Specially formulated topical pain creams are no better than placebo creams for relieving localized chronic pain, according to results from a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

nebari/ThinkStock

Study authors led by Robert E. Brutcher, PharmD, PhD, of Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Bethesda, Md., said their findings published Feb. 4 in Annals of Internal Medicine suggest compounded pain creams should not be routinely used for chronic pain conditions.

The researchers noted that the use of compounded topical pain creams has increased dramatically despite “weak evidence” supporting their efficacy to treat localized pain, and this is particularly the case in military personnel, where the authors said treatments without central effect may be particularly beneficial because “opioid therapy may render a service member nondeployable and medications that affect the central nervous system may have a negative effect on judgment and motor skills.”

They noted a report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office that showed Tricare’s pharmacy benefits program paid $259 million for compounded medications in the 2013 fiscal year, a figure that increased to $746 million in 2014.

“The soaring costs, coupled with sparse efficacy data prompted the Defense Health Agency to evaluate this issue,” they wrote.

The objectives of the current study were to assess the efficacy of compounded pain creams for chronic pain conditions and determine whether efficacy differed for the various pain classifications.

“We hypothesized that, compared with placebo, compounded topical pain creams would provide greater pain relief and functional improvement,” they said.

The randomized trial involved 133 patients diagnosed with neuropathic pain, 133 with nociceptive pain, and 133 with mixed pain who had attended pain clinics at Walter Reed. Patients were aged between 18 and 90 years and had localized pain in the face, back or buttocks, neck, abdomen, chest, groin, or in up to two extremities. To be included in the study, they were also required to have an average pain score of 4 or greater on a 0- to 10-point numerical rating scale during the preceding week and have symptoms lasting longer than 6 weeks.

Patients in all three pain subgroups were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either a compounded pain cream or a placebo cream. The authors noted that their “pain cream formulations were selected on the basis of accepted systemic indications for neuropathic and nociceptive pain.”

The formulation given to participants with neuropathic pain (n = 68) contained 10% ketamine, 6% gabapentin, 0.2% clonidine, and 2% lidocaine. The patients with nociceptive pain (n = 66) received a cream with 10% ketoprofen, 2% baclofen, 2% cyclobenzaprine, and 2% lidocaine. Those with mixed pain (n = 68) were given a cream containing 10% ketamine, 6% gabapentin, 3% diclofenac, 2% baclofen, 2% cyclobenzaprine, and 2% lidocaine. The authors said the concentrations of individual medications were based on previous trials that evaluated topical use.

The patients, who had a mean age across the groups that ranged from 48 to 57 years, applied cream to affected areas three times per day, with the amount dispensed determined by the size of the area experiencing pain. About half of the patients were women.

The primary outcome measures were an average pain score 1 month after treatment. A positive categorical response was a reduction in pain score of 2 or more points coupled with a score above 3 on a 5-point satisfaction scale. Secondary outcomes included Short Form-36 Health Survey scores, satisfaction, and categorical response. Participants with a positive outcome were followed to 3 months.

Change in the primary outcome of average pain score at 1 month did not differ between the active cream and placebo groups for any type of pain classification. The change was only –0.1 points (95% confidence interval, –0.8 to 0.5 points) for neuropathic pain, –0.3 points (95% CI, –0.9 to 0.2 points) for nociceptive pain, and –0.3 points (95% CI, –0.9 to 0.2 points) for mixed pain.

Among all patients combined, an overall change in average pain scores of –0.3 points (95% CI, –0.6 to 0.1 points) that favored the active-ingredient cream also did not differ between the treatment and placebo groups.

“The lower 95% confidence bounds for the 1-month between-group differences were all 0.9 points or less and excluded clinically meaningful benefits with the compounded topical pain cream,” the authors wrote.

Secondary outcomes also did not differ between the two study groups for any type of pain classification or for the entire cohort.

“Although participants in both treatment and control groups had improvement in their pain throughout the study, no significant differences were observed in pain scores, functional improvement, or satisfaction in the cohort or in any subgroup,” the authors concluded.

They noted that their findings were consistent with previous studies that also showed a lack of efficacy for most topical pain creams.

While some randomized trials have suggested positive findings for capsaicin, lidocaine, and NSAIDs, the authors noted that they did not find a similar benefit in their study population.

“Administered as stand-alone agents, lidocaine and NSAIDs may alleviate pain, although the effect size is small and the number needed to treat is large,” they wrote.

“Considering the increased costs of using a non–FDA-approved and regulated compounded cream rather than a single agent, we caution against routine use of compounded creams for chronic pain,” they wrote.

They noted that their study had several limitations, including that conventional treatments had failed in some of the participants before they enrolled in the study, increasing the likelihood that subsequent therapy would not be effective.

The authors suggested that future studies should aim to establish whether targeting specific types of pain or adding other agents like dimethyl sulfoxide would result in better outcomes.

The Centers for Rehabilitation Sciences Research in the U.S. Department of Defense’s Defense Health Agency funded the study. Two authors reported receiving grants and personal fees from several pharmaceutical companies.

SOURCE: Brutcher RE et al. Ann Intern Med. 2019 Feb 4. doi: 10.7326/M18-2736.

Specially formulated topical pain creams are no better than placebo creams for relieving localized chronic pain, according to results from a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

nebari/ThinkStock

Study authors led by Robert E. Brutcher, PharmD, PhD, of Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Bethesda, Md., said their findings published Feb. 4 in Annals of Internal Medicine suggest compounded pain creams should not be routinely used for chronic pain conditions.

The researchers noted that the use of compounded topical pain creams has increased dramatically despite “weak evidence” supporting their efficacy to treat localized pain, and this is particularly the case in military personnel, where the authors said treatments without central effect may be particularly beneficial because “opioid therapy may render a service member nondeployable and medications that affect the central nervous system may have a negative effect on judgment and motor skills.”

They noted a report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office that showed Tricare’s pharmacy benefits program paid $259 million for compounded medications in the 2013 fiscal year, a figure that increased to $746 million in 2014.

“The soaring costs, coupled with sparse efficacy data prompted the Defense Health Agency to evaluate this issue,” they wrote.

The objectives of the current study were to assess the efficacy of compounded pain creams for chronic pain conditions and determine whether efficacy differed for the various pain classifications.

“We hypothesized that, compared with placebo, compounded topical pain creams would provide greater pain relief and functional improvement,” they said.

The randomized trial involved 133 patients diagnosed with neuropathic pain, 133 with nociceptive pain, and 133 with mixed pain who had attended pain clinics at Walter Reed. Patients were aged between 18 and 90 years and had localized pain in the face, back or buttocks, neck, abdomen, chest, groin, or in up to two extremities. To be included in the study, they were also required to have an average pain score of 4 or greater on a 0- to 10-point numerical rating scale during the preceding week and have symptoms lasting longer than 6 weeks.

Patients in all three pain subgroups were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either a compounded pain cream or a placebo cream. The authors noted that their “pain cream formulations were selected on the basis of accepted systemic indications for neuropathic and nociceptive pain.”

The formulation given to participants with neuropathic pain (n = 68) contained 10% ketamine, 6% gabapentin, 0.2% clonidine, and 2% lidocaine. The patients with nociceptive pain (n = 66) received a cream with 10% ketoprofen, 2% baclofen, 2% cyclobenzaprine, and 2% lidocaine. Those with mixed pain (n = 68) were given a cream containing 10% ketamine, 6% gabapentin, 3% diclofenac, 2% baclofen, 2% cyclobenzaprine, and 2% lidocaine. The authors said the concentrations of individual medications were based on previous trials that evaluated topical use.

The patients, who had a mean age across the groups that ranged from 48 to 57 years, applied cream to affected areas three times per day, with the amount dispensed determined by the size of the area experiencing pain. About half of the patients were women.

The primary outcome measures were an average pain score 1 month after treatment. A positive categorical response was a reduction in pain score of 2 or more points coupled with a score above 3 on a 5-point satisfaction scale. Secondary outcomes included Short Form-36 Health Survey scores, satisfaction, and categorical response. Participants with a positive outcome were followed to 3 months.

Change in the primary outcome of average pain score at 1 month did not differ between the active cream and placebo groups for any type of pain classification. The change was only –0.1 points (95% confidence interval, –0.8 to 0.5 points) for neuropathic pain, –0.3 points (95% CI, –0.9 to 0.2 points) for nociceptive pain, and –0.3 points (95% CI, –0.9 to 0.2 points) for mixed pain.

Among all patients combined, an overall change in average pain scores of –0.3 points (95% CI, –0.6 to 0.1 points) that favored the active-ingredient cream also did not differ between the treatment and placebo groups.

“The lower 95% confidence bounds for the 1-month between-group differences were all 0.9 points or less and excluded clinically meaningful benefits with the compounded topical pain cream,” the authors wrote.

Secondary outcomes also did not differ between the two study groups for any type of pain classification or for the entire cohort.

“Although participants in both treatment and control groups had improvement in their pain throughout the study, no significant differences were observed in pain scores, functional improvement, or satisfaction in the cohort or in any subgroup,” the authors concluded.

They noted that their findings were consistent with previous studies that also showed a lack of efficacy for most topical pain creams.

While some randomized trials have suggested positive findings for capsaicin, lidocaine, and NSAIDs, the authors noted that they did not find a similar benefit in their study population.

“Administered as stand-alone agents, lidocaine and NSAIDs may alleviate pain, although the effect size is small and the number needed to treat is large,” they wrote.

“Considering the increased costs of using a non–FDA-approved and regulated compounded cream rather than a single agent, we caution against routine use of compounded creams for chronic pain,” they wrote.

They noted that their study had several limitations, including that conventional treatments had failed in some of the participants before they enrolled in the study, increasing the likelihood that subsequent therapy would not be effective.

The authors suggested that future studies should aim to establish whether targeting specific types of pain or adding other agents like dimethyl sulfoxide would result in better outcomes.

The Centers for Rehabilitation Sciences Research in the U.S. Department of Defense’s Defense Health Agency funded the study. Two authors reported receiving grants and personal fees from several pharmaceutical companies.

SOURCE: Brutcher RE et al. Ann Intern Med. 2019 Feb 4. doi: 10.7326/M18-2736.

Specially formulated topical pain creams are no better than placebo creams for relieving localized chronic pain, according to results from a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

nebari/ThinkStock

Study authors led by Robert E. Brutcher, PharmD, PhD, of Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Bethesda, Md., said their findings published Feb. 4 in Annals of Internal Medicine suggest compounded pain creams should not be routinely used for chronic pain conditions.

The researchers noted that the use of compounded topical pain creams has increased dramatically despite “weak evidence” supporting their efficacy to treat localized pain, and this is particularly the case in military personnel, where the authors said treatments without central effect may be particularly beneficial because “opioid therapy may render a service member nondeployable and medications that affect the central nervous system may have a negative effect on judgment and motor skills.”

They noted a report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office that showed Tricare’s pharmacy benefits program paid $259 million for compounded medications in the 2013 fiscal year, a figure that increased to $746 million in 2014.

“The soaring costs, coupled with sparse efficacy data prompted the Defense Health Agency to evaluate this issue,” they wrote.

The objectives of the current study were to assess the efficacy of compounded pain creams for chronic pain conditions and determine whether efficacy differed for the various pain classifications.

“We hypothesized that, compared with placebo, compounded topical pain creams would provide greater pain relief and functional improvement,” they said.

