Seeing a doctor reduces readmission risk in schizophrenia patients

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 16:47

 

– Readmission rates after discharge for patients with schizophrenia are notoriously high, with approximately a quarter of U.S. schizophrenia patients readmitted within 3 months, according to Paul A. Kurdyak, MD, PhD.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– Readmission rates after discharge for patients with schizophrenia are notoriously high, with approximately a quarter of U.S. schizophrenia patients readmitted within 3 months, according to Paul A. Kurdyak, MD, PhD.

 

– Readmission rates after discharge for patients with schizophrenia are notoriously high, with approximately a quarter of U.S. schizophrenia patients readmitted within 3 months, according to Paul A. Kurdyak, MD, PhD.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

AT APA

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: Seeing a psychiatrist or general physician during the month after hospital discharge reduced readmissions in patients with schizophrenia.

Major finding: Patients at highest risk of readmission saw a 15% reduction in readmission after 30 days if they’d seen a primary care doctor or psychiatrist, compared with those who’d seen neither.

Data source: Records from about 20,000 schizophrenia patients hospitalized in Ontario in 2012, identified in government databases.

Disclosures: The study was conducted at an institute receiving most of its support from the Ontario government.

Parkinsonian symptoms at diagnosis raise synucleinopathy mortality risk

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 01/07/2019 - 12:54

 

The elevated risk of death for patients with clinically diagnosed synucleinopathies and symptoms of parkinsonism is highest for those with multiple system atrophy with predominant parkinsonism (MSA-p), followed by dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), Parkinson’s disease dementia (PDD), and Parkinson’s disease (PD), according to Rodolfo Savica, MD, PhD, and his associates.

The investigators compared 461 patients who had onset of a clinically presumed synucleinopathy manifesting as parkinsonism from 1991 to 2010 with 452 age- and sex-matched referent participants from the general population who were free of parkinsonism and tremor of any type in the year of onset of the other patients’ synucleinopathies. Of the 461 patients with the presumed synucleinopathies, 316 (68.6%) died during follow-up and 311 had a known cause of death (98.4%). Of the 452 referent participants, 220 (48.7%) died during follow-up and 216 had a known cause of death (98.2%). The highest risk of death was among patients with MSA-p (hazard ratio, 10.51) when compared with referent participants. The remaining patients also had elevated risk of death: DLB (HR, 3.94), PDD (HR, 3.86), and PD (HR, 1.75).

Neurodegenerative disease was the most frequent cause of death among patients for all synucleinopathies (31.5%) and in PD alone (25.6%), and cardiovascular events were the second most common cause of death (15.7%). Among the referent participants, cardiovascular events were the most common cause of death (25.5%).

The results were consistent with the causes of death observed among patients with DLB, PDD, and MSA-p; however, the researchers said the sample size was too limited to observe a sufficient number of events. They also noted that there was no significant interaction with sex and age in predicting survival rates for any type of synucleinopathy.

“Our findings contribute important new evidence about the natural history and survival of people affected by synucleinopathies of various types,” the researchers concluded. “Our results may be helpful to guide clinicians counseling patients and caregivers.”

Find the full study in JAMA Neurology (doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2017.0603).

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

The elevated risk of death for patients with clinically diagnosed synucleinopathies and symptoms of parkinsonism is highest for those with multiple system atrophy with predominant parkinsonism (MSA-p), followed by dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), Parkinson’s disease dementia (PDD), and Parkinson’s disease (PD), according to Rodolfo Savica, MD, PhD, and his associates.

The investigators compared 461 patients who had onset of a clinically presumed synucleinopathy manifesting as parkinsonism from 1991 to 2010 with 452 age- and sex-matched referent participants from the general population who were free of parkinsonism and tremor of any type in the year of onset of the other patients’ synucleinopathies. Of the 461 patients with the presumed synucleinopathies, 316 (68.6%) died during follow-up and 311 had a known cause of death (98.4%). Of the 452 referent participants, 220 (48.7%) died during follow-up and 216 had a known cause of death (98.2%). The highest risk of death was among patients with MSA-p (hazard ratio, 10.51) when compared with referent participants. The remaining patients also had elevated risk of death: DLB (HR, 3.94), PDD (HR, 3.86), and PD (HR, 1.75).

Neurodegenerative disease was the most frequent cause of death among patients for all synucleinopathies (31.5%) and in PD alone (25.6%), and cardiovascular events were the second most common cause of death (15.7%). Among the referent participants, cardiovascular events were the most common cause of death (25.5%).

The results were consistent with the causes of death observed among patients with DLB, PDD, and MSA-p; however, the researchers said the sample size was too limited to observe a sufficient number of events. They also noted that there was no significant interaction with sex and age in predicting survival rates for any type of synucleinopathy.

“Our findings contribute important new evidence about the natural history and survival of people affected by synucleinopathies of various types,” the researchers concluded. “Our results may be helpful to guide clinicians counseling patients and caregivers.”

Find the full study in JAMA Neurology (doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2017.0603).

 

The elevated risk of death for patients with clinically diagnosed synucleinopathies and symptoms of parkinsonism is highest for those with multiple system atrophy with predominant parkinsonism (MSA-p), followed by dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), Parkinson’s disease dementia (PDD), and Parkinson’s disease (PD), according to Rodolfo Savica, MD, PhD, and his associates.

The investigators compared 461 patients who had onset of a clinically presumed synucleinopathy manifesting as parkinsonism from 1991 to 2010 with 452 age- and sex-matched referent participants from the general population who were free of parkinsonism and tremor of any type in the year of onset of the other patients’ synucleinopathies. Of the 461 patients with the presumed synucleinopathies, 316 (68.6%) died during follow-up and 311 had a known cause of death (98.4%). Of the 452 referent participants, 220 (48.7%) died during follow-up and 216 had a known cause of death (98.2%). The highest risk of death was among patients with MSA-p (hazard ratio, 10.51) when compared with referent participants. The remaining patients also had elevated risk of death: DLB (HR, 3.94), PDD (HR, 3.86), and PD (HR, 1.75).

Neurodegenerative disease was the most frequent cause of death among patients for all synucleinopathies (31.5%) and in PD alone (25.6%), and cardiovascular events were the second most common cause of death (15.7%). Among the referent participants, cardiovascular events were the most common cause of death (25.5%).

The results were consistent with the causes of death observed among patients with DLB, PDD, and MSA-p; however, the researchers said the sample size was too limited to observe a sufficient number of events. They also noted that there was no significant interaction with sex and age in predicting survival rates for any type of synucleinopathy.

“Our findings contribute important new evidence about the natural history and survival of people affected by synucleinopathies of various types,” the researchers concluded. “Our results may be helpful to guide clinicians counseling patients and caregivers.”

Find the full study in JAMA Neurology (doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2017.0603).

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM JAMA NEUROLOGY

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

Microneedle pretreatment shortened ALA incubation time

Microneedles poised to become increasingly valuable clinically
Article Type
Changed
Mon, 01/14/2019 - 10:02

 

Pretreatment with microneedles provided a faster, less painful, way to treat facial actinic keratoses (AKs) with photodynamic therapy, with similar clearance rates as would be expected with traditional therapy, in a study of 33 patients.

This approach reduced the incubation time of aminolevulinic acid (ALA) to 20 minutes, with comparable results to one-hour ALA incubation times. “Interestingly, the secondary outcome of pain associated with blue light exposure during photodynamic therapy was nominal and not significantly different from the sham side,” reported Tatyana A. Petukhova, MD, and her associates in the department of dermatology at the University of California, Davis (JAMA Dermatol. 2017 May 17. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2017.0849).

“Pain associated with PDT is the most severe adverse effect and may lead to interruption or discontinuation of treatment, resulting in refusal to repeat the process at a future date owing to unbearable discomfort,” they wrote. Patients also reported little to no swelling or pain after treatment and minimal erythema and peeling.

The randomized, split-face, single-blinded controlled trial enrolled 33 patients, with at least eight AKs on their faces, from a university dermatology outpatient clinic from 2015 to 2016. They were randomized to receive either 10 minutes or 20 minutes incubation time with ALA, and 32 completed the study. Those in the 20-minute group had a mean of 25 grade II facial AKs, and those in the 10-minute group had an average of 31 grade II facial AKs.

Before administration of ALA, each patient received pretreatment with a microneedle roller on one side of their face and a sham roller on the other side. On each half of their faces, the microneedle device (a single-use sterile array of microneedles measuring 200 mcm) or sham roller was rolled forward and backward eight times in four directions.

They were exposed to blue light for 1,000 seconds at an average wavelength of 478 nm, an overall fluence of 10 J/cm2, and advised to avoid sun exposure for 36 hours after treatment.

At follow-up one month later, among the patients with a 20-minute ALA incubation time, the mean AK clearance rate was 76% on the side with microneedle pretreatment, compared with 58% on the sham side (P less than .01). This included three patients with complete clearance. The efficacy of microneedle pretreatment with a 20-minute incubation time is similar to that of 1-hour incubation times with ALA. PDT typically uses 1-4 hours of incubation time.

Among the patients who received a 10-minute ALA incubation time, a mean of 43% of AKs on the microneedle side and 38% on the sham side cleared, a difference that was not statistically significant. Participants did not rate the pain as significantly different between each side of their face and both groups reported low levels of pain overall.

One limitation of the study was the short follow-up time. “Because actinic damage is cumulative, there is potential for thicker AKs to recur or for new lesions to develop during a longer follow-up period,” the authors noted.

The research was partly funded by an author’s University of California, Davis, Medical Student Research Fellowship. The authors reported having no disclosures.

Body

 

The effectiveness of photodynamic therapy (PDT) as a field therapy option for actinic keratoses (AKs) has been well documented. However, treatment is limited by poor or variable transepidermal absorption owing to the hydrophilic nature of aminolevulinic acid (ALA).

To overcome the problem of transepidermal delivery, patients wait for hours at a time between ALA application and the light treatment. These prolonged incubation times limit usefulness. Petukhova et al. hypothesized that microneedles would enhance penetration and decrease incubation period without compromising safety and efficacy. The results suggest that an effective and safe PDT treatment can be achieved by using microneedles as means to expedite drug penetration. These results also suggest that further reduction of incubation time will not be achieved by better transepidermal penetration.

As envisioned in 1971, microneedles can have an important clinical role and can be an important tool in the dermatologist’s armamentarium. Microneedles are painless when compared with hypodermic needles, do not require specific training, minimize risk of needlestick injuries, can potentially reduce cost, and improve patient compliance and access. Therefore, microneedle-based devices can potentially be used at home by patients in a safe manner. Mostly in preclinical trials, as well as in some clinical trials, microneedles have been successfully used to deliver various drugs and vaccines.

Importantly, dermatologists are uniquely positioned to research this novel drug delivery method because they routinely treat cutaneous disease. This can be leveraged by dermatologists to use microneedles not only for dermal rejuvenation purposes but also to enhance drug delivery for dermatological indications. Therefore, the study by Petukhova et al. not only provides practical information for treatment of AKs with PDT but can also be viewed as a call for action to all dermatologists to lead innovation in the field and revolutionize dermatological drug delivery.

These comments are adapted from an accompanying editorial by Hadar Lev-Tov, MD, of the University of Florida, Miami. He reported having no disclosures.

Publications
Topics
Sections
Body

 

The effectiveness of photodynamic therapy (PDT) as a field therapy option for actinic keratoses (AKs) has been well documented. However, treatment is limited by poor or variable transepidermal absorption owing to the hydrophilic nature of aminolevulinic acid (ALA).

To overcome the problem of transepidermal delivery, patients wait for hours at a time between ALA application and the light treatment. These prolonged incubation times limit usefulness. Petukhova et al. hypothesized that microneedles would enhance penetration and decrease incubation period without compromising safety and efficacy. The results suggest that an effective and safe PDT treatment can be achieved by using microneedles as means to expedite drug penetration. These results also suggest that further reduction of incubation time will not be achieved by better transepidermal penetration.

As envisioned in 1971, microneedles can have an important clinical role and can be an important tool in the dermatologist’s armamentarium. Microneedles are painless when compared with hypodermic needles, do not require specific training, minimize risk of needlestick injuries, can potentially reduce cost, and improve patient compliance and access. Therefore, microneedle-based devices can potentially be used at home by patients in a safe manner. Mostly in preclinical trials, as well as in some clinical trials, microneedles have been successfully used to deliver various drugs and vaccines.

