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.

Gluten-related Disorders

For those who missed a recent NASPGHAN Foundation webinar, I’ve attached two links (with permission from NASPGHAN foundation):

1. The PDF of the slides –these are very useful:

NASPGHAN GlutenWebinar 6_5_13 Final v34

2. Link to webinar, including CME:

http://limelightdc.com/clientarea/naspghan_gluten_webinar_06_13/landing_page.html

The experts provide a useful review of celiac, wheat allergy, and wheat intolerance.  For celiac screening, the webinar recommends avoiding a panel of serology tests in favor of isolated Tissue Transglutaminase IgA Antibody (possibly with serum IgA level.

Related blog links:

Live longer -don’t take your vitamins?

A recent editorial by Paul Offit provides data that taking more vitamins than your daily requirement is more likely to increase your risk of cancer and death (this has been noted on this blog as well –see related links below).

Link: nyti.ms/1bhK2Eg 

Here is an excerpt:

last year, a Cochrane review found that “beta carotene and vitamin E seem to increase mortality, and so may higher doses of vitamin A.”

What explains this connection between supplemental vitamins and increased rates of cancer and mortality? The key word is antioxidants.

Antioxidation vs. oxidation has been billed as a contest between good and evil. It takes place in cellular organelles called mitochondria, where the body converts food to energy — a process that requires oxygen (oxidation). One consequence of oxidation is the generation of atomic scavengers called free radicals (evil). Free radicals can damage DNA, cell membranes and the lining of arteries; not surprisingly, they’ve been linked to aging, cancer and heart disease.

To neutralize free radicals, the body makes antioxidants (good). Antioxidants can also be found in fruits and vegetables, specifically in selenium, beta carotene and vitamins A, C and E. Some studies have shown that people who eat more fruits and vegetables have a lower incidence of cancer and heart disease and live longer. The logic is obvious. If fruits and vegetables contain antioxidants, and people who eat fruits and vegetables are healthier, then people who take supplemental antioxidants should also be healthier. It hasn’t worked out that way.

The likely explanation is that free radicals aren’t as evil as advertised. (In fact, people need them to kill bacteria and eliminate new cancer cells.) And when people take large doses of antioxidants in the form of supplemental vitamins, the balance between free radical production and destruction might tip too much in one direction, causing an unnatural state where the immune system is less able to kill harmful invaders. Researchers call this the antioxidant paradox.

In December 1972, concerned that people were consuming larger and larger quantities of vitamins, the F.D.A. announced a plan to regulate vitamin supplements containing more than 150 percent of the recommended daily allowance. Vitamin makers would now have to prove that these “megavitamins” were safe before selling them. Not surprisingly, the vitamin industry saw this as a threat, and set out to destroy the bill. In the end, it did far more than that.

Industry executives recruited William Proxmire, a Democratic senator from Wisconsin, to introduce a bill preventing the F.D.A. from regulating megavitamins. On Aug. 14, 1974, the hearing began.

Speaking in support of F.D.A. regulation was Marsha Cohen, a lawyer with the Consumers Union. Setting eight cantaloupes in front of her, she said, “You would need to eat eight cantaloupes — a good source of vitamin C — to take in barely 1,000 milligrams of vitamin C. But just these two little pills, easy to swallow, contain the same amount.” She warned that if the legislation passed, “one tablet would contain as much vitamin C as all of these cantaloupes, or even twice, thrice or 20 times that amount. And there would be no protective satiety level.” Ms. Cohen was pointing out the industry’s Achilles’ heel: ingesting large quantities of vitamins is unnatural, the opposite of what manufacturers were promoting.

A little more than a month later, Mr. Proxmire’s bill passed by a vote of 81 to 10. In 1976, it became law. Decades later, Peter Barton Hutt, chief counsel to the F.D.A., wrote that “it was the most humiliating defeat” in the agency’s history.

As a result, consumers don’t know that taking megavitamins could increase their risk of cancer and heart disease and shorten their lives; they don’t know that they have been suffering too much of a good thing for too long.

Paul A. Offit is the chief of the infectious diseases division of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and the author of the forthcoming book “Do You Believe in Magic?: The Sense and Nonsense of Alternative Medicine.”

Related blog entries:

If I have diarrhea after vacation…

I may want to remember this reference: “Enteropathogens and Chronic Illness in Returning Travelers” NEJM 2013; 368: 1817-25.

