Women's Health

An 80-year-old white woman presented to our dermatology clinic with a rash across her abdomen that had been there for more than a year. While not itchy or painful, the rash was slowly expanding. The patient had tried treatments including topical antifungals and topical corticosteroids, but none had helped.

Her medical history was significant for dementia and stage III triple-negative breast cancer in the left breast (diagnosed 8 years prior), which was treated with a simple left mastectomy, chemotherapy, and radiation. She reported no history of skin cancer. She was not taking any medications and had no known drug allergies. A physical examination revealed an erythematous, papulonodular rash with diffuse induration in a band-like pattern across her entire upper abdomen and left flank (FIGURE).

WHAT IS YOUR DIAGNOSIS?
HOW WOULD YOU TREAT THIS PATIENT?

 

 

Diagnosis: Cutaneous metastasis of primary breast cancer

Based on our patient’s history, we gave a presumptive diagnosis of cutaneous breast cancer metastasis. A punch biopsy was performed. The pathology report showed nests of neoplastic cells within the dermis, which was consistent with this diagnosis. Immunohistochemical stains and fluorescence in-situ hybridization confirmed triple-negative breast markers for estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2.

An uncommon phenomenonseen mostly with breast cancer

Cutaneous metastatic carcinoma is relatively uncommon; one meta-analysis reported the overall incidence to be 5.3%.¹ While it is unusual, any internal malignancy can metastasize to the skin. In women, the most common malignancy to do so is breast cancer. One study found breast cancer to be associated with 26.5% of cutaneous metastatic cases.² These metastases often occur well after the patient has been treated for the primary malignancy.

Identifying features. Most cutaneous metastases occur near the site of the primary tumor, initially in the form of a firm, mobile, nonpainful nodule.³ This nodule is typically skin-colored or red, but in the case of cutaneous metastases of melanomas, it can appear blue or black. In the case of breast cancer, the lesions most often arise on the chest and abdomen.⁴ Occasionally, metastases can ulcerate through the skin.

Although cutaneous metastasis is uncommon, it should always be considered when asymptomatic skin lesions resist treatment—even when there is no known history of malignancy.

Some forms of cutaneous metastasis, such as carcinoma erysipeloides, can appear in specific patterns. Carcinoma erysipeloides has a similar appearance to cellulitis; it manifests as a sharply demarcated, red, inflammatory patch in the skin adjacent to the primary tumor.

Consider the clinical picture

Cutaneous metastatic lesions have a wide range of differential diagnoses due to their varied appearances. It is important to view the overall clinical picture when distinguishing such lesions. Although cutaneous metastasis is uncommon, it should always be considered when asymptomatic skin lesions resist treatment—even in someone without a known history of malignancy.

Perform a biopsy. The diagnosis can be confirmed with a skin biopsy. A punch biopsy is preferable, as visualization of the dermis is crucial, and histology often reveals nests of pleomorphic cells. Further cellular cytology can elicit the primary malignancy of origin.

Making our diagnosis

We ruled out several possibilities before arriving at our diagnosis. An infectious etiology (eg, cutaneous candidiasis) was considered, as was a cutaneous change due to radiation therapy. We also considered shingles, the early stages of which would have been similar in appearance to our patient’s lesions, and urticaria, which can manifest as erythematous papules and wheals across various parts of the body. A lack of specific symptoms (eg, pruritis, pain, fever) made these alternative diagnoses less likely. The fact that our patient’s lesions persisted for more than a year without any response to treatment—and that they continued to grow—alerted us of a more sinister etiology.

Continue to: Treating the tumor is often not possible

Treating the tumor is often not possible

Treatment first involves treating the underlying tumor. For cases in which cutaneous lesions are the first manifestation of an internal malignancy, investigation as to the source should be performed. The lesions can then be treated with a combination of chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery.^5,6

Unfortunately, in most cases of cutaneous metastases, the primary malignancy is already widespread and possibly untreatable. In such instances, palliative care is offered. Lesions are managed symptomatically, and prevention of skin irritation becomes the primary focus. Keeping the skin clean and dry helps to prevent ulceration and secondary infection.

In cases where the lesions ulcerate or crust, debridement can help. Excision of lesions, as well as pairing laser therapy with electrochemotherapy, may be helpful to improve the patient’s quality of life when lesions cause discomfort.

The prognosis for cutaneous metastasis due to breast cancer is often hard to predict because it is determined by other factors, such as the presence of internal metastases, which indicates a worse prognosis (on the scale of months). Some case reports have demonstrated that patients with metastases limited to the skin may have prolonged survival (on the scale of years).⁷

Our patient was offered an initial trial of radiation therapy, but she refused all treatment because the lesions did not cause discomfort, and she preferred to not go through further aggressive cancer treatment that could potentially cause complications and pain. We respected the patient’s wishes and counseled her on follow-up if the lesions became symptomatic or she decided she wanted to try treatment.

CORRESPONDENCE
Araya Zaesim, 1550 College St, Macon, GA, 31207; Zaesim.araya@gmail.com

An 80-year-old white woman presented to our dermatology clinic with a rash across her abdomen that had been there for more than a year. While not itchy or painful, the rash was slowly expanding. The patient had tried treatments including topical antifungals and topical corticosteroids, but none had helped.

Her medical history was significant for dementia and stage III triple-negative breast cancer in the left breast (diagnosed 8 years prior), which was treated with a simple left mastectomy, chemotherapy, and radiation. She reported no history of skin cancer. She was not taking any medications and had no known drug allergies. A physical examination revealed an erythematous, papulonodular rash with diffuse induration in a band-like pattern across her entire upper abdomen and left flank (FIGURE).

WHAT IS YOUR DIAGNOSIS?
HOW WOULD YOU TREAT THIS PATIENT?

 

 

Diagnosis: Cutaneous metastasis of primary breast cancer

Based on our patient’s history, we gave a presumptive diagnosis of cutaneous breast cancer metastasis. A punch biopsy was performed. The pathology report showed nests of neoplastic cells within the dermis, which was consistent with this diagnosis. Immunohistochemical stains and fluorescence in-situ hybridization confirmed triple-negative breast markers for estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2.

An uncommon phenomenonseen mostly with breast cancer

Cutaneous metastatic carcinoma is relatively uncommon; one meta-analysis reported the overall incidence to be 5.3%.¹ While it is unusual, any internal malignancy can metastasize to the skin. In women, the most common malignancy to do so is breast cancer. One study found breast cancer to be associated with 26.5% of cutaneous metastatic cases.² These metastases often occur well after the patient has been treated for the primary malignancy.

Identifying features. Most cutaneous metastases occur near the site of the primary tumor, initially in the form of a firm, mobile, nonpainful nodule.³ This nodule is typically skin-colored or red, but in the case of cutaneous metastases of melanomas, it can appear blue or black. In the case of breast cancer, the lesions most often arise on the chest and abdomen.⁴ Occasionally, metastases can ulcerate through the skin.

Although cutaneous metastasis is uncommon, it should always be considered when asymptomatic skin lesions resist treatment—even when there is no known history of malignancy.

Some forms of cutaneous metastasis, such as carcinoma erysipeloides, can appear in specific patterns. Carcinoma erysipeloides has a similar appearance to cellulitis; it manifests as a sharply demarcated, red, inflammatory patch in the skin adjacent to the primary tumor.

Consider the clinical picture

Cutaneous metastatic lesions have a wide range of differential diagnoses due to their varied appearances. It is important to view the overall clinical picture when distinguishing such lesions. Although cutaneous metastasis is uncommon, it should always be considered when asymptomatic skin lesions resist treatment—even in someone without a known history of malignancy.

Perform a biopsy. The diagnosis can be confirmed with a skin biopsy. A punch biopsy is preferable, as visualization of the dermis is crucial, and histology often reveals nests of pleomorphic cells. Further cellular cytology can elicit the primary malignancy of origin.

Making our diagnosis

We ruled out several possibilities before arriving at our diagnosis. An infectious etiology (eg, cutaneous candidiasis) was considered, as was a cutaneous change due to radiation therapy. We also considered shingles, the early stages of which would have been similar in appearance to our patient’s lesions, and urticaria, which can manifest as erythematous papules and wheals across various parts of the body. A lack of specific symptoms (eg, pruritis, pain, fever) made these alternative diagnoses less likely. The fact that our patient’s lesions persisted for more than a year without any response to treatment—and that they continued to grow—alerted us of a more sinister etiology.

Continue to: Treating the tumor is often not possible

Treating the tumor is often not possible

Treatment first involves treating the underlying tumor. For cases in which cutaneous lesions are the first manifestation of an internal malignancy, investigation as to the source should be performed. The lesions can then be treated with a combination of chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery.^5,6

Unfortunately, in most cases of cutaneous metastases, the primary malignancy is already widespread and possibly untreatable. In such instances, palliative care is offered. Lesions are managed symptomatically, and prevention of skin irritation becomes the primary focus. Keeping the skin clean and dry helps to prevent ulceration and secondary infection.

In cases where the lesions ulcerate or crust, debridement can help. Excision of lesions, as well as pairing laser therapy with electrochemotherapy, may be helpful to improve the patient’s quality of life when lesions cause discomfort.

The prognosis for cutaneous metastasis due to breast cancer is often hard to predict because it is determined by other factors, such as the presence of internal metastases, which indicates a worse prognosis (on the scale of months). Some case reports have demonstrated that patients with metastases limited to the skin may have prolonged survival (on the scale of years).⁷

Our patient was offered an initial trial of radiation therapy, but she refused all treatment because the lesions did not cause discomfort, and she preferred to not go through further aggressive cancer treatment that could potentially cause complications and pain. We respected the patient’s wishes and counseled her on follow-up if the lesions became symptomatic or she decided she wanted to try treatment.

CORRESPONDENCE
Araya Zaesim, 1550 College St, Macon, GA, 31207; Zaesim.araya@gmail.com

An 80-year-old white woman presented to our dermatology clinic with a rash across her abdomen that had been there for more than a year. While not itchy or painful, the rash was slowly expanding. The patient had tried treatments including topical antifungals and topical corticosteroids, but none had helped.

Her medical history was significant for dementia and stage III triple-negative breast cancer in the left breast (diagnosed 8 years prior), which was treated with a simple left mastectomy, chemotherapy, and radiation. She reported no history of skin cancer. She was not taking any medications and had no known drug allergies. A physical examination revealed an erythematous, papulonodular rash with diffuse induration in a band-like pattern across her entire upper abdomen and left flank (FIGURE).

WHAT IS YOUR DIAGNOSIS?
HOW WOULD YOU TREAT THIS PATIENT?

 

 

Diagnosis: Cutaneous metastasis of primary breast cancer

Based on our patient’s history, we gave a presumptive diagnosis of cutaneous breast cancer metastasis. A punch biopsy was performed. The pathology report showed nests of neoplastic cells within the dermis, which was consistent with this diagnosis. Immunohistochemical stains and fluorescence in-situ hybridization confirmed triple-negative breast markers for estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2.

An uncommon phenomenonseen mostly with breast cancer

Cutaneous metastatic carcinoma is relatively uncommon; one meta-analysis reported the overall incidence to be 5.3%.¹ While it is unusual, any internal malignancy can metastasize to the skin. In women, the most common malignancy to do so is breast cancer. One study found breast cancer to be associated with 26.5% of cutaneous metastatic cases.² These metastases often occur well after the patient has been treated for the primary malignancy.

Identifying features. Most cutaneous metastases occur near the site of the primary tumor, initially in the form of a firm, mobile, nonpainful nodule.³ This nodule is typically skin-colored or red, but in the case of cutaneous metastases of melanomas, it can appear blue or black. In the case of breast cancer, the lesions most often arise on the chest and abdomen.⁴ Occasionally, metastases can ulcerate through the skin.

Although cutaneous metastasis is uncommon, it should always be considered when asymptomatic skin lesions resist treatment—even when there is no known history of malignancy.

Some forms of cutaneous metastasis, such as carcinoma erysipeloides, can appear in specific patterns. Carcinoma erysipeloides has a similar appearance to cellulitis; it manifests as a sharply demarcated, red, inflammatory patch in the skin adjacent to the primary tumor.

Consider the clinical picture

Cutaneous metastatic lesions have a wide range of differential diagnoses due to their varied appearances. It is important to view the overall clinical picture when distinguishing such lesions. Although cutaneous metastasis is uncommon, it should always be considered when asymptomatic skin lesions resist treatment—even in someone without a known history of malignancy.

Perform a biopsy. The diagnosis can be confirmed with a skin biopsy. A punch biopsy is preferable, as visualization of the dermis is crucial, and histology often reveals nests of pleomorphic cells. Further cellular cytology can elicit the primary malignancy of origin.

Making our diagnosis

We ruled out several possibilities before arriving at our diagnosis. An infectious etiology (eg, cutaneous candidiasis) was considered, as was a cutaneous change due to radiation therapy. We also considered shingles, the early stages of which would have been similar in appearance to our patient’s lesions, and urticaria, which can manifest as erythematous papules and wheals across various parts of the body. A lack of specific symptoms (eg, pruritis, pain, fever) made these alternative diagnoses less likely. The fact that our patient’s lesions persisted for more than a year without any response to treatment—and that they continued to grow—alerted us of a more sinister etiology.

Continue to: Treating the tumor is often not possible

Treating the tumor is often not possible

Treatment first involves treating the underlying tumor. For cases in which cutaneous lesions are the first manifestation of an internal malignancy, investigation as to the source should be performed. The lesions can then be treated with a combination of chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery.^5,6

Unfortunately, in most cases of cutaneous metastases, the primary malignancy is already widespread and possibly untreatable. In such instances, palliative care is offered. Lesions are managed symptomatically, and prevention of skin irritation becomes the primary focus. Keeping the skin clean and dry helps to prevent ulceration and secondary infection.

In cases where the lesions ulcerate or crust, debridement can help. Excision of lesions, as well as pairing laser therapy with electrochemotherapy, may be helpful to improve the patient’s quality of life when lesions cause discomfort.

