Questions and Answers about MERS

Posted on by

Recently two cases of Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) have been reported in the U.S.  For more information -the following link (thx to Mike Hart) may be useful:  www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/MERS/index.html<http://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/MERS/index.html

From the CDC: Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) is viral respiratory illness first reported in Saudi Arabia in 2012. It is caused by a coronavirus called MERS-CoV. Most people who have been confirmed to have MERS-CoV infection developed severe acute respiratory illness. They had fever, cough, and shortness of breath. About 30% of these people died.

So far, all the cases have been linked to countries in the Arabian Peninsula. This virus has spread from ill people to others through close contact, such as caring for or living with an infected person. However, there is no evidence of sustained spreading in community settings.

Therapeutic Inertia in U.S Neonatal Units (vis-a-vis Probiotics)

Posted on by

“More than 90% of very low birth weight (VLBW) infants receive substandard care” could be the headline of a recent article/editorial (J Pediatr 2014; 164: 980-5 & 959-60).  Instead they are titled: “Cohort Study of Probiotics in a North American Neonatal Intensive Care Unit” and “Probiotic Supplementation in Preterm Infants: It is Time to Change Practice.”

In the article introduction, the authors state: “In 2011, faced with overwhelming evidence that probiotics could decrease NEC in preterm infants, and because there were no significant risks described in the extensive literature, we decided to introduce probiotics as routine care for the prevention of NEC.”

Methods: Prospective cohort study of infants at a single center NICU.  Examined rates of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) and death for 17 months before and after introduction of a probiotic (FloraBABY).  This probiotic (0.5 g) was mixed with water and administered just before milk once a day.  It was started at the first feeding and continued until the infant reached 34 weeks postmenstrual age.

Key findings:

  • Probiotics reduced NEC from 9.8% to 5.4% (OR for NEC 0.51)
  • Probiotics reduced combined outcome for NEC or death from 17% to 10.5% (OR 0.56).  Reduction in death by itself did not meet statistical significance.

Why, in 2012, were probiotics only used in 8-9% of VLBW?

Potential profits for probiotics are small which has limited studies of specific strains.  The probiotic, FloraBABY, in this study cost 11 cents per day in amount used; however, since the probiotic came in a tub, the actual cost was $12.79 for a 60-g tub for each patient.  Thus, manufacturers are unlikely to support studies to garner FDA approval.

Yet, there have been 22 randomized controlled trials published which “showed substantial benefits of probiotics and no adverse events.” A recently completed ProPrems trial (Jacob S et al, presented at 2013 PAS Annual Meeting) used a probiotic called ABC Dophilus Probiotic Powder for Infants.  This trial showed “a significant, >50%, reduction in NEC despite an incidence in their control patients of only 4.4%” and despite the fact that >95% of infants received breast milk.

“Good quality control and confirmation of the contents of the preparation are essential…There seems to be no further reason to delay the introduction of this evidence-based therapy in the NICU.”  The adoption of probiotics could avoid 2500 cases of NEC every year in North America.

The editorial notes that the evidence for probiotics is much better than many other therapies used in NICUs.  They note that some have argued that “the evidence that probiotics reduce mortality rates is as conclusive as that for surfactant for respiratory distress syndrome.”  A recent Cochrane review of 17 trials and >4900 VLBW infants showed that the RR of severe NEC for probiotics versus control was 0.41.

If people really understood this issue, there would be outrage over this issue.  In the U.S., there was recently extensive coverage over inaction about a faulty ignition switch which has been linked to at least 13 deaths.  The potential reduction in NEC and deaths with probiotics is likely much greater.

While the editorial recommends involving parent representative groups, I recommend discussing this issue with your neonatology colleagues along with your “quality care” team to find out what they are going to do about it.  Given the enormous costs in most NICUs, it is likely that each unit could self-fund a quality project (with consented patients) to provide probiotics to this vulnerable population.

Bottomline: Probiotics have excellent evidence as prophylaxis for NEC in VLBW infants.  Physicians need to advocate for their usage to “avoid years of therapeutic inertia.”

Related blog post: One More Day Syndrome & Necrotizing Enterocolitis …

Disclaimer: These blog posts are for educational purposes only. Specific dosing of medications/diets (along with potential adverse effects) should be confirmed by prescribing physician/nutritionist.  This content is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a condition.

Source Article: Methotrexate Safety

Posted on by

A recent post (Monotherapy or Combination Therapy with Adalimumab) referenced an article indicating some potential concern for malignancy potential with methotrexate (Semin Arthritis Rheum 2014; 43: 489-97). Here’s a link to the source article/abstract:  Comparative cancer risk associated with methotrexate, other…

The authors conducted a comparative effectiveness study with cancer as an outcome in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).  The final sample size was 6806 patients.  The most common drugs examined included methotrexate (n=1566) and TNF antagonists (n=3761). Other disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) included other non-biologics (n=904), rituximab (n=167), and abatacept (n=408).