The randomized trial involved 133 patients diagnosed with neuropathic pain, 133 with nociceptive pain, and 133 with mixed pain who had attended pain clinics at Walter Reed. Patients were aged between 18 and 90 years and had localized pain in the face, back or buttocks, neck, abdomen, chest, groin, or in up to two extremities. To be included in the study, they were also required to have an average pain score of 4 or greater on a 0- to 10-point numerical rating scale during the preceding week and have symptoms lasting longer than 6 weeks.

Patients in all three pain subgroups were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either a compounded pain cream or a placebo cream. The authors noted that their “pain cream formulations were selected on the basis of accepted systemic indications for neuropathic and nociceptive pain.”

The formulation given to participants with neuropathic pain (n = 68) contained 10% ketamine, 6% gabapentin, 0.2% clonidine, and 2% lidocaine. The patients with nociceptive pain (n = 66) received a cream with 10% ketoprofen, 2% baclofen, 2% cyclobenzaprine, and 2% lidocaine. Those with mixed pain (n = 68) were given a cream containing 10% ketamine, 6% gabapentin, 3% diclofenac, 2% baclofen, 2% cyclobenzaprine, and 2% lidocaine. The authors said the concentrations of individual medications were based on previous trials that evaluated topical use.

The patients, who had a mean age across the groups that ranged from 48 to 57 years, applied cream to affected areas three times per day, with the amount dispensed determined by the size of the area experiencing pain. About half of the patients were women.

The primary outcome measures were an average pain score 1 month after treatment. A positive categorical response was a reduction in pain score of 2 or more points coupled with a score above 3 on a 5-point satisfaction scale. Secondary outcomes included Short Form-36 Health Survey scores, satisfaction, and categorical response. Participants with a positive outcome were followed to 3 months.

Change in the primary outcome of average pain score at 1 month did not differ between the active cream and placebo groups for any type of pain classification. The change was only –0.1 points (95% confidence interval, –0.8 to 0.5 points) for neuropathic pain, –0.3 points (95% CI, –0.9 to 0.2 points) for nociceptive pain, and –0.3 points (95% CI, –0.9 to 0.2 points) for mixed pain.

Among all patients combined, an overall change in average pain scores of –0.3 points (95% CI, –0.6 to 0.1 points) that favored the active-ingredient cream also did not differ between the treatment and placebo groups.

“The lower 95% confidence bounds for the 1-month between-group differences were all 0.9 points or less and excluded clinically meaningful benefits with the compounded topical pain cream,” the authors wrote.

Secondary outcomes also did not differ between the two study groups for any type of pain classification or for the entire cohort.

“Although participants in both treatment and control groups had improvement in their pain throughout the study, no significant differences were observed in pain scores, functional improvement, or satisfaction in the cohort or in any subgroup,” the authors concluded.

They noted that their findings were consistent with previous studies that also showed a lack of efficacy for most topical pain creams.

While some randomized trials have suggested positive findings for capsaicin, lidocaine, and NSAIDs, the authors noted that they did not find a similar benefit in their study population.

“Administered as stand-alone agents, lidocaine and NSAIDs may alleviate pain, although the effect size is small and the number needed to treat is large,” they wrote.

“Considering the increased costs of using a non–FDA-approved and regulated compounded cream rather than a single agent, we caution against routine use of compounded creams for chronic pain,” they wrote.

They noted that their study had several limitations, including that conventional treatments had failed in some of the participants before they enrolled in the study, increasing the likelihood that subsequent therapy would not be effective.

The authors suggested that future studies should aim to establish whether targeting specific types of pain or adding other agents like dimethyl sulfoxide would result in better outcomes.

The Centers for Rehabilitation Sciences Research in the U.S. Department of Defense’s Defense Health Agency funded the study. Two authors reported receiving grants and personal fees from several pharmaceutical companies.

SOURCE: Brutcher RE et al. Ann Intern Med. 2019 Feb 4. doi: 10.7326/M18-2736.

Public health experts have attributed the alarming rise in hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection rates in recent years to the opioid epidemic, and a new Rand study suggests that an effort to deter opioid abuse – namely the 2010 abuse-deterrent reformulation of OxyContin – is partly to blame.

Between 2004 and 2015, HCV infection rates in the United States nearly tripled, but a closer look showed that states with above-median rates of OxyContin misuse prior to the reformulation had a 222% increase in HCV rates, compared with a 75% increase in states with below-median OxyContin misuse, said David Powell, PhD, a senior economist at Rand in Arlington, Va., and his colleagues, Abby Alpert, PhD, and Rosalie L. Pacula, PhD. The report was published in Health Affairs.

The coauthors found that hepatitis C infection rates were not significantly different between the two groups of states before the reformulation (0.350 vs. 0.260). But after 2010, there were large and statistically significant differences in the rates (1.128 vs. 0.455; P less than 0.01), they wrote, noting that the above-median states experienced an additional 0.58 HCV infections per 100,000 population through 2015 relative to the below-median states).

HCV infection rates declined during the 1990s followed by a plateau beginning around 2003, then rose sharply beginning in 2010, coinciding with the introduction of the release of the abuse-deterrent formulation of OxyContin, which is one of the most commonly misused opioid analgesics, the investigators said, explaining that the reformulated version was harder to crush or dissolve, making it more difficult to inhale or inject.

“Prior studies have shown that, after OxyContin became more difficult to abuse, some nonmedical users of OxyContin switched to heroin (a pharmacologically similar opiate),” they noted.

This led to a decline of more than 40% in OxyContin misuse but also to a sharp increase in heroin overdoses after 2010.

The investigators assessed whether the related increase in heroin use might explain the increase in HCV infections, which can be transmitted through shared needle use.

Using a quasi-experimental difference-in-differences approach, they examined whether states with higher exposure to the reformulated OxyContin had faster growth of HCV infection rates after the reformulations, and as a falsification exercise, they also looked at whether the nonmedical use of pain relievers other than OxyContin predicted post-reformulation HCV infection rate increases.

HCV infection rates for each calendar year from 2004 to 2015 were assessed using confirmed case reports collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and nonmedical OxyContin use was measured using self-reported data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, which is the largest U.S. survey on substance use disorder.

The two groups of states had similar demographic and economic conditions, except that the above-median misuse states had smaller populations and a larger proportion of white residents.

Of note, the patterns of HCV infection mirrored those of heroin overdoses. There was small relative increase in HCV infection rates in 2010 in the above-median OxyContin misuse states, and the gap between above- and below-median misuse states widened more rapidly from 2011 to 2013. “This striking inflection point in the trend of hepatitis C infections for high-misuse states after 2010 mimics the inflection in heroin overdoses that occurred as a result of the reformulation,” they said, noting that heroin morality per 100,000 population was nearly identical in the two groups of states in the pre-reformulation period (0.859 and 0.847).

The falsification exercise looking at nonmedical use of pain relievers other than OxyContin in the two groups of states showed that after 2010 groups’ rates of hepatitis C infections grew at virtually identical rates.

“Thus, the differential risk in hepatitis C infections was uniquely associated with OxyContin misuse, rather than prescription pain reliever misuse more generally,” they said. “This suggests that it was the OxyContin reformulation, not other policies broadly affecting opioids, that drove much of the differential growth.”

The investigators controlled for numerous other factors, including opioid policies that might have an impact on OxyContin and heroin use, prescription drug monitoring programs and pain clinic regulations, as well as the role of major pill-mill crackdowns in 2010 and 2011.

The findings represent a “substantial public health concern,” they said, explaining that, while “considerable policy attention is being given to managing the opioid epidemic ... a ‘silent epidemic’ of hepatitis C has emerged as a result of a transition in the mode of administration toward injection drug use.”

In 2017, the CDC reported on this link between the opioid epidemic and rising HCV infection rates, as well.

“It is possible that this transition will also lead to rising rates of other infectious diseases tied to injection drug use, including HIV,” Dr. Powell and his colleagues wrote.

Their findings regarding the unintended consequences of the OxyContin reformulation suggest that caution is warranted with respect to future interventions that limit the supply of abusable prescription opioids, they said, adding that “such interventions must be paired with polices that alleviate the harms associated with switching to illicit drugs, such as improved access to substance use disorder treatment and increased efforts aimed at identifying and treating diseases associated with injection drug use.”

However, policy makers and medical professionals also must recognize that reducing opioid-related mortality and increasing access to drug treatment might not be sufficient to fully address all of the public health consequences associated with the opioid crisis. As additional reformulations of opioids are promoted and more policies seek to limit access to prescription opioids, “both the medical and the law enforcement communities must recognize the critical transition from prescription opioids to other drugs, particularly those that are injected, and be prepared to consider complementary strategies that can effectively reduce the additional harms from the particular mode of drug use,” they concluded.

The coauthors cited several limitations, including the possibility that true hepatitis C infection rates might have been underestimated in the study.

He and Dr. Pacula received funding from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Dr. Powell also cited funding from the Rand Alumni Impact Award.

sworcester@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Powell D et al. Health Aff. 2019;38(2):287-94.

Public health experts have attributed the alarming rise in hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection rates in recent years to the opioid epidemic, and a new Rand study suggests that an effort to deter opioid abuse – namely the 2010 abuse-deterrent reformulation of OxyContin – is partly to blame.

Between 2004 and 2015, HCV infection rates in the United States nearly tripled, but a closer look showed that states with above-median rates of OxyContin misuse prior to the reformulation had a 222% increase in HCV rates, compared with a 75% increase in states with below-median OxyContin misuse, said David Powell, PhD, a senior economist at Rand in Arlington, Va., and his colleagues, Abby Alpert, PhD, and Rosalie L. Pacula, PhD. The report was published in Health Affairs.

The coauthors found that hepatitis C infection rates were not significantly different between the two groups of states before the reformulation (0.350 vs. 0.260). But after 2010, there were large and statistically significant differences in the rates (1.128 vs. 0.455; P less than 0.01), they wrote, noting that the above-median states experienced an additional 0.58 HCV infections per 100,000 population through 2015 relative to the below-median states).

HCV infection rates declined during the 1990s followed by a plateau beginning around 2003, then rose sharply beginning in 2010, coinciding with the introduction of the release of the abuse-deterrent formulation of OxyContin, which is one of the most commonly misused opioid analgesics, the investigators said, explaining that the reformulated version was harder to crush or dissolve, making it more difficult to inhale or inject.

“Prior studies have shown that, after OxyContin became more difficult to abuse, some nonmedical users of OxyContin switched to heroin (a pharmacologically similar opiate),” they noted.

This led to a decline of more than 40% in OxyContin misuse but also to a sharp increase in heroin overdoses after 2010.

The investigators assessed whether the related increase in heroin use might explain the increase in HCV infections, which can be transmitted through shared needle use.

Using a quasi-experimental difference-in-differences approach, they examined whether states with higher exposure to the reformulated OxyContin had faster growth of HCV infection rates after the reformulations, and as a falsification exercise, they also looked at whether the nonmedical use of pain relievers other than OxyContin predicted post-reformulation HCV infection rate increases.

HCV infection rates for each calendar year from 2004 to 2015 were assessed using confirmed case reports collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and nonmedical OxyContin use was measured using self-reported data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, which is the largest U.S. survey on substance use disorder.

The two groups of states had similar demographic and economic conditions, except that the above-median misuse states had smaller populations and a larger proportion of white residents.