The prognosis for cutaneous metastasis due to breast cancer is often hard to predict because it is determined by other factors, such as the presence of internal metastases, which indicates a worse prognosis (on the scale of months). Some case reports have demonstrated that patients with metastases limited to the skin may have prolonged survival (on the scale of years).⁷

Our patient was offered an initial trial of radiation therapy, but she refused all treatment because the lesions did not cause discomfort, and she preferred to not go through further aggressive cancer treatment that could potentially cause complications and pain. We respected the patient’s wishes and counseled her on follow-up if the lesions became symptomatic or she decided she wanted to try treatment.

CORRESPONDENCE
Araya Zaesim, 1550 College St, Macon, GA, 31207; Zaesim.araya@gmail.com

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommends that girls receive their first reproductive health visit between the ages of 13 and 15 years to discuss healthy relationships in addition to general reproductive health, according to a new committee opinion.

The recommendation, published online Oct. 24, emphasizes that such early visits provide opportunities for ob.gyns. to educate teenage girls and their guardians about age-appropriate health issues, such as sexual relationships, dating violence, and sexual coercion. Between the ages of 13 years and 15 years is an ideal window because middle school is a time that some adolescents develop their first romantic and sexual relationships (Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 132[5]:1317-18 doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002946).

“Creating a nonjudgmental environment and educating staff on the unique concerns of adolescents are helpful ways to provide effective and appropriate care to this group of patients,” the authors wrote.

Ob.gyns. can use the early meeting to discuss key aspects of a healthy relationship with patients, including communication, self-respect, and mutual respect, while helping adolescents identify the characteristics of an unhealthy relationships such as dishonesty, intimidation, disrespect, and abuse, according to the opinion. As part of the discussion, ob.gyns. also may counsel patients to define their current relationship and their expectations for future relationships. Both relationships with and without sexual intimacy should be discussed, the opinion advises.

The recommendation reminds health care professionals to be mindful of federal and state confidentiality laws and that they be aware of mandatory reporting laws when intimate partner violence, teen dating violence, or statutory rape is suspected. In addition, the opinion notes that pregnant and parenting adolescents; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or questioning (LGBTQ) individuals; and adolescents with physical and mental disabilities are at particular risk of disparities in the health care system.

“The promotion of healthy relationships in these groups requires the obstetrician-gynecologist to be aware of the unique barriers and hurdles to sexual and nonsexual expression, as well as to health care,” the opinion states. “Interventions to promote healthy relationships and a strong sexual health framework are more effective when started early and can affect indicators of long-term individual health and public health.”

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommends that girls receive their first reproductive health visit between the ages of 13 and 15 years to discuss healthy relationships in addition to general reproductive health, according to a new committee opinion.

The recommendation, published online Oct. 24, emphasizes that such early visits provide opportunities for ob.gyns. to educate teenage girls and their guardians about age-appropriate health issues, such as sexual relationships, dating violence, and sexual coercion. Between the ages of 13 years and 15 years is an ideal window because middle school is a time that some adolescents develop their first romantic and sexual relationships (Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 132[5]:1317-18 doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002946).

“Creating a nonjudgmental environment and educating staff on the unique concerns of adolescents are helpful ways to provide effective and appropriate care to this group of patients,” the authors wrote.

Ob.gyns. can use the early meeting to discuss key aspects of a healthy relationship with patients, including communication, self-respect, and mutual respect, while helping adolescents identify the characteristics of an unhealthy relationships such as dishonesty, intimidation, disrespect, and abuse, according to the opinion. As part of the discussion, ob.gyns. also may counsel patients to define their current relationship and their expectations for future relationships. Both relationships with and without sexual intimacy should be discussed, the opinion advises.

The recommendation reminds health care professionals to be mindful of federal and state confidentiality laws and that they be aware of mandatory reporting laws when intimate partner violence, teen dating violence, or statutory rape is suspected. In addition, the opinion notes that pregnant and parenting adolescents; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or questioning (LGBTQ) individuals; and adolescents with physical and mental disabilities are at particular risk of disparities in the health care system.

“The promotion of healthy relationships in these groups requires the obstetrician-gynecologist to be aware of the unique barriers and hurdles to sexual and nonsexual expression, as well as to health care,” the opinion states. “Interventions to promote healthy relationships and a strong sexual health framework are more effective when started early and can affect indicators of long-term individual health and public health.”

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommends that girls receive their first reproductive health visit between the ages of 13 and 15 years to discuss healthy relationships in addition to general reproductive health, according to a new committee opinion.

The recommendation, published online Oct. 24, emphasizes that such early visits provide opportunities for ob.gyns. to educate teenage girls and their guardians about age-appropriate health issues, such as sexual relationships, dating violence, and sexual coercion. Between the ages of 13 years and 15 years is an ideal window because middle school is a time that some adolescents develop their first romantic and sexual relationships (Obstet Gynecol. 2018; 132[5]:1317-18 doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002946).

“Creating a nonjudgmental environment and educating staff on the unique concerns of adolescents are helpful ways to provide effective and appropriate care to this group of patients,” the authors wrote.

Ob.gyns. can use the early meeting to discuss key aspects of a healthy relationship with patients, including communication, self-respect, and mutual respect, while helping adolescents identify the characteristics of an unhealthy relationships such as dishonesty, intimidation, disrespect, and abuse, according to the opinion. As part of the discussion, ob.gyns. also may counsel patients to define their current relationship and their expectations for future relationships. Both relationships with and without sexual intimacy should be discussed, the opinion advises.

The recommendation reminds health care professionals to be mindful of federal and state confidentiality laws and that they be aware of mandatory reporting laws when intimate partner violence, teen dating violence, or statutory rape is suspected. In addition, the opinion notes that pregnant and parenting adolescents; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or questioning (LGBTQ) individuals; and adolescents with physical and mental disabilities are at particular risk of disparities in the health care system.

“The promotion of healthy relationships in these groups requires the obstetrician-gynecologist to be aware of the unique barriers and hurdles to sexual and nonsexual expression, as well as to health care,” the opinion states. “Interventions to promote healthy relationships and a strong sexual health framework are more effective when started early and can affect indicators of long-term individual health and public health.”

A review of more than 1,000 hospitalizations revealed a 40% influenza vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalizations during pregnancy, Mark Thompson, MD, said at a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices in Atlanta.

Piotr Marcinski/Thinkstock

To date, no study has examined influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against hospitalizations among pregnant women, said Dr. Thompson, of the CDC’s influenza division.

He presented results of a study based on data from the Pregnancy Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (PREVENT), which included public health or health care systems with integrated laboratory, medical, and vaccination records in Australia, Canada (Alberta and Ontario), Israel, and three states (California, Oregon, and Washington). The study included women aged 18-50 years who were pregnant during local influenza seasons from 2010 to 2016. Most of the women were older than 35 years (79%), and in the third trimester (65%), and had no high risk medical conditions (66%). The study was published in Clinical Infectious Diseases (2018 Oct 11. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciy737).

The researchers identified 19,450 hospitalizations with an acute respiratory or febrile illness discharge diagnosis and clinician-ordered real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) testing for flu viruses. Of these, 1,030 (6%) of the women underwent rRT-PCR testing, 54% were diagnosed with either influenza or pneumonia, and 58% had detectable influenza A or B virus infections.

Overall, the adjusted IVE was 40%; 13% of rRT-PCR-confirmed influenza-positive pregnant women and 22% of influenza-negative pregnant women were vaccinated; IVE was adjusted for site, season, season timing, and high-risk medical conditions.

“The takeaway is this is the average performance of the vaccine across multiple countries and different seasons,” and the vaccine effectiveness appeared stable across high-risk medical conditions and trimesters of pregnancy, Dr. Thompson said.

The generalizability of the study findings was limited by the lack of data from low- to middle-income countries, he said during the meeting discussion. However, the ICU admission rate is “what we would expect” and similar to results from previous studies. The consistent results showed the need to increase flu vaccination for pregnant women worldwide and to include study populations from lower-income countries in future research.

Dr. Thompson had no financial conflicts to disclose.

A review of more than 1,000 hospitalizations revealed a 40% influenza vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalizations during pregnancy, Mark Thompson, MD, said at a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices in Atlanta.

Piotr Marcinski/Thinkstock

To date, no study has examined influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against hospitalizations among pregnant women, said Dr. Thompson, of the CDC’s influenza division.

He presented results of a study based on data from the Pregnancy Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (PREVENT), which included public health or health care systems with integrated laboratory, medical, and vaccination records in Australia, Canada (Alberta and Ontario), Israel, and three states (California, Oregon, and Washington). The study included women aged 18-50 years who were pregnant during local influenza seasons from 2010 to 2016. Most of the women were older than 35 years (79%), and in the third trimester (65%), and had no high risk medical conditions (66%). The study was published in Clinical Infectious Diseases (2018 Oct 11. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciy737).

The researchers identified 19,450 hospitalizations with an acute respiratory or febrile illness discharge diagnosis and clinician-ordered real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) testing for flu viruses. Of these, 1,030 (6%) of the women underwent rRT-PCR testing, 54% were diagnosed with either influenza or pneumonia, and 58% had detectable influenza A or B virus infections.

Overall, the adjusted IVE was 40%; 13% of rRT-PCR-confirmed influenza-positive pregnant women and 22% of influenza-negative pregnant women were vaccinated; IVE was adjusted for site, season, season timing, and high-risk medical conditions.

“The takeaway is this is the average performance of the vaccine across multiple countries and different seasons,” and the vaccine effectiveness appeared stable across high-risk medical conditions and trimesters of pregnancy, Dr. Thompson said.

The generalizability of the study findings was limited by the lack of data from low- to middle-income countries, he said during the meeting discussion. However, the ICU admission rate is “what we would expect” and similar to results from previous studies. The consistent results showed the need to increase flu vaccination for pregnant women worldwide and to include study populations from lower-income countries in future research.

Dr. Thompson had no financial conflicts to disclose.

A review of more than 1,000 hospitalizations revealed a 40% influenza vaccine effectiveness against laboratory-confirmed influenza-associated hospitalizations during pregnancy, Mark Thompson, MD, said at a meeting of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices in Atlanta.

Piotr Marcinski/Thinkstock

To date, no study has examined influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against hospitalizations among pregnant women, said Dr. Thompson, of the CDC’s influenza division.

He presented results of a study based on data from the Pregnancy Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness Network (PREVENT), which included public health or health care systems with integrated laboratory, medical, and vaccination records in Australia, Canada (Alberta and Ontario), Israel, and three states (California, Oregon, and Washington). The study included women aged 18-50 years who were pregnant during local influenza seasons from 2010 to 2016. Most of the women were older than 35 years (79%), and in the third trimester (65%), and had no high risk medical conditions (66%). The study was published in Clinical Infectious Diseases (2018 Oct 11. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciy737).

The researchers identified 19,450 hospitalizations with an acute respiratory or febrile illness discharge diagnosis and clinician-ordered real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) testing for flu viruses. Of these, 1,030 (6%) of the women underwent rRT-PCR testing, 54% were diagnosed with either influenza or pneumonia, and 58% had detectable influenza A or B virus infections.

Overall, the adjusted IVE was 40%; 13% of rRT-PCR-confirmed influenza-positive pregnant women and 22% of influenza-negative pregnant women were vaccinated; IVE was adjusted for site, season, season timing, and high-risk medical conditions.

“The takeaway is this is the average performance of the vaccine across multiple countries and different seasons,” and the vaccine effectiveness appeared stable across high-risk medical conditions and trimesters of pregnancy, Dr. Thompson said.

The generalizability of the study findings was limited by the lack of data from low- to middle-income countries, he said during the meeting discussion. However, the ICU admission rate is “what we would expect” and similar to results from previous studies. The consistent results showed the need to increase flu vaccination for pregnant women worldwide and to include study populations from lower-income countries in future research.

Dr. Thompson had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Short interpregnancy intervals carry an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes for women of all ages and increased adverse fetal and infant outcome risks for women between 20 and 34 years old, according to research published in JAMA Internal Medicine.

“This finding may be reassuring particularly for older women who must weigh the competing risks of increasing maternal age with longer interpregnancy intervals (including infertility and chromosomal anomalies) against the risks of short interpregnancy intervals,” wrote Laura Schummers, SD, of the department of epidemiology at Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, and her colleagues.

The researchers examined 148,544 pregnancies of women in British Columbia who were younger than 20 years old at the index (5%), 20-34 years at the index birth (83%), and 35 years or older (12%). The women had two or more consecutive singleton pregnancies that resulted in a live birth between 2004 and 2014 and were recorded in the British Columbia Perinatal Data Registry. There was a lower number of short interpregnancy intervals, defined as less than 6 months between the index and second pregnancy, among women in the 35-years-or-older group, compared with the 20- to 34-year-old group (4.4% vs. 5.5%); the 35-years-or-older group instead had a higher number of interpregnancy intervals between 6 and 11 months and between 12 and 17 months, compared with the 20- to 34-year-old group (17.7% vs. 16.6%, and 25.2% vs. 22.5%, respectively).

The risk for maternal mortality or severe morbidity was higher in women who were a minimum 35 years old with 6 months between pregnancies (0.62%), compared with women who had 18 months (0.26%) between pregnancies (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 2.39). There was no significant increase in those aged between 20 and 34 years at 6 months, compared with 18 months (0.23% vs. 0.25%; aRR, 0.92). However, the 20- to 34-year-old group did have an increased risk of fetal and infant adverse outcomes at 6 months, compared with 18 months (2.0% vs. 1.4%; aRR, 1.42) and compared with women in the 35-years-or-older group at 6 months and 18 months (2.1% vs. 1.8%; aRR, 1.15).

There was a 5.3% increased risk at 6 months and a 3.2% increased risk at 18 months of spontaneous preterm delivery in the 20- to 34-year-old group (aRR, 1.65), compared with a 5.0% risk at 6 months and 3.6% at 18 months in the 35-years-or-older group (aRR, 1.40). The researchers noted “modest increases” in newborns who were born small for their gestational age and indicated preterm delivery at short intervals that did not differ by age group.

The authors reported no conflicts of interest. Dr Schummers was supported a National Research Service Award from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and received a grant from the Canadian Institutes for Health Research and the Public Health Agency of Canada Family Planning Public Health Chair Seed Grant. Two of her coauthors were supported by various other awards.

SOURCE: Schummers L et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Oct 29. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.4696.

Short interpregnancy intervals carry an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes for women of all ages and increased adverse fetal and infant outcome risks for women between 20 and 34 years old, according to research published in JAMA Internal Medicine.

“This finding may be reassuring particularly for older women who must weigh the competing risks of increasing maternal age with longer interpregnancy intervals (including infertility and chromosomal anomalies) against the risks of short interpregnancy intervals,” wrote Laura Schummers, SD, of the department of epidemiology at Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, and her colleagues.

The researchers examined 148,544 pregnancies of women in British Columbia who were younger than 20 years old at the index (5%), 20-34 years at the index birth (83%), and 35 years or older (12%). The women had two or more consecutive singleton pregnancies that resulted in a live birth between 2004 and 2014 and were recorded in the British Columbia Perinatal Data Registry. There was a lower number of short interpregnancy intervals, defined as less than 6 months between the index and second pregnancy, among women in the 35-years-or-older group, compared with the 20- to 34-year-old group (4.4% vs. 5.5%); the 35-years-or-older group instead had a higher number of interpregnancy intervals between 6 and 11 months and between 12 and 17 months, compared with the 20- to 34-year-old group (17.7% vs. 16.6%, and 25.2% vs. 22.5%, respectively).

The risk for maternal mortality or severe morbidity was higher in women who were a minimum 35 years old with 6 months between pregnancies (0.62%), compared with women who had 18 months (0.26%) between pregnancies (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 2.39). There was no significant increase in those aged between 20 and 34 years at 6 months, compared with 18 months (0.23% vs. 0.25%; aRR, 0.92). However, the 20- to 34-year-old group did have an increased risk of fetal and infant adverse outcomes at 6 months, compared with 18 months (2.0% vs. 1.4%; aRR, 1.42) and compared with women in the 35-years-or-older group at 6 months and 18 months (2.1% vs. 1.8%; aRR, 1.15).

There was a 5.3% increased risk at 6 months and a 3.2% increased risk at 18 months of spontaneous preterm delivery in the 20- to 34-year-old group (aRR, 1.65), compared with a 5.0% risk at 6 months and 3.6% at 18 months in the 35-years-or-older group (aRR, 1.40). The researchers noted “modest increases” in newborns who were born small for their gestational age and indicated preterm delivery at short intervals that did not differ by age group.

The authors reported no conflicts of interest. Dr Schummers was supported a National Research Service Award from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and received a grant from the Canadian Institutes for Health Research and the Public Health Agency of Canada Family Planning Public Health Chair Seed Grant. Two of her coauthors were supported by various other awards.

SOURCE: Schummers L et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Oct 29. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.4696.

Short interpregnancy intervals carry an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes for women of all ages and increased adverse fetal and infant outcome risks for women between 20 and 34 years old, according to research published in JAMA Internal Medicine.

“This finding may be reassuring particularly for older women who must weigh the competing risks of increasing maternal age with longer interpregnancy intervals (including infertility and chromosomal anomalies) against the risks of short interpregnancy intervals,” wrote Laura Schummers, SD, of the department of epidemiology at Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, and her colleagues.

The researchers examined 148,544 pregnancies of women in British Columbia who were younger than 20 years old at the index (5%), 20-34 years at the index birth (83%), and 35 years or older (12%). The women had two or more consecutive singleton pregnancies that resulted in a live birth between 2004 and 2014 and were recorded in the British Columbia Perinatal Data Registry. There was a lower number of short interpregnancy intervals, defined as less than 6 months between the index and second pregnancy, among women in the 35-years-or-older group, compared with the 20- to 34-year-old group (4.4% vs. 5.5%); the 35-years-or-older group instead had a higher number of interpregnancy intervals between 6 and 11 months and between 12 and 17 months, compared with the 20- to 34-year-old group (17.7% vs. 16.6%, and 25.2% vs. 22.5%, respectively).

The risk for maternal mortality or severe morbidity was higher in women who were a minimum 35 years old with 6 months between pregnancies (0.62%), compared with women who had 18 months (0.26%) between pregnancies (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 2.39). There was no significant increase in those aged between 20 and 34 years at 6 months, compared with 18 months (0.23% vs. 0.25%; aRR, 0.92). However, the 20- to 34-year-old group did have an increased risk of fetal and infant adverse outcomes at 6 months, compared with 18 months (2.0% vs. 1.4%; aRR, 1.42) and compared with women in the 35-years-or-older group at 6 months and 18 months (2.1% vs. 1.8%; aRR, 1.15).

There was a 5.3% increased risk at 6 months and a 3.2% increased risk at 18 months of spontaneous preterm delivery in the 20- to 34-year-old group (aRR, 1.65), compared with a 5.0% risk at 6 months and 3.6% at 18 months in the 35-years-or-older group (aRR, 1.40). The researchers noted “modest increases” in newborns who were born small for their gestational age and indicated preterm delivery at short intervals that did not differ by age group.

The authors reported no conflicts of interest. Dr Schummers was supported a National Research Service Award from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and received a grant from the Canadian Institutes for Health Research and the Public Health Agency of Canada Family Planning Public Health Chair Seed Grant. Two of her coauthors were supported by various other awards.

SOURCE: Schummers L et al. JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Oct 29. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.4696.

Lack of knowledge about ovarian cancer prevents many women from seeking medical attention, which delays diagnosis and treatment and may prove increasingly dangerous as incidence rises by an expected 55% over the next 2 decades, according to the World Ovarian Cancer Coalition.

Data from the coalition’s 2018 survey of women with ovarian cancer show that 18% had never heard of the disease before their diagnosis and 51% had heard of it but did not know anything about it. The Every Women Study survey, completed by 1,531 women in 44 countries, also reveals that nine out of ten had experienced symptoms prior to diagnosis but fewer than half saw a physician within a month of noticing those symptoms, the coalition said.

“This study, for the first time, provides powerful evidence of the challenges faced by women diagnosed with ovarian cancer across the world and sets an agenda for global change. We were especially shocked by the widespread, woeful lack of awareness of ovarian cancer,” Annwen Jones, coalition vice-chair and cochair of the study, said in a separate written statement.

Results varied considerably by country, and only 10 countries provided enough responses to allow comparisons: Australia (120), Brazil (52), Canada (167), Germany (141), Hungary (58), Italy (92), Japan (250), Spain (70), the United Kingdom (176), and the United States (248).

Among those comparisons, women in Germany (5.5 weeks) and Spain (7.9 weeks) were the first to visit a physician after first experiencing symptoms, while those in Italy (15.2 weeks) and the United States (12.9 weeks) were last. The United States was also longest in time from first visit to diagnosis (23.6 weeks), and Japan was the shortest (11 weeks). Despite that world-longest time to diagnosis, however, over 69% of U.S. women said that their care around the time of diagnosis was very good, which was higher than any other country, the coalition reported.

Surgery statistics were closer among countries, with an average of 94% of all women undergoing surgery to treat their ovarian cancer. The United States, at 98.3%, was second to Spain’s 98.5%, and Hungary was the largest outlier on the low side at 59%. Over 87% of all women reported having chemotherapy to treat or control their cancer, and 9.8% of women said that they had received intraperitoneal chemotherapy. In the United States, 22.5% of women received intraperitoneal therapy, compared with 0.7% for the United Kingdom.

“No one country has all the answers, and whilst there is still an urgent need for a step-change in the level of investment in research for better treatments and tools for early diagnosis, there are significant opportunities to improve survival and quality of life for women in the immediate and short term to make a series of marginal gains if these variations are addressed by individual countries,” the coalition said in the report.

rfranki@mdedge.com

Lack of knowledge about ovarian cancer prevents many women from seeking medical attention, which delays diagnosis and treatment and may prove increasingly dangerous as incidence rises by an expected 55% over the next 2 decades, according to the World Ovarian Cancer Coalition.

Data from the coalition’s 2018 survey of women with ovarian cancer show that 18% had never heard of the disease before their diagnosis and 51% had heard of it but did not know anything about it. The Every Women Study survey, completed by 1,531 women in 44 countries, also reveals that nine out of ten had experienced symptoms prior to diagnosis but fewer than half saw a physician within a month of noticing those symptoms, the coalition said.

“This study, for the first time, provides powerful evidence of the challenges faced by women diagnosed with ovarian cancer across the world and sets an agenda for global change. We were especially shocked by the widespread, woeful lack of awareness of ovarian cancer,” Annwen Jones, coalition vice-chair and cochair of the study, said in a separate written statement.

Results varied considerably by country, and only 10 countries provided enough responses to allow comparisons: Australia (120), Brazil (52), Canada (167), Germany (141), Hungary (58), Italy (92), Japan (250), Spain (70), the United Kingdom (176), and the United States (248).

Among those comparisons, women in Germany (5.5 weeks) and Spain (7.9 weeks) were the first to visit a physician after first experiencing symptoms, while those in Italy (15.2 weeks) and the United States (12.9 weeks) were last. The United States was also longest in time from first visit to diagnosis (23.6 weeks), and Japan was the shortest (11 weeks). Despite that world-longest time to diagnosis, however, over 69% of U.S. women said that their care around the time of diagnosis was very good, which was higher than any other country, the coalition reported.

Surgery statistics were closer among countries, with an average of 94% of all women undergoing surgery to treat their ovarian cancer. The United States, at 98.3%, was second to Spain’s 98.5%, and Hungary was the largest outlier on the low side at 59%. Over 87% of all women reported having chemotherapy to treat or control their cancer, and 9.8% of women said that they had received intraperitoneal chemotherapy. In the United States, 22.5% of women received intraperitoneal therapy, compared with 0.7% for the United Kingdom.

“No one country has all the answers, and whilst there is still an urgent need for a step-change in the level of investment in research for better treatments and tools for early diagnosis, there are significant opportunities to improve survival and quality of life for women in the immediate and short term to make a series of marginal gains if these variations are addressed by individual countries,” the coalition said in the report.

rfranki@mdedge.com

Lack of knowledge about ovarian cancer prevents many women from seeking medical attention, which delays diagnosis and treatment and may prove increasingly dangerous as incidence rises by an expected 55% over the next 2 decades, according to the World Ovarian Cancer Coalition.

Data from the coalition’s 2018 survey of women with ovarian cancer show that 18% had never heard of the disease before their diagnosis and 51% had heard of it but did not know anything about it. The Every Women Study survey, completed by 1,531 women in 44 countries, also reveals that nine out of ten had experienced symptoms prior to diagnosis but fewer than half saw a physician within a month of noticing those symptoms, the coalition said.

“This study, for the first time, provides powerful evidence of the challenges faced by women diagnosed with ovarian cancer across the world and sets an agenda for global change. We were especially shocked by the widespread, woeful lack of awareness of ovarian cancer,” Annwen Jones, coalition vice-chair and cochair of the study, said in a separate written statement.

Results varied considerably by country, and only 10 countries provided enough responses to allow comparisons: Australia (120), Brazil (52), Canada (167), Germany (141), Hungary (58), Italy (92), Japan (250), Spain (70), the United Kingdom (176), and the United States (248).

Among those comparisons, women in Germany (5.5 weeks) and Spain (7.9 weeks) were the first to visit a physician after first experiencing symptoms, while those in Italy (15.2 weeks) and the United States (12.9 weeks) were last. The United States was also longest in time from first visit to diagnosis (23.6 weeks), and Japan was the shortest (11 weeks). Despite that world-longest time to diagnosis, however, over 69% of U.S. women said that their care around the time of diagnosis was very good, which was higher than any other country, the coalition reported.

Surgery statistics were closer among countries, with an average of 94% of all women undergoing surgery to treat their ovarian cancer. The United States, at 98.3%, was second to Spain’s 98.5%, and Hungary was the largest outlier on the low side at 59%. Over 87% of all women reported having chemotherapy to treat or control their cancer, and 9.8% of women said that they had received intraperitoneal chemotherapy. In the United States, 22.5% of women received intraperitoneal therapy, compared with 0.7% for the United Kingdom.

“No one country has all the answers, and whilst there is still an urgent need for a step-change in the level of investment in research for better treatments and tools for early diagnosis, there are significant opportunities to improve survival and quality of life for women in the immediate and short term to make a series of marginal gains if these variations are addressed by individual countries,” the coalition said in the report.

rfranki@mdedge.com

CHICAGO – Help is on the way for rheumatologists who may feel out of their depth regarding reproductive health issues in their patients.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

“Our patients, fortunately, are pursuing pregnancy more often now than in years past. One of the key messages of the guidelines is that patients really do want to discuss these topics with their rheumatologist, even though that often does not happen now. What patients told us [in the guideline-development process] is their rheumatologist knows them better than their gynecologist or any of their other doctors because we have followed them for a long period of time and we understand their disease and their symptoms. They really want our input on questions about contraception, when to plan a pregnancy, and medication use,” said Dr. Sammaritano of the Hospital for Special Surgery and Cornell University in New York.

The guidelines were created over the course of a year and a half with extensive input from ob.gyns., as well as a patient panel. The project included a systematic review of more than 300 published studies in which guideline panelists attempt to find answers to an initial list of 370 questions. Dr. Sammaritano predicted that the guidelines will prove to be useful not only for rheumatologists, but for their colleagues in ob.gyn. as well. Just as rheumatologists likely haven’t kept up with the sea changes that have occurred in ob.gyn. since their medical school days, most ob.gyns. know little about rheumatic diseases.

“There’s room for education on both sides,” she observed in an interview. “I have had to write letters to gynecologists to get them to put my patients with antiphospholipid antibodies on a contraceptive that includes a progestin because the labeling says, ‘May increase risk of thrombosis.’ And yet if you look at the literature, most of the progestins do not increase the risk of thrombosis, even in patients who are already at increased risk because of a genetic prothrombotic abnormality. I practically had to sign my life away to get a gynecologist to put a progestin-containing IUD in my patient, whereas the risk of thrombosis to my patient with an unplanned pregnancy would have been 10-fold or 100-fold higher. Unplanned pregnancy is dangerous for patients with our diseases.”

And yet, she noted, half of all pregnancies in the United States are unplanned. Among women with rheumatic diseases, the proportion may well be even higher in light of their documented low rate of utilization of effective contraception.

A publication date for the guidelines won’t be set until the review is completed, but the plan is to issue three separate documents. One will address reproductive health outside of pregnancy, with key topics to include contraception, fertility preservation, menopause, and hormone replacement therapy. The second document will focus on pregnancy management, with special attention devoted to women with lupus or antiphospholipid antibodies because they are at particularly high risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. The third document will be devoted to medications, covering issues including which medications can be continued during pregnancy and when to safely stop the ones that can’t. This section will address both maternal and paternal use of rheumatologic medications, the latter being a topic below the radar of ob.gyns.

The three medications whose paternal use in pregnancy generate the most questions in clinical practice are methotrexate, cyclophosphamide, and sulfasalazine.

“I cannot tell you how many times I’ve been asked whether male patients with rheumatic diseases need to stop their methotrexate before they plan to father a child – that’s been a big one. The answer is they don’t need to stop, but that’s a conditional recommendation because the product label still says to stop it 3 months before. But that’s based on theoretical concerns, and all the data support a lack of teratogenicity for men using methotrexate prior to and during pregnancy,” Dr. Sammaritano said.

Men on cyclophosphamide absolutely have to stop the drug 3 months before pregnancy because the drug causes DNA fragmentation in the sperm. Sulfasalazine is known to impair male fertility. The ACR guidelines will recommend that men continue the drug, but if pregnancy doesn’t occur within a reasonable time, then it’s appropriate to get a semen analysis rather than stopping sulfasalazine unnecessarily.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists guidelines now recommend long-acting reversible contraception, including IUDs and progestin implants, as first-line contraception for all women. The ACR draft guidelines strongly recommend the same.

“That is new. The use of this form of contraception in women with rheumatic diseases is quite low. In general, our patients don’t use contraception as often as other women, and when they do, they don’t use effective contraception. There are many theories as to why that may be: perhaps it’s a focus on the more immediate issues of their rheumatic disease that doesn’t allow their rheumatologist to get to the point of discussing contraception,” according to Dr. Sammaritano.

Many rheumatologists will be pleasantly surprised to learn that the problem of increased risk of pelvic inflammatory disease associated with earlier-generation IUDs is no longer an issue with the current devices. And contrary to a misconception among some ob.gyns., autoimmune disease will not cause a woman to reject her IUD.

The ACR guidelines recommend continuing hydroxychloroquine in lupus patients during pregnancy – and considering starting the drug in those not already on it – because of strong evidence supporting both safety and benefit for mother and baby.

“We are recommending the use of low-dose aspirin for patients with lupus and antiphospholipid antibodies because those two conditions increase the risk for preeclampsia, and the ob.gyns. routinely use low-dose aspirin starting toward the end of the first trimester as preventive therapy. Large studies show that it reduces the risk,” she continued.

Dr. Sammaritano cautioned that the literature on the use of rheumatologic medications in pregnancy and breast feeding is generally weak – and in the case of the new oral small molecule JAK inhibitors, essentially nonexistent.

“A lot of our recommendations are conditional because we did not feel that the data support a strong recommendation. But you have to do something. As long as you communicate the idea that we’re doing the best we can with what information is available, I think patients will respond to that,” the rheumatologist said.

She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her presentation.

bjancin@mdedge.com

CHICAGO – Help is on the way for rheumatologists who may feel out of their depth regarding reproductive health issues in their patients.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

“Our patients, fortunately, are pursuing pregnancy more often now than in years past. One of the key messages of the guidelines is that patients really do want to discuss these topics with their rheumatologist, even though that often does not happen now. What patients told us [in the guideline-development process] is their rheumatologist knows them better than their gynecologist or any of their other doctors because we have followed them for a long period of time and we understand their disease and their symptoms. They really want our input on questions about contraception, when to plan a pregnancy, and medication use,” said Dr. Sammaritano of the Hospital for Special Surgery and Cornell University in New York.

The guidelines were created over the course of a year and a half with extensive input from ob.gyns., as well as a patient panel. The project included a systematic review of more than 300 published studies in which guideline panelists attempt to find answers to an initial list of 370 questions. Dr. Sammaritano predicted that the guidelines will prove to be useful not only for rheumatologists, but for their colleagues in ob.gyn. as well. Just as rheumatologists likely haven’t kept up with the sea changes that have occurred in ob.gyn. since their medical school days, most ob.gyns. know little about rheumatic diseases.

“There’s room for education on both sides,” she observed in an interview. “I have had to write letters to gynecologists to get them to put my patients with antiphospholipid antibodies on a contraceptive that includes a progestin because the labeling says, ‘May increase risk of thrombosis.’ And yet if you look at the literature, most of the progestins do not increase the risk of thrombosis, even in patients who are already at increased risk because of a genetic prothrombotic abnormality. I practically had to sign my life away to get a gynecologist to put a progestin-containing IUD in my patient, whereas the risk of thrombosis to my patient with an unplanned pregnancy would have been 10-fold or 100-fold higher. Unplanned pregnancy is dangerous for patients with our diseases.”

And yet, she noted, half of all pregnancies in the United States are unplanned. Among women with rheumatic diseases, the proportion may well be even higher in light of their documented low rate of utilization of effective contraception.

A publication date for the guidelines won’t be set until the review is completed, but the plan is to issue three separate documents. One will address reproductive health outside of pregnancy, with key topics to include contraception, fertility preservation, menopause, and hormone replacement therapy. The second document will focus on pregnancy management, with special attention devoted to women with lupus or antiphospholipid antibodies because they are at particularly high risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. The third document will be devoted to medications, covering issues including which medications can be continued during pregnancy and when to safely stop the ones that can’t. This section will address both maternal and paternal use of rheumatologic medications, the latter being a topic below the radar of ob.gyns.

The three medications whose paternal use in pregnancy generate the most questions in clinical practice are methotrexate, cyclophosphamide, and sulfasalazine.

“I cannot tell you how many times I’ve been asked whether male patients with rheumatic diseases need to stop their methotrexate before they plan to father a child – that’s been a big one. The answer is they don’t need to stop, but that’s a conditional recommendation because the product label still says to stop it 3 months before. But that’s based on theoretical concerns, and all the data support a lack of teratogenicity for men using methotrexate prior to and during pregnancy,” Dr. Sammaritano said.

Men on cyclophosphamide absolutely have to stop the drug 3 months before pregnancy because the drug causes DNA fragmentation in the sperm. Sulfasalazine is known to impair male fertility. The ACR guidelines will recommend that men continue the drug, but if pregnancy doesn’t occur within a reasonable time, then it’s appropriate to get a semen analysis rather than stopping sulfasalazine unnecessarily.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists guidelines now recommend long-acting reversible contraception, including IUDs and progestin implants, as first-line contraception for all women. The ACR draft guidelines strongly recommend the same.

“That is new. The use of this form of contraception in women with rheumatic diseases is quite low. In general, our patients don’t use contraception as often as other women, and when they do, they don’t use effective contraception. There are many theories as to why that may be: perhaps it’s a focus on the more immediate issues of their rheumatic disease that doesn’t allow their rheumatologist to get to the point of discussing contraception,” according to Dr. Sammaritano.

Many rheumatologists will be pleasantly surprised to learn that the problem of increased risk of pelvic inflammatory disease associated with earlier-generation IUDs is no longer an issue with the current devices. And contrary to a misconception among some ob.gyns., autoimmune disease will not cause a woman to reject her IUD.

The ACR guidelines recommend continuing hydroxychloroquine in lupus patients during pregnancy – and considering starting the drug in those not already on it – because of strong evidence supporting both safety and benefit for mother and baby.

“We are recommending the use of low-dose aspirin for patients with lupus and antiphospholipid antibodies because those two conditions increase the risk for preeclampsia, and the ob.gyns. routinely use low-dose aspirin starting toward the end of the first trimester as preventive therapy. Large studies show that it reduces the risk,” she continued.

Dr. Sammaritano cautioned that the literature on the use of rheumatologic medications in pregnancy and breast feeding is generally weak – and in the case of the new oral small molecule JAK inhibitors, essentially nonexistent.

“A lot of our recommendations are conditional because we did not feel that the data support a strong recommendation. But you have to do something. As long as you communicate the idea that we’re doing the best we can with what information is available, I think patients will respond to that,” the rheumatologist said.

She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her presentation.

bjancin@mdedge.com

CHICAGO – Help is on the way for rheumatologists who may feel out of their depth regarding reproductive health issues in their patients.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

“Our patients, fortunately, are pursuing pregnancy more often now than in years past. One of the key messages of the guidelines is that patients really do want to discuss these topics with their rheumatologist, even though that often does not happen now. What patients told us [in the guideline-development process] is their rheumatologist knows them better than their gynecologist or any of their other doctors because we have followed them for a long period of time and we understand their disease and their symptoms. They really want our input on questions about contraception, when to plan a pregnancy, and medication use,” said Dr. Sammaritano of the Hospital for Special Surgery and Cornell University in New York.

The guidelines were created over the course of a year and a half with extensive input from ob.gyns., as well as a patient panel. The project included a systematic review of more than 300 published studies in which guideline panelists attempt to find answers to an initial list of 370 questions. Dr. Sammaritano predicted that the guidelines will prove to be useful not only for rheumatologists, but for their colleagues in ob.gyn. as well. Just as rheumatologists likely haven’t kept up with the sea changes that have occurred in ob.gyn. since their medical school days, most ob.gyns. know little about rheumatic diseases.

“There’s room for education on both sides,” she observed in an interview. “I have had to write letters to gynecologists to get them to put my patients with antiphospholipid antibodies on a contraceptive that includes a progestin because the labeling says, ‘May increase risk of thrombosis.’ And yet if you look at the literature, most of the progestins do not increase the risk of thrombosis, even in patients who are already at increased risk because of a genetic prothrombotic abnormality. I practically had to sign my life away to get a gynecologist to put a progestin-containing IUD in my patient, whereas the risk of thrombosis to my patient with an unplanned pregnancy would have been 10-fold or 100-fold higher. Unplanned pregnancy is dangerous for patients with our diseases.”

And yet, she noted, half of all pregnancies in the United States are unplanned. Among women with rheumatic diseases, the proportion may well be even higher in light of their documented low rate of utilization of effective contraception.

A publication date for the guidelines won’t be set until the review is completed, but the plan is to issue three separate documents. One will address reproductive health outside of pregnancy, with key topics to include contraception, fertility preservation, menopause, and hormone replacement therapy. The second document will focus on pregnancy management, with special attention devoted to women with lupus or antiphospholipid antibodies because they are at particularly high risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. The third document will be devoted to medications, covering issues including which medications can be continued during pregnancy and when to safely stop the ones that can’t. This section will address both maternal and paternal use of rheumatologic medications, the latter being a topic below the radar of ob.gyns.

The three medications whose paternal use in pregnancy generate the most questions in clinical practice are methotrexate, cyclophosphamide, and sulfasalazine.

“I cannot tell you how many times I’ve been asked whether male patients with rheumatic diseases need to stop their methotrexate before they plan to father a child – that’s been a big one. The answer is they don’t need to stop, but that’s a conditional recommendation because the product label still says to stop it 3 months before. But that’s based on theoretical concerns, and all the data support a lack of teratogenicity for men using methotrexate prior to and during pregnancy,” Dr. Sammaritano said.

Men on cyclophosphamide absolutely have to stop the drug 3 months before pregnancy because the drug causes DNA fragmentation in the sperm. Sulfasalazine is known to impair male fertility. The ACR guidelines will recommend that men continue the drug, but if pregnancy doesn’t occur within a reasonable time, then it’s appropriate to get a semen analysis rather than stopping sulfasalazine unnecessarily.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists guidelines now recommend long-acting reversible contraception, including IUDs and progestin implants, as first-line contraception for all women. The ACR draft guidelines strongly recommend the same.

“That is new. The use of this form of contraception in women with rheumatic diseases is quite low. In general, our patients don’t use contraception as often as other women, and when they do, they don’t use effective contraception. There are many theories as to why that may be: perhaps it’s a focus on the more immediate issues of their rheumatic disease that doesn’t allow their rheumatologist to get to the point of discussing contraception,” according to Dr. Sammaritano.

Many rheumatologists will be pleasantly surprised to learn that the problem of increased risk of pelvic inflammatory disease associated with earlier-generation IUDs is no longer an issue with the current devices. And contrary to a misconception among some ob.gyns., autoimmune disease will not cause a woman to reject her IUD.

The ACR guidelines recommend continuing hydroxychloroquine in lupus patients during pregnancy – and considering starting the drug in those not already on it – because of strong evidence supporting both safety and benefit for mother and baby.

“We are recommending the use of low-dose aspirin for patients with lupus and antiphospholipid antibodies because those two conditions increase the risk for preeclampsia, and the ob.gyns. routinely use low-dose aspirin starting toward the end of the first trimester as preventive therapy. Large studies show that it reduces the risk,” she continued.

Dr. Sammaritano cautioned that the literature on the use of rheumatologic medications in pregnancy and breast feeding is generally weak – and in the case of the new oral small molecule JAK inhibitors, essentially nonexistent.

“A lot of our recommendations are conditional because we did not feel that the data support a strong recommendation. But you have to do something. As long as you communicate the idea that we’re doing the best we can with what information is available, I think patients will respond to that,” the rheumatologist said.

She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her presentation.

bjancin@mdedge.com