How Important Is It to Correct Vitamin D Deficiency in a Critically-Ill Patient?

According to a recent study (NEJM 2019; 381: 2529-40), correction of vitamin D deficiency in critically-ill has NO significant effects on mortality and other non-fatal outcomes.

Link  to abstract: Early High-Dose Vitamin D3 for Critically Ill, Vitamin D–Deficient Patients

The article notes that observational data have indicated that Vitamin D deficiency is common in critically ill patients and has been associated with longer lengths of stay, prolonged ventilation and death.  However, “vitamin D level is considered a marker of coexisting conditions and frailty, and residual confounding may drive theses associations.”

Methods: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial of early vitamin D3 supplementation in critically ill, vitamin D–deficient patients who were at high risk for death. Randomization occurred within 12 hours after the decision to admit the patient to an intensive care unit. Eligible patients received a single enteral dose of 540,000 IU of vitamin D3 or matched placebo.

Results:

  • A total of 1360 patients were found to be vitamin D–deficient during point-of-care screening and underwent randomization. Of these patients, 1078 had baseline vitamin D deficiency (25-hydroxyvitamin D level, <20 ng per milliliter [50 nmol per liter]) confirmed by subsequent testing and were included in the primary analysis population.
  • The mean day 3 level of 25-hydroxyvitamin D was 46.9±23.2 ng per milliliter (117±58 nmol per liter) in the vitamin D group and 11.4±5.6 ng per milliliter (28±14 nmol per liter) in the placebo group
  • The 90-day mortality was 23.5% in the vitamin D group (125 of 531 patients) and 20.6% in the placebo group (109 of 528 patients) (difference, 2.9 percentage points; 95% CI, −2.1 to 7.9; P=0.26). There were no clinically important differences between the groups with respect to secondary clinical, physiological, or safety end points.

My take: Correction of low serum vitamin D levels did not improve outcomes.  This likely indicates that low vitamin D levels are often an epiphenomenon of critical illness and not a contributing causal etiology.

Related blog posts:

Montreal

 

 

 

Liver Shorts -January 2020

S Nagai et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17: 2759-68. For patients who underwent liver transplantation during 2016–2017, a significantly lower proportion of patients with NASH survived for 1 year after transplantation than patients with HCV (P = .004) or ALD (P < .001). 1-year patient survival rates: NASH 90.4%, HCV 92.8%, ALD 93.5%. Full Text: Increased Risk of Death in First Year After Liver Transplantation Among Patients With Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis vs Liver Disease of Other Etiologies

JE Squires et al. JPGN 2020; 70: 79-86.  Using a prospective, longitudinal database, this study from ChiLDReN network with 93 children with biliary atresia and native liver found that NO increased prevalence of neurodevelopmental delays. Markers of advanced liver disease (high bilirubin/GGT for those ≤5 yrs, and portal hypertension for those >5 years) did negatively affect neurodevelopmental measures.

C Jaramillo et al. JPGN 2020; 70: 87-92.  This pilot study with 21 patients found that degree of fibrosis, quantified by collagen hybridizing peptide, at time of Kasai, was associated with the risk of requiring a liver transplantation by age 4 years.  Total bilirubin >2 mg/dL and Albumin ❤ g/dL at 3 months post-Kasai were also associated significantly with need for liver transplantation.

H-S Chen et al. Hepatology 2019; 70: 1903-12. In this study from Taiwan with 182 children (median age of 10.6 at enrollment) with hepatitis B and a normal ALT, a baseline anti-HBc titer of >500 IU/mL was associated with spontaneous HBeAg seroconversion with hazard ratio of 2.81.  Over the median follow-up of 19.8 years, 85 subjects (46.7%) had HBeAg seroconversion. Thus, anit-HBc reflects anti-HBV immune response in the HBeAg-positive patients with normal ALT.

Gluten Intake and Development of Celiac Disease -Two Studies

  • NA Lund-Blix et al. Am J Gastroenterol 2019; 114: 1299-1306.
  • K Marild et al. Am J Gastroenterol 2019; 114: 1307-14.

Thanks to Ben Gold for these references.

In the first study, the authors used an observational prospective nationwide cohort study, the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study (MoBa) with 67,608 children born between 2000-2009 and with a mean followup of 11.5 years.