Importantly, dermatologists are uniquely positioned to research this novel drug delivery method because they routinely treat cutaneous disease. This can be leveraged by dermatologists to use microneedles not only for dermal rejuvenation purposes but also to enhance drug delivery for dermatological indications. Therefore, the study by Petukhova et al. not only provides practical information for treatment of AKs with PDT but can also be viewed as a call for action to all dermatologists to lead innovation in the field and revolutionize dermatological drug delivery.

These comments are adapted from an accompanying editorial by Hadar Lev-Tov, MD, of the University of Florida, Miami. He reported having no disclosures.

Body

 

The effectiveness of photodynamic therapy (PDT) as a field therapy option for actinic keratoses (AKs) has been well documented. However, treatment is limited by poor or variable transepidermal absorption owing to the hydrophilic nature of aminolevulinic acid (ALA).

To overcome the problem of transepidermal delivery, patients wait for hours at a time between ALA application and the light treatment. These prolonged incubation times limit usefulness. Petukhova et al. hypothesized that microneedles would enhance penetration and decrease incubation period without compromising safety and efficacy. The results suggest that an effective and safe PDT treatment can be achieved by using microneedles as means to expedite drug penetration. These results also suggest that further reduction of incubation time will not be achieved by better transepidermal penetration.

As envisioned in 1971, microneedles can have an important clinical role and can be an important tool in the dermatologist’s armamentarium. Microneedles are painless when compared with hypodermic needles, do not require specific training, minimize risk of needlestick injuries, can potentially reduce cost, and improve patient compliance and access. Therefore, microneedle-based devices can potentially be used at home by patients in a safe manner. Mostly in preclinical trials, as well as in some clinical trials, microneedles have been successfully used to deliver various drugs and vaccines.

Importantly, dermatologists are uniquely positioned to research this novel drug delivery method because they routinely treat cutaneous disease. This can be leveraged by dermatologists to use microneedles not only for dermal rejuvenation purposes but also to enhance drug delivery for dermatological indications. Therefore, the study by Petukhova et al. not only provides practical information for treatment of AKs with PDT but can also be viewed as a call for action to all dermatologists to lead innovation in the field and revolutionize dermatological drug delivery.

These comments are adapted from an accompanying editorial by Hadar Lev-Tov, MD, of the University of Florida, Miami. He reported having no disclosures.

Title
Microneedles poised to become increasingly valuable clinically
Microneedles poised to become increasingly valuable clinically

 

Pretreatment with microneedles provided a faster, less painful, way to treat facial actinic keratoses (AKs) with photodynamic therapy, with similar clearance rates as would be expected with traditional therapy, in a study of 33 patients.

This approach reduced the incubation time of aminolevulinic acid (ALA) to 20 minutes, with comparable results to one-hour ALA incubation times. “Interestingly, the secondary outcome of pain associated with blue light exposure during photodynamic therapy was nominal and not significantly different from the sham side,” reported Tatyana A. Petukhova, MD, and her associates in the department of dermatology at the University of California, Davis (JAMA Dermatol. 2017 May 17. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2017.0849).

“Pain associated with PDT is the most severe adverse effect and may lead to interruption or discontinuation of treatment, resulting in refusal to repeat the process at a future date owing to unbearable discomfort,” they wrote. Patients also reported little to no swelling or pain after treatment and minimal erythema and peeling.

The randomized, split-face, single-blinded controlled trial enrolled 33 patients, with at least eight AKs on their faces, from a university dermatology outpatient clinic from 2015 to 2016. They were randomized to receive either 10 minutes or 20 minutes incubation time with ALA, and 32 completed the study. Those in the 20-minute group had a mean of 25 grade II facial AKs, and those in the 10-minute group had an average of 31 grade II facial AKs.

Before administration of ALA, each patient received pretreatment with a microneedle roller on one side of their face and a sham roller on the other side. On each half of their faces, the microneedle device (a single-use sterile array of microneedles measuring 200 mcm) or sham roller was rolled forward and backward eight times in four directions.

They were exposed to blue light for 1,000 seconds at an average wavelength of 478 nm, an overall fluence of 10 J/cm2, and advised to avoid sun exposure for 36 hours after treatment.

At follow-up one month later, among the patients with a 20-minute ALA incubation time, the mean AK clearance rate was 76% on the side with microneedle pretreatment, compared with 58% on the sham side (P less than .01). This included three patients with complete clearance. The efficacy of microneedle pretreatment with a 20-minute incubation time is similar to that of 1-hour incubation times with ALA. PDT typically uses 1-4 hours of incubation time.

Among the patients who received a 10-minute ALA incubation time, a mean of 43% of AKs on the microneedle side and 38% on the sham side cleared, a difference that was not statistically significant. Participants did not rate the pain as significantly different between each side of their face and both groups reported low levels of pain overall.

One limitation of the study was the short follow-up time. “Because actinic damage is cumulative, there is potential for thicker AKs to recur or for new lesions to develop during a longer follow-up period,” the authors noted.

The research was partly funded by an author’s University of California, Davis, Medical Student Research Fellowship. The authors reported having no disclosures.

 

Pretreatment with microneedles provided a faster, less painful, way to treat facial actinic keratoses (AKs) with photodynamic therapy, with similar clearance rates as would be expected with traditional therapy, in a study of 33 patients.

This approach reduced the incubation time of aminolevulinic acid (ALA) to 20 minutes, with comparable results to one-hour ALA incubation times. “Interestingly, the secondary outcome of pain associated with blue light exposure during photodynamic therapy was nominal and not significantly different from the sham side,” reported Tatyana A. Petukhova, MD, and her associates in the department of dermatology at the University of California, Davis (JAMA Dermatol. 2017 May 17. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2017.0849).

“Pain associated with PDT is the most severe adverse effect and may lead to interruption or discontinuation of treatment, resulting in refusal to repeat the process at a future date owing to unbearable discomfort,” they wrote. Patients also reported little to no swelling or pain after treatment and minimal erythema and peeling.

The randomized, split-face, single-blinded controlled trial enrolled 33 patients, with at least eight AKs on their faces, from a university dermatology outpatient clinic from 2015 to 2016. They were randomized to receive either 10 minutes or 20 minutes incubation time with ALA, and 32 completed the study. Those in the 20-minute group had a mean of 25 grade II facial AKs, and those in the 10-minute group had an average of 31 grade II facial AKs.

Before administration of ALA, each patient received pretreatment with a microneedle roller on one side of their face and a sham roller on the other side. On each half of their faces, the microneedle device (a single-use sterile array of microneedles measuring 200 mcm) or sham roller was rolled forward and backward eight times in four directions.

They were exposed to blue light for 1,000 seconds at an average wavelength of 478 nm, an overall fluence of 10 J/cm2, and advised to avoid sun exposure for 36 hours after treatment.

At follow-up one month later, among the patients with a 20-minute ALA incubation time, the mean AK clearance rate was 76% on the side with microneedle pretreatment, compared with 58% on the sham side (P less than .01). This included three patients with complete clearance. The efficacy of microneedle pretreatment with a 20-minute incubation time is similar to that of 1-hour incubation times with ALA. PDT typically uses 1-4 hours of incubation time.

Among the patients who received a 10-minute ALA incubation time, a mean of 43% of AKs on the microneedle side and 38% on the sham side cleared, a difference that was not statistically significant. Participants did not rate the pain as significantly different between each side of their face and both groups reported low levels of pain overall.

One limitation of the study was the short follow-up time. “Because actinic damage is cumulative, there is potential for thicker AKs to recur or for new lesions to develop during a longer follow-up period,” the authors noted.

The research was partly funded by an author’s University of California, Davis, Medical Student Research Fellowship. The authors reported having no disclosures.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Active
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
CME ID
138855
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: Pretreatment with microneedles before a 20-minute incubation of aminolevulinic acid (ALA) and photodynamic therapy effectively cleared most facial actinic keratoses.

Major finding: The mean facial AK clearance rate one month after microneedle pretreatment and 20 minutes incubation of ALA was 76%.

Data source: The findings are based on a randomized, controlled, single-blinded study of 33 outpatients with actinic keratoses.

Disclosures: The research was partly funded by an author’s University of California, Davis, Medical Student Research Fellowship. The authors reported having no disclosures.

Mindful kids, part 1: Origins and evidence

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 16:47

 

Open a magazine or turn on the radio and you are likely to hear someone extolling the benefits of mindfulness for any number of purposes, conditions, or age groups. Businesses, schools, and health care organizations are incorporating mindfulness techniques to boost employee, student, and patient well-being and engagement, as well as to help employers, teachers, and providers to thrive. In this two-part series, part 1 will attempt to distill some of the fundamentals with regard to the following questions: 1. What is mindfulness? 2. What is the evidence for mindfulness, particularly in youth? and 3. How would you apply mindfulness techniques in your office setting?

Mindfulness was largely brought into the mainstream health care world by Jon Kabat-Zinn, PhD, of the University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester. Drawing on Buddhist traditions, he created a secularized version of meditative and movement techniques used for thousands of years to promote healthy living. A growing evidence base showed that these practices, combined in a formal curriculum dubbed mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), could alleviate symptoms and distress in conditions as diverse as chronic pain, psoriasis, and anxiety. This has spawned numerous research programs and spin-offs, and remains a foundational approach to utilizing mindfulness in medical care. Dr. Kabat-Zinn’s definition of the term is thus worth noting – mindfulness is “the awareness that arises by paying attention on purpose, in the present moment, and nonjudgmentally.”1 Put simply, mindfulness means having your mind and your body in the same place at the same time. If your mind is wandering to what happened yesterday or planning for what might happen later today, then your mind and body are not in the same time. If your mind is thinking about what is going on at home while you are at work, or what your friends are doing, your mind and body are not in the same place.

Dr. Andrew J. Rosenfeld
The evidence that moving through life in a state of mindfulness, or awareness, is beneficial has developed at multiple levels in the adult literature. Mindfulness is consistently associated with greater self-esteem, competence, life satisfaction, and positive emotions. In addition, greater mindful awareness correlates with reductions in anxiety, depression, doctors’ visits, physical complaints, hostility, and self-consciousness.2 These findings hold across many populations, including medical students and community samples, as well as those with physical and stress-related disorders.3-5 Neuroscience findings supporting the benefits of mindfulness also are multiplying. For experienced meditators, mindfulness appears to prevent cortical thinning in important areas of the brain related to executive functions (prefrontal cortex) and mind-body connection (insula).6 Even for novices, Dr. Kabat-Zinn’s 8-week MBSR program shows declines in life stress that move alongside decreases in amygdala gray matter, essentially shrinking the brain’s fight-or-flight worry center.7 This training also increases neuronal growth in the hippocampus, an area implicated in learning, memory, and emotion regulation.8,9 The hippocampus typically is diminished by depression and PTSD, but, as with MBSR, neurogenesis occurs here with exercise or SSRI antidepressant medications.

The evidence base for mindfulness in children and adolescents is more nascent, but is also broadening. A study of a modified version of Dr. Kabat-Zinn’s MBSR in middle schoolers in an inner city environment compared 12 weeks of mindfulness training versus a typical health curriculum discussing adolescence, stress, and puberty. In this inner city environment, students randomized to mindfulness training reported less depression, less hostility, fewer ruminations, and fewer PTSD symptoms as well as fewer physical complaints.10 Regarding clinical populations, mindfulness training in adolescents has shown promise for ADHD, with improvement in both core symptoms and functionality.11 This especially seems pronounced when caregivers are supported in learning mindful parenting techniques alongside their teens’ mindfulness training.12

In a general psychiatry clinic, an 8-week adolescent MBSR program was added to supplement treatment as usual – psychotherapy and medication management. Those randomized to mindfulness showed improvements in sleep and self-esteem, as well as a decline in depressive and anxiety symptoms, perceived stress, and interpersonal problems.13 Perhaps most impressively, half of the MBSR group dropped at least one diagnosis after the 8-week program, whereas none of those in the wait list group, receiving psychiatric specialty care as usual, decreased their diagnosis count.

While the sum of such research in adults and children builds a strong case for the value of mindfulness at both the universal (well-child check) and problem-focused levels, there are limitations to our knowledge base. The number of studies and total number of children and adolescents enrolled in mindfulness research is far fewer than in studies with adults. A variety of mindfulness practices have been incorporated into study interventions such that results are not always comparable and distinguishing the mechanism of action is difficult. Additionally, double-blind and placebo-controlled studies are harder to accomplish with such active interventions, although headway is being made.14

Despite what remains to be discovered, bringing mindfulness into the lives of children and adolescents seems increasingly sensible, given the growing body of scientific support for the benefits of mindfulness practices at the behavioral and functional neuroanatomic levels. As is the case with recommending healthy diets, exercise, and other universal health-promoting behaviors, the knowledge that mindfulness practices are beneficial may not be enough to get patients and their families engaged in these methods. The second article in this series will address some nuts and bolts of prescribing mindfulness in a pediatric health care setting.
 