Some “fun facts:”

  • In 2007, more than 30 million Americans traveled to developing regions. ~8% traveling to these regions needed medical care during or after travel.  Gastrointestinal symptoms were present in more than 25% who sought medical care.
  • According to the GeoSentinel Surveillance Network (42 travel medicine sites), between 1996-2005, 65% of enteric infections were due to parasites, 31% bacteria, and 3% viral. (J Infect 2009; 59: 19-27) (Parasites typically have more long-lasting infections which should be considered in interpreting this data; in addition, some pathogens are more difficult to isolate.)
  • Six pathogens were most prevalent: Giardia, Campylobacter, Entamoeba histolytica, Shigella, Stronglyoides, and Salmonella.

In addition to an enteric pathogen color-coded prevalence map, the article has a useful table identifying areas at high risk, mode of transmission, incubation period, common symptoms, recommended diagnostic tests and treatments.

To minimize the impact of these enteropathogens, physicians can help prepare travelers with appropriate vaccinations, malaria chemoprophylaxis (if needed), and effective anti-bacterial drugs for self-treatment should symptoms develop.

Related blog posts:

What to Feed Your Baby

“What to Feed Your Baby” — is the title of a recent, easy-to-read, practical book written by one of my colleagues, Stan Cohen.  I had the opportunity to read it and recommend it as an excellent resource for parents.  This book is not just for selecting formula and introducing foods, but it also reviews gastroesophageal reflux, colic, stooling problems, poor weight gain, overweight issues, prematurity, and allergies.  In addition, the subtitle, “Cost-Conscious Nutrition for Your Infant,” is an important element throughout the book.

The first few chapters highlight the advantages of breastfeeding but acknowledge that formula-feeding is an acceptable alternative.  Specific advantages that are outlined in Table 2.2 include decreased infections, decreased risk for several illnesses like sudden infant death syndrome (along with many others like diabetes and obesity), protection from allergies, and improved intelligence.  Advantages for the mother, like weight loss and better emotional health, are discussed as well.

Almost any question that a new mother would ask about the logistics of breastfeeding are answered in the 3rd chapter: “How long should each feeding be?” “Should I wake the baby?” “Do I need to stop if I have a cold?” “How long can the breastmilk be stored?”  The latter question has its own table 3.1 and the answer depends on the storage temperature.  At room temperature, covered breastmilk should be durable for 6-8 hours.  In addition, Dr. Cohen explains the need for vitamin D supplementation.

Chapters 4 and 5 help parents understand the highly marketed formulas and to understand a rationale for choosing one formula over another, including cost as a factor.  Dr. Cohen provides data on mean docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) content in breastmilk throughout the world.  In the U.S., the level is relatively low at 0.29 (as a percentage of fatty acids).  The breastmilk DHA level is nearly three times higher in Japan and Artic Canada.  These discrepancies account in part why formula companies may choose different target concentrations for some of their components when trying to mimic breastmilk.

While Dr. Cohen explains that some of the differences between formulas are akin to differences between Coke and Pepsi, he expresses a preference for the current Mead Johnson formula Enfamil Premium due to its higher DHA content –“though the research is not thoroughly established.”  However, he states that the differences probably do not justify a much higher cost.  For a generic brand, the Costco brand, “Kirkland Signature…are reasonable and less expensive, FDA-approved options.”

In addition, these chapters question whether infant organic formulas are truly organic (page 55), explain the issue of burping, and discuss the pragmatic advise regarding cleaning nipples/bottles; “kitchen clean” with soap and a washing with hot water should suffice and sterilization is not needed.

The most inciteful comments, in my opinion, are in chapter 5:

  • Lactose-free formulas: “Mead Johnson pulled its product from the market because lactose sensitivity is rare, rare, rare in infants…Abbott, in a shrewd marketing move, renamed its formula, originally called Lactofree, to Similac Sensitive, and that labeling has convinced an enormous number of mothers that this formula makes a difference.”  Similac Sensitive accounts for >10% of formula market.  A similar product is Gerber (previously Nestle) Good Start Soothe.
  • Elemental formulas: “cost as much as a monthly Porsche payment.”  Monthly costs of each type of formula are detailed in Table 5.3.  Routine cow’s milk based formula $149.88, soy-based $153.56, cow’s milk with rice starch $159.39, hydrolyzed (broken down protein) formula (e.g.. Alimentum, Nutramagen) $223.56, and elemental amino acid based $511.83.
  • Among extensively hydrolyzed formulas, Dr. Cohen indicates a preference for Alimentum (from Abbott) over its competitors due to better acceptance by infants.
  • The rationale for not switching from contracted WIC products is explained.  When changing from a contracted product to a non-contract product, the costs are much greater and among the same type of formula there is not a scientific rationale.
  • Reasons why goat’s milk are not a good choice and “dangerous” for infants are detailed.  “The protein content is over three times higher than cow’s milk…additionally, goat’s milk is deficient in folate and vitamin B6.”

As noted above, the book covers a variety of pediatric gastroenterology problems in the newborn.  As part of the chapter on undernutrition, additives to increase calories are detailed (pg 136).  For example, a tablespoon of polycose adds 23 cal, a tablespoon of rice cereal 15 cal, and  a tablespoon of vegetable oil 124 cal.

The last few chapters provide ample advice on transitioning to solid foods, reviews nutrients and mineral oils.  In addition, he provides growth charts (for full term, premature infants, and infants with Down syndrome) as well as tables on infant formula contents.

Take-home message: this is a terrific resource for parents to help understand the what, why and when of feeding their infant.  At the same time, the book provides advice on the most common pediatric gastroenterology problems of infancy like reflux, colic, stooling difficulties, allergies, and poor weight gain.

Book’s website and how to purchase:

http://www.what2feedyourbaby.com

To purchase the book:

Here is the link:

Reviews:

Other favorable reviews (http://what2feedyourbaby.com/reviews/) have come from influential pediatricians like Jay Berkelhammer and pediatric gastroenterologists like Jeff Hyams and Allan Walker.

In this book, Dr. Stanley Cohen, a pediatric gastroenterologist and nutritionist with longstanding interest in infant nutrition, provides a practical and pragmatic approach to a major concern for new mothers, namely What to Feed Your Baby.

— Allan Walker, M.D., director, Division of Nutrition, Conrad Taff professor of pediatrics and nutrition, Harvard Medical School

Related blog entries:

Quantifying the Heart Risks of Azithromycin

As noted previously in this blog (New FDA warning for azithromycin (Zithromax) | gutsandgrowth), there have been concerns raised about the risk of cardiovascular death due to the use of azithromycin.  An editorial and new study indicate that this risk is mainly confined to patients at high cardiovascular risk (NEJM 2013; 1665-67 [editorial], 1704-12 [study]).

Background: in 2011, “approximately 40.3 million people in the United States (roughly one eighth of the population) received an outpatient prescription for the macrolide azithromycin.”

In an observational study published last year (NEJM 2012; 366: 1881-90), azithromycin resulted in one death for every 21,000 outpatient prescriptions in comparison to amoxicillin.  Among those with high cardiovascular risk factors, this number was much higher: one in 4100; whereas in those with no risk factors, it was less than one per 100,000.  The risks also corresponded to peak drug levels as the increase in events took place during the 5-day course and an increased risk was not evident subsequently.

The newest study, referenced above. used data from a Danish national health care registry (18-64 year olds). These patients had a lower cardiovascular risk profile.  More than one million prescriptions were studied.  They found no difference in cardiovascular deaths between azithromycin and penicillin.  In a subgroup analysis of patients with a history of cardiovascular disease, the risk ratio was 1.35 though this did not reach statistical significance.

The editorial notes that azithromycin has been shown to reduce deaths in patients treated for community-acquired pneumonia.  However, the two most common indications for treatment remain bronchitis and sinusitis.

Bottom-line: The risks of azithromycin in young and middle-aged persons is exceedingly low or nonexistent.  In individuals with cardiovascular risk factors, azithromycin, other macrolides and fluoroquinolones could trigger a lethal arrhythmia.

Once Daily Tacrolimus for Liver Transplant Recipients

A recent study shows that once daily tacrolimus can be effective in patients who have been stable following liver transplantation (LT) (Liver Transplantation 2013; 19: 529-33).

In this retrospective, single center study with 394 adult LT patients, the authors examined the results of conversion to once daily dosing of tacrolimus.  Patient demographics noted an mean age of 53 years & mean time post-transplant was 74 months.

Criteria for conversion:

  1. At least 6 months posttransplant
  2. No rejection in >3 months
  3. Tacrolimus bid was changed to the same total daily dose at once a day and then modified based on levels.

Results after a 24 month followup:

  • 358 of 394 were able to maintain once a day dosing. 6 patients had been converted to cyclosporine, 14 patients had stopped all calcineurin inhibitors, 16 patients had returned to BID dosing.
  • Acute rejection episode was noted in 7 patients
  • Mean serum tacrolimus trough decreased after conversion from 6.1 to 4.9 ng/mL

Take-home message:

Once daily tacrolimus appears to be a reasonable strategy for stable LT patients.  It is possible that once daily administration will improve adherence.

Related blog links:

FMT -not quite the new Laser

I distinctly remember one of my high school teachers saying that if you asked someone if they were willing to have a serious operation like a brain lobe removal, that most would be unwilling unless there was no other choice.  However, if you told them that you were going to do it with a laser, people would want to get it done right away.  Such was the mesmerizing appeal of the word “laser.”

Fecal microbiota transfer (FMT) certainly does not sound as enticing as a laser treatment. Nevertheless, the authors of a recent report state that “we received interest from patients all over the world to participate.”  That being said, this recent report reintroduces the concept of FMT for ulcerative colitis (UC) (JPGN 2013; 56: 597-601).

In the introduction, the authors note that probiotics, in particular VSL#3, have shown usefulness in the treatment of UC and have noted previous sporadic reports of FMT for inflammatory bowel disease.  This led to their pilot study of 10 subjects (7 to 21 years); this was a single-center, uncontrolled study.  Due to financial constraints, there was no correlation with fecal microbial profiling, histologic/colonoscopic activity, or stool inflammatory markers.

The authors extensively describe their protocol of FMT (240 mL [in four aliquots] daily for five days) including donor exclusion criteria and donor screening.  Participants did not receive any bowel preparation prior to FMT.  The majority of participants had pancolitis;  only one patient had disease limited to proctitis. One of the ten patients could not retain FMT enemas.

Results:

  • Short-term improvement was noted with 7 of 9 (78%) achieving a clinical response within one week and 3 of 9 (33%) achieving a clinical remission.
  • The authors note that 6 of 9 (67%) maintained a clinical response at 1 month.  Although if one examines the study’s figure 2, this graphically demonstrates a fairly meager response in about half of these patients based on their PUCAI score.
  • The authors do not overstate their interpretation of their results.  “This unique biologic is potentially efficacious.”
  • Adverse effects appeared to be mild and self-limiting.

Ultimately if FMT proves efficacious for inflammatory bowel disease, feces with the right microbial mix would be quite valuable.  For now, this study indicates that further research is needed in this area.

Related blog entries:

What really causes Celiac disease?

A fascinating article in the NY Times delves into a number of environmental factors that are likely playing a role in the increasing incidence of celiac disease. Here’s the link (thanks to Kayla Lewis for this reference):

Some excerpts:
Scientists are pursuing some intriguing possibilities. One is that breast-feeding may protect against the disease. Another is that we have neglected the teeming ecosystem of microbes in the gut — bacteria that may determine whether the immune system treats gluten as food or as a deadly invader.Celiac disease is generally considered an autoimmune disorder. The name celiac derives from the Greek word for “hollow,” as in bowels. Gluten proteins in wheat, barley and rye prompt the body to turn on itself and attack the small intestine. Complications range from diarrhea and anemia to osteoporosis and, in extreme cases, lymphoma. Some important exceptions notwithstanding, the prevalence of celiac disease is estimated to range between 0.6 and 1 percent of the world’s population….Yet the more scientists study celiac disease, the more some crucial component appears in need of identification. Roughly 30 percent of people with European ancestry carry predisposing genes, for example. Yet more than 95 percent of the carriers tolerate gluten just fine. So while these genes (plus gluten) are necessary to produce the disease, they’re evidently insufficient to cause it….

A recent study, which analyzed blood serum from more than 3,500 Americans who were followed since 1974, suggested that such a trigger could strike adults at any time. By 1989, the prevalence of celiac disease in this cohort had doubled.

“You’re talking about an autoimmune disease in which we thought we had all the dots connected,” says Alessio Fasano, head of the Center for Celiac Research and Treatment at the Massachusetts General Hospital for Children in Boston, and the senior author of the study. “Then we start to accumulate evidence that there was something else.”

Identifying that “something else” has gained some urgency. In the United States, improved diagnosis doesn’t seem to explain the rising prevalence. Scientists use the presence of certain self-directed antibodies to predict celiac disease. They have analyzed serum stored since the mid-20th century and compared it to serum from Americans today. Today’s serum is more than four times as likely to carry those antibodies…

your microbes change you, but your genes also shape your microbes — as do environment, breast milk, diet and antibiotics, among many other factors.

Such complexity both confounds notions of one-way causality and suggests different paths to the same disease. “You have the same endpoint,” Dr. Jabri says, “but how you get there may be variable.”…

In a far-flung corner of Europe, people develop celiac disease and other autoimmune diseases as infrequently as Americans and Finns did a half-century ago. The same genes exposed to the same quantity of gluten do not, in that environment, produce the same frequency of disease.

“We could probably prevent celiac disease if we just give the same environment to the Finnish children as they have in Karelia,” says Dr. Hyoty. “But there’s no way to do it now, except to move the babies there.”

Author of NY Times article:

Moises Velasquez-Manoff.  Also, he is the author of “An Epidemic of Absence: A New Way of Understanding Allergies and Autoimmune Diseases.”

Related blog links:

Celiac disease and less diabetes?

While there is a well-recognized association between Celiac disease and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM), a recent study shows a lower prevalence of non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) and metabolic syndrome in patients with celiac disease (Gastroenterol 2013; 144: 912-17).

You-Tube LinkPatients With Celiac Disease Have a Lower Prevalence  – YouTube..Dr. Toufic A. Kabbani discusses his manuscript “Patients WithCeliac Disease Have a Lower Prevalence of Non-Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Syndrome.”

A retrospective review of 840 patients with biopsy-confirmed celiac disease were compared with 840 random matched controls.  Controls were matched for age, sex, and ethnicity.  Mean age was 49.4 years.

Key findings:

  • 26 (3.1%) of celiac disease cohort and 81 (9.6%) (p <0.0001) had NIDDM.
  • 3.5% of celiac disease cohort and 12.7% of controls had metabolic syndrome.
  • Though celiac disease patients had lower BMI, these findings were still present after controlling for this variable.
  • Prevalence of NIDDM was strongly associated with age in both groups.  In celiac cohort, NIDDM occurred in 0% (n=343) of those <45, 3.1% in 45-64, and 9.3% in those >65.  In contrast, the control group had NIDDM in 3.5%, 11% and 19.3% respectively.

With regard to pathophysiology, the authors did not think the protection from NIDDM was related to malabsorption.  Evidence of malabsorption was more common in patients with CD and NIDDM than in those without NIDDM.

Related blog posts:

 

PPI Side Effects: “Dissecting the Evidence”

While proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are used extensively for acid-related diseases and have been around for nearly 25 years, there have been a number of reports about potential side effects.  As a drug class, PPIs have a very good safety profile.  A recent article reviews some controversial adverse effects and summarizes the evidence for and against (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013; 11: 458-64).

I. Calcium/bone effects.  After reviewing a number of studies, the authors conclude: “There is no good evidence to establish that PPI use has a significant risk for bone density loss or osteroporotic-related fractures….Supplemental calcium is not recommended or justified solely because of PPI use.”

II. Iron. “Although it is conceivable that PPI therapy may reduce absorption of nonheme iron and retard iron pool replenishment, this effect has not been well-studied or evident from widespread use in clinical practice.

III.  Magnesium.  “The FDA recommendation to consider checking magnesium levels before starting is not practical, in particular for the over-the-counter market. In patients who may be predisposed to …ongoing magnesium loss…it may be reasonable to follow…Given the rarity of the reports and no controlled studies to delineate the mechanisms, it is important for health care providers to be aware of this” (rare reports of profound hypomagnesemia).

IV. Pneumonia. “Small relative risk associated with short-term and high-dose PPI use.  These relationships, however, do not offer a definitive explanation for the relative risk” due to the studies and confounding factors.

V. Clostridium difficile.  “To date, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that there is a definitive relationship between PPI use and C difficile infection…clinicians should be aware of this potential relationship.”

VI. Traveler’s diarrhea.  “The data…were overall supportive of no associated risk, albeit there were a few specific case reports suggesting a remote causal association.”

VII. Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth. “The relationship between PPI use and the development of SIBO is still not understood.”

VIII. Interstitial nephritis.  Extremely rare. “Investigators…did not find enough evidence to support a causative relationship.”

IX. Methotrexate.  “Coadministration of PPIs with high-dose methotrexate appears to be correlated with delayed methotrexate elimination.”

Also discussed: Vitamin B12, Clopidogrel, Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis

The authors conclude that the above reported associations have received considerable attention.  “Because PPIs are overprescribed in many patients, …the clinical effects always should be reviewed and attempts should be justified to stop any therapy that may not be needed.”

Related blog entries: