Over the past few decades, it has become increasingly clear that cannabis use can increase the risk of developing a psychotic disorder and worsen the course of existing schizophrenia in a dose-dependent fashion.^1-3 Beyond psychosis, although many patients with mental illness use cannabis for recreational purposes or as purported “self-medication,” currently available evidence suggests that marijuana is more likely to represent a harm than a benefit for psychi­atric disorders⁴ (Box^4-8). Our current state of knowledge therefore suggests that psychiatrists should caution their patients against using cannabis and prioritize interventions to reduce or discontinue use, especially among those with psychotic disorders.

Box

Despite that conclusion, because cannabis is classified as a Schedule I drug by the US Drug Enforcement Agency, clinical research investigating the risks and benefits of cannabis has been limited. It therefore remains possible that cannabis, or individual cannabinoids such as cannabidiol (CBD), may yet find a therapeutic niche in psychiatry. This article reviews evidence on CBD for the treatment of schizophrenia.

Cannabinergic drugs as potential antipsychotics

Although the bulk of evidence indicates a harmful effect of cannabis in individuals with or at risk for psychosis, there have been a few published cases of schizophrenia improving with dronabinol, an FDA-approved, synthetic form of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).^9,10 THC is the constituent of cannabis that produces euphoric effects. These provocative findings have not been replicated in controlled clinical trials, but suggest at least the theoretical possibility of idiosyncratic benefits from THC for some individuals within the psychotic spectrum.

Still, given that most available evidence supports that THC has a harmful effect on psychosis and psychosis risk, researchers have instead performed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate a possible therapeutic role for medications that oppose the agonist effects of THC at cannabinoid type 1 (CB1) receptors. To date, 2 RCTs comparing rimonabant, a CB1 inverse agonist, with placebo (PLB) in patients with schizophrenia have failed to demonstrate any benefit for psychotic symptoms or cognitive deficits.^11,12 A third trial examining rimonabant for people diagnosed with schizophrenia who were overweight found significant benefits for anxiety and depressive symptoms, but none for positive symptoms or the primary outcome of weight loss.¹³ While these results are discouraging, the role of THC in precipitating psychosis suggests that novel agents opposing the actions of THC on the cannabinoid system could have antipsychotic properties.¹⁴

Cannabidiol: An antipsychotic medication?

In contrast to THC, CBD has minimal euphorigenic properties and has recently been heralded in the popular press as a “miracle drug” with benefits for medical and psychiatric disorders alike.¹⁵ It has even been speculated that it could become a popular food supplement.¹⁶ In 2018, the FDA gave full approval to a pharmaceutically manufactured form of CBD (brand name: Epidiolex) as a novel treatment for 2 rare and severe forms of pediatric epilepsy, Lennox-Gastaut syndrome and Dravet syndrome,¹⁷ based on RCTs supporting its efficacy for these often refractory and life-threatening conditions.^18-20

In psychiatry, there have not yet been enough robust clinical studies to support broad therapeutic claims for CBD as a treatment for any mental disorder.²¹ However, there is growing evidence that CBD has potential as an antipsychotic medication. In 1995, the first case report was published describing the efficacy of CBD, 1,500 mg/d, as standalone therapy in a single individual with schizophrenia.²² In 2006, the same research group followed up with a case series in which only 1 out of 3 patients with treatment-refractory schizophrenia improved with flexible dosing of CBD to a maximum dose of 1,280 mg/d.²³

There have been 3 published RCTs exploring the efficacy of CBD in schizophrenia (Table^24-26). The first study, published in 2012, included 39 adults with schizophrenia who were randomized to 800 mg/d of CBD or amisulpride (AMS), a second-generation antipsychotic that is popular in Europe but is not available in the United States.²⁴ Over 4 weeks of randomized treatment, CBD resulted in as much improvement in overall symptoms and positive symptoms as AMS, and improvement of negative symptoms was significantly greater with CBD. Compared with patients treated with antipsychotic medication, patients who were treated with CBD had fewer extrapyramidal symptoms, less weight gain, and less prolactin elevation. This initial trial suggests that CBD might be as efficacious in schizophrenia as antipsychotic medication, without its burdensome adverse effects. However, this is the only RCT of CBD monotherapy published to date.

Continue to: Two other recently published RCTs...

Two other recently published RCTs compared CBD with PLB as add-on therapy to antipsychotics. McGuire et al²⁵ compared CBD, 1,000 mg/d, to PLB over 6 weeks in 88 patients with schizophrenia. Positive symptom improvement was statistically greater with CBD than with PLB, although the magnitude of clinical change was modest (using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS] positive symptom subscale: −3.2 points for CBD vs −1.7 points for PLB). Changes in PANSS total score and subscales for general and negative symptoms were not significantly different between treatment groups. There was also no significant difference in overall change in neurocognitive symptoms, although post-hoc analysis revealed significantly greater improvement in motor speed for patients treated with CBD. More than twice the number of patients treated with CBD were rated as “much improved” by the Clinical Global Impressions scale compared with patients treated with PLB, but this was not a statistically significant finding, and most patients experienced only “minimal” or “no improvement.” In terms of adverse events, there were no significant differences between patients in the CBD and PLB groups. Although this study is technically “positive” for CBD and suggests minimal adverse effects, it is not clear whether the statistically significant positive symptom improvements (+1.5 PANSS points for CBD over PLB) were clinically significant.

The most recently published placebo-controlled RCT of CBD as add-on therapy to antipsychotic medication included 36 patients with schizophrenia treated over 6 weeks.²⁶ In this study, there was no benefit of CBD, 600 mg/d, on any PANSS score outcome (total, general, positive, or negative symptoms). For the primary outcome of the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) Consensus Cognitive Battery, there were no significant drug × time effects, and post-hoc analyses showed that only patients treated with PLB improved with time. Sedation was more common among patients treated with CBD compared with PLB.

Making sense of the data

There have been mixed results from the few case reports and 3 RCTs of patients with schizophrenia who were treated with CBD. How can we resolve these disparate findings? A few possible interpretations of the data that warrant clarification through additional research include:

Dosing. In the first case report with positive results, CBD was dosed at 1,500 mg/d,²² whereas in the subsequent case series with mixed results, the maximum allowable dose of CBD was 1,280 mg/d.²³ Likewise, in the RCTs, positive results were found when CBD was dosed at 800 to 1,000 mg/d,^24,25 but not at 600 mg/d.²⁶ The efficacy of CBD for schizophrenia might depend on higher doses.

Treatment resistance. In the second case series in which only 1 out of 3 patients responded to treatment with CBD,²³ the patients had demonstrated previous nonresponse to at least 2 first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs) and risperidone, 6 mg/d. In the RCTs, all patients were antipsychotic-responsive.^24-26 Cannabidiol may not be as effective for patients with treatment-refractory schizophrenia as it is for patients with schizophrenia who respond to antipsychotics.

Continue to: Clinical stability

Answering questions about CBD

Cannabidiol is becoming increasingly popular for its purported health benefits. The mixed results of the few studies published on CBD for schizophrenia place clinicians in a difficult position when attempting to answer questions about how cannabinoids might fit into treatment of patients with psychosis. Consider the following:

Is cannabis helpful for patients with schizophrenia? No. Aside from the few case reports suggesting that FDA-approved THC (dronabinol) can improve symptoms in some patients,^9,10 most of the evidence from anecdotal reports and both experimental and observational studies indicate that cannabis, THC, and synthetic cannabinoids have a harmful effect in patients with or at risk for psychosis.^1-3

If you are considering recommending some form of cannabis to patients with schizophrenia, what kind should you recommend? Recommending or encouraging cannabis use for patients with psychosis is ill-advised. Although certain types of cannabis might contain more THC (eg, Cannabis indica vs Cannabis sativa) or variable amounts of CBD, in general the amount of CBD in whole leaf cannabis is minimal, with the ratio of THC to CBD increasingly significantly over the past decade.^3,27 Most forms of cannabis should therefore be avoided by individuals with or at risk for psychotic disorders.

Continue to: What about CBD oil and other CBD products sold in dispensaries?

What about CBD oil and other CBD products sold in dispensaries? Cannabidiol is increasingly available in various forms based on its ability to be designated as a legal hemp product (containing <0.3% THC) at the federal level or as a cannabinoid in states where cannabis is legal. However, several studies have now shown that cannabis products sold online or in dispensaries are often labeled inaccurately, with both under- and over-reporting of THC and CBD content.^28-30 Some CBD products have been found to have almost no CBD at all.^29,30 The unreliability of product labeling makes it difficult to predict the effects of CBD products that are not subject to FDA purity standards for medications or dietary supplements. It also raises questions about the sources of CBD and the reliability of dosing in the studies discussed above.

Why might CBD work as an antipsychotic? Although CBD has minimal affinity for cannabinoid receptors, it appears to act as a partial agonist of dopamine D2 receptors and an agonist at 5-HT1A receptors, with overall effects that decrease mesolimbic dopamine activity.^31,32 In addition, CBD increases the availability of the endogenous cannabinoid anandamide, which may have antipsychotic properties.^14,33

Now that the FDA has approved CBD manufactured by a pharmaceutical company, should it be prescribed “off-label” for patients with schizophrenia? This is the “million dollar question,” with insufficient evidence to provide a clear answer. It should now be possible to prescribe FDA-approved CBD for off-label purposes, including the treatment of schizophrenia and other psychiatric disorders. No doubt, some clinicians are already doing so. This will predictably yield more anecdotal evidence about efficacy and adverse effects in the future, but there is not yet adequate evidence to support an FDA indication for CBD in schizophrenia. Additional studies of CBD for schizophrenia are ongoing.

Bottom Line

Cannabidiol (CBD) is becoming increasingly popular based on its purported health benefits, but the evidence supporting a therapeutic role in psychiatry is preliminary at best. Although CBD is now available by prescription as an FDA-approved drug for the treatment of 2 rare forms of epilepsy, its benefits in patients with schizophrenia are uncertain based on mixed results in clinical trials.

Related Resources

• Clinicaltrials.gov. Studies of “cannabidiol” and “schizophrenia.” U.S. National Library of Medicine. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=Schizophrenia&term=cannabidiol.
• Grinspoon P. Cannabidiol (CBD) – what we know and what we don’t. Harvard Health Blog. https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/cannabidiol-cbd-what-we-know-and-what-wedont-2018082414476. Published August 24, 2018.

Drug Brand Names

Cannabidiol • Epidiolex
Dronabinol • Marinol
Risperidone • Risperdal

Over the past few decades, it has become increasingly clear that cannabis use can increase the risk of developing a psychotic disorder and worsen the course of existing schizophrenia in a dose-dependent fashion.^1-3 Beyond psychosis, although many patients with mental illness use cannabis for recreational purposes or as purported “self-medication,” currently available evidence suggests that marijuana is more likely to represent a harm than a benefit for psychi­atric disorders⁴ (Box^4-8). Our current state of knowledge therefore suggests that psychiatrists should caution their patients against using cannabis and prioritize interventions to reduce or discontinue use, especially among those with psychotic disorders.

Box

Despite that conclusion, because cannabis is classified as a Schedule I drug by the US Drug Enforcement Agency, clinical research investigating the risks and benefits of cannabis has been limited. It therefore remains possible that cannabis, or individual cannabinoids such as cannabidiol (CBD), may yet find a therapeutic niche in psychiatry. This article reviews evidence on CBD for the treatment of schizophrenia.

Cannabinergic drugs as potential antipsychotics

Although the bulk of evidence indicates a harmful effect of cannabis in individuals with or at risk for psychosis, there have been a few published cases of schizophrenia improving with dronabinol, an FDA-approved, synthetic form of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).^9,10 THC is the constituent of cannabis that produces euphoric effects. These provocative findings have not been replicated in controlled clinical trials, but suggest at least the theoretical possibility of idiosyncratic benefits from THC for some individuals within the psychotic spectrum.

Still, given that most available evidence supports that THC has a harmful effect on psychosis and psychosis risk, researchers have instead performed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate a possible therapeutic role for medications that oppose the agonist effects of THC at cannabinoid type 1 (CB1) receptors. To date, 2 RCTs comparing rimonabant, a CB1 inverse agonist, with placebo (PLB) in patients with schizophrenia have failed to demonstrate any benefit for psychotic symptoms or cognitive deficits.^11,12 A third trial examining rimonabant for people diagnosed with schizophrenia who were overweight found significant benefits for anxiety and depressive symptoms, but none for positive symptoms or the primary outcome of weight loss.¹³ While these results are discouraging, the role of THC in precipitating psychosis suggests that novel agents opposing the actions of THC on the cannabinoid system could have antipsychotic properties.¹⁴

Cannabidiol: An antipsychotic medication?

In contrast to THC, CBD has minimal euphorigenic properties and has recently been heralded in the popular press as a “miracle drug” with benefits for medical and psychiatric disorders alike.¹⁵ It has even been speculated that it could become a popular food supplement.¹⁶ In 2018, the FDA gave full approval to a pharmaceutically manufactured form of CBD (brand name: Epidiolex) as a novel treatment for 2 rare and severe forms of pediatric epilepsy, Lennox-Gastaut syndrome and Dravet syndrome,¹⁷ based on RCTs supporting its efficacy for these often refractory and life-threatening conditions.^18-20

In psychiatry, there have not yet been enough robust clinical studies to support broad therapeutic claims for CBD as a treatment for any mental disorder.²¹ However, there is growing evidence that CBD has potential as an antipsychotic medication. In 1995, the first case report was published describing the efficacy of CBD, 1,500 mg/d, as standalone therapy in a single individual with schizophrenia.²² In 2006, the same research group followed up with a case series in which only 1 out of 3 patients with treatment-refractory schizophrenia improved with flexible dosing of CBD to a maximum dose of 1,280 mg/d.²³

There have been 3 published RCTs exploring the efficacy of CBD in schizophrenia (Table^24-26). The first study, published in 2012, included 39 adults with schizophrenia who were randomized to 800 mg/d of CBD or amisulpride (AMS), a second-generation antipsychotic that is popular in Europe but is not available in the United States.²⁴ Over 4 weeks of randomized treatment, CBD resulted in as much improvement in overall symptoms and positive symptoms as AMS, and improvement of negative symptoms was significantly greater with CBD. Compared with patients treated with antipsychotic medication, patients who were treated with CBD had fewer extrapyramidal symptoms, less weight gain, and less prolactin elevation. This initial trial suggests that CBD might be as efficacious in schizophrenia as antipsychotic medication, without its burdensome adverse effects. However, this is the only RCT of CBD monotherapy published to date.

Continue to: Two other recently published RCTs...

Two other recently published RCTs compared CBD with PLB as add-on therapy to antipsychotics. McGuire et al²⁵ compared CBD, 1,000 mg/d, to PLB over 6 weeks in 88 patients with schizophrenia. Positive symptom improvement was statistically greater with CBD than with PLB, although the magnitude of clinical change was modest (using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS] positive symptom subscale: −3.2 points for CBD vs −1.7 points for PLB). Changes in PANSS total score and subscales for general and negative symptoms were not significantly different between treatment groups. There was also no significant difference in overall change in neurocognitive symptoms, although post-hoc analysis revealed significantly greater improvement in motor speed for patients treated with CBD. More than twice the number of patients treated with CBD were rated as “much improved” by the Clinical Global Impressions scale compared with patients treated with PLB, but this was not a statistically significant finding, and most patients experienced only “minimal” or “no improvement.” In terms of adverse events, there were no significant differences between patients in the CBD and PLB groups. Although this study is technically “positive” for CBD and suggests minimal adverse effects, it is not clear whether the statistically significant positive symptom improvements (+1.5 PANSS points for CBD over PLB) were clinically significant.

The most recently published placebo-controlled RCT of CBD as add-on therapy to antipsychotic medication included 36 patients with schizophrenia treated over 6 weeks.²⁶ In this study, there was no benefit of CBD, 600 mg/d, on any PANSS score outcome (total, general, positive, or negative symptoms). For the primary outcome of the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) Consensus Cognitive Battery, there were no significant drug × time effects, and post-hoc analyses showed that only patients treated with PLB improved with time. Sedation was more common among patients treated with CBD compared with PLB.

Making sense of the data

There have been mixed results from the few case reports and 3 RCTs of patients with schizophrenia who were treated with CBD. How can we resolve these disparate findings? A few possible interpretations of the data that warrant clarification through additional research include:

Dosing. In the first case report with positive results, CBD was dosed at 1,500 mg/d,²² whereas in the subsequent case series with mixed results, the maximum allowable dose of CBD was 1,280 mg/d.²³ Likewise, in the RCTs, positive results were found when CBD was dosed at 800 to 1,000 mg/d,^24,25 but not at 600 mg/d.²⁶ The efficacy of CBD for schizophrenia might depend on higher doses.

Treatment resistance. In the second case series in which only 1 out of 3 patients responded to treatment with CBD,²³ the patients had demonstrated previous nonresponse to at least 2 first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs) and risperidone, 6 mg/d. In the RCTs, all patients were antipsychotic-responsive.^24-26 Cannabidiol may not be as effective for patients with treatment-refractory schizophrenia as it is for patients with schizophrenia who respond to antipsychotics.

Continue to: Clinical stability

Answering questions about CBD

Cannabidiol is becoming increasingly popular for its purported health benefits. The mixed results of the few studies published on CBD for schizophrenia place clinicians in a difficult position when attempting to answer questions about how cannabinoids might fit into treatment of patients with psychosis. Consider the following:

Is cannabis helpful for patients with schizophrenia? No. Aside from the few case reports suggesting that FDA-approved THC (dronabinol) can improve symptoms in some patients,^9,10 most of the evidence from anecdotal reports and both experimental and observational studies indicate that cannabis, THC, and synthetic cannabinoids have a harmful effect in patients with or at risk for psychosis.^1-3

If you are considering recommending some form of cannabis to patients with schizophrenia, what kind should you recommend? Recommending or encouraging cannabis use for patients with psychosis is ill-advised. Although certain types of cannabis might contain more THC (eg, Cannabis indica vs Cannabis sativa) or variable amounts of CBD, in general the amount of CBD in whole leaf cannabis is minimal, with the ratio of THC to CBD increasingly significantly over the past decade.^3,27 Most forms of cannabis should therefore be avoided by individuals with or at risk for psychotic disorders.

Continue to: What about CBD oil and other CBD products sold in dispensaries?

What about CBD oil and other CBD products sold in dispensaries? Cannabidiol is increasingly available in various forms based on its ability to be designated as a legal hemp product (containing <0.3% THC) at the federal level or as a cannabinoid in states where cannabis is legal. However, several studies have now shown that cannabis products sold online or in dispensaries are often labeled inaccurately, with both under- and over-reporting of THC and CBD content.^28-30 Some CBD products have been found to have almost no CBD at all.^29,30 The unreliability of product labeling makes it difficult to predict the effects of CBD products that are not subject to FDA purity standards for medications or dietary supplements. It also raises questions about the sources of CBD and the reliability of dosing in the studies discussed above.

Why might CBD work as an antipsychotic? Although CBD has minimal affinity for cannabinoid receptors, it appears to act as a partial agonist of dopamine D2 receptors and an agonist at 5-HT1A receptors, with overall effects that decrease mesolimbic dopamine activity.^31,32 In addition, CBD increases the availability of the endogenous cannabinoid anandamide, which may have antipsychotic properties.^14,33

Now that the FDA has approved CBD manufactured by a pharmaceutical company, should it be prescribed “off-label” for patients with schizophrenia? This is the “million dollar question,” with insufficient evidence to provide a clear answer. It should now be possible to prescribe FDA-approved CBD for off-label purposes, including the treatment of schizophrenia and other psychiatric disorders. No doubt, some clinicians are already doing so. This will predictably yield more anecdotal evidence about efficacy and adverse effects in the future, but there is not yet adequate evidence to support an FDA indication for CBD in schizophrenia. Additional studies of CBD for schizophrenia are ongoing.

Bottom Line

Cannabidiol (CBD) is becoming increasingly popular based on its purported health benefits, but the evidence supporting a therapeutic role in psychiatry is preliminary at best. Although CBD is now available by prescription as an FDA-approved drug for the treatment of 2 rare forms of epilepsy, its benefits in patients with schizophrenia are uncertain based on mixed results in clinical trials.

Related Resources

• Clinicaltrials.gov. Studies of “cannabidiol” and “schizophrenia.” U.S. National Library of Medicine. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=Schizophrenia&term=cannabidiol.
• Grinspoon P. Cannabidiol (CBD) – what we know and what we don’t. Harvard Health Blog. https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/cannabidiol-cbd-what-we-know-and-what-wedont-2018082414476. Published August 24, 2018.

Drug Brand Names

Cannabidiol • Epidiolex
Dronabinol • Marinol
Risperidone • Risperdal

Over the past few decades, it has become increasingly clear that cannabis use can increase the risk of developing a psychotic disorder and worsen the course of existing schizophrenia in a dose-dependent fashion.^1-3 Beyond psychosis, although many patients with mental illness use cannabis for recreational purposes or as purported “self-medication,” currently available evidence suggests that marijuana is more likely to represent a harm than a benefit for psychi­atric disorders⁴ (Box^4-8). Our current state of knowledge therefore suggests that psychiatrists should caution their patients against using cannabis and prioritize interventions to reduce or discontinue use, especially among those with psychotic disorders.

Box

Despite that conclusion, because cannabis is classified as a Schedule I drug by the US Drug Enforcement Agency, clinical research investigating the risks and benefits of cannabis has been limited. It therefore remains possible that cannabis, or individual cannabinoids such as cannabidiol (CBD), may yet find a therapeutic niche in psychiatry. This article reviews evidence on CBD for the treatment of schizophrenia.

Cannabinergic drugs as potential antipsychotics

Although the bulk of evidence indicates a harmful effect of cannabis in individuals with or at risk for psychosis, there have been a few published cases of schizophrenia improving with dronabinol, an FDA-approved, synthetic form of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).^9,10 THC is the constituent of cannabis that produces euphoric effects. These provocative findings have not been replicated in controlled clinical trials, but suggest at least the theoretical possibility of idiosyncratic benefits from THC for some individuals within the psychotic spectrum.

Still, given that most available evidence supports that THC has a harmful effect on psychosis and psychosis risk, researchers have instead performed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate a possible therapeutic role for medications that oppose the agonist effects of THC at cannabinoid type 1 (CB1) receptors. To date, 2 RCTs comparing rimonabant, a CB1 inverse agonist, with placebo (PLB) in patients with schizophrenia have failed to demonstrate any benefit for psychotic symptoms or cognitive deficits.^11,12 A third trial examining rimonabant for people diagnosed with schizophrenia who were overweight found significant benefits for anxiety and depressive symptoms, but none for positive symptoms or the primary outcome of weight loss.¹³ While these results are discouraging, the role of THC in precipitating psychosis suggests that novel agents opposing the actions of THC on the cannabinoid system could have antipsychotic properties.¹⁴

Cannabidiol: An antipsychotic medication?

In contrast to THC, CBD has minimal euphorigenic properties and has recently been heralded in the popular press as a “miracle drug” with benefits for medical and psychiatric disorders alike.¹⁵ It has even been speculated that it could become a popular food supplement.¹⁶ In 2018, the FDA gave full approval to a pharmaceutically manufactured form of CBD (brand name: Epidiolex) as a novel treatment for 2 rare and severe forms of pediatric epilepsy, Lennox-Gastaut syndrome and Dravet syndrome,¹⁷ based on RCTs supporting its efficacy for these often refractory and life-threatening conditions.^18-20

In psychiatry, there have not yet been enough robust clinical studies to support broad therapeutic claims for CBD as a treatment for any mental disorder.²¹ However, there is growing evidence that CBD has potential as an antipsychotic medication. In 1995, the first case report was published describing the efficacy of CBD, 1,500 mg/d, as standalone therapy in a single individual with schizophrenia.²² In 2006, the same research group followed up with a case series in which only 1 out of 3 patients with treatment-refractory schizophrenia improved with flexible dosing of CBD to a maximum dose of 1,280 mg/d.²³

There have been 3 published RCTs exploring the efficacy of CBD in schizophrenia (Table^24-26). The first study, published in 2012, included 39 adults with schizophrenia who were randomized to 800 mg/d of CBD or amisulpride (AMS), a second-generation antipsychotic that is popular in Europe but is not available in the United States.²⁴ Over 4 weeks of randomized treatment, CBD resulted in as much improvement in overall symptoms and positive symptoms as AMS, and improvement of negative symptoms was significantly greater with CBD. Compared with patients treated with antipsychotic medication, patients who were treated with CBD had fewer extrapyramidal symptoms, less weight gain, and less prolactin elevation. This initial trial suggests that CBD might be as efficacious in schizophrenia as antipsychotic medication, without its burdensome adverse effects. However, this is the only RCT of CBD monotherapy published to date.

Continue to: Two other recently published RCTs...

Two other recently published RCTs compared CBD with PLB as add-on therapy to antipsychotics. McGuire et al²⁵ compared CBD, 1,000 mg/d, to PLB over 6 weeks in 88 patients with schizophrenia. Positive symptom improvement was statistically greater with CBD than with PLB, although the magnitude of clinical change was modest (using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS] positive symptom subscale: −3.2 points for CBD vs −1.7 points for PLB). Changes in PANSS total score and subscales for general and negative symptoms were not significantly different between treatment groups. There was also no significant difference in overall change in neurocognitive symptoms, although post-hoc analysis revealed significantly greater improvement in motor speed for patients treated with CBD. More than twice the number of patients treated with CBD were rated as “much improved” by the Clinical Global Impressions scale compared with patients treated with PLB, but this was not a statistically significant finding, and most patients experienced only “minimal” or “no improvement.” In terms of adverse events, there were no significant differences between patients in the CBD and PLB groups. Although this study is technically “positive” for CBD and suggests minimal adverse effects, it is not clear whether the statistically significant positive symptom improvements (+1.5 PANSS points for CBD over PLB) were clinically significant.

The most recently published placebo-controlled RCT of CBD as add-on therapy to antipsychotic medication included 36 patients with schizophrenia treated over 6 weeks.²⁶ In this study, there was no benefit of CBD, 600 mg/d, on any PANSS score outcome (total, general, positive, or negative symptoms). For the primary outcome of the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) Consensus Cognitive Battery, there were no significant drug × time effects, and post-hoc analyses showed that only patients treated with PLB improved with time. Sedation was more common among patients treated with CBD compared with PLB.

Making sense of the data

There have been mixed results from the few case reports and 3 RCTs of patients with schizophrenia who were treated with CBD. How can we resolve these disparate findings? A few possible interpretations of the data that warrant clarification through additional research include:

Dosing. In the first case report with positive results, CBD was dosed at 1,500 mg/d,²² whereas in the subsequent case series with mixed results, the maximum allowable dose of CBD was 1,280 mg/d.²³ Likewise, in the RCTs, positive results were found when CBD was dosed at 800 to 1,000 mg/d,^24,25 but not at 600 mg/d.²⁶ The efficacy of CBD for schizophrenia might depend on higher doses.

Treatment resistance. In the second case series in which only 1 out of 3 patients responded to treatment with CBD,²³ the patients had demonstrated previous nonresponse to at least 2 first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs) and risperidone, 6 mg/d. In the RCTs, all patients were antipsychotic-responsive.^24-26 Cannabidiol may not be as effective for patients with treatment-refractory schizophrenia as it is for patients with schizophrenia who respond to antipsychotics.

Continue to: Clinical stability

Answering questions about CBD

Cannabidiol is becoming increasingly popular for its purported health benefits. The mixed results of the few studies published on CBD for schizophrenia place clinicians in a difficult position when attempting to answer questions about how cannabinoids might fit into treatment of patients with psychosis. Consider the following:

Is cannabis helpful for patients with schizophrenia? No. Aside from the few case reports suggesting that FDA-approved THC (dronabinol) can improve symptoms in some patients,^9,10 most of the evidence from anecdotal reports and both experimental and observational studies indicate that cannabis, THC, and synthetic cannabinoids have a harmful effect in patients with or at risk for psychosis.^1-3

If you are considering recommending some form of cannabis to patients with schizophrenia, what kind should you recommend? Recommending or encouraging cannabis use for patients with psychosis is ill-advised. Although certain types of cannabis might contain more THC (eg, Cannabis indica vs Cannabis sativa) or variable amounts of CBD, in general the amount of CBD in whole leaf cannabis is minimal, with the ratio of THC to CBD increasingly significantly over the past decade.^3,27 Most forms of cannabis should therefore be avoided by individuals with or at risk for psychotic disorders.

Continue to: What about CBD oil and other CBD products sold in dispensaries?

What about CBD oil and other CBD products sold in dispensaries? Cannabidiol is increasingly available in various forms based on its ability to be designated as a legal hemp product (containing <0.3% THC) at the federal level or as a cannabinoid in states where cannabis is legal. However, several studies have now shown that cannabis products sold online or in dispensaries are often labeled inaccurately, with both under- and over-reporting of THC and CBD content.^28-30 Some CBD products have been found to have almost no CBD at all.^29,30 The unreliability of product labeling makes it difficult to predict the effects of CBD products that are not subject to FDA purity standards for medications or dietary supplements. It also raises questions about the sources of CBD and the reliability of dosing in the studies discussed above.

Why might CBD work as an antipsychotic? Although CBD has minimal affinity for cannabinoid receptors, it appears to act as a partial agonist of dopamine D2 receptors and an agonist at 5-HT1A receptors, with overall effects that decrease mesolimbic dopamine activity.^31,32 In addition, CBD increases the availability of the endogenous cannabinoid anandamide, which may have antipsychotic properties.^14,33

Now that the FDA has approved CBD manufactured by a pharmaceutical company, should it be prescribed “off-label” for patients with schizophrenia? This is the “million dollar question,” with insufficient evidence to provide a clear answer. It should now be possible to prescribe FDA-approved CBD for off-label purposes, including the treatment of schizophrenia and other psychiatric disorders. No doubt, some clinicians are already doing so. This will predictably yield more anecdotal evidence about efficacy and adverse effects in the future, but there is not yet adequate evidence to support an FDA indication for CBD in schizophrenia. Additional studies of CBD for schizophrenia are ongoing.

Bottom Line

Cannabidiol (CBD) is becoming increasingly popular based on its purported health benefits, but the evidence supporting a therapeutic role in psychiatry is preliminary at best. Although CBD is now available by prescription as an FDA-approved drug for the treatment of 2 rare forms of epilepsy, its benefits in patients with schizophrenia are uncertain based on mixed results in clinical trials.

Related Resources

• Clinicaltrials.gov. Studies of “cannabidiol” and “schizophrenia.” U.S. National Library of Medicine. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=Schizophrenia&term=cannabidiol.
• Grinspoon P. Cannabidiol (CBD) – what we know and what we don’t. Harvard Health Blog. https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/cannabidiol-cbd-what-we-know-and-what-wedont-2018082414476. Published August 24, 2018.

Drug Brand Names

Cannabidiol • Epidiolex
Dronabinol • Marinol
Risperidone • Risperdal

Q2. Correct Answer: B

Rationale:

The PRSS1 mutation has been shown to be the causative genetic factor in hereditary pancreatitis. Hereditary pancreatitis is an autosomal dominant gene mutation with 80% penetrance. Symptoms start in childhood with acute recurrent pancreatitis and progress to chronic pancreatitis, diabetes, and exocrine insufficiency. The incidence of pancreatic cancer is increased to 40% by age 70. BRCA1 mutations have been associated with familial pancreas cancer families. SPINK mutations have been associated with chronic tropical pancreatitis. Delta F508 is the most common mutation in cystic fibrosis that leads to pancreas insufficiency in childhood. The clinical scenario is classic for hereditary pancreatitis.

Reference

1. Shelton CA, Umapathy C, Stello K, Yadav D, Whitcomb DC. Hereditary pancreatitis in the United States: Survival and rates of pancreatic cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 2018 Sep;113(9):1376-84.

ginews@gastro.org

Q2. Correct Answer: B

Rationale:

The PRSS1 mutation has been shown to be the causative genetic factor in hereditary pancreatitis. Hereditary pancreatitis is an autosomal dominant gene mutation with 80% penetrance. Symptoms start in childhood with acute recurrent pancreatitis and progress to chronic pancreatitis, diabetes, and exocrine insufficiency. The incidence of pancreatic cancer is increased to 40% by age 70. BRCA1 mutations have been associated with familial pancreas cancer families. SPINK mutations have been associated with chronic tropical pancreatitis. Delta F508 is the most common mutation in cystic fibrosis that leads to pancreas insufficiency in childhood. The clinical scenario is classic for hereditary pancreatitis.

Reference

1. Shelton CA, Umapathy C, Stello K, Yadav D, Whitcomb DC. Hereditary pancreatitis in the United States: Survival and rates of pancreatic cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 2018 Sep;113(9):1376-84.

ginews@gastro.org

Q2. Correct Answer: B

Rationale:

The PRSS1 mutation has been shown to be the causative genetic factor in hereditary pancreatitis. Hereditary pancreatitis is an autosomal dominant gene mutation with 80% penetrance. Symptoms start in childhood with acute recurrent pancreatitis and progress to chronic pancreatitis, diabetes, and exocrine insufficiency. The incidence of pancreatic cancer is increased to 40% by age 70. BRCA1 mutations have been associated with familial pancreas cancer families. SPINK mutations have been associated with chronic tropical pancreatitis. Delta F508 is the most common mutation in cystic fibrosis that leads to pancreas insufficiency in childhood. The clinical scenario is classic for hereditary pancreatitis.

Reference

1. Shelton CA, Umapathy C, Stello K, Yadav D, Whitcomb DC. Hereditary pancreatitis in the United States: Survival and rates of pancreatic cancer. Am J Gastroenterol. 2018 Sep;113(9):1376-84.

ginews@gastro.org

Q1. Correct Answer: A

Rationale:

This is an example of Yersinia infection. Transmission of yersiniosis is largely foodborne.

Risk factors associated with yersiniosis include consumption of undercooked or raw pork products and exposure to untreated water. Y. enterocolitica infection has also been associated with iron-overload states (such as hemochromatosis) and blood transfusions, because iron likely promotes virulence of this organism. The incubation period for yersiniosis is typically 4-6 days. Clinical manifestations of acute yersiniosis include diarrhea, abdominal pain, and fever; nausea and vomiting may also occur. Localization of abdominal pain to the right lower quadrant is also a diagnostic clue for yersiniosis. However, both Yersinia and Campylobacter can present with right lower quadrant pain that may be confused as appendicitis (pseudo appendicitis). Another diagnostic clue is pharyngitis, which may be an accompanying symptom. Yersinia causes diarrhea through penetration of the mucosa and proliferation in the submucosa. Pathogenic Y. enterocolitica pass through the stomach, adhere to gut epithelial cells, invade the gut wall, localize in lymphoid tissue within the gut wall and in regional mesenteric lymph nodes, and evade the host’s cell-mediated immune response. Vibrio cholerae and enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC) secrete enterotoxins that stimulate secretion and/or impair absorption.

Some bacteria produce toxins in contaminated food; when ingested, the toxins cause acute symptoms, usually nausea and vomiting. Examples of these are Staphylococcus aureus and Bacillus cereus. Enteropathogenic E. coli (EPEC) and enterohemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC) adhere to the intestinal mucosa, where they attach and cause effacement of the microvilli. Shigella, enteroinvasive E. coli, and Campylobacter jejuni penetrate the mucosa, spread, and cause mucosal damage with erosions and ulcers.
 

Reference

1. Cover TL, Aber RC. Yersinia enterocolitica. N Engl J Med. Jul 6 1989;321(1):16-24.

ginews@gastro.org

Q1. Correct Answer: A

Rationale:

This is an example of Yersinia infection. Transmission of yersiniosis is largely foodborne.

Risk factors associated with yersiniosis include consumption of undercooked or raw pork products and exposure to untreated water. Y. enterocolitica infection has also been associated with iron-overload states (such as hemochromatosis) and blood transfusions, because iron likely promotes virulence of this organism. The incubation period for yersiniosis is typically 4-6 days. Clinical manifestations of acute yersiniosis include diarrhea, abdominal pain, and fever; nausea and vomiting may also occur. Localization of abdominal pain to the right lower quadrant is also a diagnostic clue for yersiniosis. However, both Yersinia and Campylobacter can present with right lower quadrant pain that may be confused as appendicitis (pseudo appendicitis). Another diagnostic clue is pharyngitis, which may be an accompanying symptom. Yersinia causes diarrhea through penetration of the mucosa and proliferation in the submucosa. Pathogenic Y. enterocolitica pass through the stomach, adhere to gut epithelial cells, invade the gut wall, localize in lymphoid tissue within the gut wall and in regional mesenteric lymph nodes, and evade the host’s cell-mediated immune response. Vibrio cholerae and enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC) secrete enterotoxins that stimulate secretion and/or impair absorption.

Some bacteria produce toxins in contaminated food; when ingested, the toxins cause acute symptoms, usually nausea and vomiting. Examples of these are Staphylococcus aureus and Bacillus cereus. Enteropathogenic E. coli (EPEC) and enterohemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC) adhere to the intestinal mucosa, where they attach and cause effacement of the microvilli. Shigella, enteroinvasive E. coli, and Campylobacter jejuni penetrate the mucosa, spread, and cause mucosal damage with erosions and ulcers.
 

Reference

1. Cover TL, Aber RC. Yersinia enterocolitica. N Engl J Med. Jul 6 1989;321(1):16-24.

ginews@gastro.org

Q1. Correct Answer: A

Rationale:

This is an example of Yersinia infection. Transmission of yersiniosis is largely foodborne.

Risk factors associated with yersiniosis include consumption of undercooked or raw pork products and exposure to untreated water. Y. enterocolitica infection has also been associated with iron-overload states (such as hemochromatosis) and blood transfusions, because iron likely promotes virulence of this organism. The incubation period for yersiniosis is typically 4-6 days. Clinical manifestations of acute yersiniosis include diarrhea, abdominal pain, and fever; nausea and vomiting may also occur. Localization of abdominal pain to the right lower quadrant is also a diagnostic clue for yersiniosis. However, both Yersinia and Campylobacter can present with right lower quadrant pain that may be confused as appendicitis (pseudo appendicitis). Another diagnostic clue is pharyngitis, which may be an accompanying symptom. Yersinia causes diarrhea through penetration of the mucosa and proliferation in the submucosa. Pathogenic Y. enterocolitica pass through the stomach, adhere to gut epithelial cells, invade the gut wall, localize in lymphoid tissue within the gut wall and in regional mesenteric lymph nodes, and evade the host’s cell-mediated immune response. Vibrio cholerae and enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC) secrete enterotoxins that stimulate secretion and/or impair absorption.

Some bacteria produce toxins in contaminated food; when ingested, the toxins cause acute symptoms, usually nausea and vomiting. Examples of these are Staphylococcus aureus and Bacillus cereus. Enteropathogenic E. coli (EPEC) and enterohemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC) adhere to the intestinal mucosa, where they attach and cause effacement of the microvilli. Shigella, enteroinvasive E. coli, and Campylobacter jejuni penetrate the mucosa, spread, and cause mucosal damage with erosions and ulcers.
 

Reference

1. Cover TL, Aber RC. Yersinia enterocolitica. N Engl J Med. Jul 6 1989;321(1):16-24.

ginews@gastro.org

Presenter

H. Barrett Fromme, MD, MHPE, FAAP
 

Session title

Sustainability Isn’t Just For The Forests: Practice management tips for long-term success in your Pediatric Hospital Medicine Group
 

Session summary

Dr. H. Barrett Fromme of the University of Chicago presented and facilitated a dialogue of sustainability. The audience was guided through a discussion of how efficiency and resources, workload and job demands, work-life integration and social support, and community at work can either lead to burnout or engagement within a Pediatric Hospital Medicine Group.

Key takeaways for HM

• Leaders can advocate with hospital leadership to optimize individual workload and job demands.
• Individuals and leaders can improve care process and clinical work flow to optimize efficiency and resources.
• Individuals and leaders can build high-functioning teams and cultivate communities of practice.
• Individuals and leaders can work together to develop goals to optimize work-life integration.
• Leaders can support values, autonomy, and growth to create an environment where individuals actively value and support their colleagues.

Dr. Kumar is a pediatric hospitalist at Cleveland Clinic Children’s and clinical assistant professor of pediatrics at Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine at Case Western Reserve University. She serves as the cochair of Pediatric Grand Rounds and is the research director for the Pediatric Hospital Medicine Fellowship at Cleveland Clinic Children’s.

Presenter

H. Barrett Fromme, MD, MHPE, FAAP
 

Session title

Sustainability Isn’t Just For The Forests: Practice management tips for long-term success in your Pediatric Hospital Medicine Group
 

Session summary

Dr. H. Barrett Fromme of the University of Chicago presented and facilitated a dialogue of sustainability. The audience was guided through a discussion of how efficiency and resources, workload and job demands, work-life integration and social support, and community at work can either lead to burnout or engagement within a Pediatric Hospital Medicine Group.

Key takeaways for HM

• Leaders can advocate with hospital leadership to optimize individual workload and job demands.
• Individuals and leaders can improve care process and clinical work flow to optimize efficiency and resources.
• Individuals and leaders can build high-functioning teams and cultivate communities of practice.
• Individuals and leaders can work together to develop goals to optimize work-life integration.
• Leaders can support values, autonomy, and growth to create an environment where individuals actively value and support their colleagues.

Dr. Kumar is a pediatric hospitalist at Cleveland Clinic Children’s and clinical assistant professor of pediatrics at Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine at Case Western Reserve University. She serves as the cochair of Pediatric Grand Rounds and is the research director for the Pediatric Hospital Medicine Fellowship at Cleveland Clinic Children’s.

Presenter

H. Barrett Fromme, MD, MHPE, FAAP
 

Session title

Sustainability Isn’t Just For The Forests: Practice management tips for long-term success in your Pediatric Hospital Medicine Group
 

Session summary

Dr. H. Barrett Fromme of the University of Chicago presented and facilitated a dialogue of sustainability. The audience was guided through a discussion of how efficiency and resources, workload and job demands, work-life integration and social support, and community at work can either lead to burnout or engagement within a Pediatric Hospital Medicine Group.

Key takeaways for HM

• Leaders can advocate with hospital leadership to optimize individual workload and job demands.
• Individuals and leaders can improve care process and clinical work flow to optimize efficiency and resources.
• Individuals and leaders can build high-functioning teams and cultivate communities of practice.
• Individuals and leaders can work together to develop goals to optimize work-life integration.
• Leaders can support values, autonomy, and growth to create an environment where individuals actively value and support their colleagues.

Dr. Kumar is a pediatric hospitalist at Cleveland Clinic Children’s and clinical assistant professor of pediatrics at Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine at Case Western Reserve University. She serves as the cochair of Pediatric Grand Rounds and is the research director for the Pediatric Hospital Medicine Fellowship at Cleveland Clinic Children’s.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved glecaprevir/pibrentasvir tablets (Mavyret) for treating any of six identified genotypes of hepatitis C virus in children ages 12-17 years.

The agency noted in its press announcement that, although Mavyret is not the first treatment option for HCV in children, it is the first that can target any of six genotypes. Dosing information now will be provided for patients aged 12 years and older or weighing at least 99 lbs, without cirrhosis or who have compensated cirrhosis. It is not recommended for patients with moderate cirrhosis, and it is contraindicated in patients with severe cirrhosis, as well as patients taking atazanavir and rifampin.

In clinical trials of 47 patients with genotype 1, 2, 3, or 4 HCV without cirrhosis or with only mild cirrhosis, results at 12 weeks after 8 or 16 weeks’ treatment suggested patients’ infections had been cured – 100% had no virus detected in their blood. Adverse reactions observed were consistent with those previously observed in adults during clinical trials.

The most common reactions were headache and fatigue. Hepatitis B virus reactivation has been reported in coinfected adults during or after treatment with direct-acting antivirals, and in those who were not receiving HBV antiviral treatment. Full prescribing information can be found on the FDA website, and more information about this approval can be found in the agency’s announcement.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved glecaprevir/pibrentasvir tablets (Mavyret) for treating any of six identified genotypes of hepatitis C virus in children ages 12-17 years.

The agency noted in its press announcement that, although Mavyret is not the first treatment option for HCV in children, it is the first that can target any of six genotypes. Dosing information now will be provided for patients aged 12 years and older or weighing at least 99 lbs, without cirrhosis or who have compensated cirrhosis. It is not recommended for patients with moderate cirrhosis, and it is contraindicated in patients with severe cirrhosis, as well as patients taking atazanavir and rifampin.

In clinical trials of 47 patients with genotype 1, 2, 3, or 4 HCV without cirrhosis or with only mild cirrhosis, results at 12 weeks after 8 or 16 weeks’ treatment suggested patients’ infections had been cured – 100% had no virus detected in their blood. Adverse reactions observed were consistent with those previously observed in adults during clinical trials.

The most common reactions were headache and fatigue. Hepatitis B virus reactivation has been reported in coinfected adults during or after treatment with direct-acting antivirals, and in those who were not receiving HBV antiviral treatment. Full prescribing information can be found on the FDA website, and more information about this approval can be found in the agency’s announcement.

The Food and Drug Administration has approved glecaprevir/pibrentasvir tablets (Mavyret) for treating any of six identified genotypes of hepatitis C virus in children ages 12-17 years.

The agency noted in its press announcement that, although Mavyret is not the first treatment option for HCV in children, it is the first that can target any of six genotypes. Dosing information now will be provided for patients aged 12 years and older or weighing at least 99 lbs, without cirrhosis or who have compensated cirrhosis. It is not recommended for patients with moderate cirrhosis, and it is contraindicated in patients with severe cirrhosis, as well as patients taking atazanavir and rifampin.

In clinical trials of 47 patients with genotype 1, 2, 3, or 4 HCV without cirrhosis or with only mild cirrhosis, results at 12 weeks after 8 or 16 weeks’ treatment suggested patients’ infections had been cured – 100% had no virus detected in their blood. Adverse reactions observed were consistent with those previously observed in adults during clinical trials.

The most common reactions were headache and fatigue. Hepatitis B virus reactivation has been reported in coinfected adults during or after treatment with direct-acting antivirals, and in those who were not receiving HBV antiviral treatment. Full prescribing information can be found on the FDA website, and more information about this approval can be found in the agency’s announcement.

ATLANTA – Combined treatment with a programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor, the oral CHK1 inhibitor SRA737, and low-dose gemcitabine for small cell lung cancer (SCLC) resulted in dramatic antitumor activity and established a strong antitumor microenvironment in a preclinical model.

The findings provide a “strong rationale” for combining these agents in patients with SCLC, Triparna Sen, PhD, reported in a late-breaking abstract presentation at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.

Dr. Sen and her colleagues assessed this triple regimen based on encouraging prior findings, including their own recent finding that DNA damage response (DDR) inhibition “actually increases antitumor immunity in this cancer type” by activating the STING/TBK1/RF3 innate immune pathway and increasing levels of chemokines-CXCL10 and CCL5 that induced activation of cytotoxic T lymphocytes.

“Based on this background and studies published in other cancer types, we hypothesized that ... SRA737... a very highly selective potent checkpoint inhibitor ... will upregulate the innate immune signaling, resulting in improved antitumor immune response in combination with anti–PD-L1,” she said, noting that bladder and colorectal cancer models were also studied.

The results varied by cancer type, but encouraging results in SCLC led to in vivo study, said Dr. Sen, who was a postdoctoral fellow, instructor, and member of the Byers Laboratory at MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, at the time the research was conducted.

She and her colleagues injected immunocompetent mice with Trp53, Rb1, and p130 triple-knockout SCLC cell lines that are “very highly representative of what we see in patients,” and resulting tumors were treated with SRA737 alone or in combination with an anti–PD-L1 agent.

PD-L1 alone did not work, and SRA737 with 5- out of 7-day dosing was associated with a significant delay in tumor growth.

“However, the combination does much better than either of the single agents alone. ... we never had tumor growth beyond baseline and there was regression as early as 12 days,” she said, noting that the combination activates the STING pathway.

Similar findings were seen for bladder and colorectal cancer models, she noted.

The next question is how chemotherapy plus immune checkpoint blockade – the currently approved first-line therapy in SCLC – can be improved, and how chemotherapy modulates the immune microenvironment in SCLC, she said.

To explore this, she and her colleagues treated the mice with subtherapeutic doses of SRA737 on 2 out of 7 days with low-dose gemcitabine, followed by anti–PD-L1 therapy, or with single-agent therapy and various double-agent combinations.

Again, none of the agents worked on their own.

“Even with the double combinations you see very, very modest benefit,” she said. “With the triple combination we wipe out the tumors; as early as 14 days we have 8 out of 10 complete responses, and we have followed the tumors up to 2 months and they stay gone.”

“In a nutshell, this works,” she added.

Additional analyses showed that the CD3+ T cells increase with the gemcitabine/SRA737 combination, and even more so with the triple-combination therapy.

“So we not only increase the CD3+ total T cells, we do increase CD8+ cytotoxic T cells,” she said. “Interestingly, we also decrease exhausted T-cell populations, and also [regulatory T] cells.”

Additionally, the M1 macrophage population was significantly higher with the triple regimen, there was a trend toward a decrease in the antimacrophage population, and there was a higher population of dendritic cells and myeloid-derived suppressor cells.

“What I believe is we are still scratching the surface, and we need to go deeper into the tumor microenvironment and see how these combinations really work,” she said, concluding that SRA737 is cytotoxic and induces micro-nuclei formation in a subset of SCLC and other cancer models in vitro, that in combination with anti–PD-L1 it activates innate immune signaling and causes tumor regression in SCLC, and that with low-dose gemcitabine it results in durable tumor regression in combination with SRA737 and anti–PD-L1.

“What is the most interesting is that this triple combination enhances antitumor immunity by increasing cytotoxic T-cell infiltration, decreasing T-cell exhaustion, and a favorable modulation of antigen presenting cells,” she said. “Why do we care? The anti–PD-L1 drug ... atezolizumab ... is right now FDA approved as a first-line treatment in combination with chemotherapy, and we already have DDR inhibitors in the clinic, we have PARP inhibitors in the clinic, we have checkpoint inhibitors in the clinic, SRA737 is in the clinic.

“So our preclinical data provides a strong rationale for combining low-dose gemcitabine with checkpoint inhibition and with anti–PD-L1 to enhance the clinical efficacy of these drugs,” she concluded.

Dr. Sen reported having no disclosures.

sworcester@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Sen T et al. AACR 2019, Abstract LB-148.

ATLANTA – Combined treatment with a programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor, the oral CHK1 inhibitor SRA737, and low-dose gemcitabine for small cell lung cancer (SCLC) resulted in dramatic antitumor activity and established a strong antitumor microenvironment in a preclinical model.

The findings provide a “strong rationale” for combining these agents in patients with SCLC, Triparna Sen, PhD, reported in a late-breaking abstract presentation at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.

Dr. Sen and her colleagues assessed this triple regimen based on encouraging prior findings, including their own recent finding that DNA damage response (DDR) inhibition “actually increases antitumor immunity in this cancer type” by activating the STING/TBK1/RF3 innate immune pathway and increasing levels of chemokines-CXCL10 and CCL5 that induced activation of cytotoxic T lymphocytes.

“Based on this background and studies published in other cancer types, we hypothesized that ... SRA737... a very highly selective potent checkpoint inhibitor ... will upregulate the innate immune signaling, resulting in improved antitumor immune response in combination with anti–PD-L1,” she said, noting that bladder and colorectal cancer models were also studied.

The results varied by cancer type, but encouraging results in SCLC led to in vivo study, said Dr. Sen, who was a postdoctoral fellow, instructor, and member of the Byers Laboratory at MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, at the time the research was conducted.

She and her colleagues injected immunocompetent mice with Trp53, Rb1, and p130 triple-knockout SCLC cell lines that are “very highly representative of what we see in patients,” and resulting tumors were treated with SRA737 alone or in combination with an anti–PD-L1 agent.

PD-L1 alone did not work, and SRA737 with 5- out of 7-day dosing was associated with a significant delay in tumor growth.

“However, the combination does much better than either of the single agents alone. ... we never had tumor growth beyond baseline and there was regression as early as 12 days,” she said, noting that the combination activates the STING pathway.

Similar findings were seen for bladder and colorectal cancer models, she noted.

The next question is how chemotherapy plus immune checkpoint blockade – the currently approved first-line therapy in SCLC – can be improved, and how chemotherapy modulates the immune microenvironment in SCLC, she said.

To explore this, she and her colleagues treated the mice with subtherapeutic doses of SRA737 on 2 out of 7 days with low-dose gemcitabine, followed by anti–PD-L1 therapy, or with single-agent therapy and various double-agent combinations.

Again, none of the agents worked on their own.

“Even with the double combinations you see very, very modest benefit,” she said. “With the triple combination we wipe out the tumors; as early as 14 days we have 8 out of 10 complete responses, and we have followed the tumors up to 2 months and they stay gone.”

“In a nutshell, this works,” she added.

Additional analyses showed that the CD3+ T cells increase with the gemcitabine/SRA737 combination, and even more so with the triple-combination therapy.

“So we not only increase the CD3+ total T cells, we do increase CD8+ cytotoxic T cells,” she said. “Interestingly, we also decrease exhausted T-cell populations, and also [regulatory T] cells.”

Additionally, the M1 macrophage population was significantly higher with the triple regimen, there was a trend toward a decrease in the antimacrophage population, and there was a higher population of dendritic cells and myeloid-derived suppressor cells.

“What I believe is we are still scratching the surface, and we need to go deeper into the tumor microenvironment and see how these combinations really work,” she said, concluding that SRA737 is cytotoxic and induces micro-nuclei formation in a subset of SCLC and other cancer models in vitro, that in combination with anti–PD-L1 it activates innate immune signaling and causes tumor regression in SCLC, and that with low-dose gemcitabine it results in durable tumor regression in combination with SRA737 and anti–PD-L1.

“What is the most interesting is that this triple combination enhances antitumor immunity by increasing cytotoxic T-cell infiltration, decreasing T-cell exhaustion, and a favorable modulation of antigen presenting cells,” she said. “Why do we care? The anti–PD-L1 drug ... atezolizumab ... is right now FDA approved as a first-line treatment in combination with chemotherapy, and we already have DDR inhibitors in the clinic, we have PARP inhibitors in the clinic, we have checkpoint inhibitors in the clinic, SRA737 is in the clinic.

“So our preclinical data provides a strong rationale for combining low-dose gemcitabine with checkpoint inhibition and with anti–PD-L1 to enhance the clinical efficacy of these drugs,” she concluded.

Dr. Sen reported having no disclosures.

sworcester@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Sen T et al. AACR 2019, Abstract LB-148.

ATLANTA – Combined treatment with a programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor, the oral CHK1 inhibitor SRA737, and low-dose gemcitabine for small cell lung cancer (SCLC) resulted in dramatic antitumor activity and established a strong antitumor microenvironment in a preclinical model.

The findings provide a “strong rationale” for combining these agents in patients with SCLC, Triparna Sen, PhD, reported in a late-breaking abstract presentation at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research.

Dr. Sen and her colleagues assessed this triple regimen based on encouraging prior findings, including their own recent finding that DNA damage response (DDR) inhibition “actually increases antitumor immunity in this cancer type” by activating the STING/TBK1/RF3 innate immune pathway and increasing levels of chemokines-CXCL10 and CCL5 that induced activation of cytotoxic T lymphocytes.

“Based on this background and studies published in other cancer types, we hypothesized that ... SRA737... a very highly selective potent checkpoint inhibitor ... will upregulate the innate immune signaling, resulting in improved antitumor immune response in combination with anti–PD-L1,” she said, noting that bladder and colorectal cancer models were also studied.

The results varied by cancer type, but encouraging results in SCLC led to in vivo study, said Dr. Sen, who was a postdoctoral fellow, instructor, and member of the Byers Laboratory at MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, at the time the research was conducted.

She and her colleagues injected immunocompetent mice with Trp53, Rb1, and p130 triple-knockout SCLC cell lines that are “very highly representative of what we see in patients,” and resulting tumors were treated with SRA737 alone or in combination with an anti–PD-L1 agent.

PD-L1 alone did not work, and SRA737 with 5- out of 7-day dosing was associated with a significant delay in tumor growth.

“However, the combination does much better than either of the single agents alone. ... we never had tumor growth beyond baseline and there was regression as early as 12 days,” she said, noting that the combination activates the STING pathway.

Similar findings were seen for bladder and colorectal cancer models, she noted.

The next question is how chemotherapy plus immune checkpoint blockade – the currently approved first-line therapy in SCLC – can be improved, and how chemotherapy modulates the immune microenvironment in SCLC, she said.

To explore this, she and her colleagues treated the mice with subtherapeutic doses of SRA737 on 2 out of 7 days with low-dose gemcitabine, followed by anti–PD-L1 therapy, or with single-agent therapy and various double-agent combinations.

Again, none of the agents worked on their own.

“Even with the double combinations you see very, very modest benefit,” she said. “With the triple combination we wipe out the tumors; as early as 14 days we have 8 out of 10 complete responses, and we have followed the tumors up to 2 months and they stay gone.”

“In a nutshell, this works,” she added.

Additional analyses showed that the CD3+ T cells increase with the gemcitabine/SRA737 combination, and even more so with the triple-combination therapy.

“So we not only increase the CD3+ total T cells, we do increase CD8+ cytotoxic T cells,” she said. “Interestingly, we also decrease exhausted T-cell populations, and also [regulatory T] cells.”

Additionally, the M1 macrophage population was significantly higher with the triple regimen, there was a trend toward a decrease in the antimacrophage population, and there was a higher population of dendritic cells and myeloid-derived suppressor cells.

“What I believe is we are still scratching the surface, and we need to go deeper into the tumor microenvironment and see how these combinations really work,” she said, concluding that SRA737 is cytotoxic and induces micro-nuclei formation in a subset of SCLC and other cancer models in vitro, that in combination with anti–PD-L1 it activates innate immune signaling and causes tumor regression in SCLC, and that with low-dose gemcitabine it results in durable tumor regression in combination with SRA737 and anti–PD-L1.

“What is the most interesting is that this triple combination enhances antitumor immunity by increasing cytotoxic T-cell infiltration, decreasing T-cell exhaustion, and a favorable modulation of antigen presenting cells,” she said. “Why do we care? The anti–PD-L1 drug ... atezolizumab ... is right now FDA approved as a first-line treatment in combination with chemotherapy, and we already have DDR inhibitors in the clinic, we have PARP inhibitors in the clinic, we have checkpoint inhibitors in the clinic, SRA737 is in the clinic.

“So our preclinical data provides a strong rationale for combining low-dose gemcitabine with checkpoint inhibition and with anti–PD-L1 to enhance the clinical efficacy of these drugs,” she concluded.

Dr. Sen reported having no disclosures.

sworcester@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Sen T et al. AACR 2019, Abstract LB-148.

ORLANDO – Infections before the age of 4 are linked to the risk of nonaffective psychosis (NAP) in adulthood, according to a study presented at the annual congress of the Schizophrenia International Research Society. Researchers also found that a lower IQ seems to make the psychosis risk more likely.

It’s well-established in the literature that infections are tied to schizophrenia and that a premorbid IQ deficit is linked as well. Researchers looked to a huge data pool from the Swedish population to try to better define these risks.

“We know that there is an association between infection and schizophrenia,” said Golam Khandaker, MRCPsych, PhD, head of the inflammation and psychiatry research group at the University of Cambridge (England). “We know that there is premorbid IQ deficit in schizophrenia. So, we wanted to know, is there a sensitive period during childhood when exposure to infection is more harmful?”

Researchers analyzed data for 647,000 people in the Swedish population who were born between 1973 and 1997, and conscripted for military service through 2010. Exposure to infection was considered to be any hospitalization with any serious infection between birth and age 13. IQ measurements were taken during military conscription at the age of 18. And researchers looked for risk of nonaffective psychosis from the age of 18 on.

There was a significant increase in risk of nonaffective psychosis in adulthood among those who’d had an infection, with a hazard ratio of 1.16 (95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.24). But when researchers broke down this risk into smaller age spans, they found that only infection between birth and 1 year old (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.06-1.33) and between age 2 and 4 (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.02-1.22) was linked with a significantly elevated risk of NAP. Researchers also saw a link between infection and IQ.

“It seems that early childhood is a sensitive period with regards to the effects of infection on IQ and risk of psychosis in adult life,” Dr. Khandaker said.

Researchers assessed whether familial factors could be confounding this link. They looked at rates of NAP among those with an early infection and no early infection in the general population and found that it was no different statistically than among full siblings with an early infection, compared with those with no early infection. In other words, the infection-psychosis risk was the same – whether someone was a close family member or not.

Dr. Khandaker said the findings more definitively establish a link between infection and psychosis risk and suggest that the early years are when children are at their most vulnerable.

“The association between adult nonaffective psychosis with premorbid IQ and childhood infection are not explained by shared familial confounding,” he said. “So these associations could be causal.”

When they looked at the role of IQ and the link between infection and psychosis risk, researchers found an interaction: With every 1-point decrease in IQ score, there was a corresponding increased risk of NAP among those with childhood infections (odds ratio, 1.006; P = .02).

“Childhood infections,” Dr. Khandaker said, “increase psychosis risk partly by interfering with neurodevelopment, and partly by exaggerating the effects of cognitive vulnerability to psychosis.”

Dr. Khandaker disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

ORLANDO – Infections before the age of 4 are linked to the risk of nonaffective psychosis (NAP) in adulthood, according to a study presented at the annual congress of the Schizophrenia International Research Society. Researchers also found that a lower IQ seems to make the psychosis risk more likely.

It’s well-established in the literature that infections are tied to schizophrenia and that a premorbid IQ deficit is linked as well. Researchers looked to a huge data pool from the Swedish population to try to better define these risks.

“We know that there is an association between infection and schizophrenia,” said Golam Khandaker, MRCPsych, PhD, head of the inflammation and psychiatry research group at the University of Cambridge (England). “We know that there is premorbid IQ deficit in schizophrenia. So, we wanted to know, is there a sensitive period during childhood when exposure to infection is more harmful?”

Researchers analyzed data for 647,000 people in the Swedish population who were born between 1973 and 1997, and conscripted for military service through 2010. Exposure to infection was considered to be any hospitalization with any serious infection between birth and age 13. IQ measurements were taken during military conscription at the age of 18. And researchers looked for risk of nonaffective psychosis from the age of 18 on.

There was a significant increase in risk of nonaffective psychosis in adulthood among those who’d had an infection, with a hazard ratio of 1.16 (95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.24). But when researchers broke down this risk into smaller age spans, they found that only infection between birth and 1 year old (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.06-1.33) and between age 2 and 4 (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.02-1.22) was linked with a significantly elevated risk of NAP. Researchers also saw a link between infection and IQ.

“It seems that early childhood is a sensitive period with regards to the effects of infection on IQ and risk of psychosis in adult life,” Dr. Khandaker said.

Researchers assessed whether familial factors could be confounding this link. They looked at rates of NAP among those with an early infection and no early infection in the general population and found that it was no different statistically than among full siblings with an early infection, compared with those with no early infection. In other words, the infection-psychosis risk was the same – whether someone was a close family member or not.

Dr. Khandaker said the findings more definitively establish a link between infection and psychosis risk and suggest that the early years are when children are at their most vulnerable.

“The association between adult nonaffective psychosis with premorbid IQ and childhood infection are not explained by shared familial confounding,” he said. “So these associations could be causal.”

When they looked at the role of IQ and the link between infection and psychosis risk, researchers found an interaction: With every 1-point decrease in IQ score, there was a corresponding increased risk of NAP among those with childhood infections (odds ratio, 1.006; P = .02).

“Childhood infections,” Dr. Khandaker said, “increase psychosis risk partly by interfering with neurodevelopment, and partly by exaggerating the effects of cognitive vulnerability to psychosis.”

Dr. Khandaker disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

ORLANDO – Infections before the age of 4 are linked to the risk of nonaffective psychosis (NAP) in adulthood, according to a study presented at the annual congress of the Schizophrenia International Research Society. Researchers also found that a lower IQ seems to make the psychosis risk more likely.

It’s well-established in the literature that infections are tied to schizophrenia and that a premorbid IQ deficit is linked as well. Researchers looked to a huge data pool from the Swedish population to try to better define these risks.

“We know that there is an association between infection and schizophrenia,” said Golam Khandaker, MRCPsych, PhD, head of the inflammation and psychiatry research group at the University of Cambridge (England). “We know that there is premorbid IQ deficit in schizophrenia. So, we wanted to know, is there a sensitive period during childhood when exposure to infection is more harmful?”

Researchers analyzed data for 647,000 people in the Swedish population who were born between 1973 and 1997, and conscripted for military service through 2010. Exposure to infection was considered to be any hospitalization with any serious infection between birth and age 13. IQ measurements were taken during military conscription at the age of 18. And researchers looked for risk of nonaffective psychosis from the age of 18 on.

There was a significant increase in risk of nonaffective psychosis in adulthood among those who’d had an infection, with a hazard ratio of 1.16 (95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.24). But when researchers broke down this risk into smaller age spans, they found that only infection between birth and 1 year old (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.06-1.33) and between age 2 and 4 (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.02-1.22) was linked with a significantly elevated risk of NAP. Researchers also saw a link between infection and IQ.

“It seems that early childhood is a sensitive period with regards to the effects of infection on IQ and risk of psychosis in adult life,” Dr. Khandaker said.

Researchers assessed whether familial factors could be confounding this link. They looked at rates of NAP among those with an early infection and no early infection in the general population and found that it was no different statistically than among full siblings with an early infection, compared with those with no early infection. In other words, the infection-psychosis risk was the same – whether someone was a close family member or not.

Dr. Khandaker said the findings more definitively establish a link between infection and psychosis risk and suggest that the early years are when children are at their most vulnerable.

“The association between adult nonaffective psychosis with premorbid IQ and childhood infection are not explained by shared familial confounding,” he said. “So these associations could be causal.”

When they looked at the role of IQ and the link between infection and psychosis risk, researchers found an interaction: With every 1-point decrease in IQ score, there was a corresponding increased risk of NAP among those with childhood infections (odds ratio, 1.006; P = .02).

“Childhood infections,” Dr. Khandaker said, “increase psychosis risk partly by interfering with neurodevelopment, and partly by exaggerating the effects of cognitive vulnerability to psychosis.”

Dr. Khandaker disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Being diagnosed with an elevated amyloid-beta biomarker that indicates greater risk of Alzheimer’s disease did not lead to increased consideration of physician-assisted death (PAD), according to an analysis of patients interviewed during clinical trials on cognitive decline.

“Our findings suggest that learning one’s amyloid imaging result does not change baseline attitudes regarding the acceptability of PAD,” wrote Emily A. Largent, PhD, of the department of medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and coauthors. The study was published as a research letter in JAMA Neurology.

Participants were recruited from two ongoing clinical trials, one of which included patients with elevated amyloid-beta (n = 50), whereas the other did not (n = 30). All participants completed an interview 4-12 weeks after receiving their biomarker results; 47 and 30 participants, respectively, also completed a follow-up interview at 12 months.

When asked whether they had considered PAD, nearly two-thirds of interviewees with the Alzheimer’s disease biomarker stated that they neither had nor would. Roughly one in five from that group said they would pursue PAD if they began to suffer from cognitive impairment or became a burden on others. Interviewees who did not have elevated amyloid beta, when asked whether a reversed result would have led to PAD or suicide, showed interest in roughly similar proportion to their at-risk counterparts.

The coauthors acknowledged the limitations of their study, including not asking about other end-of-life preferences or perceived quality of life for people with dementia. They also noted that, although their sample mirrors the populations of the two studies they drew from, “its homogeneity limits generalizability.” As such, they stressed that “further research is indicated to better understand end-of-life care preferences among people at increased risk for dementia.”

The study was supported by grants from the Alzheimer’s Association and the National Institute on Aging. One author reported receiving grants from those two organizations during the study; another reported receiving grants from Lilly and Novartis. No other conflicts of interest were reported.

SOURCE: Largent EA et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 Apr 29. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.0797.

Being diagnosed with an elevated amyloid-beta biomarker that indicates greater risk of Alzheimer’s disease did not lead to increased consideration of physician-assisted death (PAD), according to an analysis of patients interviewed during clinical trials on cognitive decline.

“Our findings suggest that learning one’s amyloid imaging result does not change baseline attitudes regarding the acceptability of PAD,” wrote Emily A. Largent, PhD, of the department of medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and coauthors. The study was published as a research letter in JAMA Neurology.

Participants were recruited from two ongoing clinical trials, one of which included patients with elevated amyloid-beta (n = 50), whereas the other did not (n = 30). All participants completed an interview 4-12 weeks after receiving their biomarker results; 47 and 30 participants, respectively, also completed a follow-up interview at 12 months.

When asked whether they had considered PAD, nearly two-thirds of interviewees with the Alzheimer’s disease biomarker stated that they neither had nor would. Roughly one in five from that group said they would pursue PAD if they began to suffer from cognitive impairment or became a burden on others. Interviewees who did not have elevated amyloid beta, when asked whether a reversed result would have led to PAD or suicide, showed interest in roughly similar proportion to their at-risk counterparts.

The coauthors acknowledged the limitations of their study, including not asking about other end-of-life preferences or perceived quality of life for people with dementia. They also noted that, although their sample mirrors the populations of the two studies they drew from, “its homogeneity limits generalizability.” As such, they stressed that “further research is indicated to better understand end-of-life care preferences among people at increased risk for dementia.”

The study was supported by grants from the Alzheimer’s Association and the National Institute on Aging. One author reported receiving grants from those two organizations during the study; another reported receiving grants from Lilly and Novartis. No other conflicts of interest were reported.

SOURCE: Largent EA et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 Apr 29. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.0797.

Being diagnosed with an elevated amyloid-beta biomarker that indicates greater risk of Alzheimer’s disease did not lead to increased consideration of physician-assisted death (PAD), according to an analysis of patients interviewed during clinical trials on cognitive decline.

“Our findings suggest that learning one’s amyloid imaging result does not change baseline attitudes regarding the acceptability of PAD,” wrote Emily A. Largent, PhD, of the department of medical ethics and health policy at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and coauthors. The study was published as a research letter in JAMA Neurology.

Participants were recruited from two ongoing clinical trials, one of which included patients with elevated amyloid-beta (n = 50), whereas the other did not (n = 30). All participants completed an interview 4-12 weeks after receiving their biomarker results; 47 and 30 participants, respectively, also completed a follow-up interview at 12 months.

When asked whether they had considered PAD, nearly two-thirds of interviewees with the Alzheimer’s disease biomarker stated that they neither had nor would. Roughly one in five from that group said they would pursue PAD if they began to suffer from cognitive impairment or became a burden on others. Interviewees who did not have elevated amyloid beta, when asked whether a reversed result would have led to PAD or suicide, showed interest in roughly similar proportion to their at-risk counterparts.

The coauthors acknowledged the limitations of their study, including not asking about other end-of-life preferences or perceived quality of life for people with dementia. They also noted that, although their sample mirrors the populations of the two studies they drew from, “its homogeneity limits generalizability.” As such, they stressed that “further research is indicated to better understand end-of-life care preferences among people at increased risk for dementia.”

The study was supported by grants from the Alzheimer’s Association and the National Institute on Aging. One author reported receiving grants from those two organizations during the study; another reported receiving grants from Lilly and Novartis. No other conflicts of interest were reported.

SOURCE: Largent EA et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 Apr 29. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.0797.

MAUI, HAWAII – Serious weight loss brings big improvement in psoriatic arthritis in obese patients, at least short term, according to a Swedish, single-arm, prospective, proof-of-concept study.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

A dose-response effect was evident: the greater the lost poundage, the bigger the improvement across multiple dimensions of psoriatic arthritis.

The short-term efficacy was eye-catching, especially in view of the well-recognized increased prevalence of obesity in psoriatic arthritis patients. But the jury is still out as to the long-term impact of this nonpharmacologic therapy, Eric M. Ruderman, MD, said at the 2019 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

He has spoken with the Swedish investigators and was happy to learn they’re continuing to follow study participants long term.

“That’s going to be the key, right? Because if you do this for 12 weeks, like every other fad crash diet, and then you let the weight go right back on again, you haven’t really accomplished anything. I think the key will be what happens at a year,” according to Dr. Ruderman, professor of medicine and associate chief for clinical affairs in the division of rheumatology at Northwestern University, Chicago.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

The study included 46 obese psoriatic arthritis patients who signed on for a structured, medically supervised very-low-energy diet lasting 12-16 weeks, depending upon their baseline obesity level. The commercially available liquid diet (Cambridge Weight Plan Limited) is a type of therapy widely prescribed by Swedish physicians, clocking in at a mere 640 kcal/day.

“I don’t know about you, but I ate that at breakfast this morning,” quipped symposium director Arthur Kavanaugh, MD, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Diego.

Following completion of the strict very-low-energy diet, patients were gradually reintroduced to a less-draconian, solid-food, energy-restricted diet, to be followed through the 12-month mark. The full 12-month protocol was supervised by staff in the obesity unit at Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Gothenburg, Sweden. The 12-month results will be presented at the annual European Congress of Rheumatology in Madrid.

Of the 46 starters, 41 made it to the 6-month follow-up assessment. At that point they’d lost a median of 18.2 kg, or 18.6% of their baseline body weight. Their body mass index had dropped from an average of 35.2 to 29.8 kg/m². And their psoriatic arthritis had improved significantly. For example, their median Disease Activity Score using 28 joint counts based upon C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) decreased from 2.9 at baseline to 2.4 at 6 months, with ACR 20, -50, and -70 responses of 51.2%, 34.1%, and 7.3% while disease-directed medications were held constant (Arthritis Res Ther. 2019 Jan 11;21[1]:17. doi: 10.1186/s13075-019-1810-5).

The investigators reported the very-low-energy diet phase was generally well tolerated. A total of 34 of the 41 patients deemed it “easier or much easier” than expected, prompting Dr. Ruderman to comment: “Because they thought it was going to be awful.”

Dr. Ruderman and Dr. Kavanaugh reported serving as consultants to numerous pharmaceutical companies.
 

bjancin@mdedge.com

MAUI, HAWAII – Serious weight loss brings big improvement in psoriatic arthritis in obese patients, at least short term, according to a Swedish, single-arm, prospective, proof-of-concept study.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

A dose-response effect was evident: the greater the lost poundage, the bigger the improvement across multiple dimensions of psoriatic arthritis.

The short-term efficacy was eye-catching, especially in view of the well-recognized increased prevalence of obesity in psoriatic arthritis patients. But the jury is still out as to the long-term impact of this nonpharmacologic therapy, Eric M. Ruderman, MD, said at the 2019 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

He has spoken with the Swedish investigators and was happy to learn they’re continuing to follow study participants long term.

“That’s going to be the key, right? Because if you do this for 12 weeks, like every other fad crash diet, and then you let the weight go right back on again, you haven’t really accomplished anything. I think the key will be what happens at a year,” according to Dr. Ruderman, professor of medicine and associate chief for clinical affairs in the division of rheumatology at Northwestern University, Chicago.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

The study included 46 obese psoriatic arthritis patients who signed on for a structured, medically supervised very-low-energy diet lasting 12-16 weeks, depending upon their baseline obesity level. The commercially available liquid diet (Cambridge Weight Plan Limited) is a type of therapy widely prescribed by Swedish physicians, clocking in at a mere 640 kcal/day.

“I don’t know about you, but I ate that at breakfast this morning,” quipped symposium director Arthur Kavanaugh, MD, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Diego.

Following completion of the strict very-low-energy diet, patients were gradually reintroduced to a less-draconian, solid-food, energy-restricted diet, to be followed through the 12-month mark. The full 12-month protocol was supervised by staff in the obesity unit at Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Gothenburg, Sweden. The 12-month results will be presented at the annual European Congress of Rheumatology in Madrid.

Of the 46 starters, 41 made it to the 6-month follow-up assessment. At that point they’d lost a median of 18.2 kg, or 18.6% of their baseline body weight. Their body mass index had dropped from an average of 35.2 to 29.8 kg/m². And their psoriatic arthritis had improved significantly. For example, their median Disease Activity Score using 28 joint counts based upon C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) decreased from 2.9 at baseline to 2.4 at 6 months, with ACR 20, -50, and -70 responses of 51.2%, 34.1%, and 7.3% while disease-directed medications were held constant (Arthritis Res Ther. 2019 Jan 11;21[1]:17. doi: 10.1186/s13075-019-1810-5).

The investigators reported the very-low-energy diet phase was generally well tolerated. A total of 34 of the 41 patients deemed it “easier or much easier” than expected, prompting Dr. Ruderman to comment: “Because they thought it was going to be awful.”

Dr. Ruderman and Dr. Kavanaugh reported serving as consultants to numerous pharmaceutical companies.
 

bjancin@mdedge.com

MAUI, HAWAII – Serious weight loss brings big improvement in psoriatic arthritis in obese patients, at least short term, according to a Swedish, single-arm, prospective, proof-of-concept study.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

A dose-response effect was evident: the greater the lost poundage, the bigger the improvement across multiple dimensions of psoriatic arthritis.

The short-term efficacy was eye-catching, especially in view of the well-recognized increased prevalence of obesity in psoriatic arthritis patients. But the jury is still out as to the long-term impact of this nonpharmacologic therapy, Eric M. Ruderman, MD, said at the 2019 Rheumatology Winter Clinical Symposium.

He has spoken with the Swedish investigators and was happy to learn they’re continuing to follow study participants long term.

“That’s going to be the key, right? Because if you do this for 12 weeks, like every other fad crash diet, and then you let the weight go right back on again, you haven’t really accomplished anything. I think the key will be what happens at a year,” according to Dr. Ruderman, professor of medicine and associate chief for clinical affairs in the division of rheumatology at Northwestern University, Chicago.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

The study included 46 obese psoriatic arthritis patients who signed on for a structured, medically supervised very-low-energy diet lasting 12-16 weeks, depending upon their baseline obesity level. The commercially available liquid diet (Cambridge Weight Plan Limited) is a type of therapy widely prescribed by Swedish physicians, clocking in at a mere 640 kcal/day.

“I don’t know about you, but I ate that at breakfast this morning,” quipped symposium director Arthur Kavanaugh, MD, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Diego.

Following completion of the strict very-low-energy diet, patients were gradually reintroduced to a less-draconian, solid-food, energy-restricted diet, to be followed through the 12-month mark. The full 12-month protocol was supervised by staff in the obesity unit at Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Gothenburg, Sweden. The 12-month results will be presented at the annual European Congress of Rheumatology in Madrid.

Of the 46 starters, 41 made it to the 6-month follow-up assessment. At that point they’d lost a median of 18.2 kg, or 18.6% of their baseline body weight. Their body mass index had dropped from an average of 35.2 to 29.8 kg/m². And their psoriatic arthritis had improved significantly. For example, their median Disease Activity Score using 28 joint counts based upon C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) decreased from 2.9 at baseline to 2.4 at 6 months, with ACR 20, -50, and -70 responses of 51.2%, 34.1%, and 7.3% while disease-directed medications were held constant (Arthritis Res Ther. 2019 Jan 11;21[1]:17. doi: 10.1186/s13075-019-1810-5).

The investigators reported the very-low-energy diet phase was generally well tolerated. A total of 34 of the 41 patients deemed it “easier or much easier” than expected, prompting Dr. Ruderman to comment: “Because they thought it was going to be awful.”

Dr. Ruderman and Dr. Kavanaugh reported serving as consultants to numerous pharmaceutical companies.
 

bjancin@mdedge.com

Most of the online patient education materials provided by eight nationally recognized ob.gyn. societies are written at levels above the readability guidelines set by the American Medical Association, National Institutes of Health, and Department of Health & Human Services, according to Fatimah Z. Fahimuddin, MD, of the University of California, San Francisco, Fresno, and her associates.

aluxum/E+/Getty Images

According to the AMA, NIH, and HHS, all patient education material should be written at or below a sixth-grade reading level.

In a study published in Obstetrics & Gynecology, the investigators analyzed the readability of 410 online patient education documents from the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, the American Urogynecologic Society, the Association of Reproductive Health Professionals, the Society of Gynecologic Oncology, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and Voices for Pelvic Floor Disorders.

The mean Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level score was 8.9 for the 69 obstetrics-related documents analyzed; for the 341 gynecology-related documents, the mean score was 8.7. The American Urogynecologic Society had the most readable documents, with a mean grade level score of 6.4; the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists had the least readable, with a mean grade level score of 12.7. For the other three readability scales utilized in the analysis, mean scores generally ranged in the 8th-12th grade reading levels.

“It is not surprising that writing patient education materials at an appropriate reading level is difficult. With readability scales utilizing syllable count, common words such as ‘menstruation,’ ‘uterus,’ and ‘contractions’ will lead to higher readability scores. Thus, higher reading levels in both specialties is seen and expected,” the investigators wrote. Measures such as the addition of glossaries to define words and visuals to illustrate complex procedures would be helpful for reading comprehension and have been used by other medical societies.

The study authors reported no conflicts of interest.

lfranki@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Fahimuddin FZ et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133:888-94.

Most of the online patient education materials provided by eight nationally recognized ob.gyn. societies are written at levels above the readability guidelines set by the American Medical Association, National Institutes of Health, and Department of Health & Human Services, according to Fatimah Z. Fahimuddin, MD, of the University of California, San Francisco, Fresno, and her associates.

aluxum/E+/Getty Images

According to the AMA, NIH, and HHS, all patient education material should be written at or below a sixth-grade reading level.

In a study published in Obstetrics & Gynecology, the investigators analyzed the readability of 410 online patient education documents from the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, the American Urogynecologic Society, the Association of Reproductive Health Professionals, the Society of Gynecologic Oncology, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and Voices for Pelvic Floor Disorders.

The mean Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level score was 8.9 for the 69 obstetrics-related documents analyzed; for the 341 gynecology-related documents, the mean score was 8.7. The American Urogynecologic Society had the most readable documents, with a mean grade level score of 6.4; the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists had the least readable, with a mean grade level score of 12.7. For the other three readability scales utilized in the analysis, mean scores generally ranged in the 8th-12th grade reading levels.

“It is not surprising that writing patient education materials at an appropriate reading level is difficult. With readability scales utilizing syllable count, common words such as ‘menstruation,’ ‘uterus,’ and ‘contractions’ will lead to higher readability scores. Thus, higher reading levels in both specialties is seen and expected,” the investigators wrote. Measures such as the addition of glossaries to define words and visuals to illustrate complex procedures would be helpful for reading comprehension and have been used by other medical societies.

The study authors reported no conflicts of interest.

lfranki@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Fahimuddin FZ et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133:888-94.

Most of the online patient education materials provided by eight nationally recognized ob.gyn. societies are written at levels above the readability guidelines set by the American Medical Association, National Institutes of Health, and Department of Health & Human Services, according to Fatimah Z. Fahimuddin, MD, of the University of California, San Francisco, Fresno, and her associates.

aluxum/E+/Getty Images

According to the AMA, NIH, and HHS, all patient education material should be written at or below a sixth-grade reading level.

In a study published in Obstetrics & Gynecology, the investigators analyzed the readability of 410 online patient education documents from the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, the American Urogynecologic Society, the Association of Reproductive Health Professionals, the Society of Gynecologic Oncology, the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and Voices for Pelvic Floor Disorders.

The mean Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level score was 8.9 for the 69 obstetrics-related documents analyzed; for the 341 gynecology-related documents, the mean score was 8.7. The American Urogynecologic Society had the most readable documents, with a mean grade level score of 6.4; the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists had the least readable, with a mean grade level score of 12.7. For the other three readability scales utilized in the analysis, mean scores generally ranged in the 8th-12th grade reading levels.

“It is not surprising that writing patient education materials at an appropriate reading level is difficult. With readability scales utilizing syllable count, common words such as ‘menstruation,’ ‘uterus,’ and ‘contractions’ will lead to higher readability scores. Thus, higher reading levels in both specialties is seen and expected,” the investigators wrote. Measures such as the addition of glossaries to define words and visuals to illustrate complex procedures would be helpful for reading comprehension and have been used by other medical societies.

The study authors reported no conflicts of interest.

lfranki@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Fahimuddin FZ et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133:888-94.