Key findings:

  • Celiac disease (CD) was diagnosed in 738 children (1.1%)
  • The adjusted relative risk of CD was 1.1 per standard deviation increase in daily gluten amount at age 18 months.
  • Compared to children in the lowest quartile of gluten ingestion, those in the upper quartile had an adjusted relative risk of 1.29.
  • Timing of gluten introduction, ≥6 months or before 4 months, was also an independent risk factor for CD. In those before 4 months the aRR was 1.45 and for those ≥6 months the aRR was 1.34

In the second study, the authors used the prospective Diabetes Autoimmunity Study in the Young cohort with 1875 at-risk children.

Key findings:

  • Children in the highest tertile of gluten intake between ages of 1 and 2 had a 2-fold greater hazard of developing CD autoimmunity (positive tTG antibodies) (aHR 2.17) than those in the lowest tertile.
  • The risk of CDA increased by 5% per daily gram increase in gluten intake in 1 year olds.

My take: Taken together, these studies indicate that higher gluten exposure (between 1-2 years) is associated with a modestly-higher risk of CD; in addition, early (<4 months) and late exposure (>6 months) may increase the risk as well.

Related blog posts:

Spoiler alert: This case study by A Fasano et al. NEJM 2020; 382: 180-9. describes a presentation of celiac disease and Addision’s disease. I recently had a teenager present with similar symptoms who had Addison’s alone (clues were fatigue, low sodium and hyperpigmentation)

How helpful is a pH-Impedance Study in Identifying Reflux-Induced Symptoms?

In both kids and adults, individuals presenting with complaints of reflux more often have other problems like functional heartburn or reflux hypersensitivity (see posts below).  A recent prospective, cross-sectional study (LB Mahoney et al. JPGN 2020; 70: 31-36) provides data that further shows that abnormal pH-impedance (pH-MII) testing does NOT predict reduced quality of life (QOL) in children with reflux symptoms (n=82).

Key findings:

  • 38% had abnormal pH-MII testing; however, there were no significant differences in QOL scores on any of the tested questionairres between those with normal or abnormal pH-MII studies.
  • Subjects with gross esophagitis on EGD reported significantly worse QOL scores. Microscopic esophagitis was not associate with differences in QOL scores.

The implication of this study is that reflux without esophagitis is NOT a driver of abnormal QOL parameters; instead, functional GI disorders are likely more important.

My take: This study makes it clear that gross endoscopic findings are much more consequential than abnormal pH-MII studies.

Related blog posts:

Highlights in IBD from Two 2019 Meetings: American College of Gastroenterology and United European Gastroenterology Week

Gastroenterology & Hepatology. December 2019 – Volume 15, Issue 12, Supplement 5

Excerpts from William Sandborn Commentary which are at the end of this supplement along with references:

Vedolizumab

In the VARSITY study (An Efficacy and Safety Study of Vedolizumab Intravenous [IV] Compared to Adalimumab Subcutaneous [SC] in Participants With Ulcerative Colitis), 769 patients with ulcerative colitis were randomized to a year of therapy with either adalimumab at the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved dose or vedolizumab at the FDA-approved dose…This shows that the idea that vedolizumab (and anti-integrin therapy) is slower-acting than anti-TNF therapy is not correct, and that both of these classes of drugs can work fairly quickly in a number of patients.

Dr Brian Bressler and colleagues looked at the effectiveness of anti-TNF therapy in the real world when used second line after failing first-line biologic therapy with vedolizumab…The study conducted by Dr Bressler and colleagues, which included both Crohn’s disease patients and ulcerative colitis patients, found that the results were fairly similar whether patients received first-line biologic therapy with an anti-TNF agent or whether patients received first-line therapy with vedolizumab… It is generally thought that vedolizumab is a safer therapy than anti-TNF therapy, so with the finding from this study, a reasonable treatment approach could be to start with vedolizumab and see if it works

Dr Christina Chambers and colleagues identified outcomes for pregnancy in 223 women, 53 of whom received vedolizumab. The researchers found that there were no major structural birth defects reported in the vedolizumab group, compared to 5.7% and 5.3% in the disease-matched group and healthy control group, respectively. Thus, there seemed to be no signal for an increased malformation risk in patients who were undergoing treatment with vedolizumab and became pregnant.

