User login
Survey explores mental health, services use in police officers
New research shows that about a quarter of police officers in one large force report past or present mental health problems.
Responding to a survey, 26% of police officers on the Dallas police department screened positive for depression, anxiety, PTSD, or symptoms of suicide ideation or self-harm.
Mental illness rates were particularly high among female officers, those who were divorced, widowed, or separated, and those with military experience.
The study also showed that concerns over confidentiality and stigma may prevent officers with mental illness from seeking treatment.
The results underscored the need to identify police officers with psychiatric problems and to connect them to the most appropriate individualized care, author Katelyn K. Jetelina, PhD, assistant professor in the department of epidemiology, human genetics, and environmental sciences, University of Texas Health Science Center, Dallas, said in an interview.
“This is a very hard-to-reach population, and because of that, we need to be innovative in reaching them for services,” she said.
The study was published online Oct. 7 in JAMA Network Open.
Dr. Jetelina and colleagues are investigating various aspects of police officers’ well-being, including their nutritional needs and their occupational, physical, and mental health.
The current study included 434 members of the Dallas police department, the ninth largest in the United States. The mean age of the participants was 37 years, 82% were men, and about half were White. The 434 officers represented 97% of those invited to participate (n = 446) and 31% of the total patrol population of the Dallas police department (n = 1,413).
These officers completed a short survey on their smartphone that asked about lifetime diagnoses of depression, anxiety, and PTSD. They were also asked whether they experienced suicidal ideation or self-harm during the previous 2 weeks.
Overall, 12% of survey respondents reported having been diagnosed with a mental illness. This, said Jetelina, is slightly lower than the rate reported in the general population.
Study participants who had not currently been diagnosed with a mental illness completed the Patient Health Questionnaire–2 (PHQ-2), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder–2 (GAD-2), and the Primary Care–Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PC-PTSD).
Officers were considered to have a positive result if they had a score of 3 or more (PHQ-2, sensitivity of 83% and specificity of 92%; PC-PTSD-5, sensitivity of 93% and specificity of 85%; GAD-2, sensitivity of 86% and specificity of 83%).
About 26% of respondents had a positive screening for mental illness symptoms, mainly PTSD and depression, which Dr. Jetelina noted is a higher percentage than in the general population.
This rate of mental health symptoms is “high and concerning,” but not surprising because of the work of police officers, which could include attending to sometimes violent car crashes, domestic abuse situations, and armed conflicts, said Dr. Jetelina.
“They’re constantly exposed to traumatic calls for service; they see people on their worst day, 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. That stress and exposure will have a detrimental effect on mental health, and we have to pay more attention to that,” she said.
Dr. Jetelina pointed out that the surveys were completed in January and February 2020, before COVID-19 had become a cause of stress for everyone and before the increase in calls for defunding police amid a resurgence of Black Lives Matter demonstrations.
However, she stressed that racial biases and occupational stress among police officers are “nothing new for them.” For example, in 2016, five Dallas police officers were killed during Black Lives Matter protests because of their race/ethnicity.
More at risk
The study showed that certain subgroups of officers were more at risk for mental illness. After adjustment for confounders, including demographic characteristics, marital status, and educational level, the odds of being diagnosed with a mental illness during the course of one’s life were significantly higher among female officers than male officers (adjusted odds ratio, 3.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-8.68).
Officers who were divorced, widowed, or separated and those who had more experience and held a higher rank were also at greater risk for mental illness.
As well, (aOR, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.38-7.67).
The study also asked participants about use of mental health care services over the past 12 months. About 35% of those who had a current mental health diagnosis and 17% of those who screened positive for mental health symptoms reported using such services.
The study also asked those who screened positive about their interest in seeking such services. After adjustments, officers with suicidal ideation or self-harm were significantly more likely to be interested in getting help, compared with officers who did not report suicidal ideation or self-harm (aOR, 7.66; 95% CI, 1.70-34.48).
Dr. Jetelina was impressed that so many officers were keen to seek help, which “is a big positive,” she said. “It’s just a matter of better detecting who needs the help and better connecting them to medical services that meet their needs.”
Mindfulness exercise
Dr. Jetelina and colleagues are conducting a pilot test of the use by police officers of smartwatches that monitor heart rate and oxygen levels. If measurements with these devices reach a predetermined threshold, the officers are “pinged” and are instructed to perform a mindfulness exercise in the field, she said.
Results so far “are really exciting,” said Dr. Jetelina. “Officers have found this extremely helpful and feasible, and so the next step is to test if this truly impacts mental illness over time.”
Routine mental health screening of officers might be beneficial, but only if it’s conducted in a manner “respectful of the officers’ needs and wants,” said Dr. Jetelina.
She pointed out that although psychological assessments are routinely carried out following an extreme traumatic call, such as one involving an officer-involved shooting, the “in-between” calls could have a more severe cumulative impact on mental health.
It’s important to provide officers with easy-to-access services tailored for their individual needs, said Dr. Jetelina.
‘Numb to it’
Eighteen patrol officers also participated in a focus group, during which several themes regarding the use of mental health care services emerged. One theme was the inability of officers to identify when they’re personally experiencing a mental health problem.
Participants said they had become “numb” to the traumatic events on the job, which is “concerning,” Dr. Jetelina said. “They think that having nightmares every week is completely normal, but it’s not, and this needs to be addressed.”
Other themes that emerged from focus groups included the belief that psychologists can’t relate to police stressors; concerns about confidentiality (one sentiment that was expressed was “you’re an idiot” if you “trust this department”); and stigma for officers who seek mental health care (participants talked about “reprisal” from seeing “a shrink,” including being labeled as “a nutter” and losing their job).
Dr. Jetelina noted that some “champion” officers revealed their mental health journey during focus groups, which tended to “open a Pandora’s box” for others to discuss their experience. She said these champions could be leveraged throughout the police department to help reduce stigma.
The study included participants from only one police department, although rigorous data collection allows for generalizability to the entire patrol department, say the authors. Although the study included only brief screens of mental illness symptoms, these short versions of screening tests have high sensitivity and specificity for mental illness in primary care, they noted.
The next step for the researchers is to study how mental illness and symptoms affect job performance, said Dr. Jetelina. “Does this impact excessive use of force? Does this impact workers’ compensation? Does this impact dispatch times, the time it takes for a police officer to respond to [a] 911 call?”
Possible underrepresentation
Anthony T. Ng, MD, regional medical director, East Region Hartford HealthCare Behavioral Health Network in Mansfield, Conn., and member of the American Psychiatric Association’s Council on Communications, found the study “helpful.”
However, the 26% who tested positive for mental illness may be an “underrepresentation” of the true picture, inasmuch as police officers might minimize or be less than truthful about their mental health status, said Dr. Ng.
Law enforcement has “never been easy,” but stressors may have escalated recently as police forces deal with shortages of staff and jails, said Dr. Ng.
He also noted that officers might face stressors at home. “Evidence shows that domestic violence is quite high – or higher than average – among law enforcement,” he said. “All these things add up.”
Psychiatrists and other mental health professionals should be “aware of the unique challenges” that police officers face and be “proactively involved” in providing guidance and education on mitigating stress, said Dr. Ng.
“You have police officers wearing body armor, so why can’t you give them some training to learn how to have psychiatric or psychological body armor?” he said. But it’s a two-way street; police forces should be open to outreach from mental health professionals. “We have to meet halfway.”
Compassion fatigue
In an accompanying commentary, John M. Violanti, PhD, of the department of epidemiology and environmental health at the State University of New York at Buffalo, said the article helps bring “to the forefront” the issue of the psychological dangers of police work.
There is conjecture as to why police experience mental distress, said Dr. Violanti, who pointed to a study of New York City police suicides during the 1930s that suggested that police have a “social license” for aggressive behavior but are restrained as part of public trust, placing them in a position of “psychological strain.”
“This situation may be reflective of the same situation police find themselves today,” said Dr. Violanti.
“Compassion fatigue,” a feeling of mental exhaustion caused by the inability to care for all persons in trouble, may also be a factor, as could the constant stress that leaves police officers feeling “cynical and isolated from others,” he wrote.
“The socialization process of becoming a police officer is associated with constrictive reasoning, viewing the world as either right or wrong, which leaves no middle ground for alternatives to deal with mental distress,” Dr. Violanti said.
He noted that police officers may abuse alcohol because of stress, peer pressure, isolation, and a culture that approves of alcohol use. “Officers tend to drink together and reinforce their own values.”.
Although no prospective studies have linked police mental health problems with childhood abuse or neglect, some mental health professionals estimate that about 25% of their police clients have a history of childhood abuse or neglect, said Dr. Violanti.
He agreed that mindfulness may help manage stress and increase cognitive flexibility in dealing with trauma and crises.
A possible way to ensure confidentiality is a peer support program that allows distressed officers to first talk privately with a trained and trusted peer officer and to then seek professional help if necessary, said Dr. Violanti.
The study was funded by a grant from the National Institute of Occupational Health and Safety. Dr. Jetelina, Dr. Ng, and Dr. Violanti disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
New research shows that about a quarter of police officers in one large force report past or present mental health problems.
Responding to a survey, 26% of police officers on the Dallas police department screened positive for depression, anxiety, PTSD, or symptoms of suicide ideation or self-harm.
Mental illness rates were particularly high among female officers, those who were divorced, widowed, or separated, and those with military experience.
The study also showed that concerns over confidentiality and stigma may prevent officers with mental illness from seeking treatment.
The results underscored the need to identify police officers with psychiatric problems and to connect them to the most appropriate individualized care, author Katelyn K. Jetelina, PhD, assistant professor in the department of epidemiology, human genetics, and environmental sciences, University of Texas Health Science Center, Dallas, said in an interview.
“This is a very hard-to-reach population, and because of that, we need to be innovative in reaching them for services,” she said.
The study was published online Oct. 7 in JAMA Network Open.
Dr. Jetelina and colleagues are investigating various aspects of police officers’ well-being, including their nutritional needs and their occupational, physical, and mental health.
The current study included 434 members of the Dallas police department, the ninth largest in the United States. The mean age of the participants was 37 years, 82% were men, and about half were White. The 434 officers represented 97% of those invited to participate (n = 446) and 31% of the total patrol population of the Dallas police department (n = 1,413).
These officers completed a short survey on their smartphone that asked about lifetime diagnoses of depression, anxiety, and PTSD. They were also asked whether they experienced suicidal ideation or self-harm during the previous 2 weeks.
Overall, 12% of survey respondents reported having been diagnosed with a mental illness. This, said Jetelina, is slightly lower than the rate reported in the general population.
Study participants who had not currently been diagnosed with a mental illness completed the Patient Health Questionnaire–2 (PHQ-2), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder–2 (GAD-2), and the Primary Care–Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PC-PTSD).
Officers were considered to have a positive result if they had a score of 3 or more (PHQ-2, sensitivity of 83% and specificity of 92%; PC-PTSD-5, sensitivity of 93% and specificity of 85%; GAD-2, sensitivity of 86% and specificity of 83%).
About 26% of respondents had a positive screening for mental illness symptoms, mainly PTSD and depression, which Dr. Jetelina noted is a higher percentage than in the general population.
This rate of mental health symptoms is “high and concerning,” but not surprising because of the work of police officers, which could include attending to sometimes violent car crashes, domestic abuse situations, and armed conflicts, said Dr. Jetelina.
“They’re constantly exposed to traumatic calls for service; they see people on their worst day, 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. That stress and exposure will have a detrimental effect on mental health, and we have to pay more attention to that,” she said.
Dr. Jetelina pointed out that the surveys were completed in January and February 2020, before COVID-19 had become a cause of stress for everyone and before the increase in calls for defunding police amid a resurgence of Black Lives Matter demonstrations.
However, she stressed that racial biases and occupational stress among police officers are “nothing new for them.” For example, in 2016, five Dallas police officers were killed during Black Lives Matter protests because of their race/ethnicity.
More at risk
The study showed that certain subgroups of officers were more at risk for mental illness. After adjustment for confounders, including demographic characteristics, marital status, and educational level, the odds of being diagnosed with a mental illness during the course of one’s life were significantly higher among female officers than male officers (adjusted odds ratio, 3.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-8.68).
Officers who were divorced, widowed, or separated and those who had more experience and held a higher rank were also at greater risk for mental illness.
As well, (aOR, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.38-7.67).
The study also asked participants about use of mental health care services over the past 12 months. About 35% of those who had a current mental health diagnosis and 17% of those who screened positive for mental health symptoms reported using such services.
The study also asked those who screened positive about their interest in seeking such services. After adjustments, officers with suicidal ideation or self-harm were significantly more likely to be interested in getting help, compared with officers who did not report suicidal ideation or self-harm (aOR, 7.66; 95% CI, 1.70-34.48).
Dr. Jetelina was impressed that so many officers were keen to seek help, which “is a big positive,” she said. “It’s just a matter of better detecting who needs the help and better connecting them to medical services that meet their needs.”
Mindfulness exercise
Dr. Jetelina and colleagues are conducting a pilot test of the use by police officers of smartwatches that monitor heart rate and oxygen levels. If measurements with these devices reach a predetermined threshold, the officers are “pinged” and are instructed to perform a mindfulness exercise in the field, she said.
Results so far “are really exciting,” said Dr. Jetelina. “Officers have found this extremely helpful and feasible, and so the next step is to test if this truly impacts mental illness over time.”
Routine mental health screening of officers might be beneficial, but only if it’s conducted in a manner “respectful of the officers’ needs and wants,” said Dr. Jetelina.
She pointed out that although psychological assessments are routinely carried out following an extreme traumatic call, such as one involving an officer-involved shooting, the “in-between” calls could have a more severe cumulative impact on mental health.
It’s important to provide officers with easy-to-access services tailored for their individual needs, said Dr. Jetelina.
‘Numb to it’
Eighteen patrol officers also participated in a focus group, during which several themes regarding the use of mental health care services emerged. One theme was the inability of officers to identify when they’re personally experiencing a mental health problem.
Participants said they had become “numb” to the traumatic events on the job, which is “concerning,” Dr. Jetelina said. “They think that having nightmares every week is completely normal, but it’s not, and this needs to be addressed.”
Other themes that emerged from focus groups included the belief that psychologists can’t relate to police stressors; concerns about confidentiality (one sentiment that was expressed was “you’re an idiot” if you “trust this department”); and stigma for officers who seek mental health care (participants talked about “reprisal” from seeing “a shrink,” including being labeled as “a nutter” and losing their job).
Dr. Jetelina noted that some “champion” officers revealed their mental health journey during focus groups, which tended to “open a Pandora’s box” for others to discuss their experience. She said these champions could be leveraged throughout the police department to help reduce stigma.
The study included participants from only one police department, although rigorous data collection allows for generalizability to the entire patrol department, say the authors. Although the study included only brief screens of mental illness symptoms, these short versions of screening tests have high sensitivity and specificity for mental illness in primary care, they noted.
The next step for the researchers is to study how mental illness and symptoms affect job performance, said Dr. Jetelina. “Does this impact excessive use of force? Does this impact workers’ compensation? Does this impact dispatch times, the time it takes for a police officer to respond to [a] 911 call?”
Possible underrepresentation
Anthony T. Ng, MD, regional medical director, East Region Hartford HealthCare Behavioral Health Network in Mansfield, Conn., and member of the American Psychiatric Association’s Council on Communications, found the study “helpful.”
However, the 26% who tested positive for mental illness may be an “underrepresentation” of the true picture, inasmuch as police officers might minimize or be less than truthful about their mental health status, said Dr. Ng.
Law enforcement has “never been easy,” but stressors may have escalated recently as police forces deal with shortages of staff and jails, said Dr. Ng.
He also noted that officers might face stressors at home. “Evidence shows that domestic violence is quite high – or higher than average – among law enforcement,” he said. “All these things add up.”
Psychiatrists and other mental health professionals should be “aware of the unique challenges” that police officers face and be “proactively involved” in providing guidance and education on mitigating stress, said Dr. Ng.
“You have police officers wearing body armor, so why can’t you give them some training to learn how to have psychiatric or psychological body armor?” he said. But it’s a two-way street; police forces should be open to outreach from mental health professionals. “We have to meet halfway.”
Compassion fatigue
In an accompanying commentary, John M. Violanti, PhD, of the department of epidemiology and environmental health at the State University of New York at Buffalo, said the article helps bring “to the forefront” the issue of the psychological dangers of police work.
There is conjecture as to why police experience mental distress, said Dr. Violanti, who pointed to a study of New York City police suicides during the 1930s that suggested that police have a “social license” for aggressive behavior but are restrained as part of public trust, placing them in a position of “psychological strain.”
“This situation may be reflective of the same situation police find themselves today,” said Dr. Violanti.
“Compassion fatigue,” a feeling of mental exhaustion caused by the inability to care for all persons in trouble, may also be a factor, as could the constant stress that leaves police officers feeling “cynical and isolated from others,” he wrote.
“The socialization process of becoming a police officer is associated with constrictive reasoning, viewing the world as either right or wrong, which leaves no middle ground for alternatives to deal with mental distress,” Dr. Violanti said.
He noted that police officers may abuse alcohol because of stress, peer pressure, isolation, and a culture that approves of alcohol use. “Officers tend to drink together and reinforce their own values.”.
Although no prospective studies have linked police mental health problems with childhood abuse or neglect, some mental health professionals estimate that about 25% of their police clients have a history of childhood abuse or neglect, said Dr. Violanti.
He agreed that mindfulness may help manage stress and increase cognitive flexibility in dealing with trauma and crises.
A possible way to ensure confidentiality is a peer support program that allows distressed officers to first talk privately with a trained and trusted peer officer and to then seek professional help if necessary, said Dr. Violanti.
The study was funded by a grant from the National Institute of Occupational Health and Safety. Dr. Jetelina, Dr. Ng, and Dr. Violanti disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
New research shows that about a quarter of police officers in one large force report past or present mental health problems.
Responding to a survey, 26% of police officers on the Dallas police department screened positive for depression, anxiety, PTSD, or symptoms of suicide ideation or self-harm.
Mental illness rates were particularly high among female officers, those who were divorced, widowed, or separated, and those with military experience.
The study also showed that concerns over confidentiality and stigma may prevent officers with mental illness from seeking treatment.
The results underscored the need to identify police officers with psychiatric problems and to connect them to the most appropriate individualized care, author Katelyn K. Jetelina, PhD, assistant professor in the department of epidemiology, human genetics, and environmental sciences, University of Texas Health Science Center, Dallas, said in an interview.
“This is a very hard-to-reach population, and because of that, we need to be innovative in reaching them for services,” she said.
The study was published online Oct. 7 in JAMA Network Open.
Dr. Jetelina and colleagues are investigating various aspects of police officers’ well-being, including their nutritional needs and their occupational, physical, and mental health.
The current study included 434 members of the Dallas police department, the ninth largest in the United States. The mean age of the participants was 37 years, 82% were men, and about half were White. The 434 officers represented 97% of those invited to participate (n = 446) and 31% of the total patrol population of the Dallas police department (n = 1,413).
These officers completed a short survey on their smartphone that asked about lifetime diagnoses of depression, anxiety, and PTSD. They were also asked whether they experienced suicidal ideation or self-harm during the previous 2 weeks.
Overall, 12% of survey respondents reported having been diagnosed with a mental illness. This, said Jetelina, is slightly lower than the rate reported in the general population.
Study participants who had not currently been diagnosed with a mental illness completed the Patient Health Questionnaire–2 (PHQ-2), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder–2 (GAD-2), and the Primary Care–Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PC-PTSD).
Officers were considered to have a positive result if they had a score of 3 or more (PHQ-2, sensitivity of 83% and specificity of 92%; PC-PTSD-5, sensitivity of 93% and specificity of 85%; GAD-2, sensitivity of 86% and specificity of 83%).
About 26% of respondents had a positive screening for mental illness symptoms, mainly PTSD and depression, which Dr. Jetelina noted is a higher percentage than in the general population.
This rate of mental health symptoms is “high and concerning,” but not surprising because of the work of police officers, which could include attending to sometimes violent car crashes, domestic abuse situations, and armed conflicts, said Dr. Jetelina.
“They’re constantly exposed to traumatic calls for service; they see people on their worst day, 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. That stress and exposure will have a detrimental effect on mental health, and we have to pay more attention to that,” she said.
Dr. Jetelina pointed out that the surveys were completed in January and February 2020, before COVID-19 had become a cause of stress for everyone and before the increase in calls for defunding police amid a resurgence of Black Lives Matter demonstrations.
However, she stressed that racial biases and occupational stress among police officers are “nothing new for them.” For example, in 2016, five Dallas police officers were killed during Black Lives Matter protests because of their race/ethnicity.
More at risk
The study showed that certain subgroups of officers were more at risk for mental illness. After adjustment for confounders, including demographic characteristics, marital status, and educational level, the odds of being diagnosed with a mental illness during the course of one’s life were significantly higher among female officers than male officers (adjusted odds ratio, 3.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-8.68).
Officers who were divorced, widowed, or separated and those who had more experience and held a higher rank were also at greater risk for mental illness.
As well, (aOR, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.38-7.67).
The study also asked participants about use of mental health care services over the past 12 months. About 35% of those who had a current mental health diagnosis and 17% of those who screened positive for mental health symptoms reported using such services.
The study also asked those who screened positive about their interest in seeking such services. After adjustments, officers with suicidal ideation or self-harm were significantly more likely to be interested in getting help, compared with officers who did not report suicidal ideation or self-harm (aOR, 7.66; 95% CI, 1.70-34.48).
Dr. Jetelina was impressed that so many officers were keen to seek help, which “is a big positive,” she said. “It’s just a matter of better detecting who needs the help and better connecting them to medical services that meet their needs.”
Mindfulness exercise
Dr. Jetelina and colleagues are conducting a pilot test of the use by police officers of smartwatches that monitor heart rate and oxygen levels. If measurements with these devices reach a predetermined threshold, the officers are “pinged” and are instructed to perform a mindfulness exercise in the field, she said.
Results so far “are really exciting,” said Dr. Jetelina. “Officers have found this extremely helpful and feasible, and so the next step is to test if this truly impacts mental illness over time.”
Routine mental health screening of officers might be beneficial, but only if it’s conducted in a manner “respectful of the officers’ needs and wants,” said Dr. Jetelina.
She pointed out that although psychological assessments are routinely carried out following an extreme traumatic call, such as one involving an officer-involved shooting, the “in-between” calls could have a more severe cumulative impact on mental health.
It’s important to provide officers with easy-to-access services tailored for their individual needs, said Dr. Jetelina.
‘Numb to it’
Eighteen patrol officers also participated in a focus group, during which several themes regarding the use of mental health care services emerged. One theme was the inability of officers to identify when they’re personally experiencing a mental health problem.
Participants said they had become “numb” to the traumatic events on the job, which is “concerning,” Dr. Jetelina said. “They think that having nightmares every week is completely normal, but it’s not, and this needs to be addressed.”
Other themes that emerged from focus groups included the belief that psychologists can’t relate to police stressors; concerns about confidentiality (one sentiment that was expressed was “you’re an idiot” if you “trust this department”); and stigma for officers who seek mental health care (participants talked about “reprisal” from seeing “a shrink,” including being labeled as “a nutter” and losing their job).
Dr. Jetelina noted that some “champion” officers revealed their mental health journey during focus groups, which tended to “open a Pandora’s box” for others to discuss their experience. She said these champions could be leveraged throughout the police department to help reduce stigma.
The study included participants from only one police department, although rigorous data collection allows for generalizability to the entire patrol department, say the authors. Although the study included only brief screens of mental illness symptoms, these short versions of screening tests have high sensitivity and specificity for mental illness in primary care, they noted.
The next step for the researchers is to study how mental illness and symptoms affect job performance, said Dr. Jetelina. “Does this impact excessive use of force? Does this impact workers’ compensation? Does this impact dispatch times, the time it takes for a police officer to respond to [a] 911 call?”
Possible underrepresentation
Anthony T. Ng, MD, regional medical director, East Region Hartford HealthCare Behavioral Health Network in Mansfield, Conn., and member of the American Psychiatric Association’s Council on Communications, found the study “helpful.”
However, the 26% who tested positive for mental illness may be an “underrepresentation” of the true picture, inasmuch as police officers might minimize or be less than truthful about their mental health status, said Dr. Ng.
Law enforcement has “never been easy,” but stressors may have escalated recently as police forces deal with shortages of staff and jails, said Dr. Ng.
He also noted that officers might face stressors at home. “Evidence shows that domestic violence is quite high – or higher than average – among law enforcement,” he said. “All these things add up.”
Psychiatrists and other mental health professionals should be “aware of the unique challenges” that police officers face and be “proactively involved” in providing guidance and education on mitigating stress, said Dr. Ng.
“You have police officers wearing body armor, so why can’t you give them some training to learn how to have psychiatric or psychological body armor?” he said. But it’s a two-way street; police forces should be open to outreach from mental health professionals. “We have to meet halfway.”
Compassion fatigue
In an accompanying commentary, John M. Violanti, PhD, of the department of epidemiology and environmental health at the State University of New York at Buffalo, said the article helps bring “to the forefront” the issue of the psychological dangers of police work.
There is conjecture as to why police experience mental distress, said Dr. Violanti, who pointed to a study of New York City police suicides during the 1930s that suggested that police have a “social license” for aggressive behavior but are restrained as part of public trust, placing them in a position of “psychological strain.”
“This situation may be reflective of the same situation police find themselves today,” said Dr. Violanti.
“Compassion fatigue,” a feeling of mental exhaustion caused by the inability to care for all persons in trouble, may also be a factor, as could the constant stress that leaves police officers feeling “cynical and isolated from others,” he wrote.
“The socialization process of becoming a police officer is associated with constrictive reasoning, viewing the world as either right or wrong, which leaves no middle ground for alternatives to deal with mental distress,” Dr. Violanti said.
He noted that police officers may abuse alcohol because of stress, peer pressure, isolation, and a culture that approves of alcohol use. “Officers tend to drink together and reinforce their own values.”.
Although no prospective studies have linked police mental health problems with childhood abuse or neglect, some mental health professionals estimate that about 25% of their police clients have a history of childhood abuse or neglect, said Dr. Violanti.
He agreed that mindfulness may help manage stress and increase cognitive flexibility in dealing with trauma and crises.
A possible way to ensure confidentiality is a peer support program that allows distressed officers to first talk privately with a trained and trusted peer officer and to then seek professional help if necessary, said Dr. Violanti.
The study was funded by a grant from the National Institute of Occupational Health and Safety. Dr. Jetelina, Dr. Ng, and Dr. Violanti disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.
Neurofibromatosis type 1: More than skin deep
Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is an autosomal dominant inherited disorder that is estimated to occur in 1:2500 births and to have a prevalence of 1:2000 to 1:4000.1,2 It was first described in 1882 by Friedrich Daniel Von Recklinghausen, who identified patients and their relatives with signs of neuroectodermal abnormalities (café-au-lait macules [CALMs], axillary and inguinal freckling, and neurofibromas).
NF1 may begin insidiously in childhood and evolves as the patient ages. It is associated with intracranial, intraspinal, and intraorbital neoplasms, although other organs and tissues can also be involved.
The family physician might be the first one to recognize the signs of this condition during a well-child exam and is in a unique position to coordinate a multidisciplinary approach to care.
A mutated allele and early manifestations on the skin
NF1 has been attributed to genetic mosaicism and is classified as segmental, generalized, or (less frequently) gonadal. The disorder results from germline mutations in the NF1 tumor-suppressor gene on chromosome 17, known to codify the cytoplasmic protein called neurofibromin.3 The penetrance of NF1 is complete, which means that 100% of patients with the mutated allele will develop the disease.
Patients typically have symptoms by the third decade of life, although many will show signs of the disease in early childhood. CALMs are the earliest expression of NF1. They manifest in the first 2 years of life and are found in almost all affected patients. The lesions are well defined and measure 10 to 40 mm. They are typically light brown, although they may darken with sun exposure.
Histologically, the lesions will show macromelanosomes and high concentrations of melanin but do not represent an increased risk for malignancy.4 Not all isolated CALMs are a sign of NF1. While children younger than 29 months with 6 or more CALMs have a high risk for NF1 (80.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 74.6% to 86.2%), those who are older than 29 months with at least 1 atypical CALM or fewer than 6 CALMs have just a 0.9% (95% CI, 0% to 2.6%) risk for constitutional NF1.5
Freckles are also observed in 90% of patients with NF1; these tend to develop after the third year of life. The breast and trunk are the most commonly affected areas in adults. The pathophysiology is unknown, but this freckling is believed to be related to skin friction, high humidity, and ambient temperature.6
Continue to: Neurofibromas are benign...
Neurofibromas are benign subcutaneous palpable lesions that grow within peripheral nerve tissue, including spinal, subcutaneous, plexiform, or dermal encapsulated nerves. Originating in Schwann cells, they are composed of fibroblasts, mast cells, macrophages, endothelial cells, and other perineural cells. Some patients show disfiguration when hundreds of these masses are present (FIGURE). These tumors increase in number as the patient ages or during pregnancy, which is thought to be secondary to hormonal changes.7 They are sometimes painful and can be pruritic. Their appearance can also cause patient distress.
The diagnosis is a clinical one
Suspicion for NF1 should be high in patients presenting with the dermatologic findings described, although CALMs and freckling are not exclusive to NF1. Diagnostic criteria for NF1, which distinguish it from other conditions, were first outlined in a National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement in 1987.8 The list of criteria has subsequently been expanded.
While the presence of at least 2 criteria is required for diagnosis,2 NF1 should be suspected in individuals who have any of the following findings8,9:
- the presence of at least 6 CALMs that are > 5 mm in prepubertal children and > 15 mm in adults
- 2 or more neurofibromas of any type, or at least one plexiform neurofibroma
- axillary or groin freckling
- optic pathway glioma
- 2 or more Lisch nodules (iris hamartomas seen on slit-lamp examination)
- bony dysplasia (sphenoid wing dysplasia, bowing of long bone ± pseudarthrosis)
- first-degree relative with NF1.
What you’ll see as the disease progresses
NF1 can affect a variety of systems, and potential complications of the disease are numerous and varied (see TABLE9). Here is some of what you may see as the patient’s disease progresses to various organ systems:
Learning disabilities and other cognitive and behavioral problems, such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, may affect up to 70% of children with NF1. Additionally, children with NF1 have visual/spatial problems, impaired visual motor integration, and language deficits.10 The etiology of cognitive impairment in NF1 is unknown.11
Continue to: Hypertension
Hypertension is common and may contribute to premature death in patients with NF1. Up to 27% of patients will have significant cardiovascular anomalies, including pulmonary valve stenosis, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in patients with complete deletions of the NF1 gene, intracardiac neurofibromas, renal artery stenosis, coarctation of the aorta, and cerebral infarctions.12 Renal artery stenosis occurs in approximately 2% of the NF1 population, and the diagnosis should be considered in hypertensive children, young adults, pregnant women, older individuals with refractory hypertension, and those with an abdominal bruit.13
Psychological issues. The disfigurement caused by neurofibromas and the uncertainty of an unpredictable disease course can cause psychological manifestations for patients with NF1. Anxiety and depression are common. Not surprisingly, patients with more severe disease report more adverse psychological effects.
Orthopedic deformities. Spinal deformities are the most common skeletal manifestation of NF1, with an incidence estimated from 10% to 25% in various studies. Bone mineral density, as measured by age- and gender-adjusted Z-scores, is significantly lower in NF1 patients than in the general population.14 Children may develop bowing of the long bones, particularly the tibia, and pseudarthrosis, a false joint in a long bone. Children with NF1 need yearly assessment of the spine. Patients with clinical evidence of scoliosis should be referred to Orthopedics for further evaluation.
Eye issues. A majority of adult patients develop neurofibroma-like nodules in the iris known as Lisch nodules. The nodules are not thought to cause any ophthalmologic complications. Patients may also develop palpebral neurofibroma, which may become large and sporadically show malignant transformation. Optic nerve glioma may cause strabismus and proptosis, and a large number of patients will also develop glaucoma and globe enlargement.15
Gastrointestinal lesions and cancer. Neurofibromas can grow in the stomach, liver, mesentery, retroperitoneum, and bowel. Adenocarcinoma developed in 23% of patients.16 Gastrointestinal tract bleeding, pseudo-obstruction, and protein-losing enteropathy also may occur.17
Continue to: Central nervous system manifestations
Central nervous system manifestations. Neurological manifestations have been observed in 55% of patients with NF1.18 These include headache, hydrocephalus, epilepsy, lacunar stroke, white matter disease, intraspinal neurofibroma, facial palsy, radiculopathy, and polyneuropathy. Tumors include optic pathway tumors, meningioma, and cerebral glioma. Glioma is the predominant tumor type in NF1 and occurs in all parts of the nervous system, with a predilection for the optic pathways, brainstem, and cerebellum.18
Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors. There is an 8% to 13% lifetime risk for malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNST), predominantly in individuals between the ages of 20 and 35.19,20 Any change in neurofibroma from soft to hard, or a rapid increase in the size, is suspicious for MPNST. Other symptoms include persistent pain lasting for longer than a month, pain that disturbs sleep, and new neurological deficits. These cancers can be hard to detect, leading to poor prognosis secondary to metastasis.19,20 The greatest risk factors for MPNST are pain associated with a mass and the presence of cutaneous and subcutaneous neurofibromas.21
Treatment is symptom based, but there is a new option
Treatment is individualized to the patient’s symptoms. Neurofibromas that are disfiguring, disruptive, or malignant may be surgically removed.
In April 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved selumetinib (Koselugo) for the treatment of pediatric patients (ages ≥ 2 years) with NF1 who have symptomatic, inoperable plexiform neurofibromas (PNs).22 In a clinical trial, patients received selumetinib 25 mg/m2 orally twice a day until they demonstrated disease progression or experienced “unacceptable” adverse events.22,23 The overall response rate was 66%, defined as “the percentage of patients with a complete response and those who experienced more than a 20% reduction in PN volume on MRI that was confirmed on a subsequent MRI within 3 to 6 months.”22
Of note, all patients had a partial, not complete, response. Common adverse effects included vomiting, rash, abdominal pain, diarrhea, and nausea.23 Selumetinib may also cause more serious adverse effects, including cardiomyopathy and ocular toxicity. Prior to treatment initiation and at regular intervals during treatment, patients should undergo cardiac and ophthalmic evaluation.22,23 Selumetinib was granted priority review and orphan drug status by the FDA.22
Continue to: You play a key role in ongoing monitoring
You play a key role in ongoing monitoring
In light of the condition’s heterogeneity, the goals of care include early recognition and treatment of complications, especially neoplasms; optimization of quality of life; and identification and treatment of comorbidities. Family physicians are well positioned to monitor patients with NF1 for age-specific disease manifestations and potential complications.9 All patients require:
- an annual physical examination by a physician who is familiar with the individual and with the disease
- annual ophthalmologic examination in early childhood; less frequent examination in older children and adults
- regular blood pressure monitoring
- other studies (eg, MRI) only as indicated on the basis of clinically apparent signs or symptoms
- monitoring by an appropriate specialist if there are abnormalities of the central nervous, skeletal, or cardiovascular systems
- referral to a neurologist for any unexplained neurological signs and symptoms. Referral should be urgent if there are acute symptoms of progressive sensory disturbance, motor deficit and incoordination, or sphincter disturbances since these might indicate an intracranial lesion or spinal cord compression. Headaches on waking, morning vomiting, and altered consciousness are suggestive of raised intracranial pressure.
Children with NF1 benefit from coordinated care between the FP and a pediatrician or other specialist familiar with the disease. In addition to providing usual well care, perform regular assessment of development and school performance. Pay careful attention to the cardiovascular system (particularly blood pressure) and evaluate for scoliosis.
Young adults should be continually monitored for all complications, especially hypertension. This population requires continued education about NF1 and its possible complications and may benefit from counseling about disease inheritance. Screen for anxiety and depression; offer psychological support.
Adults require monitoring based on patient preference and disease severity. For this population, blood pressure should be measured annually, or more frequently if the patient’s values indicate borderline hypertension. Provide education about complications, especially MPNSTs and spinal cord compression. Patients who have abnormalities of the central nervous, skeletal, or cardiovascular systems should be monitored by an appropriate specialist. If desired, the patient may be referred to a geneticist, especially if he or she expresses concern about inheritance. Cutaneous neurofibromas can be removed if they cause discomfort, although removal occasionally results in neurological deficit.
CORRESPONDENCE
T. Grant Phillips, MD, Associate Director, UPMC Altoona Family Physicians Residency, 501 Howard Avenue, Altoona, PA 16601-4899; phillipstg2@upmc.edu
1. Ly KI, Blakeley JO. The diagnosis and management of neurofibromatosis type 1. Med Clin North Am. 2019;103:1035-1054.
2. Miller DT, Freedenberg D, Schorry E, et al; Council on Genetics, American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Health supervision for children with neurofibromatosis type 1. Pediatrics. 2019;143:e20190660.
3. Boyd KP, Korf BR, Theos A. Neurofibromatosis type 1. J Am Acad Dermatol. 200l;61:1-14.
4. Hirbe AC, Gutmann DH. Neurofibromatosis type 1: a multidisciplinary approach to care. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13:834-844.
5. Ben-Shachar S, Dubov T, Toledano-Alhadef H, et al. Predicting neurofibromatosis type 1 risk among children with isolated café-au-lait macules. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76:1077-1083.e3.
6. Friedman JM. Neurofibromatosis 1. In: Adam MP, Ardinger HH, Pagon RA, et al, eds. GeneReviews® [Internet]. Seattle (WA): University of Washington, Seattle; 1993-2020. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1109. Accessed Septemeber 28, 2020.
7. Roth TM, Petty EM, Barald KF. The role of steroid hormones in the NF1 phenotype: focus on pregnancy. Am J Med Genet A. 2008;146A:1624-1633.
8. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement: neurofibromatosis. Bethesda, MD, July 13-15, 1987. Neurofibromatosis. 1988;1:172-178. https://consensus.nih.gov/1987/1987Neurofibramatosis064html.htm. Accessed Septemeber 28, 2020.
9. Ferner RE, Huson SM, Thomas N, et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of individuals with neurofibromatosis 1. J Med Genet. 2007;44:81-88.
10. Koth CW, Cutting LE, Denckla MB. The association of neurofibromatosis type 1 and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Child Neuropsychol. 2000;6:185-194.
11. North KN, Riccardi VM, Samango‐Sprouse C, et al. Cognitive function and academic performance in neurofibromatosis 1: consensus statement from the NF1 Cognitive Disorders Task Force. Neurology. 1997;48:1121-1127.
12. Gerber PA, Antal AS, Neumann NJ, et al. Neurofibromatosis. Eur J Med Res. 2009;14:102-105.
13. Friedman JM, Arbiser J, Epstein JA, et al. Cardiovascular disease in neurofibromatosis 1: a report of the NF1 Cardiovascular Task Force. Genet Med. 2003;4:105-111.
14. Lammert M, Kappler M, Mautner VF, et al. Decreased bone mineral density in patients with neurofibromatosis 1. Osteoporos Int. 2005;16:1161-1166.
15. Abdolrahimzadeh B, Piraino DC, Albanese G, et al. Neurofibromatosis: an update of ophthalmic characteristics and applications of optical coherence tomography. Clin Ophthalmol. 2016;10:851-860.
16. Bakker JR, Haber MM, Garcia FU. Gastrointestinal neurofibromatosis: an unusual cause of gastric outlet obstruction. Am Surg. 2005;71:100-105.
17. Rastogi R. Intra-abdominal manifestations of von Recklinghausen’s neurofibromatosis. Saudi J Gastroenterol. 2008;14:80-82.
18. Créange A, Zeller J, Rostaing-Rigattieri S, et al. Neurological complications of neurofibromatosis type 1 in adulthood. Brain. 1999;122(pt 3):473-481.
19. Ferner RE, Gutmann DH. International consensus statement on malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumours in neurofibromatosis 1. Cancer Res. 2002;62:1573-1577.
20. Evans DG, Baser ME, McGaughran J, et al. Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors in neurofibromatosis 1. J Med Genet. 2002;39:311-314.
21. King AA, Debaun MR, Riccardi VM, et al. Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors in neurofibromatosis 1. Am J Med Genet. 2000;93:388-392.
22. US Food and Drug Administration. FDA approves first therapy for children with debilitating and disfiguring rare disease [news release]. April 10, 2020. www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-therapy-children-debilitating-and-disfiguring-rare-disease. Accessed September 28, 2020.
23. Koselugo (selumetinib) [product information]. Wilmington, DC: AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP; April 2020. www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2020/213756s000lbl.pdf. Accessed September 24, 2020.
Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is an autosomal dominant inherited disorder that is estimated to occur in 1:2500 births and to have a prevalence of 1:2000 to 1:4000.1,2 It was first described in 1882 by Friedrich Daniel Von Recklinghausen, who identified patients and their relatives with signs of neuroectodermal abnormalities (café-au-lait macules [CALMs], axillary and inguinal freckling, and neurofibromas).
NF1 may begin insidiously in childhood and evolves as the patient ages. It is associated with intracranial, intraspinal, and intraorbital neoplasms, although other organs and tissues can also be involved.
The family physician might be the first one to recognize the signs of this condition during a well-child exam and is in a unique position to coordinate a multidisciplinary approach to care.
A mutated allele and early manifestations on the skin
NF1 has been attributed to genetic mosaicism and is classified as segmental, generalized, or (less frequently) gonadal. The disorder results from germline mutations in the NF1 tumor-suppressor gene on chromosome 17, known to codify the cytoplasmic protein called neurofibromin.3 The penetrance of NF1 is complete, which means that 100% of patients with the mutated allele will develop the disease.
Patients typically have symptoms by the third decade of life, although many will show signs of the disease in early childhood. CALMs are the earliest expression of NF1. They manifest in the first 2 years of life and are found in almost all affected patients. The lesions are well defined and measure 10 to 40 mm. They are typically light brown, although they may darken with sun exposure.
Histologically, the lesions will show macromelanosomes and high concentrations of melanin but do not represent an increased risk for malignancy.4 Not all isolated CALMs are a sign of NF1. While children younger than 29 months with 6 or more CALMs have a high risk for NF1 (80.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 74.6% to 86.2%), those who are older than 29 months with at least 1 atypical CALM or fewer than 6 CALMs have just a 0.9% (95% CI, 0% to 2.6%) risk for constitutional NF1.5
Freckles are also observed in 90% of patients with NF1; these tend to develop after the third year of life. The breast and trunk are the most commonly affected areas in adults. The pathophysiology is unknown, but this freckling is believed to be related to skin friction, high humidity, and ambient temperature.6
Continue to: Neurofibromas are benign...
Neurofibromas are benign subcutaneous palpable lesions that grow within peripheral nerve tissue, including spinal, subcutaneous, plexiform, or dermal encapsulated nerves. Originating in Schwann cells, they are composed of fibroblasts, mast cells, macrophages, endothelial cells, and other perineural cells. Some patients show disfiguration when hundreds of these masses are present (FIGURE). These tumors increase in number as the patient ages or during pregnancy, which is thought to be secondary to hormonal changes.7 They are sometimes painful and can be pruritic. Their appearance can also cause patient distress.
The diagnosis is a clinical one
Suspicion for NF1 should be high in patients presenting with the dermatologic findings described, although CALMs and freckling are not exclusive to NF1. Diagnostic criteria for NF1, which distinguish it from other conditions, were first outlined in a National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement in 1987.8 The list of criteria has subsequently been expanded.
While the presence of at least 2 criteria is required for diagnosis,2 NF1 should be suspected in individuals who have any of the following findings8,9:
- the presence of at least 6 CALMs that are > 5 mm in prepubertal children and > 15 mm in adults
- 2 or more neurofibromas of any type, or at least one plexiform neurofibroma
- axillary or groin freckling
- optic pathway glioma
- 2 or more Lisch nodules (iris hamartomas seen on slit-lamp examination)
- bony dysplasia (sphenoid wing dysplasia, bowing of long bone ± pseudarthrosis)
- first-degree relative with NF1.
What you’ll see as the disease progresses
NF1 can affect a variety of systems, and potential complications of the disease are numerous and varied (see TABLE9). Here is some of what you may see as the patient’s disease progresses to various organ systems:
Learning disabilities and other cognitive and behavioral problems, such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, may affect up to 70% of children with NF1. Additionally, children with NF1 have visual/spatial problems, impaired visual motor integration, and language deficits.10 The etiology of cognitive impairment in NF1 is unknown.11
Continue to: Hypertension
Hypertension is common and may contribute to premature death in patients with NF1. Up to 27% of patients will have significant cardiovascular anomalies, including pulmonary valve stenosis, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in patients with complete deletions of the NF1 gene, intracardiac neurofibromas, renal artery stenosis, coarctation of the aorta, and cerebral infarctions.12 Renal artery stenosis occurs in approximately 2% of the NF1 population, and the diagnosis should be considered in hypertensive children, young adults, pregnant women, older individuals with refractory hypertension, and those with an abdominal bruit.13
Psychological issues. The disfigurement caused by neurofibromas and the uncertainty of an unpredictable disease course can cause psychological manifestations for patients with NF1. Anxiety and depression are common. Not surprisingly, patients with more severe disease report more adverse psychological effects.
Orthopedic deformities. Spinal deformities are the most common skeletal manifestation of NF1, with an incidence estimated from 10% to 25% in various studies. Bone mineral density, as measured by age- and gender-adjusted Z-scores, is significantly lower in NF1 patients than in the general population.14 Children may develop bowing of the long bones, particularly the tibia, and pseudarthrosis, a false joint in a long bone. Children with NF1 need yearly assessment of the spine. Patients with clinical evidence of scoliosis should be referred to Orthopedics for further evaluation.
Eye issues. A majority of adult patients develop neurofibroma-like nodules in the iris known as Lisch nodules. The nodules are not thought to cause any ophthalmologic complications. Patients may also develop palpebral neurofibroma, which may become large and sporadically show malignant transformation. Optic nerve glioma may cause strabismus and proptosis, and a large number of patients will also develop glaucoma and globe enlargement.15
Gastrointestinal lesions and cancer. Neurofibromas can grow in the stomach, liver, mesentery, retroperitoneum, and bowel. Adenocarcinoma developed in 23% of patients.16 Gastrointestinal tract bleeding, pseudo-obstruction, and protein-losing enteropathy also may occur.17
Continue to: Central nervous system manifestations
Central nervous system manifestations. Neurological manifestations have been observed in 55% of patients with NF1.18 These include headache, hydrocephalus, epilepsy, lacunar stroke, white matter disease, intraspinal neurofibroma, facial palsy, radiculopathy, and polyneuropathy. Tumors include optic pathway tumors, meningioma, and cerebral glioma. Glioma is the predominant tumor type in NF1 and occurs in all parts of the nervous system, with a predilection for the optic pathways, brainstem, and cerebellum.18
Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors. There is an 8% to 13% lifetime risk for malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNST), predominantly in individuals between the ages of 20 and 35.19,20 Any change in neurofibroma from soft to hard, or a rapid increase in the size, is suspicious for MPNST. Other symptoms include persistent pain lasting for longer than a month, pain that disturbs sleep, and new neurological deficits. These cancers can be hard to detect, leading to poor prognosis secondary to metastasis.19,20 The greatest risk factors for MPNST are pain associated with a mass and the presence of cutaneous and subcutaneous neurofibromas.21
Treatment is symptom based, but there is a new option
Treatment is individualized to the patient’s symptoms. Neurofibromas that are disfiguring, disruptive, or malignant may be surgically removed.
In April 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved selumetinib (Koselugo) for the treatment of pediatric patients (ages ≥ 2 years) with NF1 who have symptomatic, inoperable plexiform neurofibromas (PNs).22 In a clinical trial, patients received selumetinib 25 mg/m2 orally twice a day until they demonstrated disease progression or experienced “unacceptable” adverse events.22,23 The overall response rate was 66%, defined as “the percentage of patients with a complete response and those who experienced more than a 20% reduction in PN volume on MRI that was confirmed on a subsequent MRI within 3 to 6 months.”22
Of note, all patients had a partial, not complete, response. Common adverse effects included vomiting, rash, abdominal pain, diarrhea, and nausea.23 Selumetinib may also cause more serious adverse effects, including cardiomyopathy and ocular toxicity. Prior to treatment initiation and at regular intervals during treatment, patients should undergo cardiac and ophthalmic evaluation.22,23 Selumetinib was granted priority review and orphan drug status by the FDA.22
Continue to: You play a key role in ongoing monitoring
You play a key role in ongoing monitoring
In light of the condition’s heterogeneity, the goals of care include early recognition and treatment of complications, especially neoplasms; optimization of quality of life; and identification and treatment of comorbidities. Family physicians are well positioned to monitor patients with NF1 for age-specific disease manifestations and potential complications.9 All patients require:
- an annual physical examination by a physician who is familiar with the individual and with the disease
- annual ophthalmologic examination in early childhood; less frequent examination in older children and adults
- regular blood pressure monitoring
- other studies (eg, MRI) only as indicated on the basis of clinically apparent signs or symptoms
- monitoring by an appropriate specialist if there are abnormalities of the central nervous, skeletal, or cardiovascular systems
- referral to a neurologist for any unexplained neurological signs and symptoms. Referral should be urgent if there are acute symptoms of progressive sensory disturbance, motor deficit and incoordination, or sphincter disturbances since these might indicate an intracranial lesion or spinal cord compression. Headaches on waking, morning vomiting, and altered consciousness are suggestive of raised intracranial pressure.
Children with NF1 benefit from coordinated care between the FP and a pediatrician or other specialist familiar with the disease. In addition to providing usual well care, perform regular assessment of development and school performance. Pay careful attention to the cardiovascular system (particularly blood pressure) and evaluate for scoliosis.
Young adults should be continually monitored for all complications, especially hypertension. This population requires continued education about NF1 and its possible complications and may benefit from counseling about disease inheritance. Screen for anxiety and depression; offer psychological support.
Adults require monitoring based on patient preference and disease severity. For this population, blood pressure should be measured annually, or more frequently if the patient’s values indicate borderline hypertension. Provide education about complications, especially MPNSTs and spinal cord compression. Patients who have abnormalities of the central nervous, skeletal, or cardiovascular systems should be monitored by an appropriate specialist. If desired, the patient may be referred to a geneticist, especially if he or she expresses concern about inheritance. Cutaneous neurofibromas can be removed if they cause discomfort, although removal occasionally results in neurological deficit.
CORRESPONDENCE
T. Grant Phillips, MD, Associate Director, UPMC Altoona Family Physicians Residency, 501 Howard Avenue, Altoona, PA 16601-4899; phillipstg2@upmc.edu
Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is an autosomal dominant inherited disorder that is estimated to occur in 1:2500 births and to have a prevalence of 1:2000 to 1:4000.1,2 It was first described in 1882 by Friedrich Daniel Von Recklinghausen, who identified patients and their relatives with signs of neuroectodermal abnormalities (café-au-lait macules [CALMs], axillary and inguinal freckling, and neurofibromas).
NF1 may begin insidiously in childhood and evolves as the patient ages. It is associated with intracranial, intraspinal, and intraorbital neoplasms, although other organs and tissues can also be involved.
The family physician might be the first one to recognize the signs of this condition during a well-child exam and is in a unique position to coordinate a multidisciplinary approach to care.
A mutated allele and early manifestations on the skin
NF1 has been attributed to genetic mosaicism and is classified as segmental, generalized, or (less frequently) gonadal. The disorder results from germline mutations in the NF1 tumor-suppressor gene on chromosome 17, known to codify the cytoplasmic protein called neurofibromin.3 The penetrance of NF1 is complete, which means that 100% of patients with the mutated allele will develop the disease.
Patients typically have symptoms by the third decade of life, although many will show signs of the disease in early childhood. CALMs are the earliest expression of NF1. They manifest in the first 2 years of life and are found in almost all affected patients. The lesions are well defined and measure 10 to 40 mm. They are typically light brown, although they may darken with sun exposure.
Histologically, the lesions will show macromelanosomes and high concentrations of melanin but do not represent an increased risk for malignancy.4 Not all isolated CALMs are a sign of NF1. While children younger than 29 months with 6 or more CALMs have a high risk for NF1 (80.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 74.6% to 86.2%), those who are older than 29 months with at least 1 atypical CALM or fewer than 6 CALMs have just a 0.9% (95% CI, 0% to 2.6%) risk for constitutional NF1.5
Freckles are also observed in 90% of patients with NF1; these tend to develop after the third year of life. The breast and trunk are the most commonly affected areas in adults. The pathophysiology is unknown, but this freckling is believed to be related to skin friction, high humidity, and ambient temperature.6
Continue to: Neurofibromas are benign...
Neurofibromas are benign subcutaneous palpable lesions that grow within peripheral nerve tissue, including spinal, subcutaneous, plexiform, or dermal encapsulated nerves. Originating in Schwann cells, they are composed of fibroblasts, mast cells, macrophages, endothelial cells, and other perineural cells. Some patients show disfiguration when hundreds of these masses are present (FIGURE). These tumors increase in number as the patient ages or during pregnancy, which is thought to be secondary to hormonal changes.7 They are sometimes painful and can be pruritic. Their appearance can also cause patient distress.
The diagnosis is a clinical one
Suspicion for NF1 should be high in patients presenting with the dermatologic findings described, although CALMs and freckling are not exclusive to NF1. Diagnostic criteria for NF1, which distinguish it from other conditions, were first outlined in a National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement in 1987.8 The list of criteria has subsequently been expanded.
While the presence of at least 2 criteria is required for diagnosis,2 NF1 should be suspected in individuals who have any of the following findings8,9:
- the presence of at least 6 CALMs that are > 5 mm in prepubertal children and > 15 mm in adults
- 2 or more neurofibromas of any type, or at least one plexiform neurofibroma
- axillary or groin freckling
- optic pathway glioma
- 2 or more Lisch nodules (iris hamartomas seen on slit-lamp examination)
- bony dysplasia (sphenoid wing dysplasia, bowing of long bone ± pseudarthrosis)
- first-degree relative with NF1.
What you’ll see as the disease progresses
NF1 can affect a variety of systems, and potential complications of the disease are numerous and varied (see TABLE9). Here is some of what you may see as the patient’s disease progresses to various organ systems:
Learning disabilities and other cognitive and behavioral problems, such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, may affect up to 70% of children with NF1. Additionally, children with NF1 have visual/spatial problems, impaired visual motor integration, and language deficits.10 The etiology of cognitive impairment in NF1 is unknown.11
Continue to: Hypertension
Hypertension is common and may contribute to premature death in patients with NF1. Up to 27% of patients will have significant cardiovascular anomalies, including pulmonary valve stenosis, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in patients with complete deletions of the NF1 gene, intracardiac neurofibromas, renal artery stenosis, coarctation of the aorta, and cerebral infarctions.12 Renal artery stenosis occurs in approximately 2% of the NF1 population, and the diagnosis should be considered in hypertensive children, young adults, pregnant women, older individuals with refractory hypertension, and those with an abdominal bruit.13
Psychological issues. The disfigurement caused by neurofibromas and the uncertainty of an unpredictable disease course can cause psychological manifestations for patients with NF1. Anxiety and depression are common. Not surprisingly, patients with more severe disease report more adverse psychological effects.
Orthopedic deformities. Spinal deformities are the most common skeletal manifestation of NF1, with an incidence estimated from 10% to 25% in various studies. Bone mineral density, as measured by age- and gender-adjusted Z-scores, is significantly lower in NF1 patients than in the general population.14 Children may develop bowing of the long bones, particularly the tibia, and pseudarthrosis, a false joint in a long bone. Children with NF1 need yearly assessment of the spine. Patients with clinical evidence of scoliosis should be referred to Orthopedics for further evaluation.
Eye issues. A majority of adult patients develop neurofibroma-like nodules in the iris known as Lisch nodules. The nodules are not thought to cause any ophthalmologic complications. Patients may also develop palpebral neurofibroma, which may become large and sporadically show malignant transformation. Optic nerve glioma may cause strabismus and proptosis, and a large number of patients will also develop glaucoma and globe enlargement.15
Gastrointestinal lesions and cancer. Neurofibromas can grow in the stomach, liver, mesentery, retroperitoneum, and bowel. Adenocarcinoma developed in 23% of patients.16 Gastrointestinal tract bleeding, pseudo-obstruction, and protein-losing enteropathy also may occur.17
Continue to: Central nervous system manifestations
Central nervous system manifestations. Neurological manifestations have been observed in 55% of patients with NF1.18 These include headache, hydrocephalus, epilepsy, lacunar stroke, white matter disease, intraspinal neurofibroma, facial palsy, radiculopathy, and polyneuropathy. Tumors include optic pathway tumors, meningioma, and cerebral glioma. Glioma is the predominant tumor type in NF1 and occurs in all parts of the nervous system, with a predilection for the optic pathways, brainstem, and cerebellum.18
Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors. There is an 8% to 13% lifetime risk for malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNST), predominantly in individuals between the ages of 20 and 35.19,20 Any change in neurofibroma from soft to hard, or a rapid increase in the size, is suspicious for MPNST. Other symptoms include persistent pain lasting for longer than a month, pain that disturbs sleep, and new neurological deficits. These cancers can be hard to detect, leading to poor prognosis secondary to metastasis.19,20 The greatest risk factors for MPNST are pain associated with a mass and the presence of cutaneous and subcutaneous neurofibromas.21
Treatment is symptom based, but there is a new option
Treatment is individualized to the patient’s symptoms. Neurofibromas that are disfiguring, disruptive, or malignant may be surgically removed.
In April 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved selumetinib (Koselugo) for the treatment of pediatric patients (ages ≥ 2 years) with NF1 who have symptomatic, inoperable plexiform neurofibromas (PNs).22 In a clinical trial, patients received selumetinib 25 mg/m2 orally twice a day until they demonstrated disease progression or experienced “unacceptable” adverse events.22,23 The overall response rate was 66%, defined as “the percentage of patients with a complete response and those who experienced more than a 20% reduction in PN volume on MRI that was confirmed on a subsequent MRI within 3 to 6 months.”22
Of note, all patients had a partial, not complete, response. Common adverse effects included vomiting, rash, abdominal pain, diarrhea, and nausea.23 Selumetinib may also cause more serious adverse effects, including cardiomyopathy and ocular toxicity. Prior to treatment initiation and at regular intervals during treatment, patients should undergo cardiac and ophthalmic evaluation.22,23 Selumetinib was granted priority review and orphan drug status by the FDA.22
Continue to: You play a key role in ongoing monitoring
You play a key role in ongoing monitoring
In light of the condition’s heterogeneity, the goals of care include early recognition and treatment of complications, especially neoplasms; optimization of quality of life; and identification and treatment of comorbidities. Family physicians are well positioned to monitor patients with NF1 for age-specific disease manifestations and potential complications.9 All patients require:
- an annual physical examination by a physician who is familiar with the individual and with the disease
- annual ophthalmologic examination in early childhood; less frequent examination in older children and adults
- regular blood pressure monitoring
- other studies (eg, MRI) only as indicated on the basis of clinically apparent signs or symptoms
- monitoring by an appropriate specialist if there are abnormalities of the central nervous, skeletal, or cardiovascular systems
- referral to a neurologist for any unexplained neurological signs and symptoms. Referral should be urgent if there are acute symptoms of progressive sensory disturbance, motor deficit and incoordination, or sphincter disturbances since these might indicate an intracranial lesion or spinal cord compression. Headaches on waking, morning vomiting, and altered consciousness are suggestive of raised intracranial pressure.
Children with NF1 benefit from coordinated care between the FP and a pediatrician or other specialist familiar with the disease. In addition to providing usual well care, perform regular assessment of development and school performance. Pay careful attention to the cardiovascular system (particularly blood pressure) and evaluate for scoliosis.
Young adults should be continually monitored for all complications, especially hypertension. This population requires continued education about NF1 and its possible complications and may benefit from counseling about disease inheritance. Screen for anxiety and depression; offer psychological support.
Adults require monitoring based on patient preference and disease severity. For this population, blood pressure should be measured annually, or more frequently if the patient’s values indicate borderline hypertension. Provide education about complications, especially MPNSTs and spinal cord compression. Patients who have abnormalities of the central nervous, skeletal, or cardiovascular systems should be monitored by an appropriate specialist. If desired, the patient may be referred to a geneticist, especially if he or she expresses concern about inheritance. Cutaneous neurofibromas can be removed if they cause discomfort, although removal occasionally results in neurological deficit.
CORRESPONDENCE
T. Grant Phillips, MD, Associate Director, UPMC Altoona Family Physicians Residency, 501 Howard Avenue, Altoona, PA 16601-4899; phillipstg2@upmc.edu
1. Ly KI, Blakeley JO. The diagnosis and management of neurofibromatosis type 1. Med Clin North Am. 2019;103:1035-1054.
2. Miller DT, Freedenberg D, Schorry E, et al; Council on Genetics, American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Health supervision for children with neurofibromatosis type 1. Pediatrics. 2019;143:e20190660.
3. Boyd KP, Korf BR, Theos A. Neurofibromatosis type 1. J Am Acad Dermatol. 200l;61:1-14.
4. Hirbe AC, Gutmann DH. Neurofibromatosis type 1: a multidisciplinary approach to care. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13:834-844.
5. Ben-Shachar S, Dubov T, Toledano-Alhadef H, et al. Predicting neurofibromatosis type 1 risk among children with isolated café-au-lait macules. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76:1077-1083.e3.
6. Friedman JM. Neurofibromatosis 1. In: Adam MP, Ardinger HH, Pagon RA, et al, eds. GeneReviews® [Internet]. Seattle (WA): University of Washington, Seattle; 1993-2020. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1109. Accessed Septemeber 28, 2020.
7. Roth TM, Petty EM, Barald KF. The role of steroid hormones in the NF1 phenotype: focus on pregnancy. Am J Med Genet A. 2008;146A:1624-1633.
8. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement: neurofibromatosis. Bethesda, MD, July 13-15, 1987. Neurofibromatosis. 1988;1:172-178. https://consensus.nih.gov/1987/1987Neurofibramatosis064html.htm. Accessed Septemeber 28, 2020.
9. Ferner RE, Huson SM, Thomas N, et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of individuals with neurofibromatosis 1. J Med Genet. 2007;44:81-88.
10. Koth CW, Cutting LE, Denckla MB. The association of neurofibromatosis type 1 and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Child Neuropsychol. 2000;6:185-194.
11. North KN, Riccardi VM, Samango‐Sprouse C, et al. Cognitive function and academic performance in neurofibromatosis 1: consensus statement from the NF1 Cognitive Disorders Task Force. Neurology. 1997;48:1121-1127.
12. Gerber PA, Antal AS, Neumann NJ, et al. Neurofibromatosis. Eur J Med Res. 2009;14:102-105.
13. Friedman JM, Arbiser J, Epstein JA, et al. Cardiovascular disease in neurofibromatosis 1: a report of the NF1 Cardiovascular Task Force. Genet Med. 2003;4:105-111.
14. Lammert M, Kappler M, Mautner VF, et al. Decreased bone mineral density in patients with neurofibromatosis 1. Osteoporos Int. 2005;16:1161-1166.
15. Abdolrahimzadeh B, Piraino DC, Albanese G, et al. Neurofibromatosis: an update of ophthalmic characteristics and applications of optical coherence tomography. Clin Ophthalmol. 2016;10:851-860.
16. Bakker JR, Haber MM, Garcia FU. Gastrointestinal neurofibromatosis: an unusual cause of gastric outlet obstruction. Am Surg. 2005;71:100-105.
17. Rastogi R. Intra-abdominal manifestations of von Recklinghausen’s neurofibromatosis. Saudi J Gastroenterol. 2008;14:80-82.
18. Créange A, Zeller J, Rostaing-Rigattieri S, et al. Neurological complications of neurofibromatosis type 1 in adulthood. Brain. 1999;122(pt 3):473-481.
19. Ferner RE, Gutmann DH. International consensus statement on malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumours in neurofibromatosis 1. Cancer Res. 2002;62:1573-1577.
20. Evans DG, Baser ME, McGaughran J, et al. Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors in neurofibromatosis 1. J Med Genet. 2002;39:311-314.
21. King AA, Debaun MR, Riccardi VM, et al. Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors in neurofibromatosis 1. Am J Med Genet. 2000;93:388-392.
22. US Food and Drug Administration. FDA approves first therapy for children with debilitating and disfiguring rare disease [news release]. April 10, 2020. www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-therapy-children-debilitating-and-disfiguring-rare-disease. Accessed September 28, 2020.
23. Koselugo (selumetinib) [product information]. Wilmington, DC: AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP; April 2020. www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2020/213756s000lbl.pdf. Accessed September 24, 2020.
1. Ly KI, Blakeley JO. The diagnosis and management of neurofibromatosis type 1. Med Clin North Am. 2019;103:1035-1054.
2. Miller DT, Freedenberg D, Schorry E, et al; Council on Genetics, American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. Health supervision for children with neurofibromatosis type 1. Pediatrics. 2019;143:e20190660.
3. Boyd KP, Korf BR, Theos A. Neurofibromatosis type 1. J Am Acad Dermatol. 200l;61:1-14.
4. Hirbe AC, Gutmann DH. Neurofibromatosis type 1: a multidisciplinary approach to care. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13:834-844.
5. Ben-Shachar S, Dubov T, Toledano-Alhadef H, et al. Predicting neurofibromatosis type 1 risk among children with isolated café-au-lait macules. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;76:1077-1083.e3.
6. Friedman JM. Neurofibromatosis 1. In: Adam MP, Ardinger HH, Pagon RA, et al, eds. GeneReviews® [Internet]. Seattle (WA): University of Washington, Seattle; 1993-2020. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1109. Accessed Septemeber 28, 2020.
7. Roth TM, Petty EM, Barald KF. The role of steroid hormones in the NF1 phenotype: focus on pregnancy. Am J Med Genet A. 2008;146A:1624-1633.
8. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement: neurofibromatosis. Bethesda, MD, July 13-15, 1987. Neurofibromatosis. 1988;1:172-178. https://consensus.nih.gov/1987/1987Neurofibramatosis064html.htm. Accessed Septemeber 28, 2020.
9. Ferner RE, Huson SM, Thomas N, et al. Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of individuals with neurofibromatosis 1. J Med Genet. 2007;44:81-88.
10. Koth CW, Cutting LE, Denckla MB. The association of neurofibromatosis type 1 and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Child Neuropsychol. 2000;6:185-194.
11. North KN, Riccardi VM, Samango‐Sprouse C, et al. Cognitive function and academic performance in neurofibromatosis 1: consensus statement from the NF1 Cognitive Disorders Task Force. Neurology. 1997;48:1121-1127.
12. Gerber PA, Antal AS, Neumann NJ, et al. Neurofibromatosis. Eur J Med Res. 2009;14:102-105.
13. Friedman JM, Arbiser J, Epstein JA, et al. Cardiovascular disease in neurofibromatosis 1: a report of the NF1 Cardiovascular Task Force. Genet Med. 2003;4:105-111.
14. Lammert M, Kappler M, Mautner VF, et al. Decreased bone mineral density in patients with neurofibromatosis 1. Osteoporos Int. 2005;16:1161-1166.
15. Abdolrahimzadeh B, Piraino DC, Albanese G, et al. Neurofibromatosis: an update of ophthalmic characteristics and applications of optical coherence tomography. Clin Ophthalmol. 2016;10:851-860.
16. Bakker JR, Haber MM, Garcia FU. Gastrointestinal neurofibromatosis: an unusual cause of gastric outlet obstruction. Am Surg. 2005;71:100-105.
17. Rastogi R. Intra-abdominal manifestations of von Recklinghausen’s neurofibromatosis. Saudi J Gastroenterol. 2008;14:80-82.
18. Créange A, Zeller J, Rostaing-Rigattieri S, et al. Neurological complications of neurofibromatosis type 1 in adulthood. Brain. 1999;122(pt 3):473-481.
19. Ferner RE, Gutmann DH. International consensus statement on malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumours in neurofibromatosis 1. Cancer Res. 2002;62:1573-1577.
20. Evans DG, Baser ME, McGaughran J, et al. Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors in neurofibromatosis 1. J Med Genet. 2002;39:311-314.
21. King AA, Debaun MR, Riccardi VM, et al. Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors in neurofibromatosis 1. Am J Med Genet. 2000;93:388-392.
22. US Food and Drug Administration. FDA approves first therapy for children with debilitating and disfiguring rare disease [news release]. April 10, 2020. www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-therapy-children-debilitating-and-disfiguring-rare-disease. Accessed September 28, 2020.
23. Koselugo (selumetinib) [product information]. Wilmington, DC: AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP; April 2020. www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2020/213756s000lbl.pdf. Accessed September 24, 2020.
Is your patient’s cannabis use problematic?
CASE
Jessica F is a new 23-year-old patient at your clinic who is seeing you to discuss her severe anxiety. She also has asthma and reports during your exploration of her family history that her father has been diagnosed with schizophrenia. She has been using 3 cartridges of cannabis vape daily to help “calm her mind” but has never tried other psychotropic medications and has never been referred to a psychiatrist.
How would you proceed with this patient?
Despite emerging evidence of the harmful effects of cannabis consumption, public perception of harm has steadily declined over the past 10 years.1,2 More adults are using cannabis than before and using it more frequently. Among primary care patients who consume cannabis recreationally, about half report less than monthly consumption; 15% use it weekly, and 20% daily.3 The potency of cannabis products has also increased. In the past 2 decades, the average tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content of recreational cannabis rose from 3% to 19%, and high-THC content delivery modalities such as vaporizer pens (“vapes”) were introduced.4,5
Health hazards of cannabis use include gastrointestinal dysfunction (eg, cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome), acute psychosis or exacerbation of an existing mood, anxiety, or psychotic disorder, and cardiovascular sequelae such as myocardial infarction or dysrhythmia.6 Potential long-term effects include neurocognitive impairment among adolescents who use cannabis,7-9 worse outcomes in anxiety and mood disorders,10 schizophrenia,11 cardiovascular sequelae,12 chronic bronchitis,13 negative impact on reproductive function,14 and poor birth outcomes.15-17
Hidden in plain sight. Many patients who use cannabis report that their primary care physicians are unaware of their cannabis consumption.18 Inadequate screening for cannabis can be attributed to time constraints, inconsistent definitions for problematic or risky cannabis use, and lack of guidance.19,20 This article offers a more inclusive definition of “problematic cannabis use,” presents an up-to-date framework for evaluating it in the outpatient setting, and outlines potential interventions.
Your patient doesn’t meetthe DSM criteria, but …
Although it is important to identify cannabis use disorder (CUD) as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition (DSM-5; TABLE 121,22), consider also the immediate and long-term consequences of cannabis use for individuals who do not meet criteria for CUD. “Problematic cannabis use,” as we define it, may also involve (a) high-risk behaviors or (b) contraindicating medical or psychiatric comorbidities (TABLE 26-9).
CASE
The patient in our case exhibited
Continue to: Guidelines for screening and evaluation
Guidelines for screening and evaluation
All primary care patients should be screened for problematic cannabis use, but especially teenagers, young adults, pregnant women, and patients with a mental health or substance use history. A variation of the single question used to screen for alcohol use disorder can be applied to cannabis use.23 We recommend asking the initial question, “Over the past month, how many days a week on average have you used cannabis and products that contain THC?” Although some guidelines emphasize frequency of cannabis use when identifying problematic consumption,24,25 duration of behavior and content of THC are also important indicators.19 Inquire about cannabis consumption over 1 month to differentiate sporadic use from longstanding persistent use.
Explore what types of cannabis the patient is ingesting and whether the patient uses cannabis heavily (4 or more times a week on average). Also determine the method of ingestion (eg, eating, vaping, smoking), THC-content (%, if known), and estimated weight of daily cannabis use in grams (TABLE 326). Although patients may not always be able to provide accurate answers, you can gain a sense of the quantity and forms of cannabis a patient is ingesting to inform future conversations on risk and harm reduction.27
Assess a patient’s risk for harm
Cannabis use has the potential to cause immediate harm (linked to a single event of problematic cannabis use) and long-term harm (linked to a recurring pattern of problematic consumption). Cannabis can be especially harmful for patients with the following medical comorbidities or psychosocial factors, and should be avoided.
Cardiovascular disease. Cannabis is associated with an elevated risk for acute coronary syndrome and cardiovascular disease.28 Long-term cannabis use is linked to increased frequency of anginal events, development of cardiac arrhythmias, peripheral arteritis, coronary vasospasms, and problems with platelet aggregation.29,30 Strongly caution against cannabis use with patients who have a history of cardiovascular disease, orthostatic hypotension, tachyarrhythmia, or hypertension.
Pulmonary disease. Patients with pulmonary disease such as asthma may find cannabis helpful as a short-term bronchodilator.31 However, for patients with underlying pulmonary disease who also smoke cigarettes, strongly discourage the smoking of cannabis or hashish, as that may worsen asthma symptoms,32 increase risk of chronic bronchitis,33 and increase cough, sputum production, and wheezing.31 There is currently insufficient evidence to suggest a positive association between cannabis use and the development of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.34
Continue to: Family history of psychotic disorders
Family history of psychotic disorders. Cannabis is associated with a dose-dependent risk of schizophrenia, which is especially pronounced in patients with a family history of schizophrenia.35 Among patients with a history of psychosis, heavy cannabis use has been associated with increased hospitalizations, increased positive symptoms, and more frequent relapses.36-38
Pregnancy, current or planned. Some women turn to cannabis during pregnancy due to its antiemetic properties. However, perinatal exposure to cannabis is associated with significant risk to the offspring. Maternal cannabis use during the first and second trimesters of pregnancy is associated with decreased performance of the child on measures of function at 3 years of age.39 In addition, cannabis consumption during pregnancy is linked to increased frequency of childhood behavioral issues, inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity.40 Peripartum cannabis exposure can affect birth outcomes and is correlated with lower birth weight, incidence of preterm labor, and neonatal intensive care unit admission.15-17,41 Of note, the THC concentration in breast milk peaks at 1 hour after the nursing mother inhales cannabis and typically dissipates after 4 hours.42
Age < 25 years. Chronic heavy use of cannabis in those younger than 25 is associated with higher likelihood of developing CUD, lower IQ,9 lower level of educational attainment, lower income,43 and decreased executive function.8
Substance use disorder history. Recreational cannabis use can hinder recovery from other substance use disorders.44
Consider these 5 interventions
Physicians can address problematic cannabis use with a 5-pronged approach: (1) harm reduction, (2) motivational interviewing, (3) addressing underlying conditions, (4) mitigating withdrawal symptoms, and (5) referring to an addiction specialist (FIGURE).
Continue to: Harm reduction
Harm reduction
Harm reduction applies to all individuals who use cannabis but especially to problematic cannabis users. Ask users to abstain from cannabis for limited periods of time to see how such abstinence affects other areas of their life. While abstinence is a goal, be prepared to perform non-abstinence-based interventions. The goal of harm reduction is to encourage behaviors that minimize health risks to which cannabis users are exposed. Encourage patients to:
Abstain from driving while intoxicated. Cannabis use while driving slows reaction time,45 impairs road tracking (driving with correct road position),46 increases weaving,47 and causes a loss of anticipatory reactions learned in driving practice.48 Risk of crashing is significantly increased with elevated levels of THC, and driving within 1 hour of cannabis ingestion nearly doubles the risk of a crash.49-51
Abstain from vaping THC-containing products. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that patients minimize the use of THC-containing e-cigarette or vaping products in light of the thousands of reports in the United States of product-associated lung injury, which in some cases have led to death.52
Clarify serving sizes and recognize delayed effects. Inexperienced cannabis users often are confused by recommended serving sizes for edible cannabis products. A typical cannabis-infused brownie may contain 100 mg of THC when the recommended serving size typically is 10 mg. THC content is included on the label of cannabis edibles purchased in state-regulated stores; these products are tested regularly in laboratories designated by the state.
Due to the delayed onset of THC’s effect, there have been numerous cases of patients taking a higher-than-intended dose of edible cannabis that caused acute intoxication and psychomedical sequelae leading to emergency hospital visits and, in some cases, death.6,53 Individuals should start at a low dose and gradually work up to a higher dose as tolerated. Patients naïve to cannabis should be especially cautious when ingesting edible products.
Continue to: Abstain from cannabis with high THC content
Abstain from cannabis with high THC content. High-potency cannabis (> 10% THC) is associated with earlier onset of first-episode psychosis.54,55
Motivational interviewing
Motivational interviewing (MI) is a psychosocial approach that emphasizes a patient’s self-efficacy and an interviewer’s positive feedback to collaboratively address substance use.56 MI can be performed in short, discrete sessions. Such interventions can reduce the average number of days of cannabis use. One large-scale Cochrane review found that cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), motivational enhancement therapy, or the 2 therapies combined most consistently reduced the frequency of cannabis use reported by patients at early follow-up.57
Address underlying conditions
Some patients use cannabis to self-medicate for pain, insomnia, nausea, and anxiety. Identify these conditions and address them with first-line pharmacologic or psychotherapeutic interventions when possible. This is especially important for conditions in which long-term cannabis use may adversely impact outcomes, such as in posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and mood disorders.58-60 Little evidence exists for the use of cannabis as treatment of any primary psychiatric disorder.61,62 Family physicians who are uncomfortable treating a specific underlying condition can consult specialists in pain management, sleep medicine, psychiatry, and neurology.
Mitigate withdrawal symptoms
Discontinuation of cannabis use may lead to withdrawal symptoms such as waxing and waning irritability, restlessness, sweating, aggression, anxiety, depressed mood, sleep disturbance, or changes in appetite.63,64 These symptoms typically emerge within the first couple days of abstinence and can last up to 28 days.63,64 Although the US Food and Drug Administration has not approved any medications for CUD treatment, and there are no established protocols for detoxification, there is evidence that CBT or medications such as gabapentin or zolpidem can reduce the intensity of withdrawal symptoms.65,66
Refer to an addiction specialist
Consider referring patients with problematic cannabis use to an addiction specialist with expertise in psychopharmacologic and psychotherapeutic approaches to managing substance use.
Continue to: CASE
CASE
You renew Ms. F’s asthma medications, discuss her cannabis use, start her on a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, and refer her to an outpatient psychiatrist. Over the next few weeks, you and the outpatient psychiatrist employ brief motivational interviewing around cannabis use, and you provide psychoeducation around potential harms of use when driving and in light of the patient’s asthma.
The patient’s anxiety symptoms decrease with up-titration of the SSRI by the outpatient psychiatrist and with enrollment in individual CBT. She is slowly able to taper off cannabis vaping with continued motivational interviewing and encouragement, despite withdrawal-induced anxiety and sleep disturbance.
CORRESPONDENCE
Michael Hsu, MD, Brigham & Women’s Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA 02215; mhsu7@partners.org.
1. Sarvet AL, Wall MM, Keyes KM, et al. Recent rapid decrease in adolescents’ perception that marijuana is harmful, but no concurrent increase in use. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2018;186:68-74.
2. Compton WM, Han B, Jones CM, Blanco C, Hughes A. Marijuana use and use disorders in adults in the USA, 2002-14: analysis of annual cross-sectional surveys. Lancet Psychiatry. 2016;3:954-964.
3. Lapham GT, Lee AK, Caldeiro RM, et al. Frequency of cannabis use among primary care patients in Washington state. J Am Board Fam Med. 2017;30:795‐805.
4. Chandra S, Radwan MM, Majumdar CG, et al. New trends in cannabis potency in USA and Europe during the last decade (2008-2017). Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2019;269:5-15.
5. Sevigny EL, Pacula RL, Heaton P. The effects of medical marijuana laws on potency. Int J Drug Policy. 2014;25:308-319.
6. Monte AA, Shelton SK, Mills E, et al. Acute illness associated with cannabis use, by route of exposure: an observational study. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170:531-537.
7. Scott JC, Slomiak ST, Jones JD, et al. Association of cannabis with cognitive functioning in adolescents and young adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry. 2018;75:585-595.
8. Gruber SA, Sagar KA, Dahlgren MK, et al. Age of onset of marijuana use and executive function. Psychol Addict Behav. 2012;26:496-506.
9. Meier MH, Caspi A, Ambler A, et al. Persistent cannabis users show neuropsychological decline from childhood to midlife. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109:E2657-E2664.
10. Mammen G, Rueda S, Roerecke M, et al. Association of cannabis with long-term clinical symptoms in anxiety and mood disorders: a systematic review of prospective studies. J Clin Psychiatry. 2018;79:17r11839.
11. Gage SH, Hickman M, Zammit S. Association between cannabis and psychosis: epidemiologic evidence. Biol Psychiatry. 2016;79:549-556.
12. Singh A, Saluja S, Kumar A, et al. Cardiovascular complications of marijuana and related substances: a review. Cardiol Ther. 2018;7:45-59.
13. Volkow ND, Compton WM, Weiss SR. Adverse health effects of marijuana use. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:2219-2227.
14. Bari M, Battista N, Pirazzi V, et al. The manifold actions of endocannabinoids on female and male reproductive events. Front Biosci (Landmark Ed). 2011;16:498-516.
15. Hayatbakhsh MR, Flenady VJ, Gibbons KS, et al. Birth outcomes associated with cannabis use before and during pregnancy. Pediatr Res. 2012;71:215-219.
16. Saurel-Cubizolles M-J, Prunet C, Blondel B. Cannabis use during pregnancy in France in 2010. BJOG. 2014;121:971-977.
17. Prunet C, Delnord M, Saurel-Cubizolles M-J, et al. Risk factors of preterm birth in France in 2010 and changes since 1995: results from the French national perinatal surveys. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2017;46:19-28.
18. Kondrad EC, Reed AJ, Simpson MJ, et al. Lack of communication about medical marijuana use between doctors and their patients. J Am Board Fam Med. 2018;31:805-808.
19. Casajuana C, López-Pelayo H, Balcells MM, et al. Definitions of risky and problematic cannabis use: a systematic review. Subst Use Misuse. 2016;51:1760-1770.
20. Norberg MM, Gates P, Dillon P, et al. Screening and managing cannabis use: comparing GP’s and nurses’ knowledge, beliefs, and behavior. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2012;7:31.
21. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Washington DC: APA Publishing; 2013:509-516.
22. Hasin DS, Saha TD, Kerridge BT, et al. Prevalence of marijuana use disorders in the United States between 2001-2002 and 2012-2013. JAMA Psychiatry. 2015;72:1235-1242.
23. Smith PC, Schmidt SM, Allensworth-Davies D, et al. A single-question screening test for drug use in primary care. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170:1155-1160.
24. Fischer B, Jones W, Shuper P, et al. 12-month follow-up of an exploratory ‘brief intervention’ for high-frequency cannabis users among Canadian university students. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2012;7:15.
25. Turner SD, Spithoff S, Kahan M. Approach to cannabis use disorder in primary care: focus on youth and other high-risk users. Can Fam Physician. 2014;60:801-808.
26. Smart R, Caulkins JP, Kilmer B, et al. Variation in cannabis potency & prices in a newly-legal market: evidence from 30 million cannabis sales in Washington State. Addiction. 2017;112:2167-2177.
27. Bonn-Miller MO, Loflin MJE, Thomas BF, et al. Labeling accuracy of cannabidiol extracts sold online. JAMA. 2017;318:1708-1709.
28. Richards JR, Bing ML, Moulin AK, et al. Cannabis use and acute coronary syndrome. Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2019;57:831-841.
29. Subramaniam VN, Menezes AR, DeSchutter A, et al. The cardiovascular effects of marijuana: are the potential adverse effects worth the high? Mo Med. 2019;116:146-153.
30. Jones RT. Cardiovascular system effects of marijuana. J Clin Pharmacol. 2002;42:58S-63S.
31. Tetrault JM, Crothers K, Moore BA, et al. Effects of marijuana smoking on pulmonary function and respiratory complications: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167:221-228.
32. Bramness JG, von Soest T. A longitudinal study of cannabis use increasing the use of asthma medication in young Norwegian adults. BMC Pulm Med. 2019;19:52.
33. Moore BA, Augustson EM, Moser RP, et al. Respiratory effects of marijuana and tobacco use in a U.S. sample. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20:33-37.
34. Tashkin DP. Does marijuana pose risks for chronic airflow obstruction? Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2015;12:235-236.
35. McGuire PK, Jones P, Harvey I, et al. Morbid risk of schizophrenia for relatives of patients with cannabis-associated psychosis. Schizophr Res. 1995;15:277-281.
36. Hall W, Degenhardt L. Cannabis use and the risk of developing a psychotic disorder. World Psychiatry. 2008;7:68-71.
37. Gerlach J, Koret B, Gereš N, et al. Clinical challenges in patients with first episode psychosis and cannabis use: mini-review and a case study. Psychiatr Danub. 2019;31(suppl 2):162-170.
38. Patel R, Wilson R, Jackson R, et al. Association of cannabis use with hospital admission and antipsychotic treatment failure in first episode psychosis: an observational study. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e009888.
39. Day NL, Richardson GA, Goldschmidt L, et al. Effect of prenatal marijuana exposure on the cognitive development of offspring at age three. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 1994;16:169-175.
40. Goldschmidt L, Day NL, Richardson GA. Effects of prenatal marijuana exposure on child behavior problems at age 10. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 2000;22:325-336.
41. Corsi DJ, Walsh L, Weiss D, et al. Association between self-reported prenatal cannabis use and maternal, perinatal, and neonatal outcomes. JAMA. 2019;322:145-152.
42. Baker T, Datta P, Rewers-Felkins K, et al. Transfer of inhaled cannabis into human breast milk. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131:783-788.
43. Thompson K, Leadbeater B, Ames M, et al. Associations between marijuana use trajectories and educational and occupational success in young adulthood. Prev Sci. 2019;20:257-269.
44. Yuan M, Kanellopoulos T, Kotbi N. Cannabis use and psychiatric illness in the context of medical marijuana legalization: a clinical perspective. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2019;61:82-83.
45. Ronen A, Gershon P, Drobiner H, et al. Effects of THC on driving performance, physiological state and subjective feelings relative to alcohol. Accid Anal Prev. 2008;40:926-934.
46. Robbe H. Marijuana’s impairing effects on driving are moderate when taken alone but severe when combined with alcohol. Hum Psychopharmacol Clin Exp. 1998;13(suppl 2):S70-S78.
47. Lenné MG, Dietze PM, Triggs TJ, et al. The effects of cannabis and alcohol on simulated arterial driving: influences of driving experience and task demand. Accid Anal Prev. 2010;42:859-866.
48. Anderson BM, Rizzo M, Block RI, et al. Sex differences in the effects of marijuana on simulated driving performance. J Psychoactive Drugs. 2010;42:19-30.
49. Laumon B, Gadegbeku B, Martin J-L, Biecheler M-B. Cannabis intoxication and fatal road crashes in France: population based case-control study. BMJ. 2005;331:1371.
50. Asbridge M, Poulin C, Donato A. Motor vehicle collision risk and driving under the influence of cannabis: evidence from adolescents in Atlantic Canada. Accid Anal Prev. 2005;37:1025-1034.
51. Mann RE, Adlaf E, Zhao J, et al. Cannabis use and self-reported collisions in a representative sample of adult drivers. J Safety Res. 2007;38:669-674.
52. Taylor J, Wiens T, Peterson J, et al. Characteristics of e-cigarette, or vaping, products used by patients with associated lung injury and products seized by law enforcement—Minnesota, 2018 and 2019. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019;68:1096-1100.
53. Hancock-Allen JB, Barker L, VanDyke M, et al. Notes from the field: death following ingestion of an edible marijuana product—Colorado, March 2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015;64:771-772.
54. Murray RM, Quigley H, Quattrone D, et al. Traditional marijuana, high-potency cannabis and synthetic cannabinoids: increasing risk for psychosis. World Psychiatry. 2016;15:195-204.
55. Di Forti MD, Sallis H, Allegri F, et al. Daily use, especially of high-potency cannabis, drives the earlier onset of psychosis in cannabis users. Schizophr Bull. 2014;40:1509-1517.
56. Miller WR. Motivational interviewing: research, practice, and puzzles. Addict Behav. 1996;21:835-842.
57. Gates PJ, Sabioni P, Copeland J, et al. Psychosocial interventions for cannabis use disorder. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;(5):CD005336.
58. Wilkinson ST, Stefanovics E, Rosenheck RA. Marijuana use is associated with worse outcomes in symptom severity and violent behavior in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder. J Clin Psychiatry. 2015;76:1174-1180.
59. Cougle JR, Bonn-Miller MO, Vujanovic AA, et al. Posttraumatic stress disorder and cannabis use in a nationally representative sample. Psychol Addict Behav. 2011;25:554-558.
60. Johnson MJ, Pierce JD, Mavandadi S, et al. Mental health symptom severity in cannabis using and non-using veterans with probable PTSD. J Affect Disord. 2016;190:439-442.
61. Wilkinson ST, Radhakrishnan R, D’Souza DC. A systematic review of the evidence for medical marijuana in psychiatric indications. J Clin Psychiatry. 2016;77:1050-1064.
62. Black N, Stockings E, Campbell G, et al. Cannabinoids for the treatment of mental disorders and symptoms of mental disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry. 2019;6:995-1010.
63. Bonnet U, Preuss U. The cannabis withdrawal syndrome: current insights. Subst Abuse Rehabil. 2017;8:9-37.
64. Vandrey R, Smith MT, McCann UD, et al. Sleep disturbance and the effects of extended-release zolpidem during cannabis withdrawal. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011;117:38-44.
65. Mason BJ, Crean R, Goodell V, et al. A proof-of-concept randomized controlled study of gabapentin: effects on cannabis use, withdrawal and executive function deficits in cannabis-dependent adults. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2012;37:1689-1698.
66. Weinstein A, Miller H, Tal E, et al. Treatment of cannabis withdrawal syndrome using cognitive-behavioral therapy and relapse prevention for cannabis dependence. J Groups Addict Recover. 2010;5:240-263.
CASE
Jessica F is a new 23-year-old patient at your clinic who is seeing you to discuss her severe anxiety. She also has asthma and reports during your exploration of her family history that her father has been diagnosed with schizophrenia. She has been using 3 cartridges of cannabis vape daily to help “calm her mind” but has never tried other psychotropic medications and has never been referred to a psychiatrist.
How would you proceed with this patient?
Despite emerging evidence of the harmful effects of cannabis consumption, public perception of harm has steadily declined over the past 10 years.1,2 More adults are using cannabis than before and using it more frequently. Among primary care patients who consume cannabis recreationally, about half report less than monthly consumption; 15% use it weekly, and 20% daily.3 The potency of cannabis products has also increased. In the past 2 decades, the average tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content of recreational cannabis rose from 3% to 19%, and high-THC content delivery modalities such as vaporizer pens (“vapes”) were introduced.4,5
Health hazards of cannabis use include gastrointestinal dysfunction (eg, cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome), acute psychosis or exacerbation of an existing mood, anxiety, or psychotic disorder, and cardiovascular sequelae such as myocardial infarction or dysrhythmia.6 Potential long-term effects include neurocognitive impairment among adolescents who use cannabis,7-9 worse outcomes in anxiety and mood disorders,10 schizophrenia,11 cardiovascular sequelae,12 chronic bronchitis,13 negative impact on reproductive function,14 and poor birth outcomes.15-17
Hidden in plain sight. Many patients who use cannabis report that their primary care physicians are unaware of their cannabis consumption.18 Inadequate screening for cannabis can be attributed to time constraints, inconsistent definitions for problematic or risky cannabis use, and lack of guidance.19,20 This article offers a more inclusive definition of “problematic cannabis use,” presents an up-to-date framework for evaluating it in the outpatient setting, and outlines potential interventions.
Your patient doesn’t meetthe DSM criteria, but …
Although it is important to identify cannabis use disorder (CUD) as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition (DSM-5; TABLE 121,22), consider also the immediate and long-term consequences of cannabis use for individuals who do not meet criteria for CUD. “Problematic cannabis use,” as we define it, may also involve (a) high-risk behaviors or (b) contraindicating medical or psychiatric comorbidities (TABLE 26-9).
CASE
The patient in our case exhibited
Continue to: Guidelines for screening and evaluation
Guidelines for screening and evaluation
All primary care patients should be screened for problematic cannabis use, but especially teenagers, young adults, pregnant women, and patients with a mental health or substance use history. A variation of the single question used to screen for alcohol use disorder can be applied to cannabis use.23 We recommend asking the initial question, “Over the past month, how many days a week on average have you used cannabis and products that contain THC?” Although some guidelines emphasize frequency of cannabis use when identifying problematic consumption,24,25 duration of behavior and content of THC are also important indicators.19 Inquire about cannabis consumption over 1 month to differentiate sporadic use from longstanding persistent use.
Explore what types of cannabis the patient is ingesting and whether the patient uses cannabis heavily (4 or more times a week on average). Also determine the method of ingestion (eg, eating, vaping, smoking), THC-content (%, if known), and estimated weight of daily cannabis use in grams (TABLE 326). Although patients may not always be able to provide accurate answers, you can gain a sense of the quantity and forms of cannabis a patient is ingesting to inform future conversations on risk and harm reduction.27
Assess a patient’s risk for harm
Cannabis use has the potential to cause immediate harm (linked to a single event of problematic cannabis use) and long-term harm (linked to a recurring pattern of problematic consumption). Cannabis can be especially harmful for patients with the following medical comorbidities or psychosocial factors, and should be avoided.
Cardiovascular disease. Cannabis is associated with an elevated risk for acute coronary syndrome and cardiovascular disease.28 Long-term cannabis use is linked to increased frequency of anginal events, development of cardiac arrhythmias, peripheral arteritis, coronary vasospasms, and problems with platelet aggregation.29,30 Strongly caution against cannabis use with patients who have a history of cardiovascular disease, orthostatic hypotension, tachyarrhythmia, or hypertension.
Pulmonary disease. Patients with pulmonary disease such as asthma may find cannabis helpful as a short-term bronchodilator.31 However, for patients with underlying pulmonary disease who also smoke cigarettes, strongly discourage the smoking of cannabis or hashish, as that may worsen asthma symptoms,32 increase risk of chronic bronchitis,33 and increase cough, sputum production, and wheezing.31 There is currently insufficient evidence to suggest a positive association between cannabis use and the development of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.34
Continue to: Family history of psychotic disorders
Family history of psychotic disorders. Cannabis is associated with a dose-dependent risk of schizophrenia, which is especially pronounced in patients with a family history of schizophrenia.35 Among patients with a history of psychosis, heavy cannabis use has been associated with increased hospitalizations, increased positive symptoms, and more frequent relapses.36-38
Pregnancy, current or planned. Some women turn to cannabis during pregnancy due to its antiemetic properties. However, perinatal exposure to cannabis is associated with significant risk to the offspring. Maternal cannabis use during the first and second trimesters of pregnancy is associated with decreased performance of the child on measures of function at 3 years of age.39 In addition, cannabis consumption during pregnancy is linked to increased frequency of childhood behavioral issues, inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity.40 Peripartum cannabis exposure can affect birth outcomes and is correlated with lower birth weight, incidence of preterm labor, and neonatal intensive care unit admission.15-17,41 Of note, the THC concentration in breast milk peaks at 1 hour after the nursing mother inhales cannabis and typically dissipates after 4 hours.42
Age < 25 years. Chronic heavy use of cannabis in those younger than 25 is associated with higher likelihood of developing CUD, lower IQ,9 lower level of educational attainment, lower income,43 and decreased executive function.8
Substance use disorder history. Recreational cannabis use can hinder recovery from other substance use disorders.44
Consider these 5 interventions
Physicians can address problematic cannabis use with a 5-pronged approach: (1) harm reduction, (2) motivational interviewing, (3) addressing underlying conditions, (4) mitigating withdrawal symptoms, and (5) referring to an addiction specialist (FIGURE).
Continue to: Harm reduction
Harm reduction
Harm reduction applies to all individuals who use cannabis but especially to problematic cannabis users. Ask users to abstain from cannabis for limited periods of time to see how such abstinence affects other areas of their life. While abstinence is a goal, be prepared to perform non-abstinence-based interventions. The goal of harm reduction is to encourage behaviors that minimize health risks to which cannabis users are exposed. Encourage patients to:
Abstain from driving while intoxicated. Cannabis use while driving slows reaction time,45 impairs road tracking (driving with correct road position),46 increases weaving,47 and causes a loss of anticipatory reactions learned in driving practice.48 Risk of crashing is significantly increased with elevated levels of THC, and driving within 1 hour of cannabis ingestion nearly doubles the risk of a crash.49-51
Abstain from vaping THC-containing products. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that patients minimize the use of THC-containing e-cigarette or vaping products in light of the thousands of reports in the United States of product-associated lung injury, which in some cases have led to death.52
Clarify serving sizes and recognize delayed effects. Inexperienced cannabis users often are confused by recommended serving sizes for edible cannabis products. A typical cannabis-infused brownie may contain 100 mg of THC when the recommended serving size typically is 10 mg. THC content is included on the label of cannabis edibles purchased in state-regulated stores; these products are tested regularly in laboratories designated by the state.
Due to the delayed onset of THC’s effect, there have been numerous cases of patients taking a higher-than-intended dose of edible cannabis that caused acute intoxication and psychomedical sequelae leading to emergency hospital visits and, in some cases, death.6,53 Individuals should start at a low dose and gradually work up to a higher dose as tolerated. Patients naïve to cannabis should be especially cautious when ingesting edible products.
Continue to: Abstain from cannabis with high THC content
Abstain from cannabis with high THC content. High-potency cannabis (> 10% THC) is associated with earlier onset of first-episode psychosis.54,55
Motivational interviewing
Motivational interviewing (MI) is a psychosocial approach that emphasizes a patient’s self-efficacy and an interviewer’s positive feedback to collaboratively address substance use.56 MI can be performed in short, discrete sessions. Such interventions can reduce the average number of days of cannabis use. One large-scale Cochrane review found that cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), motivational enhancement therapy, or the 2 therapies combined most consistently reduced the frequency of cannabis use reported by patients at early follow-up.57
Address underlying conditions
Some patients use cannabis to self-medicate for pain, insomnia, nausea, and anxiety. Identify these conditions and address them with first-line pharmacologic or psychotherapeutic interventions when possible. This is especially important for conditions in which long-term cannabis use may adversely impact outcomes, such as in posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and mood disorders.58-60 Little evidence exists for the use of cannabis as treatment of any primary psychiatric disorder.61,62 Family physicians who are uncomfortable treating a specific underlying condition can consult specialists in pain management, sleep medicine, psychiatry, and neurology.
Mitigate withdrawal symptoms
Discontinuation of cannabis use may lead to withdrawal symptoms such as waxing and waning irritability, restlessness, sweating, aggression, anxiety, depressed mood, sleep disturbance, or changes in appetite.63,64 These symptoms typically emerge within the first couple days of abstinence and can last up to 28 days.63,64 Although the US Food and Drug Administration has not approved any medications for CUD treatment, and there are no established protocols for detoxification, there is evidence that CBT or medications such as gabapentin or zolpidem can reduce the intensity of withdrawal symptoms.65,66
Refer to an addiction specialist
Consider referring patients with problematic cannabis use to an addiction specialist with expertise in psychopharmacologic and psychotherapeutic approaches to managing substance use.
Continue to: CASE
CASE
You renew Ms. F’s asthma medications, discuss her cannabis use, start her on a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, and refer her to an outpatient psychiatrist. Over the next few weeks, you and the outpatient psychiatrist employ brief motivational interviewing around cannabis use, and you provide psychoeducation around potential harms of use when driving and in light of the patient’s asthma.
The patient’s anxiety symptoms decrease with up-titration of the SSRI by the outpatient psychiatrist and with enrollment in individual CBT. She is slowly able to taper off cannabis vaping with continued motivational interviewing and encouragement, despite withdrawal-induced anxiety and sleep disturbance.
CORRESPONDENCE
Michael Hsu, MD, Brigham & Women’s Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA 02215; mhsu7@partners.org.
CASE
Jessica F is a new 23-year-old patient at your clinic who is seeing you to discuss her severe anxiety. She also has asthma and reports during your exploration of her family history that her father has been diagnosed with schizophrenia. She has been using 3 cartridges of cannabis vape daily to help “calm her mind” but has never tried other psychotropic medications and has never been referred to a psychiatrist.
How would you proceed with this patient?
Despite emerging evidence of the harmful effects of cannabis consumption, public perception of harm has steadily declined over the past 10 years.1,2 More adults are using cannabis than before and using it more frequently. Among primary care patients who consume cannabis recreationally, about half report less than monthly consumption; 15% use it weekly, and 20% daily.3 The potency of cannabis products has also increased. In the past 2 decades, the average tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content of recreational cannabis rose from 3% to 19%, and high-THC content delivery modalities such as vaporizer pens (“vapes”) were introduced.4,5
Health hazards of cannabis use include gastrointestinal dysfunction (eg, cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome), acute psychosis or exacerbation of an existing mood, anxiety, or psychotic disorder, and cardiovascular sequelae such as myocardial infarction or dysrhythmia.6 Potential long-term effects include neurocognitive impairment among adolescents who use cannabis,7-9 worse outcomes in anxiety and mood disorders,10 schizophrenia,11 cardiovascular sequelae,12 chronic bronchitis,13 negative impact on reproductive function,14 and poor birth outcomes.15-17
Hidden in plain sight. Many patients who use cannabis report that their primary care physicians are unaware of their cannabis consumption.18 Inadequate screening for cannabis can be attributed to time constraints, inconsistent definitions for problematic or risky cannabis use, and lack of guidance.19,20 This article offers a more inclusive definition of “problematic cannabis use,” presents an up-to-date framework for evaluating it in the outpatient setting, and outlines potential interventions.
Your patient doesn’t meetthe DSM criteria, but …
Although it is important to identify cannabis use disorder (CUD) as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition (DSM-5; TABLE 121,22), consider also the immediate and long-term consequences of cannabis use for individuals who do not meet criteria for CUD. “Problematic cannabis use,” as we define it, may also involve (a) high-risk behaviors or (b) contraindicating medical or psychiatric comorbidities (TABLE 26-9).
CASE
The patient in our case exhibited
Continue to: Guidelines for screening and evaluation
Guidelines for screening and evaluation
All primary care patients should be screened for problematic cannabis use, but especially teenagers, young adults, pregnant women, and patients with a mental health or substance use history. A variation of the single question used to screen for alcohol use disorder can be applied to cannabis use.23 We recommend asking the initial question, “Over the past month, how many days a week on average have you used cannabis and products that contain THC?” Although some guidelines emphasize frequency of cannabis use when identifying problematic consumption,24,25 duration of behavior and content of THC are also important indicators.19 Inquire about cannabis consumption over 1 month to differentiate sporadic use from longstanding persistent use.
Explore what types of cannabis the patient is ingesting and whether the patient uses cannabis heavily (4 or more times a week on average). Also determine the method of ingestion (eg, eating, vaping, smoking), THC-content (%, if known), and estimated weight of daily cannabis use in grams (TABLE 326). Although patients may not always be able to provide accurate answers, you can gain a sense of the quantity and forms of cannabis a patient is ingesting to inform future conversations on risk and harm reduction.27
Assess a patient’s risk for harm
Cannabis use has the potential to cause immediate harm (linked to a single event of problematic cannabis use) and long-term harm (linked to a recurring pattern of problematic consumption). Cannabis can be especially harmful for patients with the following medical comorbidities or psychosocial factors, and should be avoided.
Cardiovascular disease. Cannabis is associated with an elevated risk for acute coronary syndrome and cardiovascular disease.28 Long-term cannabis use is linked to increased frequency of anginal events, development of cardiac arrhythmias, peripheral arteritis, coronary vasospasms, and problems with platelet aggregation.29,30 Strongly caution against cannabis use with patients who have a history of cardiovascular disease, orthostatic hypotension, tachyarrhythmia, or hypertension.
Pulmonary disease. Patients with pulmonary disease such as asthma may find cannabis helpful as a short-term bronchodilator.31 However, for patients with underlying pulmonary disease who also smoke cigarettes, strongly discourage the smoking of cannabis or hashish, as that may worsen asthma symptoms,32 increase risk of chronic bronchitis,33 and increase cough, sputum production, and wheezing.31 There is currently insufficient evidence to suggest a positive association between cannabis use and the development of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.34
Continue to: Family history of psychotic disorders
Family history of psychotic disorders. Cannabis is associated with a dose-dependent risk of schizophrenia, which is especially pronounced in patients with a family history of schizophrenia.35 Among patients with a history of psychosis, heavy cannabis use has been associated with increased hospitalizations, increased positive symptoms, and more frequent relapses.36-38
Pregnancy, current or planned. Some women turn to cannabis during pregnancy due to its antiemetic properties. However, perinatal exposure to cannabis is associated with significant risk to the offspring. Maternal cannabis use during the first and second trimesters of pregnancy is associated with decreased performance of the child on measures of function at 3 years of age.39 In addition, cannabis consumption during pregnancy is linked to increased frequency of childhood behavioral issues, inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity.40 Peripartum cannabis exposure can affect birth outcomes and is correlated with lower birth weight, incidence of preterm labor, and neonatal intensive care unit admission.15-17,41 Of note, the THC concentration in breast milk peaks at 1 hour after the nursing mother inhales cannabis and typically dissipates after 4 hours.42
Age < 25 years. Chronic heavy use of cannabis in those younger than 25 is associated with higher likelihood of developing CUD, lower IQ,9 lower level of educational attainment, lower income,43 and decreased executive function.8
Substance use disorder history. Recreational cannabis use can hinder recovery from other substance use disorders.44
Consider these 5 interventions
Physicians can address problematic cannabis use with a 5-pronged approach: (1) harm reduction, (2) motivational interviewing, (3) addressing underlying conditions, (4) mitigating withdrawal symptoms, and (5) referring to an addiction specialist (FIGURE).
Continue to: Harm reduction
Harm reduction
Harm reduction applies to all individuals who use cannabis but especially to problematic cannabis users. Ask users to abstain from cannabis for limited periods of time to see how such abstinence affects other areas of their life. While abstinence is a goal, be prepared to perform non-abstinence-based interventions. The goal of harm reduction is to encourage behaviors that minimize health risks to which cannabis users are exposed. Encourage patients to:
Abstain from driving while intoxicated. Cannabis use while driving slows reaction time,45 impairs road tracking (driving with correct road position),46 increases weaving,47 and causes a loss of anticipatory reactions learned in driving practice.48 Risk of crashing is significantly increased with elevated levels of THC, and driving within 1 hour of cannabis ingestion nearly doubles the risk of a crash.49-51
Abstain from vaping THC-containing products. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that patients minimize the use of THC-containing e-cigarette or vaping products in light of the thousands of reports in the United States of product-associated lung injury, which in some cases have led to death.52
Clarify serving sizes and recognize delayed effects. Inexperienced cannabis users often are confused by recommended serving sizes for edible cannabis products. A typical cannabis-infused brownie may contain 100 mg of THC when the recommended serving size typically is 10 mg. THC content is included on the label of cannabis edibles purchased in state-regulated stores; these products are tested regularly in laboratories designated by the state.
Due to the delayed onset of THC’s effect, there have been numerous cases of patients taking a higher-than-intended dose of edible cannabis that caused acute intoxication and psychomedical sequelae leading to emergency hospital visits and, in some cases, death.6,53 Individuals should start at a low dose and gradually work up to a higher dose as tolerated. Patients naïve to cannabis should be especially cautious when ingesting edible products.
Continue to: Abstain from cannabis with high THC content
Abstain from cannabis with high THC content. High-potency cannabis (> 10% THC) is associated with earlier onset of first-episode psychosis.54,55
Motivational interviewing
Motivational interviewing (MI) is a psychosocial approach that emphasizes a patient’s self-efficacy and an interviewer’s positive feedback to collaboratively address substance use.56 MI can be performed in short, discrete sessions. Such interventions can reduce the average number of days of cannabis use. One large-scale Cochrane review found that cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), motivational enhancement therapy, or the 2 therapies combined most consistently reduced the frequency of cannabis use reported by patients at early follow-up.57
Address underlying conditions
Some patients use cannabis to self-medicate for pain, insomnia, nausea, and anxiety. Identify these conditions and address them with first-line pharmacologic or psychotherapeutic interventions when possible. This is especially important for conditions in which long-term cannabis use may adversely impact outcomes, such as in posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and mood disorders.58-60 Little evidence exists for the use of cannabis as treatment of any primary psychiatric disorder.61,62 Family physicians who are uncomfortable treating a specific underlying condition can consult specialists in pain management, sleep medicine, psychiatry, and neurology.
Mitigate withdrawal symptoms
Discontinuation of cannabis use may lead to withdrawal symptoms such as waxing and waning irritability, restlessness, sweating, aggression, anxiety, depressed mood, sleep disturbance, or changes in appetite.63,64 These symptoms typically emerge within the first couple days of abstinence and can last up to 28 days.63,64 Although the US Food and Drug Administration has not approved any medications for CUD treatment, and there are no established protocols for detoxification, there is evidence that CBT or medications such as gabapentin or zolpidem can reduce the intensity of withdrawal symptoms.65,66
Refer to an addiction specialist
Consider referring patients with problematic cannabis use to an addiction specialist with expertise in psychopharmacologic and psychotherapeutic approaches to managing substance use.
Continue to: CASE
CASE
You renew Ms. F’s asthma medications, discuss her cannabis use, start her on a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, and refer her to an outpatient psychiatrist. Over the next few weeks, you and the outpatient psychiatrist employ brief motivational interviewing around cannabis use, and you provide psychoeducation around potential harms of use when driving and in light of the patient’s asthma.
The patient’s anxiety symptoms decrease with up-titration of the SSRI by the outpatient psychiatrist and with enrollment in individual CBT. She is slowly able to taper off cannabis vaping with continued motivational interviewing and encouragement, despite withdrawal-induced anxiety and sleep disturbance.
CORRESPONDENCE
Michael Hsu, MD, Brigham & Women’s Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA 02215; mhsu7@partners.org.
1. Sarvet AL, Wall MM, Keyes KM, et al. Recent rapid decrease in adolescents’ perception that marijuana is harmful, but no concurrent increase in use. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2018;186:68-74.
2. Compton WM, Han B, Jones CM, Blanco C, Hughes A. Marijuana use and use disorders in adults in the USA, 2002-14: analysis of annual cross-sectional surveys. Lancet Psychiatry. 2016;3:954-964.
3. Lapham GT, Lee AK, Caldeiro RM, et al. Frequency of cannabis use among primary care patients in Washington state. J Am Board Fam Med. 2017;30:795‐805.
4. Chandra S, Radwan MM, Majumdar CG, et al. New trends in cannabis potency in USA and Europe during the last decade (2008-2017). Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2019;269:5-15.
5. Sevigny EL, Pacula RL, Heaton P. The effects of medical marijuana laws on potency. Int J Drug Policy. 2014;25:308-319.
6. Monte AA, Shelton SK, Mills E, et al. Acute illness associated with cannabis use, by route of exposure: an observational study. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170:531-537.
7. Scott JC, Slomiak ST, Jones JD, et al. Association of cannabis with cognitive functioning in adolescents and young adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry. 2018;75:585-595.
8. Gruber SA, Sagar KA, Dahlgren MK, et al. Age of onset of marijuana use and executive function. Psychol Addict Behav. 2012;26:496-506.
9. Meier MH, Caspi A, Ambler A, et al. Persistent cannabis users show neuropsychological decline from childhood to midlife. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109:E2657-E2664.
10. Mammen G, Rueda S, Roerecke M, et al. Association of cannabis with long-term clinical symptoms in anxiety and mood disorders: a systematic review of prospective studies. J Clin Psychiatry. 2018;79:17r11839.
11. Gage SH, Hickman M, Zammit S. Association between cannabis and psychosis: epidemiologic evidence. Biol Psychiatry. 2016;79:549-556.
12. Singh A, Saluja S, Kumar A, et al. Cardiovascular complications of marijuana and related substances: a review. Cardiol Ther. 2018;7:45-59.
13. Volkow ND, Compton WM, Weiss SR. Adverse health effects of marijuana use. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:2219-2227.
14. Bari M, Battista N, Pirazzi V, et al. The manifold actions of endocannabinoids on female and male reproductive events. Front Biosci (Landmark Ed). 2011;16:498-516.
15. Hayatbakhsh MR, Flenady VJ, Gibbons KS, et al. Birth outcomes associated with cannabis use before and during pregnancy. Pediatr Res. 2012;71:215-219.
16. Saurel-Cubizolles M-J, Prunet C, Blondel B. Cannabis use during pregnancy in France in 2010. BJOG. 2014;121:971-977.
17. Prunet C, Delnord M, Saurel-Cubizolles M-J, et al. Risk factors of preterm birth in France in 2010 and changes since 1995: results from the French national perinatal surveys. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2017;46:19-28.
18. Kondrad EC, Reed AJ, Simpson MJ, et al. Lack of communication about medical marijuana use between doctors and their patients. J Am Board Fam Med. 2018;31:805-808.
19. Casajuana C, López-Pelayo H, Balcells MM, et al. Definitions of risky and problematic cannabis use: a systematic review. Subst Use Misuse. 2016;51:1760-1770.
20. Norberg MM, Gates P, Dillon P, et al. Screening and managing cannabis use: comparing GP’s and nurses’ knowledge, beliefs, and behavior. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2012;7:31.
21. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Washington DC: APA Publishing; 2013:509-516.
22. Hasin DS, Saha TD, Kerridge BT, et al. Prevalence of marijuana use disorders in the United States between 2001-2002 and 2012-2013. JAMA Psychiatry. 2015;72:1235-1242.
23. Smith PC, Schmidt SM, Allensworth-Davies D, et al. A single-question screening test for drug use in primary care. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170:1155-1160.
24. Fischer B, Jones W, Shuper P, et al. 12-month follow-up of an exploratory ‘brief intervention’ for high-frequency cannabis users among Canadian university students. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2012;7:15.
25. Turner SD, Spithoff S, Kahan M. Approach to cannabis use disorder in primary care: focus on youth and other high-risk users. Can Fam Physician. 2014;60:801-808.
26. Smart R, Caulkins JP, Kilmer B, et al. Variation in cannabis potency & prices in a newly-legal market: evidence from 30 million cannabis sales in Washington State. Addiction. 2017;112:2167-2177.
27. Bonn-Miller MO, Loflin MJE, Thomas BF, et al. Labeling accuracy of cannabidiol extracts sold online. JAMA. 2017;318:1708-1709.
28. Richards JR, Bing ML, Moulin AK, et al. Cannabis use and acute coronary syndrome. Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2019;57:831-841.
29. Subramaniam VN, Menezes AR, DeSchutter A, et al. The cardiovascular effects of marijuana: are the potential adverse effects worth the high? Mo Med. 2019;116:146-153.
30. Jones RT. Cardiovascular system effects of marijuana. J Clin Pharmacol. 2002;42:58S-63S.
31. Tetrault JM, Crothers K, Moore BA, et al. Effects of marijuana smoking on pulmonary function and respiratory complications: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167:221-228.
32. Bramness JG, von Soest T. A longitudinal study of cannabis use increasing the use of asthma medication in young Norwegian adults. BMC Pulm Med. 2019;19:52.
33. Moore BA, Augustson EM, Moser RP, et al. Respiratory effects of marijuana and tobacco use in a U.S. sample. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20:33-37.
34. Tashkin DP. Does marijuana pose risks for chronic airflow obstruction? Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2015;12:235-236.
35. McGuire PK, Jones P, Harvey I, et al. Morbid risk of schizophrenia for relatives of patients with cannabis-associated psychosis. Schizophr Res. 1995;15:277-281.
36. Hall W, Degenhardt L. Cannabis use and the risk of developing a psychotic disorder. World Psychiatry. 2008;7:68-71.
37. Gerlach J, Koret B, Gereš N, et al. Clinical challenges in patients with first episode psychosis and cannabis use: mini-review and a case study. Psychiatr Danub. 2019;31(suppl 2):162-170.
38. Patel R, Wilson R, Jackson R, et al. Association of cannabis use with hospital admission and antipsychotic treatment failure in first episode psychosis: an observational study. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e009888.
39. Day NL, Richardson GA, Goldschmidt L, et al. Effect of prenatal marijuana exposure on the cognitive development of offspring at age three. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 1994;16:169-175.
40. Goldschmidt L, Day NL, Richardson GA. Effects of prenatal marijuana exposure on child behavior problems at age 10. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 2000;22:325-336.
41. Corsi DJ, Walsh L, Weiss D, et al. Association between self-reported prenatal cannabis use and maternal, perinatal, and neonatal outcomes. JAMA. 2019;322:145-152.
42. Baker T, Datta P, Rewers-Felkins K, et al. Transfer of inhaled cannabis into human breast milk. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131:783-788.
43. Thompson K, Leadbeater B, Ames M, et al. Associations between marijuana use trajectories and educational and occupational success in young adulthood. Prev Sci. 2019;20:257-269.
44. Yuan M, Kanellopoulos T, Kotbi N. Cannabis use and psychiatric illness in the context of medical marijuana legalization: a clinical perspective. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2019;61:82-83.
45. Ronen A, Gershon P, Drobiner H, et al. Effects of THC on driving performance, physiological state and subjective feelings relative to alcohol. Accid Anal Prev. 2008;40:926-934.
46. Robbe H. Marijuana’s impairing effects on driving are moderate when taken alone but severe when combined with alcohol. Hum Psychopharmacol Clin Exp. 1998;13(suppl 2):S70-S78.
47. Lenné MG, Dietze PM, Triggs TJ, et al. The effects of cannabis and alcohol on simulated arterial driving: influences of driving experience and task demand. Accid Anal Prev. 2010;42:859-866.
48. Anderson BM, Rizzo M, Block RI, et al. Sex differences in the effects of marijuana on simulated driving performance. J Psychoactive Drugs. 2010;42:19-30.
49. Laumon B, Gadegbeku B, Martin J-L, Biecheler M-B. Cannabis intoxication and fatal road crashes in France: population based case-control study. BMJ. 2005;331:1371.
50. Asbridge M, Poulin C, Donato A. Motor vehicle collision risk and driving under the influence of cannabis: evidence from adolescents in Atlantic Canada. Accid Anal Prev. 2005;37:1025-1034.
51. Mann RE, Adlaf E, Zhao J, et al. Cannabis use and self-reported collisions in a representative sample of adult drivers. J Safety Res. 2007;38:669-674.
52. Taylor J, Wiens T, Peterson J, et al. Characteristics of e-cigarette, or vaping, products used by patients with associated lung injury and products seized by law enforcement—Minnesota, 2018 and 2019. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019;68:1096-1100.
53. Hancock-Allen JB, Barker L, VanDyke M, et al. Notes from the field: death following ingestion of an edible marijuana product—Colorado, March 2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015;64:771-772.
54. Murray RM, Quigley H, Quattrone D, et al. Traditional marijuana, high-potency cannabis and synthetic cannabinoids: increasing risk for psychosis. World Psychiatry. 2016;15:195-204.
55. Di Forti MD, Sallis H, Allegri F, et al. Daily use, especially of high-potency cannabis, drives the earlier onset of psychosis in cannabis users. Schizophr Bull. 2014;40:1509-1517.
56. Miller WR. Motivational interviewing: research, practice, and puzzles. Addict Behav. 1996;21:835-842.
57. Gates PJ, Sabioni P, Copeland J, et al. Psychosocial interventions for cannabis use disorder. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;(5):CD005336.
58. Wilkinson ST, Stefanovics E, Rosenheck RA. Marijuana use is associated with worse outcomes in symptom severity and violent behavior in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder. J Clin Psychiatry. 2015;76:1174-1180.
59. Cougle JR, Bonn-Miller MO, Vujanovic AA, et al. Posttraumatic stress disorder and cannabis use in a nationally representative sample. Psychol Addict Behav. 2011;25:554-558.
60. Johnson MJ, Pierce JD, Mavandadi S, et al. Mental health symptom severity in cannabis using and non-using veterans with probable PTSD. J Affect Disord. 2016;190:439-442.
61. Wilkinson ST, Radhakrishnan R, D’Souza DC. A systematic review of the evidence for medical marijuana in psychiatric indications. J Clin Psychiatry. 2016;77:1050-1064.
62. Black N, Stockings E, Campbell G, et al. Cannabinoids for the treatment of mental disorders and symptoms of mental disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry. 2019;6:995-1010.
63. Bonnet U, Preuss U. The cannabis withdrawal syndrome: current insights. Subst Abuse Rehabil. 2017;8:9-37.
64. Vandrey R, Smith MT, McCann UD, et al. Sleep disturbance and the effects of extended-release zolpidem during cannabis withdrawal. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011;117:38-44.
65. Mason BJ, Crean R, Goodell V, et al. A proof-of-concept randomized controlled study of gabapentin: effects on cannabis use, withdrawal and executive function deficits in cannabis-dependent adults. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2012;37:1689-1698.
66. Weinstein A, Miller H, Tal E, et al. Treatment of cannabis withdrawal syndrome using cognitive-behavioral therapy and relapse prevention for cannabis dependence. J Groups Addict Recover. 2010;5:240-263.
1. Sarvet AL, Wall MM, Keyes KM, et al. Recent rapid decrease in adolescents’ perception that marijuana is harmful, but no concurrent increase in use. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2018;186:68-74.
2. Compton WM, Han B, Jones CM, Blanco C, Hughes A. Marijuana use and use disorders in adults in the USA, 2002-14: analysis of annual cross-sectional surveys. Lancet Psychiatry. 2016;3:954-964.
3. Lapham GT, Lee AK, Caldeiro RM, et al. Frequency of cannabis use among primary care patients in Washington state. J Am Board Fam Med. 2017;30:795‐805.
4. Chandra S, Radwan MM, Majumdar CG, et al. New trends in cannabis potency in USA and Europe during the last decade (2008-2017). Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2019;269:5-15.
5. Sevigny EL, Pacula RL, Heaton P. The effects of medical marijuana laws on potency. Int J Drug Policy. 2014;25:308-319.
6. Monte AA, Shelton SK, Mills E, et al. Acute illness associated with cannabis use, by route of exposure: an observational study. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170:531-537.
7. Scott JC, Slomiak ST, Jones JD, et al. Association of cannabis with cognitive functioning in adolescents and young adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry. 2018;75:585-595.
8. Gruber SA, Sagar KA, Dahlgren MK, et al. Age of onset of marijuana use and executive function. Psychol Addict Behav. 2012;26:496-506.
9. Meier MH, Caspi A, Ambler A, et al. Persistent cannabis users show neuropsychological decline from childhood to midlife. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109:E2657-E2664.
10. Mammen G, Rueda S, Roerecke M, et al. Association of cannabis with long-term clinical symptoms in anxiety and mood disorders: a systematic review of prospective studies. J Clin Psychiatry. 2018;79:17r11839.
11. Gage SH, Hickman M, Zammit S. Association between cannabis and psychosis: epidemiologic evidence. Biol Psychiatry. 2016;79:549-556.
12. Singh A, Saluja S, Kumar A, et al. Cardiovascular complications of marijuana and related substances: a review. Cardiol Ther. 2018;7:45-59.
13. Volkow ND, Compton WM, Weiss SR. Adverse health effects of marijuana use. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:2219-2227.
14. Bari M, Battista N, Pirazzi V, et al. The manifold actions of endocannabinoids on female and male reproductive events. Front Biosci (Landmark Ed). 2011;16:498-516.
15. Hayatbakhsh MR, Flenady VJ, Gibbons KS, et al. Birth outcomes associated with cannabis use before and during pregnancy. Pediatr Res. 2012;71:215-219.
16. Saurel-Cubizolles M-J, Prunet C, Blondel B. Cannabis use during pregnancy in France in 2010. BJOG. 2014;121:971-977.
17. Prunet C, Delnord M, Saurel-Cubizolles M-J, et al. Risk factors of preterm birth in France in 2010 and changes since 1995: results from the French national perinatal surveys. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2017;46:19-28.
18. Kondrad EC, Reed AJ, Simpson MJ, et al. Lack of communication about medical marijuana use between doctors and their patients. J Am Board Fam Med. 2018;31:805-808.
19. Casajuana C, López-Pelayo H, Balcells MM, et al. Definitions of risky and problematic cannabis use: a systematic review. Subst Use Misuse. 2016;51:1760-1770.
20. Norberg MM, Gates P, Dillon P, et al. Screening and managing cannabis use: comparing GP’s and nurses’ knowledge, beliefs, and behavior. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2012;7:31.
21. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Washington DC: APA Publishing; 2013:509-516.
22. Hasin DS, Saha TD, Kerridge BT, et al. Prevalence of marijuana use disorders in the United States between 2001-2002 and 2012-2013. JAMA Psychiatry. 2015;72:1235-1242.
23. Smith PC, Schmidt SM, Allensworth-Davies D, et al. A single-question screening test for drug use in primary care. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170:1155-1160.
24. Fischer B, Jones W, Shuper P, et al. 12-month follow-up of an exploratory ‘brief intervention’ for high-frequency cannabis users among Canadian university students. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2012;7:15.
25. Turner SD, Spithoff S, Kahan M. Approach to cannabis use disorder in primary care: focus on youth and other high-risk users. Can Fam Physician. 2014;60:801-808.
26. Smart R, Caulkins JP, Kilmer B, et al. Variation in cannabis potency & prices in a newly-legal market: evidence from 30 million cannabis sales in Washington State. Addiction. 2017;112:2167-2177.
27. Bonn-Miller MO, Loflin MJE, Thomas BF, et al. Labeling accuracy of cannabidiol extracts sold online. JAMA. 2017;318:1708-1709.
28. Richards JR, Bing ML, Moulin AK, et al. Cannabis use and acute coronary syndrome. Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2019;57:831-841.
29. Subramaniam VN, Menezes AR, DeSchutter A, et al. The cardiovascular effects of marijuana: are the potential adverse effects worth the high? Mo Med. 2019;116:146-153.
30. Jones RT. Cardiovascular system effects of marijuana. J Clin Pharmacol. 2002;42:58S-63S.
31. Tetrault JM, Crothers K, Moore BA, et al. Effects of marijuana smoking on pulmonary function and respiratory complications: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167:221-228.
32. Bramness JG, von Soest T. A longitudinal study of cannabis use increasing the use of asthma medication in young Norwegian adults. BMC Pulm Med. 2019;19:52.
33. Moore BA, Augustson EM, Moser RP, et al. Respiratory effects of marijuana and tobacco use in a U.S. sample. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20:33-37.
34. Tashkin DP. Does marijuana pose risks for chronic airflow obstruction? Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2015;12:235-236.
35. McGuire PK, Jones P, Harvey I, et al. Morbid risk of schizophrenia for relatives of patients with cannabis-associated psychosis. Schizophr Res. 1995;15:277-281.
36. Hall W, Degenhardt L. Cannabis use and the risk of developing a psychotic disorder. World Psychiatry. 2008;7:68-71.
37. Gerlach J, Koret B, Gereš N, et al. Clinical challenges in patients with first episode psychosis and cannabis use: mini-review and a case study. Psychiatr Danub. 2019;31(suppl 2):162-170.
38. Patel R, Wilson R, Jackson R, et al. Association of cannabis use with hospital admission and antipsychotic treatment failure in first episode psychosis: an observational study. BMJ Open. 2016;6:e009888.
39. Day NL, Richardson GA, Goldschmidt L, et al. Effect of prenatal marijuana exposure on the cognitive development of offspring at age three. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 1994;16:169-175.
40. Goldschmidt L, Day NL, Richardson GA. Effects of prenatal marijuana exposure on child behavior problems at age 10. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 2000;22:325-336.
41. Corsi DJ, Walsh L, Weiss D, et al. Association between self-reported prenatal cannabis use and maternal, perinatal, and neonatal outcomes. JAMA. 2019;322:145-152.
42. Baker T, Datta P, Rewers-Felkins K, et al. Transfer of inhaled cannabis into human breast milk. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;131:783-788.
43. Thompson K, Leadbeater B, Ames M, et al. Associations between marijuana use trajectories and educational and occupational success in young adulthood. Prev Sci. 2019;20:257-269.
44. Yuan M, Kanellopoulos T, Kotbi N. Cannabis use and psychiatric illness in the context of medical marijuana legalization: a clinical perspective. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2019;61:82-83.
45. Ronen A, Gershon P, Drobiner H, et al. Effects of THC on driving performance, physiological state and subjective feelings relative to alcohol. Accid Anal Prev. 2008;40:926-934.
46. Robbe H. Marijuana’s impairing effects on driving are moderate when taken alone but severe when combined with alcohol. Hum Psychopharmacol Clin Exp. 1998;13(suppl 2):S70-S78.
47. Lenné MG, Dietze PM, Triggs TJ, et al. The effects of cannabis and alcohol on simulated arterial driving: influences of driving experience and task demand. Accid Anal Prev. 2010;42:859-866.
48. Anderson BM, Rizzo M, Block RI, et al. Sex differences in the effects of marijuana on simulated driving performance. J Psychoactive Drugs. 2010;42:19-30.
49. Laumon B, Gadegbeku B, Martin J-L, Biecheler M-B. Cannabis intoxication and fatal road crashes in France: population based case-control study. BMJ. 2005;331:1371.
50. Asbridge M, Poulin C, Donato A. Motor vehicle collision risk and driving under the influence of cannabis: evidence from adolescents in Atlantic Canada. Accid Anal Prev. 2005;37:1025-1034.
51. Mann RE, Adlaf E, Zhao J, et al. Cannabis use and self-reported collisions in a representative sample of adult drivers. J Safety Res. 2007;38:669-674.
52. Taylor J, Wiens T, Peterson J, et al. Characteristics of e-cigarette, or vaping, products used by patients with associated lung injury and products seized by law enforcement—Minnesota, 2018 and 2019. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2019;68:1096-1100.
53. Hancock-Allen JB, Barker L, VanDyke M, et al. Notes from the field: death following ingestion of an edible marijuana product—Colorado, March 2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015;64:771-772.
54. Murray RM, Quigley H, Quattrone D, et al. Traditional marijuana, high-potency cannabis and synthetic cannabinoids: increasing risk for psychosis. World Psychiatry. 2016;15:195-204.
55. Di Forti MD, Sallis H, Allegri F, et al. Daily use, especially of high-potency cannabis, drives the earlier onset of psychosis in cannabis users. Schizophr Bull. 2014;40:1509-1517.
56. Miller WR. Motivational interviewing: research, practice, and puzzles. Addict Behav. 1996;21:835-842.
57. Gates PJ, Sabioni P, Copeland J, et al. Psychosocial interventions for cannabis use disorder. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;(5):CD005336.
58. Wilkinson ST, Stefanovics E, Rosenheck RA. Marijuana use is associated with worse outcomes in symptom severity and violent behavior in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder. J Clin Psychiatry. 2015;76:1174-1180.
59. Cougle JR, Bonn-Miller MO, Vujanovic AA, et al. Posttraumatic stress disorder and cannabis use in a nationally representative sample. Psychol Addict Behav. 2011;25:554-558.
60. Johnson MJ, Pierce JD, Mavandadi S, et al. Mental health symptom severity in cannabis using and non-using veterans with probable PTSD. J Affect Disord. 2016;190:439-442.
61. Wilkinson ST, Radhakrishnan R, D’Souza DC. A systematic review of the evidence for medical marijuana in psychiatric indications. J Clin Psychiatry. 2016;77:1050-1064.
62. Black N, Stockings E, Campbell G, et al. Cannabinoids for the treatment of mental disorders and symptoms of mental disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry. 2019;6:995-1010.
63. Bonnet U, Preuss U. The cannabis withdrawal syndrome: current insights. Subst Abuse Rehabil. 2017;8:9-37.
64. Vandrey R, Smith MT, McCann UD, et al. Sleep disturbance and the effects of extended-release zolpidem during cannabis withdrawal. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011;117:38-44.
65. Mason BJ, Crean R, Goodell V, et al. A proof-of-concept randomized controlled study of gabapentin: effects on cannabis use, withdrawal and executive function deficits in cannabis-dependent adults. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2012;37:1689-1698.
66. Weinstein A, Miller H, Tal E, et al. Treatment of cannabis withdrawal syndrome using cognitive-behavioral therapy and relapse prevention for cannabis dependence. J Groups Addict Recover. 2010;5:240-263.
PRACTICE RECOMMENDATIONS
› Address underlying conditions for which patients use recreational cannabis to manage symptoms. B
› Consider discrete, in-office sessions of motivational interviewing and referral for cognitive behavioral therapy for patients with problematic cannabis use. B
› Provide counseling around harm reduction for all patients—especially those with problematic cannabis use. C
› Consider referral to an addiction specialist for patients with cannabis use disorder or other problematic cannabis use. C
Strength of recommendation (SOR)
A Good-quality patient-oriented evidence
B Inconsistent or limited-quality patient-oriented evidence
C Consensus, usual practice, opinion, disease-oriented evidence, case series
Repurposing cardiovascular drugs for serious mental illness
One of the hottest topics now in psychiatry is the possibility of repurposing long-established cardiovascular medications for treatment of patients with serious mental illness, Livia De Picker, MD, PhD, said at the virtual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
The appeal is multifold. A huge unmet need exists in psychiatry for new and better treatments with novel mechanisms of action. Many guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications have a long track record, including a well-established safety profile with no surprises, and are available in generic versions. They can be developed for a new indication at minimal cost, noted Dr. De Picker, a psychiatrist at the University of Antwerp (Belgium).
The idea of psychiatric repurposing of drugs originally developed for nonpsychiatric indications is nothing new, she added. Examples include lithium for gout, valproate for epilepsy, and ketamine for anesthesiology.
One hitch in efforts to repurpose cardiovascular medications is that, when psychiatric patients have been included in randomized trials of the drugs’ cardiovascular effects, the psychiatric outcomes often went untallied.
Indeed, the only high-quality randomized trial evidence of psychiatric benefits for any class of cardiovascular medications is for statins, where a modest-sized meta-analysis of six placebo-controlled trials in 339 patients with schizophrenia showed the lipid-lowering agents had benefit for both positive and negative symptoms (Psychiatry Res. 2018 Apr;262:84-93). But that’s not a body of data of sufficient size to be definitive, in Dr. De Picker’s view.
Much of the recent enthusiasm for exploring the potential of cardiovascular drugs for psychiatric conditions comes from hypothesis-generating big data analyses drawn from Scandinavian national patient registries. Danish investigators scrutinized all 1.6 million Danes exposed to six classes of drugs of interest during 2005-2015 and determined that those on long-term statins, low-dose aspirin, ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, or allopurinol were associated with a decreased rate of new-onset depression, while high-dose aspirin and non-aspirin NSAIDs were associated with an increased rate, compared with a 30% random sample of the country’s population (Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2019 Jan;1391:68-77).
Similarly, the Danish group found that continued use of statins, angiotensin agents, or low-dose aspirin was associated with a decreased rate of new-onset bipolar disorder, while high-dose aspirin and other NSAIDs were linked to increased risk (Bipolar Disord. 2019 Aug;[15]:410-8). What these agents have in common, the investigators observed, is that they act on inflammation and potentially on the stress response system.
Meanwhile, Swedish investigators examined the course of 142,691 Swedes with a diagnosis of bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, or nonaffective psychosis during 2005-2016. They determined that, during periods when those individuals were on a statin, calcium channel blocker, or metformin, they had reduced rates of psychiatric hospitalization and self-harm (JAMA Psychiatry. 2019 Apr 1;76[4]:382-90).
Scottish researchers analyzed the health records of 144,066 patients placed on monotherapy for hypertension and determined that the lowest risk for hospitalization for a mood disorder during follow-up was in those prescribed an ACE inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker. The risk was significantly higher in patients on a beta-blocker or calcium channel blocker, and intermediate in those on a thiazide diuretic (Hypertension. 2016 Nov;68[5:1132-8).
“Obviously, this is all at a very macro scale and we have no idea whatsoever what this means for individual patients, number needed to treat, or which type of patients would benefit, but it does provide us with some guidance for future research,” according to Dr. De Picker.
In the meantime, while physicians await definitive evidence of any impact of cardiovascular drugs might have on psychiatric outcomes, abundant data exist underscoring what she called “shockingly high levels” of inadequate management of cardiovascular risk factors in patients with serious mental illness. That problem needs to be addressed, and Dr. De Picker offered her personal recommendations for doing so in a manner consistent with the evidence to date suggestive of potential mental health benefits of some cardiovascular medications.
She advised that, for treatment of hypertension in patients with bipolar disorder or major depression, an ACE inhibitor or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor is preferred as first-line. There is some evidence to suggest lipophilic beta-blockers, which cross the blood-brain barrier, improve anxiety symptoms and panic attacks, and prevent memory consolidation in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder. But the Scottish data suggest that they may worsen mood disorders.
“I would be careful in using beta-blockers as first-line treatment for hypertension. They’re not in the guidelines for anxiety disorders. British guidelines recommend them to prevent memory consolidation in PTSD, but do not use them as first-line in patients with major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder,” she said. As for calcium channel blockers, the jury is still out, with mixed and inconsistent evidence to date as to the impact of this drug class on mental illness outcomes.
She recommended a very low threshold for prescribing statin therapy in patients with serious mental illness in light of the superb risk/benefit ratio for this drug class. In her younger patients, she turns for guidance to an online calculator of an individual’s 10-year risk of a first acute MI or stroke.
Metformin has been shown to be beneficial for addressing the weight gain and other adverse metabolic effects caused by antipsychotic agents, and there is some preliminary evidence of improved psychiatric outcomes in patients with serious mental illness.
Christian Otte, MD, who also spoke at the session, noted that not only do emerging data point to the possibility that cardiovascular drugs might have benefit in terms of psychiatric outcomes, there is also some evidence, albeit mixed, that the converse is true: that is, psychiatric drugs may have cardiovascular benefits. He pointed to a South Korean trial in which 300 patients with a recent acute coronary syndrome and major depression were randomized to 24 weeks of escitalopram or placebo. At median 8.1 years of follow-up, the group that received the SSRI had a 31% relative risk reduction in the primary composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, acute MI, or percutaneous coronary intervention (JAMA. 2018 Jul 24; 320[4]:350–7).
“Potentially independent of their antidepressant effects, some SSRIs’ antiplatelet effects could be beneficial for patients with coronary heart disease, although the jury is still open regarding this question, with evidence in both directions,” said Dr. Otte, professor of psychiatry at Charite University Medical Center in Berlin.
Dr. De Picker offered an example as well: Finnish psychiatrists recently reported that cardiovascular mortality was reduced by an adjusted 38% during periods when 62,250 Finnish schizophrenia patients were on antipsychotic agents, compared with periods of nonuse of the drugs in a national study with a median 14.1 years of follow-up (World Psychiatry. 2020 Feb;19[1]:61-8).
“What they discovered – and this is quite contrary to what we are used to hearing about antipsychotic medication and cardiovascular risk – is that while the number of cardiovascular hospitalizations was not different in periods with or without antipsychotic use, the cardiovascular mortality was quite strikingly reduced when patients were on antipsychotic medication,” she said.
Asked by an audience member whether she personally prescribes metformin, Dr. De Picker replied: “Well, yes, why not? One of the very nice things about metformin is that it is actually a very safe drug, even in the hands of nonspecialists.
“I understand that maybe psychiatrists may not feel very comfortable in starting patients on metformin due to a lack of experience. But there are really only two things you need to take into account. About one-quarter of patients will experience GI side effects – nausea, vomiting, abdominal discomfort – and this can be reduced by gradually uptitrating the dose, dosing at mealtime, and using an extended-release formulation. And the second thing is that metformin can impair vitamin B12 absorption, so I think, especially in psychiatric patients, it would be good to do an annual measurement of vitamin B12 level and, if necessary, administer intramuscular supplements,” Dr. De Picker said.
She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her presentation.
SOURCE: De Picker L. ECNP 2020. Session EDU.05.
One of the hottest topics now in psychiatry is the possibility of repurposing long-established cardiovascular medications for treatment of patients with serious mental illness, Livia De Picker, MD, PhD, said at the virtual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
The appeal is multifold. A huge unmet need exists in psychiatry for new and better treatments with novel mechanisms of action. Many guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications have a long track record, including a well-established safety profile with no surprises, and are available in generic versions. They can be developed for a new indication at minimal cost, noted Dr. De Picker, a psychiatrist at the University of Antwerp (Belgium).
The idea of psychiatric repurposing of drugs originally developed for nonpsychiatric indications is nothing new, she added. Examples include lithium for gout, valproate for epilepsy, and ketamine for anesthesiology.
One hitch in efforts to repurpose cardiovascular medications is that, when psychiatric patients have been included in randomized trials of the drugs’ cardiovascular effects, the psychiatric outcomes often went untallied.
Indeed, the only high-quality randomized trial evidence of psychiatric benefits for any class of cardiovascular medications is for statins, where a modest-sized meta-analysis of six placebo-controlled trials in 339 patients with schizophrenia showed the lipid-lowering agents had benefit for both positive and negative symptoms (Psychiatry Res. 2018 Apr;262:84-93). But that’s not a body of data of sufficient size to be definitive, in Dr. De Picker’s view.
Much of the recent enthusiasm for exploring the potential of cardiovascular drugs for psychiatric conditions comes from hypothesis-generating big data analyses drawn from Scandinavian national patient registries. Danish investigators scrutinized all 1.6 million Danes exposed to six classes of drugs of interest during 2005-2015 and determined that those on long-term statins, low-dose aspirin, ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, or allopurinol were associated with a decreased rate of new-onset depression, while high-dose aspirin and non-aspirin NSAIDs were associated with an increased rate, compared with a 30% random sample of the country’s population (Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2019 Jan;1391:68-77).
Similarly, the Danish group found that continued use of statins, angiotensin agents, or low-dose aspirin was associated with a decreased rate of new-onset bipolar disorder, while high-dose aspirin and other NSAIDs were linked to increased risk (Bipolar Disord. 2019 Aug;[15]:410-8). What these agents have in common, the investigators observed, is that they act on inflammation and potentially on the stress response system.
Meanwhile, Swedish investigators examined the course of 142,691 Swedes with a diagnosis of bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, or nonaffective psychosis during 2005-2016. They determined that, during periods when those individuals were on a statin, calcium channel blocker, or metformin, they had reduced rates of psychiatric hospitalization and self-harm (JAMA Psychiatry. 2019 Apr 1;76[4]:382-90).
Scottish researchers analyzed the health records of 144,066 patients placed on monotherapy for hypertension and determined that the lowest risk for hospitalization for a mood disorder during follow-up was in those prescribed an ACE inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker. The risk was significantly higher in patients on a beta-blocker or calcium channel blocker, and intermediate in those on a thiazide diuretic (Hypertension. 2016 Nov;68[5:1132-8).
“Obviously, this is all at a very macro scale and we have no idea whatsoever what this means for individual patients, number needed to treat, or which type of patients would benefit, but it does provide us with some guidance for future research,” according to Dr. De Picker.
In the meantime, while physicians await definitive evidence of any impact of cardiovascular drugs might have on psychiatric outcomes, abundant data exist underscoring what she called “shockingly high levels” of inadequate management of cardiovascular risk factors in patients with serious mental illness. That problem needs to be addressed, and Dr. De Picker offered her personal recommendations for doing so in a manner consistent with the evidence to date suggestive of potential mental health benefits of some cardiovascular medications.
She advised that, for treatment of hypertension in patients with bipolar disorder or major depression, an ACE inhibitor or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor is preferred as first-line. There is some evidence to suggest lipophilic beta-blockers, which cross the blood-brain barrier, improve anxiety symptoms and panic attacks, and prevent memory consolidation in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder. But the Scottish data suggest that they may worsen mood disorders.
“I would be careful in using beta-blockers as first-line treatment for hypertension. They’re not in the guidelines for anxiety disorders. British guidelines recommend them to prevent memory consolidation in PTSD, but do not use them as first-line in patients with major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder,” she said. As for calcium channel blockers, the jury is still out, with mixed and inconsistent evidence to date as to the impact of this drug class on mental illness outcomes.
She recommended a very low threshold for prescribing statin therapy in patients with serious mental illness in light of the superb risk/benefit ratio for this drug class. In her younger patients, she turns for guidance to an online calculator of an individual’s 10-year risk of a first acute MI or stroke.
Metformin has been shown to be beneficial for addressing the weight gain and other adverse metabolic effects caused by antipsychotic agents, and there is some preliminary evidence of improved psychiatric outcomes in patients with serious mental illness.
Christian Otte, MD, who also spoke at the session, noted that not only do emerging data point to the possibility that cardiovascular drugs might have benefit in terms of psychiatric outcomes, there is also some evidence, albeit mixed, that the converse is true: that is, psychiatric drugs may have cardiovascular benefits. He pointed to a South Korean trial in which 300 patients with a recent acute coronary syndrome and major depression were randomized to 24 weeks of escitalopram or placebo. At median 8.1 years of follow-up, the group that received the SSRI had a 31% relative risk reduction in the primary composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, acute MI, or percutaneous coronary intervention (JAMA. 2018 Jul 24; 320[4]:350–7).
“Potentially independent of their antidepressant effects, some SSRIs’ antiplatelet effects could be beneficial for patients with coronary heart disease, although the jury is still open regarding this question, with evidence in both directions,” said Dr. Otte, professor of psychiatry at Charite University Medical Center in Berlin.
Dr. De Picker offered an example as well: Finnish psychiatrists recently reported that cardiovascular mortality was reduced by an adjusted 38% during periods when 62,250 Finnish schizophrenia patients were on antipsychotic agents, compared with periods of nonuse of the drugs in a national study with a median 14.1 years of follow-up (World Psychiatry. 2020 Feb;19[1]:61-8).
“What they discovered – and this is quite contrary to what we are used to hearing about antipsychotic medication and cardiovascular risk – is that while the number of cardiovascular hospitalizations was not different in periods with or without antipsychotic use, the cardiovascular mortality was quite strikingly reduced when patients were on antipsychotic medication,” she said.
Asked by an audience member whether she personally prescribes metformin, Dr. De Picker replied: “Well, yes, why not? One of the very nice things about metformin is that it is actually a very safe drug, even in the hands of nonspecialists.
“I understand that maybe psychiatrists may not feel very comfortable in starting patients on metformin due to a lack of experience. But there are really only two things you need to take into account. About one-quarter of patients will experience GI side effects – nausea, vomiting, abdominal discomfort – and this can be reduced by gradually uptitrating the dose, dosing at mealtime, and using an extended-release formulation. And the second thing is that metformin can impair vitamin B12 absorption, so I think, especially in psychiatric patients, it would be good to do an annual measurement of vitamin B12 level and, if necessary, administer intramuscular supplements,” Dr. De Picker said.
She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her presentation.
SOURCE: De Picker L. ECNP 2020. Session EDU.05.
One of the hottest topics now in psychiatry is the possibility of repurposing long-established cardiovascular medications for treatment of patients with serious mental illness, Livia De Picker, MD, PhD, said at the virtual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
The appeal is multifold. A huge unmet need exists in psychiatry for new and better treatments with novel mechanisms of action. Many guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications have a long track record, including a well-established safety profile with no surprises, and are available in generic versions. They can be developed for a new indication at minimal cost, noted Dr. De Picker, a psychiatrist at the University of Antwerp (Belgium).
The idea of psychiatric repurposing of drugs originally developed for nonpsychiatric indications is nothing new, she added. Examples include lithium for gout, valproate for epilepsy, and ketamine for anesthesiology.
One hitch in efforts to repurpose cardiovascular medications is that, when psychiatric patients have been included in randomized trials of the drugs’ cardiovascular effects, the psychiatric outcomes often went untallied.
Indeed, the only high-quality randomized trial evidence of psychiatric benefits for any class of cardiovascular medications is for statins, where a modest-sized meta-analysis of six placebo-controlled trials in 339 patients with schizophrenia showed the lipid-lowering agents had benefit for both positive and negative symptoms (Psychiatry Res. 2018 Apr;262:84-93). But that’s not a body of data of sufficient size to be definitive, in Dr. De Picker’s view.
Much of the recent enthusiasm for exploring the potential of cardiovascular drugs for psychiatric conditions comes from hypothesis-generating big data analyses drawn from Scandinavian national patient registries. Danish investigators scrutinized all 1.6 million Danes exposed to six classes of drugs of interest during 2005-2015 and determined that those on long-term statins, low-dose aspirin, ACE inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, or allopurinol were associated with a decreased rate of new-onset depression, while high-dose aspirin and non-aspirin NSAIDs were associated with an increased rate, compared with a 30% random sample of the country’s population (Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2019 Jan;1391:68-77).
Similarly, the Danish group found that continued use of statins, angiotensin agents, or low-dose aspirin was associated with a decreased rate of new-onset bipolar disorder, while high-dose aspirin and other NSAIDs were linked to increased risk (Bipolar Disord. 2019 Aug;[15]:410-8). What these agents have in common, the investigators observed, is that they act on inflammation and potentially on the stress response system.
Meanwhile, Swedish investigators examined the course of 142,691 Swedes with a diagnosis of bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, or nonaffective psychosis during 2005-2016. They determined that, during periods when those individuals were on a statin, calcium channel blocker, or metformin, they had reduced rates of psychiatric hospitalization and self-harm (JAMA Psychiatry. 2019 Apr 1;76[4]:382-90).
Scottish researchers analyzed the health records of 144,066 patients placed on monotherapy for hypertension and determined that the lowest risk for hospitalization for a mood disorder during follow-up was in those prescribed an ACE inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker. The risk was significantly higher in patients on a beta-blocker or calcium channel blocker, and intermediate in those on a thiazide diuretic (Hypertension. 2016 Nov;68[5:1132-8).
“Obviously, this is all at a very macro scale and we have no idea whatsoever what this means for individual patients, number needed to treat, or which type of patients would benefit, but it does provide us with some guidance for future research,” according to Dr. De Picker.
In the meantime, while physicians await definitive evidence of any impact of cardiovascular drugs might have on psychiatric outcomes, abundant data exist underscoring what she called “shockingly high levels” of inadequate management of cardiovascular risk factors in patients with serious mental illness. That problem needs to be addressed, and Dr. De Picker offered her personal recommendations for doing so in a manner consistent with the evidence to date suggestive of potential mental health benefits of some cardiovascular medications.
She advised that, for treatment of hypertension in patients with bipolar disorder or major depression, an ACE inhibitor or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor is preferred as first-line. There is some evidence to suggest lipophilic beta-blockers, which cross the blood-brain barrier, improve anxiety symptoms and panic attacks, and prevent memory consolidation in patients with posttraumatic stress disorder. But the Scottish data suggest that they may worsen mood disorders.
“I would be careful in using beta-blockers as first-line treatment for hypertension. They’re not in the guidelines for anxiety disorders. British guidelines recommend them to prevent memory consolidation in PTSD, but do not use them as first-line in patients with major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder,” she said. As for calcium channel blockers, the jury is still out, with mixed and inconsistent evidence to date as to the impact of this drug class on mental illness outcomes.
She recommended a very low threshold for prescribing statin therapy in patients with serious mental illness in light of the superb risk/benefit ratio for this drug class. In her younger patients, she turns for guidance to an online calculator of an individual’s 10-year risk of a first acute MI or stroke.
Metformin has been shown to be beneficial for addressing the weight gain and other adverse metabolic effects caused by antipsychotic agents, and there is some preliminary evidence of improved psychiatric outcomes in patients with serious mental illness.
Christian Otte, MD, who also spoke at the session, noted that not only do emerging data point to the possibility that cardiovascular drugs might have benefit in terms of psychiatric outcomes, there is also some evidence, albeit mixed, that the converse is true: that is, psychiatric drugs may have cardiovascular benefits. He pointed to a South Korean trial in which 300 patients with a recent acute coronary syndrome and major depression were randomized to 24 weeks of escitalopram or placebo. At median 8.1 years of follow-up, the group that received the SSRI had a 31% relative risk reduction in the primary composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, acute MI, or percutaneous coronary intervention (JAMA. 2018 Jul 24; 320[4]:350–7).
“Potentially independent of their antidepressant effects, some SSRIs’ antiplatelet effects could be beneficial for patients with coronary heart disease, although the jury is still open regarding this question, with evidence in both directions,” said Dr. Otte, professor of psychiatry at Charite University Medical Center in Berlin.
Dr. De Picker offered an example as well: Finnish psychiatrists recently reported that cardiovascular mortality was reduced by an adjusted 38% during periods when 62,250 Finnish schizophrenia patients were on antipsychotic agents, compared with periods of nonuse of the drugs in a national study with a median 14.1 years of follow-up (World Psychiatry. 2020 Feb;19[1]:61-8).
“What they discovered – and this is quite contrary to what we are used to hearing about antipsychotic medication and cardiovascular risk – is that while the number of cardiovascular hospitalizations was not different in periods with or without antipsychotic use, the cardiovascular mortality was quite strikingly reduced when patients were on antipsychotic medication,” she said.
Asked by an audience member whether she personally prescribes metformin, Dr. De Picker replied: “Well, yes, why not? One of the very nice things about metformin is that it is actually a very safe drug, even in the hands of nonspecialists.
“I understand that maybe psychiatrists may not feel very comfortable in starting patients on metformin due to a lack of experience. But there are really only two things you need to take into account. About one-quarter of patients will experience GI side effects – nausea, vomiting, abdominal discomfort – and this can be reduced by gradually uptitrating the dose, dosing at mealtime, and using an extended-release formulation. And the second thing is that metformin can impair vitamin B12 absorption, so I think, especially in psychiatric patients, it would be good to do an annual measurement of vitamin B12 level and, if necessary, administer intramuscular supplements,” Dr. De Picker said.
She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her presentation.
SOURCE: De Picker L. ECNP 2020. Session EDU.05.
FROM ECNP 2020
Mental health risks rise with age and stage for gender-incongruent youth
Gender-incongruent youth who present for gender-affirming medical care later in adolescence have higher rates of mental health problems than their younger counterparts, based on data from a review of 300 individuals.
“Puberty is a vulnerable time for youth with gender dysphoria because distress may intensify with the development of secondary sex characteristics corresponding to the assigned rather than the experienced gender,” wrote Julia C. Sorbara, MD, of the University of Toronto and the Hospital for Sick Children, also in Toronto, and colleagues.
Although gender-affirming medical care (GAMC) in the form of hormone blockers and/or gender-affirming hormones early in puberty can decrease in emotional and behavioral problems, many teens present later in puberty, and the relationship between pubertal stage at presentation for treatment and mental health has not been examined, they wrote.
In a study published in Pediatrics, the researchers reviewed data from youth with gender incongruence who were seen at a single center; 116 were younger than 15 years at presentation for GAMC and were defined as younger-presenting youth (YPY), and 184 patients aged 15 years and older were defined as older-presenting youth (OPY).
Overall, 78% of the youth reported at least one mental health problem at their initial visit. Significantly more OPY than YPY reported diagnosed depression (46% vs. 30%), self-harm (40% vs. 28%), suicidal thoughts (52% vs. 40%), suicide attempts (17% vs. 9%), and use of psychoactive medications (36% vs. 23%), all with P < .05.
In a multivariate analysis, patients in Tanner stages 4 and 5 were five times more likely to experience depressive disorders (odds ratio, 5.49) and four times as likely to experience depressive disorders (OR, 4.18) as those in earlier Tanner stages. Older age remained significantly associated with use of psychoactive medications (OR, 1.31), but not with anxiety or depression, the researchers wrote.
The YPY group were significantly younger at the age of recognizing gender incongruence, compared with the OPY group, with median ages at recognition of 5.8 years and 9 years, respectively, and younger patients came out about their gender identity at an average of 12 years, compared with 15 years for older patients.
The quantitative data are among the first to relate pubertal stage to mental health in gender-incongruent youth, “supporting clinical observations that pubertal development, menses, and erections are distressing to these youth and consistent with the beneficial role of pubertal suppression, even when used as monotherapy without gender-affirming hormones,” Dr. Sorbara and associates wrote.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the cross-sectional design and the collection of mental health data at only one time point and by the use of self-reports. However, the results suggest that “[gender-incongruent] youth who present to GAMC later in life are a particularly high-risk subset of a vulnerable population,” they noted. “Further study is required to better describe the mental health trajectories of transgender youth and determine if mental health status or age at initiation of GAMC is correlated with psychological well-being in adulthood.”
Don’t rush to puberty suppression in younger teens
To reduce the stress of puberty on gender-nonconforming youth, puberty suppression as “a reversible medical intervention” was introduced by Dutch clinicians in the early 2000s, Annelou L.C. de Vries, MD, PhD, of Amsterdam University Medical Center, wrote in an accompanying editorial.
“The aim of puberty suppression was to prevent the psychological suffering stemming from undesired physical changes when puberty starts and allowing the adolescent time to make plans regarding further transition or not,” Dr. de Vries said. “Following this rationale, younger age at the time of starting medical-affirming treatment (puberty suppression or hormones) would be expected to correlate with fewer psychological difficulties related to physical changes than older individuals,” which was confirmed in the current study.
However, clinicians should be cautious in offering puberty suppression at a younger age, in part because “despite the increased availability of gender-affirming medical interventions for younger ages in recent years, there has not been a proportional decline in older presenting youth with gender incongruence,” she said.
More data are needed on youth with postpuberty adolescent-onset transgender histories. The original Dutch studies on gender-affirming medical interventions note case histories describing “the complexities that may be associated with later-presenting transgender adolescents and describe that some eventually detransition,” Dr. de Vries explained.
Ultimately, prospective studies with longer follow-up data are needed to better inform clinicians in developing an individualized treatment plan for youth with gender incongruence, Dr. de Vries concluded.
Care barriers can include parents, access, insurance
The study authors describe the situation of gender-affirming medical care in teens perfectly, M. Brett Cooper, MD, of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center/Children’s Health Dallas, said in an interview.
Given a variety of factors that need further exploration, “many youth often don’t end up seeking gender-affirming medical care until puberty has progressed to near full maturity,” he said. “The findings from this study provide preliminary evidence to show that if we can identify these youth earlier in their gender journey, we might be able to impact adverse mental health outcomes in a positive way.”
Dr. Cooper said he was not surprised by the study findings. “They are similar to what I see in my clinic.
“Many of our patients often don’t present for medical care until around age 15 or older, similar to the findings of the study,” he added. “The majority of our patients have had a diagnosis of anxiety or depression at some point in their lifetime, including inpatient hospitalizations for their mental health.”
One of the most important barriers to care often can be parents or guardians, said Dr. Cooper. “Young people usually know their gender identity by about age 4-5 but parents may think that a gender-diverse identity could simply be a ‘phase.’ Other times, young people may hide their identity out of fear of a negative reaction from their parents. The distress around identity may become more pronounced once pubertal changes, such as breast and testicle development, begin to worsen their dysphoria.”
“Another barrier to care can be the inability to find a competent, gender-affirming provider,” Dr. Cooper said. “Most large United States cities have at least one gender-affirming clinic, but for those youth who grow up in smaller towns, it may be difficult to access these clinics. In addition, some clinics require a letter from a therapist stating that the young person is transgender before they can be seen for medical care. This creates an access barrier, as it may be difficult not just to find a therapist but one who has experience working with gender-diverse youth.”
Insurance coverage, including lack thereof, is yet another barrier to care for transgender youth, said Dr. Cooper. “While many insurance companies have begun to cover medications such as testosterone and estrogen for gender-affirming care, many still have exclusions on things like puberty blockers and surgical interventions.” These interventions can be lifesaving, but financially prohibitive for many families if not covered by insurance.
As for the value of early timing of gender-affirming care, Dr. Cooper agreed with the study findings that the earlier that a young person can get into medical care for their gender identity, the better chance there is to reduce the prevalence of serious mental health outcomes. “This also prevents the potential development of secondary sexual characteristics, decreasing the need for or amount of surgery in the future if desired,” he said.
“More research is needed to better understand the reasons why many youth don’t present to care until later in puberty. In addition, we need better research on interventions that are effective at reducing serious mental health events in transgender and gender diverse youth,” Dr. Cooper stated. “Another area that I would like to see researched is looking at the mental health of non-Caucasian youth. As the authors noted in their study, many clinics have a high percentage of patients presenting for care who identify as White or Caucasian, and we need to better understand why these other youth are not presenting for care.”
The study received no outside funding. Dr. Sorbara disclosed salary support from the Canadian Pediatric Endocrine Group fellowship program. Dr. de Vries had no financial conflicts to disclose. Dr. Cooper had no financial conflicts to disclose, and serves as a contributor to LGBTQ Youth Consult in Pediatric News.
SOURCES: Sorbara JC et al. Pediatrics. 2020 Sep 21. doi: 10.1542/peds.2019-3600; de Vries ALC et al. Pediatrics. 2020 Sep 21. doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-010611.
Gender-incongruent youth who present for gender-affirming medical care later in adolescence have higher rates of mental health problems than their younger counterparts, based on data from a review of 300 individuals.
“Puberty is a vulnerable time for youth with gender dysphoria because distress may intensify with the development of secondary sex characteristics corresponding to the assigned rather than the experienced gender,” wrote Julia C. Sorbara, MD, of the University of Toronto and the Hospital for Sick Children, also in Toronto, and colleagues.
Although gender-affirming medical care (GAMC) in the form of hormone blockers and/or gender-affirming hormones early in puberty can decrease in emotional and behavioral problems, many teens present later in puberty, and the relationship between pubertal stage at presentation for treatment and mental health has not been examined, they wrote.
In a study published in Pediatrics, the researchers reviewed data from youth with gender incongruence who were seen at a single center; 116 were younger than 15 years at presentation for GAMC and were defined as younger-presenting youth (YPY), and 184 patients aged 15 years and older were defined as older-presenting youth (OPY).
Overall, 78% of the youth reported at least one mental health problem at their initial visit. Significantly more OPY than YPY reported diagnosed depression (46% vs. 30%), self-harm (40% vs. 28%), suicidal thoughts (52% vs. 40%), suicide attempts (17% vs. 9%), and use of psychoactive medications (36% vs. 23%), all with P < .05.
In a multivariate analysis, patients in Tanner stages 4 and 5 were five times more likely to experience depressive disorders (odds ratio, 5.49) and four times as likely to experience depressive disorders (OR, 4.18) as those in earlier Tanner stages. Older age remained significantly associated with use of psychoactive medications (OR, 1.31), but not with anxiety or depression, the researchers wrote.
The YPY group were significantly younger at the age of recognizing gender incongruence, compared with the OPY group, with median ages at recognition of 5.8 years and 9 years, respectively, and younger patients came out about their gender identity at an average of 12 years, compared with 15 years for older patients.
The quantitative data are among the first to relate pubertal stage to mental health in gender-incongruent youth, “supporting clinical observations that pubertal development, menses, and erections are distressing to these youth and consistent with the beneficial role of pubertal suppression, even when used as monotherapy without gender-affirming hormones,” Dr. Sorbara and associates wrote.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the cross-sectional design and the collection of mental health data at only one time point and by the use of self-reports. However, the results suggest that “[gender-incongruent] youth who present to GAMC later in life are a particularly high-risk subset of a vulnerable population,” they noted. “Further study is required to better describe the mental health trajectories of transgender youth and determine if mental health status or age at initiation of GAMC is correlated with psychological well-being in adulthood.”
Don’t rush to puberty suppression in younger teens
To reduce the stress of puberty on gender-nonconforming youth, puberty suppression as “a reversible medical intervention” was introduced by Dutch clinicians in the early 2000s, Annelou L.C. de Vries, MD, PhD, of Amsterdam University Medical Center, wrote in an accompanying editorial.
“The aim of puberty suppression was to prevent the psychological suffering stemming from undesired physical changes when puberty starts and allowing the adolescent time to make plans regarding further transition or not,” Dr. de Vries said. “Following this rationale, younger age at the time of starting medical-affirming treatment (puberty suppression or hormones) would be expected to correlate with fewer psychological difficulties related to physical changes than older individuals,” which was confirmed in the current study.
However, clinicians should be cautious in offering puberty suppression at a younger age, in part because “despite the increased availability of gender-affirming medical interventions for younger ages in recent years, there has not been a proportional decline in older presenting youth with gender incongruence,” she said.
More data are needed on youth with postpuberty adolescent-onset transgender histories. The original Dutch studies on gender-affirming medical interventions note case histories describing “the complexities that may be associated with later-presenting transgender adolescents and describe that some eventually detransition,” Dr. de Vries explained.
Ultimately, prospective studies with longer follow-up data are needed to better inform clinicians in developing an individualized treatment plan for youth with gender incongruence, Dr. de Vries concluded.
Care barriers can include parents, access, insurance
The study authors describe the situation of gender-affirming medical care in teens perfectly, M. Brett Cooper, MD, of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center/Children’s Health Dallas, said in an interview.
Given a variety of factors that need further exploration, “many youth often don’t end up seeking gender-affirming medical care until puberty has progressed to near full maturity,” he said. “The findings from this study provide preliminary evidence to show that if we can identify these youth earlier in their gender journey, we might be able to impact adverse mental health outcomes in a positive way.”
Dr. Cooper said he was not surprised by the study findings. “They are similar to what I see in my clinic.
“Many of our patients often don’t present for medical care until around age 15 or older, similar to the findings of the study,” he added. “The majority of our patients have had a diagnosis of anxiety or depression at some point in their lifetime, including inpatient hospitalizations for their mental health.”
One of the most important barriers to care often can be parents or guardians, said Dr. Cooper. “Young people usually know their gender identity by about age 4-5 but parents may think that a gender-diverse identity could simply be a ‘phase.’ Other times, young people may hide their identity out of fear of a negative reaction from their parents. The distress around identity may become more pronounced once pubertal changes, such as breast and testicle development, begin to worsen their dysphoria.”
“Another barrier to care can be the inability to find a competent, gender-affirming provider,” Dr. Cooper said. “Most large United States cities have at least one gender-affirming clinic, but for those youth who grow up in smaller towns, it may be difficult to access these clinics. In addition, some clinics require a letter from a therapist stating that the young person is transgender before they can be seen for medical care. This creates an access barrier, as it may be difficult not just to find a therapist but one who has experience working with gender-diverse youth.”
Insurance coverage, including lack thereof, is yet another barrier to care for transgender youth, said Dr. Cooper. “While many insurance companies have begun to cover medications such as testosterone and estrogen for gender-affirming care, many still have exclusions on things like puberty blockers and surgical interventions.” These interventions can be lifesaving, but financially prohibitive for many families if not covered by insurance.
As for the value of early timing of gender-affirming care, Dr. Cooper agreed with the study findings that the earlier that a young person can get into medical care for their gender identity, the better chance there is to reduce the prevalence of serious mental health outcomes. “This also prevents the potential development of secondary sexual characteristics, decreasing the need for or amount of surgery in the future if desired,” he said.
“More research is needed to better understand the reasons why many youth don’t present to care until later in puberty. In addition, we need better research on interventions that are effective at reducing serious mental health events in transgender and gender diverse youth,” Dr. Cooper stated. “Another area that I would like to see researched is looking at the mental health of non-Caucasian youth. As the authors noted in their study, many clinics have a high percentage of patients presenting for care who identify as White or Caucasian, and we need to better understand why these other youth are not presenting for care.”
The study received no outside funding. Dr. Sorbara disclosed salary support from the Canadian Pediatric Endocrine Group fellowship program. Dr. de Vries had no financial conflicts to disclose. Dr. Cooper had no financial conflicts to disclose, and serves as a contributor to LGBTQ Youth Consult in Pediatric News.
SOURCES: Sorbara JC et al. Pediatrics. 2020 Sep 21. doi: 10.1542/peds.2019-3600; de Vries ALC et al. Pediatrics. 2020 Sep 21. doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-010611.
Gender-incongruent youth who present for gender-affirming medical care later in adolescence have higher rates of mental health problems than their younger counterparts, based on data from a review of 300 individuals.
“Puberty is a vulnerable time for youth with gender dysphoria because distress may intensify with the development of secondary sex characteristics corresponding to the assigned rather than the experienced gender,” wrote Julia C. Sorbara, MD, of the University of Toronto and the Hospital for Sick Children, also in Toronto, and colleagues.
Although gender-affirming medical care (GAMC) in the form of hormone blockers and/or gender-affirming hormones early in puberty can decrease in emotional and behavioral problems, many teens present later in puberty, and the relationship between pubertal stage at presentation for treatment and mental health has not been examined, they wrote.
In a study published in Pediatrics, the researchers reviewed data from youth with gender incongruence who were seen at a single center; 116 were younger than 15 years at presentation for GAMC and were defined as younger-presenting youth (YPY), and 184 patients aged 15 years and older were defined as older-presenting youth (OPY).
Overall, 78% of the youth reported at least one mental health problem at their initial visit. Significantly more OPY than YPY reported diagnosed depression (46% vs. 30%), self-harm (40% vs. 28%), suicidal thoughts (52% vs. 40%), suicide attempts (17% vs. 9%), and use of psychoactive medications (36% vs. 23%), all with P < .05.
In a multivariate analysis, patients in Tanner stages 4 and 5 were five times more likely to experience depressive disorders (odds ratio, 5.49) and four times as likely to experience depressive disorders (OR, 4.18) as those in earlier Tanner stages. Older age remained significantly associated with use of psychoactive medications (OR, 1.31), but not with anxiety or depression, the researchers wrote.
The YPY group were significantly younger at the age of recognizing gender incongruence, compared with the OPY group, with median ages at recognition of 5.8 years and 9 years, respectively, and younger patients came out about their gender identity at an average of 12 years, compared with 15 years for older patients.
The quantitative data are among the first to relate pubertal stage to mental health in gender-incongruent youth, “supporting clinical observations that pubertal development, menses, and erections are distressing to these youth and consistent with the beneficial role of pubertal suppression, even when used as monotherapy without gender-affirming hormones,” Dr. Sorbara and associates wrote.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the cross-sectional design and the collection of mental health data at only one time point and by the use of self-reports. However, the results suggest that “[gender-incongruent] youth who present to GAMC later in life are a particularly high-risk subset of a vulnerable population,” they noted. “Further study is required to better describe the mental health trajectories of transgender youth and determine if mental health status or age at initiation of GAMC is correlated with psychological well-being in adulthood.”
Don’t rush to puberty suppression in younger teens
To reduce the stress of puberty on gender-nonconforming youth, puberty suppression as “a reversible medical intervention” was introduced by Dutch clinicians in the early 2000s, Annelou L.C. de Vries, MD, PhD, of Amsterdam University Medical Center, wrote in an accompanying editorial.
“The aim of puberty suppression was to prevent the psychological suffering stemming from undesired physical changes when puberty starts and allowing the adolescent time to make plans regarding further transition or not,” Dr. de Vries said. “Following this rationale, younger age at the time of starting medical-affirming treatment (puberty suppression or hormones) would be expected to correlate with fewer psychological difficulties related to physical changes than older individuals,” which was confirmed in the current study.
However, clinicians should be cautious in offering puberty suppression at a younger age, in part because “despite the increased availability of gender-affirming medical interventions for younger ages in recent years, there has not been a proportional decline in older presenting youth with gender incongruence,” she said.
More data are needed on youth with postpuberty adolescent-onset transgender histories. The original Dutch studies on gender-affirming medical interventions note case histories describing “the complexities that may be associated with later-presenting transgender adolescents and describe that some eventually detransition,” Dr. de Vries explained.
Ultimately, prospective studies with longer follow-up data are needed to better inform clinicians in developing an individualized treatment plan for youth with gender incongruence, Dr. de Vries concluded.
Care barriers can include parents, access, insurance
The study authors describe the situation of gender-affirming medical care in teens perfectly, M. Brett Cooper, MD, of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center/Children’s Health Dallas, said in an interview.
Given a variety of factors that need further exploration, “many youth often don’t end up seeking gender-affirming medical care until puberty has progressed to near full maturity,” he said. “The findings from this study provide preliminary evidence to show that if we can identify these youth earlier in their gender journey, we might be able to impact adverse mental health outcomes in a positive way.”
Dr. Cooper said he was not surprised by the study findings. “They are similar to what I see in my clinic.
“Many of our patients often don’t present for medical care until around age 15 or older, similar to the findings of the study,” he added. “The majority of our patients have had a diagnosis of anxiety or depression at some point in their lifetime, including inpatient hospitalizations for their mental health.”
One of the most important barriers to care often can be parents or guardians, said Dr. Cooper. “Young people usually know their gender identity by about age 4-5 but parents may think that a gender-diverse identity could simply be a ‘phase.’ Other times, young people may hide their identity out of fear of a negative reaction from their parents. The distress around identity may become more pronounced once pubertal changes, such as breast and testicle development, begin to worsen their dysphoria.”
“Another barrier to care can be the inability to find a competent, gender-affirming provider,” Dr. Cooper said. “Most large United States cities have at least one gender-affirming clinic, but for those youth who grow up in smaller towns, it may be difficult to access these clinics. In addition, some clinics require a letter from a therapist stating that the young person is transgender before they can be seen for medical care. This creates an access barrier, as it may be difficult not just to find a therapist but one who has experience working with gender-diverse youth.”
Insurance coverage, including lack thereof, is yet another barrier to care for transgender youth, said Dr. Cooper. “While many insurance companies have begun to cover medications such as testosterone and estrogen for gender-affirming care, many still have exclusions on things like puberty blockers and surgical interventions.” These interventions can be lifesaving, but financially prohibitive for many families if not covered by insurance.
As for the value of early timing of gender-affirming care, Dr. Cooper agreed with the study findings that the earlier that a young person can get into medical care for their gender identity, the better chance there is to reduce the prevalence of serious mental health outcomes. “This also prevents the potential development of secondary sexual characteristics, decreasing the need for or amount of surgery in the future if desired,” he said.
“More research is needed to better understand the reasons why many youth don’t present to care until later in puberty. In addition, we need better research on interventions that are effective at reducing serious mental health events in transgender and gender diverse youth,” Dr. Cooper stated. “Another area that I would like to see researched is looking at the mental health of non-Caucasian youth. As the authors noted in their study, many clinics have a high percentage of patients presenting for care who identify as White or Caucasian, and we need to better understand why these other youth are not presenting for care.”
The study received no outside funding. Dr. Sorbara disclosed salary support from the Canadian Pediatric Endocrine Group fellowship program. Dr. de Vries had no financial conflicts to disclose. Dr. Cooper had no financial conflicts to disclose, and serves as a contributor to LGBTQ Youth Consult in Pediatric News.
SOURCES: Sorbara JC et al. Pediatrics. 2020 Sep 21. doi: 10.1542/peds.2019-3600; de Vries ALC et al. Pediatrics. 2020 Sep 21. doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-010611.
FROM PEDIATRICS
28-year-old woman • weakness • anxiety • altered mental status • Dx?
THE CASE
A 28-year-old woman with an extensive psychiatric history—including generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and recent postpartum depression—presented with a chief complaint of right leg weakness. She stated this weakness had begun 4 days earlier. It occurred episodically and was preceded by tingling and cramping sensations. Each episode lasted a couple of minutes and spontaneously resolved. Associated with it, she experienced slurred speech and altered mentation. There was no loss of consciousness and no pain. A panic attack usually followed, consisting of feelings of impending doom, rapid breathing, palpitations, and nausea.
She had 3 prior diagnostic evaluations for this same chief complaint, twice in an emergency department (ED) and once with her primary care physician. These evaluations included lab work and extensive head imaging, which demonstrated no acute intracranial pathology. At each previous presentation, the diagnosis was an exacerbation of her anxiety disorder, and she was treated with lorazepam.
At the current presentation, her vital signs were stable. Examination revealed a notably anxious patient. She repeatedly expressed concern that she might have a brain tumor or some other deadly disease, as she had a family history of brain cancer. Her physical exam was entirely normal, including normal strength, sensation, and reflexes in all extremities.
Further head imaging (computed tomography, CT angiography, and magnetic resonance imaging of the brain) failed to reveal an etiology of her symptoms. With no clear organic cause, her medical providers again suspected an anxiety or panic episode. She was given reassurance, and an outpatient neurology consult was arranged.
THE DIAGNOSIS
One week later, at her outpatient neurology appointment, an electroencephalogram (EEG) was performed. Following photic stimulation, the EEG showed multiple right- and left-hemisphere foci of cortical hyperexcitability including a subtle sharp component (see FIGURE). Immediately following the longest of these episodes, the patient expressed a sense of anxiety and an altered sensorium similar to her prior presentations.
The EEG findings, in addition to the postictal anxiety symptoms and clinical history, were all important components that led the treating neurologist to the diagnosis of localization-related (focal) epilepsy.1 The patient was started on oxcarbazepine, a first-line anti-epileptic medication used in the treatment of focal epilepsy.2 She is being followed by a neurologist regularly and after optimizing her anti-epileptic medication, is no longer having seizures.
DISCUSSION
The difficulty of this case stems from the atypical presentation of the patient’s seizures. The key step to the correct diagnosis was a neurological consultation and an ensuing EEG. However, the patient received a vast spectrum of care, including multiple work-ups, prior to a conclusive diagnosis—which highlights an important issue health care providers must address.
Continue to: The role of bias
The role of bias. From the patient’s initial visits to the ED to her hospital admission, there was a prominent affixation, known as the anchoring bias,3 by the clinicians providing her care: All were focused heavily on her psychiatric features. Conversely, the evaluation for patients with suspected psychiatric diagnoses should focus on successfully ruling out major organic etiology with a broad differential diagnosis. It is crucial for providers to take a step back and make a conscious attempt to avoid fixation on a particular diagnosis, especially when it is psychiatric in nature. This allows the provider to actively consider alternative explanations for a patient presentation and work through a more encompassing differential.
The distinguishing symptoms. There is a common association between comorbid mood disorders (eg, depression, anxiety) and epilepsy.4 Another clue is ictal anxiety or nervousness, which is commonly observed in patients with partial seizures (and occurred with our patient).
These ictal episodes can be difficult to identify within the context of an isolated psychiatric diagnosis.5 The distinction can be clarified by the presence of associated somatic symptoms, which in this case included unilateral cramping, paresthesia, and weakness. These symptoms should clue in a practitioner to the possibility of underlying neurologic pathology, which should prompt the ordering of either an EEG or, at minimum, a neurological consultation.
THE TAKEAWAY
This case report shows how anchoring bias can lead to a delay in diagnosis and treatment. Avoidance of this type of bias requires heightened cognitive awareness by medical providers. A more system-based approach is to have structured diagnostic assessments,6 such as conducting a thorough neurological exam for patients with somatic symptoms and exacerbating comorbid psychiatric conditions.
It may also help to review cases like this with colleagues from diverse disciplinary backgrounds, highlighting thought processes and sharing uncertainty.3 These processes may shed light on confounding diagnoses that might be playing a role in a patient’s presentation and ultimately aid in the decision-making process.
CORRESPONDENCE
Paimon Ameli, DO, Naval Medical Center San Diego, 34800 Bob Wilson Drive, San Diego, CA 92134; paimonm@gmail.com
1. Fisher RS, Cross JH, French JA, et al. Operational classification of seizure types by the International League Against Epilepsy: position paper of the ILAE Commission for Classification and Terminology. Epilepsia. 2017;58:522-530.
2. Marson AG, Al-Kharusi AM, Alwaidh M, et al. The SANAD study of effectiveness of carbamazepine, gabapentin, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, or topiramate for treatment of partial epilepsy: an unblinded randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2007;369:1000-1015.
3. Croskerry P. The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimize them. Acad Med. 2003;78:775-780.
4. Jackson MJ, Turkington D. Depression and anxiety in epilepsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2005;76(suppl 1):i45-i47.
5. López-Gómez M, Espinola M, Ramirez-Bermudez J, et al. Clinical presentation of anxiety among patients with epilepsy. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2008;4:1235-1239.
6. Etchells E. Anchoring bias with critical implications. Published June 2015. Patient Safety Network. https://psnet.ahrq.gov/web-mm/anchoring-bias-critical-implications. Accessed September 29, 2020.
THE CASE
A 28-year-old woman with an extensive psychiatric history—including generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and recent postpartum depression—presented with a chief complaint of right leg weakness. She stated this weakness had begun 4 days earlier. It occurred episodically and was preceded by tingling and cramping sensations. Each episode lasted a couple of minutes and spontaneously resolved. Associated with it, she experienced slurred speech and altered mentation. There was no loss of consciousness and no pain. A panic attack usually followed, consisting of feelings of impending doom, rapid breathing, palpitations, and nausea.
She had 3 prior diagnostic evaluations for this same chief complaint, twice in an emergency department (ED) and once with her primary care physician. These evaluations included lab work and extensive head imaging, which demonstrated no acute intracranial pathology. At each previous presentation, the diagnosis was an exacerbation of her anxiety disorder, and she was treated with lorazepam.
At the current presentation, her vital signs were stable. Examination revealed a notably anxious patient. She repeatedly expressed concern that she might have a brain tumor or some other deadly disease, as she had a family history of brain cancer. Her physical exam was entirely normal, including normal strength, sensation, and reflexes in all extremities.
Further head imaging (computed tomography, CT angiography, and magnetic resonance imaging of the brain) failed to reveal an etiology of her symptoms. With no clear organic cause, her medical providers again suspected an anxiety or panic episode. She was given reassurance, and an outpatient neurology consult was arranged.
THE DIAGNOSIS
One week later, at her outpatient neurology appointment, an electroencephalogram (EEG) was performed. Following photic stimulation, the EEG showed multiple right- and left-hemisphere foci of cortical hyperexcitability including a subtle sharp component (see FIGURE). Immediately following the longest of these episodes, the patient expressed a sense of anxiety and an altered sensorium similar to her prior presentations.
The EEG findings, in addition to the postictal anxiety symptoms and clinical history, were all important components that led the treating neurologist to the diagnosis of localization-related (focal) epilepsy.1 The patient was started on oxcarbazepine, a first-line anti-epileptic medication used in the treatment of focal epilepsy.2 She is being followed by a neurologist regularly and after optimizing her anti-epileptic medication, is no longer having seizures.
DISCUSSION
The difficulty of this case stems from the atypical presentation of the patient’s seizures. The key step to the correct diagnosis was a neurological consultation and an ensuing EEG. However, the patient received a vast spectrum of care, including multiple work-ups, prior to a conclusive diagnosis—which highlights an important issue health care providers must address.
Continue to: The role of bias
The role of bias. From the patient’s initial visits to the ED to her hospital admission, there was a prominent affixation, known as the anchoring bias,3 by the clinicians providing her care: All were focused heavily on her psychiatric features. Conversely, the evaluation for patients with suspected psychiatric diagnoses should focus on successfully ruling out major organic etiology with a broad differential diagnosis. It is crucial for providers to take a step back and make a conscious attempt to avoid fixation on a particular diagnosis, especially when it is psychiatric in nature. This allows the provider to actively consider alternative explanations for a patient presentation and work through a more encompassing differential.
The distinguishing symptoms. There is a common association between comorbid mood disorders (eg, depression, anxiety) and epilepsy.4 Another clue is ictal anxiety or nervousness, which is commonly observed in patients with partial seizures (and occurred with our patient).
These ictal episodes can be difficult to identify within the context of an isolated psychiatric diagnosis.5 The distinction can be clarified by the presence of associated somatic symptoms, which in this case included unilateral cramping, paresthesia, and weakness. These symptoms should clue in a practitioner to the possibility of underlying neurologic pathology, which should prompt the ordering of either an EEG or, at minimum, a neurological consultation.
THE TAKEAWAY
This case report shows how anchoring bias can lead to a delay in diagnosis and treatment. Avoidance of this type of bias requires heightened cognitive awareness by medical providers. A more system-based approach is to have structured diagnostic assessments,6 such as conducting a thorough neurological exam for patients with somatic symptoms and exacerbating comorbid psychiatric conditions.
It may also help to review cases like this with colleagues from diverse disciplinary backgrounds, highlighting thought processes and sharing uncertainty.3 These processes may shed light on confounding diagnoses that might be playing a role in a patient’s presentation and ultimately aid in the decision-making process.
CORRESPONDENCE
Paimon Ameli, DO, Naval Medical Center San Diego, 34800 Bob Wilson Drive, San Diego, CA 92134; paimonm@gmail.com
THE CASE
A 28-year-old woman with an extensive psychiatric history—including generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and recent postpartum depression—presented with a chief complaint of right leg weakness. She stated this weakness had begun 4 days earlier. It occurred episodically and was preceded by tingling and cramping sensations. Each episode lasted a couple of minutes and spontaneously resolved. Associated with it, she experienced slurred speech and altered mentation. There was no loss of consciousness and no pain. A panic attack usually followed, consisting of feelings of impending doom, rapid breathing, palpitations, and nausea.
She had 3 prior diagnostic evaluations for this same chief complaint, twice in an emergency department (ED) and once with her primary care physician. These evaluations included lab work and extensive head imaging, which demonstrated no acute intracranial pathology. At each previous presentation, the diagnosis was an exacerbation of her anxiety disorder, and she was treated with lorazepam.
At the current presentation, her vital signs were stable. Examination revealed a notably anxious patient. She repeatedly expressed concern that she might have a brain tumor or some other deadly disease, as she had a family history of brain cancer. Her physical exam was entirely normal, including normal strength, sensation, and reflexes in all extremities.
Further head imaging (computed tomography, CT angiography, and magnetic resonance imaging of the brain) failed to reveal an etiology of her symptoms. With no clear organic cause, her medical providers again suspected an anxiety or panic episode. She was given reassurance, and an outpatient neurology consult was arranged.
THE DIAGNOSIS
One week later, at her outpatient neurology appointment, an electroencephalogram (EEG) was performed. Following photic stimulation, the EEG showed multiple right- and left-hemisphere foci of cortical hyperexcitability including a subtle sharp component (see FIGURE). Immediately following the longest of these episodes, the patient expressed a sense of anxiety and an altered sensorium similar to her prior presentations.
The EEG findings, in addition to the postictal anxiety symptoms and clinical history, were all important components that led the treating neurologist to the diagnosis of localization-related (focal) epilepsy.1 The patient was started on oxcarbazepine, a first-line anti-epileptic medication used in the treatment of focal epilepsy.2 She is being followed by a neurologist regularly and after optimizing her anti-epileptic medication, is no longer having seizures.
DISCUSSION
The difficulty of this case stems from the atypical presentation of the patient’s seizures. The key step to the correct diagnosis was a neurological consultation and an ensuing EEG. However, the patient received a vast spectrum of care, including multiple work-ups, prior to a conclusive diagnosis—which highlights an important issue health care providers must address.
Continue to: The role of bias
The role of bias. From the patient’s initial visits to the ED to her hospital admission, there was a prominent affixation, known as the anchoring bias,3 by the clinicians providing her care: All were focused heavily on her psychiatric features. Conversely, the evaluation for patients with suspected psychiatric diagnoses should focus on successfully ruling out major organic etiology with a broad differential diagnosis. It is crucial for providers to take a step back and make a conscious attempt to avoid fixation on a particular diagnosis, especially when it is psychiatric in nature. This allows the provider to actively consider alternative explanations for a patient presentation and work through a more encompassing differential.
The distinguishing symptoms. There is a common association between comorbid mood disorders (eg, depression, anxiety) and epilepsy.4 Another clue is ictal anxiety or nervousness, which is commonly observed in patients with partial seizures (and occurred with our patient).
These ictal episodes can be difficult to identify within the context of an isolated psychiatric diagnosis.5 The distinction can be clarified by the presence of associated somatic symptoms, which in this case included unilateral cramping, paresthesia, and weakness. These symptoms should clue in a practitioner to the possibility of underlying neurologic pathology, which should prompt the ordering of either an EEG or, at minimum, a neurological consultation.
THE TAKEAWAY
This case report shows how anchoring bias can lead to a delay in diagnosis and treatment. Avoidance of this type of bias requires heightened cognitive awareness by medical providers. A more system-based approach is to have structured diagnostic assessments,6 such as conducting a thorough neurological exam for patients with somatic symptoms and exacerbating comorbid psychiatric conditions.
It may also help to review cases like this with colleagues from diverse disciplinary backgrounds, highlighting thought processes and sharing uncertainty.3 These processes may shed light on confounding diagnoses that might be playing a role in a patient’s presentation and ultimately aid in the decision-making process.
CORRESPONDENCE
Paimon Ameli, DO, Naval Medical Center San Diego, 34800 Bob Wilson Drive, San Diego, CA 92134; paimonm@gmail.com
1. Fisher RS, Cross JH, French JA, et al. Operational classification of seizure types by the International League Against Epilepsy: position paper of the ILAE Commission for Classification and Terminology. Epilepsia. 2017;58:522-530.
2. Marson AG, Al-Kharusi AM, Alwaidh M, et al. The SANAD study of effectiveness of carbamazepine, gabapentin, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, or topiramate for treatment of partial epilepsy: an unblinded randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2007;369:1000-1015.
3. Croskerry P. The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimize them. Acad Med. 2003;78:775-780.
4. Jackson MJ, Turkington D. Depression and anxiety in epilepsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2005;76(suppl 1):i45-i47.
5. López-Gómez M, Espinola M, Ramirez-Bermudez J, et al. Clinical presentation of anxiety among patients with epilepsy. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2008;4:1235-1239.
6. Etchells E. Anchoring bias with critical implications. Published June 2015. Patient Safety Network. https://psnet.ahrq.gov/web-mm/anchoring-bias-critical-implications. Accessed September 29, 2020.
1. Fisher RS, Cross JH, French JA, et al. Operational classification of seizure types by the International League Against Epilepsy: position paper of the ILAE Commission for Classification and Terminology. Epilepsia. 2017;58:522-530.
2. Marson AG, Al-Kharusi AM, Alwaidh M, et al. The SANAD study of effectiveness of carbamazepine, gabapentin, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, or topiramate for treatment of partial epilepsy: an unblinded randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2007;369:1000-1015.
3. Croskerry P. The importance of cognitive errors in diagnosis and strategies to minimize them. Acad Med. 2003;78:775-780.
4. Jackson MJ, Turkington D. Depression and anxiety in epilepsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2005;76(suppl 1):i45-i47.
5. López-Gómez M, Espinola M, Ramirez-Bermudez J, et al. Clinical presentation of anxiety among patients with epilepsy. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2008;4:1235-1239.
6. Etchells E. Anchoring bias with critical implications. Published June 2015. Patient Safety Network. https://psnet.ahrq.gov/web-mm/anchoring-bias-critical-implications. Accessed September 29, 2020.
Is depression contagious?
I previously wrote a column in which I discussed the possible relationship between television viewing and the risk of developing depression. In that column I mentioned that, while there is widespread suspicion that depression may have a genetic component, I was unaware of any strong evidence that this is the case. This week I encountered another study in the American Journal of Psychiatry that suggests that the environment in which a child is raised can play a significant role in whether he or she will develop depression.
All of the children in the study had been born to families in which at least one biological parent had been diagnosed with major depression. There were nearly 700 full sibships and 2,600 half sibships studied. The researchers found that children who had been adopted away and raised in families that had been selected for having high-quality childrearing standards were significantly less likely to develop depression (23% for full siblings, 19% for half siblings) than their siblings who had remained in the home of their biological parents. It is interesting that this protective effect of the adoptive home “disappeared when an adoptive parent or stepsibling had major depression or the adoptive home was disrupted by parental death or divorce.”
It is unlikely that this study ever will be replicated because of the unique manner in which these Swedish adoptions were managed and recorded. However, and probably even more of an influence than genetics.
Are you surprised by the results of this study? Or, like me, have you always suspected that a child growing up in a household with a depressed, missing, or divorced parent was at increased risk of becoming depressed, particularly they had a genetic vulnerability? How will you change your approach to families with a depressed parent or ones that are navigating through the stormy waters of even an amicable divorce? Will you be more diligent about screening children in these families for depression? Should the agencies that are responsible for managing adoption and foster home placement include this new information in their screening criteria?
It would be very interesting to see a similar study performed using families in which a biological parent had been diagnosed with anxiety or an attention-deficit disorder. Could it mean that we should be considering depression and these conditions as contagious disorders? The results from such studies might help provide clarity to why we are seeing more children with mental health complaints. They might explain why pediatricians are seeing an increasing frequency of mental health complaints in our offices. It may not be too far-fetched to use epidemiologic terms when we are talking about depression, anxiety, and ADHD. Should we be considering these conditions to be contagious under certain circumstances?
Since the human genome has been sequenced I sense that our attention has become overfocused on using what we are learning about our DNA to explain what makes us sick. It may be time to swing the pendulum back a few degrees and remind ourselves of the power of the family environment.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at pdnews@mdedge.com.
I previously wrote a column in which I discussed the possible relationship between television viewing and the risk of developing depression. In that column I mentioned that, while there is widespread suspicion that depression may have a genetic component, I was unaware of any strong evidence that this is the case. This week I encountered another study in the American Journal of Psychiatry that suggests that the environment in which a child is raised can play a significant role in whether he or she will develop depression.
All of the children in the study had been born to families in which at least one biological parent had been diagnosed with major depression. There were nearly 700 full sibships and 2,600 half sibships studied. The researchers found that children who had been adopted away and raised in families that had been selected for having high-quality childrearing standards were significantly less likely to develop depression (23% for full siblings, 19% for half siblings) than their siblings who had remained in the home of their biological parents. It is interesting that this protective effect of the adoptive home “disappeared when an adoptive parent or stepsibling had major depression or the adoptive home was disrupted by parental death or divorce.”
It is unlikely that this study ever will be replicated because of the unique manner in which these Swedish adoptions were managed and recorded. However, and probably even more of an influence than genetics.
Are you surprised by the results of this study? Or, like me, have you always suspected that a child growing up in a household with a depressed, missing, or divorced parent was at increased risk of becoming depressed, particularly they had a genetic vulnerability? How will you change your approach to families with a depressed parent or ones that are navigating through the stormy waters of even an amicable divorce? Will you be more diligent about screening children in these families for depression? Should the agencies that are responsible for managing adoption and foster home placement include this new information in their screening criteria?
It would be very interesting to see a similar study performed using families in which a biological parent had been diagnosed with anxiety or an attention-deficit disorder. Could it mean that we should be considering depression and these conditions as contagious disorders? The results from such studies might help provide clarity to why we are seeing more children with mental health complaints. They might explain why pediatricians are seeing an increasing frequency of mental health complaints in our offices. It may not be too far-fetched to use epidemiologic terms when we are talking about depression, anxiety, and ADHD. Should we be considering these conditions to be contagious under certain circumstances?
Since the human genome has been sequenced I sense that our attention has become overfocused on using what we are learning about our DNA to explain what makes us sick. It may be time to swing the pendulum back a few degrees and remind ourselves of the power of the family environment.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at pdnews@mdedge.com.
I previously wrote a column in which I discussed the possible relationship between television viewing and the risk of developing depression. In that column I mentioned that, while there is widespread suspicion that depression may have a genetic component, I was unaware of any strong evidence that this is the case. This week I encountered another study in the American Journal of Psychiatry that suggests that the environment in which a child is raised can play a significant role in whether he or she will develop depression.
All of the children in the study had been born to families in which at least one biological parent had been diagnosed with major depression. There were nearly 700 full sibships and 2,600 half sibships studied. The researchers found that children who had been adopted away and raised in families that had been selected for having high-quality childrearing standards were significantly less likely to develop depression (23% for full siblings, 19% for half siblings) than their siblings who had remained in the home of their biological parents. It is interesting that this protective effect of the adoptive home “disappeared when an adoptive parent or stepsibling had major depression or the adoptive home was disrupted by parental death or divorce.”
It is unlikely that this study ever will be replicated because of the unique manner in which these Swedish adoptions were managed and recorded. However, and probably even more of an influence than genetics.
Are you surprised by the results of this study? Or, like me, have you always suspected that a child growing up in a household with a depressed, missing, or divorced parent was at increased risk of becoming depressed, particularly they had a genetic vulnerability? How will you change your approach to families with a depressed parent or ones that are navigating through the stormy waters of even an amicable divorce? Will you be more diligent about screening children in these families for depression? Should the agencies that are responsible for managing adoption and foster home placement include this new information in their screening criteria?
It would be very interesting to see a similar study performed using families in which a biological parent had been diagnosed with anxiety or an attention-deficit disorder. Could it mean that we should be considering depression and these conditions as contagious disorders? The results from such studies might help provide clarity to why we are seeing more children with mental health complaints. They might explain why pediatricians are seeing an increasing frequency of mental health complaints in our offices. It may not be too far-fetched to use epidemiologic terms when we are talking about depression, anxiety, and ADHD. Should we be considering these conditions to be contagious under certain circumstances?
Since the human genome has been sequenced I sense that our attention has become overfocused on using what we are learning about our DNA to explain what makes us sick. It may be time to swing the pendulum back a few degrees and remind ourselves of the power of the family environment.
Dr. Wilkoff practiced primary care pediatrics in Brunswick, Maine, for nearly 40 years. He has authored several books on behavioral pediatrics, including “How to Say No to Your Toddler.” Email him at pdnews@mdedge.com.
Alcohol problems linked to legal performance-enhancement products
Adolescent alcohol use among boys was prospectively associated with use of legal performance-enhancing substances in young adulthood, based on prospective cohort data from more than 12,000 individuals, wrote Kyle T. Ganson, PhD, MSW, of the University of Toronto, and colleagues.
In addition, legal use of performance-enhancing substances (PES) among young men was associated with increased risk of alcohol use problems.
Although previous studies have shown a range of adverse effects associated with the use of anabolic-androgenic steroid derivatives (defined as illegal PES), the possible adverse effects of legal PES (defined in this report as protein powders, creatine monohydrate, dehydroepiandrostenedione, and amino acids) have not been well studied, the researchers wrote.
In a study published in Pediatrics, the researchers reviewed data from 12,133 young adults aged 18-26 years who were part of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health from 1994 to 2008.
Overall, 16% of young men and 1% of young women reported using legal PES in the past year. Among men, legal PES use was prospectively associated with increased risk of a range of alcohol-related problem behaviors including binge drinking (adjusted odds ratio, 1.35), injurious and risky behaviors (aOR, 1.78), legal problems (aOR, 1.52), reduced activities and socializing (aOR, 1.91), and problems with emotional or physical health (aOR, 1.44).
Legal PES use among young adult women was associated with an increased risk of emotional or physical health problems (aOR, 3.00).
Adolescent impact
Between adolescence and young adulthood (an average of 7 years’ follow-up), alcohol use was prospectively associated with legal PES use in young men (OR, 1.39), but neither cigarette smoking nor marijuana use in adolescence was associated with later use of legal PES. Among young women, no type of adolescent substance use was prospectively associated with later use of legal PES.
“To date, legal PES have not been largely considered as part of the spectrum of substances used among adolescents, have not been subject to the same regulatory scrutiny as other substances known to be linked to subsequent substance use and are freely available over the counter to adolescents,” Dr. Ganson and associates noted.
“Clearly, the robust reciprocal temporal relationship between substance use and legal PES suggests that each may serve as a gateway for the other,” they wrote.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the inability to identify outcomes associated with variable PES components, incomplete data collection on several drinking-related risk behaviors, and inability to analyze prospective use of illegal or other substances associated with use of legal PES, the researchers wrote.
However, “these results provide further evidence in support of the gateway theory and prospective health risk behaviors associated with legal PES and substance use,” they wrote.
The data may inform policy on the additional regulation of legal PES use in minors. In the meantime, “it is important for medical providers and clinicians to assess problematic alcohol use and drinking-related risk behaviors among young adult men who have previously used legal PES,” Dr. Ganson and associates concluded.
Challenges to clinicians
An important point to recognize is that PES is a misleading term, Steven Cuff, MD, of the Ohio State University, Columbus, and Michele LaBotz, MD, of Tufts University, Boston, wrote in an accompanying editorial. “Most legal supplements marketed for athletic performance enhancement are ineffective at increasing muscle mass or athletic performance beyond what can be achieved through appropriate nutrition and training,” they emphasized. The current study findings suggest that “legal PES should be integrated into the gateway hypothesis regarding patterns and progression of substance use through adolescence and early adulthood,” and support discouragement of any PES use among adolescents and young adults.
Even legal PES can be dangerous because of the lack of oversight of dietary supplements by the Food and Drug Administration. “There is widespread evidence that many over-the-counter dietary supplements lack stated ingredients, contain unlabeled ingredients (including potential allergens), or are contaminated with impurities or illegal or dangerous substances, such as steroids and stimulants,” the editorialists emphasized.
In addition, the association found in the study between muscle dysphoria and both PES use and substance use disorders, notably alcohol-related morbidity, highlights the need for a proactive approach by pediatricians to minimize the risk, they noted.
“For pediatricians uncomfortable with initiating discussions on PES use with their patients, an American Academy of Pediatrics–supported role-play simulation is available,” they concluded.
The study is important because “PES use is ubiquitous among adolescents and young adults,” Dr. LaBotz said in an interview. “Although it is widely believed that PES use serves as a likely ‘gateway’ to use of anabolic steroids and other substances, this is one of the very few studies that explores this relationship. Their findings that alcohol use appears to correlate with subsequent use of PES, and that PES use appears to correlate with future alcohol-related issues, suggest that this is not a simple linear progression of problematic behavior.”
Dr. LaBotz added that she was not surprised by the study findings, and emphasized that pediatric health care providers should be aware of the association between PES and alcohol use. “PES screening should be incorporated into screening done for alcohol and other substance use. This appears to be particularly true for athletes and other subpopulations who are at higher risk for problematic alcohol use.”
She said much of PES use is driven by the desire by young men for a muscular appearance, but more research is needed on young women. “In the past, this was a goal primarily associated with males, but females have become increasingly interested in achieving muscularity as well, which suggests an increasing risk of PES use among females as compared to earlier reports. We need updated data on patterns, prevalence and consequences of PES use in females.”
In addition, “although preparticipation physical examination forms include screening questions for PES use among athletes, further information is needed on how to incorporate PES into substance use screening that is performed in a general pediatric population, such as including athletes and nonathletes,” Dr. LaBotz said.
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health and by grants to one of the coauthors from the Pediatric Scientist Development Program funded by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Pediatric Society, as well as the American Heart Association Career Development Award. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose. Dr. Cuff and Dr. LaBotz had no financial conflicts to disclose.
SOURCE: Ganson KT et al. Pediatrics. 2020 Sep. doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-0409.
Adolescent alcohol use among boys was prospectively associated with use of legal performance-enhancing substances in young adulthood, based on prospective cohort data from more than 12,000 individuals, wrote Kyle T. Ganson, PhD, MSW, of the University of Toronto, and colleagues.
In addition, legal use of performance-enhancing substances (PES) among young men was associated with increased risk of alcohol use problems.
Although previous studies have shown a range of adverse effects associated with the use of anabolic-androgenic steroid derivatives (defined as illegal PES), the possible adverse effects of legal PES (defined in this report as protein powders, creatine monohydrate, dehydroepiandrostenedione, and amino acids) have not been well studied, the researchers wrote.
In a study published in Pediatrics, the researchers reviewed data from 12,133 young adults aged 18-26 years who were part of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health from 1994 to 2008.
Overall, 16% of young men and 1% of young women reported using legal PES in the past year. Among men, legal PES use was prospectively associated with increased risk of a range of alcohol-related problem behaviors including binge drinking (adjusted odds ratio, 1.35), injurious and risky behaviors (aOR, 1.78), legal problems (aOR, 1.52), reduced activities and socializing (aOR, 1.91), and problems with emotional or physical health (aOR, 1.44).
Legal PES use among young adult women was associated with an increased risk of emotional or physical health problems (aOR, 3.00).
Adolescent impact
Between adolescence and young adulthood (an average of 7 years’ follow-up), alcohol use was prospectively associated with legal PES use in young men (OR, 1.39), but neither cigarette smoking nor marijuana use in adolescence was associated with later use of legal PES. Among young women, no type of adolescent substance use was prospectively associated with later use of legal PES.
“To date, legal PES have not been largely considered as part of the spectrum of substances used among adolescents, have not been subject to the same regulatory scrutiny as other substances known to be linked to subsequent substance use and are freely available over the counter to adolescents,” Dr. Ganson and associates noted.
“Clearly, the robust reciprocal temporal relationship between substance use and legal PES suggests that each may serve as a gateway for the other,” they wrote.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the inability to identify outcomes associated with variable PES components, incomplete data collection on several drinking-related risk behaviors, and inability to analyze prospective use of illegal or other substances associated with use of legal PES, the researchers wrote.
However, “these results provide further evidence in support of the gateway theory and prospective health risk behaviors associated with legal PES and substance use,” they wrote.
The data may inform policy on the additional regulation of legal PES use in minors. In the meantime, “it is important for medical providers and clinicians to assess problematic alcohol use and drinking-related risk behaviors among young adult men who have previously used legal PES,” Dr. Ganson and associates concluded.
Challenges to clinicians
An important point to recognize is that PES is a misleading term, Steven Cuff, MD, of the Ohio State University, Columbus, and Michele LaBotz, MD, of Tufts University, Boston, wrote in an accompanying editorial. “Most legal supplements marketed for athletic performance enhancement are ineffective at increasing muscle mass or athletic performance beyond what can be achieved through appropriate nutrition and training,” they emphasized. The current study findings suggest that “legal PES should be integrated into the gateway hypothesis regarding patterns and progression of substance use through adolescence and early adulthood,” and support discouragement of any PES use among adolescents and young adults.
Even legal PES can be dangerous because of the lack of oversight of dietary supplements by the Food and Drug Administration. “There is widespread evidence that many over-the-counter dietary supplements lack stated ingredients, contain unlabeled ingredients (including potential allergens), or are contaminated with impurities or illegal or dangerous substances, such as steroids and stimulants,” the editorialists emphasized.
In addition, the association found in the study between muscle dysphoria and both PES use and substance use disorders, notably alcohol-related morbidity, highlights the need for a proactive approach by pediatricians to minimize the risk, they noted.
“For pediatricians uncomfortable with initiating discussions on PES use with their patients, an American Academy of Pediatrics–supported role-play simulation is available,” they concluded.
The study is important because “PES use is ubiquitous among adolescents and young adults,” Dr. LaBotz said in an interview. “Although it is widely believed that PES use serves as a likely ‘gateway’ to use of anabolic steroids and other substances, this is one of the very few studies that explores this relationship. Their findings that alcohol use appears to correlate with subsequent use of PES, and that PES use appears to correlate with future alcohol-related issues, suggest that this is not a simple linear progression of problematic behavior.”
Dr. LaBotz added that she was not surprised by the study findings, and emphasized that pediatric health care providers should be aware of the association between PES and alcohol use. “PES screening should be incorporated into screening done for alcohol and other substance use. This appears to be particularly true for athletes and other subpopulations who are at higher risk for problematic alcohol use.”
She said much of PES use is driven by the desire by young men for a muscular appearance, but more research is needed on young women. “In the past, this was a goal primarily associated with males, but females have become increasingly interested in achieving muscularity as well, which suggests an increasing risk of PES use among females as compared to earlier reports. We need updated data on patterns, prevalence and consequences of PES use in females.”
In addition, “although preparticipation physical examination forms include screening questions for PES use among athletes, further information is needed on how to incorporate PES into substance use screening that is performed in a general pediatric population, such as including athletes and nonathletes,” Dr. LaBotz said.
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health and by grants to one of the coauthors from the Pediatric Scientist Development Program funded by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Pediatric Society, as well as the American Heart Association Career Development Award. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose. Dr. Cuff and Dr. LaBotz had no financial conflicts to disclose.
SOURCE: Ganson KT et al. Pediatrics. 2020 Sep. doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-0409.
Adolescent alcohol use among boys was prospectively associated with use of legal performance-enhancing substances in young adulthood, based on prospective cohort data from more than 12,000 individuals, wrote Kyle T. Ganson, PhD, MSW, of the University of Toronto, and colleagues.
In addition, legal use of performance-enhancing substances (PES) among young men was associated with increased risk of alcohol use problems.
Although previous studies have shown a range of adverse effects associated with the use of anabolic-androgenic steroid derivatives (defined as illegal PES), the possible adverse effects of legal PES (defined in this report as protein powders, creatine monohydrate, dehydroepiandrostenedione, and amino acids) have not been well studied, the researchers wrote.
In a study published in Pediatrics, the researchers reviewed data from 12,133 young adults aged 18-26 years who were part of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health from 1994 to 2008.
Overall, 16% of young men and 1% of young women reported using legal PES in the past year. Among men, legal PES use was prospectively associated with increased risk of a range of alcohol-related problem behaviors including binge drinking (adjusted odds ratio, 1.35), injurious and risky behaviors (aOR, 1.78), legal problems (aOR, 1.52), reduced activities and socializing (aOR, 1.91), and problems with emotional or physical health (aOR, 1.44).
Legal PES use among young adult women was associated with an increased risk of emotional or physical health problems (aOR, 3.00).
Adolescent impact
Between adolescence and young adulthood (an average of 7 years’ follow-up), alcohol use was prospectively associated with legal PES use in young men (OR, 1.39), but neither cigarette smoking nor marijuana use in adolescence was associated with later use of legal PES. Among young women, no type of adolescent substance use was prospectively associated with later use of legal PES.
“To date, legal PES have not been largely considered as part of the spectrum of substances used among adolescents, have not been subject to the same regulatory scrutiny as other substances known to be linked to subsequent substance use and are freely available over the counter to adolescents,” Dr. Ganson and associates noted.
“Clearly, the robust reciprocal temporal relationship between substance use and legal PES suggests that each may serve as a gateway for the other,” they wrote.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the inability to identify outcomes associated with variable PES components, incomplete data collection on several drinking-related risk behaviors, and inability to analyze prospective use of illegal or other substances associated with use of legal PES, the researchers wrote.
However, “these results provide further evidence in support of the gateway theory and prospective health risk behaviors associated with legal PES and substance use,” they wrote.
The data may inform policy on the additional regulation of legal PES use in minors. In the meantime, “it is important for medical providers and clinicians to assess problematic alcohol use and drinking-related risk behaviors among young adult men who have previously used legal PES,” Dr. Ganson and associates concluded.
Challenges to clinicians
An important point to recognize is that PES is a misleading term, Steven Cuff, MD, of the Ohio State University, Columbus, and Michele LaBotz, MD, of Tufts University, Boston, wrote in an accompanying editorial. “Most legal supplements marketed for athletic performance enhancement are ineffective at increasing muscle mass or athletic performance beyond what can be achieved through appropriate nutrition and training,” they emphasized. The current study findings suggest that “legal PES should be integrated into the gateway hypothesis regarding patterns and progression of substance use through adolescence and early adulthood,” and support discouragement of any PES use among adolescents and young adults.
Even legal PES can be dangerous because of the lack of oversight of dietary supplements by the Food and Drug Administration. “There is widespread evidence that many over-the-counter dietary supplements lack stated ingredients, contain unlabeled ingredients (including potential allergens), or are contaminated with impurities or illegal or dangerous substances, such as steroids and stimulants,” the editorialists emphasized.
In addition, the association found in the study between muscle dysphoria and both PES use and substance use disorders, notably alcohol-related morbidity, highlights the need for a proactive approach by pediatricians to minimize the risk, they noted.
“For pediatricians uncomfortable with initiating discussions on PES use with their patients, an American Academy of Pediatrics–supported role-play simulation is available,” they concluded.
The study is important because “PES use is ubiquitous among adolescents and young adults,” Dr. LaBotz said in an interview. “Although it is widely believed that PES use serves as a likely ‘gateway’ to use of anabolic steroids and other substances, this is one of the very few studies that explores this relationship. Their findings that alcohol use appears to correlate with subsequent use of PES, and that PES use appears to correlate with future alcohol-related issues, suggest that this is not a simple linear progression of problematic behavior.”
Dr. LaBotz added that she was not surprised by the study findings, and emphasized that pediatric health care providers should be aware of the association between PES and alcohol use. “PES screening should be incorporated into screening done for alcohol and other substance use. This appears to be particularly true for athletes and other subpopulations who are at higher risk for problematic alcohol use.”
She said much of PES use is driven by the desire by young men for a muscular appearance, but more research is needed on young women. “In the past, this was a goal primarily associated with males, but females have become increasingly interested in achieving muscularity as well, which suggests an increasing risk of PES use among females as compared to earlier reports. We need updated data on patterns, prevalence and consequences of PES use in females.”
In addition, “although preparticipation physical examination forms include screening questions for PES use among athletes, further information is needed on how to incorporate PES into substance use screening that is performed in a general pediatric population, such as including athletes and nonathletes,” Dr. LaBotz said.
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health and by grants to one of the coauthors from the Pediatric Scientist Development Program funded by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Pediatric Society, as well as the American Heart Association Career Development Award. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose. Dr. Cuff and Dr. LaBotz had no financial conflicts to disclose.
SOURCE: Ganson KT et al. Pediatrics. 2020 Sep. doi: 10.1542/peds.2020-0409.
FROM PEDIATRICS
LSD microdosing to boost attention: Too soon to tell?
Microdosing with lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) is associated with improved mood and increased attention, early research suggests. However, at least one expert believes it’s far too soon to tell and warns against endorsing patient microdosing.
In a dose-finding exploratory study, three low doses of LSD were compared with placebo in healthy volunteers who were all recreational drug users. Adjusted results showed that the highest dose boosted attention and mood, although participants were aware of psychedelic effects, prompting researchers to conclude the results demonstrated “selective, beneficial effects.”
“The majority of participants have improved attention,” study investigator Nadia Hutten, PhD, Department of Neuropsychology and Psychopharmacology, Maastricht University, the Netherlands, told Medscape Medical News.
“So we think that patients with attention deficits might have more beneficial effects,” she added, noting her team plans to study LSD microdosing in patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
The study was presented at the 33rd European College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ECNP) Congress, which was held online this year because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Growing interest
Over the past 10 years there has been growing interest in psychedelic microdosing, which is defined as a dose that aims to enhance mood and/or performance but does not affect perception.
However, there has been considerable debate over what constitutes a “microdose.” One tenth of a “full” psychedelic dose is typically suggested, but users report a much wider dose range in practice, suggesting potential “individual variation in response to low doses,” the researchers note.
In the current dose-finding study, the researchers explored whether the effects of LSD on cognition and subjective measures differed between individuals.
The study included 24 healthy recreational drug users and compared the acute effects of 5 mcg, 20 mcg, and 20 mcg LSD with placebo on a computer-based psychomotor vigilance task (PVT) that measured attention and on a Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST).
Participants also completed the 72-item Profile of Mood States (POMS) questionnaire, a visual analog scale (VAS) on mood, and the 94-item 5-Dimensional Altered States of Consciousness Rating scales (5D-ASC).
Unadjusted results showed that the 20-mcg LSD dose significantly reduced correct substitutions on the DSST vs placebo (P < .05), but had no effect on attentional lapses on the PCT or on positive mood on the POMS.
Correcting the DSST score for the number of total responses revealed no dose effect of LSD. This suggested that participants were no less accurate when under the influence of LSD, even though they encoded fewer digits, the researchers note.
Participants also reported that both the 10-mcg and 20-mcg dose of LSD increased subjective experiences on the VAS and alternated states of consciousness on the 5D-ASC compared with placebo.
After stratifying the results by dose and participant, the effect of LSD differed between individuals. For example, both the 5-mcg and 20-mcg doses were associated with improvement in attention on the PVT (P < .05), but not the 10-mcg dose.
These results also indicated that the 20-mcg dose was associated with a significant increase in the correct number of substitutions on the DSST and with a significant increase in positive mood on the POMS (P < .05 for both outcomes).
The findings suggest that future studies in patient populations with impaired attention are needed, “including biological parameters involved in LSD receptor-binding and metabolism, in order to understand the inter-individual variation in response to LSD,” the investigators note.
In an educational session at the meeting, the study’s lead researcher, Kim Kuypers, PhD, associate professor at Maastricht University, said research shows individuals are already self-medicating with psychedelic microdosing to treat a wide range of mental health problems, and rated it as significantly more effective than conventional therapy at alleviating symptoms and improving quality of life.
Nevertheless, Kuypers noted there have been fewer than 20 published placebo-controlled studies examining psychedelic microdosing in humans – and much of the current evidence is anecdotal.
However, there is some clinical research suggesting that low-dose LSD is associated with improved mood and cognitive performance and that it also has an effect on resting-state amygdala functional connectivity and acutely increases brain-derived neurotrophic factor plasma levels.
Furthermore, said Kuypers, the evidence in healthy volunteers thus far suggests microdosing is “safe.”
Jumping ahead of the science?
Commenting on the study for Medscape Medical News, Jeffrey A. Lieberman, MD, professor and chair of psychiatry at Columbia University, New York City, said he “gives the investigators credit for doing such a study” but does not believe anything can be gleaned from the findings.
He said he is also concerned that the resurgence of psychedelic research is not congruent with “the methodologic rigor and scientific thinking that accompanies treatment development in other disease areas.”
Lieberman, who is also psychiatrist-in-chief at the NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital Columbia Medical Center and was not involved with the study, added that some of the research is also being conducted in individuals who are “true believers and not sufficiently dispassionate and objective.”
“ But because these are such notorious and interesting compounds, they have attracted a lot of peripheral interest to promote and to disseminate; and the risk is that it will be done in the wrong way and there may be consequences,” he said.
Moreover, Lieberman noted that the psychedelic drugs may be used in practice ahead of strong evidence of safety and efficacy. As an example, he pointed to ketamine, a drug that was identified as a treatment for people with depression who had not responded to standard treatments, he noted.
“But before you knew it, there were clinics being opened up all over the place by anesthesiologists or other people that were trying to make a quick buck,” he said.
“That was alarming because they were stretching the criteria for whom the treatment was appropriate; there were no protocols for dosing, for frequency of administration, and there was inadequate psychiatric follow-up,” Lieberman added.
Preliminary but promising
He agreed with Kuypers that cases of microdosing with psychedelics are largely anecdotal.
“So in that context, when these investigators tried to put it to a test, which is commendable, the results in no way tell you whether it’s good, bad, or indifferent,” Lieberman said. In fact, the results are “disappointing in terms of suggesting any beneficial effect.”
Lieberman said more and larger studies are needed in order to determine whether LSD microdosing is beneficial.
In response to Lieberman’s comments, Kuypers told Medscape Medical News that the investigators tried to base their placebo-controlled research on previous anecdotal research.
She emphasized that the “whole field is still in its infancy,” including research on the use of “full” doses of psychedelics.
“I sometimes think that the message is too positive. We should never forget to communicate that not a lot of research has been done.” In addition, she agreed that researchers should “keep a balanced message.”
“All the data to date is preliminary, in my view, but promising,” she stressed, “and the evidence is growing.”
The study received financial support from the Beckley Foundation. The study authors and Lieberman have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
This article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Microdosing with lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) is associated with improved mood and increased attention, early research suggests. However, at least one expert believes it’s far too soon to tell and warns against endorsing patient microdosing.
In a dose-finding exploratory study, three low doses of LSD were compared with placebo in healthy volunteers who were all recreational drug users. Adjusted results showed that the highest dose boosted attention and mood, although participants were aware of psychedelic effects, prompting researchers to conclude the results demonstrated “selective, beneficial effects.”
“The majority of participants have improved attention,” study investigator Nadia Hutten, PhD, Department of Neuropsychology and Psychopharmacology, Maastricht University, the Netherlands, told Medscape Medical News.
“So we think that patients with attention deficits might have more beneficial effects,” she added, noting her team plans to study LSD microdosing in patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
The study was presented at the 33rd European College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ECNP) Congress, which was held online this year because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Growing interest
Over the past 10 years there has been growing interest in psychedelic microdosing, which is defined as a dose that aims to enhance mood and/or performance but does not affect perception.
However, there has been considerable debate over what constitutes a “microdose.” One tenth of a “full” psychedelic dose is typically suggested, but users report a much wider dose range in practice, suggesting potential “individual variation in response to low doses,” the researchers note.
In the current dose-finding study, the researchers explored whether the effects of LSD on cognition and subjective measures differed between individuals.
The study included 24 healthy recreational drug users and compared the acute effects of 5 mcg, 20 mcg, and 20 mcg LSD with placebo on a computer-based psychomotor vigilance task (PVT) that measured attention and on a Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST).
Participants also completed the 72-item Profile of Mood States (POMS) questionnaire, a visual analog scale (VAS) on mood, and the 94-item 5-Dimensional Altered States of Consciousness Rating scales (5D-ASC).
Unadjusted results showed that the 20-mcg LSD dose significantly reduced correct substitutions on the DSST vs placebo (P < .05), but had no effect on attentional lapses on the PCT or on positive mood on the POMS.
Correcting the DSST score for the number of total responses revealed no dose effect of LSD. This suggested that participants were no less accurate when under the influence of LSD, even though they encoded fewer digits, the researchers note.
Participants also reported that both the 10-mcg and 20-mcg dose of LSD increased subjective experiences on the VAS and alternated states of consciousness on the 5D-ASC compared with placebo.
After stratifying the results by dose and participant, the effect of LSD differed between individuals. For example, both the 5-mcg and 20-mcg doses were associated with improvement in attention on the PVT (P < .05), but not the 10-mcg dose.
These results also indicated that the 20-mcg dose was associated with a significant increase in the correct number of substitutions on the DSST and with a significant increase in positive mood on the POMS (P < .05 for both outcomes).
The findings suggest that future studies in patient populations with impaired attention are needed, “including biological parameters involved in LSD receptor-binding and metabolism, in order to understand the inter-individual variation in response to LSD,” the investigators note.
In an educational session at the meeting, the study’s lead researcher, Kim Kuypers, PhD, associate professor at Maastricht University, said research shows individuals are already self-medicating with psychedelic microdosing to treat a wide range of mental health problems, and rated it as significantly more effective than conventional therapy at alleviating symptoms and improving quality of life.
Nevertheless, Kuypers noted there have been fewer than 20 published placebo-controlled studies examining psychedelic microdosing in humans – and much of the current evidence is anecdotal.
However, there is some clinical research suggesting that low-dose LSD is associated with improved mood and cognitive performance and that it also has an effect on resting-state amygdala functional connectivity and acutely increases brain-derived neurotrophic factor plasma levels.
Furthermore, said Kuypers, the evidence in healthy volunteers thus far suggests microdosing is “safe.”
Jumping ahead of the science?
Commenting on the study for Medscape Medical News, Jeffrey A. Lieberman, MD, professor and chair of psychiatry at Columbia University, New York City, said he “gives the investigators credit for doing such a study” but does not believe anything can be gleaned from the findings.
He said he is also concerned that the resurgence of psychedelic research is not congruent with “the methodologic rigor and scientific thinking that accompanies treatment development in other disease areas.”
Lieberman, who is also psychiatrist-in-chief at the NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital Columbia Medical Center and was not involved with the study, added that some of the research is also being conducted in individuals who are “true believers and not sufficiently dispassionate and objective.”
“ But because these are such notorious and interesting compounds, they have attracted a lot of peripheral interest to promote and to disseminate; and the risk is that it will be done in the wrong way and there may be consequences,” he said.
Moreover, Lieberman noted that the psychedelic drugs may be used in practice ahead of strong evidence of safety and efficacy. As an example, he pointed to ketamine, a drug that was identified as a treatment for people with depression who had not responded to standard treatments, he noted.
“But before you knew it, there were clinics being opened up all over the place by anesthesiologists or other people that were trying to make a quick buck,” he said.
“That was alarming because they were stretching the criteria for whom the treatment was appropriate; there were no protocols for dosing, for frequency of administration, and there was inadequate psychiatric follow-up,” Lieberman added.
Preliminary but promising
He agreed with Kuypers that cases of microdosing with psychedelics are largely anecdotal.
“So in that context, when these investigators tried to put it to a test, which is commendable, the results in no way tell you whether it’s good, bad, or indifferent,” Lieberman said. In fact, the results are “disappointing in terms of suggesting any beneficial effect.”
Lieberman said more and larger studies are needed in order to determine whether LSD microdosing is beneficial.
In response to Lieberman’s comments, Kuypers told Medscape Medical News that the investigators tried to base their placebo-controlled research on previous anecdotal research.
She emphasized that the “whole field is still in its infancy,” including research on the use of “full” doses of psychedelics.
“I sometimes think that the message is too positive. We should never forget to communicate that not a lot of research has been done.” In addition, she agreed that researchers should “keep a balanced message.”
“All the data to date is preliminary, in my view, but promising,” she stressed, “and the evidence is growing.”
The study received financial support from the Beckley Foundation. The study authors and Lieberman have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
This article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Microdosing with lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) is associated with improved mood and increased attention, early research suggests. However, at least one expert believes it’s far too soon to tell and warns against endorsing patient microdosing.
In a dose-finding exploratory study, three low doses of LSD were compared with placebo in healthy volunteers who were all recreational drug users. Adjusted results showed that the highest dose boosted attention and mood, although participants were aware of psychedelic effects, prompting researchers to conclude the results demonstrated “selective, beneficial effects.”
“The majority of participants have improved attention,” study investigator Nadia Hutten, PhD, Department of Neuropsychology and Psychopharmacology, Maastricht University, the Netherlands, told Medscape Medical News.
“So we think that patients with attention deficits might have more beneficial effects,” she added, noting her team plans to study LSD microdosing in patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
The study was presented at the 33rd European College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ECNP) Congress, which was held online this year because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Growing interest
Over the past 10 years there has been growing interest in psychedelic microdosing, which is defined as a dose that aims to enhance mood and/or performance but does not affect perception.
However, there has been considerable debate over what constitutes a “microdose.” One tenth of a “full” psychedelic dose is typically suggested, but users report a much wider dose range in practice, suggesting potential “individual variation in response to low doses,” the researchers note.
In the current dose-finding study, the researchers explored whether the effects of LSD on cognition and subjective measures differed between individuals.
The study included 24 healthy recreational drug users and compared the acute effects of 5 mcg, 20 mcg, and 20 mcg LSD with placebo on a computer-based psychomotor vigilance task (PVT) that measured attention and on a Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST).
Participants also completed the 72-item Profile of Mood States (POMS) questionnaire, a visual analog scale (VAS) on mood, and the 94-item 5-Dimensional Altered States of Consciousness Rating scales (5D-ASC).
Unadjusted results showed that the 20-mcg LSD dose significantly reduced correct substitutions on the DSST vs placebo (P < .05), but had no effect on attentional lapses on the PCT or on positive mood on the POMS.
Correcting the DSST score for the number of total responses revealed no dose effect of LSD. This suggested that participants were no less accurate when under the influence of LSD, even though they encoded fewer digits, the researchers note.
Participants also reported that both the 10-mcg and 20-mcg dose of LSD increased subjective experiences on the VAS and alternated states of consciousness on the 5D-ASC compared with placebo.
After stratifying the results by dose and participant, the effect of LSD differed between individuals. For example, both the 5-mcg and 20-mcg doses were associated with improvement in attention on the PVT (P < .05), but not the 10-mcg dose.
These results also indicated that the 20-mcg dose was associated with a significant increase in the correct number of substitutions on the DSST and with a significant increase in positive mood on the POMS (P < .05 for both outcomes).
The findings suggest that future studies in patient populations with impaired attention are needed, “including biological parameters involved in LSD receptor-binding and metabolism, in order to understand the inter-individual variation in response to LSD,” the investigators note.
In an educational session at the meeting, the study’s lead researcher, Kim Kuypers, PhD, associate professor at Maastricht University, said research shows individuals are already self-medicating with psychedelic microdosing to treat a wide range of mental health problems, and rated it as significantly more effective than conventional therapy at alleviating symptoms and improving quality of life.
Nevertheless, Kuypers noted there have been fewer than 20 published placebo-controlled studies examining psychedelic microdosing in humans – and much of the current evidence is anecdotal.
However, there is some clinical research suggesting that low-dose LSD is associated with improved mood and cognitive performance and that it also has an effect on resting-state amygdala functional connectivity and acutely increases brain-derived neurotrophic factor plasma levels.
Furthermore, said Kuypers, the evidence in healthy volunteers thus far suggests microdosing is “safe.”
Jumping ahead of the science?
Commenting on the study for Medscape Medical News, Jeffrey A. Lieberman, MD, professor and chair of psychiatry at Columbia University, New York City, said he “gives the investigators credit for doing such a study” but does not believe anything can be gleaned from the findings.
He said he is also concerned that the resurgence of psychedelic research is not congruent with “the methodologic rigor and scientific thinking that accompanies treatment development in other disease areas.”
Lieberman, who is also psychiatrist-in-chief at the NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital Columbia Medical Center and was not involved with the study, added that some of the research is also being conducted in individuals who are “true believers and not sufficiently dispassionate and objective.”
“ But because these are such notorious and interesting compounds, they have attracted a lot of peripheral interest to promote and to disseminate; and the risk is that it will be done in the wrong way and there may be consequences,” he said.
Moreover, Lieberman noted that the psychedelic drugs may be used in practice ahead of strong evidence of safety and efficacy. As an example, he pointed to ketamine, a drug that was identified as a treatment for people with depression who had not responded to standard treatments, he noted.
“But before you knew it, there were clinics being opened up all over the place by anesthesiologists or other people that were trying to make a quick buck,” he said.
“That was alarming because they were stretching the criteria for whom the treatment was appropriate; there were no protocols for dosing, for frequency of administration, and there was inadequate psychiatric follow-up,” Lieberman added.
Preliminary but promising
He agreed with Kuypers that cases of microdosing with psychedelics are largely anecdotal.
“So in that context, when these investigators tried to put it to a test, which is commendable, the results in no way tell you whether it’s good, bad, or indifferent,” Lieberman said. In fact, the results are “disappointing in terms of suggesting any beneficial effect.”
Lieberman said more and larger studies are needed in order to determine whether LSD microdosing is beneficial.
In response to Lieberman’s comments, Kuypers told Medscape Medical News that the investigators tried to base their placebo-controlled research on previous anecdotal research.
She emphasized that the “whole field is still in its infancy,” including research on the use of “full” doses of psychedelics.
“I sometimes think that the message is too positive. We should never forget to communicate that not a lot of research has been done.” In addition, she agreed that researchers should “keep a balanced message.”
“All the data to date is preliminary, in my view, but promising,” she stressed, “and the evidence is growing.”
The study received financial support from the Beckley Foundation. The study authors and Lieberman have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
This article first appeared on Medscape.com.
PEDIATRIC BEHAVIORAL AND MENTAL HEALTH
- Reduce mental illness stigma
- Ready for school? Not many preschoolers with ADHD are
- Suicide screening is key
- Alcohol, opioid misuse tied to risky behaviors
- Identify runaway risk
- Reduce mental illness stigma
- Ready for school? Not many preschoolers with ADHD are
- Suicide screening is key
- Alcohol, opioid misuse tied to risky behaviors
- Identify runaway risk
- Reduce mental illness stigma
- Ready for school? Not many preschoolers with ADHD are
- Suicide screening is key
- Alcohol, opioid misuse tied to risky behaviors
- Identify runaway risk