Of note, the patterns of HCV infection mirrored those of heroin overdoses. There was small relative increase in HCV infection rates in 2010 in the above-median OxyContin misuse states, and the gap between above- and below-median misuse states widened more rapidly from 2011 to 2013. “This striking inflection point in the trend of hepatitis C infections for high-misuse states after 2010 mimics the inflection in heroin overdoses that occurred as a result of the reformulation,” they said, noting that heroin morality per 100,000 population was nearly identical in the two groups of states in the pre-reformulation period (0.859 and 0.847).

The falsification exercise looking at nonmedical use of pain relievers other than OxyContin in the two groups of states showed that after 2010 groups’ rates of hepatitis C infections grew at virtually identical rates.

“Thus, the differential risk in hepatitis C infections was uniquely associated with OxyContin misuse, rather than prescription pain reliever misuse more generally,” they said. “This suggests that it was the OxyContin reformulation, not other policies broadly affecting opioids, that drove much of the differential growth.”

The investigators controlled for numerous other factors, including opioid policies that might have an impact on OxyContin and heroin use, prescription drug monitoring programs and pain clinic regulations, as well as the role of major pill-mill crackdowns in 2010 and 2011.

The findings represent a “substantial public health concern,” they said, explaining that, while “considerable policy attention is being given to managing the opioid epidemic ... a ‘silent epidemic’ of hepatitis C has emerged as a result of a transition in the mode of administration toward injection drug use.”

In 2017, the CDC reported on this link between the opioid epidemic and rising HCV infection rates, as well.

“It is possible that this transition will also lead to rising rates of other infectious diseases tied to injection drug use, including HIV,” Dr. Powell and his colleagues wrote.

Their findings regarding the unintended consequences of the OxyContin reformulation suggest that caution is warranted with respect to future interventions that limit the supply of abusable prescription opioids, they said, adding that “such interventions must be paired with polices that alleviate the harms associated with switching to illicit drugs, such as improved access to substance use disorder treatment and increased efforts aimed at identifying and treating diseases associated with injection drug use.”

However, policy makers and medical professionals also must recognize that reducing opioid-related mortality and increasing access to drug treatment might not be sufficient to fully address all of the public health consequences associated with the opioid crisis. As additional reformulations of opioids are promoted and more policies seek to limit access to prescription opioids, “both the medical and the law enforcement communities must recognize the critical transition from prescription opioids to other drugs, particularly those that are injected, and be prepared to consider complementary strategies that can effectively reduce the additional harms from the particular mode of drug use,” they concluded.

The coauthors cited several limitations, including the possibility that true hepatitis C infection rates might have been underestimated in the study.

He and Dr. Pacula received funding from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Dr. Powell also cited funding from the Rand Alumni Impact Award.

sworcester@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Powell D et al. Health Aff. 2019;38(2):287-94.

Public health experts have attributed the alarming rise in hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection rates in recent years to the opioid epidemic, and a new Rand study suggests that an effort to deter opioid abuse – namely the 2010 abuse-deterrent reformulation of OxyContin – is partly to blame.

Between 2004 and 2015, HCV infection rates in the United States nearly tripled, but a closer look showed that states with above-median rates of OxyContin misuse prior to the reformulation had a 222% increase in HCV rates, compared with a 75% increase in states with below-median OxyContin misuse, said David Powell, PhD, a senior economist at Rand in Arlington, Va., and his colleagues, Abby Alpert, PhD, and Rosalie L. Pacula, PhD. The report was published in Health Affairs.

The coauthors found that hepatitis C infection rates were not significantly different between the two groups of states before the reformulation (0.350 vs. 0.260). But after 2010, there were large and statistically significant differences in the rates (1.128 vs. 0.455; P less than 0.01), they wrote, noting that the above-median states experienced an additional 0.58 HCV infections per 100,000 population through 2015 relative to the below-median states).

HCV infection rates declined during the 1990s followed by a plateau beginning around 2003, then rose sharply beginning in 2010, coinciding with the introduction of the release of the abuse-deterrent formulation of OxyContin, which is one of the most commonly misused opioid analgesics, the investigators said, explaining that the reformulated version was harder to crush or dissolve, making it more difficult to inhale or inject.

“Prior studies have shown that, after OxyContin became more difficult to abuse, some nonmedical users of OxyContin switched to heroin (a pharmacologically similar opiate),” they noted.

This led to a decline of more than 40% in OxyContin misuse but also to a sharp increase in heroin overdoses after 2010.

The investigators assessed whether the related increase in heroin use might explain the increase in HCV infections, which can be transmitted through shared needle use.

Using a quasi-experimental difference-in-differences approach, they examined whether states with higher exposure to the reformulated OxyContin had faster growth of HCV infection rates after the reformulations, and as a falsification exercise, they also looked at whether the nonmedical use of pain relievers other than OxyContin predicted post-reformulation HCV infection rate increases.

HCV infection rates for each calendar year from 2004 to 2015 were assessed using confirmed case reports collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and nonmedical OxyContin use was measured using self-reported data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, which is the largest U.S. survey on substance use disorder.

The two groups of states had similar demographic and economic conditions, except that the above-median misuse states had smaller populations and a larger proportion of white residents.

Of note, the patterns of HCV infection mirrored those of heroin overdoses. There was small relative increase in HCV infection rates in 2010 in the above-median OxyContin misuse states, and the gap between above- and below-median misuse states widened more rapidly from 2011 to 2013. “This striking inflection point in the trend of hepatitis C infections for high-misuse states after 2010 mimics the inflection in heroin overdoses that occurred as a result of the reformulation,” they said, noting that heroin morality per 100,000 population was nearly identical in the two groups of states in the pre-reformulation period (0.859 and 0.847).

The falsification exercise looking at nonmedical use of pain relievers other than OxyContin in the two groups of states showed that after 2010 groups’ rates of hepatitis C infections grew at virtually identical rates.

“Thus, the differential risk in hepatitis C infections was uniquely associated with OxyContin misuse, rather than prescription pain reliever misuse more generally,” they said. “This suggests that it was the OxyContin reformulation, not other policies broadly affecting opioids, that drove much of the differential growth.”

The investigators controlled for numerous other factors, including opioid policies that might have an impact on OxyContin and heroin use, prescription drug monitoring programs and pain clinic regulations, as well as the role of major pill-mill crackdowns in 2010 and 2011.

The findings represent a “substantial public health concern,” they said, explaining that, while “considerable policy attention is being given to managing the opioid epidemic ... a ‘silent epidemic’ of hepatitis C has emerged as a result of a transition in the mode of administration toward injection drug use.”

In 2017, the CDC reported on this link between the opioid epidemic and rising HCV infection rates, as well.

“It is possible that this transition will also lead to rising rates of other infectious diseases tied to injection drug use, including HIV,” Dr. Powell and his colleagues wrote.

Their findings regarding the unintended consequences of the OxyContin reformulation suggest that caution is warranted with respect to future interventions that limit the supply of abusable prescription opioids, they said, adding that “such interventions must be paired with polices that alleviate the harms associated with switching to illicit drugs, such as improved access to substance use disorder treatment and increased efforts aimed at identifying and treating diseases associated with injection drug use.”

However, policy makers and medical professionals also must recognize that reducing opioid-related mortality and increasing access to drug treatment might not be sufficient to fully address all of the public health consequences associated with the opioid crisis. As additional reformulations of opioids are promoted and more policies seek to limit access to prescription opioids, “both the medical and the law enforcement communities must recognize the critical transition from prescription opioids to other drugs, particularly those that are injected, and be prepared to consider complementary strategies that can effectively reduce the additional harms from the particular mode of drug use,” they concluded.

The coauthors cited several limitations, including the possibility that true hepatitis C infection rates might have been underestimated in the study.

He and Dr. Pacula received funding from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Dr. Powell also cited funding from the Rand Alumni Impact Award.

sworcester@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Powell D et al. Health Aff. 2019;38(2):287-94.

BOSTON – An atrial mapping catheter that combines ultrasound anatomic mapping with nontouch, high-resolution, charge-density mapping resulted in a high, 73% freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation rate 12 months after ablation procedures guided by this catheter in a single-arm, multicenter study with 121 patients with persistent atrial fibrillation followed for 1 year.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

The AcQMap device tested in the study “allows you to quickly remap” the left atrium after an initial pulmonary vein isolation or after other types of ablations to find remaining areas of abnormal electrical activity on the atrial walls and then “go after those,” Atul Verma, MD, said at the annual International AF Symposium.

An analysis he reported showed that the single patient variable that linked with the highest rate of 1-year freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) was having at least three atrial targets ablated in addition to pulmonary vein isolation. Patients who received this number of added ablations were more than nine times more likely to be free from AF after 12 months, compared with patients who received fewer additional ablations, said Dr. Verma, a cardiac electrophysiologist at Southlake Regional Health Centre in Newmarket, Ont.

The AcQMap catheter “identifies more places to ablate.” What makes it unique among currently available mapping devices is its high resolution, its use of charge-density mapping rather than voltage-based mapping, and its speed, Dr. Verma said in an interview.

The AcQMap device has Food and Drug Administration marketing approval for mapping and so is available for routine U.S. use. However, Dr. Verma cautioned that the increased freedom from persistent AF after using the catheter during ablation that he reported should be confirmed by a randomized trial. Another electrophysiologist who performs ablations but was not involved with the study, Vivek Reddy, MD, agreed with this caveat.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

“Nonrandomized trials of ablation in patients with persistent AF are at best hypothesis generating. We’ve learned that the hard way; we have been burned too many times. To assess mapping of AF activity you need a randomized, controlled trial,” said Dr. Reddy, professor of medicine and director of cardiac arrhythmia services at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York.

The UNCOVER-AF (Utilizing Novel Dipole Density Capabilities to Objectively Visualize the Etiology of Rhythms in Atrial Fibrillation) study ran at 13 centers in Canada and Europe and enrolled 129 patients who had persistent AF for an average of almost 2 years, of whom 127 actually underwent an ablation procedure and 121 were followed for 12 months post ablation. Operators were free to use the AcQMap device to map the left atrium as many times as they thought necessary, generally once at the start of the procedure, a second time after they completed pulmonary vein isolation, and then a variable number of subsequent times. On average they performed about four mappings in each patient. At entry, patients had received an average of one antiarrhythmic drug. After their ablation treatment, about 10% of patients received an antiarrhythmic drug.

The investigators found no major adverse events linked to use of the mapping device. Three patients had major adverse events related to the overall ablation procedure: Two developed cardiac tamponade, and one had a stroke. No patients had an esophageal fistula or symptomatic pulmonary vein stenosis.

After the single ablation procedure and at 12-month follow-up, the prevalence of freedom from recurrent AF was 73%, and freedom from any atrial arrhythmia was 69%. As a historical comparison, Dr. Verma cited the 12-month outcome following pulmonary vein isolation and other ablative measures in the STAR AF II (Substrate and Trigger Ablation for Reduction of Atrial Fibrillation Trial Part II) trial, which reported a 59% freedom from AF rate and a 49% freedom from any atrial arrhythmia rate with or without antiarrhythmic drug treatment after pulmonary vein isolation (N Engl J Med. 2015 May 7;372[19]:1812-22).

Multivariate analysis of the new data showed that, in addition to ablation of three or more targets, two other variables also linked significantly with long-term freedom from AF: Ablation of at least two types of electrical abnormalities in the left atrial wall, which boosted the 12-month AF-free rate by 2.8 fold, and being in sinus rhythm at the start of the ablation procedure, which linked with a 5-fold higher rate of long-term freedom from AF.

Dr. Verma also reported the AF burden measured after ablation in 96 patients who each underwent an average of 85 hours of postablation heart rhythm monitoring. Ninety percent of these patients showed no AF episodes of more than 30 seconds throughout the duration of their monitoring.

UNCOVER-AF was funded by Acutus, the company that markets the AcQMap catheter. Dr. Verma has been an advisor to or speaker on behalf of Bayer, Biosense Webster, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Medtronic, and St. Jude (Abbott), and he has received research funding from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Medtronic. He had no personal disclosures relative to Acutus. Dr. Reddy has been a consultant to, received research funding from, and has an equity stake in Acutus, and has similar relationships with more than three dozen other companies.

mzoler@mdedge.com

BOSTON – An atrial mapping catheter that combines ultrasound anatomic mapping with nontouch, high-resolution, charge-density mapping resulted in a high, 73% freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation rate 12 months after ablation procedures guided by this catheter in a single-arm, multicenter study with 121 patients with persistent atrial fibrillation followed for 1 year.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

The AcQMap device tested in the study “allows you to quickly remap” the left atrium after an initial pulmonary vein isolation or after other types of ablations to find remaining areas of abnormal electrical activity on the atrial walls and then “go after those,” Atul Verma, MD, said at the annual International AF Symposium.

An analysis he reported showed that the single patient variable that linked with the highest rate of 1-year freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) was having at least three atrial targets ablated in addition to pulmonary vein isolation. Patients who received this number of added ablations were more than nine times more likely to be free from AF after 12 months, compared with patients who received fewer additional ablations, said Dr. Verma, a cardiac electrophysiologist at Southlake Regional Health Centre in Newmarket, Ont.

The AcQMap catheter “identifies more places to ablate.” What makes it unique among currently available mapping devices is its high resolution, its use of charge-density mapping rather than voltage-based mapping, and its speed, Dr. Verma said in an interview.

The AcQMap device has Food and Drug Administration marketing approval for mapping and so is available for routine U.S. use. However, Dr. Verma cautioned that the increased freedom from persistent AF after using the catheter during ablation that he reported should be confirmed by a randomized trial. Another electrophysiologist who performs ablations but was not involved with the study, Vivek Reddy, MD, agreed with this caveat.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

“Nonrandomized trials of ablation in patients with persistent AF are at best hypothesis generating. We’ve learned that the hard way; we have been burned too many times. To assess mapping of AF activity you need a randomized, controlled trial,” said Dr. Reddy, professor of medicine and director of cardiac arrhythmia services at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York.

The UNCOVER-AF (Utilizing Novel Dipole Density Capabilities to Objectively Visualize the Etiology of Rhythms in Atrial Fibrillation) study ran at 13 centers in Canada and Europe and enrolled 129 patients who had persistent AF for an average of almost 2 years, of whom 127 actually underwent an ablation procedure and 121 were followed for 12 months post ablation. Operators were free to use the AcQMap device to map the left atrium as many times as they thought necessary, generally once at the start of the procedure, a second time after they completed pulmonary vein isolation, and then a variable number of subsequent times. On average they performed about four mappings in each patient. At entry, patients had received an average of one antiarrhythmic drug. After their ablation treatment, about 10% of patients received an antiarrhythmic drug.

The investigators found no major adverse events linked to use of the mapping device. Three patients had major adverse events related to the overall ablation procedure: Two developed cardiac tamponade, and one had a stroke. No patients had an esophageal fistula or symptomatic pulmonary vein stenosis.

After the single ablation procedure and at 12-month follow-up, the prevalence of freedom from recurrent AF was 73%, and freedom from any atrial arrhythmia was 69%. As a historical comparison, Dr. Verma cited the 12-month outcome following pulmonary vein isolation and other ablative measures in the STAR AF II (Substrate and Trigger Ablation for Reduction of Atrial Fibrillation Trial Part II) trial, which reported a 59% freedom from AF rate and a 49% freedom from any atrial arrhythmia rate with or without antiarrhythmic drug treatment after pulmonary vein isolation (N Engl J Med. 2015 May 7;372[19]:1812-22).

Multivariate analysis of the new data showed that, in addition to ablation of three or more targets, two other variables also linked significantly with long-term freedom from AF: Ablation of at least two types of electrical abnormalities in the left atrial wall, which boosted the 12-month AF-free rate by 2.8 fold, and being in sinus rhythm at the start of the ablation procedure, which linked with a 5-fold higher rate of long-term freedom from AF.

Dr. Verma also reported the AF burden measured after ablation in 96 patients who each underwent an average of 85 hours of postablation heart rhythm monitoring. Ninety percent of these patients showed no AF episodes of more than 30 seconds throughout the duration of their monitoring.

UNCOVER-AF was funded by Acutus, the company that markets the AcQMap catheter. Dr. Verma has been an advisor to or speaker on behalf of Bayer, Biosense Webster, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Medtronic, and St. Jude (Abbott), and he has received research funding from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Medtronic. He had no personal disclosures relative to Acutus. Dr. Reddy has been a consultant to, received research funding from, and has an equity stake in Acutus, and has similar relationships with more than three dozen other companies.

mzoler@mdedge.com

BOSTON – An atrial mapping catheter that combines ultrasound anatomic mapping with nontouch, high-resolution, charge-density mapping resulted in a high, 73% freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation rate 12 months after ablation procedures guided by this catheter in a single-arm, multicenter study with 121 patients with persistent atrial fibrillation followed for 1 year.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

The AcQMap device tested in the study “allows you to quickly remap” the left atrium after an initial pulmonary vein isolation or after other types of ablations to find remaining areas of abnormal electrical activity on the atrial walls and then “go after those,” Atul Verma, MD, said at the annual International AF Symposium.

An analysis he reported showed that the single patient variable that linked with the highest rate of 1-year freedom from recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) was having at least three atrial targets ablated in addition to pulmonary vein isolation. Patients who received this number of added ablations were more than nine times more likely to be free from AF after 12 months, compared with patients who received fewer additional ablations, said Dr. Verma, a cardiac electrophysiologist at Southlake Regional Health Centre in Newmarket, Ont.

The AcQMap catheter “identifies more places to ablate.” What makes it unique among currently available mapping devices is its high resolution, its use of charge-density mapping rather than voltage-based mapping, and its speed, Dr. Verma said in an interview.

The AcQMap device has Food and Drug Administration marketing approval for mapping and so is available for routine U.S. use. However, Dr. Verma cautioned that the increased freedom from persistent AF after using the catheter during ablation that he reported should be confirmed by a randomized trial. Another electrophysiologist who performs ablations but was not involved with the study, Vivek Reddy, MD, agreed with this caveat.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

“Nonrandomized trials of ablation in patients with persistent AF are at best hypothesis generating. We’ve learned that the hard way; we have been burned too many times. To assess mapping of AF activity you need a randomized, controlled trial,” said Dr. Reddy, professor of medicine and director of cardiac arrhythmia services at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York.

The UNCOVER-AF (Utilizing Novel Dipole Density Capabilities to Objectively Visualize the Etiology of Rhythms in Atrial Fibrillation) study ran at 13 centers in Canada and Europe and enrolled 129 patients who had persistent AF for an average of almost 2 years, of whom 127 actually underwent an ablation procedure and 121 were followed for 12 months post ablation. Operators were free to use the AcQMap device to map the left atrium as many times as they thought necessary, generally once at the start of the procedure, a second time after they completed pulmonary vein isolation, and then a variable number of subsequent times. On average they performed about four mappings in each patient. At entry, patients had received an average of one antiarrhythmic drug. After their ablation treatment, about 10% of patients received an antiarrhythmic drug.

The investigators found no major adverse events linked to use of the mapping device. Three patients had major adverse events related to the overall ablation procedure: Two developed cardiac tamponade, and one had a stroke. No patients had an esophageal fistula or symptomatic pulmonary vein stenosis.

After the single ablation procedure and at 12-month follow-up, the prevalence of freedom from recurrent AF was 73%, and freedom from any atrial arrhythmia was 69%. As a historical comparison, Dr. Verma cited the 12-month outcome following pulmonary vein isolation and other ablative measures in the STAR AF II (Substrate and Trigger Ablation for Reduction of Atrial Fibrillation Trial Part II) trial, which reported a 59% freedom from AF rate and a 49% freedom from any atrial arrhythmia rate with or without antiarrhythmic drug treatment after pulmonary vein isolation (N Engl J Med. 2015 May 7;372[19]:1812-22).

Multivariate analysis of the new data showed that, in addition to ablation of three or more targets, two other variables also linked significantly with long-term freedom from AF: Ablation of at least two types of electrical abnormalities in the left atrial wall, which boosted the 12-month AF-free rate by 2.8 fold, and being in sinus rhythm at the start of the ablation procedure, which linked with a 5-fold higher rate of long-term freedom from AF.

Dr. Verma also reported the AF burden measured after ablation in 96 patients who each underwent an average of 85 hours of postablation heart rhythm monitoring. Ninety percent of these patients showed no AF episodes of more than 30 seconds throughout the duration of their monitoring.

UNCOVER-AF was funded by Acutus, the company that markets the AcQMap catheter. Dr. Verma has been an advisor to or speaker on behalf of Bayer, Biosense Webster, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Medtronic, and St. Jude (Abbott), and he has received research funding from Bayer, Biosense Webster, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Medtronic. He had no personal disclosures relative to Acutus. Dr. Reddy has been a consultant to, received research funding from, and has an equity stake in Acutus, and has similar relationships with more than three dozen other companies.

mzoler@mdedge.com

“I’d be a millionaire if I could get rid of my conscience.”

A friend of mine in obstetrics said that yesterday. We were talking about the various quackery products pushed over the Internet and in some stores. These things claim to heal anything from Parkinson’s disease to a broken heart, and are generally sold by someone without real medical training. Generally, they also include some comment about this being a cure that doctors are hiding from you.

Of course, all of this is untrue. If there were actually cure for some horrible neurologic disease, I’d be thrilled to prescribe it. I’m here to reduce suffering, not prolong it.

I get it. People want to believe there’s hope when there is none. Even if it’s just something like forgetting a broken relationship, they want to believe there’s a way to make it happen quickly and painlessly.

It would be nice if it worked that way, but it doesn’t. Worse, people in these unfortunate medical or emotional situations are often vulnerable to these sales pitches, and there’s no shortage of unscrupulous individuals willing to prey on them.

What bothers me most in these cases is when doctors, with training similar to mine, push these “remedies.” Often they’re sold in a case in the waiting room and recommended during the visit. I assume these physicians either have lost their conscience and don’t care, or over time have somehow convinced themselves that what they’re doing is right.

Having a doctor selling or endorsing such a product gives it a credibility that it usually won’t get from an average Internet huckster, even if it’s for the same thing.

I’m sure some doctors have convinced themselves that the product is harmless, and therefore falls under primum non nocere. But being harmless isn’t the same as being effective, which is what the patient wants.

Like my friend said, with the financial pressures modern physicians are under, it’s easy to look at things like this as a way to improve cash flow and the bottom line. But you can’t lose sight of the patients. They’re why we are here, and selling them a product that will do them no good isn’t right.

Hippocrates’ “Do no harm” is a key part of being a doctor, but Jiminy Cricket’s “always let your conscience be your guide” is part of being a good doctor. We should never forget that.
 

Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.

“I’d be a millionaire if I could get rid of my conscience.”

A friend of mine in obstetrics said that yesterday. We were talking about the various quackery products pushed over the Internet and in some stores. These things claim to heal anything from Parkinson’s disease to a broken heart, and are generally sold by someone without real medical training. Generally, they also include some comment about this being a cure that doctors are hiding from you.