The authors note that with “the advent of newer DMARDs and combination therapy (this) has allowed more RA patients to lead more functional lives.  With this improvement in therapy, more attention is focused on the comparative risks and benefits of treatment.”

Key findings/discussion:

  • TNF antagonists were associated “with a reduced overall cancer risk versus methotrexate.” (HR 0.29).  Figure 2B, shows a plot with specific HR for various malignancies.  TNF antagonists had a HR of 0.15 for lymphoma.
  • Oncogenic potential of methotrexate was described almost 20 years ago, however, “its obvious clinical benefits have overshadowed malignancy concerns.”
  • “Our findings suggest that when examining the cancer risk associated with other DMARDs, combined methotrexate use must be factor into adjusted analyses.”

How does this translate to inflammatory bowel disease (IBD)?  While RA and IBD patients may have different risks for malignancy, this study suggests that patients receiving methotrexate therapy may have a low risk of malignancy.  The potential benefits of methotrexate therapy along with alternatives need to be weighed against this possible risk. Perhaps, this article may help reduce the concerns regarding anti-TNF therapy with regard to relative risk.

Related post:

A Lack of $2.17 Can Cost Thousands More

Posted on by

An interesting article in the NY Times explains a couple situations in which patients reluctantly admit their lack of financial resources and how this impacts their care.  The article underscores the message that doctors need to find a careful way to find out if patients can afford their medications.

Here’s the link: http://nyti.ms/1fVPzDx  and here’s an excerpt:

His protuberant belly was actually a sign of serious liver disease that had quickly worsened…

“I know how to take the pills, but I can’t buy them,” he said, his eyes refusing to meet mine as he stared at a spot on the hospital’s beige floor…The medicines were crucial to helping him avoid landing in the hospital again, so I went down to the pharmacy to see what the problem might be. “The co-pay is $2.17,” the pharmacist told me matter-of-factly, referring to a white paper bag with a few pill-filled bottles inside…The medications cost less than a subway ticket, but were still more than my patient could afford. If he ended up in the hospital again because he couldn’t take them, the medical costs would be thousands of times greater than $2.17…

A recent report in The American Journal of Medicine that found that one-third of Americans suffering from a chronic illness such as diabetes or high blood pressure said they had trouble affording medications, food or both…

The standard co-payment was $20, the doctor told her, and then gently asked if it would be a problem to pay.  The mother shook her head, but tears were welling up in her eyes. “But we can’t come back in a few months,” she blurted out. “It’s just too expensive.”

Tears rolled down her cheeks, and she looked away as her cheeks flushed. Her daughters sat silently on the exam table, their thin legs swinging back and forth.

I felt the family’s shame and embarrassment, and in retrospect, it seems obvious they lacked enough to eat. Yet we wouldn’t have known they were pressed for funds if our patient hadn’t brought up the issue at the last minute. The pediatrician was able to waive the co-payment, but it was just another short-term fix to a longer-term problem.

Neither doctors nor medical students can solve a patient’s financial problems on the spot. Yet any one of us can be the first to detect a problem. If we’ve done the research, we can help patients get the assistance they need, or at least direct them to social workers, pharmacists and other members of the health care team who can. What we cannot do is fail to ask.

Marriage, Divorce and Separation with Anti-TNF Therapy

Posted on by

This review article (Inflamm Bowel Dis 2014; 20: 757-66) examines the question of whether and when anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) agents can be stopped in Crohn’s disease (CD) patients in remission.  This topic is particularly helpful since this comes up frequently in clinical practice.

As recently as a few years ago, one expert advised me that starting an anti-TNF agent (like infliximab or adalimumab) was like getting married.  Once you committed, you stayed in that relationship indefinitely.  Of course, it is well-known that individuals get divorced.  In medical terms, I guess that would be the equivalent of developing antibodies to the anti-TNF agent or other adverse reactions.  Switching from one anti-TNF to another would be equivalent to marital infidelity.

So what does this review article say about all of this?  The article examines nine studies with a little more than 500 patients.  “Current evidence suggests that a group of CD patients, possibly 30% to 40% in clinical remission while on IM (immunomodulators) and infliximab can stop the latter and maintain clinical remission for a relatively long interval.  It seems that, if followed long enough, virtually all patients (including those on IM) will eventually develop clinical recurrence.”

