Author Archives: gutsandgrowth

Unknown's avatar

About gutsandgrowth

I am a pediatric gastroenterologist at GI Care for Kids (previously called CCDHC) in Atlanta, Georgia. The goal of my blog is to share some of my reading in my field more broadly. In addition, I wanted to provide my voice to a wide range of topics that often have inaccurate or incomplete information. Before starting this blog in 2011, I would tear out articles from journals and/or keep notes in a palm pilot. This blog helps provide an updated source of information that is easy to access and search, along with links to useful multimedia sources. I was born and raised in Chattanooga. After graduating from the University of Virginia, I attended Baylor College of Medicine. I completed residency and fellowship training at the University of Cincinnati at the Children’s Hospital Medical Center. I received funding from the National Institutes of Health for molecular biology research of the gastrointestinal tract. During my fellowship, I had the opportunity to work with some of the most amazing pediatric gastroenterologists and mentors. Some of these individuals included Mitchell Cohen, William Balistreri, James Heubi, Jorge Bezerra, Colin Rudolph, John Bucuvalas, and Michael Farrell. I am grateful for their teaching and their friendship. During my training with their help, I received a nationwide award for the best research by a GI fellow. I have authored numerous publications/presentations including original research, case reports, review articles, and textbook chapters on various pediatric gastrointestinal problems. In addition, I have been recognized by Atlanta Magazine as a "Top Doctor" in my field multiple times. Currently, I am the vice chair of the section of nutrition for the Georgia Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics. In addition, I am an adjunct Associate Clinical Professor of Pediatrics at Emory University School of Medicine. Other society memberships have included the North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition (NASPGHAN), American Academy of Pediatrics, the Food Allergy Network, the American Gastroenterology Association, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases, and the Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation. As part of a national pediatric GI organization called NASPGHAN (and its affiliated website GIKids), I have helped develop educational materials on a wide-range of gastrointestinal and liver diseases which are used across the country. Also, I have been an invited speaker for national campaigns to improve the evaluation and treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease, celiac disease, eosinophilic esophagitis, hepatitis C, and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Some information on these topics has been posted at my work website, www.gicareforkids.com, which has links to multiple other useful resources. I am fortunate to work at GI Care For Kids. Our group has 17 terrific physicians with a wide range of subspecialization, including liver diseases, feeding disorders, eosinophilic diseases, inflammatory bowel disease, cystic fibrosis, DiGeorge/22q, celiac disease, and motility disorders. Many of our physicians are recognized nationally for their achievements. Our group of physicians have worked closely together for many years. None of the physicians in our group have ever left to join other groups. I have also worked with the same nurse (Bernadette) since I moved to Atlanta in 1997. For many families, more practical matters about our office include the following: – 14 office/satellite locations – physicians who speak Spanish – cutting edge research – on-site nutritionists – on-site psychology support for abdominal pain and feeding disorders – participation in ImproveCareNow to better the outcomes for children with inflammatory bowel disease – office endoscopy suite (lower costs and easier scheduling) – office infusion center (lower costs and easier for families) – easy access to nursing advice (each physician has at least one nurse) I am married and have two sons (both adults). I like to read, walk/hike, bike, swim, and play tennis with my free time. I do not have any financial relationships with pharmaceutical companies or other financial relationships to disclose. I have helped enroll patients in industry-sponsored research studies.

Autism, Acetaminophen, and Misleading Claims

Posted on by

I am not an expert on autism. However, I am concerned about the administration’s recent recommendations regarding acetaminophen and autism. Even scientists who have suggested a possible link have NOT recommended stopping the use of acetaminophen during pregnancy.

It is well-recognized that autism is related to multiple factors, both genetic and potential environmental factors. The use of acetaminophen, even if linked to autism, could represent an epiphenomenon in which a primary disorder (like a fever or infection) is responsible for subsequent neurodevelopmental problems rather than the medicine itself. While there has been growing concern about the increasing frequency of autism, much of this relates to changes in the definition of autism over various periods.

I recommend the following recent sources of information on this topic:

From ACOG -an excerpt:

“Today’s announcement by HHS is not backed by the full body of scientific evidence and dangerously simplifies the many and complex causes of neurologic challenges in children. It is highly unsettling that our federal health agencies are willing to make an announcement that will affect the health and well-being of millions of people without the backing of reliable data.

“In more than two decades of research on the use of acetaminophen in pregnancy, not a single reputable study has successfully concluded that the use of acetaminophen in any trimester of pregnancy causes neurodevelopmental disorders in children. In fact, the two highest-quality studies on this subject—one of which was published in JAMA last year—found no significant associations between use of acetaminophen during pregnancy and children’s risk of autism, ADHD, or intellectual disability. 

“Acetaminophen is one of the few options available to pregnant patients to treat pain and fever, which can be harmful to pregnant people when left untreated. Maternal fever, headaches as an early sign of preeclampsia, and pain are all managed with the therapeutic use of acetaminophen, making acetaminophen essential to the people who need it. The conditions people use acetaminophen to treat during pregnancy are far more dangerous than any theoretical risks and can create severe morbidity and mortality for the pregnant person and the fetus.”

From KFF News:

In August, Bauer and her colleagues published an analysis of 46 previous studies on Tylenol, autism, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Many found no link between the drug and the conditions, while some suggested Tylenol might occasionally exacerbate other potential causes of autism, such as genetics.

Bauer, an epidemiologist at the University of Massachusetts-Lowell, and her team called for more judicious use of the drug until the science is settled.

Autism experts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were neither consulted for the White House’s long-awaited autism announcement nor asked to review a draft of the findings and recommendations…

If prenatal Tylenol has any association, which it may not, it would help account for only a fraction of cases, she said. Further, research has not deeply examined Tylenol risks in young children, and many rigorous studies refute a link between vaccines and autism.

Bauer worries such statements will cut both ways: People may put themselves at risk to avoid vaccines and Tylenol, the only safe painkiller for use during pregnancy. And she frets that scientists might outright reject her team’s measured concerns about Tylenol in a backlash against misleading remarks from Trump and other members of his “Make America Healthy Again” movement….

Helen Tager-Flusberg, director of the Center for Autism Research Excellence at Boston University, called Trump’s comments dangerous. Fevers can harm the mother and the developing fetus, she said, adding that fevers are more strongly associated with autism than Tylenol…

Several medical and scientific associations have called for Kennedy’s removal or resignation. Many scientists are skeptical of what he says because much of it has been misleading or wrong. For example, he’s said HIV isn’t the only cause of AIDS (it is), that antidepressant drugs cause mass shootings (they don’t), that older adults don’t have severe autism (some do), that the measles vaccine causes brain swelling (it doesn’t), that covid vaccines were the deadliest vaccines ever made (they aren’t), that vaccines aren’t safety-tested (they are), and that vaccines contribute to autism (they don’t).

From the Wall Street Journal:

Washington Post Editorial:

From TIME article: “Despite what we are now hearing from the most powerful health offices in the nation, the science on acetaminophen and autism remains unsettled. What is not unsettled is the damage done when politics masquerades as medicine. Every false certainty erodes the trust that holds the fragile bridge between patients and their doctors. Break that trust, and no study, no drug, no vaccine will be enough to save lives when the next real crisis comes. When politicians play doctor, it’s families who will pay the price.”

My take: Thinking about the damage from this press conference, I was reminded of a scene from the movie “Doubt.” In the movie Doubt, Father Flynn (played by Philip Seymour Hoffman) tells a parable about an old priest instructing a woman who has been gossiping to take a pillow, cut it open on her roof, and then return to gather up all the feathers. When she tells him it can’t be done because “the wind took them all over,” the priest responds: “And that… is gossip!”

The spreading of damaging rumors and lies, which is being done by leaders of this country, is impossible to contain or undo once released, and its impact is far-reaching and destructive. 