 

 

Dr. Rosenfeld is an assistant professor in the departments of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont Medical Center, Robert Larner College of Medicine, Burlington. He said he has no relevant disclosures.

References

1. Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness (New York: Bantam Books, Penguin Random House, 2013).

2. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003 Apr;84(4):822-48.

3. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1982 Apr;4(1):33-47.

4. Am J Psychiatry. 1992 Jul;149(7):936-43.

5. Clin Psychol Rev. 2011 Aug;31(6):1041-56.

6. Neuroreport. 2005 Nov 28;16(17):1893-7.

7. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2010 Mar;5(1):11-7.

8. Neuroimage. 2009 Apr 15;45(3):672-8.

9. Psychiatry Res. 2011 Jan 30;191(1):36-43.

10. Pediatrics. 2016 Jan;137(1):e20152532.

11. J Atten Disord. 2008 May;11(6):737-46.

12. J Child Fam Stud. 2012 Oct;21(5):775-87.

13. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2009 Oct;77(5):855-66.

14. Biol Psychiatry. 2016 Jul 1;80(1):53-61.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Open a magazine or turn on the radio and you are likely to hear someone extolling the benefits of mindfulness for any number of purposes, conditions, or age groups. Businesses, schools, and health care organizations are incorporating mindfulness techniques to boost employee, student, and patient well-being and engagement, as well as to help employers, teachers, and providers to thrive. In this two-part series, part 1 will attempt to distill some of the fundamentals with regard to the following questions: 1. What is mindfulness? 2. What is the evidence for mindfulness, particularly in youth? and 3. How would you apply mindfulness techniques in your office setting?

Mindfulness was largely brought into the mainstream health care world by Jon Kabat-Zinn, PhD, of the University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester. Drawing on Buddhist traditions, he created a secularized version of meditative and movement techniques used for thousands of years to promote healthy living. A growing evidence base showed that these practices, combined in a formal curriculum dubbed mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), could alleviate symptoms and distress in conditions as diverse as chronic pain, psoriasis, and anxiety. This has spawned numerous research programs and spin-offs, and remains a foundational approach to utilizing mindfulness in medical care. Dr. Kabat-Zinn’s definition of the term is thus worth noting – mindfulness is “the awareness that arises by paying attention on purpose, in the present moment, and nonjudgmentally.”1 Put simply, mindfulness means having your mind and your body in the same place at the same time. If your mind is wandering to what happened yesterday or planning for what might happen later today, then your mind and body are not in the same time. If your mind is thinking about what is going on at home while you are at work, or what your friends are doing, your mind and body are not in the same place.

Dr. Andrew J. Rosenfeld
The evidence that moving through life in a state of mindfulness, or awareness, is beneficial has developed at multiple levels in the adult literature. Mindfulness is consistently associated with greater self-esteem, competence, life satisfaction, and positive emotions. In addition, greater mindful awareness correlates with reductions in anxiety, depression, doctors’ visits, physical complaints, hostility, and self-consciousness.2 These findings hold across many populations, including medical students and community samples, as well as those with physical and stress-related disorders.3-5 Neuroscience findings supporting the benefits of mindfulness also are multiplying. For experienced meditators, mindfulness appears to prevent cortical thinning in important areas of the brain related to executive functions (prefrontal cortex) and mind-body connection (insula).6 Even for novices, Dr. Kabat-Zinn’s 8-week MBSR program shows declines in life stress that move alongside decreases in amygdala gray matter, essentially shrinking the brain’s fight-or-flight worry center.7 This training also increases neuronal growth in the hippocampus, an area implicated in learning, memory, and emotion regulation.8,9 The hippocampus typically is diminished by depression and PTSD, but, as with MBSR, neurogenesis occurs here with exercise or SSRI antidepressant medications.

The evidence base for mindfulness in children and adolescents is more nascent, but is also broadening. A study of a modified version of Dr. Kabat-Zinn’s MBSR in middle schoolers in an inner city environment compared 12 weeks of mindfulness training versus a typical health curriculum discussing adolescence, stress, and puberty. In this inner city environment, students randomized to mindfulness training reported less depression, less hostility, fewer ruminations, and fewer PTSD symptoms as well as fewer physical complaints.10 Regarding clinical populations, mindfulness training in adolescents has shown promise for ADHD, with improvement in both core symptoms and functionality.11 This especially seems pronounced when caregivers are supported in learning mindful parenting techniques alongside their teens’ mindfulness training.12

In a general psychiatry clinic, an 8-week adolescent MBSR program was added to supplement treatment as usual – psychotherapy and medication management. Those randomized to mindfulness showed improvements in sleep and self-esteem, as well as a decline in depressive and anxiety symptoms, perceived stress, and interpersonal problems.13 Perhaps most impressively, half of the MBSR group dropped at least one diagnosis after the 8-week program, whereas none of those in the wait list group, receiving psychiatric specialty care as usual, decreased their diagnosis count.

While the sum of such research in adults and children builds a strong case for the value of mindfulness at both the universal (well-child check) and problem-focused levels, there are limitations to our knowledge base. The number of studies and total number of children and adolescents enrolled in mindfulness research is far fewer than in studies with adults. A variety of mindfulness practices have been incorporated into study interventions such that results are not always comparable and distinguishing the mechanism of action is difficult. Additionally, double-blind and placebo-controlled studies are harder to accomplish with such active interventions, although headway is being made.14

Despite what remains to be discovered, bringing mindfulness into the lives of children and adolescents seems increasingly sensible, given the growing body of scientific support for the benefits of mindfulness practices at the behavioral and functional neuroanatomic levels. As is the case with recommending healthy diets, exercise, and other universal health-promoting behaviors, the knowledge that mindfulness practices are beneficial may not be enough to get patients and their families engaged in these methods. The second article in this series will address some nuts and bolts of prescribing mindfulness in a pediatric health care setting.
 

 

 

Dr. Rosenfeld is an assistant professor in the departments of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont Medical Center, Robert Larner College of Medicine, Burlington. He said he has no relevant disclosures.

References

1. Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness (New York: Bantam Books, Penguin Random House, 2013).

2. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003 Apr;84(4):822-48.

3. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1982 Apr;4(1):33-47.

4. Am J Psychiatry. 1992 Jul;149(7):936-43.

5. Clin Psychol Rev. 2011 Aug;31(6):1041-56.

6. Neuroreport. 2005 Nov 28;16(17):1893-7.

7. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2010 Mar;5(1):11-7.

8. Neuroimage. 2009 Apr 15;45(3):672-8.

9. Psychiatry Res. 2011 Jan 30;191(1):36-43.

10. Pediatrics. 2016 Jan;137(1):e20152532.

11. J Atten Disord. 2008 May;11(6):737-46.

12. J Child Fam Stud. 2012 Oct;21(5):775-87.

13. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2009 Oct;77(5):855-66.

14. Biol Psychiatry. 2016 Jul 1;80(1):53-61.

 

Open a magazine or turn on the radio and you are likely to hear someone extolling the benefits of mindfulness for any number of purposes, conditions, or age groups. Businesses, schools, and health care organizations are incorporating mindfulness techniques to boost employee, student, and patient well-being and engagement, as well as to help employers, teachers, and providers to thrive. In this two-part series, part 1 will attempt to distill some of the fundamentals with regard to the following questions: 1. What is mindfulness? 2. What is the evidence for mindfulness, particularly in youth? and 3. How would you apply mindfulness techniques in your office setting?

Mindfulness was largely brought into the mainstream health care world by Jon Kabat-Zinn, PhD, of the University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester. Drawing on Buddhist traditions, he created a secularized version of meditative and movement techniques used for thousands of years to promote healthy living. A growing evidence base showed that these practices, combined in a formal curriculum dubbed mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR), could alleviate symptoms and distress in conditions as diverse as chronic pain, psoriasis, and anxiety. This has spawned numerous research programs and spin-offs, and remains a foundational approach to utilizing mindfulness in medical care. Dr. Kabat-Zinn’s definition of the term is thus worth noting – mindfulness is “the awareness that arises by paying attention on purpose, in the present moment, and nonjudgmentally.”1 Put simply, mindfulness means having your mind and your body in the same place at the same time. If your mind is wandering to what happened yesterday or planning for what might happen later today, then your mind and body are not in the same time. If your mind is thinking about what is going on at home while you are at work, or what your friends are doing, your mind and body are not in the same place.

Dr. Andrew J. Rosenfeld
The evidence that moving through life in a state of mindfulness, or awareness, is beneficial has developed at multiple levels in the adult literature. Mindfulness is consistently associated with greater self-esteem, competence, life satisfaction, and positive emotions. In addition, greater mindful awareness correlates with reductions in anxiety, depression, doctors’ visits, physical complaints, hostility, and self-consciousness.2 These findings hold across many populations, including medical students and community samples, as well as those with physical and stress-related disorders.3-5 Neuroscience findings supporting the benefits of mindfulness also are multiplying. For experienced meditators, mindfulness appears to prevent cortical thinning in important areas of the brain related to executive functions (prefrontal cortex) and mind-body connection (insula).6 Even for novices, Dr. Kabat-Zinn’s 8-week MBSR program shows declines in life stress that move alongside decreases in amygdala gray matter, essentially shrinking the brain’s fight-or-flight worry center.7 This training also increases neuronal growth in the hippocampus, an area implicated in learning, memory, and emotion regulation.8,9 The hippocampus typically is diminished by depression and PTSD, but, as with MBSR, neurogenesis occurs here with exercise or SSRI antidepressant medications.

The evidence base for mindfulness in children and adolescents is more nascent, but is also broadening. A study of a modified version of Dr. Kabat-Zinn’s MBSR in middle schoolers in an inner city environment compared 12 weeks of mindfulness training versus a typical health curriculum discussing adolescence, stress, and puberty. In this inner city environment, students randomized to mindfulness training reported less depression, less hostility, fewer ruminations, and fewer PTSD symptoms as well as fewer physical complaints.10 Regarding clinical populations, mindfulness training in adolescents has shown promise for ADHD, with improvement in both core symptoms and functionality.11 This especially seems pronounced when caregivers are supported in learning mindful parenting techniques alongside their teens’ mindfulness training.12

In a general psychiatry clinic, an 8-week adolescent MBSR program was added to supplement treatment as usual – psychotherapy and medication management. Those randomized to mindfulness showed improvements in sleep and self-esteem, as well as a decline in depressive and anxiety symptoms, perceived stress, and interpersonal problems.13 Perhaps most impressively, half of the MBSR group dropped at least one diagnosis after the 8-week program, whereas none of those in the wait list group, receiving psychiatric specialty care as usual, decreased their diagnosis count.

While the sum of such research in adults and children builds a strong case for the value of mindfulness at both the universal (well-child check) and problem-focused levels, there are limitations to our knowledge base. The number of studies and total number of children and adolescents enrolled in mindfulness research is far fewer than in studies with adults. A variety of mindfulness practices have been incorporated into study interventions such that results are not always comparable and distinguishing the mechanism of action is difficult. Additionally, double-blind and placebo-controlled studies are harder to accomplish with such active interventions, although headway is being made.14

Despite what remains to be discovered, bringing mindfulness into the lives of children and adolescents seems increasingly sensible, given the growing body of scientific support for the benefits of mindfulness practices at the behavioral and functional neuroanatomic levels. As is the case with recommending healthy diets, exercise, and other universal health-promoting behaviors, the knowledge that mindfulness practices are beneficial may not be enough to get patients and their families engaged in these methods. The second article in this series will address some nuts and bolts of prescribing mindfulness in a pediatric health care setting.
 

 

 

Dr. Rosenfeld is an assistant professor in the departments of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont Medical Center, Robert Larner College of Medicine, Burlington. He said he has no relevant disclosures.

References

1. Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness (New York: Bantam Books, Penguin Random House, 2013).

2. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003 Apr;84(4):822-48.

3. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 1982 Apr;4(1):33-47.

4. Am J Psychiatry. 1992 Jul;149(7):936-43.

5. Clin Psychol Rev. 2011 Aug;31(6):1041-56.

6. Neuroreport. 2005 Nov 28;16(17):1893-7.

7. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2010 Mar;5(1):11-7.

8. Neuroimage. 2009 Apr 15;45(3):672-8.

9. Psychiatry Res. 2011 Jan 30;191(1):36-43.

10. Pediatrics. 2016 Jan;137(1):e20152532.

11. J Atten Disord. 2008 May;11(6):737-46.

12. J Child Fam Stud. 2012 Oct;21(5):775-87.

13. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2009 Oct;77(5):855-66.

14. Biol Psychiatry. 2016 Jul 1;80(1):53-61.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

Mindful kids, part 2: Integration into practice

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 16:47

 

In this follow-up to last month’s column on mindfulness, in which the evidence base makes a compelling argument for incorporating mindfulness into our list of healthy practices for youth brain development, the challenge of implementing mindfulness “prescriptions” in practice is considered in more depth. As a reminder, a working definition of mindfulness was offered as, “the awareness that arises by paying attention on purpose, in the present moment, and nonjudgmentally.”1

An important piece of prescribing, either pharmaceuticals or health-promoting practices, is sharing the risks, benefits, and alternatives to the recommended treatment. Last month’s article considered the potential benefits of cultivating a mindfulness practice. Few risks have been well-documented, particularly in the pediatric population. While some case reports describe adults having profoundly disturbing emotional reactions,these are in the context of intensive meditation experiences (think 10-day silent retreat).2 While there is not evidence of harm in youth, the lesson to be learned from adult experiences may be to consult with an advanced teacher if a patient chooses to become intensely involved in any meditative practice.

Dr. Andrew Rosenfeld
More frequent perhaps is the concern from parents and youth that mindfulness is “too New Age” or “too soft.” My hope is that the behavioral and neuroscience evidence discussed in last month’s article can help combat this misbelief. In broad strokes, mindfulness builds the brain’s executive control functions (impulse control, focus, judgment, self-regulation) subserved by the prefrontal cortex while quieting the fight-or-flight, fear-learning circuits seated in the amygdala. This fosters a greater capacity to be in a calm and emotionally regulated state, with less time spent reacting to danger signals when in a generally safe environment.

Bringing mindfulness practices to your office practice could occur anywhere along the spectrum from integrating some mindfulness moments into your standard physical exam to collaborating with an experienced mindfulness or yoga instructor to offer individual and group support to patients and families. My focus here is on simple practices and tools to begin introducing mindfulness to families.

A key component is clinician and caregiver buy-in. Developing your own practice, even if it’s simply three mindful breaths before entering each patient exam room, goes miles in terms of your being able to speak genuinely about the benefits and challenges of mindfulness in a relatable way. Similarly, the more kids see their families practicing and supporting mindfulness, the more likely they are to develop their own routines.

Legitimizing mindfulness practices with a “prescription” also can add to success rates. Considering diaphragmatic breathing as a foundational technique, the following prescription can be printed on cards and reviewed briefly in a visit:

  1. Show me how you breathe. Now let’s practice belly (abdominal/diaphragmatic) breathing.
  2. Move both hands to your belly. Imagine you are breathing behind your belly button. Feel your belly rise like a balloon.
  3. As you breathe out, feel your belly drop as you let air out.
  4. Bonus: Now breathe through your nose only as you continue belly breathing. Next, notice your belly rising and falling without placing your hands on it.

In a physical exam, the following might work: When you place your stethoscope on the chest and back to auscultate the lungs, instruct the child to “place a hand on your belly and take a deep breath into your belly button so that your hand moves out. Keep taking slow, deep belly breaths while I listen.”

This breathing technique activates the parasympathetic nervous system, quelling the fight-or-flight response that may contribute to anxiety, aggressive reactivity, and interfere with sleep. Prescribing five of these belly breaths before bedtime is a good beginning, increasing frequency and duration over time as the practice becomes routine, then adding the “bonus” techniques. Introducing abdominal breathing also makes a good opportunity to ask the child about sources of stress in their lives.

For the distracted or stressed-out youth, focus is key. Those children who seem to be always multitasking or never sit still may benefit from cultivating a focus practice. It also may help still the mind before bedtime. A mindfulness prescription for focus is as follows:

  1. The rays of the sun are much more powerful when they are brought into focus. Just like building a muscle, focus can be built up to be stronger. Let’s practice focusing.
  2. As you breathe in, count slowly to 5, raising one finger for each count. As you breathe out, count down to 0, lowering each finger.
  3. Notice when you get distracted during the counting. Exercise your focus by coming back to counting your breath.
  4. Let your hands rest in your lap. Then, move to counting silently in your head.
 

 

Alternative options for focus objects include watching the secondhand on a clock, balancing a peacock feather on a fingertip, listening to a bell or chime until it can no longer be heard, watching a sand timer until every grain falls.

In a physical exam, the following might work: During the neurologic exam for cranial nerves (eye movements), direct the child to focus on your finger. Hold it still for 10 seconds, gently reminding them to keep their focus on your finger if needed. Then, as you move to each quadrant, move slowly and stay in each quadrant for 5 seconds. Encourage them to “keep your focus on my finger.”

After practicing a focus exercise, inquire about the patient’s focus during school, homework, and activities. Suggest making the focused breathing, or an alternative focus activity, part of the daily routine. Parents are encouraged to participate alongside their children.

Depending on the amount of time you have in the visit, your mindfulness intervention may simply be how you conduct the physical exam. With more time or a child or family who seems to have an indication for prescribing mindfulness (stress, anxiety, inattention, insomnia, etc.), a more didactic approach toward mindfulness techniques accompanied by a specific prescription may be in order. Developmentally, clinicians in our practice have found that hands-on activities and games can help involve younger children, while teens can get into one of the apps developed to facilitate mindful practices. (See Online resources.) Diagnostically, more hyperactive or distractible children may mesh better with movement-based practices. Depressed or anxious children may enjoy quieter activities or benefit from small incentives to increase motivation. Children with traumatic histories may benefit from a slow pace, keeping their eyes open and looking at the floor rather than eyes closed and avoiding physical contact initially.

Methods of meditation and mindfulness exist in most every philosophical and religious tradition, but the neuroscientific value of these practices is a more recent take on these wisdom traditions. As we follow the growing research literature on mindfulness, consider incorporating this “new” prescription into your toolbox of healthy practices for the developing brain.

Dr. Rosenfeld is assistant professor in the departments of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont Medical Center and the university’s Robert Larner College of Medicine, Burlington. He reported no relevant disclosures. Email him at pdnews@frontlinemedcom.com.

Online resources:

References

1. Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness. (New York: Bantam Books, Penguin Random House, 2013).

2. Rocha, Tomas. “The Dark Knight of the Soul.” The Atlantic. June 25, 2014.
 

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

In this follow-up to last month’s column on mindfulness, in which the evidence base makes a compelling argument for incorporating mindfulness into our list of healthy practices for youth brain development, the challenge of implementing mindfulness “prescriptions” in practice is considered in more depth. As a reminder, a working definition of mindfulness was offered as, “the awareness that arises by paying attention on purpose, in the present moment, and nonjudgmentally.”1

An important piece of prescribing, either pharmaceuticals or health-promoting practices, is sharing the risks, benefits, and alternatives to the recommended treatment. Last month’s article considered the potential benefits of cultivating a mindfulness practice. Few risks have been well-documented, particularly in the pediatric population. While some case reports describe adults having profoundly disturbing emotional reactions,these are in the context of intensive meditation experiences (think 10-day silent retreat).2 While there is not evidence of harm in youth, the lesson to be learned from adult experiences may be to consult with an advanced teacher if a patient chooses to become intensely involved in any meditative practice.

Dr. Andrew Rosenfeld
More frequent perhaps is the concern from parents and youth that mindfulness is “too New Age” or “too soft.” My hope is that the behavioral and neuroscience evidence discussed in last month’s article can help combat this misbelief. In broad strokes, mindfulness builds the brain’s executive control functions (impulse control, focus, judgment, self-regulation) subserved by the prefrontal cortex while quieting the fight-or-flight, fear-learning circuits seated in the amygdala. This fosters a greater capacity to be in a calm and emotionally regulated state, with less time spent reacting to danger signals when in a generally safe environment.

Bringing mindfulness practices to your office practice could occur anywhere along the spectrum from integrating some mindfulness moments into your standard physical exam to collaborating with an experienced mindfulness or yoga instructor to offer individual and group support to patients and families. My focus here is on simple practices and tools to begin introducing mindfulness to families.

A key component is clinician and caregiver buy-in. Developing your own practice, even if it’s simply three mindful breaths before entering each patient exam room, goes miles in terms of your being able to speak genuinely about the benefits and challenges of mindfulness in a relatable way. Similarly, the more kids see their families practicing and supporting mindfulness, the more likely they are to develop their own routines.

Legitimizing mindfulness practices with a “prescription” also can add to success rates. Considering diaphragmatic breathing as a foundational technique, the following prescription can be printed on cards and reviewed briefly in a visit:

  1. Show me how you breathe. Now let’s practice belly (abdominal/diaphragmatic) breathing.
  2. Move both hands to your belly. Imagine you are breathing behind your belly button. Feel your belly rise like a balloon.
  3. As you breathe out, feel your belly drop as you let air out.
  4. Bonus: Now breathe through your nose only as you continue belly breathing. Next, notice your belly rising and falling without placing your hands on it.

In a physical exam, the following might work: When you place your stethoscope on the chest and back to auscultate the lungs, instruct the child to “place a hand on your belly and take a deep breath into your belly button so that your hand moves out. Keep taking slow, deep belly breaths while I listen.”

This breathing technique activates the parasympathetic nervous system, quelling the fight-or-flight response that may contribute to anxiety, aggressive reactivity, and interfere with sleep. Prescribing five of these belly breaths before bedtime is a good beginning, increasing frequency and duration over time as the practice becomes routine, then adding the “bonus” techniques. Introducing abdominal breathing also makes a good opportunity to ask the child about sources of stress in their lives.

For the distracted or stressed-out youth, focus is key. Those children who seem to be always multitasking or never sit still may benefit from cultivating a focus practice. It also may help still the mind before bedtime. A mindfulness prescription for focus is as follows:

  1. The rays of the sun are much more powerful when they are brought into focus. Just like building a muscle, focus can be built up to be stronger. Let’s practice focusing.
  2. As you breathe in, count slowly to 5, raising one finger for each count. As you breathe out, count down to 0, lowering each finger.
  3. Notice when you get distracted during the counting. Exercise your focus by coming back to counting your breath.
  4. Let your hands rest in your lap. Then, move to counting silently in your head.
 

 

Alternative options for focus objects include watching the secondhand on a clock, balancing a peacock feather on a fingertip, listening to a bell or chime until it can no longer be heard, watching a sand timer until every grain falls.

In a physical exam, the following might work: During the neurologic exam for cranial nerves (eye movements), direct the child to focus on your finger. Hold it still for 10 seconds, gently reminding them to keep their focus on your finger if needed. Then, as you move to each quadrant, move slowly and stay in each quadrant for 5 seconds. Encourage them to “keep your focus on my finger.”

After practicing a focus exercise, inquire about the patient’s focus during school, homework, and activities. Suggest making the focused breathing, or an alternative focus activity, part of the daily routine. Parents are encouraged to participate alongside their children.

Depending on the amount of time you have in the visit, your mindfulness intervention may simply be how you conduct the physical exam. With more time or a child or family who seems to have an indication for prescribing mindfulness (stress, anxiety, inattention, insomnia, etc.), a more didactic approach toward mindfulness techniques accompanied by a specific prescription may be in order. Developmentally, clinicians in our practice have found that hands-on activities and games can help involve younger children, while teens can get into one of the apps developed to facilitate mindful practices. (See Online resources.) Diagnostically, more hyperactive or distractible children may mesh better with movement-based practices. Depressed or anxious children may enjoy quieter activities or benefit from small incentives to increase motivation. Children with traumatic histories may benefit from a slow pace, keeping their eyes open and looking at the floor rather than eyes closed and avoiding physical contact initially.

Methods of meditation and mindfulness exist in most every philosophical and religious tradition, but the neuroscientific value of these practices is a more recent take on these wisdom traditions. As we follow the growing research literature on mindfulness, consider incorporating this “new” prescription into your toolbox of healthy practices for the developing brain.

Dr. Rosenfeld is assistant professor in the departments of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont Medical Center and the university’s Robert Larner College of Medicine, Burlington. He reported no relevant disclosures. Email him at pdnews@frontlinemedcom.com.

Online resources:

References

1. Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness. (New York: Bantam Books, Penguin Random House, 2013).

2. Rocha, Tomas. “The Dark Knight of the Soul.” The Atlantic. June 25, 2014.
 

 

In this follow-up to last month’s column on mindfulness, in which the evidence base makes a compelling argument for incorporating mindfulness into our list of healthy practices for youth brain development, the challenge of implementing mindfulness “prescriptions” in practice is considered in more depth. As a reminder, a working definition of mindfulness was offered as, “the awareness that arises by paying attention on purpose, in the present moment, and nonjudgmentally.”1

An important piece of prescribing, either pharmaceuticals or health-promoting practices, is sharing the risks, benefits, and alternatives to the recommended treatment. Last month’s article considered the potential benefits of cultivating a mindfulness practice. Few risks have been well-documented, particularly in the pediatric population. While some case reports describe adults having profoundly disturbing emotional reactions,these are in the context of intensive meditation experiences (think 10-day silent retreat).2 While there is not evidence of harm in youth, the lesson to be learned from adult experiences may be to consult with an advanced teacher if a patient chooses to become intensely involved in any meditative practice.

Dr. Andrew Rosenfeld
More frequent perhaps is the concern from parents and youth that mindfulness is “too New Age” or “too soft.” My hope is that the behavioral and neuroscience evidence discussed in last month’s article can help combat this misbelief. In broad strokes, mindfulness builds the brain’s executive control functions (impulse control, focus, judgment, self-regulation) subserved by the prefrontal cortex while quieting the fight-or-flight, fear-learning circuits seated in the amygdala. This fosters a greater capacity to be in a calm and emotionally regulated state, with less time spent reacting to danger signals when in a generally safe environment.

Bringing mindfulness practices to your office practice could occur anywhere along the spectrum from integrating some mindfulness moments into your standard physical exam to collaborating with an experienced mindfulness or yoga instructor to offer individual and group support to patients and families. My focus here is on simple practices and tools to begin introducing mindfulness to families.

A key component is clinician and caregiver buy-in. Developing your own practice, even if it’s simply three mindful breaths before entering each patient exam room, goes miles in terms of your being able to speak genuinely about the benefits and challenges of mindfulness in a relatable way. Similarly, the more kids see their families practicing and supporting mindfulness, the more likely they are to develop their own routines.

Legitimizing mindfulness practices with a “prescription” also can add to success rates. Considering diaphragmatic breathing as a foundational technique, the following prescription can be printed on cards and reviewed briefly in a visit:

  1. Show me how you breathe. Now let’s practice belly (abdominal/diaphragmatic) breathing.
  2. Move both hands to your belly. Imagine you are breathing behind your belly button. Feel your belly rise like a balloon.
  3. As you breathe out, feel your belly drop as you let air out.
  4. Bonus: Now breathe through your nose only as you continue belly breathing. Next, notice your belly rising and falling without placing your hands on it.

In a physical exam, the following might work: When you place your stethoscope on the chest and back to auscultate the lungs, instruct the child to “place a hand on your belly and take a deep breath into your belly button so that your hand moves out. Keep taking slow, deep belly breaths while I listen.”

This breathing technique activates the parasympathetic nervous system, quelling the fight-or-flight response that may contribute to anxiety, aggressive reactivity, and interfere with sleep. Prescribing five of these belly breaths before bedtime is a good beginning, increasing frequency and duration over time as the practice becomes routine, then adding the “bonus” techniques. Introducing abdominal breathing also makes a good opportunity to ask the child about sources of stress in their lives.

For the distracted or stressed-out youth, focus is key. Those children who seem to be always multitasking or never sit still may benefit from cultivating a focus practice. It also may help still the mind before bedtime. A mindfulness prescription for focus is as follows:

  1. The rays of the sun are much more powerful when they are brought into focus. Just like building a muscle, focus can be built up to be stronger. Let’s practice focusing.
  2. As you breathe in, count slowly to 5, raising one finger for each count. As you breathe out, count down to 0, lowering each finger.
  3. Notice when you get distracted during the counting. Exercise your focus by coming back to counting your breath.
  4. Let your hands rest in your lap. Then, move to counting silently in your head.
 

 

Alternative options for focus objects include watching the secondhand on a clock, balancing a peacock feather on a fingertip, listening to a bell or chime until it can no longer be heard, watching a sand timer until every grain falls.

In a physical exam, the following might work: During the neurologic exam for cranial nerves (eye movements), direct the child to focus on your finger. Hold it still for 10 seconds, gently reminding them to keep their focus on your finger if needed. Then, as you move to each quadrant, move slowly and stay in each quadrant for 5 seconds. Encourage them to “keep your focus on my finger.”

After practicing a focus exercise, inquire about the patient’s focus during school, homework, and activities. Suggest making the focused breathing, or an alternative focus activity, part of the daily routine. Parents are encouraged to participate alongside their children.

Depending on the amount of time you have in the visit, your mindfulness intervention may simply be how you conduct the physical exam. With more time or a child or family who seems to have an indication for prescribing mindfulness (stress, anxiety, inattention, insomnia, etc.), a more didactic approach toward mindfulness techniques accompanied by a specific prescription may be in order. Developmentally, clinicians in our practice have found that hands-on activities and games can help involve younger children, while teens can get into one of the apps developed to facilitate mindful practices. (See Online resources.) Diagnostically, more hyperactive or distractible children may mesh better with movement-based practices. Depressed or anxious children may enjoy quieter activities or benefit from small incentives to increase motivation. Children with traumatic histories may benefit from a slow pace, keeping their eyes open and looking at the floor rather than eyes closed and avoiding physical contact initially.

Methods of meditation and mindfulness exist in most every philosophical and religious tradition, but the neuroscientific value of these practices is a more recent take on these wisdom traditions. As we follow the growing research literature on mindfulness, consider incorporating this “new” prescription into your toolbox of healthy practices for the developing brain.

Dr. Rosenfeld is assistant professor in the departments of psychiatry and pediatrics at the University of Vermont Medical Center and the university’s Robert Larner College of Medicine, Burlington. He reported no relevant disclosures. Email him at pdnews@frontlinemedcom.com.

Online resources:

References

1. Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness. (New York: Bantam Books, Penguin Random House, 2013).

2. Rocha, Tomas. “The Dark Knight of the Soul.” The Atlantic. June 25, 2014.
 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

FDA approves sarilumab for DMARD-intolerant RA patients

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 16:47

 

The Food and Drug Administration has approved sarilumab (Kevzara), a human monoclonal antibody against the interleukin-6 receptor, for the treatment of adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), the manufacturer Regeneron Pharmaceuticals announced May 22.

Interleukin-6 is an important factor in RA, as excess amounts of IL-6 build up in the body and contribute to RA-associated inflammation. Sarilumab has been shown to bind to and reduce IL-6R signaling, and is intended for people who have shown inadequate response to or are intolerant to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

Courtesy Wikimedia Commons/FitzColinGerald/Creative Commons License
FDA approval of sarilumab was based on results from two phase III clinical trials. In the MOBILITY study, 66% of patients who received 200 mg sarilumab plus methotrexate achieved an American College of Rheumatology 20 level of improvement after 24 weeks, compared with 33% of patients who received placebo plus methotrexate. In the TARGET study, 61% of patients who received 200 mg sarilumab plus a nonbiologic DMARD achieved an ACR20 response after 24 weeks, compared with 34% of patients who received placebo plus a nonbiologic DMARD.

“Not all currently available treatments work in all patients, and some patients may spend years cycling through different treatments without achieving their treatment goals. Sarilumab works differently from the most commonly used biologics, such as those in the anti-TNF [tumor necrosis factor] class, and is a welcome new option for patients and their physicians,” Alan Kivitz, MD, an investigator in sarilumab clinical trials and a rheumatologist in group practice in Duncansville, Pa., said in Regeneron’s announcement.

The recommended dosage of sarilumab is 200 mg once every 2 weeks given as a subcutaneous injection, which can be self-administered. The dosage can be reduced from 200 mg to 150 mg once every 2 weeks, as needed, to help manage certain laboratory abnormalities (neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and liver enzyme elevations). Significant adverse events associated with sarilumab include weakening of the immune system, changes in certain laboratory tests, perforation in the stomach or intestines, increased risk of cancer, and serious allergic reaction.
 

Publications
Topics
Sections
Related Articles

 

The Food and Drug Administration has approved sarilumab (Kevzara), a human monoclonal antibody against the interleukin-6 receptor, for the treatment of adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), the manufacturer Regeneron Pharmaceuticals announced May 22.

Interleukin-6 is an important factor in RA, as excess amounts of IL-6 build up in the body and contribute to RA-associated inflammation. Sarilumab has been shown to bind to and reduce IL-6R signaling, and is intended for people who have shown inadequate response to or are intolerant to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

Courtesy Wikimedia Commons/FitzColinGerald/Creative Commons License
FDA approval of sarilumab was based on results from two phase III clinical trials. In the MOBILITY study, 66% of patients who received 200 mg sarilumab plus methotrexate achieved an American College of Rheumatology 20 level of improvement after 24 weeks, compared with 33% of patients who received placebo plus methotrexate. In the TARGET study, 61% of patients who received 200 mg sarilumab plus a nonbiologic DMARD achieved an ACR20 response after 24 weeks, compared with 34% of patients who received placebo plus a nonbiologic DMARD.

“Not all currently available treatments work in all patients, and some patients may spend years cycling through different treatments without achieving their treatment goals. Sarilumab works differently from the most commonly used biologics, such as those in the anti-TNF [tumor necrosis factor] class, and is a welcome new option for patients and their physicians,” Alan Kivitz, MD, an investigator in sarilumab clinical trials and a rheumatologist in group practice in Duncansville, Pa., said in Regeneron’s announcement.

The recommended dosage of sarilumab is 200 mg once every 2 weeks given as a subcutaneous injection, which can be self-administered. The dosage can be reduced from 200 mg to 150 mg once every 2 weeks, as needed, to help manage certain laboratory abnormalities (neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and liver enzyme elevations). Significant adverse events associated with sarilumab include weakening of the immune system, changes in certain laboratory tests, perforation in the stomach or intestines, increased risk of cancer, and serious allergic reaction.
 

 

The Food and Drug Administration has approved sarilumab (Kevzara), a human monoclonal antibody against the interleukin-6 receptor, for the treatment of adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), the manufacturer Regeneron Pharmaceuticals announced May 22.

Interleukin-6 is an important factor in RA, as excess amounts of IL-6 build up in the body and contribute to RA-associated inflammation. Sarilumab has been shown to bind to and reduce IL-6R signaling, and is intended for people who have shown inadequate response to or are intolerant to conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs).

Courtesy Wikimedia Commons/FitzColinGerald/Creative Commons License
FDA approval of sarilumab was based on results from two phase III clinical trials. In the MOBILITY study, 66% of patients who received 200 mg sarilumab plus methotrexate achieved an American College of Rheumatology 20 level of improvement after 24 weeks, compared with 33% of patients who received placebo plus methotrexate. In the TARGET study, 61% of patients who received 200 mg sarilumab plus a nonbiologic DMARD achieved an ACR20 response after 24 weeks, compared with 34% of patients who received placebo plus a nonbiologic DMARD.

“Not all currently available treatments work in all patients, and some patients may spend years cycling through different treatments without achieving their treatment goals. Sarilumab works differently from the most commonly used biologics, such as those in the anti-TNF [tumor necrosis factor] class, and is a welcome new option for patients and their physicians,” Alan Kivitz, MD, an investigator in sarilumab clinical trials and a rheumatologist in group practice in Duncansville, Pa., said in Regeneron’s announcement.

The recommended dosage of sarilumab is 200 mg once every 2 weeks given as a subcutaneous injection, which can be self-administered. The dosage can be reduced from 200 mg to 150 mg once every 2 weeks, as needed, to help manage certain laboratory abnormalities (neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and liver enzyme elevations). Significant adverse events associated with sarilumab include weakening of the immune system, changes in certain laboratory tests, perforation in the stomach or intestines, increased risk of cancer, and serious allergic reaction.
 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

Physician-created APMs: Early recommendations offer insight

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 04/03/2019 - 10:27

 

Three physician-created advanced alternative payment models have been recommended for approval by an advisory committee of the Health & Human Services department. Their path to this milestone can help guide organizations and groups who want to benefit from the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA)–based Quality Payment Program on a more intense scale.

Advanced alternative payment models (APMs) involve physicians taking on two-sided risk along with Medicare in exchange for the potential for higher bonus payments for delivering higher value care to patients. Officials at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services have created seven APMs (some primary care and some specialty focused), but they may not appeal to everyone. That’s where physician-created APMs come in.

Elizabeth Mitchell
Getting approval for this type of APM – technically known as a physician-focused payment models (PFPMs) – is tough. Of the first three PFPMs submitted for review, two were recommended for limited trial periods only. A third proposal was not recommended.

Proposals are routed through the Physician-focused Payment Model Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC), comprising physicians and experts in value-based health care systems. Commissioners are appointed by the Comptroller General of the United States.

Each proposals was assigned to three commissioners, including at least one physician, for review against 10 criteria:

  • Scope of proposed PFPM (high priority)
  • Quality and cost (high priority)
  • Payment methodology (high priority)
  • Value over volume
  • Flexibility
  • Ability to be evaluated
  • Integration and care coordination
  • Patient choice
  • Patient safety
  • Health information technology

While each proposal met a few of the criteria, none met all three high priority criteria and none were recommended for approval by its preliminary reviewers; however, after committee deliberation, two received provisional recommendation.

“We are recommending the two models for small-scale testing,” PTAC Vice-Chairman Elizabeth Mitchell said in an interview. “Even though we think they are very good ideas, we know that more experience and evidence is required before they may be ready.”

The two models that got the limited recommendation were

  • Project Sonar, submitted by the Illinois Gastroenterology Group and SonarMD, a web-based platform that queries patients with inflammatory bowel disease monthly to determine which are in need of more hands-on care.
  • APM, submitted by the American College of Surgeons, an episode-based payment model that uses claims data but expands on existing CMS value-based models by not requiring hospitalizations. It creates an episodic payment using outpatient settings, including acute and chronic care.

The COPD [chronic obstructive pulmonary disease] and Asthma Monitoring Project (CAMP), a smartphone app to remotely monitor and guide treatment of patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, was not recommended. It was submitted by Pulmonary Medicine, Infectious Disease and Critical Care Consultants Medical Group of Sacremento, Calif.

PTAC has received more than 20 letters of intent from physicians and aims to hold another round of public hearings in September to determine their usefulness.

“I think it is very safe to say that our whole committee has been really gratified with the level of interest and engagement,” said Ms. Mitchell, president and CEO of Network for Regional Healthcare Improvement in Portland, Maine. The volume of applications “underscores the level of interest from the field. The entire reason PTAC was established was to get those good ideas from practicing physicians and others who are identifying better ways to deliver care but are facing barriers in the current payment system.”

She offered advice to those who are contemplating submission of a payment model.

“Really understand the criteria and review the request for proposals,” she said. “I think the committee lays out what we are looking for in terms of information, and we are hoping that it is really straight forward.”

She also stressed that successful models need to work broadly. “We are not talking about something that works for a single practice,” she said. “We are talking about models that are ready for inclusion in the whole CMS portfolio. It is helpful if there is experience to draw from that informs our deliberations, but we recognize that, in some cases, there has not been the opportunity to test these models broadly.”

Most of all, the highest priority when it comes to the models is related to quality of care and cost.

“We are not soliciting models that are essentially tweaks to fee-for-service. We are looking for changes that cannot be made without a new method of payment,” she said, adding that the models “have to either reduce cost while maintaining quality or improve quality without raising cost.”

Meeting transcripts and video are posted online and can help potential applicants see how the committee came to its recommendations.

“The committee does not deliberate on the proposals except in public,” Ms. Mitchell said. “So, those public meetings were the first time we had deliberated on any of the proposals we have considered. The preliminary review teams have discussed it [in depth], but the full committee can only deliberate in public.”

 

 

Publications
Topics
Sections
Related Articles

 

Three physician-created advanced alternative payment models have been recommended for approval by an advisory committee of the Health & Human Services department. Their path to this milestone can help guide organizations and groups who want to benefit from the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA)–based Quality Payment Program on a more intense scale.

Advanced alternative payment models (APMs) involve physicians taking on two-sided risk along with Medicare in exchange for the potential for higher bonus payments for delivering higher value care to patients. Officials at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services have created seven APMs (some primary care and some specialty focused), but they may not appeal to everyone. That’s where physician-created APMs come in.

Elizabeth Mitchell
Getting approval for this type of APM – technically known as a physician-focused payment models (PFPMs) – is tough. Of the first three PFPMs submitted for review, two were recommended for limited trial periods only. A third proposal was not recommended.

Proposals are routed through the Physician-focused Payment Model Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC), comprising physicians and experts in value-based health care systems. Commissioners are appointed by the Comptroller General of the United States.

Each proposals was assigned to three commissioners, including at least one physician, for review against 10 criteria:

  • Scope of proposed PFPM (high priority)
  • Quality and cost (high priority)
  • Payment methodology (high priority)
  • Value over volume
  • Flexibility
  • Ability to be evaluated
  • Integration and care coordination
  • Patient choice
  • Patient safety
  • Health information technology

While each proposal met a few of the criteria, none met all three high priority criteria and none were recommended for approval by its preliminary reviewers; however, after committee deliberation, two received provisional recommendation.

“We are recommending the two models for small-scale testing,” PTAC Vice-Chairman Elizabeth Mitchell said in an interview. “Even though we think they are very good ideas, we know that more experience and evidence is required before they may be ready.”

The two models that got the limited recommendation were

  • Project Sonar, submitted by the Illinois Gastroenterology Group and SonarMD, a web-based platform that queries patients with inflammatory bowel disease monthly to determine which are in need of more hands-on care.
  • APM, submitted by the American College of Surgeons, an episode-based payment model that uses claims data but expands on existing CMS value-based models by not requiring hospitalizations. It creates an episodic payment using outpatient settings, including acute and chronic care.

The COPD [chronic obstructive pulmonary disease] and Asthma Monitoring Project (CAMP), a smartphone app to remotely monitor and guide treatment of patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, was not recommended. It was submitted by Pulmonary Medicine, Infectious Disease and Critical Care Consultants Medical Group of Sacremento, Calif.

PTAC has received more than 20 letters of intent from physicians and aims to hold another round of public hearings in September to determine their usefulness.

“I think it is very safe to say that our whole committee has been really gratified with the level of interest and engagement,” said Ms. Mitchell, president and CEO of Network for Regional Healthcare Improvement in Portland, Maine. The volume of applications “underscores the level of interest from the field. The entire reason PTAC was established was to get those good ideas from practicing physicians and others who are identifying better ways to deliver care but are facing barriers in the current payment system.”

She offered advice to those who are contemplating submission of a payment model.

“Really understand the criteria and review the request for proposals,” she said. “I think the committee lays out what we are looking for in terms of information, and we are hoping that it is really straight forward.”

She also stressed that successful models need to work broadly. “We are not talking about something that works for a single practice,” she said. “We are talking about models that are ready for inclusion in the whole CMS portfolio. It is helpful if there is experience to draw from that informs our deliberations, but we recognize that, in some cases, there has not been the opportunity to test these models broadly.”

Most of all, the highest priority when it comes to the models is related to quality of care and cost.

“We are not soliciting models that are essentially tweaks to fee-for-service. We are looking for changes that cannot be made without a new method of payment,” she said, adding that the models “have to either reduce cost while maintaining quality or improve quality without raising cost.”

Meeting transcripts and video are posted online and can help potential applicants see how the committee came to its recommendations.

“The committee does not deliberate on the proposals except in public,” Ms. Mitchell said. “So, those public meetings were the first time we had deliberated on any of the proposals we have considered. The preliminary review teams have discussed it [in depth], but the full committee can only deliberate in public.”

 

 

 

Three physician-created advanced alternative payment models have been recommended for approval by an advisory committee of the Health & Human Services department. Their path to this milestone can help guide organizations and groups who want to benefit from the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA)–based Quality Payment Program on a more intense scale.

Advanced alternative payment models (APMs) involve physicians taking on two-sided risk along with Medicare in exchange for the potential for higher bonus payments for delivering higher value care to patients. Officials at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services have created seven APMs (some primary care and some specialty focused), but they may not appeal to everyone. That’s where physician-created APMs come in.

Elizabeth Mitchell
Getting approval for this type of APM – technically known as a physician-focused payment models (PFPMs) – is tough. Of the first three PFPMs submitted for review, two were recommended for limited trial periods only. A third proposal was not recommended.

Proposals are routed through the Physician-focused Payment Model Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC), comprising physicians and experts in value-based health care systems. Commissioners are appointed by the Comptroller General of the United States.

Each proposals was assigned to three commissioners, including at least one physician, for review against 10 criteria:

  • Scope of proposed PFPM (high priority)
  • Quality and cost (high priority)
  • Payment methodology (high priority)
  • Value over volume
  • Flexibility
  • Ability to be evaluated
  • Integration and care coordination
  • Patient choice
  • Patient safety
  • Health information technology

While each proposal met a few of the criteria, none met all three high priority criteria and none were recommended for approval by its preliminary reviewers; however, after committee deliberation, two received provisional recommendation.

“We are recommending the two models for small-scale testing,” PTAC Vice-Chairman Elizabeth Mitchell said in an interview. “Even though we think they are very good ideas, we know that more experience and evidence is required before they may be ready.”

The two models that got the limited recommendation were

  • Project Sonar, submitted by the Illinois Gastroenterology Group and SonarMD, a web-based platform that queries patients with inflammatory bowel disease monthly to determine which are in need of more hands-on care.
  • APM, submitted by the American College of Surgeons, an episode-based payment model that uses claims data but expands on existing CMS value-based models by not requiring hospitalizations. It creates an episodic payment using outpatient settings, including acute and chronic care.

The COPD [chronic obstructive pulmonary disease] and Asthma Monitoring Project (CAMP), a smartphone app to remotely monitor and guide treatment of patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, was not recommended. It was submitted by Pulmonary Medicine, Infectious Disease and Critical Care Consultants Medical Group of Sacremento, Calif.

PTAC has received more than 20 letters of intent from physicians and aims to hold another round of public hearings in September to determine their usefulness.

“I think it is very safe to say that our whole committee has been really gratified with the level of interest and engagement,” said Ms. Mitchell, president and CEO of Network for Regional Healthcare Improvement in Portland, Maine. The volume of applications “underscores the level of interest from the field. The entire reason PTAC was established was to get those good ideas from practicing physicians and others who are identifying better ways to deliver care but are facing barriers in the current payment system.”

She offered advice to those who are contemplating submission of a payment model.

“Really understand the criteria and review the request for proposals,” she said. “I think the committee lays out what we are looking for in terms of information, and we are hoping that it is really straight forward.”

She also stressed that successful models need to work broadly. “We are not talking about something that works for a single practice,” she said. “We are talking about models that are ready for inclusion in the whole CMS portfolio. It is helpful if there is experience to draw from that informs our deliberations, but we recognize that, in some cases, there has not been the opportunity to test these models broadly.”

Most of all, the highest priority when it comes to the models is related to quality of care and cost.

“We are not soliciting models that are essentially tweaks to fee-for-service. We are looking for changes that cannot be made without a new method of payment,” she said, adding that the models “have to either reduce cost while maintaining quality or improve quality without raising cost.”

Meeting transcripts and video are posted online and can help potential applicants see how the committee came to its recommendations.

“The committee does not deliberate on the proposals except in public,” Ms. Mitchell said. “So, those public meetings were the first time we had deliberated on any of the proposals we have considered. The preliminary review teams have discussed it [in depth], but the full committee can only deliberate in public.”

 

 

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

Oral HPV infections sharply lower for vaccinated youth

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 16:47

 

Vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) appears to be highly effective at preventing oral infection with oncogenic types of the virus, based on the results of a cohort study of a nationally representative sample of more than 2,600 U.S. young adults.

“HPV-positive oropharynx cancer is the fastest rising cancer among young white men in the United States. Over 90% of these cancers are caused by HPV type 16,” said senior study author Maura L. Gillison, MD, PhD, who conducted the research at Ohio State University, Columbus. “HPV 16 is one of the types covered in currently recommended HPV vaccines that have been shown to be safe and effective in the prevention of anogenital infections and associated cancers.

vaccine
jarun011/Thinkstock
“Vaccines were approved and recommended for girls between the ages of 9 and 26 in 2006, and for boys in 2011 between the ages of 9 and 21, and up to age 26 for men who have sex with men,” she noted. “But there haven’t been any clinical trials evaluating whether the currently approved HPV vaccines can prevent oral infections that lead to cancer, so that’s not currently an indication.”

Results of the study showed that only about a sixth of the young adults surveyed between 2011 and 2014 had received at least one dose of an HPV vaccine. But relative to peers who had not received any doses, these young adults had an 88% lower prevalence of oral infection with HPV types 16, 18, 6, and 11, which are covered by vaccines; in particular, prevalence was 100% lower, with complete absence of these infections, in vaccinated young men, compared with unvaccinated young men, Dr. Gillison said in a presscast leading up to the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Analyses further suggested that based on levels of vaccine uptake seen in 2014 in the population, the vaccine was preventing only about 17% of the total of approximately 927,000 preventable oral infections with these virus types in that year.

“Our data indicate that HPV vaccines have tremendous potential to prevent oral infection,” said Dr. Gillison, noting that they are already strongly recommended by numerous health and medical organizations. Unfortunately, at the time of the study, “low vaccine uptake limited the population impact of the vaccine.”

However, there is now “considerable optimism,” she said, because recent data have shown that 60% of girls and 40% of boys younger than 18 have received at least one dose of HPV vaccine, marking a major increase in uptake.

“We can’t say that this is cause effect, the impact of these vaccines on infection, because this isn’t a prospective clinical trial,” she acknowledged. “Nevertheless, we can conclude that HPV vaccination may have additional benefits beyond prevention of anogenital cancers.”

The findings are encouraging in that they suggest it will be possible to avert infection-induced oropharyngeal cancer, according to ASCO President-Elect Bruce E. Johnson, MD, who is also chief clinical research officer at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, both in Boston.

“This certainly shows that in the target population to get vaccination, you can indeed prevent the infection, which is one of the first steps that would eventually potentially lead to cancer,” he said.

In the study, Dr. Gillison and her colleagues analyzed data from 2,627 men and women aged 18-33 years who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey in the years 2011-2014. Oral rinses were collected as part of the survey to assess HPV infection.

The results showed that 18% of the young adults overall reported having received at least one dose of HPV vaccine, although receipt was much higher among young women than among young men (29% vs. 7%).

The prevalence of oral infection with HPV types 16/18/6/11 was sharply lower for these vaccinated young adults, compared with unvaccinated peers in the cohort as a whole (0.11% vs. 1.6%; P = .008). In a sex-stratified analysis, the reduction was especially striking among men (0% vs. 2%, P = .007), reported Dr. Gillison, who is now professor of thoracic/head and neck medical oncology at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.

The vaccinated and unvaccinated groups did not differ significantly with respect to the combined prevalence of oral infection with 33 types of HPV that are not covered by vaccines.

When HPV vaccine uptake in the population in 2014 was considered, estimates suggested that vaccination was preventing only 17% of all vaccine-preventable oral HPV 16/18/6/11 infections in that year (25% in women and 7% in men).

Research on anogenital HPV infection, especially cervical HPV infection, suggests that most individuals will clear the infection on their own naturally, without any intervention, Dr. Gillison said. However, research has failed to identify good predictors of clearance or persistence.

“That’s why there is the current recommendation for universal vaccination of young boys and girls, because we don’t know how to distinguish someone who, like the overwhelming majority of individuals, is going to clear their infection with their own immune system, versus those who don’t have that capability and could progress to cancer,” she said.

Dr. Gillison disclosed that she has a consulting or advisory role with GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Merck, and Celgene, and that she receives research funding (institutional) from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, AstraZeneca, and Merck.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

Vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) appears to be highly effective at preventing oral infection with oncogenic types of the virus, based on the results of a cohort study of a nationally representative sample of more than 2,600 U.S. young adults.

“HPV-positive oropharynx cancer is the fastest rising cancer among young white men in the United States. Over 90% of these cancers are caused by HPV type 16,” said senior study author Maura L. Gillison, MD, PhD, who conducted the research at Ohio State University, Columbus. “HPV 16 is one of the types covered in currently recommended HPV vaccines that have been shown to be safe and effective in the prevention of anogenital infections and associated cancers.

vaccine
jarun011/Thinkstock
“Vaccines were approved and recommended for girls between the ages of 9 and 26 in 2006, and for boys in 2011 between the ages of 9 and 21, and up to age 26 for men who have sex with men,” she noted. “But there haven’t been any clinical trials evaluating whether the currently approved HPV vaccines can prevent oral infections that lead to cancer, so that’s not currently an indication.”

Results of the study showed that only about a sixth of the young adults surveyed between 2011 and 2014 had received at least one dose of an HPV vaccine. But relative to peers who had not received any doses, these young adults had an 88% lower prevalence of oral infection with HPV types 16, 18, 6, and 11, which are covered by vaccines; in particular, prevalence was 100% lower, with complete absence of these infections, in vaccinated young men, compared with unvaccinated young men, Dr. Gillison said in a presscast leading up to the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Analyses further suggested that based on levels of vaccine uptake seen in 2014 in the population, the vaccine was preventing only about 17% of the total of approximately 927,000 preventable oral infections with these virus types in that year.

“Our data indicate that HPV vaccines have tremendous potential to prevent oral infection,” said Dr. Gillison, noting that they are already strongly recommended by numerous health and medical organizations. Unfortunately, at the time of the study, “low vaccine uptake limited the population impact of the vaccine.”

However, there is now “considerable optimism,” she said, because recent data have shown that 60% of girls and 40% of boys younger than 18 have received at least one dose of HPV vaccine, marking a major increase in uptake.

“We can’t say that this is cause effect, the impact of these vaccines on infection, because this isn’t a prospective clinical trial,” she acknowledged. “Nevertheless, we can conclude that HPV vaccination may have additional benefits beyond prevention of anogenital cancers.”

The findings are encouraging in that they suggest it will be possible to avert infection-induced oropharyngeal cancer, according to ASCO President-Elect Bruce E. Johnson, MD, who is also chief clinical research officer at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, both in Boston.

“This certainly shows that in the target population to get vaccination, you can indeed prevent the infection, which is one of the first steps that would eventually potentially lead to cancer,” he said.

In the study, Dr. Gillison and her colleagues analyzed data from 2,627 men and women aged 18-33 years who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey in the years 2011-2014. Oral rinses were collected as part of the survey to assess HPV infection.

The results showed that 18% of the young adults overall reported having received at least one dose of HPV vaccine, although receipt was much higher among young women than among young men (29% vs. 7%).

The prevalence of oral infection with HPV types 16/18/6/11 was sharply lower for these vaccinated young adults, compared with unvaccinated peers in the cohort as a whole (0.11% vs. 1.6%; P = .008). In a sex-stratified analysis, the reduction was especially striking among men (0% vs. 2%, P = .007), reported Dr. Gillison, who is now professor of thoracic/head and neck medical oncology at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.

The vaccinated and unvaccinated groups did not differ significantly with respect to the combined prevalence of oral infection with 33 types of HPV that are not covered by vaccines.

When HPV vaccine uptake in the population in 2014 was considered, estimates suggested that vaccination was preventing only 17% of all vaccine-preventable oral HPV 16/18/6/11 infections in that year (25% in women and 7% in men).

Research on anogenital HPV infection, especially cervical HPV infection, suggests that most individuals will clear the infection on their own naturally, without any intervention, Dr. Gillison said. However, research has failed to identify good predictors of clearance or persistence.

“That’s why there is the current recommendation for universal vaccination of young boys and girls, because we don’t know how to distinguish someone who, like the overwhelming majority of individuals, is going to clear their infection with their own immune system, versus those who don’t have that capability and could progress to cancer,” she said.

Dr. Gillison disclosed that she has a consulting or advisory role with GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Merck, and Celgene, and that she receives research funding (institutional) from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, AstraZeneca, and Merck.

 

Vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) appears to be highly effective at preventing oral infection with oncogenic types of the virus, based on the results of a cohort study of a nationally representative sample of more than 2,600 U.S. young adults.

“HPV-positive oropharynx cancer is the fastest rising cancer among young white men in the United States. Over 90% of these cancers are caused by HPV type 16,” said senior study author Maura L. Gillison, MD, PhD, who conducted the research at Ohio State University, Columbus. “HPV 16 is one of the types covered in currently recommended HPV vaccines that have been shown to be safe and effective in the prevention of anogenital infections and associated cancers.

vaccine
jarun011/Thinkstock
“Vaccines were approved and recommended for girls between the ages of 9 and 26 in 2006, and for boys in 2011 between the ages of 9 and 21, and up to age 26 for men who have sex with men,” she noted. “But there haven’t been any clinical trials evaluating whether the currently approved HPV vaccines can prevent oral infections that lead to cancer, so that’s not currently an indication.”

Results of the study showed that only about a sixth of the young adults surveyed between 2011 and 2014 had received at least one dose of an HPV vaccine. But relative to peers who had not received any doses, these young adults had an 88% lower prevalence of oral infection with HPV types 16, 18, 6, and 11, which are covered by vaccines; in particular, prevalence was 100% lower, with complete absence of these infections, in vaccinated young men, compared with unvaccinated young men, Dr. Gillison said in a presscast leading up to the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Analyses further suggested that based on levels of vaccine uptake seen in 2014 in the population, the vaccine was preventing only about 17% of the total of approximately 927,000 preventable oral infections with these virus types in that year.

“Our data indicate that HPV vaccines have tremendous potential to prevent oral infection,” said Dr. Gillison, noting that they are already strongly recommended by numerous health and medical organizations. Unfortunately, at the time of the study, “low vaccine uptake limited the population impact of the vaccine.”

However, there is now “considerable optimism,” she said, because recent data have shown that 60% of girls and 40% of boys younger than 18 have received at least one dose of HPV vaccine, marking a major increase in uptake.

“We can’t say that this is cause effect, the impact of these vaccines on infection, because this isn’t a prospective clinical trial,” she acknowledged. “Nevertheless, we can conclude that HPV vaccination may have additional benefits beyond prevention of anogenital cancers.”

The findings are encouraging in that they suggest it will be possible to avert infection-induced oropharyngeal cancer, according to ASCO President-Elect Bruce E. Johnson, MD, who is also chief clinical research officer at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, both in Boston.

“This certainly shows that in the target population to get vaccination, you can indeed prevent the infection, which is one of the first steps that would eventually potentially lead to cancer,” he said.

In the study, Dr. Gillison and her colleagues analyzed data from 2,627 men and women aged 18-33 years who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey in the years 2011-2014. Oral rinses were collected as part of the survey to assess HPV infection.

The results showed that 18% of the young adults overall reported having received at least one dose of HPV vaccine, although receipt was much higher among young women than among young men (29% vs. 7%).

The prevalence of oral infection with HPV types 16/18/6/11 was sharply lower for these vaccinated young adults, compared with unvaccinated peers in the cohort as a whole (0.11% vs. 1.6%; P = .008). In a sex-stratified analysis, the reduction was especially striking among men (0% vs. 2%, P = .007), reported Dr. Gillison, who is now professor of thoracic/head and neck medical oncology at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.

The vaccinated and unvaccinated groups did not differ significantly with respect to the combined prevalence of oral infection with 33 types of HPV that are not covered by vaccines.

When HPV vaccine uptake in the population in 2014 was considered, estimates suggested that vaccination was preventing only 17% of all vaccine-preventable oral HPV 16/18/6/11 infections in that year (25% in women and 7% in men).

Research on anogenital HPV infection, especially cervical HPV infection, suggests that most individuals will clear the infection on their own naturally, without any intervention, Dr. Gillison said. However, research has failed to identify good predictors of clearance or persistence.

“That’s why there is the current recommendation for universal vaccination of young boys and girls, because we don’t know how to distinguish someone who, like the overwhelming majority of individuals, is going to clear their infection with their own immune system, versus those who don’t have that capability and could progress to cancer,” she said.

Dr. Gillison disclosed that she has a consulting or advisory role with GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Merck, and Celgene, and that she receives research funding (institutional) from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, AstraZeneca, and Merck.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM THE 2017 ASCO ANNUAL MEETING

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: HPV vaccination appears to confer a high level of protection against oral infection with oncogenic virus types.

Major finding: Compared with unvaccinated peers, young adults who had received at least one dose of HPV vaccine had an 88% lower prevalence of oral infection with HPV types 16/18/6/11.

Data source: A cross-sectional cohort study of 2,627 men and women aged 18-33 years who participated in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey during 2011-2014.

Disclosures: Dr. Gillison disclosed that she has a consulting or advisory role with GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Merck, and Celgene, and that she receives research funding (institutional) from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, AstraZeneca, and Merck.

VIDEO: Use oil-based contrast for HSG fertility boost

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 12/04/2018 - 16:05

 

– Ongoing pregnancies and live births were substantially higher when oil-based contrast, instead of water-based contrast, was used for hysterosalpingography (HSG) in a randomized trial at 27 hospitals in the Netherlands.

It’s long been known that HSG, commonly used to assess reproductive tract patency, also improves fertility, perhaps by immunologic effects or simply by flushing debris and mucus out of the fallopian tubes. Until now, however, it’s been unclear if oil or water contrast boosts fertility the most.

To find out, investigators randomized 554 infertile women scheduled for HSG to poppy seed oil contrast (Lipiodol Ultra-Fluid, Guerbet) and 554 others to water contrast (Telebrix Hystero, Guerbet).

A total of 220 women in the oil group (39.7%), but 161 in the water group (29.1%), achieved ongoing pregnancies (rate ratio in favor of oil, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.16-1.61; P less than 0.001). Of 552 women in each of the groups, 214 in the oil group (38.8%) and 155 in the water group (28.1%) had live births (RR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.17-1.64; P less than 0.001). Rates of adverse events were low and similar in the two groups. About three-quarters of the pregnancies were naturally conceived, and most of the rest resulted from intrauterine insemination. Only a few women in each group used in vitro fertilization (N Engl J Med. 2017 May 18. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1612337).

Three women in the oil group, but none in the water group, delivered a child with a congenital anomaly. “This finding is probably due to chance. The frequency of congenital anomalies with oil contrast was not greater than rates reported in the general population, and we are unaware of other data suggesting an increased risk of congenital anomalies with oil contrast,” the researchers said.

In an interview at the World Congress on Endometriosis, senior investigator Ben Mol, MD, PhD, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Adelaide (Australia), shared his thoughts on how the new findings should be used in routine practice when women with endometriosis and other conditions experience difficulty conceiving.

There was no industry funding for the work. Dr. Mol reported personal fees from Guerbet unrelated to the study.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– Ongoing pregnancies and live births were substantially higher when oil-based contrast, instead of water-based contrast, was used for hysterosalpingography (HSG) in a randomized trial at 27 hospitals in the Netherlands.

It’s long been known that HSG, commonly used to assess reproductive tract patency, also improves fertility, perhaps by immunologic effects or simply by flushing debris and mucus out of the fallopian tubes. Until now, however, it’s been unclear if oil or water contrast boosts fertility the most.

To find out, investigators randomized 554 infertile women scheduled for HSG to poppy seed oil contrast (Lipiodol Ultra-Fluid, Guerbet) and 554 others to water contrast (Telebrix Hystero, Guerbet).

A total of 220 women in the oil group (39.7%), but 161 in the water group (29.1%), achieved ongoing pregnancies (rate ratio in favor of oil, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.16-1.61; P less than 0.001). Of 552 women in each of the groups, 214 in the oil group (38.8%) and 155 in the water group (28.1%) had live births (RR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.17-1.64; P less than 0.001). Rates of adverse events were low and similar in the two groups. About three-quarters of the pregnancies were naturally conceived, and most of the rest resulted from intrauterine insemination. Only a few women in each group used in vitro fertilization (N Engl J Med. 2017 May 18. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1612337).

Three women in the oil group, but none in the water group, delivered a child with a congenital anomaly. “This finding is probably due to chance. The frequency of congenital anomalies with oil contrast was not greater than rates reported in the general population, and we are unaware of other data suggesting an increased risk of congenital anomalies with oil contrast,” the researchers said.

In an interview at the World Congress on Endometriosis, senior investigator Ben Mol, MD, PhD, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Adelaide (Australia), shared his thoughts on how the new findings should be used in routine practice when women with endometriosis and other conditions experience difficulty conceiving.

There was no industry funding for the work. Dr. Mol reported personal fees from Guerbet unrelated to the study.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel

 

– Ongoing pregnancies and live births were substantially higher when oil-based contrast, instead of water-based contrast, was used for hysterosalpingography (HSG) in a randomized trial at 27 hospitals in the Netherlands.

It’s long been known that HSG, commonly used to assess reproductive tract patency, also improves fertility, perhaps by immunologic effects or simply by flushing debris and mucus out of the fallopian tubes. Until now, however, it’s been unclear if oil or water contrast boosts fertility the most.

To find out, investigators randomized 554 infertile women scheduled for HSG to poppy seed oil contrast (Lipiodol Ultra-Fluid, Guerbet) and 554 others to water contrast (Telebrix Hystero, Guerbet).

A total of 220 women in the oil group (39.7%), but 161 in the water group (29.1%), achieved ongoing pregnancies (rate ratio in favor of oil, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.16-1.61; P less than 0.001). Of 552 women in each of the groups, 214 in the oil group (38.8%) and 155 in the water group (28.1%) had live births (RR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.17-1.64; P less than 0.001). Rates of adverse events were low and similar in the two groups. About three-quarters of the pregnancies were naturally conceived, and most of the rest resulted from intrauterine insemination. Only a few women in each group used in vitro fertilization (N Engl J Med. 2017 May 18. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1612337).

Three women in the oil group, but none in the water group, delivered a child with a congenital anomaly. “This finding is probably due to chance. The frequency of congenital anomalies with oil contrast was not greater than rates reported in the general population, and we are unaware of other data suggesting an increased risk of congenital anomalies with oil contrast,” the researchers said.

In an interview at the World Congress on Endometriosis, senior investigator Ben Mol, MD, PhD, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Adelaide (Australia), shared his thoughts on how the new findings should be used in routine practice when women with endometriosis and other conditions experience difficulty conceiving.

There was no industry funding for the work. Dr. Mol reported personal fees from Guerbet unrelated to the study.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

AT WEC 2017

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

VIDEO: Chronic cough drug shows phase II efficacy, tolerability

Article Type
Changed
Tue, 07/21/2020 - 14:18

 

– A new oral drug that blocks a nerve ion channel was generally tolerable and effective at reducing chronic, refractory cough in a placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, phase II study with 252 patients.

A 50 mg b.i.d dosage of MK-7264 cut cough frequency by at least 30% in 80% of patients, compared with 44% of patients on placebo, Jaclyn A. Smith, MD, said at an international conference of the American Thoracic Society.

At that dosage, 48% of patients reported some change in their taste sensations, an expected drug effect, with about 40% characterizing it as very bothersome or extremely bothersome. An additional 9% reported a complete loss of taste. However, only 6 patients out of 63 randomized to this dosage stopped taking their medication, suggesting that the drug was tolerable for most patients. The results also suggested that lower dosages with less potent taste adverse effects produced significant cough reductions in some patients.

“Patients with chronic, refractory cough are often “willing to accept some taste change to reduce their cough count. Patients are willing to put up with the taste side effects,” Dr. Smith said in a video interview.

The study enrolled patients with chronic, refractory cough at U.S. and UK centers and randomized 63 to each of three active treatment arms receiving 7.5 mg, 20 mg, or 50 mg b.i.d. of MK-7264 or to placebo for 12 weeks. The patients averaged 60 years of age and about three-quarters were women. On average, they had their cough for more than 10 years, and these patients coughed roughly 30 times an hour when awake.

The study’s primary endpoint was reduction in awake cough frequency, and, after 12 weeks on treatment with 50 mg b.i.d., this had fallen an average of 37%, compared with placebo, said Dr. Smith, a professor of respiratory medicine at the University of Manchester, England.

The 7.5-mg and 20-mg b.i.d. dosages each led to cough frequency reductions of about 22% over placebo that were not statistically significant. This was likely a result of the unexpectedly strong placebo effect in the study, Dr. Smith said. Most of the cough effect was evident after the first 4 weeks on treatment.

Dr. Smith noted that she and her associates “most definitely” plan to progress to a phase III trial. “We really lack effective treatments for cough,” she said.

The study was sponsored by Merck, the company developing MK-7264. Dr. Smith is a consultant to Merck and has a licensing agreement with Vitalograph.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– A new oral drug that blocks a nerve ion channel was generally tolerable and effective at reducing chronic, refractory cough in a placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, phase II study with 252 patients.

A 50 mg b.i.d dosage of MK-7264 cut cough frequency by at least 30% in 80% of patients, compared with 44% of patients on placebo, Jaclyn A. Smith, MD, said at an international conference of the American Thoracic Society.

At that dosage, 48% of patients reported some change in their taste sensations, an expected drug effect, with about 40% characterizing it as very bothersome or extremely bothersome. An additional 9% reported a complete loss of taste. However, only 6 patients out of 63 randomized to this dosage stopped taking their medication, suggesting that the drug was tolerable for most patients. The results also suggested that lower dosages with less potent taste adverse effects produced significant cough reductions in some patients.

“Patients with chronic, refractory cough are often “willing to accept some taste change to reduce their cough count. Patients are willing to put up with the taste side effects,” Dr. Smith said in a video interview.

The study enrolled patients with chronic, refractory cough at U.S. and UK centers and randomized 63 to each of three active treatment arms receiving 7.5 mg, 20 mg, or 50 mg b.i.d. of MK-7264 or to placebo for 12 weeks. The patients averaged 60 years of age and about three-quarters were women. On average, they had their cough for more than 10 years, and these patients coughed roughly 30 times an hour when awake.

The study’s primary endpoint was reduction in awake cough frequency, and, after 12 weeks on treatment with 50 mg b.i.d., this had fallen an average of 37%, compared with placebo, said Dr. Smith, a professor of respiratory medicine at the University of Manchester, England.

The 7.5-mg and 20-mg b.i.d. dosages each led to cough frequency reductions of about 22% over placebo that were not statistically significant. This was likely a result of the unexpectedly strong placebo effect in the study, Dr. Smith said. Most of the cough effect was evident after the first 4 weeks on treatment.

Dr. Smith noted that she and her associates “most definitely” plan to progress to a phase III trial. “We really lack effective treatments for cough,” she said.

The study was sponsored by Merck, the company developing MK-7264. Dr. Smith is a consultant to Merck and has a licensing agreement with Vitalograph.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel

 

– A new oral drug that blocks a nerve ion channel was generally tolerable and effective at reducing chronic, refractory cough in a placebo-controlled, dose-ranging, phase II study with 252 patients.

A 50 mg b.i.d dosage of MK-7264 cut cough frequency by at least 30% in 80% of patients, compared with 44% of patients on placebo, Jaclyn A. Smith, MD, said at an international conference of the American Thoracic Society.

At that dosage, 48% of patients reported some change in their taste sensations, an expected drug effect, with about 40% characterizing it as very bothersome or extremely bothersome. An additional 9% reported a complete loss of taste. However, only 6 patients out of 63 randomized to this dosage stopped taking their medication, suggesting that the drug was tolerable for most patients. The results also suggested that lower dosages with less potent taste adverse effects produced significant cough reductions in some patients.

“Patients with chronic, refractory cough are often “willing to accept some taste change to reduce their cough count. Patients are willing to put up with the taste side effects,” Dr. Smith said in a video interview.

The study enrolled patients with chronic, refractory cough at U.S. and UK centers and randomized 63 to each of three active treatment arms receiving 7.5 mg, 20 mg, or 50 mg b.i.d. of MK-7264 or to placebo for 12 weeks. The patients averaged 60 years of age and about three-quarters were women. On average, they had their cough for more than 10 years, and these patients coughed roughly 30 times an hour when awake.

The study’s primary endpoint was reduction in awake cough frequency, and, after 12 weeks on treatment with 50 mg b.i.d., this had fallen an average of 37%, compared with placebo, said Dr. Smith, a professor of respiratory medicine at the University of Manchester, England.

The 7.5-mg and 20-mg b.i.d. dosages each led to cough frequency reductions of about 22% over placebo that were not statistically significant. This was likely a result of the unexpectedly strong placebo effect in the study, Dr. Smith said. Most of the cough effect was evident after the first 4 weeks on treatment.

Dr. Smith noted that she and her associates “most definitely” plan to progress to a phase III trial. “We really lack effective treatments for cough,” she said.

The study was sponsored by Merck, the company developing MK-7264. Dr. Smith is a consultant to Merck and has a licensing agreement with Vitalograph.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

AT ATS 2017

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: A nerve ion-channel blocking drug produced significant reductions in the frequency and severity of chronic, refractory cough and was mostly tolerable, despite causing significant taste changes in many patients.

Major finding: A 50 mg b.i.d. dosage of MK-7264 reduced awake cough frequency by an average of 37%, compared with placebo.

Data source: A multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study with 252 patients.

Disclosures: The study was sponsored by Merck, the company developing MK-7264. Dr. Smith is a consultant to Merck and has a licensing agreement with Vitalograph.