Adalimumab

The SERENE trials are a set of head-to-head trials, one for ulcerative colitis and one for Crohn’s disease, comparing standard-dose adalimumab to a more intensive induction regimen of adalimumab…

For both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease, the SERENE trials showed that the current FDA-approved dosing regimen is effective and that more intensive induction therapy does not improve outcomes over time. Thus, there is no utility in giving high induction doses. 

Tofacitinib

Over 1000 patients who had been treated with tofacitinib were examined…during induction and maintenance of the placebo-controlled portion of the tofacitinib clinical trials, there were a total of 5 deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary emboli events. All 5 occurred in patients who were receiving placebo; none of these events occurred in patients who were receiving tofacitinib…[And] There was a total of 5 deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary emboli events during this long-term extension…Looking at the ulcerative colitis clinical trial data that I presented, it is somewhat reassuring that we did not see the same elevation in risk for deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary emboli that was seen in the high-risk rheumatoid arthritis patient population.

Mont Royal (Montreal)

ESPGHAN Guidelines for Diagnosing Coeliac Disease 2020

Briefly noted: S Husby et al. JPGN 2020; 70: 141-56.

Link to document: ESPGHAN Guidelines for Diagnosing Coeliac Disease 2020

Key recommendations for diagnosing celiac disease (CD):

  • If CD is suspected, measurement of total serum IgA and IgA-antibodies against transglutaminase 2 (TGA-IgA) is superior to other combinations
  • We recommend against deamidated gliadin peptide antibodies (DGP-IgG/IgA) for initial testing
  • Only if total IgA is low/undetectable, an IgG-based test is indicated
  • If TGA-IgA is ≥10 times the upper limit of normal (10× ULN) and the family agrees, the no-biopsy diagnosis may be applied, provided endomysial antibodies (EMA-IgA) will test positive in a second blood sample. HLA DQ2-/DQ8 determination and symptoms are not obligatory criteria
  • In children with positive TGA-IgA <10× ULN at least 4 biopsies from the distal duodenum and at least 1 from the bulb should be taken

Related blog posts:

 

P’tit Train du Nord Linear Park

More Good News for PPIs: NO Increased Risk of Dementia

From ACG SmartBrief (thanks to Ben Gold for this):

A study published in The American Journal of Gastroenterology found no link between the use of proton-pump inhibitors and increased dementia risk. The study, led by Muhammad Ali Khan, MD, examined 11 studies with a combined 642,949 participants, and researchers said “PPI use among patients who have a valid indication for it, should not be curtailed because of concerns about dementia risk.”

The American Journal of Gastroenterology: January 2, 2020 – Volume Publish Ahead of Print – Issue – p doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000500

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:

Long-term use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) has been associated with a wide variety of potentially serious adverse effects including a possible increased risk of dementia. Studies evaluating this association have reached divergent conclusions. We aimed to evaluate this proposed association further and to assess the quality of the evidence in its support.

METHODS:

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, and Cochrane databases for studies examining a link between PPI use and dementia, up to February 2019. Studies reporting summary results as hazard ratio (HR) or odds ratio (OR) were pooled using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model for meta-analyses. Methodological quality of individual observational studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the overall quality of evidence rated as per the GRADE approach.

RESULTS:

We identified and included 11 observational studies comprising 642,949 subjects; 64% were women. Most studies were short-term ranging from 5 to 10 years. There were 158,954 PPI users and 483,995 nonusers. For studies summarizing data as adjusted HR, pooled HR for all causes of dementia was 1.10 (0.88–1.37); for Alzheimer dementia only, it was 1.06 (0.72–1.55). For studies summarizing data as adjusted OR, pooled OR for all causes of dementia was 1.03 (0.84–1.25) and for Alzheimer dementia only 0.96 (0.82–1.11). Per Newcastle-Ottawa scale assessment, 10 studies were of high quality and 1 was of moderate quality. By applying GRADE methodology, quality of evidence for both outcomes was very low.

DISCUSSION:

We found no evidence to support the proposed association between PPI use and an increased risk of dementia. PPI use among patients who have a valid indication for it, should not be curtailed because of concerns about dementia risk.

Related blog posts:

P’tit Train du Nord Linear Park