Of course, all of this is untrue. If there were actually cure for some horrible neurologic disease, I’d be thrilled to prescribe it. I’m here to reduce suffering, not prolong it.

I get it. People want to believe there’s hope when there is none. Even if it’s just something like forgetting a broken relationship, they want to believe there’s a way to make it happen quickly and painlessly.

It would be nice if it worked that way, but it doesn’t. Worse, people in these unfortunate medical or emotional situations are often vulnerable to these sales pitches, and there’s no shortage of unscrupulous individuals willing to prey on them.

What bothers me most in these cases is when doctors, with training similar to mine, push these “remedies.” Often they’re sold in a case in the waiting room and recommended during the visit. I assume these physicians either have lost their conscience and don’t care, or over time have somehow convinced themselves that what they’re doing is right.

Having a doctor selling or endorsing such a product gives it a credibility that it usually won’t get from an average Internet huckster, even if it’s for the same thing.

I’m sure some doctors have convinced themselves that the product is harmless, and therefore falls under primum non nocere. But being harmless isn’t the same as being effective, which is what the patient wants.

Like my friend said, with the financial pressures modern physicians are under, it’s easy to look at things like this as a way to improve cash flow and the bottom line. But you can’t lose sight of the patients. They’re why we are here, and selling them a product that will do them no good isn’t right.

Hippocrates’ “Do no harm” is a key part of being a doctor, but Jiminy Cricket’s “always let your conscience be your guide” is part of being a good doctor. We should never forget that.
 

Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.

“I’d be a millionaire if I could get rid of my conscience.”

A friend of mine in obstetrics said that yesterday. We were talking about the various quackery products pushed over the Internet and in some stores. These things claim to heal anything from Parkinson’s disease to a broken heart, and are generally sold by someone without real medical training. Generally, they also include some comment about this being a cure that doctors are hiding from you.

Of course, all of this is untrue. If there were actually cure for some horrible neurologic disease, I’d be thrilled to prescribe it. I’m here to reduce suffering, not prolong it.

I get it. People want to believe there’s hope when there is none. Even if it’s just something like forgetting a broken relationship, they want to believe there’s a way to make it happen quickly and painlessly.

It would be nice if it worked that way, but it doesn’t. Worse, people in these unfortunate medical or emotional situations are often vulnerable to these sales pitches, and there’s no shortage of unscrupulous individuals willing to prey on them.

What bothers me most in these cases is when doctors, with training similar to mine, push these “remedies.” Often they’re sold in a case in the waiting room and recommended during the visit. I assume these physicians either have lost their conscience and don’t care, or over time have somehow convinced themselves that what they’re doing is right.

Having a doctor selling or endorsing such a product gives it a credibility that it usually won’t get from an average Internet huckster, even if it’s for the same thing.

I’m sure some doctors have convinced themselves that the product is harmless, and therefore falls under primum non nocere. But being harmless isn’t the same as being effective, which is what the patient wants.

Like my friend said, with the financial pressures modern physicians are under, it’s easy to look at things like this as a way to improve cash flow and the bottom line. But you can’t lose sight of the patients. They’re why we are here, and selling them a product that will do them no good isn’t right.

Hippocrates’ “Do no harm” is a key part of being a doctor, but Jiminy Cricket’s “always let your conscience be your guide” is part of being a good doctor. We should never forget that.
 

Dr. Block has a solo neurology practice in Scottsdale, Ariz.

Stryker has announced a voluntary field action for its Lifepak 15 monitor/defibrillators, according to a safety alert from the Food and Drug Administration.

Wikimedia Commons/FitzColinGerald/Creative Commons License

The company is notifying certain Lifepak 15 customers of an issue causing the device to lock up after a defibrillation shock is delivered. The lockup displays as a blank monitor with the LED lights on, indicating that the power is on, but the keypad and device become nonfunctional, the FDA said. This lockup can delay delivery of therapy, which can cause injury or death.

Since the introduction of the device in 2009, 58 complaints regarding the issue have been reported, including 6 that resulted in death. In all, 13,003 devices are included in the field action.

Customers should continue to use their devices if they have been affected until a correction can be completed. If the lockup occurs, the user should press and hold the “on” button until the LED turns off, then hit the “on” button again. If this does not reset the device, the batteries should be removed and reinserted, or the device should be removed and reconnected to its power adapter, the FDA said.

Find the full press release on the FDA website.

lfranki@mdedge.com

Stryker has announced a voluntary field action for its Lifepak 15 monitor/defibrillators, according to a safety alert from the Food and Drug Administration.

Wikimedia Commons/FitzColinGerald/Creative Commons License

The company is notifying certain Lifepak 15 customers of an issue causing the device to lock up after a defibrillation shock is delivered. The lockup displays as a blank monitor with the LED lights on, indicating that the power is on, but the keypad and device become nonfunctional, the FDA said. This lockup can delay delivery of therapy, which can cause injury or death.

Since the introduction of the device in 2009, 58 complaints regarding the issue have been reported, including 6 that resulted in death. In all, 13,003 devices are included in the field action.

Customers should continue to use their devices if they have been affected until a correction can be completed. If the lockup occurs, the user should press and hold the “on” button until the LED turns off, then hit the “on” button again. If this does not reset the device, the batteries should be removed and reinserted, or the device should be removed and reconnected to its power adapter, the FDA said.

Find the full press release on the FDA website.

lfranki@mdedge.com

Stryker has announced a voluntary field action for its Lifepak 15 monitor/defibrillators, according to a safety alert from the Food and Drug Administration.

Wikimedia Commons/FitzColinGerald/Creative Commons License

The company is notifying certain Lifepak 15 customers of an issue causing the device to lock up after a defibrillation shock is delivered. The lockup displays as a blank monitor with the LED lights on, indicating that the power is on, but the keypad and device become nonfunctional, the FDA said. This lockup can delay delivery of therapy, which can cause injury or death.

Since the introduction of the device in 2009, 58 complaints regarding the issue have been reported, including 6 that resulted in death. In all, 13,003 devices are included in the field action.

Customers should continue to use their devices if they have been affected until a correction can be completed. If the lockup occurs, the user should press and hold the “on” button until the LED turns off, then hit the “on” button again. If this does not reset the device, the batteries should be removed and reinserted, or the device should be removed and reconnected to its power adapter, the FDA said.

Find the full press release on the FDA website.

lfranki@mdedge.com

Automated office blood pressure readings appear to be more accurate than routine office readings and BP readings in research settings, according to a recent systematic review and meta-analysis.

Based on the evidence, automated office BP (AOBP) readings should now be the preferred method of reading a patient’s BP in clinical practice despite initial reluctance to incorporate this technique over other methods, the researchers wrote in JAMA Internal Medicine.

“The existing evidence supports the use of AOBP to screen patients for possible hypertension in clinical practice, especially if one takes into account the white coat effect associated with current manual or oscillometric techniques for office BP measurement,” wrote Michael Roerecke, PhD, of the University of Toronto, and his colleagues.

Dr. Roerecke and his colleagues identified 31 articles with 9,279 participants (4,736 men, 4,543 women) where AOBP was compared with another method of BP reading, such as awake ambulatory, routine office, and research BP readings. The AOBP reading was performed with a fully automated oscillometric sphygmomanometer with the patient resting in a quiet area.

The researchers found systolic AOBP of 130 mm Hg was associated with significantly higher readings from routine office (mean difference, 14.5 mm Hg) or research BP readings (7.0 mm Hg), while participants had similar AOBP and awake ambulatory BP readings (0.3 mm Hg). All differences were statistically significant (P less than .001).

“If AOBP is to be used in clinical practice, readings must closely adhere to the procedures used in the AOBP studies in this meta-analysis, including multiple BP readings recorded with a fully automated oscillometric sphygmomanometer while the patient rests alone in a quiet place,” the researchers wrote.

Potential limitations of the study were the large statistical heterogeneity of the sample, though the researchers noted little clinical heterogeneity, and that most studies measured AOBP and awake ambulatory BP on the same day to limit differences in timing.

The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Roerecke M et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Feb 4. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.6551.

Automated office blood pressure readings appear to be more accurate than routine office readings and BP readings in research settings, according to a recent systematic review and meta-analysis.

Based on the evidence, automated office BP (AOBP) readings should now be the preferred method of reading a patient’s BP in clinical practice despite initial reluctance to incorporate this technique over other methods, the researchers wrote in JAMA Internal Medicine.

“The existing evidence supports the use of AOBP to screen patients for possible hypertension in clinical practice, especially if one takes into account the white coat effect associated with current manual or oscillometric techniques for office BP measurement,” wrote Michael Roerecke, PhD, of the University of Toronto, and his colleagues.

Dr. Roerecke and his colleagues identified 31 articles with 9,279 participants (4,736 men, 4,543 women) where AOBP was compared with another method of BP reading, such as awake ambulatory, routine office, and research BP readings. The AOBP reading was performed with a fully automated oscillometric sphygmomanometer with the patient resting in a quiet area.

The researchers found systolic AOBP of 130 mm Hg was associated with significantly higher readings from routine office (mean difference, 14.5 mm Hg) or research BP readings (7.0 mm Hg), while participants had similar AOBP and awake ambulatory BP readings (0.3 mm Hg). All differences were statistically significant (P less than .001).

“If AOBP is to be used in clinical practice, readings must closely adhere to the procedures used in the AOBP studies in this meta-analysis, including multiple BP readings recorded with a fully automated oscillometric sphygmomanometer while the patient rests alone in a quiet place,” the researchers wrote.

Potential limitations of the study were the large statistical heterogeneity of the sample, though the researchers noted little clinical heterogeneity, and that most studies measured AOBP and awake ambulatory BP on the same day to limit differences in timing.

The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Roerecke M et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Feb 4. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.6551.

Automated office blood pressure readings appear to be more accurate than routine office readings and BP readings in research settings, according to a recent systematic review and meta-analysis.

Based on the evidence, automated office BP (AOBP) readings should now be the preferred method of reading a patient’s BP in clinical practice despite initial reluctance to incorporate this technique over other methods, the researchers wrote in JAMA Internal Medicine.

“The existing evidence supports the use of AOBP to screen patients for possible hypertension in clinical practice, especially if one takes into account the white coat effect associated with current manual or oscillometric techniques for office BP measurement,” wrote Michael Roerecke, PhD, of the University of Toronto, and his colleagues.

Dr. Roerecke and his colleagues identified 31 articles with 9,279 participants (4,736 men, 4,543 women) where AOBP was compared with another method of BP reading, such as awake ambulatory, routine office, and research BP readings. The AOBP reading was performed with a fully automated oscillometric sphygmomanometer with the patient resting in a quiet area.

The researchers found systolic AOBP of 130 mm Hg was associated with significantly higher readings from routine office (mean difference, 14.5 mm Hg) or research BP readings (7.0 mm Hg), while participants had similar AOBP and awake ambulatory BP readings (0.3 mm Hg). All differences were statistically significant (P less than .001).

“If AOBP is to be used in clinical practice, readings must closely adhere to the procedures used in the AOBP studies in this meta-analysis, including multiple BP readings recorded with a fully automated oscillometric sphygmomanometer while the patient rests alone in a quiet place,” the researchers wrote.

Potential limitations of the study were the large statistical heterogeneity of the sample, though the researchers noted little clinical heterogeneity, and that most studies measured AOBP and awake ambulatory BP on the same day to limit differences in timing.

The authors reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Roerecke M et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Feb 4. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.6551.

Despite concern about the rise of nonvaccine serotypes following widespread PCV13 immunization, cases of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) remain nearly as low as after initial implementation of the vaccine and severe cases have not risen at all.

luiscar/Thinkstock

This was the finding of a prospective time-series analysis study from eight French pediatric emergency departments between June 2009 and May 2017.

The 12,587 children with CAP enrolled in the study between June 2009 and May 2017 were all aged 15 years or younger and came from one of eight French pediatric EDs.

Pediatric pneumonia cases per 1,000 ED visits dropped 44% after PCV13 was implemented, a decrease from 6.3 to 3.5 cases of CAP per 1,000 pediatric visits from June 2011 to May 2014, with a slight but statistically significant increase to 3.8 cases of CAP per 1,000 pediatric visits from June 2014 to May 2017. However, there was no statistically significant increase in cases with pleural effusion, hospitalization, or high inflammatory biomarkers.

“These results contrast with the recent increase in frequency of invasive pneumococcal disease observed in several countries during the same period linked to serotype replacement beyond 5 years after PCV13 implementation,” reported Naïm Ouldali, MD, of the Association Clinique et Thérapeutique Infantile du Val-de-Marne in France, and associates. The report is in JAMA Pediatrics.

“This difference in the trends suggests different consequences of serotype replacement on pneumococcal CAP vs invasive pneumococcal disease,” they wrote. “The recent slight increase in the number of all CAP cases and virus involvement may reflect changes in the epidemiology of other pathogens and/or serotype replacement with less pathogenic serotypes.”

This latter point arose from discovering no dominant serotype during the study period. Of the 11 serotypes not covered by PCV13, none appeared in more than four cases.

“The implementation of PCV13 has led to the quasi-disappearance of the more invasive serotypes and increase in others in nasopharyngeal flora, which greatly reduces the frequency of the more severe forms of CAP, but could also play a role in the slight increase in frequency of the more benign forms,” the authors reported.

Among the study’s limitations was lack of a control group, precluding the ability to attribute findings to any changes in case reporting. And “participating physicians were encouraged to not change their practice, including test use, and no other potential interfering intervention.”

Funding sources for this study included the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Group of the French Pediatrics Society, Association Clinique et Thérapeutique Infantile du Val-de-Marne, the Foundation for Medical Research and a Pfizer Investigator Initiated Research grant.

Dr Ouldali has received grants from GlaxoSmithKline, and many of the authors have financial ties and/or have received non-financial support from AstraZeneca, Biocodex, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and/or Sanofi Pasteur.

SOURCE: Ouldali N et al. JAMA Pediatrics. 2019 Feb 4. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.5273.

Despite concern about the rise of nonvaccine serotypes following widespread PCV13 immunization, cases of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) remain nearly as low as after initial implementation of the vaccine and severe cases have not risen at all.

luiscar/Thinkstock

This was the finding of a prospective time-series analysis study from eight French pediatric emergency departments between June 2009 and May 2017.

The 12,587 children with CAP enrolled in the study between June 2009 and May 2017 were all aged 15 years or younger and came from one of eight French pediatric EDs.

Pediatric pneumonia cases per 1,000 ED visits dropped 44% after PCV13 was implemented, a decrease from 6.3 to 3.5 cases of CAP per 1,000 pediatric visits from June 2011 to May 2014, with a slight but statistically significant increase to 3.8 cases of CAP per 1,000 pediatric visits from June 2014 to May 2017. However, there was no statistically significant increase in cases with pleural effusion, hospitalization, or high inflammatory biomarkers.

“These results contrast with the recent increase in frequency of invasive pneumococcal disease observed in several countries during the same period linked to serotype replacement beyond 5 years after PCV13 implementation,” reported Naïm Ouldali, MD, of the Association Clinique et Thérapeutique Infantile du Val-de-Marne in France, and associates. The report is in JAMA Pediatrics.

“This difference in the trends suggests different consequences of serotype replacement on pneumococcal CAP vs invasive pneumococcal disease,” they wrote. “The recent slight increase in the number of all CAP cases and virus involvement may reflect changes in the epidemiology of other pathogens and/or serotype replacement with less pathogenic serotypes.”

This latter point arose from discovering no dominant serotype during the study period. Of the 11 serotypes not covered by PCV13, none appeared in more than four cases.

“The implementation of PCV13 has led to the quasi-disappearance of the more invasive serotypes and increase in others in nasopharyngeal flora, which greatly reduces the frequency of the more severe forms of CAP, but could also play a role in the slight increase in frequency of the more benign forms,” the authors reported.

Among the study’s limitations was lack of a control group, precluding the ability to attribute findings to any changes in case reporting. And “participating physicians were encouraged to not change their practice, including test use, and no other potential interfering intervention.”

Funding sources for this study included the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Group of the French Pediatrics Society, Association Clinique et Thérapeutique Infantile du Val-de-Marne, the Foundation for Medical Research and a Pfizer Investigator Initiated Research grant.

Dr Ouldali has received grants from GlaxoSmithKline, and many of the authors have financial ties and/or have received non-financial support from AstraZeneca, Biocodex, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and/or Sanofi Pasteur.

SOURCE: Ouldali N et al. JAMA Pediatrics. 2019 Feb 4. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.5273.

Despite concern about the rise of nonvaccine serotypes following widespread PCV13 immunization, cases of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) remain nearly as low as after initial implementation of the vaccine and severe cases have not risen at all.

luiscar/Thinkstock

This was the finding of a prospective time-series analysis study from eight French pediatric emergency departments between June 2009 and May 2017.

The 12,587 children with CAP enrolled in the study between June 2009 and May 2017 were all aged 15 years or younger and came from one of eight French pediatric EDs.

Pediatric pneumonia cases per 1,000 ED visits dropped 44% after PCV13 was implemented, a decrease from 6.3 to 3.5 cases of CAP per 1,000 pediatric visits from June 2011 to May 2014, with a slight but statistically significant increase to 3.8 cases of CAP per 1,000 pediatric visits from June 2014 to May 2017. However, there was no statistically significant increase in cases with pleural effusion, hospitalization, or high inflammatory biomarkers.

“These results contrast with the recent increase in frequency of invasive pneumococcal disease observed in several countries during the same period linked to serotype replacement beyond 5 years after PCV13 implementation,” reported Naïm Ouldali, MD, of the Association Clinique et Thérapeutique Infantile du Val-de-Marne in France, and associates. The report is in JAMA Pediatrics.

“This difference in the trends suggests different consequences of serotype replacement on pneumococcal CAP vs invasive pneumococcal disease,” they wrote. “The recent slight increase in the number of all CAP cases and virus involvement may reflect changes in the epidemiology of other pathogens and/or serotype replacement with less pathogenic serotypes.”

This latter point arose from discovering no dominant serotype during the study period. Of the 11 serotypes not covered by PCV13, none appeared in more than four cases.

“The implementation of PCV13 has led to the quasi-disappearance of the more invasive serotypes and increase in others in nasopharyngeal flora, which greatly reduces the frequency of the more severe forms of CAP, but could also play a role in the slight increase in frequency of the more benign forms,” the authors reported.

Among the study’s limitations was lack of a control group, precluding the ability to attribute findings to any changes in case reporting. And “participating physicians were encouraged to not change their practice, including test use, and no other potential interfering intervention.”

Funding sources for this study included the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Group of the French Pediatrics Society, Association Clinique et Thérapeutique Infantile du Val-de-Marne, the Foundation for Medical Research and a Pfizer Investigator Initiated Research grant.

Dr Ouldali has received grants from GlaxoSmithKline, and many of the authors have financial ties and/or have received non-financial support from AstraZeneca, Biocodex, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer and/or Sanofi Pasteur.

SOURCE: Ouldali N et al. JAMA Pediatrics. 2019 Feb 4. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2018.5273.

I’m very excited about the first issue of The New Gastroenterologist in 2019, which has some fantastic articles that I hope you will find interesting and useful. The In Focus feature this month covers acute pancreatitis, which is an incredibly important topic for all in our field. Amar Mandalia and Matthew DiMagno (University of Michigan) provide a comprehensive overview of the management of acute pancreatitis, including a review of the recent AGA guideline on this topic. This article can be found online, as well as in print in the February issue of GI & Hepatology News.

Rhonda Cole (Michael E. DeBakey VAMC/Baylor) addresses the important topic of how to deal with difficult people, and she provides some useful tips for situations that many of us struggle with. Also in this issue, Rishi Naik (Vanderbilt) and current Associate Editor of Gastroenterology John Inadomi (University of Washington) provide some tips on how to write an effective cover letter for a journal submission. Anna Duloy and Sachin Wani (University of Colorado) provide an overview of the current state of training in advanced endoscopy, which will be very helpful for all those considering a fellowship or incorporation of these procedures into their practices.

For those looking to pick the right private practice position, David Ramsay (Digestive Health Specialists, Winston-Salem, N.C.) provides some useful tips to help you find the job that will be the best fit. In prior issues of The New Gastroenterologist, there have been several articles discussing saving for retirement, but how about how to effectively save for your children’s education? To address that topic, Michael Clancy (Drexel) provides an informative overview of 529 college savings accounts.

Finally, Gyanprakash Ketwaroo (Baylor), Peter Liang (NYU Langone), Carol Brown, and Celena NuQuay (AGA) provide an overview of one of the most important and impactful initiatives from the AGA for the early career community – the AGA Regional Practice Skills Workshops. These workshops are a tremendous resource for early career GIs, and I would recommend that you check one out if you have not already had the opportunity.

If you’re interested in browsing older articles from The New Gastroenterologist, articles from previous issues can be found on our webpage. Also, we are always looking for new ideas and new contributors. If you have suggestions or are interested, please contact me at bryson.katona@uphs.upenn.edu or the managing editor, Ryan Farrell, at rfarrell@gastro.org

Sincerely,

Bryson W. Katona, MD, PhD
Editor in Chief

Dr. Katona is an assistant professor of medicine in the division of gastroenterology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

I’m very excited about the first issue of The New Gastroenterologist in 2019, which has some fantastic articles that I hope you will find interesting and useful. The In Focus feature this month covers acute pancreatitis, which is an incredibly important topic for all in our field. Amar Mandalia and Matthew DiMagno (University of Michigan) provide a comprehensive overview of the management of acute pancreatitis, including a review of the recent AGA guideline on this topic. This article can be found online, as well as in print in the February issue of GI & Hepatology News.

Rhonda Cole (Michael E. DeBakey VAMC/Baylor) addresses the important topic of how to deal with difficult people, and she provides some useful tips for situations that many of us struggle with. Also in this issue, Rishi Naik (Vanderbilt) and current Associate Editor of Gastroenterology John Inadomi (University of Washington) provide some tips on how to write an effective cover letter for a journal submission. Anna Duloy and Sachin Wani (University of Colorado) provide an overview of the current state of training in advanced endoscopy, which will be very helpful for all those considering a fellowship or incorporation of these procedures into their practices.

For those looking to pick the right private practice position, David Ramsay (Digestive Health Specialists, Winston-Salem, N.C.) provides some useful tips to help you find the job that will be the best fit. In prior issues of The New Gastroenterologist, there have been several articles discussing saving for retirement, but how about how to effectively save for your children’s education? To address that topic, Michael Clancy (Drexel) provides an informative overview of 529 college savings accounts.

Finally, Gyanprakash Ketwaroo (Baylor), Peter Liang (NYU Langone), Carol Brown, and Celena NuQuay (AGA) provide an overview of one of the most important and impactful initiatives from the AGA for the early career community – the AGA Regional Practice Skills Workshops. These workshops are a tremendous resource for early career GIs, and I would recommend that you check one out if you have not already had the opportunity.

If you’re interested in browsing older articles from The New Gastroenterologist, articles from previous issues can be found on our webpage. Also, we are always looking for new ideas and new contributors. If you have suggestions or are interested, please contact me at bryson.katona@uphs.upenn.edu or the managing editor, Ryan Farrell, at rfarrell@gastro.org

Sincerely,

Bryson W. Katona, MD, PhD
Editor in Chief

Dr. Katona is an assistant professor of medicine in the division of gastroenterology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

I’m very excited about the first issue of The New Gastroenterologist in 2019, which has some fantastic articles that I hope you will find interesting and useful. The In Focus feature this month covers acute pancreatitis, which is an incredibly important topic for all in our field. Amar Mandalia and Matthew DiMagno (University of Michigan) provide a comprehensive overview of the management of acute pancreatitis, including a review of the recent AGA guideline on this topic. This article can be found online, as well as in print in the February issue of GI & Hepatology News.

Rhonda Cole (Michael E. DeBakey VAMC/Baylor) addresses the important topic of how to deal with difficult people, and she provides some useful tips for situations that many of us struggle with. Also in this issue, Rishi Naik (Vanderbilt) and current Associate Editor of Gastroenterology John Inadomi (University of Washington) provide some tips on how to write an effective cover letter for a journal submission. Anna Duloy and Sachin Wani (University of Colorado) provide an overview of the current state of training in advanced endoscopy, which will be very helpful for all those considering a fellowship or incorporation of these procedures into their practices.

For those looking to pick the right private practice position, David Ramsay (Digestive Health Specialists, Winston-Salem, N.C.) provides some useful tips to help you find the job that will be the best fit. In prior issues of The New Gastroenterologist, there have been several articles discussing saving for retirement, but how about how to effectively save for your children’s education? To address that topic, Michael Clancy (Drexel) provides an informative overview of 529 college savings accounts.

Finally, Gyanprakash Ketwaroo (Baylor), Peter Liang (NYU Langone), Carol Brown, and Celena NuQuay (AGA) provide an overview of one of the most important and impactful initiatives from the AGA for the early career community – the AGA Regional Practice Skills Workshops. These workshops are a tremendous resource for early career GIs, and I would recommend that you check one out if you have not already had the opportunity.

If you’re interested in browsing older articles from The New Gastroenterologist, articles from previous issues can be found on our webpage. Also, we are always looking for new ideas and new contributors. If you have suggestions or are interested, please contact me at bryson.katona@uphs.upenn.edu or the managing editor, Ryan Farrell, at rfarrell@gastro.org

Sincerely,

Bryson W. Katona, MD, PhD
Editor in Chief

Dr. Katona is an assistant professor of medicine in the division of gastroenterology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Patients who test positive on a fecal immunochemical test (FIT), even after a recent colonoscopy, should be offered a repeat colonoscopy. That is the conclusion following a review of 2,228 subjects who were FIT positive, which revealed a greater risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) the longer the gap since the last colonoscopy. The findings support the recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on CRC Screening to offer repeat colonoscopies to FIT-positive patients, even if they recently underwent a colonoscopy.

pixologicstudio/Thinkstock

That recommendation was based on low-quality supporting evidence, and there is currently little agreement about whether annual FIT should be performed along with colonoscopy.

The researchers set out to detect the frequency of CRC and ACRN among patients with a positive FIT test. They analyzed data from the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea, which offers an annual FIT for adults aged 50 years and older as an initial screening, followed by a colonoscopy in case of a positive result.

The researchers analyzed data from 52,376 individuals who underwent FIT at a single center in Korea during January 2013–July 2017. They excluded patients with a history of CRC or colorectal surgery, inflammatory bowel disease, or poor bowel preparation.

FIT-positive and FIT-negative patients were divided into three groups based on the length of time since their last colonoscopy: less than 3 years, 3-10 years, or more than 10 years or no colonoscopy.

Compared with FIT-negative subjects, FIT-positive individuals were more likely to be diagnosed with any colorectal neoplasia (61.3% vs. 51.8%; P less than .001), ACRN (20.0% vs. 10.3%; P less than .001), and CRC (5.0% vs. 1.9%; P less than .001).

A total of 6% of subjects had a positive FIT result, and data from 2,228 were analyzed after exclusions. They were compared with 6,135 participants who had negative FIT results but underwent a colonoscopy.

Of patients with a positive FIT result, 23.1% had a colonoscopy less than 3 years before, 19.2% had one 3-10 years prior, and 57.8% had a colonoscopy more than 10 years earlier or had never had one.

The more-than-10-year group had a higher frequency of colorectal neoplasia, ACRN, or CRC (26.0%) than did the 3-10-year group (12.6%), and the less-than-3-year group (10.9%; P less than .001 for all). A similar trend was seen for CRC: 7.2%, 1.6%, and 2.1%, respectively (P less than .001).

SOURCE: Kim NH et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Jan 23. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.01.012.

Patients who test positive on a fecal immunochemical test (FIT), even after a recent colonoscopy, should be offered a repeat colonoscopy. That is the conclusion following a review of 2,228 subjects who were FIT positive, which revealed a greater risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) the longer the gap since the last colonoscopy. The findings support the recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on CRC Screening to offer repeat colonoscopies to FIT-positive patients, even if they recently underwent a colonoscopy.

pixologicstudio/Thinkstock

That recommendation was based on low-quality supporting evidence, and there is currently little agreement about whether annual FIT should be performed along with colonoscopy.

The researchers set out to detect the frequency of CRC and ACRN among patients with a positive FIT test. They analyzed data from the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea, which offers an annual FIT for adults aged 50 years and older as an initial screening, followed by a colonoscopy in case of a positive result.

The researchers analyzed data from 52,376 individuals who underwent FIT at a single center in Korea during January 2013–July 2017. They excluded patients with a history of CRC or colorectal surgery, inflammatory bowel disease, or poor bowel preparation.

FIT-positive and FIT-negative patients were divided into three groups based on the length of time since their last colonoscopy: less than 3 years, 3-10 years, or more than 10 years or no colonoscopy.

Compared with FIT-negative subjects, FIT-positive individuals were more likely to be diagnosed with any colorectal neoplasia (61.3% vs. 51.8%; P less than .001), ACRN (20.0% vs. 10.3%; P less than .001), and CRC (5.0% vs. 1.9%; P less than .001).

A total of 6% of subjects had a positive FIT result, and data from 2,228 were analyzed after exclusions. They were compared with 6,135 participants who had negative FIT results but underwent a colonoscopy.

Of patients with a positive FIT result, 23.1% had a colonoscopy less than 3 years before, 19.2% had one 3-10 years prior, and 57.8% had a colonoscopy more than 10 years earlier or had never had one.

The more-than-10-year group had a higher frequency of colorectal neoplasia, ACRN, or CRC (26.0%) than did the 3-10-year group (12.6%), and the less-than-3-year group (10.9%; P less than .001 for all). A similar trend was seen for CRC: 7.2%, 1.6%, and 2.1%, respectively (P less than .001).

SOURCE: Kim NH et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Jan 23. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.01.012.

Patients who test positive on a fecal immunochemical test (FIT), even after a recent colonoscopy, should be offered a repeat colonoscopy. That is the conclusion following a review of 2,228 subjects who were FIT positive, which revealed a greater risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACRN) the longer the gap since the last colonoscopy. The findings support the recommendations of the U.S. Multi-Society Task Force on CRC Screening to offer repeat colonoscopies to FIT-positive patients, even if they recently underwent a colonoscopy.

pixologicstudio/Thinkstock

That recommendation was based on low-quality supporting evidence, and there is currently little agreement about whether annual FIT should be performed along with colonoscopy.

The researchers set out to detect the frequency of CRC and ACRN among patients with a positive FIT test. They analyzed data from the National Cancer Screening Program in Korea, which offers an annual FIT for adults aged 50 years and older as an initial screening, followed by a colonoscopy in case of a positive result.

The researchers analyzed data from 52,376 individuals who underwent FIT at a single center in Korea during January 2013–July 2017. They excluded patients with a history of CRC or colorectal surgery, inflammatory bowel disease, or poor bowel preparation.

FIT-positive and FIT-negative patients were divided into three groups based on the length of time since their last colonoscopy: less than 3 years, 3-10 years, or more than 10 years or no colonoscopy.

Compared with FIT-negative subjects, FIT-positive individuals were more likely to be diagnosed with any colorectal neoplasia (61.3% vs. 51.8%; P less than .001), ACRN (20.0% vs. 10.3%; P less than .001), and CRC (5.0% vs. 1.9%; P less than .001).

A total of 6% of subjects had a positive FIT result, and data from 2,228 were analyzed after exclusions. They were compared with 6,135 participants who had negative FIT results but underwent a colonoscopy.

Of patients with a positive FIT result, 23.1% had a colonoscopy less than 3 years before, 19.2% had one 3-10 years prior, and 57.8% had a colonoscopy more than 10 years earlier or had never had one.

The more-than-10-year group had a higher frequency of colorectal neoplasia, ACRN, or CRC (26.0%) than did the 3-10-year group (12.6%), and the less-than-3-year group (10.9%; P less than .001 for all). A similar trend was seen for CRC: 7.2%, 1.6%, and 2.1%, respectively (P less than .001).

SOURCE: Kim NH et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Jan 23. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.01.012.

The Diagnosis: Metastatic Cancer

Further workup of patient 1 revealed an alkaline phosphatase level of 743 U/L (reference range, 30–120 U/L), total bilirubin level of 8.5 mg/dL (reference range, 0.3–1.2 mg/dL), and a white blood cell count of 14,000/μL (reference range, 4500–11,000/μL). Computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis demonstrated cancer of unknown primary site that had metastasized to the colon, liver, and lungs. There was suspicion for potential colon cancer as the primary disease; however, based on the cutaneous findings, a skin biopsy was performed to confirm the diagnosis. Histology and immunohistochemistry revealed adenocarcinoma tumor cells positive for CDX2 (caudal type homeobox 2) and cytokeratin (CK) 7 with a subset positive for CK-20. The cells were negative for estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, mammaglobin, gross cystic disease fluid protein, and GATA3 (GATA binding protein 3). Immunohistochemistry was most consistent with pancreatic cancer. During palliative percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage placement, a liver biopsy confirmed the skin biopsy results.

Further workup of patient 2 revealed a white blood cell count of 13,000/μL (reference range, 4500–11,000/μL). Computed tomography of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis revealed metastatic disease to the lungs with a suspicion for colon cancer as the primary site. Biopsy of the skin lesion revealed a mucin-producing adenocarcinoma, and immunohistochemistry was positive for keratin (AE1/AE3), CK-20, and CDX2, consistent with metastatic colon carcinoma. Immunohistochemistry of the biopsied skin lesion was nonreactive for CK-7. The patient had a colonoscopy that revealed a fungating, partially obstructing, circumferential large mass in the ascending colon.

Metastasis to the skin from visceral malignancies is not uncommon and may represent the first evidence of widespread disease, particularly in breast cancer or mucosal cancers of the head and neck.¹ Cutaneous metastasis of colon cancer is uncommon and cutaneous metastasis of pancreatic cancer is rare. Furthermore, nonumbilical sites are much more common than umbilical sites for cutaneous metastatic disease.² Pancreatic cancer is estimated to be the origin of a cutaneous umbilical metastasis, frequently termed Sister Mary Joseph nodule, in 7% to 9% of cases; colon cancer is estimated to account for 13% to 15% of cases.³ Sister Mary Joseph nodule or sign refers to a nodule often bulging into the umbilicus, signifying metastasis from a
malignant cancer.

In a study of cutaneous metastases, 10% (42/420) of patients with metastatic disease had cutaneous metastasis; 0.48% (2/420) were due to pancreatic cancer and 4.3% (18/420) were due to colon cancer.⁴ In another review, 63 cases of cutaneous metastasis of pancreatic cancer were found, 43 of which were nonumbilical.² 

On immunohistochemistry, CK-7 positivity is highly specific for pancreatic cancer.² Cytokeratin 7 often is used in conjunction with CK-20 to differentiate various types of glandular tumors. CDX2 is a highly sensitive and specific marker for adenocarcinomas of intestinal origin.⁵ The negative estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, mammaglobin, gross cystic disease fluid protein, and GATA3 stains are useful in excluding breast cancer (patient 1 had history of breast cancer).

When cutaneous involvement is present in pancreatic cancer, the disease usually is widespread. Multiple studies have reported involvement of other organs with cutaneous metastasis at rates of 88.9%,6 90.3%,7 and 93.5%.² However, early recognition of metastatic cancerous lesions can lead to earlier diagnosis and earlier palliative treatment, perhaps prolonging median survival time in patients. In a review of 63 patients with cutaneous metastatic pancreatic cancer, the authors found a median survival time of 5 months, with surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or a combination helping to improve survival time from a median of 3.0 to 8.3 months.²

The location of lesions and duration of disease in both patients was atypical for arthropod assault. Acyclovir-resistant herpes zoster rarely is reported outside of human immunodeficiency patients; in addition, there was a lack of clear dermatomal distribution. Although cutaneous Crohn disease can manifest as pink papules, it is rare and unlikely as a presenting symptom. Cutaneous sarcoidosis can take many different skin manifestations, and patients can have cutaneous involvement without systemic manifestation. In both patients, medical history was more indicative of metastatic cancer than the other options in the differential diagnosis.

Cutaneous metastasis from colon cancer and pancreatic cancer is rare, and the prognosis is poor in these cases; however, in the appropriate clinical scenario, especially in a patient with a history of cancer, sinister etiologies should be considered for firm red papules of the umbilicus. Skin biopsy coupled with immunohistochemical staining can assist in identifying the primary malignancy.

The Diagnosis: Metastatic Cancer

Further workup of patient 1 revealed an alkaline phosphatase level of 743 U/L (reference range, 30–120 U/L), total bilirubin level of 8.5 mg/dL (reference range, 0.3–1.2 mg/dL), and a white blood cell count of 14,000/μL (reference range, 4500–11,000/μL). Computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis demonstrated cancer of unknown primary site that had metastasized to the colon, liver, and lungs. There was suspicion for potential colon cancer as the primary disease; however, based on the cutaneous findings, a skin biopsy was performed to confirm the diagnosis. Histology and immunohistochemistry revealed adenocarcinoma tumor cells positive for CDX2 (caudal type homeobox 2) and cytokeratin (CK) 7 with a subset positive for CK-20. The cells were negative for estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, mammaglobin, gross cystic disease fluid protein, and GATA3 (GATA binding protein 3). Immunohistochemistry was most consistent with pancreatic cancer. During palliative percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage placement, a liver biopsy confirmed the skin biopsy results.

Further workup of patient 2 revealed a white blood cell count of 13,000/μL (reference range, 4500–11,000/μL). Computed tomography of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis revealed metastatic disease to the lungs with a suspicion for colon cancer as the primary site. Biopsy of the skin lesion revealed a mucin-producing adenocarcinoma, and immunohistochemistry was positive for keratin (AE1/AE3), CK-20, and CDX2, consistent with metastatic colon carcinoma. Immunohistochemistry of the biopsied skin lesion was nonreactive for CK-7. The patient had a colonoscopy that revealed a fungating, partially obstructing, circumferential large mass in the ascending colon.

Metastasis to the skin from visceral malignancies is not uncommon and may represent the first evidence of widespread disease, particularly in breast cancer or mucosal cancers of the head and neck.¹ Cutaneous metastasis of colon cancer is uncommon and cutaneous metastasis of pancreatic cancer is rare. Furthermore, nonumbilical sites are much more common than umbilical sites for cutaneous metastatic disease.² Pancreatic cancer is estimated to be the origin of a cutaneous umbilical metastasis, frequently termed Sister Mary Joseph nodule, in 7% to 9% of cases; colon cancer is estimated to account for 13% to 15% of cases.³ Sister Mary Joseph nodule or sign refers to a nodule often bulging into the umbilicus, signifying metastasis from a
malignant cancer.

In a study of cutaneous metastases, 10% (42/420) of patients with metastatic disease had cutaneous metastasis; 0.48% (2/420) were due to pancreatic cancer and 4.3% (18/420) were due to colon cancer.⁴ In another review, 63 cases of cutaneous metastasis of pancreatic cancer were found, 43 of which were nonumbilical.² 

On immunohistochemistry, CK-7 positivity is highly specific for pancreatic cancer.² Cytokeratin 7 often is used in conjunction with CK-20 to differentiate various types of glandular tumors. CDX2 is a highly sensitive and specific marker for adenocarcinomas of intestinal origin.⁵ The negative estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, mammaglobin, gross cystic disease fluid protein, and GATA3 stains are useful in excluding breast cancer (patient 1 had history of breast cancer).

When cutaneous involvement is present in pancreatic cancer, the disease usually is widespread. Multiple studies have reported involvement of other organs with cutaneous metastasis at rates of 88.9%,6 90.3%,7 and 93.5%.² However, early recognition of metastatic cancerous lesions can lead to earlier diagnosis and earlier palliative treatment, perhaps prolonging median survival time in patients. In a review of 63 patients with cutaneous metastatic pancreatic cancer, the authors found a median survival time of 5 months, with surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or a combination helping to improve survival time from a median of 3.0 to 8.3 months.²

The location of lesions and duration of disease in both patients was atypical for arthropod assault. Acyclovir-resistant herpes zoster rarely is reported outside of human immunodeficiency patients; in addition, there was a lack of clear dermatomal distribution. Although cutaneous Crohn disease can manifest as pink papules, it is rare and unlikely as a presenting symptom. Cutaneous sarcoidosis can take many different skin manifestations, and patients can have cutaneous involvement without systemic manifestation. In both patients, medical history was more indicative of metastatic cancer than the other options in the differential diagnosis.

Cutaneous metastasis from colon cancer and pancreatic cancer is rare, and the prognosis is poor in these cases; however, in the appropriate clinical scenario, especially in a patient with a history of cancer, sinister etiologies should be considered for firm red papules of the umbilicus. Skin biopsy coupled with immunohistochemical staining can assist in identifying the primary malignancy.

The Diagnosis: Metastatic Cancer

Further workup of patient 1 revealed an alkaline phosphatase level of 743 U/L (reference range, 30–120 U/L), total bilirubin level of 8.5 mg/dL (reference range, 0.3–1.2 mg/dL), and a white blood cell count of 14,000/μL (reference range, 4500–11,000/μL). Computed tomography of the abdomen and pelvis demonstrated cancer of unknown primary site that had metastasized to the colon, liver, and lungs. There was suspicion for potential colon cancer as the primary disease; however, based on the cutaneous findings, a skin biopsy was performed to confirm the diagnosis. Histology and immunohistochemistry revealed adenocarcinoma tumor cells positive for CDX2 (caudal type homeobox 2) and cytokeratin (CK) 7 with a subset positive for CK-20. The cells were negative for estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, mammaglobin, gross cystic disease fluid protein, and GATA3 (GATA binding protein 3). Immunohistochemistry was most consistent with pancreatic cancer. During palliative percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage placement, a liver biopsy confirmed the skin biopsy results.

Further workup of patient 2 revealed a white blood cell count of 13,000/μL (reference range, 4500–11,000/μL). Computed tomography of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis revealed metastatic disease to the lungs with a suspicion for colon cancer as the primary site. Biopsy of the skin lesion revealed a mucin-producing adenocarcinoma, and immunohistochemistry was positive for keratin (AE1/AE3), CK-20, and CDX2, consistent with metastatic colon carcinoma. Immunohistochemistry of the biopsied skin lesion was nonreactive for CK-7. The patient had a colonoscopy that revealed a fungating, partially obstructing, circumferential large mass in the ascending colon.

Metastasis to the skin from visceral malignancies is not uncommon and may represent the first evidence of widespread disease, particularly in breast cancer or mucosal cancers of the head and neck.¹ Cutaneous metastasis of colon cancer is uncommon and cutaneous metastasis of pancreatic cancer is rare. Furthermore, nonumbilical sites are much more common than umbilical sites for cutaneous metastatic disease.² Pancreatic cancer is estimated to be the origin of a cutaneous umbilical metastasis, frequently termed Sister Mary Joseph nodule, in 7% to 9% of cases; colon cancer is estimated to account for 13% to 15% of cases.³ Sister Mary Joseph nodule or sign refers to a nodule often bulging into the umbilicus, signifying metastasis from a
malignant cancer.

In a study of cutaneous metastases, 10% (42/420) of patients with metastatic disease had cutaneous metastasis; 0.48% (2/420) were due to pancreatic cancer and 4.3% (18/420) were due to colon cancer.⁴ In another review, 63 cases of cutaneous metastasis of pancreatic cancer were found, 43 of which were nonumbilical.² 

On immunohistochemistry, CK-7 positivity is highly specific for pancreatic cancer.² Cytokeratin 7 often is used in conjunction with CK-20 to differentiate various types of glandular tumors. CDX2 is a highly sensitive and specific marker for adenocarcinomas of intestinal origin.⁵ The negative estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, mammaglobin, gross cystic disease fluid protein, and GATA3 stains are useful in excluding breast cancer (patient 1 had history of breast cancer).

When cutaneous involvement is present in pancreatic cancer, the disease usually is widespread. Multiple studies have reported involvement of other organs with cutaneous metastasis at rates of 88.9%,6 90.3%,7 and 93.5%.² However, early recognition of metastatic cancerous lesions can lead to earlier diagnosis and earlier palliative treatment, perhaps prolonging median survival time in patients. In a review of 63 patients with cutaneous metastatic pancreatic cancer, the authors found a median survival time of 5 months, with surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, or a combination helping to improve survival time from a median of 3.0 to 8.3 months.²

The location of lesions and duration of disease in both patients was atypical for arthropod assault. Acyclovir-resistant herpes zoster rarely is reported outside of human immunodeficiency patients; in addition, there was a lack of clear dermatomal distribution. Although cutaneous Crohn disease can manifest as pink papules, it is rare and unlikely as a presenting symptom. Cutaneous sarcoidosis can take many different skin manifestations, and patients can have cutaneous involvement without systemic manifestation. In both patients, medical history was more indicative of metastatic cancer than the other options in the differential diagnosis.

Cutaneous metastasis from colon cancer and pancreatic cancer is rare, and the prognosis is poor in these cases; however, in the appropriate clinical scenario, especially in a patient with a history of cancer, sinister etiologies should be considered for firm red papules of the umbilicus. Skin biopsy coupled with immunohistochemical staining can assist in identifying the primary malignancy.