Related blog posts:

Rectal Budesonide for Biliary Atresia After Kasai Procedure

Posted on by

S Langreen et al. JPGN 2025;81:626–633. Rectal budesonide: A potential game changer after Kasai hepatoportoenterostomy

Background: After the START trial in 2014, it seemed that enthusiasm for post-operative steroids for biliary atresia had waned. The START study did not find that steroids improved outcomes after Kasai hepatoportoenterostomy (HPE). Subsequently, though, there have been observational reports of using steroids in a customized fashion to improve outcomes. Langreen et al add to this literature by examining their use of rectal budesonide (2 mg) for 3 months in a retrospective cohort (n=142) with a historical control (n=137). Jaundice-free native liver survival (jfNLS) was assessed at 6 months, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years post-Kasai.

Key findings:

  • Improvements were noted in jfNLS at 6 months (53% vs. 39%) , 2 years (45% vs. 22%), 5 years (40% vs. 23%) and 10 years (32% vs. 13%)
  • These benefits were exclusive to patients with nonsyndromic BA
  • No serious adverse effects were identified with budesonide

Rationale for rectal budesonide: The authors note that “a single dose of budesonide foam contains about 2 mg of budesonide, equivalent to 25 mg of prednisolone or 20 mg of methylprednisolone…In our series, no serious steroid associated adverse effects were recorded, possibly due to the first pass after rectal administration.”

Limitations: “The retrospective nature of our data analysis allows for variability in the follow‐up protocols, potential biases (historical control group, change of surgeons) and confounding factors cannot be entirely ruled out.”

Kaplan–Meier curve comparing native liver survival between the study and control groups
over a 10‐year follow‐up.. Study group—blue. Control group—orange.

My take: The START study with 140 participants was well-designed and did not find a benefit with systemic steroids. However small differences in outcomes can be difficult to identify. Rectal budesonide may improve outcomes. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial would be more definitive.

Related blog posts:

Liver Transplantation is Getting More Costly in U.S

Posted on by

A Kaplan et al. Liver Transplantation 2025; 31: 1165-1175. Open Access! The rising cost of liver transplantation in the United States

Key points:

  • LT is resource-intensive and costly, with expenditures rising dramatically in recent years. Factors contributing to this increase in cost include expanded transplant criteria (higher risk recipients), utilization of marginal organs, and broader organ distribution, resulting in significant logistical expenses
  • Advanced technologies like organ perfusion devices, while promising better outcomes, further inflate costs due to their high price and market monopolization
  • Despite rising costs, reimbursement has remained largely stagnant, putting financial strain on transplant programs, and threatening their sustainability. “In fact, there has been an observed decline (−32%) in adjusted reimbursement of LT by Medicare over the past decade.62“

Increased Costs Associated with Recipient Characteristics:

  • “According to the latest annual SRTR report, patients aged 65 or older undergoing LT accounted for 21.9% of transplants in 2022, up from 14.6% a decade prior.18 One study looking at the cost burden of hospitalizations associated with liver transplants from 2016 to 2019 found mean costs increasing by nearly $10,000 per hospitalization in the group aged >65 over the study period”
  • “Increasing numbers of patients are being transplanted for steatotic liver disease… LT associated with metabolic dysfunction–associated steatotic liver disease has been demonstrated to be associated with higher costs, largely attributable to longer posttransplant lengths of stay.21–23 Similarly, LT associated with AH/ALD is very expensive—at 1 transplant program, net revenue from LT admission to 90 days after LT was −5.0% for AH compared to +1.4% for acute-on-chronic liver failure.24“

Organ distribution:

  • “In 2019, the OPTN implemented further changes in liver allocation from a regional-based system to an acuity circle model. This model was intended to create a more equitable allocation system and to reduce waitlist mortality for patients across the United States…This has been associated with a 77% increase in fly-out costs, amounting to an increase in $47,010,190 across all LT centers by recent estimates.4“
  • “1 study found that the cost for private jets ranged from $6850 to $27,350 depending on the distance traveled.29 In this same study, commercial flights, as opposed to private jets, were found to be safe and only around 10% of the cost.”

Perfusion devices:

“The FDA’s approval of organ perfusion and preservation devices has ushered in a new era in organ transplantation, enabling medical teams to extend the geographical reach for organ procurement. These devices enhance the utilization of organs that may have previously been discarded… It has been suggested that the average cost of using normothermic regional perfusion for DCD organs is around $10,000 per donor, compared to the $40,000–$80,000 per donor for use of NMP [normothermic machine perfusion].”

My take: Transplant centers are getting squeezed financially. In addition, ~25% of liver transplant patients experience a high financial burden. Pretty soon, along with checking organs for suitability, it may be necessary to assess liver transplant centers for viability.

Related blog posts:

Osaka Garden in Jackson Park (Chicago)

Fidaxomicin Treatment of Clostridioides difficile in Children and Adolescents

Posted on by

MA Conrad et al. The Journal of Pediatrics, Volume 285, 114681. Open Access! Fidaxomicin Treatment of Clostridioides difficile Infections and Recurrences in Children and Adolescents: A Retrospective Multicenter Study

Methods: This was a  a multicenter, retrospective, observational study of fidaxomicin treatment for primary or recurrent CDI in children ages 12 months to 18 years old identified from 2013 to 2021 at 5 centers. Inclusion criteria were active CDI, defined as ≥3 watery stools in 24 hours and a positive laboratory test (toxin enzyme immunoassay positivity and/or polymerase chain reaction [PCR] positivity). Cure was defined as resolution of symptoms.

Patient characteristics:

  • Of the 95 patients included in this study, 84 (88%) were treated with fidaxomicin for a recurrent CDI, and 82 (86%) had at least one medical or surgical comorbidity.  
  • 38 (40%) patients had 4 or more CDI prior to fidaxomicin.
  • 22 (23%) had prior FMT.
  • 29 (31%) had IBD

Key findings:

  • By day 14 (end of treatment): 50 patients (52.6%) had a clinical cure and an additional 29 (30.5%) had improvement of symptoms. Thus, 17% did not respond to treatment.
  • Among 79 patients who responded to fidaxomicin treatment, 17 (21.5%) had a clinical and microbiologically confirmed recurrence of CDI by day 60, likely representing relapse.
  • Patients with inflammatory bowel disease were less likely to achieve clinical cure at day 14 (OR 0.27). 9 of 29 were considered treatment failures.
  • If the patient’s with IBD are excluded (n=66), there were only 7 (11%) treatment failures

Discussion points:

  • “Our clinical experience is that approval for coverage by insurers often is restricted to those with recurrent CDI, and the cost of fidaxomicin may limit availability for use as primary therapy.”
  • “CDI in IBD is a major clinical conundrum as the symptoms of the 2 disorders can overlap, and a positive C. difficile test is not always indicative of its active pathologic role…Therefore, patients who undergo treatment for CDI without response likely have an alternative cause of symptoms…. Current guidelines recommend reassessing symptoms in patients
    with IBD being treated for CDI at day 3 or 4 of the treatment course in order to consider escalation of IBD therapy in those who are not responding clinically to antimicrobial therapy.”

My take (borrowed from the authors): “More extensive studies are necessary to understand how to position fidaxomicin in the treatment algorithm for pediatric CDI.”

Related blog posts:

Chicago Botanic Garden (n Glencoe, IL)

When Celiac Disease Symptoms Continue Despite a Gluten Free Diet

Posted on by

A Kruegger et al. JPGN 2025; 81:596–605. Open Access! The prevalence and predictive factors of overlapping disorders of gut–brain interaction and celiac disease in children

Methods: Single-center, retrospective study of children (4–21 years old, n=191) with biopsy-proven Celiac disease (CeD) who were evaluated for DGBI based on Rome IV criteria. Patients who were adherent to a GFD, demonstrated tissue transglutaminase immunoglobulin A (TTG IgA) decline, and had at least one visit 9–24-months after diagnosis with a pediatric gastroenterologist. For this study, sustained TTG IgA decline required at least two declining TTG IgA values, a 90% decline from baseline, or normalization of TTG IgA.

Key findings:

  • 43% (n = 83) met Rome IV DGBI diagnostic criteria.
  • Functional constipation (27/83, 33%) and functional abdominal pain (24/83, 29%) were the most common DGBI
  • Abdominal pain, constipation, and vomiting at initial presentation as well as comorbid joint hypermobility, headaches, and chronic musculoskeletal pain increased risk of developing DGBI after serological decline

Discussion Points:

  • “The prevalence reported here is similar to a study of adults with CeD who were adherent to a GFD that reported over 50% met criteria for a functional gastrointestinal disorder19 and is higher than previously reported pediatric prevalence rates”
  • “The majority of patients who met DGBI criteria did so through having the persistence of the same gastrointestinal symptoms that were present at CeD diagnosis. This raises the question as to whether the symptoms at presentation were due to CeD, DGBI, or both”
  • “Clinicians could consider discussing that while symptoms related to CeD should improve on a GFD, some symptoms may persist, especially if they have an increased likelihood of having a comorbid DGBI. Such counseling may prevent the misattribution of persistent symptoms to ongoing gluten exposure and mitigate hypervigilance”
  • “Having complete villous blunting on diagnostic biopsy increased the likelihood of having a DGBI. Intuitively, it is possible that complete villous blunting can lead to greater nerve sensitization and subsequently higher rates of DGBI. It is also possible that complete villous blunting is slower to recover”

My take: Given the overlap of DGBI symptoms with CeD, diagnosing DGBI in patients with CeD can be challenging. However, DGBI is much more likely to contribute to lingering symptoms than refractory CeD.

As a practical matter, the high frequency of ongoing GI symptoms despite use of a GFD provides another drawback to relying on a no-biopsy diagnosis. A no-biopsy diagnosis introduces greater uncertainty in the diagnosis and does not allow for a histologic comparison if a subsequent evaluation is needed.

Related blog posts:

Claude Monet, Bridge over a Pond of Water Lilies at The Metropolitan Museum of Art

The Future of Vaccine Policy in America with Politicized ACIP

Posted on by

HY Chu et al. NEJM 2025; 398: 817-822. The Path Forward for Vaccine Policy in the United States

This commentary was published on 7/30/25 and was written by the 17 voting members of the ACIP who were dismissed.

Key points:

  • For over 60 years, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), which comprised a diverse group of nonpartisan specialists, has advised the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on vaccine recommendations based on science and intensive review of evidence. The abrupt dismantling of the rigorously vetted process and the replacement of the Committee with an inexperienced and biased panel has engendered fundamental distrust in the Committee’s vital work…The government has abruptly changed vaccine policy through social media postings and publications in news media.
**VRBPAC denotes FDA’s Vaccines and Related
Biological Products Advisory Committee
  • The ACIP has been an independent committee of vaccine scientists and clinicians that has relied on a process called the Evidence to Recommendations framework. This deliberative framework calls for a review of the strength of evidence around a variety of factors, including the magnitude of the public health problem, potential benefits and harms, values, acceptability, resource use, equity, and feasibility.
  • Previously, the ACIP had well-defined and stringent conflict of interest standards.  Voting members had to disclose and actively manage any actual or apparent conflicts of interest before and throughout their tenure… ACIP members disclosed any potential conflicts during each vote and could not vote on issues where they had an ongoing conflict.
  • ACIP recommendations have many implications. For example, government-run medical systems such as the Veterans Health Administration may be able to provide only vaccines consistent with ACIP recommendations…For children who are uninsured, underinsured, Medicaid-eligible, American Indian, or Alaska Native, the Vaccines for Children program pays only for ACIP-recommended vaccines; about half of children in the United States get their vaccines through this program.
  • The nation now faces a scenario in which the rigor and discipline of these vaccine recommendation processes are rapidly eroding…Three major issues are of particular concern: the quality and availability of data; straightforward guidance for providers and the public; and insurance coverage and vaccine access, uptake, and equity.
  • The absence of a cohesive federal policy produced by means of an evidence-based, expert-informed process creates the very real potential for conflicting messaging from within the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) or in relation to messages from nongovernmental agencies, such as professional organizations. This lack of coordination is likely to cause confusion for providers and the public, vaccine-administration errors, decreased uptake of vaccines, and further erosion of an already damaged public trust. It is also likely that in this milieu, misinformation will flourish.
  • The ACIP cannot be replaced, but it may be possible to limit the damage. In this vacuum, it is urgent that other organizations step forward to reassert an evidence-based, expert approach to vaccine recommendations to bring the nation back from the precipice of uncontrolled spread of infectious diseases and needless deaths.

My take: The advice from governmental agencies has been compromised. With regard to vaccines, instead of a transparent process with expertise, we are left with partisan recommendations with questionable credibility.

Related blog posts:

 

AI for GI

Posted on by

This month’s Gastroenterology issue is devoted solely to the use/expected uses as well as risks of artificial intelligence (AI) for gastroenterology and hepatology.

DL Shung, M Iacucci. Gastroenterol 2025; 169: 391-392. Artificial Intelligence in Gastroenterology and Hepatology: Potential and Perils

An excerpt:

“AI is reshaping the landscape of gastroenterology and hepatology with the promise of better, faster, more objective, and standardized care of delivery. However, behind the algorithms lies a more insidious risk: the erosion of trust in human providers…Information risk …include both error commission (ie, when the models generate false statements, introduce nonsensical concepts, or fabricate sources) and error omission (ie, summaries that omit critical information)…

When AI becomes the center of care, patients may perceive their doctors as intermediaries…diminishing the therapeutic effect of the patient-physician relationship…This arrangement can dilute clinical training, increase physician burnout, and lead to medicolegal implications…Other risks include perpetuating bias from nonrepresentative training data and amplifying uncertainty of AI due to lack of real-world validation…

We hope that AI systems will allow us to spend more, not less, time with patients and empower us to provide personalized care by leveraging high-quality multimodal data.”

Most of the articles are behind a paywall in this issue. There are five that are open access articles:

My take: These articles provide a good deal of information about the applications and risks of AI. In my view, physicians will be needed more than ever to help interpret/manage the huge amount of information available.

Related blog posts:

Upadacitinib for Crohn’s Disease: U-ENDURE Study

Posted on by

R Panaccione et al. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2025; (In press) Open Access! Upadacitinib Maintenance Therapy in Crohn’s Disease: Final Results From the Randomized Phase 3 U-ENDURE Study

Methods: Clinical responders to 12 weeks of upadacitinib 45 mg once daily (QD) induction were randomized (1:1:1) to receive upadacitinib 15 mg QD (n = 221), upadacitinib 30 mg QD (n = 229), or placebo (n = 223) as maintenance therapy for 52 weeks

**This study presents data from the entire cohort (n=673); a previous report from ENDURE-3 analyzed data on 502 patients (though findings were nearly identical). EV Loftus et al. N Engl J Med 2023; 388:1966-1980 (Related post: Landmark Study: Oral Biologic for Crohn’s –Upadacitinib)

Key findings:

  • At week 52, more upadacitinib-treated vs placebo patients achieved CDAI clinical remission (upadacitinib 15 mg, 36.2% and upadacitinib 30 mg, 51.5% vs placebo, 15.2%)
  • The rates of endoscopic response were 27.3% for upadacitinib 15 mg and 40.7% for upadacitinib 30 mg vs 7.2% for placebo
  • Herpes zoster infections occurred more frequently in the upadacitinib groups compared with placebo; all were nonserious, and most involved a single dermatome
  • In U-ENDURE, no dose-dependent risk for MACE, VTE, or malignancy (excluding NMSC) was observed during the 52-week maintenance period

My take: Upadacitinib is a effective in a good number of patients with with moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease who have been refractory to other advanced therapies.

Related blog posts:

Warnings of Hepatitis B Vaccine Policy Shift

Posted on by

Despite the enormous benefits of hepatitis B vaccination, it appears that this administration has its sights on changing the policy of administration at birth.

NY Times 9/16/25: C.D.C. Vaccine Advisers May Limit Hepatitis B Shots for Newborns

An excerpt:

Committee members, some of whom are vaccine skeptics, are likely to recommend restricting the use of the shots at birth or delaying them until later in childhood…

“Unless the mother is hepatitis-B-positive, an argument could be made to delay the vaccine for this infection,” Martin Kulldorff, the committee’s chair, said at its previous meeting in June.

Vaccine experts at the C.D.C., who normally would be deeply involved in preparing for this week’s meeting, have been sidelined and given no more information than the public about the meeting’s agenda or possible outcomes…

Before 1991, when newborns were not all vaccinated for hepatitis B, about 20,000 babies became infected each year. Routine immunization at birth cut the number of newborn infections … There are now fewer than 20 children per year who acquire the disease from their mothers.

Only about half of the cases before 1991 were a result of transmission from an infected mother. The other half “weren’t getting it from becoming sex workers, and they weren’t getting it from being intravenous drug users,” Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, said…

From 2015 to 2017, about 21,000 infants were born to pregnant women with hepatitis B antibodies, but fewer than half were identified through prenatal screening, according to the C.D.C.

My take: If routine immunization at birth is stopped, there will be a lot more hepatitis B infections and subsequent complications. Some infections will be acquired at birth and some later due to missed opportunities to provide protection later on.

Related blog posts:

Brooklyn Botanic Garden

What Caught My Eye in a Recent Anti-IL23 Commentary

Posted on by

This recent commentary on the all-subcutaneous induction and maintenance treatment with guselkumab, an anti-IL23 agent, reviewed the GRAVITI study. Related post: Guselkumab for Crohn’s Disease: Pivotal GRAVITI Study

However, what captured my attention was the last sentence: “The convenience of subcutaneous induction enhances patient friendliness, positioning guselkumab as a strong market contender. Could an oral anti–IL-23 formulation be the next game changer?14“

“Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ) today announced positive topline results from ANTHEM-UC, a Phase 2b study of icotrokinra (JNJ-2113), the first investigational targeted oral peptide that selectively blocks the IL-23 receptor, in adults with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (UC)…

In the ANTHEM-UC study (n=252), three doses of once daily icotrokinra were tested with all meeting the primary endpoint of clinical response at Week 12. A response rate of 63.5% for patients treated with the highest dose of icotrokinra was achieved at Week 12 versus 27% for placebo (p<0.001). Further, 30.2% of patients treated with the highest dose of icotrokinra demonstrated clinical remission at Week 12 versus 11.1% of patients who received placebo (p<0.01). Remission and response rates continued to improve through Week 28.

  • Clinical response is defined as decrease from baseline in the modified Mayo score by greater than or equal to (>=) 30 percent (%) and >=2 points, with either a >=1-point decrease from baseline in the rectal bleeding subscore or a rectal bleeding subscore of 0 or 1.
  • Clinical remission is defined as a Mayo stool frequency subscore of 0 or 1 and not increased from induction baseline, a Mayo rectal bleeding subscore of 0, and a Mayo endoscopy subscore of 0 or 1 with no friability present on the endoscopy.”

My take: It would be terrific for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (and other immune-mediated diseases) to have another excellent oral therapy. A prior study of plaque psoriasis indicated that an oral IL-23 medication is feasible (Related post: In Trials: An Oral IL-23 Antagonist Peptide).

Related joke (regarding “caught my eye” in the title of this post):

A man who lived in a block of apartments thought it was raining and put his head out the window to check.  As he did so a glass eye fell into his hand. He looked up to see where it came from in time to see a young woman looking down. “Is this yours?” he asked.

She said, “Yes, could you bring it up?” and the man agreed. On arrival she was profuse in her thanks and offered the man a drink. Shortly afterwards she said, “I’m about to have dinner.  There’s plenty; would you like to join me?” He readily accepted her offer and both enjoyed a lovely meal. As the evening was drawing to a close the lady said, “I’ve had a marvelous evening.  Would you like to stay the night?”  The man hesitated then said, “Do you act like this with every man you meet?”

“No,” she replied, “only those who catch my eye.”

The Manneporte by Claude Monet (at the Metropolitan Museum of Art)