
These limitations do not preclude physicians from recommending the diet for other reasons. “Numerous studies, reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials consistently rank the Mediterranean diet as among the healthiest diets available,” Dr. Postuma said. “So, one can clearly recommend diets such as these, even if not necessarily for Parkinson’s disease prevention.”
Adding insights
The researchers used a Mediterranean diet score that was developed in a population of adults from metropolitan Athens, “an area not unlike the one in which the score is being applied in the HELIAD study,” Christy C. Tangney, PhD, professor of clinical nutrition and preventive medicine and associate dean for research at Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, said in a separate editorial. As expected, the average Mediterranean diet adherence score in this study was higher than that in the Chicago Health and Aging Project (33.2 vs. 28.2).
“If we can identify differences in diet or lifestyle patterns and risk of this latent phase of Parkinson’s disease neurodegeneration, we may be one step closer to identifying preventive measures,” she said. Follow-up reports from HELIAD and other cohorts may allow researchers to assess how changes in dietary patterns relate to changes in Parkinson’s disease markers, the probability of prodromal Parkinson’s disease, and incident Parkinson’s disease, Dr. Tangney said.
The study authors had no conflicts of interest or financial disclosures. The study was supported by a grant from the Alzheimer’s Association, an ESPA‐EU grant cofunded by the European Social Fund and Greek National resources, and a grant from the Ministry for Health and Social Solidarity (Greece). Dr. Maraki and a coauthor have received financial support from the Greek State Scholarships Foundation. Dr. Tangney and Dr. Postuma had no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Maraki MI et al. Mov Disord. 2018 Oct 10. doi: 10.1002/mds.27489.
FROM MOVEMENT DISORDERS
Key clinical point: Adherence to a Mediterranean diet is associated with lower probability of prodromal Parkinson’s disease.
Major finding: Each 1-unit increase in Mediterranean diet score was associated with a 2% decreased probability for prodromal Parkinson’s disease.
Study details: A study of 1,731 older adults in the population-based Hellenic Longitudinal Investigation of Aging and Diet (HELIAD) cohort in Greece.
Disclosures: The study authors had no conflicts of interest or financial disclosures. The study was supported by a grant from the Alzheimer’s Association, an ESPA‐EU grant cofunded by the European Social Fund and Greek National resources, and a grant from the Ministry for Health and Social Solidarity (Greece). Dr. Maraki and a coauthor have received financial support from the Greek State Scholarships Foundation.
Source: Maraki MI et al. Mov Disord. 2018 Oct 10. doi:10.1002/mds.27489.
Deferoxamine does not improve 90-day outcomes after ICH
HONOLULU – (ICH), according to trial results described at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association. However, the drug is safe and well tolerated and data suggest that it may improve outcomes at 180 days.
Animal studies indicate that iron, which is released from hemolyzed red blood cells, accumulates in the brain after ICH and is associated with secondary neuronal injury and death. Researchers have found that deferoxamine, an iron chelator, provides neuroprotection and improves recovery after experimental ICH. The drug also has anti-inflammatory, antiapoptotic, and BP-lowering effects. Deferoxamine has been approved since the 1960s.
Magdy H. Selim, MD, PhD, a neurologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, and colleagues hypothesized that treatment with deferoxamine could improve outcomes in patients with ICH. The researchers conducted a phase 2 clinical trial to evaluate whether deferoxamine should be studied in a phase 3 efficacy trial. In their multicenter, double-blind study, Dr. Selim and his colleagues randomized patients with spontaneous supratentorial ICH in equal groups to 32 mg/kg per day of deferoxamine or saline placebo. Treatments were administered as intravenous infusions for 3 consecutive days, and therapy was initiated within 24 hours after ICH onset. The follow-up period was 6 months.
Eligible participants had an National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of 6 or higher, a Glasgow Coma Scale score greater than 6, and had been functionally independent before the hemorrhage. The researchers excluded patients with a secondary cause for ICH or coagulopathy.
The primary endpoint in the futility analysis was the proportion of participants with a good clinical outcome – defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0-2 – at 90 days and 180 days. The secondary endpoint was good outcome, defined as an mRS score of 0-3, at 90 days. Safety endpoints included all deferoxamine-related adverse events until day 7 or discharge (whichever was earlier) and serious adverse events through day 90.
Dr. Selim and his colleagues enrolled 294 participants in their trial, 3 of whom did not receive treatment. Of these included participants, 147 (50.5%) were randomized to placebo and 144 (49.5%) were randomized to deferoxamine. Participants’ mean age was 60.3 years, and 38.5% of the population was female.
Overall, the two study arms did not differ significantly according to demographic and clinical characteristics, however, there were more nonwhite patients in the deferoxamine arm than in the placebo arm, however. In addition, thalamic hemorrhage and intraventricular hemorrhage were more common in the placebo-treated group and hemorrhages in the putamen and basal ganglia were more common in the deferoxamine-treated group.
The rates of adverse events were comparable between the two study arms. Dr. Selim and his colleagues found no unexpected safety issues. Mortality was low, and the 90-day and 180-day mortality rates were comparable between the two treatment arms.
Approximately 34% of deferoxamine-treated patients and 33% of placebo-treated patients had an mRS score of 0-2 at 90 days. The adjusted absolute risk difference between arms was 0.6%; this result did not surpass the predefined futility threshold. The risk difference between groups for mRS score of 0-2 at 180 days was 8.6% in favor of deferoxamine, which did surpass the futility threshold.
The risk difference for meeting the secondary endpoint was 6.2% in favor of deferoxamine; this result did not surpass the futility threshold. Patients in both treatment groups improved between day 90 and day 180. The likelihood of good outcome was approximately 10% higher in the deferoxamine group at day 90 and 26% higher in the deferoxamine group at day 180.
“It is futile to conduct a phase 3 trial with the anticipation that treatment with deferoxamine would improve outcome, defined as mRS score of 0-2 at 90 days,” said Dr. Selim. “These data, together with the data from MISTIE and CLEAR, suggest that ICH trials need to have a longer follow-up period to capture the full extent of recovery after ICH. Several of our secondary analyses tended to favor deferoxamine over the placebo arm and leave open the possibility that deferoxamine might lead to improved outcome at 180 days.”
The researchers received support from the NIH and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.
SOURCE: Selim MH et al. ISC 2019, Abstract LB22.
HONOLULU – (ICH), according to trial results described at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association. However, the drug is safe and well tolerated and data suggest that it may improve outcomes at 180 days.
Animal studies indicate that iron, which is released from hemolyzed red blood cells, accumulates in the brain after ICH and is associated with secondary neuronal injury and death. Researchers have found that deferoxamine, an iron chelator, provides neuroprotection and improves recovery after experimental ICH. The drug also has anti-inflammatory, antiapoptotic, and BP-lowering effects. Deferoxamine has been approved since the 1960s.
Magdy H. Selim, MD, PhD, a neurologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, and colleagues hypothesized that treatment with deferoxamine could improve outcomes in patients with ICH. The researchers conducted a phase 2 clinical trial to evaluate whether deferoxamine should be studied in a phase 3 efficacy trial. In their multicenter, double-blind study, Dr. Selim and his colleagues randomized patients with spontaneous supratentorial ICH in equal groups to 32 mg/kg per day of deferoxamine or saline placebo. Treatments were administered as intravenous infusions for 3 consecutive days, and therapy was initiated within 24 hours after ICH onset. The follow-up period was 6 months.
Eligible participants had an National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of 6 or higher, a Glasgow Coma Scale score greater than 6, and had been functionally independent before the hemorrhage. The researchers excluded patients with a secondary cause for ICH or coagulopathy.
The primary endpoint in the futility analysis was the proportion of participants with a good clinical outcome – defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0-2 – at 90 days and 180 days. The secondary endpoint was good outcome, defined as an mRS score of 0-3, at 90 days. Safety endpoints included all deferoxamine-related adverse events until day 7 or discharge (whichever was earlier) and serious adverse events through day 90.
Dr. Selim and his colleagues enrolled 294 participants in their trial, 3 of whom did not receive treatment. Of these included participants, 147 (50.5%) were randomized to placebo and 144 (49.5%) were randomized to deferoxamine. Participants’ mean age was 60.3 years, and 38.5% of the population was female.
Overall, the two study arms did not differ significantly according to demographic and clinical characteristics, however, there were more nonwhite patients in the deferoxamine arm than in the placebo arm, however. In addition, thalamic hemorrhage and intraventricular hemorrhage were more common in the placebo-treated group and hemorrhages in the putamen and basal ganglia were more common in the deferoxamine-treated group.
The rates of adverse events were comparable between the two study arms. Dr. Selim and his colleagues found no unexpected safety issues. Mortality was low, and the 90-day and 180-day mortality rates were comparable between the two treatment arms.
Approximately 34% of deferoxamine-treated patients and 33% of placebo-treated patients had an mRS score of 0-2 at 90 days. The adjusted absolute risk difference between arms was 0.6%; this result did not surpass the predefined futility threshold. The risk difference between groups for mRS score of 0-2 at 180 days was 8.6% in favor of deferoxamine, which did surpass the futility threshold.
The risk difference for meeting the secondary endpoint was 6.2% in favor of deferoxamine; this result did not surpass the futility threshold. Patients in both treatment groups improved between day 90 and day 180. The likelihood of good outcome was approximately 10% higher in the deferoxamine group at day 90 and 26% higher in the deferoxamine group at day 180.
“It is futile to conduct a phase 3 trial with the anticipation that treatment with deferoxamine would improve outcome, defined as mRS score of 0-2 at 90 days,” said Dr. Selim. “These data, together with the data from MISTIE and CLEAR, suggest that ICH trials need to have a longer follow-up period to capture the full extent of recovery after ICH. Several of our secondary analyses tended to favor deferoxamine over the placebo arm and leave open the possibility that deferoxamine might lead to improved outcome at 180 days.”
The researchers received support from the NIH and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.
SOURCE: Selim MH et al. ISC 2019, Abstract LB22.
HONOLULU – (ICH), according to trial results described at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association. However, the drug is safe and well tolerated and data suggest that it may improve outcomes at 180 days.
Animal studies indicate that iron, which is released from hemolyzed red blood cells, accumulates in the brain after ICH and is associated with secondary neuronal injury and death. Researchers have found that deferoxamine, an iron chelator, provides neuroprotection and improves recovery after experimental ICH. The drug also has anti-inflammatory, antiapoptotic, and BP-lowering effects. Deferoxamine has been approved since the 1960s.
Magdy H. Selim, MD, PhD, a neurologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, and colleagues hypothesized that treatment with deferoxamine could improve outcomes in patients with ICH. The researchers conducted a phase 2 clinical trial to evaluate whether deferoxamine should be studied in a phase 3 efficacy trial. In their multicenter, double-blind study, Dr. Selim and his colleagues randomized patients with spontaneous supratentorial ICH in equal groups to 32 mg/kg per day of deferoxamine or saline placebo. Treatments were administered as intravenous infusions for 3 consecutive days, and therapy was initiated within 24 hours after ICH onset. The follow-up period was 6 months.
Eligible participants had an National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score of 6 or higher, a Glasgow Coma Scale score greater than 6, and had been functionally independent before the hemorrhage. The researchers excluded patients with a secondary cause for ICH or coagulopathy.
The primary endpoint in the futility analysis was the proportion of participants with a good clinical outcome – defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0-2 – at 90 days and 180 days. The secondary endpoint was good outcome, defined as an mRS score of 0-3, at 90 days. Safety endpoints included all deferoxamine-related adverse events until day 7 or discharge (whichever was earlier) and serious adverse events through day 90.
Dr. Selim and his colleagues enrolled 294 participants in their trial, 3 of whom did not receive treatment. Of these included participants, 147 (50.5%) were randomized to placebo and 144 (49.5%) were randomized to deferoxamine. Participants’ mean age was 60.3 years, and 38.5% of the population was female.
Overall, the two study arms did not differ significantly according to demographic and clinical characteristics, however, there were more nonwhite patients in the deferoxamine arm than in the placebo arm, however. In addition, thalamic hemorrhage and intraventricular hemorrhage were more common in the placebo-treated group and hemorrhages in the putamen and basal ganglia were more common in the deferoxamine-treated group.
The rates of adverse events were comparable between the two study arms. Dr. Selim and his colleagues found no unexpected safety issues. Mortality was low, and the 90-day and 180-day mortality rates were comparable between the two treatment arms.
Approximately 34% of deferoxamine-treated patients and 33% of placebo-treated patients had an mRS score of 0-2 at 90 days. The adjusted absolute risk difference between arms was 0.6%; this result did not surpass the predefined futility threshold. The risk difference between groups for mRS score of 0-2 at 180 days was 8.6% in favor of deferoxamine, which did surpass the futility threshold.
The risk difference for meeting the secondary endpoint was 6.2% in favor of deferoxamine; this result did not surpass the futility threshold. Patients in both treatment groups improved between day 90 and day 180. The likelihood of good outcome was approximately 10% higher in the deferoxamine group at day 90 and 26% higher in the deferoxamine group at day 180.
“It is futile to conduct a phase 3 trial with the anticipation that treatment with deferoxamine would improve outcome, defined as mRS score of 0-2 at 90 days,” said Dr. Selim. “These data, together with the data from MISTIE and CLEAR, suggest that ICH trials need to have a longer follow-up period to capture the full extent of recovery after ICH. Several of our secondary analyses tended to favor deferoxamine over the placebo arm and leave open the possibility that deferoxamine might lead to improved outcome at 180 days.”
The researchers received support from the NIH and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.
SOURCE: Selim MH et al. ISC 2019, Abstract LB22.
REPORTING FROM ISC 2019
Key clinical point: Deferoxamine does not improve disability at 90 days after intracranial hemorrhage.
Major finding: Approximately one-third of patients in both treatment groups had a good outcome.
Study details: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind study of 294 participants with intracranial hemorrhage.
Disclosures: The National Institutes of Health and National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke supported this study.
Source: Selim MH et al. ISC 2019, Abstract LB22.
Opioids often prescribed in low-income areas
Also today, undervaccination poses a particular danger to patients with HIV, patients with inflammatory bowl disease aren’t getting appropriate reproductive counseling, and the type of exercise does matter when it comes to preventing falls among elderly patients.
Amazon Alexa
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
Also today, undervaccination poses a particular danger to patients with HIV, patients with inflammatory bowl disease aren’t getting appropriate reproductive counseling, and the type of exercise does matter when it comes to preventing falls among elderly patients.
Amazon Alexa
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
Also today, undervaccination poses a particular danger to patients with HIV, patients with inflammatory bowl disease aren’t getting appropriate reproductive counseling, and the type of exercise does matter when it comes to preventing falls among elderly patients.
Amazon Alexa
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
Love hormone plein air, posh preused Kleenex, and dieting plague vectors
Paint me like one of your French girls
If you’re trying to think of a fun Valentine’s activity, look no further than paint night! Normally associated with a ladies night out (and heavy on the wine), a recent study found that painting releases high levels of the “love hormone”, a.k.a. oxytocin, in men.
Researchers compared the levels of oxytocin with partners painting and partners playing board games, and were surprised by the results: While all the couples released oxytocin during these activities, men in paint class had the highest levels – twice as much as any other group.
Feel free to cite this study next time your man complains about being dragged to a paint-and-sip. Painting partners also experienced more touching than the gaming group (unless you count throwing Monopoly pieces at your significant other as touching).
You won’t get me sick, I’ll get me sick!
There are certain items that, after being used once, you really wouldn’t want to reuse. A snotty, mucus-filled tissue is pretty high up on that list ... or so you would hope. But that’s not thinking with real American entrepreneurial spirit! Welcome to Vaev Tissue, a startup based in Los Angeles that sells used tissues containing germs from a sick person for the bargain price of $79.99.
Yes, you read that correctly. They sell an $80 used tissue. The purpose, according to Vaev’s mission statement, is “to get sick on your own terms,” as “using a tissue that carries a human sneeze is safer than needles or pills.”
As you might expect, the tissues are popular with young parents and adults who are “critical” of vaccines. Who else could hear advice from actual doctors who told Time magazine that “there is nothing positive that can come from this, only things that are adverse,” or that the tissues are an “incredible liability,” and continue on, regardless?
And if you’re thinking, “If these people want to get sick, why not just have someone sneeze on them?” Don’t be ridiculous. Focus testers responded highly negatively to simply being handed a dirty tissue. The premium packaging and high price tag are a necessity.
Our advice? Well, as tempting as all this sounds, we think we’ll stick with washing our hands and not sticking used tissues in our faces. You know, like reasonable people.
Why Bullwinkle thinks pink
Flying squirrels are secretly doing their best flamingo impression – who knew? A forestry professor discovered, by happy accident, that flying squirrels are fluorescent – they glow hot pink under ultraviolet light.
Turns out, almost all species of gliders – even blue-helmeted Rocket “Rocky” J. Squirrel – are members of the Pink Ladies. They are one of the very few glowing mammals; the only other known mammalian species to have fluorescent fur are certain opossums.
But why do these airborne rodents glow pink? Is it because of an overintake of bubblegum? Are flying squirrels just really flamboyant but also shy? Are they huge fans of the singer Pink?
A biologist involved in studying these colorful critters hypothesized that the reason is slightly more related to environment than musical preference. Flying squirrels are nocturnal, making them most active when UV light is most prominent. The garish glow might have something to do with nighttime perception.
However, we don’t know the answer for sure. And in the meantime, we can choose to believe flying squirrels eat way too much cotton candy.
Buzz, feed, diet. Repeat
Guns don’t hurt this mass murderer. Police can’t arrest it. Background checks are pointless. A border wall won’t keep it out. So, how do you stop a mosquito?
Diet drugs.
Because female mosquitoes transmit malaria, Zika, and other diseases when they move from person to person feeding on human blood, investigators sought to curb that appetite by chemically re-creating the feeling of fullness they get after a big meal.
The lady killers in their study – Aedes aegypti, to be exact – when given an antiobesity drug that suppresses human appetite by activating neuropeptide receptors that regulate food intake, turned away from a tempting piece of nylon stocking that had been worn by one of the researchers. Further work showed that treated mosquitoes were as disinterested in feeding on a live mouse as mosquitoes that had already enjoyed a full blood meal.
The LOTME research staff (What? Of course, we have a research staff. You don’t?) is working on the mosquito problem too, although we’ve taken a somewhat different approach: The “volunteers” who walk into the mosquito-filled room wear a sign that says, “My blood will make your butt look bigger.”
Paint me like one of your French girls
If you’re trying to think of a fun Valentine’s activity, look no further than paint night! Normally associated with a ladies night out (and heavy on the wine), a recent study found that painting releases high levels of the “love hormone”, a.k.a. oxytocin, in men.
Researchers compared the levels of oxytocin with partners painting and partners playing board games, and were surprised by the results: While all the couples released oxytocin during these activities, men in paint class had the highest levels – twice as much as any other group.
Feel free to cite this study next time your man complains about being dragged to a paint-and-sip. Painting partners also experienced more touching than the gaming group (unless you count throwing Monopoly pieces at your significant other as touching).
You won’t get me sick, I’ll get me sick!
There are certain items that, after being used once, you really wouldn’t want to reuse. A snotty, mucus-filled tissue is pretty high up on that list ... or so you would hope. But that’s not thinking with real American entrepreneurial spirit! Welcome to Vaev Tissue, a startup based in Los Angeles that sells used tissues containing germs from a sick person for the bargain price of $79.99.
Yes, you read that correctly. They sell an $80 used tissue. The purpose, according to Vaev’s mission statement, is “to get sick on your own terms,” as “using a tissue that carries a human sneeze is safer than needles or pills.”
As you might expect, the tissues are popular with young parents and adults who are “critical” of vaccines. Who else could hear advice from actual doctors who told Time magazine that “there is nothing positive that can come from this, only things that are adverse,” or that the tissues are an “incredible liability,” and continue on, regardless?
And if you’re thinking, “If these people want to get sick, why not just have someone sneeze on them?” Don’t be ridiculous. Focus testers responded highly negatively to simply being handed a dirty tissue. The premium packaging and high price tag are a necessity.
Our advice? Well, as tempting as all this sounds, we think we’ll stick with washing our hands and not sticking used tissues in our faces. You know, like reasonable people.
Why Bullwinkle thinks pink
Flying squirrels are secretly doing their best flamingo impression – who knew? A forestry professor discovered, by happy accident, that flying squirrels are fluorescent – they glow hot pink under ultraviolet light.
Turns out, almost all species of gliders – even blue-helmeted Rocket “Rocky” J. Squirrel – are members of the Pink Ladies. They are one of the very few glowing mammals; the only other known mammalian species to have fluorescent fur are certain opossums.
But why do these airborne rodents glow pink? Is it because of an overintake of bubblegum? Are flying squirrels just really flamboyant but also shy? Are they huge fans of the singer Pink?
A biologist involved in studying these colorful critters hypothesized that the reason is slightly more related to environment than musical preference. Flying squirrels are nocturnal, making them most active when UV light is most prominent. The garish glow might have something to do with nighttime perception.
However, we don’t know the answer for sure. And in the meantime, we can choose to believe flying squirrels eat way too much cotton candy.
Buzz, feed, diet. Repeat
Guns don’t hurt this mass murderer. Police can’t arrest it. Background checks are pointless. A border wall won’t keep it out. So, how do you stop a mosquito?
Diet drugs.
Because female mosquitoes transmit malaria, Zika, and other diseases when they move from person to person feeding on human blood, investigators sought to curb that appetite by chemically re-creating the feeling of fullness they get after a big meal.
The lady killers in their study – Aedes aegypti, to be exact – when given an antiobesity drug that suppresses human appetite by activating neuropeptide receptors that regulate food intake, turned away from a tempting piece of nylon stocking that had been worn by one of the researchers. Further work showed that treated mosquitoes were as disinterested in feeding on a live mouse as mosquitoes that had already enjoyed a full blood meal.
The LOTME research staff (What? Of course, we have a research staff. You don’t?) is working on the mosquito problem too, although we’ve taken a somewhat different approach: The “volunteers” who walk into the mosquito-filled room wear a sign that says, “My blood will make your butt look bigger.”
Paint me like one of your French girls
If you’re trying to think of a fun Valentine’s activity, look no further than paint night! Normally associated with a ladies night out (and heavy on the wine), a recent study found that painting releases high levels of the “love hormone”, a.k.a. oxytocin, in men.
Researchers compared the levels of oxytocin with partners painting and partners playing board games, and were surprised by the results: While all the couples released oxytocin during these activities, men in paint class had the highest levels – twice as much as any other group.
Feel free to cite this study next time your man complains about being dragged to a paint-and-sip. Painting partners also experienced more touching than the gaming group (unless you count throwing Monopoly pieces at your significant other as touching).
You won’t get me sick, I’ll get me sick!
There are certain items that, after being used once, you really wouldn’t want to reuse. A snotty, mucus-filled tissue is pretty high up on that list ... or so you would hope. But that’s not thinking with real American entrepreneurial spirit! Welcome to Vaev Tissue, a startup based in Los Angeles that sells used tissues containing germs from a sick person for the bargain price of $79.99.
Yes, you read that correctly. They sell an $80 used tissue. The purpose, according to Vaev’s mission statement, is “to get sick on your own terms,” as “using a tissue that carries a human sneeze is safer than needles or pills.”
As you might expect, the tissues are popular with young parents and adults who are “critical” of vaccines. Who else could hear advice from actual doctors who told Time magazine that “there is nothing positive that can come from this, only things that are adverse,” or that the tissues are an “incredible liability,” and continue on, regardless?
And if you’re thinking, “If these people want to get sick, why not just have someone sneeze on them?” Don’t be ridiculous. Focus testers responded highly negatively to simply being handed a dirty tissue. The premium packaging and high price tag are a necessity.
Our advice? Well, as tempting as all this sounds, we think we’ll stick with washing our hands and not sticking used tissues in our faces. You know, like reasonable people.
Why Bullwinkle thinks pink
Flying squirrels are secretly doing their best flamingo impression – who knew? A forestry professor discovered, by happy accident, that flying squirrels are fluorescent – they glow hot pink under ultraviolet light.
Turns out, almost all species of gliders – even blue-helmeted Rocket “Rocky” J. Squirrel – are members of the Pink Ladies. They are one of the very few glowing mammals; the only other known mammalian species to have fluorescent fur are certain opossums.
But why do these airborne rodents glow pink? Is it because of an overintake of bubblegum? Are flying squirrels just really flamboyant but also shy? Are they huge fans of the singer Pink?
A biologist involved in studying these colorful critters hypothesized that the reason is slightly more related to environment than musical preference. Flying squirrels are nocturnal, making them most active when UV light is most prominent. The garish glow might have something to do with nighttime perception.
However, we don’t know the answer for sure. And in the meantime, we can choose to believe flying squirrels eat way too much cotton candy.
Buzz, feed, diet. Repeat
Guns don’t hurt this mass murderer. Police can’t arrest it. Background checks are pointless. A border wall won’t keep it out. So, how do you stop a mosquito?
Diet drugs.
Because female mosquitoes transmit malaria, Zika, and other diseases when they move from person to person feeding on human blood, investigators sought to curb that appetite by chemically re-creating the feeling of fullness they get after a big meal.
The lady killers in their study – Aedes aegypti, to be exact – when given an antiobesity drug that suppresses human appetite by activating neuropeptide receptors that regulate food intake, turned away from a tempting piece of nylon stocking that had been worn by one of the researchers. Further work showed that treated mosquitoes were as disinterested in feeding on a live mouse as mosquitoes that had already enjoyed a full blood meal.
The LOTME research staff (What? Of course, we have a research staff. You don’t?) is working on the mosquito problem too, although we’ve taken a somewhat different approach: The “volunteers” who walk into the mosquito-filled room wear a sign that says, “My blood will make your butt look bigger.”
ONC aims to help docs, patients with information sharing in proposed rule
The Office of the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology is looking to adopt standardized application programming interfaces (APIs) in an effort to boost interoperability of health data.
The Department of Health & Human Services office posted a proposed rule Feb. 11, 2019, that would, according to an agency press release, “help allow individuals to securely and easily access structured and unstructured EHI [electronic health information] formats using smartphones and other mobile devices.”
“We think our rule is going to help reduce burden and improve care,” Michael Lipinski, director of the Regulatory Affairs Division in the ONC Office of Policy, said in an interview. “It is going to do that through technology. With the APIs, you should be able to get to your information easier and have it readily available. Whether that is from another health care provider or using other health care products through the API to improve care, you will have that ability between the certified API and the information blocking policies to use third party developers and their products.”
The proposed rule also included a requirement that EHRs certified by ONC be able to easily export information contained within the EHR and make the format used to extract and export the data contained within the EHR publicly available.
“Another third party developer can build to that and offer competing services to pull that information out,” Mr. Lipinski said. “That would obviously help if you were choosing to switch [EHRs] if you didn’t like the features you were getting from your EHR. ... That functionality should help if you want to do that.”
The standardizing of APIs to help the delivery of data will go hand in hand with information blocking aspects of the proposed rule, which defines the few exceptions where an activity would not be considered information blocking, such as when engaging in practices will prevent patient harm; engaging in consistent, nondiscriminatory practices to protect patient privacy; and implementing practices to promote the security of health information.
Mr. Lipinski said these changes will help prevent providers from hiding behind HIPAA rules as the excuse to not share patient information, which will help with care coordination. “From a provider’s perspective, this should help them get more access to information, more access in a structured way and then easily get and share that information.”
Ultimately, Mr. Lipinski said, the goal is “to increase competition and lower cost while still improving the quality of care for patients.”
The Office of the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology is looking to adopt standardized application programming interfaces (APIs) in an effort to boost interoperability of health data.
The Department of Health & Human Services office posted a proposed rule Feb. 11, 2019, that would, according to an agency press release, “help allow individuals to securely and easily access structured and unstructured EHI [electronic health information] formats using smartphones and other mobile devices.”
“We think our rule is going to help reduce burden and improve care,” Michael Lipinski, director of the Regulatory Affairs Division in the ONC Office of Policy, said in an interview. “It is going to do that through technology. With the APIs, you should be able to get to your information easier and have it readily available. Whether that is from another health care provider or using other health care products through the API to improve care, you will have that ability between the certified API and the information blocking policies to use third party developers and their products.”
The proposed rule also included a requirement that EHRs certified by ONC be able to easily export information contained within the EHR and make the format used to extract and export the data contained within the EHR publicly available.
“Another third party developer can build to that and offer competing services to pull that information out,” Mr. Lipinski said. “That would obviously help if you were choosing to switch [EHRs] if you didn’t like the features you were getting from your EHR. ... That functionality should help if you want to do that.”
The standardizing of APIs to help the delivery of data will go hand in hand with information blocking aspects of the proposed rule, which defines the few exceptions where an activity would not be considered information blocking, such as when engaging in practices will prevent patient harm; engaging in consistent, nondiscriminatory practices to protect patient privacy; and implementing practices to promote the security of health information.
Mr. Lipinski said these changes will help prevent providers from hiding behind HIPAA rules as the excuse to not share patient information, which will help with care coordination. “From a provider’s perspective, this should help them get more access to information, more access in a structured way and then easily get and share that information.”
Ultimately, Mr. Lipinski said, the goal is “to increase competition and lower cost while still improving the quality of care for patients.”
The Office of the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology is looking to adopt standardized application programming interfaces (APIs) in an effort to boost interoperability of health data.
The Department of Health & Human Services office posted a proposed rule Feb. 11, 2019, that would, according to an agency press release, “help allow individuals to securely and easily access structured and unstructured EHI [electronic health information] formats using smartphones and other mobile devices.”
“We think our rule is going to help reduce burden and improve care,” Michael Lipinski, director of the Regulatory Affairs Division in the ONC Office of Policy, said in an interview. “It is going to do that through technology. With the APIs, you should be able to get to your information easier and have it readily available. Whether that is from another health care provider or using other health care products through the API to improve care, you will have that ability between the certified API and the information blocking policies to use third party developers and their products.”
The proposed rule also included a requirement that EHRs certified by ONC be able to easily export information contained within the EHR and make the format used to extract and export the data contained within the EHR publicly available.
“Another third party developer can build to that and offer competing services to pull that information out,” Mr. Lipinski said. “That would obviously help if you were choosing to switch [EHRs] if you didn’t like the features you were getting from your EHR. ... That functionality should help if you want to do that.”
The standardizing of APIs to help the delivery of data will go hand in hand with information blocking aspects of the proposed rule, which defines the few exceptions where an activity would not be considered information blocking, such as when engaging in practices will prevent patient harm; engaging in consistent, nondiscriminatory practices to protect patient privacy; and implementing practices to promote the security of health information.
Mr. Lipinski said these changes will help prevent providers from hiding behind HIPAA rules as the excuse to not share patient information, which will help with care coordination. “From a provider’s perspective, this should help them get more access to information, more access in a structured way and then easily get and share that information.”
Ultimately, Mr. Lipinski said, the goal is “to increase competition and lower cost while still improving the quality of care for patients.”
Fund projects, not people to address gender bias in research funding
LONDON – Female investigators are less likely to secure research funding than male investigators, not because their proposed project is of lesser scientific merit, but simply because they are women, according to research published in The Lancet.
Women had a 30% lower chance of success in getting funding for a project than did their male counterparts when the caliber of the principal investigator was considered as an explicit part of the grant application process, with an 8.8% probability of getting funded versus 12.7%, respectively. If the application was considered solely on a project basis, however, the gender bias was less (12.1% vs. 12.9%).
The overall success of grant applications was 15.8% in the analysis, which considered almost 24,000 grant applications from more than 7,000 principal investigators submitted to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) between 2011 and 2016.
“I see our study as basically one good thwack in a long game of whack-a-mole,” lead study author Holly O. Witteman, PhD, said during an event to launch a special edition of The Lancet focusing on advancing women in science, medicine, and global health.
Dr. Witteman’s research is one of three original articles included in the thematic issue that brings together female authors and commentators to look at gender equity and what needs to be done to address imbalances. The issue is the result of a call for papers that led to more than 300 submissions from more than 40 countries and, according to an editorial from The Lancet, highlights that gender equity in medicine “is not only a matter of justice and rights, it is crucial for producing the best research and providing the best care to patients.”
That there are discrepancies in research funding awarded to female and male investigators has been known for years, Dr. Witteman, associate professor of family and emergency medicine at Laval University, Quebec City, said at the London press conference. To learn how and why, a “quasiexperimental” approach was used to find out what factors might be influencing the gender gap.
“Women are scored lower for competence compared to men with the same publication record,” she said. It’s not that they publish less or do easier research, or that the quality is lower, they are just viewed less favorably overall throughout their careers. Even when you control for confounding factors, “they still don’t advance as quickly,” she said.
“It had been documented for a while that, overall, women tend to get less grant funding and there hasn’t been any evidence to show either way if maybe women’s grant applications weren’t as good,” Dr. Witteman explained.
In 2014, the CIHR changed the way it funded research projects, creating a “natural experiment.” Two new grant application programs were put in place which largely differed by whether or not an explicit review of the principal investigator and their ability to conduct the research was included.
Adjusting for age and type of research, Dr. Witteman and her coauthors found that there was little difference in the success of women in securing research funding when their grant applications were judged solely on a scientific basis; however, when the focus was placed on the principal investigator, women were disadvantaged.
Dr. Witteman said that “this provides robust evidence in support of the idea that women write equally good grant applications but aren’t evaluated as being equally good scientists.”
So how to redress the balance? Dr. Witteman suggested that one way was for funders to collect robust evidence on the success of grant applications and be transparent who is getting funded and how much funding is being awarded. Institutions should invest in and support young investigators, distributing power and flattening traditionally male-led hierarchies. Salaries should be aligned and research support evened out, she said.
Investigators themselves also have a role to play to do the best possible work and try to change the system. “Advocate for others,” she said. That included advocating for others in groups that you may not be part of – which can be easier in some respects than advocating for a group that you are in.
“Funders should evaluate projects, not people,” Jennifer L. Raymond, PhD, and Miriam B. Goodman, PhD, both professors at Stanford (Calif.) University wrote in a comment in The Lancet special issue. They suggested that people-based funding had been gaining popularity but that funders would be better off funding by project to achieve scientific and clinical goals. “Assess the investigator only after double-blind review of the proposed research is complete,” they suggested. “Reduce the assessment of the investigator to a binary judgment of whether or not the investigator has the expertise and resources needed do the proposed research.”
During a panel discussion at The Lancet event, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, PhD, associate professor of informatics at Indiana University in Bloomington and a program director for the Science and Innovation Policy Program at the National Science Foundation (NSF) observed that data on gender equality in research funding were already being collected and will be used to determine how best to adjust funding policies.
“Looking from the 1980s to the present, women make up shy of 20% of the funds given by the National Science Foundation,” Dr. Sugimoto said. “That’s improved over time, and it’s at 28% currently, which is less than their authorship.”
Tammy Clifford, PhD, vice president of research programs at the CIHR observed that data collection was “a critically important step, but of course that’s not the only step,” she said. “We need to look at and analyze the data regularly, and then when you see things that are not on track, you make changes.”
One of the changes the CIHR has made is to train people who are reviewing grant applications on factors that may unconsciously affect their decisions. “There are things to be done, and I don’t think we are quite there yet, but we are committed to continually looking at those data, to making the changes that are required.”
Representing the Wellcome Trust, Ed Whiting, director of policy and chief of staff, said that the funding of projects led by female investigators was moving in the right direction. He noted that there was still a lower rate of applications from women for senior award levels, but that the panels that decide upon the funding were moving toward equal gender representation. The aim was to get to a 50/50 female to male ratio on the panels by 2020, he said; it is was at 46%-52% in 2018.
Dr. Witteman and all other commentators had no financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Witteman HO et al. Lancet. 2019. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32611-4
LONDON – Female investigators are less likely to secure research funding than male investigators, not because their proposed project is of lesser scientific merit, but simply because they are women, according to research published in The Lancet.
Women had a 30% lower chance of success in getting funding for a project than did their male counterparts when the caliber of the principal investigator was considered as an explicit part of the grant application process, with an 8.8% probability of getting funded versus 12.7%, respectively. If the application was considered solely on a project basis, however, the gender bias was less (12.1% vs. 12.9%).
The overall success of grant applications was 15.8% in the analysis, which considered almost 24,000 grant applications from more than 7,000 principal investigators submitted to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) between 2011 and 2016.
“I see our study as basically one good thwack in a long game of whack-a-mole,” lead study author Holly O. Witteman, PhD, said during an event to launch a special edition of The Lancet focusing on advancing women in science, medicine, and global health.
Dr. Witteman’s research is one of three original articles included in the thematic issue that brings together female authors and commentators to look at gender equity and what needs to be done to address imbalances. The issue is the result of a call for papers that led to more than 300 submissions from more than 40 countries and, according to an editorial from The Lancet, highlights that gender equity in medicine “is not only a matter of justice and rights, it is crucial for producing the best research and providing the best care to patients.”
That there are discrepancies in research funding awarded to female and male investigators has been known for years, Dr. Witteman, associate professor of family and emergency medicine at Laval University, Quebec City, said at the London press conference. To learn how and why, a “quasiexperimental” approach was used to find out what factors might be influencing the gender gap.
“Women are scored lower for competence compared to men with the same publication record,” she said. It’s not that they publish less or do easier research, or that the quality is lower, they are just viewed less favorably overall throughout their careers. Even when you control for confounding factors, “they still don’t advance as quickly,” she said.
“It had been documented for a while that, overall, women tend to get less grant funding and there hasn’t been any evidence to show either way if maybe women’s grant applications weren’t as good,” Dr. Witteman explained.
In 2014, the CIHR changed the way it funded research projects, creating a “natural experiment.” Two new grant application programs were put in place which largely differed by whether or not an explicit review of the principal investigator and their ability to conduct the research was included.
Adjusting for age and type of research, Dr. Witteman and her coauthors found that there was little difference in the success of women in securing research funding when their grant applications were judged solely on a scientific basis; however, when the focus was placed on the principal investigator, women were disadvantaged.
Dr. Witteman said that “this provides robust evidence in support of the idea that women write equally good grant applications but aren’t evaluated as being equally good scientists.”
So how to redress the balance? Dr. Witteman suggested that one way was for funders to collect robust evidence on the success of grant applications and be transparent who is getting funded and how much funding is being awarded. Institutions should invest in and support young investigators, distributing power and flattening traditionally male-led hierarchies. Salaries should be aligned and research support evened out, she said.
Investigators themselves also have a role to play to do the best possible work and try to change the system. “Advocate for others,” she said. That included advocating for others in groups that you may not be part of – which can be easier in some respects than advocating for a group that you are in.
“Funders should evaluate projects, not people,” Jennifer L. Raymond, PhD, and Miriam B. Goodman, PhD, both professors at Stanford (Calif.) University wrote in a comment in The Lancet special issue. They suggested that people-based funding had been gaining popularity but that funders would be better off funding by project to achieve scientific and clinical goals. “Assess the investigator only after double-blind review of the proposed research is complete,” they suggested. “Reduce the assessment of the investigator to a binary judgment of whether or not the investigator has the expertise and resources needed do the proposed research.”
During a panel discussion at The Lancet event, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, PhD, associate professor of informatics at Indiana University in Bloomington and a program director for the Science and Innovation Policy Program at the National Science Foundation (NSF) observed that data on gender equality in research funding were already being collected and will be used to determine how best to adjust funding policies.
“Looking from the 1980s to the present, women make up shy of 20% of the funds given by the National Science Foundation,” Dr. Sugimoto said. “That’s improved over time, and it’s at 28% currently, which is less than their authorship.”
Tammy Clifford, PhD, vice president of research programs at the CIHR observed that data collection was “a critically important step, but of course that’s not the only step,” she said. “We need to look at and analyze the data regularly, and then when you see things that are not on track, you make changes.”
One of the changes the CIHR has made is to train people who are reviewing grant applications on factors that may unconsciously affect their decisions. “There are things to be done, and I don’t think we are quite there yet, but we are committed to continually looking at those data, to making the changes that are required.”
Representing the Wellcome Trust, Ed Whiting, director of policy and chief of staff, said that the funding of projects led by female investigators was moving in the right direction. He noted that there was still a lower rate of applications from women for senior award levels, but that the panels that decide upon the funding were moving toward equal gender representation. The aim was to get to a 50/50 female to male ratio on the panels by 2020, he said; it is was at 46%-52% in 2018.
Dr. Witteman and all other commentators had no financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Witteman HO et al. Lancet. 2019. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32611-4
LONDON – Female investigators are less likely to secure research funding than male investigators, not because their proposed project is of lesser scientific merit, but simply because they are women, according to research published in The Lancet.
Women had a 30% lower chance of success in getting funding for a project than did their male counterparts when the caliber of the principal investigator was considered as an explicit part of the grant application process, with an 8.8% probability of getting funded versus 12.7%, respectively. If the application was considered solely on a project basis, however, the gender bias was less (12.1% vs. 12.9%).
The overall success of grant applications was 15.8% in the analysis, which considered almost 24,000 grant applications from more than 7,000 principal investigators submitted to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) between 2011 and 2016.
“I see our study as basically one good thwack in a long game of whack-a-mole,” lead study author Holly O. Witteman, PhD, said during an event to launch a special edition of The Lancet focusing on advancing women in science, medicine, and global health.
Dr. Witteman’s research is one of three original articles included in the thematic issue that brings together female authors and commentators to look at gender equity and what needs to be done to address imbalances. The issue is the result of a call for papers that led to more than 300 submissions from more than 40 countries and, according to an editorial from The Lancet, highlights that gender equity in medicine “is not only a matter of justice and rights, it is crucial for producing the best research and providing the best care to patients.”
That there are discrepancies in research funding awarded to female and male investigators has been known for years, Dr. Witteman, associate professor of family and emergency medicine at Laval University, Quebec City, said at the London press conference. To learn how and why, a “quasiexperimental” approach was used to find out what factors might be influencing the gender gap.
“Women are scored lower for competence compared to men with the same publication record,” she said. It’s not that they publish less or do easier research, or that the quality is lower, they are just viewed less favorably overall throughout their careers. Even when you control for confounding factors, “they still don’t advance as quickly,” she said.
“It had been documented for a while that, overall, women tend to get less grant funding and there hasn’t been any evidence to show either way if maybe women’s grant applications weren’t as good,” Dr. Witteman explained.
In 2014, the CIHR changed the way it funded research projects, creating a “natural experiment.” Two new grant application programs were put in place which largely differed by whether or not an explicit review of the principal investigator and their ability to conduct the research was included.
Adjusting for age and type of research, Dr. Witteman and her coauthors found that there was little difference in the success of women in securing research funding when their grant applications were judged solely on a scientific basis; however, when the focus was placed on the principal investigator, women were disadvantaged.
Dr. Witteman said that “this provides robust evidence in support of the idea that women write equally good grant applications but aren’t evaluated as being equally good scientists.”
So how to redress the balance? Dr. Witteman suggested that one way was for funders to collect robust evidence on the success of grant applications and be transparent who is getting funded and how much funding is being awarded. Institutions should invest in and support young investigators, distributing power and flattening traditionally male-led hierarchies. Salaries should be aligned and research support evened out, she said.
Investigators themselves also have a role to play to do the best possible work and try to change the system. “Advocate for others,” she said. That included advocating for others in groups that you may not be part of – which can be easier in some respects than advocating for a group that you are in.
“Funders should evaluate projects, not people,” Jennifer L. Raymond, PhD, and Miriam B. Goodman, PhD, both professors at Stanford (Calif.) University wrote in a comment in The Lancet special issue. They suggested that people-based funding had been gaining popularity but that funders would be better off funding by project to achieve scientific and clinical goals. “Assess the investigator only after double-blind review of the proposed research is complete,” they suggested. “Reduce the assessment of the investigator to a binary judgment of whether or not the investigator has the expertise and resources needed do the proposed research.”
During a panel discussion at The Lancet event, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, PhD, associate professor of informatics at Indiana University in Bloomington and a program director for the Science and Innovation Policy Program at the National Science Foundation (NSF) observed that data on gender equality in research funding were already being collected and will be used to determine how best to adjust funding policies.
“Looking from the 1980s to the present, women make up shy of 20% of the funds given by the National Science Foundation,” Dr. Sugimoto said. “That’s improved over time, and it’s at 28% currently, which is less than their authorship.”
Tammy Clifford, PhD, vice president of research programs at the CIHR observed that data collection was “a critically important step, but of course that’s not the only step,” she said. “We need to look at and analyze the data regularly, and then when you see things that are not on track, you make changes.”
One of the changes the CIHR has made is to train people who are reviewing grant applications on factors that may unconsciously affect their decisions. “There are things to be done, and I don’t think we are quite there yet, but we are committed to continually looking at those data, to making the changes that are required.”
Representing the Wellcome Trust, Ed Whiting, director of policy and chief of staff, said that the funding of projects led by female investigators was moving in the right direction. He noted that there was still a lower rate of applications from women for senior award levels, but that the panels that decide upon the funding were moving toward equal gender representation. The aim was to get to a 50/50 female to male ratio on the panels by 2020, he said; it is was at 46%-52% in 2018.
Dr. Witteman and all other commentators had no financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Witteman HO et al. Lancet. 2019. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32611-4
FROM A LAUNCH EVENT HELD BY THE LANCET
Key clinical point: Funding bodies should focus on the science of a research project not on who is conducting the research.
Major finding: Between 2011 and 2016, 8.8% of projects proposed by female researchers and 12.7% of those proposed by male researchers were funded.
Study details: Analysis of nearly 24,000 grant applications from more than 7,000 principal investigators submitted to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research during 2011-2016.
Disclosures: The research was unfunded. Dr. Witteman and all other commentators had no financial disclosures.
Source: Witteman HO et al. Lancet. 2019. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32611-4.
Getting a good night’s sleep
For most things, the harder you work at it, the more successful you’ll be. Except when it comes to sleep. Nothing frightens sleep away faster than an all-out effort to find it. And yet, it should be the easiest of all health habits to cultivate. Sleep should be a hardwired, physiologic, default condition (sort of like eating and sex, all are which are evolutionary imperatives). And yet, lack of sleep is a common and grave problem even in our safe and comfortable modern environment.
Lack of sleep depletes your willpower, making it less likely you’ll actually go to the gym or be able to resist that bear claw pastry calling you back to the break room. Poor sleep impairs your ability to lose and keep off weight. It can lead to mistakes of inattention – a problem if you’re flying a plane or screening for melanoma.
As a recovering insomniac, I’ve scouted out the territory for you and have taken a few notes as a Baedeker on your journey to better sleep. Tracking sleep is easy; most any fitness tracker or smart watch outfitted with the right app will do the work for you. I’ve used my Apple Watch and Pillow for years. (I’ve no conflict of interest). I’ve found that the quality score it provides each night is interesting, but not all that important. Using pad and paper you could just as easily quantify your sleep: How many hours were you in bed, asleep, and how did you feel the next day.
Here is something important I learned about myself: I don’t need 8 hours. You might not either. Most articles say that we adults need 7-8 hours of sleep. I wasted a lot of effort trying to keep it above the 7-hour mark. Then I realized that even on nights when I got 6-7, I felt fine the next day! Don’t assume you need 8 hours. It could be 6 or it could be 9. It might in fact change depending on how you slept recently, what is happening in your life, or which season it is. If you feel alert and well rested, then you’ve likely found all the sleep you need.
Let’s assume you aren’t well rested. Now what? Like most of good health, a behavioral approach is needed to get you on the right path. You’ve likely heard that bright, particularly blue, light is harmful to falling asleep. Good news! Most devices will let you filter blue light out if you must continue that “Better Call Saul” binge. Better options: Leave your tablet in the living room and plug in your phone on the opposite side of the room (with a short cord). Invest instead in a book light and actual books. There is something about the patina of paper that can encourage sleep to come find you.
Keep the room comfortably cool. What’s important here is the temperature drop. That is, going from warm to cool. This is why a warm shower or bath before getting into bed can help you. Your temperature will drop, a signal for sleep.
So now you’re asleep. But wait, you say you’re awake again and it’s 3:00 a.m.? This is sleep maintenance insomnia. You lie there, patiently waiting, like anticipating your waiter’s return when you’re eating in Rome – ah, you could be there all night. Nothing you do seems to bring sleep back around. The best advice is to try to retrain yourself that when you are up, you’re up, and when in bed, you’re asleep. You can try getting up, moving to a different room. Try meditation or reading. Wait until you feel the urge to sleep sneak back on you, then head back to bed. Although sometimes difficult, you might consider riding it out. If you can’t fall back, then get on with your day (although I don’t recommend sending emails at 3:45 a.m., it freaks people out, I’ve learned). The following night, you will likely be sleep deprived and might find you can fall asleep easier and for longer.
Be forgiving. Unlike your diet or exercise, sleep isn’t as much in your control. You can work a little harder in spin, or double your effort to keep to your plant/keto diet. But for sleep, you must just be patient. It will come. When it is good and ready.
Dr. Benabio is director of Healthcare Transformation and chief of dermatology at Kaiser Permanente San Diego. The opinions expressed in this column are his own and do not represent those of Kaiser Permanente. Dr. Benabio is @Dermdoc on Twitter. Write to him at dermnews@mdedge.com.
For most things, the harder you work at it, the more successful you’ll be. Except when it comes to sleep. Nothing frightens sleep away faster than an all-out effort to find it. And yet, it should be the easiest of all health habits to cultivate. Sleep should be a hardwired, physiologic, default condition (sort of like eating and sex, all are which are evolutionary imperatives). And yet, lack of sleep is a common and grave problem even in our safe and comfortable modern environment.
Lack of sleep depletes your willpower, making it less likely you’ll actually go to the gym or be able to resist that bear claw pastry calling you back to the break room. Poor sleep impairs your ability to lose and keep off weight. It can lead to mistakes of inattention – a problem if you’re flying a plane or screening for melanoma.
As a recovering insomniac, I’ve scouted out the territory for you and have taken a few notes as a Baedeker on your journey to better sleep. Tracking sleep is easy; most any fitness tracker or smart watch outfitted with the right app will do the work for you. I’ve used my Apple Watch and Pillow for years. (I’ve no conflict of interest). I’ve found that the quality score it provides each night is interesting, but not all that important. Using pad and paper you could just as easily quantify your sleep: How many hours were you in bed, asleep, and how did you feel the next day.
Here is something important I learned about myself: I don’t need 8 hours. You might not either. Most articles say that we adults need 7-8 hours of sleep. I wasted a lot of effort trying to keep it above the 7-hour mark. Then I realized that even on nights when I got 6-7, I felt fine the next day! Don’t assume you need 8 hours. It could be 6 or it could be 9. It might in fact change depending on how you slept recently, what is happening in your life, or which season it is. If you feel alert and well rested, then you’ve likely found all the sleep you need.
Let’s assume you aren’t well rested. Now what? Like most of good health, a behavioral approach is needed to get you on the right path. You’ve likely heard that bright, particularly blue, light is harmful to falling asleep. Good news! Most devices will let you filter blue light out if you must continue that “Better Call Saul” binge. Better options: Leave your tablet in the living room and plug in your phone on the opposite side of the room (with a short cord). Invest instead in a book light and actual books. There is something about the patina of paper that can encourage sleep to come find you.
Keep the room comfortably cool. What’s important here is the temperature drop. That is, going from warm to cool. This is why a warm shower or bath before getting into bed can help you. Your temperature will drop, a signal for sleep.
So now you’re asleep. But wait, you say you’re awake again and it’s 3:00 a.m.? This is sleep maintenance insomnia. You lie there, patiently waiting, like anticipating your waiter’s return when you’re eating in Rome – ah, you could be there all night. Nothing you do seems to bring sleep back around. The best advice is to try to retrain yourself that when you are up, you’re up, and when in bed, you’re asleep. You can try getting up, moving to a different room. Try meditation or reading. Wait until you feel the urge to sleep sneak back on you, then head back to bed. Although sometimes difficult, you might consider riding it out. If you can’t fall back, then get on with your day (although I don’t recommend sending emails at 3:45 a.m., it freaks people out, I’ve learned). The following night, you will likely be sleep deprived and might find you can fall asleep easier and for longer.
Be forgiving. Unlike your diet or exercise, sleep isn’t as much in your control. You can work a little harder in spin, or double your effort to keep to your plant/keto diet. But for sleep, you must just be patient. It will come. When it is good and ready.
Dr. Benabio is director of Healthcare Transformation and chief of dermatology at Kaiser Permanente San Diego. The opinions expressed in this column are his own and do not represent those of Kaiser Permanente. Dr. Benabio is @Dermdoc on Twitter. Write to him at dermnews@mdedge.com.
For most things, the harder you work at it, the more successful you’ll be. Except when it comes to sleep. Nothing frightens sleep away faster than an all-out effort to find it. And yet, it should be the easiest of all health habits to cultivate. Sleep should be a hardwired, physiologic, default condition (sort of like eating and sex, all are which are evolutionary imperatives). And yet, lack of sleep is a common and grave problem even in our safe and comfortable modern environment.
Lack of sleep depletes your willpower, making it less likely you’ll actually go to the gym or be able to resist that bear claw pastry calling you back to the break room. Poor sleep impairs your ability to lose and keep off weight. It can lead to mistakes of inattention – a problem if you’re flying a plane or screening for melanoma.
As a recovering insomniac, I’ve scouted out the territory for you and have taken a few notes as a Baedeker on your journey to better sleep. Tracking sleep is easy; most any fitness tracker or smart watch outfitted with the right app will do the work for you. I’ve used my Apple Watch and Pillow for years. (I’ve no conflict of interest). I’ve found that the quality score it provides each night is interesting, but not all that important. Using pad and paper you could just as easily quantify your sleep: How many hours were you in bed, asleep, and how did you feel the next day.
Here is something important I learned about myself: I don’t need 8 hours. You might not either. Most articles say that we adults need 7-8 hours of sleep. I wasted a lot of effort trying to keep it above the 7-hour mark. Then I realized that even on nights when I got 6-7, I felt fine the next day! Don’t assume you need 8 hours. It could be 6 or it could be 9. It might in fact change depending on how you slept recently, what is happening in your life, or which season it is. If you feel alert and well rested, then you’ve likely found all the sleep you need.
Let’s assume you aren’t well rested. Now what? Like most of good health, a behavioral approach is needed to get you on the right path. You’ve likely heard that bright, particularly blue, light is harmful to falling asleep. Good news! Most devices will let you filter blue light out if you must continue that “Better Call Saul” binge. Better options: Leave your tablet in the living room and plug in your phone on the opposite side of the room (with a short cord). Invest instead in a book light and actual books. There is something about the patina of paper that can encourage sleep to come find you.
Keep the room comfortably cool. What’s important here is the temperature drop. That is, going from warm to cool. This is why a warm shower or bath before getting into bed can help you. Your temperature will drop, a signal for sleep.
So now you’re asleep. But wait, you say you’re awake again and it’s 3:00 a.m.? This is sleep maintenance insomnia. You lie there, patiently waiting, like anticipating your waiter’s return when you’re eating in Rome – ah, you could be there all night. Nothing you do seems to bring sleep back around. The best advice is to try to retrain yourself that when you are up, you’re up, and when in bed, you’re asleep. You can try getting up, moving to a different room. Try meditation or reading. Wait until you feel the urge to sleep sneak back on you, then head back to bed. Although sometimes difficult, you might consider riding it out. If you can’t fall back, then get on with your day (although I don’t recommend sending emails at 3:45 a.m., it freaks people out, I’ve learned). The following night, you will likely be sleep deprived and might find you can fall asleep easier and for longer.
Be forgiving. Unlike your diet or exercise, sleep isn’t as much in your control. You can work a little harder in spin, or double your effort to keep to your plant/keto diet. But for sleep, you must just be patient. It will come. When it is good and ready.
Dr. Benabio is director of Healthcare Transformation and chief of dermatology at Kaiser Permanente San Diego. The opinions expressed in this column are his own and do not represent those of Kaiser Permanente. Dr. Benabio is @Dermdoc on Twitter. Write to him at dermnews@mdedge.com.
Survey: Health care costs, access unlikely to improve in 2019
but most predict that the Affordable Care Act will make it through the year despite government efforts to defund it, according to a survey by health care market research company InCrowd.
Over 80% of the 200 physicians surveyed Dec. 20-22, 2018, said that it was somewhat or very unlikely that health care costs would improve over the course of this year, and almost 70% expressed those opinions regarding improved access to care. More than 70% said that the federal government will find ways to defund the ACA, but 60% believe that it will remain in place and almost 70% said that coverage for preexisting conditions will continue, InCrowd reported. A minority of respondents (45%) predicted that the quality of health care was very likely or somewhat likely to improve in 2019.
A number of other issues were covered in the survey: 71% of physicians predicted that children up to age 26 years will be able to stay on their parents’ coverage, 69% expect the insurance mandate to be eliminated, 58% believe that mental health coverage will be allowed, and 56% said that it is unlikely for more states to expand Medicaid, according to data from the 100 primary care physicians and 100 specialists who responded to the InCrowd MicroSurvey.
but most predict that the Affordable Care Act will make it through the year despite government efforts to defund it, according to a survey by health care market research company InCrowd.
Over 80% of the 200 physicians surveyed Dec. 20-22, 2018, said that it was somewhat or very unlikely that health care costs would improve over the course of this year, and almost 70% expressed those opinions regarding improved access to care. More than 70% said that the federal government will find ways to defund the ACA, but 60% believe that it will remain in place and almost 70% said that coverage for preexisting conditions will continue, InCrowd reported. A minority of respondents (45%) predicted that the quality of health care was very likely or somewhat likely to improve in 2019.
A number of other issues were covered in the survey: 71% of physicians predicted that children up to age 26 years will be able to stay on their parents’ coverage, 69% expect the insurance mandate to be eliminated, 58% believe that mental health coverage will be allowed, and 56% said that it is unlikely for more states to expand Medicaid, according to data from the 100 primary care physicians and 100 specialists who responded to the InCrowd MicroSurvey.
but most predict that the Affordable Care Act will make it through the year despite government efforts to defund it, according to a survey by health care market research company InCrowd.
Over 80% of the 200 physicians surveyed Dec. 20-22, 2018, said that it was somewhat or very unlikely that health care costs would improve over the course of this year, and almost 70% expressed those opinions regarding improved access to care. More than 70% said that the federal government will find ways to defund the ACA, but 60% believe that it will remain in place and almost 70% said that coverage for preexisting conditions will continue, InCrowd reported. A minority of respondents (45%) predicted that the quality of health care was very likely or somewhat likely to improve in 2019.
A number of other issues were covered in the survey: 71% of physicians predicted that children up to age 26 years will be able to stay on their parents’ coverage, 69% expect the insurance mandate to be eliminated, 58% believe that mental health coverage will be allowed, and 56% said that it is unlikely for more states to expand Medicaid, according to data from the 100 primary care physicians and 100 specialists who responded to the InCrowd MicroSurvey.
Conservatism spreads in prostate cancer
, the United States now has more than 100 measles cases for the year, e-cigarette use reverses progress in reducing teens’ tobacco use, and consider adopting the MESA 10-year coronary heart disease risk calculator.
Amazon Alexa
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
, the United States now has more than 100 measles cases for the year, e-cigarette use reverses progress in reducing teens’ tobacco use, and consider adopting the MESA 10-year coronary heart disease risk calculator.
Amazon Alexa
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
, the United States now has more than 100 measles cases for the year, e-cigarette use reverses progress in reducing teens’ tobacco use, and consider adopting the MESA 10-year coronary heart disease risk calculator.
Amazon Alexa
Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
Vaccination and antiviral treatment do not affect stroke risk following shingles
HONOLULU – according to findings from a retrospective study of Medicare beneficiaries with shingles and ischemic stroke.
The findings suggest that primary prevention of shingles through vaccination might be the most effective approach to prevent shingles-associated acute ischemic stroke, said the researchers, who presented the study at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association.
Almost one in three people in the United States will develop shingles, also known as herpes zoster, in their lifetime, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Previous research has not simultaneously examined the effect of shingles vaccination and antiviral treatment following shingles onset on the risk of acute ischemic stroke.
Quanhe Yang, PhD, a senior scientist at the CDC, and his colleagues examined data for 35,186 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries who were 66 years or older, diagnosed with shingles during 2008-2014, and diagnosed with acute ischemic stroke within a year of shingles diagnosis. Using a self-controlled case series design, the investigators analyzed the association between shingles and stroke. Dr. Yang and his colleagues estimated the incident rate ratio (IRR) by comparing the incidence of stroke during risk periods (i.e., periods following shingles), compared with control periods. To minimize confounding by age, they restricted their analyses to approximately 365 days from the shingles index date.
To investigate how vaccination against shingles with Zostavax and antiviral treatment following shingles affected stroke risk, the researchers classified beneficiaries into the following four groups: Group 1 had no vaccination and no antiviral treatment (49% of beneficiaries), Group 2 had vaccination only (9%), Group 3 had antiviral treatment only (34%), and Group 4 had vaccination and antiviral treatment (8%). The researchers tested for interaction to examine the changes in IRRs across the four groups.
IRRs for stroke progressively declined as time passed from the index shingles date, from 1.61 at 0-14 days following shingles to 1.35 at 15-30 days, 1.16 at 31-90 days, and 1.05 at 91-180 days. The researchers found no evidence that shingles vaccination and antiviral treatment modified the risk of acute ischemic stroke. The association between shingles and risk for acute ischemic stroke was consistent across age groups (i.e., 66-74 years, 75-84 years, and 85 years or older), sex, and race (i.e., non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic, other).
One of the study’s strengths was that its sample was a large national cohort of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, Dr. Yang said. In addition, the study design eliminated all fixed confounding effects. Potential weaknesses, however, included the fact that herpes zoster diagnosis was based on administrative data and that the vaccine’s efficacy declines over time.
The findings suggest that the importance of following the recommended shingles vaccination protocol in the prevention of shingles, Dr. Yang said. Shingrix, a vaccine that the Food and Drug Administration approved in 2017, prevents shingles with an efficacy greater than 90%, he added.
The investigators reported no funding source or disclosures for this study.
SOURCE: Yang Q et al. Circulation. 2019;50(Suppl_1): Abstract 39
HONOLULU – according to findings from a retrospective study of Medicare beneficiaries with shingles and ischemic stroke.
The findings suggest that primary prevention of shingles through vaccination might be the most effective approach to prevent shingles-associated acute ischemic stroke, said the researchers, who presented the study at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association.
Almost one in three people in the United States will develop shingles, also known as herpes zoster, in their lifetime, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Previous research has not simultaneously examined the effect of shingles vaccination and antiviral treatment following shingles onset on the risk of acute ischemic stroke.
Quanhe Yang, PhD, a senior scientist at the CDC, and his colleagues examined data for 35,186 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries who were 66 years or older, diagnosed with shingles during 2008-2014, and diagnosed with acute ischemic stroke within a year of shingles diagnosis. Using a self-controlled case series design, the investigators analyzed the association between shingles and stroke. Dr. Yang and his colleagues estimated the incident rate ratio (IRR) by comparing the incidence of stroke during risk periods (i.e., periods following shingles), compared with control periods. To minimize confounding by age, they restricted their analyses to approximately 365 days from the shingles index date.
To investigate how vaccination against shingles with Zostavax and antiviral treatment following shingles affected stroke risk, the researchers classified beneficiaries into the following four groups: Group 1 had no vaccination and no antiviral treatment (49% of beneficiaries), Group 2 had vaccination only (9%), Group 3 had antiviral treatment only (34%), and Group 4 had vaccination and antiviral treatment (8%). The researchers tested for interaction to examine the changes in IRRs across the four groups.
IRRs for stroke progressively declined as time passed from the index shingles date, from 1.61 at 0-14 days following shingles to 1.35 at 15-30 days, 1.16 at 31-90 days, and 1.05 at 91-180 days. The researchers found no evidence that shingles vaccination and antiviral treatment modified the risk of acute ischemic stroke. The association between shingles and risk for acute ischemic stroke was consistent across age groups (i.e., 66-74 years, 75-84 years, and 85 years or older), sex, and race (i.e., non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic, other).
One of the study’s strengths was that its sample was a large national cohort of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, Dr. Yang said. In addition, the study design eliminated all fixed confounding effects. Potential weaknesses, however, included the fact that herpes zoster diagnosis was based on administrative data and that the vaccine’s efficacy declines over time.
The findings suggest that the importance of following the recommended shingles vaccination protocol in the prevention of shingles, Dr. Yang said. Shingrix, a vaccine that the Food and Drug Administration approved in 2017, prevents shingles with an efficacy greater than 90%, he added.
The investigators reported no funding source or disclosures for this study.
SOURCE: Yang Q et al. Circulation. 2019;50(Suppl_1): Abstract 39
HONOLULU – according to findings from a retrospective study of Medicare beneficiaries with shingles and ischemic stroke.
The findings suggest that primary prevention of shingles through vaccination might be the most effective approach to prevent shingles-associated acute ischemic stroke, said the researchers, who presented the study at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association.
Almost one in three people in the United States will develop shingles, also known as herpes zoster, in their lifetime, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Previous research has not simultaneously examined the effect of shingles vaccination and antiviral treatment following shingles onset on the risk of acute ischemic stroke.
Quanhe Yang, PhD, a senior scientist at the CDC, and his colleagues examined data for 35,186 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries who were 66 years or older, diagnosed with shingles during 2008-2014, and diagnosed with acute ischemic stroke within a year of shingles diagnosis. Using a self-controlled case series design, the investigators analyzed the association between shingles and stroke. Dr. Yang and his colleagues estimated the incident rate ratio (IRR) by comparing the incidence of stroke during risk periods (i.e., periods following shingles), compared with control periods. To minimize confounding by age, they restricted their analyses to approximately 365 days from the shingles index date.
To investigate how vaccination against shingles with Zostavax and antiviral treatment following shingles affected stroke risk, the researchers classified beneficiaries into the following four groups: Group 1 had no vaccination and no antiviral treatment (49% of beneficiaries), Group 2 had vaccination only (9%), Group 3 had antiviral treatment only (34%), and Group 4 had vaccination and antiviral treatment (8%). The researchers tested for interaction to examine the changes in IRRs across the four groups.
IRRs for stroke progressively declined as time passed from the index shingles date, from 1.61 at 0-14 days following shingles to 1.35 at 15-30 days, 1.16 at 31-90 days, and 1.05 at 91-180 days. The researchers found no evidence that shingles vaccination and antiviral treatment modified the risk of acute ischemic stroke. The association between shingles and risk for acute ischemic stroke was consistent across age groups (i.e., 66-74 years, 75-84 years, and 85 years or older), sex, and race (i.e., non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic, other).
One of the study’s strengths was that its sample was a large national cohort of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, Dr. Yang said. In addition, the study design eliminated all fixed confounding effects. Potential weaknesses, however, included the fact that herpes zoster diagnosis was based on administrative data and that the vaccine’s efficacy declines over time.
The findings suggest that the importance of following the recommended shingles vaccination protocol in the prevention of shingles, Dr. Yang said. Shingrix, a vaccine that the Food and Drug Administration approved in 2017, prevents shingles with an efficacy greater than 90%, he added.
The investigators reported no funding source or disclosures for this study.
SOURCE: Yang Q et al. Circulation. 2019;50(Suppl_1): Abstract 39
REPORTING FROM ISC 2019
Key clinical point: After a patient develops shingles, prior vaccination or treatment with antiviral medication does not change the risk of acute ischemic stroke.
Major finding: Stroke incidence increased by 61% within 14 days after shingles onset.
Study details: A self-controlled case series of 35,186 Medicare beneficiaries with shingles and acute ischemic stroke.
Disclosures: The authors reported no funding source or disclosures for this study.
Source: Yang Q et al. Circulation. 2019;50(Suppl_1), Abstract 39