If tempted to separate but not divorce anti-TNF therapy, the authors recommend, in addition to clinical remission, “normal colonoscopy (and/or normal surrogate markers of disease activity) should be adopted as a criterion when stopping therapy and during follow-up….As of today, many authors do not recommend to routinely stop anti-TNF agents in patients responding to this therapy and in the absence of other issues.  Others propose to stop them after a minimum of 2 years of clinical and endoscopic remission or longer if only clinical remission can be documented…

If costs or other issues are present, we suggest to cautiously stop anti-TNF agents only in patients on combination therapy with profound (clinical, biochemical, and endoscopic) and long lasting (>1 year) remission and continuing the IM.  Such patients should be closely followed by serial determinations of fecal calprotectin and inflammatory indices, and the medication immediately restarted in the presence of a flare. When in doubt, colonoscopy should be performed.”

Take-home message: Most patients are better off staying married to their anti-TNF therapy.

Also noted: Inflamm Bowel Dis 2014; 20: 742-56.  Clinical Utility of Fecal Biomarkers for the Diagnosis and Management of Inflammatory Bowel Disease.  This is a useful review with 103 references.

After I Passed The Test

Posted on by

After I passed my maintenance exam (American Board of Pediatrics -Pediatric Gastroenterology Subspecialty), I thought I would publish a few criticisms.

1. The test has not kept up with the digital age. In daily practice, it is a good idea to look up information and research difficult cases.  Knowing how to use these resources is more important than memorizing a lot of rare facts for an exam.

2. Why should any of the questions ask me to interpret radiographs or histology slides?  In daily practice, I would rely on my colleagues in radiology and pathology.  One of my surgical colleagues years ago used to say, “when I order a CT it should be like ordering a pizza.  Don’t ask me why I want it.  Ask me what I want on it.”  In the case of the maintenance exam, ask which test I want.  There are excellent radiologists and pathologists who are the experts at interpreting the results.

3. How is the MOC evidence-based? The popular buzz word of quality care is “evidence-based.”  Where is the data that taking the test & keeping up with the MOC (maintenance of certification) process improves physician performance?   From my discussions, it is apparent that physicians do not believe that the test “weeds” out underperforming physicians.

4. If the MOC process is so important, how come there are so many physicians who were “grandfathered” out of the requirements?  While the official line to this question is that the “diplomates” at that time who were board-certified were not time-limited, an honest answer is that it was the only politically feasible way to get enough physician support.

As a whole, these criticisms indicate the difficulty in designing a test to assess whether a physician has the necessary competencies.  As alluded to in a previous post (Training Not Meeting Procedure Thresholds for Fellows …), it is crucial that physicians gain the necessary experience/knnowledge in their training.

The MOC has lofty goals of assuring that physicians acquire and maintain their skills.  Yet, the current approach does not meet these goals.  Ultimately, the burden on a physician, like in other career pathways, on keeping up his knowledge and clinical skills relies mainly on the conscientious individual.  Those interested in taking shortcuts will do this and the current system is merely a nuisance.

Superiority of Anti-TNF Therapy (Part 2)

Posted on by

A recent blog (Superiority of Anti-TNF Therapy in Children | gutsandgrowth) described a recent article showing that kids treated with anti-TNF therapy at the time of diagnosis had improved outcomes compared to children who were treated with other medications.  In this day of multimedia, there is a video explaining the study which may be helpful for families and clinicians alike –here’s the link:  Dr. Michael Stephens discusses the research findings: .

An excerpt from the explanation with the video:

The current research study looks at outcomes and compares three different types of treatments. The first group receives anti-TNF therapy. The second group received immune modulating therapy. The third group received no treatment within the first three months. This study was an observational study and the choice of treatment was at the discretion of the physician. In order to correct for this factor, a statistical technique was used. Patients with similar characteristics were paired within the three groups . The results showed that patients who received the anti-TNF therapy had an improved outcome, such as a higher remission rate and some indications of improved growth, at one year. All three groups had improvements in weight and body mass index but only the anti-TNF group had improvements in linear growth.

Just the Beginning: Mutations in Very Early Onset Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Posted on by

A recent study (Gastroenterol 2014; 146: 1028-39) indicates that mutations in tetratricopeptide repeat domain 7A (TTC7A) can result in a severe form of very early onset inflammatory bowel disease (VEOIBD).

After identifying a TTC7A heterozygote mutation in an infant by using whole exome sequencing of DNA, the authors subsequently identified 4 additional patients (2 siblings from 2 families) who also had loss of function mutations in VEOIBD.  Thus far, four of the five identified infants have died.

The manuscript has some terrific figures describing endoscopic/histologic characteristics, TTC7A genetic analysis, functional TTC7A enterocyte studies with immunofluorescence, impaired cell adhesion figure, tandem mass spectrometry, and a summary mechanistic figure (figure 6).  Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation has not been effective and might not work due to the enterocyte defect.

This study adds another VEOIBD gene mutation.  Previous mutations have involved in VEOIBD have included IL10RA/B, XIAP, ADAM17, NCF4, and NCF2/RAC2. The specific subtype matters as some defects may respond to stem cell transplantation.

Take-home message: there are a diverse number of pathways that can lead to VEOIBD.  Given the recent availability of whole exome sequencing, more mutations are sure to be identified soon.

Related blog post/link:

IL-10 and early onset IBD | gutsandgrowth In addition to the Toronto group (noted in this blog), a group in Boston with Harland Winter/CJ Moran is also interested in whole exome sequencing for VEOIBD patients.

Causes and Treatment of Very-Early Onset IBD –-this link is to the AGA Journals blog post on the same subject.

How Long Will Infliximab Work?

Posted on by

Given the limited therapeutic options, the question of infliximab (IFX) durability in pediatrics is quite important.  One center has published its 10-year retrospective experience (Inflamm Bowel Dis 2014; 20: 606-13).

Inclusion criteria for the 188 patients included initiating IFX prior to age 21 years and patients who had a minimum of 1-year followup.

Demographics: Median age at diagnosis was 11 years for Crohn’s disease (CD) and 12 years for ulcerative colitis (UC). Indication for IFX due to steroid refractory disease was present in 42% of UC patients compared with 14% of CD patients.  Monotherapy was more common in UC patients, 65%, compared to 35% of CD patients.

Methotrexate was administered in 69 (44%) of CD patients at time of IFX with the majority (n=56) as oral treatment (low-dose <10 mg every week).  In addition, MTX was initiated after IFX induction in another 38 (24%).  Only 36 (23%) remained on IFX mono therapy throughout the duration of treatment in CD patients.

Key findings:

  • 88% of CD patients remained on IFX at 1 year, 80% at 2 years, and 72% at 5 years.
  • Only 7 of 157 CD patients were primary nonresponders.
  • 65 of 89 CD patients who did not achieve a sustained durable remission underwent dose escalation. 40 of 65 responded to dose escalation.
  • Of those who lost response to IFX, the majority were transitioned to adalimumab (ADA) and among this group, 82% remained on ADA treatment at last followup.
  • Among UC patients (n=31), 9 were primary nonresponders. At last followup, 41% (9) remained in a durable sustained response at last followup.
  • While the authors used MTX due to favorable effects on IFX pharmacokinetics (Arthritis Rheum 1998; 41: 1552-63), there was “not a significant difference in IFX durability or efficacy between this group and patients with CD on IFX monotherapy”
  • Availability of antibodies to infliximab (ATIs) and IFX trough levels were only assessed in a subset.  However, “we did see a significant difference in those that responded to dose intensification when ATIs were undetectable.”

Bottomline: The majority of CD patients can remain on IFX for >5 years.  Among those who lose response, adalimumab was a durable alternative.  A much lower durable response was evident with the subset of patients with UC.

Related blog post:

Also noted:

Inflamm Bowel Dis 2014; 20: 614-21. In this study of 78 youth with IBD, depressive symptoms warranting additional evaluation were present in 13% which was lower than in the community comparison group.  Disease severity was noted to be inactive in 63% and mild in another 18%.

Inflamm Bowel Dis 2014; 20: 495-501. This study showed that 25 children exposed to anti-TNFs prenatally for maternal IBD seemed to show good safety.  Immunologic investigation undertaken in 17 of the children was normal.  No control group limited the ability to determine if increased infections were present.

And, here’s a link to Mar-April Circle Newsletter from ImproveCareNow -topics include group medical appointments, parent working group, dieting with IBD, and includes link to self management handbook.

 

 

Imaging in NAFLD -Don’t Rely on Ultrasound

Posted on by

A recent article (Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014; 12: 765-73) notes that ultrasound is not accurate for diagnosing NAFLD:

The link to the article: http://goo.gl/R1GdAG, video abstract: http://youtu.be/spnlSPTS-SE (from Jeff Schwimmer’s twitter feed) ,and an excerpt from the article’s abstract:

Results

We analyzed 9 studies comprising 610 children; 4 studies assessed ultrasonography and 5 studies assessed magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Ultrasonography was used in the diagnosis of fatty liver with positive predictive values of 47% to 62%. There was not a consistent relationship between ultrasound steatosis score and the reference measurement of hepatic steatosis. Liver fat as measurements by MRI or by spectroscopy varied with the methodologies used. Liver fat measurements by MRI correlated with results from histologic analyses, but sample size did not allow for an assessment of diagnostic accuracy.

Conclusions

Available evidence does not support the use of ultrasonography for the diagnosis or grading of fatty liver in children. Although MRI is a promising approach, the data are insufficient to make evidence-based recommendations regarding its use in children for the assessment of hepatic steatosis.

Related blog posts: