Mixed Topics

It’s not necessary to completely eradicate all Clostridioides difficile to successfully treat recurrent C. difficile infections with fecal microbiota transplant (FMT), according to a study presented online July 12 at the European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases.

C. difficile colonization persisted for 3 weeks after FMT in about one-quarter of patients, but it’s not clear whether this is a persistent infection, a newly acquired infection, or partial persistence of a mixed infection, said Elisabeth Terveer, MD, a medical microbiologist at Leiden (the Netherlands) University Medical Center. In addition, “82% of patients with detectable C. diff do not relapse, so it’s absolutely not necessary for a cure,” she said.

Several mechanisms explain why FMT is a highly effective therapy for recurrent C. difficile infections, including restoration of bacterial metabolism in the gut, immune modulation, and direct competition between bacteria, Dr. Terveer said, but it’s less clear whether eradication of C. difficile spores is among these mechanisms. 

Between May 2016 and April 2020, the researchers analyzed fecal samples from 84 patients who took vancomycin for at least 4 days before undergoing FMT. The researchers took fecal samples from patients before FMT and 3 weeks after FMT to culture them and the donor samples for presence of C. difficile, and they assessed clinical outcomes at 3 weeks and 6 months after FMT.

After antibiotic treatment but prior to FMT, 19% of patients (n = 16) still had a toxigenic C. difficile culture while the other 81% had a negative culture. None of the donor samples had a positive C. difficile culture. After FMT treatment, five patients who had a positive pre-FMT culture remained positive, and the other 11 were negative. Among the 81% of patients (n = 68) who had a negative culture just before FMT, 22 had a positive culture and 46 had a negative culture after FMT. Overall, 26% of patients post FMT had a positive C. difficile culture, a finding that was 10-fold higher than another study that assessed C. difficile with PCR testing, Dr. Terveer said.

The clinical cure rate after FMT was 94%, and five patients had relapses within 2 months of their FMT. These relapses were more prevalent in patients with a positive C. difficile culture prior to FMT (odds ratio [OR], 7.6; P = .045) and a positive C. difficile culture after FMT (OR, 13.6; P = .016). Still, 82% of patients who had a positive C. difficile culture post FMT remained clinically cured 2 months later.

It’s unclear why 19% of patients had a positive culture after their antibiotic pretreatment prior to FMT, Dr. Terveer said, but it may be because the pretreatment was of such a short duration.

“I think the advice should be: Give a full anti–C. diff antibiotic course to treat the C. diff infection, and then give FMT afterward to restore the microbiota and prevent further relapses,” Dr. Terveer told attendees.

Dimitri Drekonja, MD, chief of the Minneapolis VA Infectious Disease Section, said the findings were not necessarily surprising, but it would have been interesting for the researchers to have conducted DNA sequencing of the patients’ fecal samples post FMT to see what the biological diversity looked like.

“One school of thought has been that you have to repopulate the normal diverse microbiota of the colon” with FMT, and the other “is that you need to get rid of the C. diff that›s there,” Dr. Drekonja, who was not involved in the study, said in an interview. “I think more people think it’s the diverse microbiota because if it’s just getting rid of C. diff, we can get do that with antibiotics – but that gets rid of the other organisms.”

As long as you have a diverse microbiota post FMT, Dr. Drekonja said, then “having a few residual organisms, even if they get magnified in the culture process, is probably not that big a deal.”

But there’s a third school of thought that Dr. Drekonja said he himself falls into: “I don’t really care how it works, just that in well-done trials, it does work.” As long as large, robust, well-blinded trials show that FMT works, “I’m open to all sorts of ideas of what the mechanism is,” he said. “The main thing is that it does or doesn’t work.”

These findings basically reinforce current guidance not to test patients’ stools if they are asymptomatic, Dr. Drekonja said. In the past, clinicians sometimes tested patients’ stool after therapy to ensure the C. difficile was eradicated, regardless of whether the patient had symptoms of infection, he said.

“We’ve since become much more attuned that there are lots of people who have detectable C. diff in their stool without any symptoms,” whether detectable by culture or PCR, Dr. Drekonja said. “Generally, if you’re doing well and you’re not having diarrhea, don’t test, and if someone does test and finds it, pretend you didn’t see the test,” he advised. “This is a big part of diagnostic stewardship, which is: You don’t go testing people who are doing well.”

The Netherlands Donor Feces Bank used in the research is funded by a grant from Vedanta Biosciences. Dr. Drekonja had no disclosures.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

It’s not necessary to completely eradicate all Clostridioides difficile to successfully treat recurrent C. difficile infections with fecal microbiota transplant (FMT), according to a study presented online July 12 at the European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases.

C. difficile colonization persisted for 3 weeks after FMT in about one-quarter of patients, but it’s not clear whether this is a persistent infection, a newly acquired infection, or partial persistence of a mixed infection, said Elisabeth Terveer, MD, a medical microbiologist at Leiden (the Netherlands) University Medical Center. In addition, “82% of patients with detectable C. diff do not relapse, so it’s absolutely not necessary for a cure,” she said.

Several mechanisms explain why FMT is a highly effective therapy for recurrent C. difficile infections, including restoration of bacterial metabolism in the gut, immune modulation, and direct competition between bacteria, Dr. Terveer said, but it’s less clear whether eradication of C. difficile spores is among these mechanisms. 

Between May 2016 and April 2020, the researchers analyzed fecal samples from 84 patients who took vancomycin for at least 4 days before undergoing FMT. The researchers took fecal samples from patients before FMT and 3 weeks after FMT to culture them and the donor samples for presence of C. difficile, and they assessed clinical outcomes at 3 weeks and 6 months after FMT.

After antibiotic treatment but prior to FMT, 19% of patients (n = 16) still had a toxigenic C. difficile culture while the other 81% had a negative culture. None of the donor samples had a positive C. difficile culture. After FMT treatment, five patients who had a positive pre-FMT culture remained positive, and the other 11 were negative. Among the 81% of patients (n = 68) who had a negative culture just before FMT, 22 had a positive culture and 46 had a negative culture after FMT. Overall, 26% of patients post FMT had a positive C. difficile culture, a finding that was 10-fold higher than another study that assessed C. difficile with PCR testing, Dr. Terveer said.

The clinical cure rate after FMT was 94%, and five patients had relapses within 2 months of their FMT. These relapses were more prevalent in patients with a positive C. difficile culture prior to FMT (odds ratio [OR], 7.6; P = .045) and a positive C. difficile culture after FMT (OR, 13.6; P = .016). Still, 82% of patients who had a positive C. difficile culture post FMT remained clinically cured 2 months later.

It’s unclear why 19% of patients had a positive culture after their antibiotic pretreatment prior to FMT, Dr. Terveer said, but it may be because the pretreatment was of such a short duration.

“I think the advice should be: Give a full anti–C. diff antibiotic course to treat the C. diff infection, and then give FMT afterward to restore the microbiota and prevent further relapses,” Dr. Terveer told attendees.

Dimitri Drekonja, MD, chief of the Minneapolis VA Infectious Disease Section, said the findings were not necessarily surprising, but it would have been interesting for the researchers to have conducted DNA sequencing of the patients’ fecal samples post FMT to see what the biological diversity looked like.

“One school of thought has been that you have to repopulate the normal diverse microbiota of the colon” with FMT, and the other “is that you need to get rid of the C. diff that›s there,” Dr. Drekonja, who was not involved in the study, said in an interview. “I think more people think it’s the diverse microbiota because if it’s just getting rid of C. diff, we can get do that with antibiotics – but that gets rid of the other organisms.”

As long as you have a diverse microbiota post FMT, Dr. Drekonja said, then “having a few residual organisms, even if they get magnified in the culture process, is probably not that big a deal.”

But there’s a third school of thought that Dr. Drekonja said he himself falls into: “I don’t really care how it works, just that in well-done trials, it does work.” As long as large, robust, well-blinded trials show that FMT works, “I’m open to all sorts of ideas of what the mechanism is,” he said. “The main thing is that it does or doesn’t work.”

These findings basically reinforce current guidance not to test patients’ stools if they are asymptomatic, Dr. Drekonja said. In the past, clinicians sometimes tested patients’ stool after therapy to ensure the C. difficile was eradicated, regardless of whether the patient had symptoms of infection, he said.

“We’ve since become much more attuned that there are lots of people who have detectable C. diff in their stool without any symptoms,” whether detectable by culture or PCR, Dr. Drekonja said. “Generally, if you’re doing well and you’re not having diarrhea, don’t test, and if someone does test and finds it, pretend you didn’t see the test,” he advised. “This is a big part of diagnostic stewardship, which is: You don’t go testing people who are doing well.”

The Netherlands Donor Feces Bank used in the research is funded by a grant from Vedanta Biosciences. Dr. Drekonja had no disclosures.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

It’s not necessary to completely eradicate all Clostridioides difficile to successfully treat recurrent C. difficile infections with fecal microbiota transplant (FMT), according to a study presented online July 12 at the European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases.

C. difficile colonization persisted for 3 weeks after FMT in about one-quarter of patients, but it’s not clear whether this is a persistent infection, a newly acquired infection, or partial persistence of a mixed infection, said Elisabeth Terveer, MD, a medical microbiologist at Leiden (the Netherlands) University Medical Center. In addition, “82% of patients with detectable C. diff do not relapse, so it’s absolutely not necessary for a cure,” she said.

Several mechanisms explain why FMT is a highly effective therapy for recurrent C. difficile infections, including restoration of bacterial metabolism in the gut, immune modulation, and direct competition between bacteria, Dr. Terveer said, but it’s less clear whether eradication of C. difficile spores is among these mechanisms. 

Between May 2016 and April 2020, the researchers analyzed fecal samples from 84 patients who took vancomycin for at least 4 days before undergoing FMT. The researchers took fecal samples from patients before FMT and 3 weeks after FMT to culture them and the donor samples for presence of C. difficile, and they assessed clinical outcomes at 3 weeks and 6 months after FMT.

After antibiotic treatment but prior to FMT, 19% of patients (n = 16) still had a toxigenic C. difficile culture while the other 81% had a negative culture. None of the donor samples had a positive C. difficile culture. After FMT treatment, five patients who had a positive pre-FMT culture remained positive, and the other 11 were negative. Among the 81% of patients (n = 68) who had a negative culture just before FMT, 22 had a positive culture and 46 had a negative culture after FMT. Overall, 26% of patients post FMT had a positive C. difficile culture, a finding that was 10-fold higher than another study that assessed C. difficile with PCR testing, Dr. Terveer said.

The clinical cure rate after FMT was 94%, and five patients had relapses within 2 months of their FMT. These relapses were more prevalent in patients with a positive C. difficile culture prior to FMT (odds ratio [OR], 7.6; P = .045) and a positive C. difficile culture after FMT (OR, 13.6; P = .016). Still, 82% of patients who had a positive C. difficile culture post FMT remained clinically cured 2 months later.

It’s unclear why 19% of patients had a positive culture after their antibiotic pretreatment prior to FMT, Dr. Terveer said, but it may be because the pretreatment was of such a short duration.

“I think the advice should be: Give a full anti–C. diff antibiotic course to treat the C. diff infection, and then give FMT afterward to restore the microbiota and prevent further relapses,” Dr. Terveer told attendees.

Dimitri Drekonja, MD, chief of the Minneapolis VA Infectious Disease Section, said the findings were not necessarily surprising, but it would have been interesting for the researchers to have conducted DNA sequencing of the patients’ fecal samples post FMT to see what the biological diversity looked like.

“One school of thought has been that you have to repopulate the normal diverse microbiota of the colon” with FMT, and the other “is that you need to get rid of the C. diff that›s there,” Dr. Drekonja, who was not involved in the study, said in an interview. “I think more people think it’s the diverse microbiota because if it’s just getting rid of C. diff, we can get do that with antibiotics – but that gets rid of the other organisms.”

As long as you have a diverse microbiota post FMT, Dr. Drekonja said, then “having a few residual organisms, even if they get magnified in the culture process, is probably not that big a deal.”

But there’s a third school of thought that Dr. Drekonja said he himself falls into: “I don’t really care how it works, just that in well-done trials, it does work.” As long as large, robust, well-blinded trials show that FMT works, “I’m open to all sorts of ideas of what the mechanism is,” he said. “The main thing is that it does or doesn’t work.”

These findings basically reinforce current guidance not to test patients’ stools if they are asymptomatic, Dr. Drekonja said. In the past, clinicians sometimes tested patients’ stool after therapy to ensure the C. difficile was eradicated, regardless of whether the patient had symptoms of infection, he said.

“We’ve since become much more attuned that there are lots of people who have detectable C. diff in their stool without any symptoms,” whether detectable by culture or PCR, Dr. Drekonja said. “Generally, if you’re doing well and you’re not having diarrhea, don’t test, and if someone does test and finds it, pretend you didn’t see the test,” he advised. “This is a big part of diagnostic stewardship, which is: You don’t go testing people who are doing well.”

The Netherlands Donor Feces Bank used in the research is funded by a grant from Vedanta Biosciences. Dr. Drekonja had no disclosures.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

For the sixth consecutive year, the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., claimed the No. 1 spot in the annual honor roll of best hospitals published July 27 by U.S. News & World Report.
 

This year’s expanded report debuts new ratings for seven “important procedures and conditions to help patients, in consultation with their doctors, narrow down their choice of hospital based on the specific type of care they need,” Ben Harder, managing editor and chief of health analysis, said in a news release.

With new ratings for myocardial infarction, stroke, hip fracture, and back surgery (spinal fusion), the report now ranks 17 procedures and conditions.

Also new to the 2021 report, which marks the 32nd edition, is a look at racial disparities in health care and the inclusion of health equity measures alongside the hospital rankings.

The new measures examine whether the patients each hospital has treated reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of the surrounding community, among other aspects of health equity.

“At roughly four out of five hospitals, we found that the community’s minority residents were underrepresented among patients receiving services such as joint replacement, cancer surgery and common heart procedures,” Mr. Harder said.

“Against this backdrop, however, we found important exceptions – hospitals that provide care to a disproportionate share of their community’s minority residents. These metrics are just a beginning; we aim to expand on our measurement of health equity in the future,” Mr. Harder added.

Mayo and Cleveland Clinic remain tops

Following the Mayo Clinic, the Cleveland Clinic once again takes the No. 2 spot in the magazine’s latest annual honor roll of best hospitals, which highlights hospitals that deliver exceptional treatment across multiple areas of care.

UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, holds the No. 3 spot in 2021. In 2020, UCLA Medical Center and New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York, sat in a tie at No. 4.

In 2021, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, which held the No. 3 spot in 2020, drops to No. 4, while Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston takes the No. 5 spot, up from No. 6 in 2020.

Rounding out the top 10 (in order) are Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles; New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York; NYU Langone Hospitals, New York; UCSF Medical Center, San Francisco; and Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago.
 

2021-2022 Best Hospitals honor roll

1. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

2. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland

3. UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles

4. Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore

5. Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston

6. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, San Francisco

7. New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York

8. NYU Langone Hospitals, New York

9. UCSF Medical Center, San Francisco

10. Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago

11. University of Michigan Hospitals–Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor.

12. Stanford Health Care–Stanford Hospital, Palo Alto, Calif.

13. Hospitals of the University of Pennsylvania–Penn Presbyterian, Philadelphia

14. Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston

15. Mayo Clinic–Phoenix, Phoenix

16. Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston

17. (tie) Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis

17. (tie) Mount Sinai Hospital, New York Rush University Medical Center, Chicago

19. Rush University Medical Center, Chicago

20. Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.

For the 2021-2022 rankings and ratings, the magazine compared more than 4,750 hospitals nationwide in 15 specialties and 17 procedures and conditions.

At least 2,039 hospitals received a high performance rating in at least one of the services rated; 11 hospitals received high performance in all 17. A total of 175 hospitals were nationally ranked in at least one specialty

For specialty rankings, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center continues to hold the No. 1 spot in cancer care, the Hospital for Special Surgery continues to be No. 1 in orthopedics, and the Cleveland Clinic continues to be No. 1 in cardiology and heart surgery.
 

Top five for cancer

1. University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston

2. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York

3. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

4. Dana-Farber/Brigham & Women’s Cancer Center, Boston

5. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland

Top five for cardiology and heart surgery

1. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland

2. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

3. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles

4. New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York

5. NYU Langone Hospitals, New York

Top five for orthopedics

1. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York

2. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

3. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles

4. NYU Langone Orthopedic Hospital, New York

5. UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles

The magazine noted that data for the 2021-2022 Best Hospitals rankings and ratings were not affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, which began after the end of the data collection period.

The methodologies used in determining the rankings are based largely on objective measures, such as risk-adjusted survival, discharge-to-home rates, volume, and quality of nursing, among other care-related indicators.

The full report is available online.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

For the sixth consecutive year, the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., claimed the No. 1 spot in the annual honor roll of best hospitals published July 27 by U.S. News & World Report.
 

This year’s expanded report debuts new ratings for seven “important procedures and conditions to help patients, in consultation with their doctors, narrow down their choice of hospital based on the specific type of care they need,” Ben Harder, managing editor and chief of health analysis, said in a news release.

With new ratings for myocardial infarction, stroke, hip fracture, and back surgery (spinal fusion), the report now ranks 17 procedures and conditions.

Also new to the 2021 report, which marks the 32nd edition, is a look at racial disparities in health care and the inclusion of health equity measures alongside the hospital rankings.

The new measures examine whether the patients each hospital has treated reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of the surrounding community, among other aspects of health equity.

“At roughly four out of five hospitals, we found that the community’s minority residents were underrepresented among patients receiving services such as joint replacement, cancer surgery and common heart procedures,” Mr. Harder said.

“Against this backdrop, however, we found important exceptions – hospitals that provide care to a disproportionate share of their community’s minority residents. These metrics are just a beginning; we aim to expand on our measurement of health equity in the future,” Mr. Harder added.

Mayo and Cleveland Clinic remain tops

Following the Mayo Clinic, the Cleveland Clinic once again takes the No. 2 spot in the magazine’s latest annual honor roll of best hospitals, which highlights hospitals that deliver exceptional treatment across multiple areas of care.

UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, holds the No. 3 spot in 2021. In 2020, UCLA Medical Center and New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York, sat in a tie at No. 4.

In 2021, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, which held the No. 3 spot in 2020, drops to No. 4, while Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston takes the No. 5 spot, up from No. 6 in 2020.

Rounding out the top 10 (in order) are Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles; New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York; NYU Langone Hospitals, New York; UCSF Medical Center, San Francisco; and Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago.
 

2021-2022 Best Hospitals honor roll

1. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

2. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland

3. UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles

4. Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore

5. Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston

6. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, San Francisco

7. New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York

8. NYU Langone Hospitals, New York

9. UCSF Medical Center, San Francisco

10. Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago

11. University of Michigan Hospitals–Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor.

12. Stanford Health Care–Stanford Hospital, Palo Alto, Calif.

13. Hospitals of the University of Pennsylvania–Penn Presbyterian, Philadelphia

14. Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston

15. Mayo Clinic–Phoenix, Phoenix

16. Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston

17. (tie) Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis

17. (tie) Mount Sinai Hospital, New York Rush University Medical Center, Chicago

19. Rush University Medical Center, Chicago

20. Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.

For the 2021-2022 rankings and ratings, the magazine compared more than 4,750 hospitals nationwide in 15 specialties and 17 procedures and conditions.

At least 2,039 hospitals received a high performance rating in at least one of the services rated; 11 hospitals received high performance in all 17. A total of 175 hospitals were nationally ranked in at least one specialty

For specialty rankings, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center continues to hold the No. 1 spot in cancer care, the Hospital for Special Surgery continues to be No. 1 in orthopedics, and the Cleveland Clinic continues to be No. 1 in cardiology and heart surgery.
 

Top five for cancer

1. University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston

2. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York

3. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

4. Dana-Farber/Brigham & Women’s Cancer Center, Boston

5. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland

Top five for cardiology and heart surgery

1. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland

2. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

3. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles

4. New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York

5. NYU Langone Hospitals, New York

Top five for orthopedics

1. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York

2. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

3. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles

4. NYU Langone Orthopedic Hospital, New York

5. UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles

The magazine noted that data for the 2021-2022 Best Hospitals rankings and ratings were not affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, which began after the end of the data collection period.

The methodologies used in determining the rankings are based largely on objective measures, such as risk-adjusted survival, discharge-to-home rates, volume, and quality of nursing, among other care-related indicators.

The full report is available online.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

For the sixth consecutive year, the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., claimed the No. 1 spot in the annual honor roll of best hospitals published July 27 by U.S. News & World Report.
 

This year’s expanded report debuts new ratings for seven “important procedures and conditions to help patients, in consultation with their doctors, narrow down their choice of hospital based on the specific type of care they need,” Ben Harder, managing editor and chief of health analysis, said in a news release.

With new ratings for myocardial infarction, stroke, hip fracture, and back surgery (spinal fusion), the report now ranks 17 procedures and conditions.

Also new to the 2021 report, which marks the 32nd edition, is a look at racial disparities in health care and the inclusion of health equity measures alongside the hospital rankings.

The new measures examine whether the patients each hospital has treated reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of the surrounding community, among other aspects of health equity.

“At roughly four out of five hospitals, we found that the community’s minority residents were underrepresented among patients receiving services such as joint replacement, cancer surgery and common heart procedures,” Mr. Harder said.

“Against this backdrop, however, we found important exceptions – hospitals that provide care to a disproportionate share of their community’s minority residents. These metrics are just a beginning; we aim to expand on our measurement of health equity in the future,” Mr. Harder added.

Mayo and Cleveland Clinic remain tops

Following the Mayo Clinic, the Cleveland Clinic once again takes the No. 2 spot in the magazine’s latest annual honor roll of best hospitals, which highlights hospitals that deliver exceptional treatment across multiple areas of care.

UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, holds the No. 3 spot in 2021. In 2020, UCLA Medical Center and New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York, sat in a tie at No. 4.

In 2021, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, which held the No. 3 spot in 2020, drops to No. 4, while Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston takes the No. 5 spot, up from No. 6 in 2020.

Rounding out the top 10 (in order) are Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles; New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York; NYU Langone Hospitals, New York; UCSF Medical Center, San Francisco; and Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago.
 

2021-2022 Best Hospitals honor roll

1. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

2. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland

3. UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles

4. Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore

5. Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston

6. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, San Francisco

7. New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York

8. NYU Langone Hospitals, New York

9. UCSF Medical Center, San Francisco

10. Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago

11. University of Michigan Hospitals–Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor.

12. Stanford Health Care–Stanford Hospital, Palo Alto, Calif.

13. Hospitals of the University of Pennsylvania–Penn Presbyterian, Philadelphia

14. Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston

15. Mayo Clinic–Phoenix, Phoenix

16. Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston

17. (tie) Barnes-Jewish Hospital, St. Louis

17. (tie) Mount Sinai Hospital, New York Rush University Medical Center, Chicago

19. Rush University Medical Center, Chicago

20. Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn.

For the 2021-2022 rankings and ratings, the magazine compared more than 4,750 hospitals nationwide in 15 specialties and 17 procedures and conditions.

At least 2,039 hospitals received a high performance rating in at least one of the services rated; 11 hospitals received high performance in all 17. A total of 175 hospitals were nationally ranked in at least one specialty

For specialty rankings, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center continues to hold the No. 1 spot in cancer care, the Hospital for Special Surgery continues to be No. 1 in orthopedics, and the Cleveland Clinic continues to be No. 1 in cardiology and heart surgery.
 

Top five for cancer

1. University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston

2. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York

3. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

4. Dana-Farber/Brigham & Women’s Cancer Center, Boston

5. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland

Top five for cardiology and heart surgery

1. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland

2. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

3. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles

4. New York–Presbyterian Hospital–Columbia and Cornell, New York

5. NYU Langone Hospitals, New York

Top five for orthopedics

1. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York

2. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

3. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles

4. NYU Langone Orthopedic Hospital, New York

5. UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles

The magazine noted that data for the 2021-2022 Best Hospitals rankings and ratings were not affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, which began after the end of the data collection period.

The methodologies used in determining the rankings are based largely on objective measures, such as risk-adjusted survival, discharge-to-home rates, volume, and quality of nursing, among other care-related indicators.

The full report is available online.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

You have a will, so you can rest easy, right? Not necessarily. If your will is outdated, it can actually cause more harm than good. Even though it can provide for some contingencies, an old will can’t cover every change that may have occurred since it was first drawn. Here are five reasons to update your will.

Keep it current

When life changes, so should your will. Ensure that this important document matches your current wishes by reviewing it every few years.

Take a look at what has changed

Professionals advise that you review your will every few years and more often if situations such as the following five have occurred since you last updated your will.

• Family changes. If you’ve had any changes in your family situation, you will probably need to update your will. Events such as marriage, divorce, death, birth, adoption, or a falling out with a loved one may affect how your estate will be distributed, who should act as guardian for your dependents, and who should be named as executor of your estate.
• Relocating to a new state. The laws among the states vary. Moving to a new state or purchasing property in another state can affect your estate plan and how property in that state will be taxed and distributed.
• Changes in your estate’s value. When you made your will, your assets may have been relatively modest. Now the value may be larger and your will no longer reflects how you would like your estate divided.
• Tax law changes. Federal and state legislatures are continually tinkering with federal estate and state inheritance tax laws. An old will may fail to take advantage of strategies that will minimize estate taxes.
• You want to support a favorite cause. If you have developed a connection to a cause, you may want to benefit a particular charity with a gift in your estate. Contact us for sample language you can share with your attorney to include a gift to us in your will.

Get the help you need

To make sure your will accomplishes all you intend, seek the help of an attorney who specializes in estate planning. Already finalized your charitable distribution to the AGA Research Foundation? Send us your letter of intent at foundation@gastro.org.

You have a will, so you can rest easy, right? Not necessarily. If your will is outdated, it can actually cause more harm than good. Even though it can provide for some contingencies, an old will can’t cover every change that may have occurred since it was first drawn. Here are five reasons to update your will.

Keep it current

When life changes, so should your will. Ensure that this important document matches your current wishes by reviewing it every few years.

Take a look at what has changed

Professionals advise that you review your will every few years and more often if situations such as the following five have occurred since you last updated your will.

• Family changes. If you’ve had any changes in your family situation, you will probably need to update your will. Events such as marriage, divorce, death, birth, adoption, or a falling out with a loved one may affect how your estate will be distributed, who should act as guardian for your dependents, and who should be named as executor of your estate.
• Relocating to a new state. The laws among the states vary. Moving to a new state or purchasing property in another state can affect your estate plan and how property in that state will be taxed and distributed.
• Changes in your estate’s value. When you made your will, your assets may have been relatively modest. Now the value may be larger and your will no longer reflects how you would like your estate divided.
• Tax law changes. Federal and state legislatures are continually tinkering with federal estate and state inheritance tax laws. An old will may fail to take advantage of strategies that will minimize estate taxes.
• You want to support a favorite cause. If you have developed a connection to a cause, you may want to benefit a particular charity with a gift in your estate. Contact us for sample language you can share with your attorney to include a gift to us in your will.

Get the help you need

To make sure your will accomplishes all you intend, seek the help of an attorney who specializes in estate planning. Already finalized your charitable distribution to the AGA Research Foundation? Send us your letter of intent at foundation@gastro.org.

You have a will, so you can rest easy, right? Not necessarily. If your will is outdated, it can actually cause more harm than good. Even though it can provide for some contingencies, an old will can’t cover every change that may have occurred since it was first drawn. Here are five reasons to update your will.

Keep it current

When life changes, so should your will. Ensure that this important document matches your current wishes by reviewing it every few years.

Take a look at what has changed

Professionals advise that you review your will every few years and more often if situations such as the following five have occurred since you last updated your will.

• Family changes. If you’ve had any changes in your family situation, you will probably need to update your will. Events such as marriage, divorce, death, birth, adoption, or a falling out with a loved one may affect how your estate will be distributed, who should act as guardian for your dependents, and who should be named as executor of your estate.
• Relocating to a new state. The laws among the states vary. Moving to a new state or purchasing property in another state can affect your estate plan and how property in that state will be taxed and distributed.
• Changes in your estate’s value. When you made your will, your assets may have been relatively modest. Now the value may be larger and your will no longer reflects how you would like your estate divided.
• Tax law changes. Federal and state legislatures are continually tinkering with federal estate and state inheritance tax laws. An old will may fail to take advantage of strategies that will minimize estate taxes.
• You want to support a favorite cause. If you have developed a connection to a cause, you may want to benefit a particular charity with a gift in your estate. Contact us for sample language you can share with your attorney to include a gift to us in your will.

Get the help you need

To make sure your will accomplishes all you intend, seek the help of an attorney who specializes in estate planning. Already finalized your charitable distribution to the AGA Research Foundation? Send us your letter of intent at foundation@gastro.org.

Physicians with difficult patient scenarios regularly bring their questions to the AGA Community ( https://community.gastro.org ) to seek advice from colleagues about therapy and disease management options, best practices, and diagnoses. Here’s a preview of a recent popular clinical discussion:  

From Brock Doubledee, DO: Xeljanz for Crohn’s

“I have a 20-year-old female with moderately active Crohn’s disease who has now failed Humira, Remicade, Entyvio and Stelara. The only option I know of for her at this time is Xeljanz, however her insurance will not approve this medication given its lack of FDA approval. I would be interested to know if anyone has any other recommended options or has had success with getting insurance approval. If you have had success I would appreciate any articles or guidance you have utilized to gain this approval.”

See how AGA members responded and join the discussion: https://community.gastro.org/posts/24445.

Physicians with difficult patient scenarios regularly bring their questions to the AGA Community ( https://community.gastro.org ) to seek advice from colleagues about therapy and disease management options, best practices, and diagnoses. Here’s a preview of a recent popular clinical discussion:  

From Brock Doubledee, DO: Xeljanz for Crohn’s

“I have a 20-year-old female with moderately active Crohn’s disease who has now failed Humira, Remicade, Entyvio and Stelara. The only option I know of for her at this time is Xeljanz, however her insurance will not approve this medication given its lack of FDA approval. I would be interested to know if anyone has any other recommended options or has had success with getting insurance approval. If you have had success I would appreciate any articles or guidance you have utilized to gain this approval.”

See how AGA members responded and join the discussion: https://community.gastro.org/posts/24445.

Physicians with difficult patient scenarios regularly bring their questions to the AGA Community ( https://community.gastro.org ) to seek advice from colleagues about therapy and disease management options, best practices, and diagnoses. Here’s a preview of a recent popular clinical discussion:  

From Brock Doubledee, DO: Xeljanz for Crohn’s

“I have a 20-year-old female with moderately active Crohn’s disease who has now failed Humira, Remicade, Entyvio and Stelara. The only option I know of for her at this time is Xeljanz, however her insurance will not approve this medication given its lack of FDA approval. I would be interested to know if anyone has any other recommended options or has had success with getting insurance approval. If you have had success I would appreciate any articles or guidance you have utilized to gain this approval.”

See how AGA members responded and join the discussion: https://community.gastro.org/posts/24445.

The initial manifestations of dysautonomia may be dermatologic related, so awareness of what to look for is essential.

During the annual meeting of the Society for Pediatric Dermatology, Adelaide A. Hebert, MD, defined dysautonomia as an umbrella term describing conditions that result in a malfunction of the autonomic nervous system. “This encompasses both the sympathetic and the parasympathetic components of the nervous system,” said Dr. Hebert, professor of dermatology and pediatrics, and chief of pediatric dermatology at the University of Texas, Houston. “Clinical findings may be neurometabolic, developmental, and/or degenerative,” representing a “whole constellation of issues” that physicians may encounter in practice, she noted. Of particular interest is postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), which affects between 1 million and 3 million people in the United States. Typical symptoms include lightheadedness, fainting, and a rapid increase in heartbeat after standing up from a seated position. Other conditions associated with dysautonomia include neurocardiogenic syncope and multiple system atrophy.

Dysautonomia can impact the brain, heart, mouth, blood vessels, eyes, immune cells, and bladder, as well as the skin. Patient presentations vary with symptoms that can range from mild to debilitating. The average time from symptom onset to diagnosis of dysautonomia is 7 years. “It is very difficult to put together these mysterious symptoms that patients have unless one really thinks about dysautonomia as a possible diagnosis,” Dr. Hebert said.

One of the common symptoms that she has seen in her clinical practice is joint hypermobility. “There is a known association between dysautonomia and hypermobile-type Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS), and these patients often have hyperhidrosis,” she said. “So, keep in mind that you could see hypermobility, especially in those with EDS, with associated hyperhidrosis and dysautonomia.” Two key references that she recommends to clinicians when evaluating patients with possible dysautonomia are a study on postural tachycardia in hypermobile EDS, and an article on cardiovascular autonomic dysfunction in hypermobile EDS.

The Beighton Scoring System, which measures joint mobility on a 9-point scale, involves assessment of the joint mobility of the knuckle of both pinky fingers, the base of both thumbs, the elbows, knees, and spine. An instructional video on how to perform a joint hypermobility assessment is available on the Ehler-Danlos Society website.

Literature review

In March 2021, Dr. Hebert and colleagues from other medical specialties published a summary of the literature on cutaneous manifestations in dysautonomia, with an emphasis on syndromes of orthostatic intolerance. “We had neurology, cardiology, along with dermatology involved in contributing the findings they had seen in the UTHealth McGovern Dysautonomia Center of Excellence as there was a dearth of literature that taught us about the cutaneous manifestations of orthostatic intolerance syndromes,” Dr. Hebert said.

One study included in the review showed that 23 out of 26 patients with POTS had at least one of the following cutaneous manifestations: flushing, Raynaud’s phenomenon, evanescent hyperemia, livedo reticularis, erythromelalgia, and hypo- or hyperhidrosis. “If you see a patient with any of these findings, you want to think about the possibility of dysautonomia,” she said, adding that urticaria can also be a finding.

To screen for dysautonomia, she advised, “ask patients if they have difficulty sitting or standing upright, if they have indigestion or other gastric symptoms, abnormal blood vessel functioning such as low or high blood pressure, increased or decreased sweating, changes in urinary frequency or urinary incontinence, or challenges with vision.”

If the patient answers yes to two or more of these questions, she said, consider a referral to neurology and/or cardiology or a center of excellence for further evaluation with tilt-table testing and other screening tools. She also recommended a review published in 2015 that describes the dermatological manifestations of postural tachycardia syndrome and includes illustrated cases.

One of Dr. Hebert’s future dermatology residents assembled a composite of data from the Dysautonomia Center of Excellence, and in the study, found that, compared with males, females with dysautonomia suffer more from excessive sweating, paleness of the face, pale extremities, swelling, cyanosis, cold intolerance, flushing, and hot flashes.

Dr. Hebert disclosed that she has been a consultant to and an adviser for several pharmaceutical companies.

dbrunk@mdedge.com

The initial manifestations of dysautonomia may be dermatologic related, so awareness of what to look for is essential.

During the annual meeting of the Society for Pediatric Dermatology, Adelaide A. Hebert, MD, defined dysautonomia as an umbrella term describing conditions that result in a malfunction of the autonomic nervous system. “This encompasses both the sympathetic and the parasympathetic components of the nervous system,” said Dr. Hebert, professor of dermatology and pediatrics, and chief of pediatric dermatology at the University of Texas, Houston. “Clinical findings may be neurometabolic, developmental, and/or degenerative,” representing a “whole constellation of issues” that physicians may encounter in practice, she noted. Of particular interest is postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), which affects between 1 million and 3 million people in the United States. Typical symptoms include lightheadedness, fainting, and a rapid increase in heartbeat after standing up from a seated position. Other conditions associated with dysautonomia include neurocardiogenic syncope and multiple system atrophy.

Dysautonomia can impact the brain, heart, mouth, blood vessels, eyes, immune cells, and bladder, as well as the skin. Patient presentations vary with symptoms that can range from mild to debilitating. The average time from symptom onset to diagnosis of dysautonomia is 7 years. “It is very difficult to put together these mysterious symptoms that patients have unless one really thinks about dysautonomia as a possible diagnosis,” Dr. Hebert said.

One of the common symptoms that she has seen in her clinical practice is joint hypermobility. “There is a known association between dysautonomia and hypermobile-type Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS), and these patients often have hyperhidrosis,” she said. “So, keep in mind that you could see hypermobility, especially in those with EDS, with associated hyperhidrosis and dysautonomia.” Two key references that she recommends to clinicians when evaluating patients with possible dysautonomia are a study on postural tachycardia in hypermobile EDS, and an article on cardiovascular autonomic dysfunction in hypermobile EDS.

The Beighton Scoring System, which measures joint mobility on a 9-point scale, involves assessment of the joint mobility of the knuckle of both pinky fingers, the base of both thumbs, the elbows, knees, and spine. An instructional video on how to perform a joint hypermobility assessment is available on the Ehler-Danlos Society website.

Literature review

In March 2021, Dr. Hebert and colleagues from other medical specialties published a summary of the literature on cutaneous manifestations in dysautonomia, with an emphasis on syndromes of orthostatic intolerance. “We had neurology, cardiology, along with dermatology involved in contributing the findings they had seen in the UTHealth McGovern Dysautonomia Center of Excellence as there was a dearth of literature that taught us about the cutaneous manifestations of orthostatic intolerance syndromes,” Dr. Hebert said.

One study included in the review showed that 23 out of 26 patients with POTS had at least one of the following cutaneous manifestations: flushing, Raynaud’s phenomenon, evanescent hyperemia, livedo reticularis, erythromelalgia, and hypo- or hyperhidrosis. “If you see a patient with any of these findings, you want to think about the possibility of dysautonomia,” she said, adding that urticaria can also be a finding.

To screen for dysautonomia, she advised, “ask patients if they have difficulty sitting or standing upright, if they have indigestion or other gastric symptoms, abnormal blood vessel functioning such as low or high blood pressure, increased or decreased sweating, changes in urinary frequency or urinary incontinence, or challenges with vision.”

If the patient answers yes to two or more of these questions, she said, consider a referral to neurology and/or cardiology or a center of excellence for further evaluation with tilt-table testing and other screening tools. She also recommended a review published in 2015 that describes the dermatological manifestations of postural tachycardia syndrome and includes illustrated cases.

One of Dr. Hebert’s future dermatology residents assembled a composite of data from the Dysautonomia Center of Excellence, and in the study, found that, compared with males, females with dysautonomia suffer more from excessive sweating, paleness of the face, pale extremities, swelling, cyanosis, cold intolerance, flushing, and hot flashes.

Dr. Hebert disclosed that she has been a consultant to and an adviser for several pharmaceutical companies.

dbrunk@mdedge.com

The initial manifestations of dysautonomia may be dermatologic related, so awareness of what to look for is essential.

During the annual meeting of the Society for Pediatric Dermatology, Adelaide A. Hebert, MD, defined dysautonomia as an umbrella term describing conditions that result in a malfunction of the autonomic nervous system. “This encompasses both the sympathetic and the parasympathetic components of the nervous system,” said Dr. Hebert, professor of dermatology and pediatrics, and chief of pediatric dermatology at the University of Texas, Houston. “Clinical findings may be neurometabolic, developmental, and/or degenerative,” representing a “whole constellation of issues” that physicians may encounter in practice, she noted. Of particular interest is postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), which affects between 1 million and 3 million people in the United States. Typical symptoms include lightheadedness, fainting, and a rapid increase in heartbeat after standing up from a seated position. Other conditions associated with dysautonomia include neurocardiogenic syncope and multiple system atrophy.

Dysautonomia can impact the brain, heart, mouth, blood vessels, eyes, immune cells, and bladder, as well as the skin. Patient presentations vary with symptoms that can range from mild to debilitating. The average time from symptom onset to diagnosis of dysautonomia is 7 years. “It is very difficult to put together these mysterious symptoms that patients have unless one really thinks about dysautonomia as a possible diagnosis,” Dr. Hebert said.

One of the common symptoms that she has seen in her clinical practice is joint hypermobility. “There is a known association between dysautonomia and hypermobile-type Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS), and these patients often have hyperhidrosis,” she said. “So, keep in mind that you could see hypermobility, especially in those with EDS, with associated hyperhidrosis and dysautonomia.” Two key references that she recommends to clinicians when evaluating patients with possible dysautonomia are a study on postural tachycardia in hypermobile EDS, and an article on cardiovascular autonomic dysfunction in hypermobile EDS.

The Beighton Scoring System, which measures joint mobility on a 9-point scale, involves assessment of the joint mobility of the knuckle of both pinky fingers, the base of both thumbs, the elbows, knees, and spine. An instructional video on how to perform a joint hypermobility assessment is available on the Ehler-Danlos Society website.

Literature review

In March 2021, Dr. Hebert and colleagues from other medical specialties published a summary of the literature on cutaneous manifestations in dysautonomia, with an emphasis on syndromes of orthostatic intolerance. “We had neurology, cardiology, along with dermatology involved in contributing the findings they had seen in the UTHealth McGovern Dysautonomia Center of Excellence as there was a dearth of literature that taught us about the cutaneous manifestations of orthostatic intolerance syndromes,” Dr. Hebert said.

One study included in the review showed that 23 out of 26 patients with POTS had at least one of the following cutaneous manifestations: flushing, Raynaud’s phenomenon, evanescent hyperemia, livedo reticularis, erythromelalgia, and hypo- or hyperhidrosis. “If you see a patient with any of these findings, you want to think about the possibility of dysautonomia,” she said, adding that urticaria can also be a finding.

To screen for dysautonomia, she advised, “ask patients if they have difficulty sitting or standing upright, if they have indigestion or other gastric symptoms, abnormal blood vessel functioning such as low or high blood pressure, increased or decreased sweating, changes in urinary frequency or urinary incontinence, or challenges with vision.”

If the patient answers yes to two or more of these questions, she said, consider a referral to neurology and/or cardiology or a center of excellence for further evaluation with tilt-table testing and other screening tools. She also recommended a review published in 2015 that describes the dermatological manifestations of postural tachycardia syndrome and includes illustrated cases.

One of Dr. Hebert’s future dermatology residents assembled a composite of data from the Dysautonomia Center of Excellence, and in the study, found that, compared with males, females with dysautonomia suffer more from excessive sweating, paleness of the face, pale extremities, swelling, cyanosis, cold intolerance, flushing, and hot flashes.

Dr. Hebert disclosed that she has been a consultant to and an adviser for several pharmaceutical companies.

dbrunk@mdedge.com

Rates of heart failure (HF) caused by methamphetamine abuse are climbing quickly in the western United States, at great financial and societal cost, suggests an analysis that documents the trends in California over a recent decade.

In the new study, methamphetamine-associated HF (meth-HF) admissions in the state rose by 585% between 2008 and 2018, and charges related those hospitalizations jumped 840%. Cases of HF unrelated to meth fell by 6% during the same period.

The recent explosion in meth-HF hospitalizations has also been costly for society in general, because most cases are younger adults in their most productive, prime earning years, Susan X. Zhao, MD, Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, San Jose, Calif., said in an interview.

“Over the past 11 years, especially since 2018, it has really started to take off, with a pretty dramatic rise. And it happened without much attention, because when we think about drugs, we think about acute overdose and not so much about the chronic, smoldering, long-term effects,” said Dr. Zhao, who is lead author on the study published July 13, 2021, in Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes.

“It’s really affecting a section of the population that is not supposed to be having heart failure problems. I think it is going to continue for the next decade until we put a stop to the parent problem, which is methamphetamine,” Dr. Zhao said. “We’re at the beginning, even though the rise has been pretty dramatic. The worst is yet to come.”
 

Under the radar

Methamphetamine-associated HF has been a growing problem for many years but has largely been “flying under the radar” because HF hospitalization data focus on Medicare-age patients, not the overwhelmingly younger meth-HF population, the report notes.

“We have to get this message out. Many of my patients with meth heart failure had no idea this would happen to them. They didn’t know,” Dr. Zhao said. “Once I tell them that this is what methamphetamines will do to you after years and years of use, they say they wish someone had told them.”

Dr. Zhao and colleagues looked at HF admission data collected by California’s Health and Human Services Agency to assess meth-HF trends and disease burden. They identified 1,033,076 HF hospitalizations during the decade, of which 42,565 (4.12%) were for meth-HF.

Patients hospitalized with meth-HF had a mean age of 49.6 years, compared with 72.2 for the other patients admitted with HF (P < .001). Virtually all of the patients hospitalized for meth-HF were younger than 65 years: 94.5%, compared with 30% for the other HF patients (P < .001).

Hospitalized patients with meth-HF were mostly men, their prevalence of 80% contrasting with 52.4% for patients with non–meth-related HF (P < .001).

Rates of hospitalization for meth-HF steadily increased during the study period. The age-adjusted rate of meth-HF hospitalization per 100,000 rose from 4.1 in 2008 to 28.1 in 2018. The rate of hospitalization for HF unrelated to meth actually declined, going from 342.3 in 2008 to 321.6 in 2018.

Charges for hospitalizations related to meth-HF shot up more than eight times, from $41.5 million in 2008 to $390.2 million in 2018. In contrast, charges for other HF hospitalizations rose by only 82%, from $3.5 billion to $6.3 billion.
 

Multiple layers of prevention

Dr. Zhao proposed ways that clinicians can communicate with their patients who are using or considering to use meth. “There are multiple layers of prevention. For people who are thinking of using meth, they need to get the message that something really bad can happen to them years down the road. They’re not going to die from it overnight, but it will damage the heart slowly,” she said.

The next layer of prevention can potentially help meth users who have not yet developed heart problems, Dr. Zhao said. “This would be the time to say, ‘you’re so lucky, your heart is still good. It’s time to stop because people like you, a few years from now are going to die prematurely from a very horrible, very suffering kind of death’.”

Importantly, in meth users who have already developed HF, even then it may not be too late to reverse the cardiomyopathy and symptoms. For up to a third of people with established meth-HF, “if they stop using meth, if they take good cardiac medications, and if the heart failure is in an early enough course, their heart can entirely revert to normal,” Dr. Zhao said, citing an earlier work from her and her colleagues.

Currently, methamphetamine abuse has taken especially strong root in rural areas in California and the Midwest. But Dr. Zhao predicts it will soon become prevalent throughout the United States.
 

Spotlight on an ‘epidemic’

The rapid growth of the methamphetamine “epidemic” has been well-documented in the United States and around the world, observed an accompanying editorial from Pavan Reddy, MD, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Morningside, New York, and Uri Elkayam, MD, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.

They contend that more attention has been given to opioid overdose deaths; meth abuse does not seem to command the same attention, likely because meth is not as strongly associated with acute overdose.

But meth, wrote Dr. Reddy and Dr. Elkayam, “is a different drug with its own M.O., equally dangerous and costly to society but more insidious in nature, its effects potentially causing decades of mental and physical debilitation before ending in premature death.”

The current study “has turned a spotlight on a public health crisis that has grown unfettered for over 2 decades,” and is a call for the “medical community to recognize and manage cases of meth-HF with a comprehensive approach that addresses both mental and physical illness,” they concluded. “Only then can we hope to properly help these patients and with that, reduce the socioeconomic burden of meth-HF.”
 

A quietly building crisis

The sharp rise in meth-HF hospitalizations is an expected reflection of the methamphetamine crisis, which has been quietly building over the last few years, addiction psychiatrist Corneliu N. Stanciu, MD, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, N.H., said in an interview.

“This new version of methamphetamines looks like ice and is more potent and toxic than former versions traditionally made in home-built labs,” he said. Lately the vast majority of methamphetamines in the United States have come from Mexico, are less expensive with higher purity, “and can be manufactured in greater quantities.”

Some patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) also inject methamphetamines, which can make OUD treatment clinics good places to screen for meth abuse and educate about its cardiovascular implications, Dr. Stanciu said.

“Just as addiction treatment centers present an opportunity to implement cardiac screening and referrals,” he said, “cardiology visits and hospitalizations such as those for meth-HF also present a golden opportunity for involvement of substance use disorder interventions and referrals to get patients into treatment and prevent further damage through ongoing use.”

Dr. Zhao, Dr. Reddy, Dr. Eklayam, and Dr. Stanciu report no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Rates of heart failure (HF) caused by methamphetamine abuse are climbing quickly in the western United States, at great financial and societal cost, suggests an analysis that documents the trends in California over a recent decade.

In the new study, methamphetamine-associated HF (meth-HF) admissions in the state rose by 585% between 2008 and 2018, and charges related those hospitalizations jumped 840%. Cases of HF unrelated to meth fell by 6% during the same period.

The recent explosion in meth-HF hospitalizations has also been costly for society in general, because most cases are younger adults in their most productive, prime earning years, Susan X. Zhao, MD, Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, San Jose, Calif., said in an interview.

“Over the past 11 years, especially since 2018, it has really started to take off, with a pretty dramatic rise. And it happened without much attention, because when we think about drugs, we think about acute overdose and not so much about the chronic, smoldering, long-term effects,” said Dr. Zhao, who is lead author on the study published July 13, 2021, in Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes.

“It’s really affecting a section of the population that is not supposed to be having heart failure problems. I think it is going to continue for the next decade until we put a stop to the parent problem, which is methamphetamine,” Dr. Zhao said. “We’re at the beginning, even though the rise has been pretty dramatic. The worst is yet to come.”
 

Under the radar

Methamphetamine-associated HF has been a growing problem for many years but has largely been “flying under the radar” because HF hospitalization data focus on Medicare-age patients, not the overwhelmingly younger meth-HF population, the report notes.

“We have to get this message out. Many of my patients with meth heart failure had no idea this would happen to them. They didn’t know,” Dr. Zhao said. “Once I tell them that this is what methamphetamines will do to you after years and years of use, they say they wish someone had told them.”

Dr. Zhao and colleagues looked at HF admission data collected by California’s Health and Human Services Agency to assess meth-HF trends and disease burden. They identified 1,033,076 HF hospitalizations during the decade, of which 42,565 (4.12%) were for meth-HF.

Patients hospitalized with meth-HF had a mean age of 49.6 years, compared with 72.2 for the other patients admitted with HF (P < .001). Virtually all of the patients hospitalized for meth-HF were younger than 65 years: 94.5%, compared with 30% for the other HF patients (P < .001).

Hospitalized patients with meth-HF were mostly men, their prevalence of 80% contrasting with 52.4% for patients with non–meth-related HF (P < .001).

Rates of hospitalization for meth-HF steadily increased during the study period. The age-adjusted rate of meth-HF hospitalization per 100,000 rose from 4.1 in 2008 to 28.1 in 2018. The rate of hospitalization for HF unrelated to meth actually declined, going from 342.3 in 2008 to 321.6 in 2018.

Charges for hospitalizations related to meth-HF shot up more than eight times, from $41.5 million in 2008 to $390.2 million in 2018. In contrast, charges for other HF hospitalizations rose by only 82%, from $3.5 billion to $6.3 billion.
 

Multiple layers of prevention

Dr. Zhao proposed ways that clinicians can communicate with their patients who are using or considering to use meth. “There are multiple layers of prevention. For people who are thinking of using meth, they need to get the message that something really bad can happen to them years down the road. They’re not going to die from it overnight, but it will damage the heart slowly,” she said.

The next layer of prevention can potentially help meth users who have not yet developed heart problems, Dr. Zhao said. “This would be the time to say, ‘you’re so lucky, your heart is still good. It’s time to stop because people like you, a few years from now are going to die prematurely from a very horrible, very suffering kind of death’.”

Importantly, in meth users who have already developed HF, even then it may not be too late to reverse the cardiomyopathy and symptoms. For up to a third of people with established meth-HF, “if they stop using meth, if they take good cardiac medications, and if the heart failure is in an early enough course, their heart can entirely revert to normal,” Dr. Zhao said, citing an earlier work from her and her colleagues.

Currently, methamphetamine abuse has taken especially strong root in rural areas in California and the Midwest. But Dr. Zhao predicts it will soon become prevalent throughout the United States.
 

Spotlight on an ‘epidemic’

The rapid growth of the methamphetamine “epidemic” has been well-documented in the United States and around the world, observed an accompanying editorial from Pavan Reddy, MD, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Morningside, New York, and Uri Elkayam, MD, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.

They contend that more attention has been given to opioid overdose deaths; meth abuse does not seem to command the same attention, likely because meth is not as strongly associated with acute overdose.

But meth, wrote Dr. Reddy and Dr. Elkayam, “is a different drug with its own M.O., equally dangerous and costly to society but more insidious in nature, its effects potentially causing decades of mental and physical debilitation before ending in premature death.”

The current study “has turned a spotlight on a public health crisis that has grown unfettered for over 2 decades,” and is a call for the “medical community to recognize and manage cases of meth-HF with a comprehensive approach that addresses both mental and physical illness,” they concluded. “Only then can we hope to properly help these patients and with that, reduce the socioeconomic burden of meth-HF.”
 

A quietly building crisis

The sharp rise in meth-HF hospitalizations is an expected reflection of the methamphetamine crisis, which has been quietly building over the last few years, addiction psychiatrist Corneliu N. Stanciu, MD, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, N.H., said in an interview.

“This new version of methamphetamines looks like ice and is more potent and toxic than former versions traditionally made in home-built labs,” he said. Lately the vast majority of methamphetamines in the United States have come from Mexico, are less expensive with higher purity, “and can be manufactured in greater quantities.”

Some patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) also inject methamphetamines, which can make OUD treatment clinics good places to screen for meth abuse and educate about its cardiovascular implications, Dr. Stanciu said.

“Just as addiction treatment centers present an opportunity to implement cardiac screening and referrals,” he said, “cardiology visits and hospitalizations such as those for meth-HF also present a golden opportunity for involvement of substance use disorder interventions and referrals to get patients into treatment and prevent further damage through ongoing use.”

Dr. Zhao, Dr. Reddy, Dr. Eklayam, and Dr. Stanciu report no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Rates of heart failure (HF) caused by methamphetamine abuse are climbing quickly in the western United States, at great financial and societal cost, suggests an analysis that documents the trends in California over a recent decade.

In the new study, methamphetamine-associated HF (meth-HF) admissions in the state rose by 585% between 2008 and 2018, and charges related those hospitalizations jumped 840%. Cases of HF unrelated to meth fell by 6% during the same period.

The recent explosion in meth-HF hospitalizations has also been costly for society in general, because most cases are younger adults in their most productive, prime earning years, Susan X. Zhao, MD, Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, San Jose, Calif., said in an interview.

“Over the past 11 years, especially since 2018, it has really started to take off, with a pretty dramatic rise. And it happened without much attention, because when we think about drugs, we think about acute overdose and not so much about the chronic, smoldering, long-term effects,” said Dr. Zhao, who is lead author on the study published July 13, 2021, in Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes.

“It’s really affecting a section of the population that is not supposed to be having heart failure problems. I think it is going to continue for the next decade until we put a stop to the parent problem, which is methamphetamine,” Dr. Zhao said. “We’re at the beginning, even though the rise has been pretty dramatic. The worst is yet to come.”
 

Under the radar

Methamphetamine-associated HF has been a growing problem for many years but has largely been “flying under the radar” because HF hospitalization data focus on Medicare-age patients, not the overwhelmingly younger meth-HF population, the report notes.

“We have to get this message out. Many of my patients with meth heart failure had no idea this would happen to them. They didn’t know,” Dr. Zhao said. “Once I tell them that this is what methamphetamines will do to you after years and years of use, they say they wish someone had told them.”

Dr. Zhao and colleagues looked at HF admission data collected by California’s Health and Human Services Agency to assess meth-HF trends and disease burden. They identified 1,033,076 HF hospitalizations during the decade, of which 42,565 (4.12%) were for meth-HF.

Patients hospitalized with meth-HF had a mean age of 49.6 years, compared with 72.2 for the other patients admitted with HF (P < .001). Virtually all of the patients hospitalized for meth-HF were younger than 65 years: 94.5%, compared with 30% for the other HF patients (P < .001).

Hospitalized patients with meth-HF were mostly men, their prevalence of 80% contrasting with 52.4% for patients with non–meth-related HF (P < .001).

Rates of hospitalization for meth-HF steadily increased during the study period. The age-adjusted rate of meth-HF hospitalization per 100,000 rose from 4.1 in 2008 to 28.1 in 2018. The rate of hospitalization for HF unrelated to meth actually declined, going from 342.3 in 2008 to 321.6 in 2018.

Charges for hospitalizations related to meth-HF shot up more than eight times, from $41.5 million in 2008 to $390.2 million in 2018. In contrast, charges for other HF hospitalizations rose by only 82%, from $3.5 billion to $6.3 billion.
 

Multiple layers of prevention

Dr. Zhao proposed ways that clinicians can communicate with their patients who are using or considering to use meth. “There are multiple layers of prevention. For people who are thinking of using meth, they need to get the message that something really bad can happen to them years down the road. They’re not going to die from it overnight, but it will damage the heart slowly,” she said.

The next layer of prevention can potentially help meth users who have not yet developed heart problems, Dr. Zhao said. “This would be the time to say, ‘you’re so lucky, your heart is still good. It’s time to stop because people like you, a few years from now are going to die prematurely from a very horrible, very suffering kind of death’.”

Importantly, in meth users who have already developed HF, even then it may not be too late to reverse the cardiomyopathy and symptoms. For up to a third of people with established meth-HF, “if they stop using meth, if they take good cardiac medications, and if the heart failure is in an early enough course, their heart can entirely revert to normal,” Dr. Zhao said, citing an earlier work from her and her colleagues.

Currently, methamphetamine abuse has taken especially strong root in rural areas in California and the Midwest. But Dr. Zhao predicts it will soon become prevalent throughout the United States.
 

Spotlight on an ‘epidemic’

The rapid growth of the methamphetamine “epidemic” has been well-documented in the United States and around the world, observed an accompanying editorial from Pavan Reddy, MD, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Morningside, New York, and Uri Elkayam, MD, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.

They contend that more attention has been given to opioid overdose deaths; meth abuse does not seem to command the same attention, likely because meth is not as strongly associated with acute overdose.

But meth, wrote Dr. Reddy and Dr. Elkayam, “is a different drug with its own M.O., equally dangerous and costly to society but more insidious in nature, its effects potentially causing decades of mental and physical debilitation before ending in premature death.”

The current study “has turned a spotlight on a public health crisis that has grown unfettered for over 2 decades,” and is a call for the “medical community to recognize and manage cases of meth-HF with a comprehensive approach that addresses both mental and physical illness,” they concluded. “Only then can we hope to properly help these patients and with that, reduce the socioeconomic burden of meth-HF.”
 

A quietly building crisis

The sharp rise in meth-HF hospitalizations is an expected reflection of the methamphetamine crisis, which has been quietly building over the last few years, addiction psychiatrist Corneliu N. Stanciu, MD, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, N.H., said in an interview.

“This new version of methamphetamines looks like ice and is more potent and toxic than former versions traditionally made in home-built labs,” he said. Lately the vast majority of methamphetamines in the United States have come from Mexico, are less expensive with higher purity, “and can be manufactured in greater quantities.”

Some patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) also inject methamphetamines, which can make OUD treatment clinics good places to screen for meth abuse and educate about its cardiovascular implications, Dr. Stanciu said.

“Just as addiction treatment centers present an opportunity to implement cardiac screening and referrals,” he said, “cardiology visits and hospitalizations such as those for meth-HF also present a golden opportunity for involvement of substance use disorder interventions and referrals to get patients into treatment and prevent further damage through ongoing use.”

Dr. Zhao, Dr. Reddy, Dr. Eklayam, and Dr. Stanciu report no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The Pediatric Hospital Medicine annual conference, though virtual in 2021, promises to retain its role as the premier educational event for pediatric hospitalists and other clinicians involved in treating pediatric patients.

The “can’t-miss” session, on August 5, at 6:30 p.m. ET, is a one-on-one discussion between Anthony S. Fauci, MD, and Lee Savio Beers, MD, president of the American Academic of Pediatrics, according to members of the meeting planning committee.

In addition to the conversation between Dr. Beers and Dr. Fauci, this year’s meeting offers a mix of workshops with pointers and pearls to improve practice, keynote and plenary sessions to inform and inspire, and abstract presentations of new research. Three members of the PHM Planning Committee shared their insights on the hot topics, advice for new clinicians, and tips for making the most of this year’s meeting.
 

Workshops worth watching

“The keynote plenary sessions by Julie Silver, MD, on ‘Accelerating Patient Care and Healthcare Workforce Diversity and Inclusion,’ and by Ilan Alhadeff, MD, on ‘Leading through Adversity’ should inspire even the least enthusiastic among us,” Mirna Giordano, MD, FHM, of Columbia University Medical Center, New York, said in an interview. A talk by Nathan T. Chomilo, MD, “will likely prompt reflection on how George Floyd’s death changed us, and how we practice medicine forever.” In addition, “PHM Stories are not to be missed, they are voices that speak loud and move mountains.”

The PHM Stories are concise, narrative talks with minimal use of slides; each PHM Stories session includes three distinct talks and a 15-minute question and answer session. PHM Stories sessions are scheduled for each day of the conference, and topics include “Practicing Medicine While Human: The Secrets Physicians Keep,” by Uchenna Ewulonu, MD; “Finding the Power of the Imposter: How I Learned to Be Exactly the Color I Am, Everywhere I Go,” by Alexandra Coria, MD; and “Purple Butterflies: A Reflection on Why I’m a Pediatric Hospitalist,” by Joanne Mendoza, MD.

“The PHM community has been through a lot in the aftermath of the pandemic,” said Dr. Giordano. “The mini-plenary session on the mental health needs of our patients, and clinical quick-hit sessions on verbal deescalation of the agitated patients and cardiac effects of COVID-19 will likely be not only very popular, but also useful in clinical endeavors. The workshop on how to navigate the adult issues in hospitalized patients will provide the Med-Peds pearls we all wish we heard earlier.”

Although a 75-minute workshop session may seem long, “the workshop choices will offer something for everyone’s taste: education, research, clinical topics, diversity, and advocacy,” Dr. Giordano said. “I suggest that attendees check in advance which sessions will be available after the meeting, so that they prioritize highly interactive sessions like workshops, and that they experience, even if virtual, small group/room gatherings and networking.” There will be time for fun, too, she emphasized, with social sessions “that we hope will break the screen monotony and bring smiles to everyone’s faces.”

For younger clinicians relatively new to practice, Dr. Giordano recommended several workshops for a wealth of advice and guidance, including “New Kids on the Block: Thriving in your First Faculty Position,” “Channeling Your Inner Coach: Techniques to Enhance Clinical Teaching & Feedback,” “Palliative Care Pearls for the Pediatric Hospitalist,” “Perioperative Medicine for Medically Complex Children: Case Studies in Programmatic Approaches,” “The Bare Necessities: Social Determinant of Health Screening for the Hospitalist,” and “Mentorship, Autonomy, and Supervising a PHM Fellow.”
 

Classic topics and new concepts

“We are so excited to be able to offer a full spectrum of offerings at this year’s virtual meeting,” Yemisi Jones, MD, FHM, of Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, said in an interview. “We are covering some classic topics that we can’t do without at PHM, such as clinical updates in the management of sick and well newborns; workshops on best practices for educators; as well as the latest in PHM scholarship.” Sessions include “timely topics such as equity for women in medicine with one of our plenary speakers, Julie Silver, MD, and new febrile infant guidelines,” she added.

In particular, the COVID-19 and mental health session will help address clinicians’ evolving understanding of the COVID-19 pandemic and its effects on hospitalized children, said Dr. Jones. “Attendees can expect practical, timely updates on the current state of the science and ways to improve their practice to provide the best care for our patients.”

Attendees will be able to maximize the virtual conference format by accessing archived recordings, including clinical quick hits, mini-plenaries, and PHM Stories, which can be viewed during the scheduled meeting time or after, Dr. Jones said. “Workshops and abstract presentations will involve real-time interaction with presenters, so would be highest yield to attend during the live meeting. We also encourage all participants to take full advantage of the platform and the various networking opportunities to engage with others in our PHM community.”

For residents and new fellows, Dr. Jones advised making the workshop, “A Whole New World: Tips and Tools to Soar Into Your First Year of Fellowship,” a priority. “For early-career faculty, the ‘New Kids on the Block: Thriving in your First Faculty Position workshop will be a valuable resource.”
 

Make the meeting content a priority

This year’s conference has an exceptional slate of plenary speakers, Michelle Marks, DO, SFHM, of the Cleveland Clinic said in an interview. In addition to the much-anticipated session on vaccinations, school guidelines, and other topics with Dr. Fauci and Dr. Beers, the sessions on leading through adversity and workforce diversity and inclusion are “important topics to the PHM community and to our greater communities as a whole.”

Dr. Marks also highlighted the value of the COVID-19 and mental health session, as the long-term impact of COVID-19 on mental health of children and adults continues to grab headlines. “From this session specifically, I hope the attendees will gain awareness of the special mental health needs for child during a global disaster like a pandemic, which can be generalized to other situations and gain skills and resources to help meet and advocate for children’s mental health needs.”

For clinicians attending the virtual conference, “The most important strategy is to schedule time off of clinical work for the virtual meeting if you can so you can focus on the content,” said Dr. Marks. “For the longer sessions, it would be very important to block time in your day to fully attend the session, attend in a private space if possible since there will be breakouts with discussion, have your camera on, and engage with the workshop group as much as possible. The virtual format can be challenging because of all the external distractions, so intentional focus is necessary,” to get the most out of the experience.

The mini-plenary session on “The New AAP Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Management of Febrile Infants 8-60 Days Old,” is an important session for all attendees, Dr. Marks said. She also recommended the Clinical Quick Hits sessions for anyone seeking “a diverse array of practical knowledge which can be easily applied to everyday practice.” The Clinical Quick Hits are designed as 35-minute, rapid-fire presentations focused on clinical knowledge. Each of these presentations will focus on the latest updates or evolutions in clinical practice in one area. Some key topics include counseling parents when a child has an abnormal exam finding, assessing pelvic pain in adolescent girls, and preventing venous thromboembolism in the inpatient setting.

“I would also recommend that younger clinicians take in at least one or two workshops or sessions on nonclinical topics to see the breath of content at the meeting and to develop a niche interest for themselves outside of clinical work,” Dr. Marks noted.

Nonclinical sessions at PHM 2021 include workshops on a pilot for a comprehensive LGBTQ+ curriculum, using media tools for public health messaging, and practicing health literacy.

To register for the Pediatric Hospital Medicine 2021 virtual conference, visit https://apaevents.regfox.com/phm21-virtual-conference.

Dr. Giordano, Dr. Jones, and Dr. Marks are members of the PHM conference planning committee and had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.

The Pediatric Hospital Medicine annual conference, though virtual in 2021, promises to retain its role as the premier educational event for pediatric hospitalists and other clinicians involved in treating pediatric patients.

The “can’t-miss” session, on August 5, at 6:30 p.m. ET, is a one-on-one discussion between Anthony S. Fauci, MD, and Lee Savio Beers, MD, president of the American Academic of Pediatrics, according to members of the meeting planning committee.

In addition to the conversation between Dr. Beers and Dr. Fauci, this year’s meeting offers a mix of workshops with pointers and pearls to improve practice, keynote and plenary sessions to inform and inspire, and abstract presentations of new research. Three members of the PHM Planning Committee shared their insights on the hot topics, advice for new clinicians, and tips for making the most of this year’s meeting.
 

Workshops worth watching

“The keynote plenary sessions by Julie Silver, MD, on ‘Accelerating Patient Care and Healthcare Workforce Diversity and Inclusion,’ and by Ilan Alhadeff, MD, on ‘Leading through Adversity’ should inspire even the least enthusiastic among us,” Mirna Giordano, MD, FHM, of Columbia University Medical Center, New York, said in an interview. A talk by Nathan T. Chomilo, MD, “will likely prompt reflection on how George Floyd’s death changed us, and how we practice medicine forever.” In addition, “PHM Stories are not to be missed, they are voices that speak loud and move mountains.”

The PHM Stories are concise, narrative talks with minimal use of slides; each PHM Stories session includes three distinct talks and a 15-minute question and answer session. PHM Stories sessions are scheduled for each day of the conference, and topics include “Practicing Medicine While Human: The Secrets Physicians Keep,” by Uchenna Ewulonu, MD; “Finding the Power of the Imposter: How I Learned to Be Exactly the Color I Am, Everywhere I Go,” by Alexandra Coria, MD; and “Purple Butterflies: A Reflection on Why I’m a Pediatric Hospitalist,” by Joanne Mendoza, MD.

“The PHM community has been through a lot in the aftermath of the pandemic,” said Dr. Giordano. “The mini-plenary session on the mental health needs of our patients, and clinical quick-hit sessions on verbal deescalation of the agitated patients and cardiac effects of COVID-19 will likely be not only very popular, but also useful in clinical endeavors. The workshop on how to navigate the adult issues in hospitalized patients will provide the Med-Peds pearls we all wish we heard earlier.”

Although a 75-minute workshop session may seem long, “the workshop choices will offer something for everyone’s taste: education, research, clinical topics, diversity, and advocacy,” Dr. Giordano said. “I suggest that attendees check in advance which sessions will be available after the meeting, so that they prioritize highly interactive sessions like workshops, and that they experience, even if virtual, small group/room gatherings and networking.” There will be time for fun, too, she emphasized, with social sessions “that we hope will break the screen monotony and bring smiles to everyone’s faces.”

For younger clinicians relatively new to practice, Dr. Giordano recommended several workshops for a wealth of advice and guidance, including “New Kids on the Block: Thriving in your First Faculty Position,” “Channeling Your Inner Coach: Techniques to Enhance Clinical Teaching & Feedback,” “Palliative Care Pearls for the Pediatric Hospitalist,” “Perioperative Medicine for Medically Complex Children: Case Studies in Programmatic Approaches,” “The Bare Necessities: Social Determinant of Health Screening for the Hospitalist,” and “Mentorship, Autonomy, and Supervising a PHM Fellow.”
 

Classic topics and new concepts

“We are so excited to be able to offer a full spectrum of offerings at this year’s virtual meeting,” Yemisi Jones, MD, FHM, of Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, said in an interview. “We are covering some classic topics that we can’t do without at PHM, such as clinical updates in the management of sick and well newborns; workshops on best practices for educators; as well as the latest in PHM scholarship.” Sessions include “timely topics such as equity for women in medicine with one of our plenary speakers, Julie Silver, MD, and new febrile infant guidelines,” she added.

In particular, the COVID-19 and mental health session will help address clinicians’ evolving understanding of the COVID-19 pandemic and its effects on hospitalized children, said Dr. Jones. “Attendees can expect practical, timely updates on the current state of the science and ways to improve their practice to provide the best care for our patients.”

Attendees will be able to maximize the virtual conference format by accessing archived recordings, including clinical quick hits, mini-plenaries, and PHM Stories, which can be viewed during the scheduled meeting time or after, Dr. Jones said. “Workshops and abstract presentations will involve real-time interaction with presenters, so would be highest yield to attend during the live meeting. We also encourage all participants to take full advantage of the platform and the various networking opportunities to engage with others in our PHM community.”

For residents and new fellows, Dr. Jones advised making the workshop, “A Whole New World: Tips and Tools to Soar Into Your First Year of Fellowship,” a priority. “For early-career faculty, the ‘New Kids on the Block: Thriving in your First Faculty Position workshop will be a valuable resource.”
 

Make the meeting content a priority

This year’s conference has an exceptional slate of plenary speakers, Michelle Marks, DO, SFHM, of the Cleveland Clinic said in an interview. In addition to the much-anticipated session on vaccinations, school guidelines, and other topics with Dr. Fauci and Dr. Beers, the sessions on leading through adversity and workforce diversity and inclusion are “important topics to the PHM community and to our greater communities as a whole.”

Dr. Marks also highlighted the value of the COVID-19 and mental health session, as the long-term impact of COVID-19 on mental health of children and adults continues to grab headlines. “From this session specifically, I hope the attendees will gain awareness of the special mental health needs for child during a global disaster like a pandemic, which can be generalized to other situations and gain skills and resources to help meet and advocate for children’s mental health needs.”

For clinicians attending the virtual conference, “The most important strategy is to schedule time off of clinical work for the virtual meeting if you can so you can focus on the content,” said Dr. Marks. “For the longer sessions, it would be very important to block time in your day to fully attend the session, attend in a private space if possible since there will be breakouts with discussion, have your camera on, and engage with the workshop group as much as possible. The virtual format can be challenging because of all the external distractions, so intentional focus is necessary,” to get the most out of the experience.

The mini-plenary session on “The New AAP Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Management of Febrile Infants 8-60 Days Old,” is an important session for all attendees, Dr. Marks said. She also recommended the Clinical Quick Hits sessions for anyone seeking “a diverse array of practical knowledge which can be easily applied to everyday practice.” The Clinical Quick Hits are designed as 35-minute, rapid-fire presentations focused on clinical knowledge. Each of these presentations will focus on the latest updates or evolutions in clinical practice in one area. Some key topics include counseling parents when a child has an abnormal exam finding, assessing pelvic pain in adolescent girls, and preventing venous thromboembolism in the inpatient setting.

“I would also recommend that younger clinicians take in at least one or two workshops or sessions on nonclinical topics to see the breath of content at the meeting and to develop a niche interest for themselves outside of clinical work,” Dr. Marks noted.

Nonclinical sessions at PHM 2021 include workshops on a pilot for a comprehensive LGBTQ+ curriculum, using media tools for public health messaging, and practicing health literacy.

To register for the Pediatric Hospital Medicine 2021 virtual conference, visit https://apaevents.regfox.com/phm21-virtual-conference.

Dr. Giordano, Dr. Jones, and Dr. Marks are members of the PHM conference planning committee and had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.

The Pediatric Hospital Medicine annual conference, though virtual in 2021, promises to retain its role as the premier educational event for pediatric hospitalists and other clinicians involved in treating pediatric patients.

The “can’t-miss” session, on August 5, at 6:30 p.m. ET, is a one-on-one discussion between Anthony S. Fauci, MD, and Lee Savio Beers, MD, president of the American Academic of Pediatrics, according to members of the meeting planning committee.

In addition to the conversation between Dr. Beers and Dr. Fauci, this year’s meeting offers a mix of workshops with pointers and pearls to improve practice, keynote and plenary sessions to inform and inspire, and abstract presentations of new research. Three members of the PHM Planning Committee shared their insights on the hot topics, advice for new clinicians, and tips for making the most of this year’s meeting.
 

Workshops worth watching

“The keynote plenary sessions by Julie Silver, MD, on ‘Accelerating Patient Care and Healthcare Workforce Diversity and Inclusion,’ and by Ilan Alhadeff, MD, on ‘Leading through Adversity’ should inspire even the least enthusiastic among us,” Mirna Giordano, MD, FHM, of Columbia University Medical Center, New York, said in an interview. A talk by Nathan T. Chomilo, MD, “will likely prompt reflection on how George Floyd’s death changed us, and how we practice medicine forever.” In addition, “PHM Stories are not to be missed, they are voices that speak loud and move mountains.”

The PHM Stories are concise, narrative talks with minimal use of slides; each PHM Stories session includes three distinct talks and a 15-minute question and answer session. PHM Stories sessions are scheduled for each day of the conference, and topics include “Practicing Medicine While Human: The Secrets Physicians Keep,” by Uchenna Ewulonu, MD; “Finding the Power of the Imposter: How I Learned to Be Exactly the Color I Am, Everywhere I Go,” by Alexandra Coria, MD; and “Purple Butterflies: A Reflection on Why I’m a Pediatric Hospitalist,” by Joanne Mendoza, MD.

“The PHM community has been through a lot in the aftermath of the pandemic,” said Dr. Giordano. “The mini-plenary session on the mental health needs of our patients, and clinical quick-hit sessions on verbal deescalation of the agitated patients and cardiac effects of COVID-19 will likely be not only very popular, but also useful in clinical endeavors. The workshop on how to navigate the adult issues in hospitalized patients will provide the Med-Peds pearls we all wish we heard earlier.”

Although a 75-minute workshop session may seem long, “the workshop choices will offer something for everyone’s taste: education, research, clinical topics, diversity, and advocacy,” Dr. Giordano said. “I suggest that attendees check in advance which sessions will be available after the meeting, so that they prioritize highly interactive sessions like workshops, and that they experience, even if virtual, small group/room gatherings and networking.” There will be time for fun, too, she emphasized, with social sessions “that we hope will break the screen monotony and bring smiles to everyone’s faces.”

For younger clinicians relatively new to practice, Dr. Giordano recommended several workshops for a wealth of advice and guidance, including “New Kids on the Block: Thriving in your First Faculty Position,” “Channeling Your Inner Coach: Techniques to Enhance Clinical Teaching & Feedback,” “Palliative Care Pearls for the Pediatric Hospitalist,” “Perioperative Medicine for Medically Complex Children: Case Studies in Programmatic Approaches,” “The Bare Necessities: Social Determinant of Health Screening for the Hospitalist,” and “Mentorship, Autonomy, and Supervising a PHM Fellow.”
 

Classic topics and new concepts

“We are so excited to be able to offer a full spectrum of offerings at this year’s virtual meeting,” Yemisi Jones, MD, FHM, of Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, said in an interview. “We are covering some classic topics that we can’t do without at PHM, such as clinical updates in the management of sick and well newborns; workshops on best practices for educators; as well as the latest in PHM scholarship.” Sessions include “timely topics such as equity for women in medicine with one of our plenary speakers, Julie Silver, MD, and new febrile infant guidelines,” she added.

In particular, the COVID-19 and mental health session will help address clinicians’ evolving understanding of the COVID-19 pandemic and its effects on hospitalized children, said Dr. Jones. “Attendees can expect practical, timely updates on the current state of the science and ways to improve their practice to provide the best care for our patients.”

Attendees will be able to maximize the virtual conference format by accessing archived recordings, including clinical quick hits, mini-plenaries, and PHM Stories, which can be viewed during the scheduled meeting time or after, Dr. Jones said. “Workshops and abstract presentations will involve real-time interaction with presenters, so would be highest yield to attend during the live meeting. We also encourage all participants to take full advantage of the platform and the various networking opportunities to engage with others in our PHM community.”

For residents and new fellows, Dr. Jones advised making the workshop, “A Whole New World: Tips and Tools to Soar Into Your First Year of Fellowship,” a priority. “For early-career faculty, the ‘New Kids on the Block: Thriving in your First Faculty Position workshop will be a valuable resource.”
 

Make the meeting content a priority

This year’s conference has an exceptional slate of plenary speakers, Michelle Marks, DO, SFHM, of the Cleveland Clinic said in an interview. In addition to the much-anticipated session on vaccinations, school guidelines, and other topics with Dr. Fauci and Dr. Beers, the sessions on leading through adversity and workforce diversity and inclusion are “important topics to the PHM community and to our greater communities as a whole.”

Dr. Marks also highlighted the value of the COVID-19 and mental health session, as the long-term impact of COVID-19 on mental health of children and adults continues to grab headlines. “From this session specifically, I hope the attendees will gain awareness of the special mental health needs for child during a global disaster like a pandemic, which can be generalized to other situations and gain skills and resources to help meet and advocate for children’s mental health needs.”

For clinicians attending the virtual conference, “The most important strategy is to schedule time off of clinical work for the virtual meeting if you can so you can focus on the content,” said Dr. Marks. “For the longer sessions, it would be very important to block time in your day to fully attend the session, attend in a private space if possible since there will be breakouts with discussion, have your camera on, and engage with the workshop group as much as possible. The virtual format can be challenging because of all the external distractions, so intentional focus is necessary,” to get the most out of the experience.

The mini-plenary session on “The New AAP Clinical Practice Guideline on the Evaluation and Management of Febrile Infants 8-60 Days Old,” is an important session for all attendees, Dr. Marks said. She also recommended the Clinical Quick Hits sessions for anyone seeking “a diverse array of practical knowledge which can be easily applied to everyday practice.” The Clinical Quick Hits are designed as 35-minute, rapid-fire presentations focused on clinical knowledge. Each of these presentations will focus on the latest updates or evolutions in clinical practice in one area. Some key topics include counseling parents when a child has an abnormal exam finding, assessing pelvic pain in adolescent girls, and preventing venous thromboembolism in the inpatient setting.

“I would also recommend that younger clinicians take in at least one or two workshops or sessions on nonclinical topics to see the breath of content at the meeting and to develop a niche interest for themselves outside of clinical work,” Dr. Marks noted.

Nonclinical sessions at PHM 2021 include workshops on a pilot for a comprehensive LGBTQ+ curriculum, using media tools for public health messaging, and practicing health literacy.

To register for the Pediatric Hospital Medicine 2021 virtual conference, visit https://apaevents.regfox.com/phm21-virtual-conference.

Dr. Giordano, Dr. Jones, and Dr. Marks are members of the PHM conference planning committee and had no relevant financial conflicts to disclose.

On July 22, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released updated sexually transmitted infection treatment guidelines to reflect current screening, testing, and treatment recommendations. The guidelines were last updated in 2015.

The new recommendations come at a pivotal moment in the field’s history, Kimberly Workowski, MD, a medical officer at the CDC’s Division of STD Prevention, told this news organization in an email. “The COVID-19 pandemic has caused decreased clinic capacity and drug and diagnostic test kit shortages,” she says. Many of these shortages have been resolved, she added, and it is important that health care professionals use the most current evidence-based recommendations for screening and management of STIs.

Updates to these guidelines were necessary to reflect “continued advances in research in the prevention of STIs, new interventions in terms of STI prevention, and thirdly, changing epidemiology,” Jeffrey Klausner, MD, MPH, an STI specialist with the Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, said in an interview. “There’s been increased concern about antimicrobial resistance, and that’s really driven some of the key changes in these new STI treatment guidelines.”

Notable updates to the guidelines include the following:

• Updated treatment recommendations for gonorrhea, chlamydia, , and 
• Two-step testing for diagnosing genital  virus
• Expanded risk factors for  testing in pregnant women
• Information on FDA-cleared rectal and oral tests to diagnose chlamydia and gonorrhea
• A recommendation that universal  screening be conducted at least once in a lifetime for adults aged 18 years and older

Dr. Workowski emphasized updates to gonorrhea treatment that built on the recommendation published in December 2020 in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. The CDC now recommends that gonorrhea be treated with a single 500-mg injection of ceftriaxone, and if chlamydial infection is not ruled out, treating with a regimen of 100 mg of oral doxycycline taken twice daily for 7 days. Other gonorrhea treatment recommendations include retesting patients 3 months after treatment and that a test of cure be conducted for people with pharyngeal gonorrhea 1 to 2 weeks after treatment, using either culture or nucleic-acid amplification tests.

“Effectively treating gonorrhea remains a public health priority,” Dr. Workowski said. “Gonorrhea can rapidly develop antibiotic resistance and is the second most commonly reported bacterial STI in the U.S., increasing 56% from 2015 to 2019.”

The updates to syphilis screening for pregnant women are also important, added Dr. Klausner. “We’ve seen a dramatic and shameful rise in congenital syphilis,” he said. In addition to screening all pregnant women at the first prenatal visit, the CDC recommends retesting for syphilis at 28 weeks’ gestation and at delivery if the mother lives in an area where the prevalence of syphilis is high or if she is at risk of acquiring syphilis during pregnancy. An expectant mother is at higher risk if she has multiple sex partners, has an STI during pregnancy, has a partner with an STI, has a new sex partner, or misuses drugs, the recommendations state.

Dr. Klausner also noted that the updates provide more robust guidelines for treating transgender individuals and incarcerated people.

The treatment guidelines are available online along with a wall chart and a pocket guide that summarizes these updates. The mobile app with the 2015 guidelines will be retired at the end of July 2021, Dr. Workowski said. An app with these updated treatment recommendations is in development and will be available later this year.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

On July 22, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released updated sexually transmitted infection treatment guidelines to reflect current screening, testing, and treatment recommendations. The guidelines were last updated in 2015.

The new recommendations come at a pivotal moment in the field’s history, Kimberly Workowski, MD, a medical officer at the CDC’s Division of STD Prevention, told this news organization in an email. “The COVID-19 pandemic has caused decreased clinic capacity and drug and diagnostic test kit shortages,” she says. Many of these shortages have been resolved, she added, and it is important that health care professionals use the most current evidence-based recommendations for screening and management of STIs.

Updates to these guidelines were necessary to reflect “continued advances in research in the prevention of STIs, new interventions in terms of STI prevention, and thirdly, changing epidemiology,” Jeffrey Klausner, MD, MPH, an STI specialist with the Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, said in an interview. “There’s been increased concern about antimicrobial resistance, and that’s really driven some of the key changes in these new STI treatment guidelines.”

Notable updates to the guidelines include the following:

• Updated treatment recommendations for gonorrhea, chlamydia, , and 
• Two-step testing for diagnosing genital  virus
• Expanded risk factors for  testing in pregnant women
• Information on FDA-cleared rectal and oral tests to diagnose chlamydia and gonorrhea
• A recommendation that universal  screening be conducted at least once in a lifetime for adults aged 18 years and older

Dr. Workowski emphasized updates to gonorrhea treatment that built on the recommendation published in December 2020 in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. The CDC now recommends that gonorrhea be treated with a single 500-mg injection of ceftriaxone, and if chlamydial infection is not ruled out, treating with a regimen of 100 mg of oral doxycycline taken twice daily for 7 days. Other gonorrhea treatment recommendations include retesting patients 3 months after treatment and that a test of cure be conducted for people with pharyngeal gonorrhea 1 to 2 weeks after treatment, using either culture or nucleic-acid amplification tests.

“Effectively treating gonorrhea remains a public health priority,” Dr. Workowski said. “Gonorrhea can rapidly develop antibiotic resistance and is the second most commonly reported bacterial STI in the U.S., increasing 56% from 2015 to 2019.”

The updates to syphilis screening for pregnant women are also important, added Dr. Klausner. “We’ve seen a dramatic and shameful rise in congenital syphilis,” he said. In addition to screening all pregnant women at the first prenatal visit, the CDC recommends retesting for syphilis at 28 weeks’ gestation and at delivery if the mother lives in an area where the prevalence of syphilis is high or if she is at risk of acquiring syphilis during pregnancy. An expectant mother is at higher risk if she has multiple sex partners, has an STI during pregnancy, has a partner with an STI, has a new sex partner, or misuses drugs, the recommendations state.

Dr. Klausner also noted that the updates provide more robust guidelines for treating transgender individuals and incarcerated people.

The treatment guidelines are available online along with a wall chart and a pocket guide that summarizes these updates. The mobile app with the 2015 guidelines will be retired at the end of July 2021, Dr. Workowski said. An app with these updated treatment recommendations is in development and will be available later this year.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

On July 22, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released updated sexually transmitted infection treatment guidelines to reflect current screening, testing, and treatment recommendations. The guidelines were last updated in 2015.

The new recommendations come at a pivotal moment in the field’s history, Kimberly Workowski, MD, a medical officer at the CDC’s Division of STD Prevention, told this news organization in an email. “The COVID-19 pandemic has caused decreased clinic capacity and drug and diagnostic test kit shortages,” she says. Many of these shortages have been resolved, she added, and it is important that health care professionals use the most current evidence-based recommendations for screening and management of STIs.

Updates to these guidelines were necessary to reflect “continued advances in research in the prevention of STIs, new interventions in terms of STI prevention, and thirdly, changing epidemiology,” Jeffrey Klausner, MD, MPH, an STI specialist with the Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, said in an interview. “There’s been increased concern about antimicrobial resistance, and that’s really driven some of the key changes in these new STI treatment guidelines.”

Notable updates to the guidelines include the following:

• Updated treatment recommendations for gonorrhea, chlamydia, , and 
• Two-step testing for diagnosing genital  virus
• Expanded risk factors for  testing in pregnant women
• Information on FDA-cleared rectal and oral tests to diagnose chlamydia and gonorrhea
• A recommendation that universal  screening be conducted at least once in a lifetime for adults aged 18 years and older

Dr. Workowski emphasized updates to gonorrhea treatment that built on the recommendation published in December 2020 in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. The CDC now recommends that gonorrhea be treated with a single 500-mg injection of ceftriaxone, and if chlamydial infection is not ruled out, treating with a regimen of 100 mg of oral doxycycline taken twice daily for 7 days. Other gonorrhea treatment recommendations include retesting patients 3 months after treatment and that a test of cure be conducted for people with pharyngeal gonorrhea 1 to 2 weeks after treatment, using either culture or nucleic-acid amplification tests.

“Effectively treating gonorrhea remains a public health priority,” Dr. Workowski said. “Gonorrhea can rapidly develop antibiotic resistance and is the second most commonly reported bacterial STI in the U.S., increasing 56% from 2015 to 2019.”

The updates to syphilis screening for pregnant women are also important, added Dr. Klausner. “We’ve seen a dramatic and shameful rise in congenital syphilis,” he said. In addition to screening all pregnant women at the first prenatal visit, the CDC recommends retesting for syphilis at 28 weeks’ gestation and at delivery if the mother lives in an area where the prevalence of syphilis is high or if she is at risk of acquiring syphilis during pregnancy. An expectant mother is at higher risk if she has multiple sex partners, has an STI during pregnancy, has a partner with an STI, has a new sex partner, or misuses drugs, the recommendations state.

Dr. Klausner also noted that the updates provide more robust guidelines for treating transgender individuals and incarcerated people.

The treatment guidelines are available online along with a wall chart and a pocket guide that summarizes these updates. The mobile app with the 2015 guidelines will be retired at the end of July 2021, Dr. Workowski said. An app with these updated treatment recommendations is in development and will be available later this year.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A single high dose of the antifungal agent liposomal amphotericin B (L-AmB; AmBisome, Gilead Sciences), with a background regimen of flucytosine and fluconazole, is non-inferior and significantly safer in preventing mortality in HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis than a conventional seven-day regimen that is the current standard of care, according to a new study.

The much-anticipated results suggest an important alternative amid controversy over the drug’s cost and availability.

“The results of this phase 3 [AMBITION-cm] trial make it clear that this approach is just as good as the current World Health Organization-recommended first-line treatment in preventing death,” first author David S. Lawrence, MD, AMBITION study lead clinician, of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom, said in an interview.

“The fact that this was the largest ever trial [on HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis] conducted to date… gives us a high level of confidence in these results,” he said of the study, which was presented at the virtual annual meeting of the International AIDS Society.

“We believe that this should become the WHO-recommended first-line regimen,” he emphasized.

In commenting on the study, Meg Doherty, MD, PhD, director of global HIV, hepatitis, and STI programs at WHO, agreed that a shorter regimen could be vital, particularly in settings with limited resources.

“The results from the AMBITION trial are important for low- and middle-income countries, where the cost and complexity of implementing the current standard seven-day course of L-ambisome or cryptococcal meningitis treatment can put this out of reach for many,” she told this news organization.

“Simplification that maintains the highest quality of care is an important component of the public health approach for HIV treatment and care,” she added.

Dr. Doherty could not comment on any possible changes to WHO recommendations, which are formulated by an independent guideline development group, but a spokesperson said that “WHO is preparing an updated review of the evidence for treating cryptococcal disease as a first step towards updating guidance.”

Conventional treatment toxicities

Cryptococcal meningitis is a leading cause of death in HIV, and the conventional treatment of amphotericin B deoxycholate, though less expensive than L-AmB, is more toxic, causing anemia, renal impairment, and electrolyte abnormalities, Dr. Lawrence explained

Having previously shown a single 10 mg/kg dose of L-AmB to be as effective as the longer regimen of 14 daily doses in terms of clearing cryptococcus from the cerebrospinal fluid, Dr. Lawrence and his colleagues conducted the phase 3 AMBITION-Cm trial to evaluate the effect on mortality, enrolling 844 patients in Botswana, Malawi, South Africa, Uganda, and Zimbabwe who were HIV-positive and had a first episode of cryptococcal meningitis.

Participants in the study were randomized to treatment either with single, high-dose L-AmB (10 mg/kg), combined with 14 days of flucytosine 100 mg/kg/day and fluconazole 1,200 mg/day or to a control group receiving 7 daily doses of AmB deoxycholate (1 mg/kg) plus 7 days of flucytosine 100 mg/kg/day, followed by 7 days of fluconazole 1,200 mg/day.

All patients were also provided with consolidation therapy of fluconazole 800 mg/day for eight weeks. Of the patients, 60.2% were male, their median age was 37, and their median CD4 count was 27 cells/mm³.

For the primary endpoint in the intention-to-treat analysis of 814 patients, the 10-week mortality rate in the single-dose L-AmB group was 24.82% (101 of 407) and 28.75% (117 of 407) in the control arm, for a difference (-3.93%) that was well within the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of 10%.

As expected, the safety measures were significantly improved with the single-dose of L-AmB: Rates of grade 3 or 4 adverse events within the initial 21 days of treatment in the single-dose L-AmB group were 50% versus 62.3% in the control group, and severe anemia occurred in just 13% of single-dose L-AmB participants, compared with 41% in the AmB deoxycholate control arm (both P < .001), Dr. Lawrence reported.

Furthermore, the average decline in hemoglobin over the first week was 0.3 g/dL in the single-dose L-AmB arm and 1.9 g/dL in the control arm, resulting in the need for more blood transfusions in the control arm (P < .001).

The impact on kidney function was also worse in the higher dose arm, with an average increase in creatinine over the first week of 20.2% in the L-AmB group versus 49.7% in the control group, while hypokalemia and thrombophlebitis were also more common with the higher dose group, Dr. Lawrence noted.

In the adjusted analysis, the single-dose L-AmB measures were in fact superior after adjusting for factors including research site, age, sex, baseline Glasgow Coma Scale, CD4 count, CSF cryptococcal colony-forming units/mL, antiretroviral therapy status, hemoglobin, and CSF opening pressure.

Mortality rate still high – but significantly reduced

The mortality rate of about 25% in the study after the treatment is still significantly higher than typically seen in high-income countries such as the United States, where HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis is less common and associated with a mortality of roughly 10-15%, Dr. Lawrence noted.

The rate is nevertheless among the lowest mortality rates ever reported within a clinical trial conducted in resource-limited settings, he explained.

“These results are a step in the right direction and a significant improvement on the rates of 40% to 45% reported with two-week L-AmB-based regimens in African settings,” Dr. Lawrence underscored.

Higher cost — but potentially more cost-effective

With a higher cost than AmB deoxycholate, L-AmB’s utilization in resource-limited settings has been a challenge: A single vial of L-AmB ranges from $80 to $200, according to some reports, and while 14-day dosing requires as many as 42 vials of L-AmB, even a 7-day regimen still requires 21 vials.

In comparison, the single-dose L-AmB regimen only requires an average of 10 to 11 vials per patient, but the regimen’s higher safety could translate to far greater cost savings, Dr. Lawrence explained.

“While the AmBisome regimen is technically more expensive in terms of drugs, we expect it to be cost-effective or possibly cost-saving when taking into account that there is less toxicity, fewer blood tests, less transfusions, etc., and possibly shorter duration of hospital admission,” he said.

Cost, supply controversy: ‘Black fungus’-related demand

The drug’s cost — as well as supply issues — have meanwhile become even more of a problem as L-AmB has unexpectedly also become urgently needed in the treatment of mucormycosis in India and Nepal, where the otherwise rare fungal disease, commonly known as “black fungus,” has been increasingly affecting COVID-19 patients and survivors.

Gilead had previously announced in 2018 its intention to make L-AmB more widely available at a price of $16.25 per vial, but “implementation of this has been slow,” Dr. Lawrence said.

As a result, Gilead is facing heightened pressure to implement the lower prices – and also improve substantial supply issues, with Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) and dozens of other global organizations issuing an open letter to Gilead and partner Viatris in June calling for immediate action to implement the lower price and improve supply of L-AmB.

In a company statement, Gilead responded, detailing its “commit[ment] to the non-profit pricing for the treatment of cryptococcal meningitis” and to efforts to improve the public health crisis in India.

For their part, Dr. Lawrence and his colleagues are working on producing more research on the issue.

“We hope that the conclusive results of the AMBITION trial will give a much needed push to implement this program,” he said.

“We are also currently completing the cost-effectiveness analysis of the study, which we hope will provide additional evidence to support widespread implementation of this regimen and highlight further the urgent need to broaden access to AmBisome and flucytosine,” he said.

The trial was supported by a grant through the European Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP), the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA) (TRIA2015-1092), and the Wellcome Trust / Medical Research Council (UK)/UKAID Joint Global Health Trials (MR/P006922/1. The AmBisome was donated by Gilead Sciences. Dr. Lawrence had no disclosures to report.

A single high dose of the antifungal agent liposomal amphotericin B (L-AmB; AmBisome, Gilead Sciences), with a background regimen of flucytosine and fluconazole, is non-inferior and significantly safer in preventing mortality in HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis than a conventional seven-day regimen that is the current standard of care, according to a new study.

The much-anticipated results suggest an important alternative amid controversy over the drug’s cost and availability.

“The results of this phase 3 [AMBITION-cm] trial make it clear that this approach is just as good as the current World Health Organization-recommended first-line treatment in preventing death,” first author David S. Lawrence, MD, AMBITION study lead clinician, of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom, said in an interview.

“The fact that this was the largest ever trial [on HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis] conducted to date… gives us a high level of confidence in these results,” he said of the study, which was presented at the virtual annual meeting of the International AIDS Society.

“We believe that this should become the WHO-recommended first-line regimen,” he emphasized.

In commenting on the study, Meg Doherty, MD, PhD, director of global HIV, hepatitis, and STI programs at WHO, agreed that a shorter regimen could be vital, particularly in settings with limited resources.

“The results from the AMBITION trial are important for low- and middle-income countries, where the cost and complexity of implementing the current standard seven-day course of L-ambisome or cryptococcal meningitis treatment can put this out of reach for many,” she told this news organization.

“Simplification that maintains the highest quality of care is an important component of the public health approach for HIV treatment and care,” she added.

Dr. Doherty could not comment on any possible changes to WHO recommendations, which are formulated by an independent guideline development group, but a spokesperson said that “WHO is preparing an updated review of the evidence for treating cryptococcal disease as a first step towards updating guidance.”

Conventional treatment toxicities

Cryptococcal meningitis is a leading cause of death in HIV, and the conventional treatment of amphotericin B deoxycholate, though less expensive than L-AmB, is more toxic, causing anemia, renal impairment, and electrolyte abnormalities, Dr. Lawrence explained

Having previously shown a single 10 mg/kg dose of L-AmB to be as effective as the longer regimen of 14 daily doses in terms of clearing cryptococcus from the cerebrospinal fluid, Dr. Lawrence and his colleagues conducted the phase 3 AMBITION-Cm trial to evaluate the effect on mortality, enrolling 844 patients in Botswana, Malawi, South Africa, Uganda, and Zimbabwe who were HIV-positive and had a first episode of cryptococcal meningitis.

Participants in the study were randomized to treatment either with single, high-dose L-AmB (10 mg/kg), combined with 14 days of flucytosine 100 mg/kg/day and fluconazole 1,200 mg/day or to a control group receiving 7 daily doses of AmB deoxycholate (1 mg/kg) plus 7 days of flucytosine 100 mg/kg/day, followed by 7 days of fluconazole 1,200 mg/day.

All patients were also provided with consolidation therapy of fluconazole 800 mg/day for eight weeks. Of the patients, 60.2% were male, their median age was 37, and their median CD4 count was 27 cells/mm³.

For the primary endpoint in the intention-to-treat analysis of 814 patients, the 10-week mortality rate in the single-dose L-AmB group was 24.82% (101 of 407) and 28.75% (117 of 407) in the control arm, for a difference (-3.93%) that was well within the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of 10%.

As expected, the safety measures were significantly improved with the single-dose of L-AmB: Rates of grade 3 or 4 adverse events within the initial 21 days of treatment in the single-dose L-AmB group were 50% versus 62.3% in the control group, and severe anemia occurred in just 13% of single-dose L-AmB participants, compared with 41% in the AmB deoxycholate control arm (both P < .001), Dr. Lawrence reported.

Furthermore, the average decline in hemoglobin over the first week was 0.3 g/dL in the single-dose L-AmB arm and 1.9 g/dL in the control arm, resulting in the need for more blood transfusions in the control arm (P < .001).

The impact on kidney function was also worse in the higher dose arm, with an average increase in creatinine over the first week of 20.2% in the L-AmB group versus 49.7% in the control group, while hypokalemia and thrombophlebitis were also more common with the higher dose group, Dr. Lawrence noted.

In the adjusted analysis, the single-dose L-AmB measures were in fact superior after adjusting for factors including research site, age, sex, baseline Glasgow Coma Scale, CD4 count, CSF cryptococcal colony-forming units/mL, antiretroviral therapy status, hemoglobin, and CSF opening pressure.

Mortality rate still high – but significantly reduced

The mortality rate of about 25% in the study after the treatment is still significantly higher than typically seen in high-income countries such as the United States, where HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis is less common and associated with a mortality of roughly 10-15%, Dr. Lawrence noted.

The rate is nevertheless among the lowest mortality rates ever reported within a clinical trial conducted in resource-limited settings, he explained.

“These results are a step in the right direction and a significant improvement on the rates of 40% to 45% reported with two-week L-AmB-based regimens in African settings,” Dr. Lawrence underscored.

Higher cost — but potentially more cost-effective

With a higher cost than AmB deoxycholate, L-AmB’s utilization in resource-limited settings has been a challenge: A single vial of L-AmB ranges from $80 to $200, according to some reports, and while 14-day dosing requires as many as 42 vials of L-AmB, even a 7-day regimen still requires 21 vials.

In comparison, the single-dose L-AmB regimen only requires an average of 10 to 11 vials per patient, but the regimen’s higher safety could translate to far greater cost savings, Dr. Lawrence explained.

“While the AmBisome regimen is technically more expensive in terms of drugs, we expect it to be cost-effective or possibly cost-saving when taking into account that there is less toxicity, fewer blood tests, less transfusions, etc., and possibly shorter duration of hospital admission,” he said.

Cost, supply controversy: ‘Black fungus’-related demand

The drug’s cost — as well as supply issues — have meanwhile become even more of a problem as L-AmB has unexpectedly also become urgently needed in the treatment of mucormycosis in India and Nepal, where the otherwise rare fungal disease, commonly known as “black fungus,” has been increasingly affecting COVID-19 patients and survivors.

Gilead had previously announced in 2018 its intention to make L-AmB more widely available at a price of $16.25 per vial, but “implementation of this has been slow,” Dr. Lawrence said.

As a result, Gilead is facing heightened pressure to implement the lower prices – and also improve substantial supply issues, with Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) and dozens of other global organizations issuing an open letter to Gilead and partner Viatris in June calling for immediate action to implement the lower price and improve supply of L-AmB.

In a company statement, Gilead responded, detailing its “commit[ment] to the non-profit pricing for the treatment of cryptococcal meningitis” and to efforts to improve the public health crisis in India.

For their part, Dr. Lawrence and his colleagues are working on producing more research on the issue.

“We hope that the conclusive results of the AMBITION trial will give a much needed push to implement this program,” he said.

“We are also currently completing the cost-effectiveness analysis of the study, which we hope will provide additional evidence to support widespread implementation of this regimen and highlight further the urgent need to broaden access to AmBisome and flucytosine,” he said.

The trial was supported by a grant through the European Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP), the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA) (TRIA2015-1092), and the Wellcome Trust / Medical Research Council (UK)/UKAID Joint Global Health Trials (MR/P006922/1. The AmBisome was donated by Gilead Sciences. Dr. Lawrence had no disclosures to report.

A single high dose of the antifungal agent liposomal amphotericin B (L-AmB; AmBisome, Gilead Sciences), with a background regimen of flucytosine and fluconazole, is non-inferior and significantly safer in preventing mortality in HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis than a conventional seven-day regimen that is the current standard of care, according to a new study.

The much-anticipated results suggest an important alternative amid controversy over the drug’s cost and availability.

“The results of this phase 3 [AMBITION-cm] trial make it clear that this approach is just as good as the current World Health Organization-recommended first-line treatment in preventing death,” first author David S. Lawrence, MD, AMBITION study lead clinician, of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, United Kingdom, said in an interview.

“The fact that this was the largest ever trial [on HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis] conducted to date… gives us a high level of confidence in these results,” he said of the study, which was presented at the virtual annual meeting of the International AIDS Society.

“We believe that this should become the WHO-recommended first-line regimen,” he emphasized.

In commenting on the study, Meg Doherty, MD, PhD, director of global HIV, hepatitis, and STI programs at WHO, agreed that a shorter regimen could be vital, particularly in settings with limited resources.

“The results from the AMBITION trial are important for low- and middle-income countries, where the cost and complexity of implementing the current standard seven-day course of L-ambisome or cryptococcal meningitis treatment can put this out of reach for many,” she told this news organization.

“Simplification that maintains the highest quality of care is an important component of the public health approach for HIV treatment and care,” she added.

Dr. Doherty could not comment on any possible changes to WHO recommendations, which are formulated by an independent guideline development group, but a spokesperson said that “WHO is preparing an updated review of the evidence for treating cryptococcal disease as a first step towards updating guidance.”

Conventional treatment toxicities

Cryptococcal meningitis is a leading cause of death in HIV, and the conventional treatment of amphotericin B deoxycholate, though less expensive than L-AmB, is more toxic, causing anemia, renal impairment, and electrolyte abnormalities, Dr. Lawrence explained

Having previously shown a single 10 mg/kg dose of L-AmB to be as effective as the longer regimen of 14 daily doses in terms of clearing cryptococcus from the cerebrospinal fluid, Dr. Lawrence and his colleagues conducted the phase 3 AMBITION-Cm trial to evaluate the effect on mortality, enrolling 844 patients in Botswana, Malawi, South Africa, Uganda, and Zimbabwe who were HIV-positive and had a first episode of cryptococcal meningitis.

Participants in the study were randomized to treatment either with single, high-dose L-AmB (10 mg/kg), combined with 14 days of flucytosine 100 mg/kg/day and fluconazole 1,200 mg/day or to a control group receiving 7 daily doses of AmB deoxycholate (1 mg/kg) plus 7 days of flucytosine 100 mg/kg/day, followed by 7 days of fluconazole 1,200 mg/day.

All patients were also provided with consolidation therapy of fluconazole 800 mg/day for eight weeks. Of the patients, 60.2% were male, their median age was 37, and their median CD4 count was 27 cells/mm³.

For the primary endpoint in the intention-to-treat analysis of 814 patients, the 10-week mortality rate in the single-dose L-AmB group was 24.82% (101 of 407) and 28.75% (117 of 407) in the control arm, for a difference (-3.93%) that was well within the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of 10%.

As expected, the safety measures were significantly improved with the single-dose of L-AmB: Rates of grade 3 or 4 adverse events within the initial 21 days of treatment in the single-dose L-AmB group were 50% versus 62.3% in the control group, and severe anemia occurred in just 13% of single-dose L-AmB participants, compared with 41% in the AmB deoxycholate control arm (both P < .001), Dr. Lawrence reported.

Furthermore, the average decline in hemoglobin over the first week was 0.3 g/dL in the single-dose L-AmB arm and 1.9 g/dL in the control arm, resulting in the need for more blood transfusions in the control arm (P < .001).

The impact on kidney function was also worse in the higher dose arm, with an average increase in creatinine over the first week of 20.2% in the L-AmB group versus 49.7% in the control group, while hypokalemia and thrombophlebitis were also more common with the higher dose group, Dr. Lawrence noted.

In the adjusted analysis, the single-dose L-AmB measures were in fact superior after adjusting for factors including research site, age, sex, baseline Glasgow Coma Scale, CD4 count, CSF cryptococcal colony-forming units/mL, antiretroviral therapy status, hemoglobin, and CSF opening pressure.

Mortality rate still high – but significantly reduced

The mortality rate of about 25% in the study after the treatment is still significantly higher than typically seen in high-income countries such as the United States, where HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis is less common and associated with a mortality of roughly 10-15%, Dr. Lawrence noted.

The rate is nevertheless among the lowest mortality rates ever reported within a clinical trial conducted in resource-limited settings, he explained.

“These results are a step in the right direction and a significant improvement on the rates of 40% to 45% reported with two-week L-AmB-based regimens in African settings,” Dr. Lawrence underscored.

Higher cost — but potentially more cost-effective

With a higher cost than AmB deoxycholate, L-AmB’s utilization in resource-limited settings has been a challenge: A single vial of L-AmB ranges from $80 to $200, according to some reports, and while 14-day dosing requires as many as 42 vials of L-AmB, even a 7-day regimen still requires 21 vials.

In comparison, the single-dose L-AmB regimen only requires an average of 10 to 11 vials per patient, but the regimen’s higher safety could translate to far greater cost savings, Dr. Lawrence explained.

“While the AmBisome regimen is technically more expensive in terms of drugs, we expect it to be cost-effective or possibly cost-saving when taking into account that there is less toxicity, fewer blood tests, less transfusions, etc., and possibly shorter duration of hospital admission,” he said.

Cost, supply controversy: ‘Black fungus’-related demand

The drug’s cost — as well as supply issues — have meanwhile become even more of a problem as L-AmB has unexpectedly also become urgently needed in the treatment of mucormycosis in India and Nepal, where the otherwise rare fungal disease, commonly known as “black fungus,” has been increasingly affecting COVID-19 patients and survivors.

Gilead had previously announced in 2018 its intention to make L-AmB more widely available at a price of $16.25 per vial, but “implementation of this has been slow,” Dr. Lawrence said.

As a result, Gilead is facing heightened pressure to implement the lower prices – and also improve substantial supply issues, with Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) and dozens of other global organizations issuing an open letter to Gilead and partner Viatris in June calling for immediate action to implement the lower price and improve supply of L-AmB.

In a company statement, Gilead responded, detailing its “commit[ment] to the non-profit pricing for the treatment of cryptococcal meningitis” and to efforts to improve the public health crisis in India.

For their part, Dr. Lawrence and his colleagues are working on producing more research on the issue.

“We hope that the conclusive results of the AMBITION trial will give a much needed push to implement this program,” he said.

“We are also currently completing the cost-effectiveness analysis of the study, which we hope will provide additional evidence to support widespread implementation of this regimen and highlight further the urgent need to broaden access to AmBisome and flucytosine,” he said.

The trial was supported by a grant through the European Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP), the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA) (TRIA2015-1092), and the Wellcome Trust / Medical Research Council (UK)/UKAID Joint Global Health Trials (MR/P006922/1. The AmBisome was donated by Gilead Sciences. Dr. Lawrence had no disclosures to report.

The Food and Drug Administration has issued a notice about potential mechanical failures and biocompatibility concerns with MAGEC system devices from NuVasive.

MAGEC is a surgical magnetic rod system used to treat early-onset scoliosis (EOS) in children under 10 years of age. The magnetic system can help avoid invasive surgeries, as growth rods can be adjusted with an external remote control. MAGEC is the only FDA-approved pure distraction-based system for EOS and is the most-used technology for EOS treatment in the United States, Aakash Agarwal, PhD, director of research and clinical affairs at Spinal Balance in Swanton, Ohio, said in an interview.

According to the notice, there are reports of endcap separation and O-ring seal failure in the following six MAGEC devices:

• MAGEC Spinal Bracing and Distraction System
• MAGEC 2 Spinal Bracing and Distraction System
• MAGEC System
• MAGEC System Model X Device
• MAGEC System Model X Rod
• MAGEC System Rods

Endcap separation can potentially expose the patient’s tissue to internal components of the device that have not been completely tested for biocompatibility.

In February 2020, NuVasive recalled its MAGEC System Model X rods to address reports of endcap separation issues. The FDA cleared a modified version of the device designed to mitigate these events in July 2020. In April 2021, NuVasive informed providers of potential biocompatibility concerns and placed a voluntary shipping hold on the MAGEC device system. The shipping hold was lifted July 15, the company announced.

The FDA is currently not recommending removal of functioning MAGEC devices, noting that it is “in the best interest of patients” to continue to make the system available. The overall benefits of the device outweigh the known risks, and the restricted use for a 2-year implantation time for children under 10 years of age will further mitigate these risks, the FDA said in the statement.

To report adverse events related to MAGEC devices, patients, caregivers, and providers can submit a report through MedWatch, the FDA safety information and adverse event reporting program.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The Food and Drug Administration has issued a notice about potential mechanical failures and biocompatibility concerns with MAGEC system devices from NuVasive.

MAGEC is a surgical magnetic rod system used to treat early-onset scoliosis (EOS) in children under 10 years of age. The magnetic system can help avoid invasive surgeries, as growth rods can be adjusted with an external remote control. MAGEC is the only FDA-approved pure distraction-based system for EOS and is the most-used technology for EOS treatment in the United States, Aakash Agarwal, PhD, director of research and clinical affairs at Spinal Balance in Swanton, Ohio, said in an interview.

According to the notice, there are reports of endcap separation and O-ring seal failure in the following six MAGEC devices:

• MAGEC Spinal Bracing and Distraction System
• MAGEC 2 Spinal Bracing and Distraction System
• MAGEC System
• MAGEC System Model X Device
• MAGEC System Model X Rod
• MAGEC System Rods

Endcap separation can potentially expose the patient’s tissue to internal components of the device that have not been completely tested for biocompatibility.

In February 2020, NuVasive recalled its MAGEC System Model X rods to address reports of endcap separation issues. The FDA cleared a modified version of the device designed to mitigate these events in July 2020. In April 2021, NuVasive informed providers of potential biocompatibility concerns and placed a voluntary shipping hold on the MAGEC device system. The shipping hold was lifted July 15, the company announced.

The FDA is currently not recommending removal of functioning MAGEC devices, noting that it is “in the best interest of patients” to continue to make the system available. The overall benefits of the device outweigh the known risks, and the restricted use for a 2-year implantation time for children under 10 years of age will further mitigate these risks, the FDA said in the statement.

To report adverse events related to MAGEC devices, patients, caregivers, and providers can submit a report through MedWatch, the FDA safety information and adverse event reporting program.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The Food and Drug Administration has issued a notice about potential mechanical failures and biocompatibility concerns with MAGEC system devices from NuVasive.

MAGEC is a surgical magnetic rod system used to treat early-onset scoliosis (EOS) in children under 10 years of age. The magnetic system can help avoid invasive surgeries, as growth rods can be adjusted with an external remote control. MAGEC is the only FDA-approved pure distraction-based system for EOS and is the most-used technology for EOS treatment in the United States, Aakash Agarwal, PhD, director of research and clinical affairs at Spinal Balance in Swanton, Ohio, said in an interview.

According to the notice, there are reports of endcap separation and O-ring seal failure in the following six MAGEC devices:

• MAGEC Spinal Bracing and Distraction System
• MAGEC 2 Spinal Bracing and Distraction System
• MAGEC System
• MAGEC System Model X Device
• MAGEC System Model X Rod
• MAGEC System Rods

Endcap separation can potentially expose the patient’s tissue to internal components of the device that have not been completely tested for biocompatibility.

In February 2020, NuVasive recalled its MAGEC System Model X rods to address reports of endcap separation issues. The FDA cleared a modified version of the device designed to mitigate these events in July 2020. In April 2021, NuVasive informed providers of potential biocompatibility concerns and placed a voluntary shipping hold on the MAGEC device system. The shipping hold was lifted July 15, the company announced.

The FDA is currently not recommending removal of functioning MAGEC devices, noting that it is “in the best interest of patients” to continue to make the system available. The overall benefits of the device outweigh the known risks, and the restricted use for a 2-year implantation time for children under 10 years of age will further mitigate these risks, the FDA said in the statement.

To report adverse events related to MAGEC devices, patients, caregivers, and providers can submit a report through MedWatch, the FDA safety information and adverse event reporting program.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.