Gynecology & Obstetrics (all articles)
RCT: Infrequent Zoledronate Infusions Reduce Vertebral Fractures in Early Postmenopausal Women Without Osteoporosis
18 Jan, 2025 | 16:48h | UTCBackground: Osteoporosis prevention typically targets older, higher-risk populations with significantly reduced bone mineral density (BMD). However, many fragility fractures occur in women who do not meet the traditional diagnostic threshold for osteoporosis (T score ≤ –2.5). This study investigated whether infrequent administration of zoledronate could prevent vertebral fractures in early postmenopausal women (50 to 60 years of age) who have BMD values between normal and osteoporotic ranges.
Objective: To determine if administering intravenous zoledronate once at baseline—and again 5 years later—could reduce the incidence of morphometric vertebral fractures and other fracture types over a 10-year period in early postmenopausal women without osteoporosis.
Methods:
- Design: A 10-year, prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.
- Population: 1054 women (mean age 56.0) within 10 years post-menopause, with lumbar spine or hip T scores <0 but >–2.5, recruited from the electoral roll in Auckland, New Zealand.
- Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive:
- Zoledronate 5 mg at baseline and again at Year 5 (zoledronate–zoledronate)
- Zoledronate 5 mg at baseline and placebo at Year 5 (zoledronate–placebo)
- Placebo infusions at baseline and Year 5 (placebo–placebo)
- Follow-up: 10 years, with repeated BMD and spine X-ray assessments at baseline, Year 5, and Year 10.
- Primary Endpoint: Incidence of new morphometric vertebral fractures, defined by semiquantitative radiographic methods.
- Secondary Endpoints: Fragility fracture, any fracture, major osteoporotic fracture, changes in BMD, and bone-turnover markers.
Results:
- Vertebral Fractures: Over 10 years, 6.3% of participants in the zoledronate–zoledronate group and 6.6% in the zoledronate–placebo group experienced a new morphometric vertebral fracture, versus 11.1% in placebo–placebo. After imputation, the relative risks versus placebo–placebo were 0.56 (95% CI, 0.34–0.92; p=0.04) and 0.59 (95% CI, 0.36–0.97; p=0.08), respectively.
- Other Fractures: The zoledronate–zoledronate group had a 30% reduced risk of any fracture (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.56–0.88), and zoledronate–placebo showed a 23% reduction (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62–0.97), both compared with placebo–placebo.
- Bone Mineral Density: At Year 10, the zoledronate–zoledronate group had sustained BMD gains (~7–9 percentage points above placebo), whereas the zoledronate–placebo group retained a moderate advantage (~5–6 percentage points above placebo).
- Bone-Turnover Markers: Markers remained suppressed in the zoledronate–zoledronate group through Year 10, while in the zoledronate–placebo group, they gradually rose after Year 5 but stayed below baseline levels.
- Safety: Few adverse events were reported. Uveitis or episcleritis after the first infusion occurred in 1.1% of zoledronate recipients. No cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw or atypical femoral fractures were observed.
Conclusions: A single 5-mg dose of zoledronate, with an optional additional dose at five years, reduced the incidence of morphometric vertebral fractures and helped preserve BMD in younger postmenopausal women without osteoporosis. Both zoledronate regimens showed notable fracture-risk reductions and sustained effects on bone turnover.
Implications for Practice: These findings extend the potential role of zoledronate in fracture prevention to younger, early postmenopausal women without osteoporosis. Infrequent infusions are attractive because of their prolonged pharmacologic action and generally favorable safety profile. However, caution is warranted before broadly implementing this strategy for all postmenopausal women, as the data come from a relatively homogenous population and do not address other risk factors or comorbidities. Real-world adherence, healthcare resource allocation, and patient preferences must all be considered. Moreover, further evaluation of cost-effectiveness is essential, especially if expanding use to large populations. Longer follow-up in broader and more diverse groups may reveal less common adverse events that were not detected in this trial. Clinicians should therefore weigh individual risk–benefit profiles and await additional data before making universal recommendations.
Study Strengths and Limitations:
- Strengths: The trial’s 10-year duration, double-blind design, and high retention rate enhance its internal validity. Using radiographic assessments for vertebral fractures adds objectivity and robustness.
- Limitations: The trial predominantly involved healthy, early postmenopausal women of European descent, limiting the applicability of the findings to other ethnicities, older populations, or those with complex comorbidities. Only two zoledronate infusions at a five-year interval were evaluated, leaving the optimal dosing frequency unresolved. Further, while adverse events appeared uncommon here, the sample size and population profile may not adequately capture rare or long-latency adverse outcomes.
Future Research: Larger trials in more diverse demographic and clinical settings are necessary to determine whether infrequent zoledronate can safely and effectively reduce fracture risk across broader patient groups. Studies comparing different dosing schedules, as well as investigations into cost-effectiveness and logistics of administration, would be highly valuable. Longer-term surveillance in real-world cohorts should help clarify the incidence of uncommon adverse events. Ultimately, such additional evidence will guide whether infrequent zoledronate infusions might be integrated into routine practice for fracture prevention in postmenopausal women without osteoporosis.
Reference:
- Bolland MJ, Nisa Z, Mellar A, et al. Fracture Prevention with Infrequent Zoledronate in Women 50 to 60 Years of Age. New England Journal of Medicine. 2025;392:239-248. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2407031
- Chapurlat R. Infrequent Zoledronate — Small Individual Gain, Larger Population Gain. New England Journal of Medicine. 2025;392:281-283. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMe2415376
RCT: Sequential Oral Agents Not Noninferior to Insulin for Gestational Diabetes
8 Jan, 2025 | 11:05h | UTCBackground: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) affects a growing number of pregnant individuals worldwide. While insulin has long been the standard pharmacological treatment, oral glucose-lowering agents (metformin and glyburide) have gained traction.
Objective: This trial investigated whether a sequential oral glucose-lowering regimen—beginning with metformin and adding glyburide as needed—was noninferior to an insulin-based strategy in reducing the risk of infants born large for gestational age (LGA).
Methods: This open-label, randomized, noninferiority trial enrolled 820 participants with singleton pregnancies at 16 to 34 weeks of gestation across 25 Dutch centers. Participants were randomized 1:1 to either (1) metformin initiated at 500 mg once daily and increased every three days up to 1000 mg twice daily or the highest tolerated dose with glyburide at 2.5 mg 30-60 minutes before each meal (with a dose increase up to a maximum of 5 mg three times per day) added if needed, and insulin added only if both failed, discontinuing glyburide, or (2) standard insulin therapy. The primary outcome was LGA (>90th percentile for gestational age and sex).
Results: Among those allocated to oral therapy (n=409), 79% achieved glycemic control without insulin. However, 23.9% of infants in the oral-therapy group were LGA vs 19.9% in the insulin group (absolute risk difference 4.0%; 95% CI, −1.7% to 9.8%). This exceeded the predefined 8% absolute risk difference noninferiority margin (P = .09 for noninferiority). Maternal hypoglycemia occurred more often with oral agents (20.9% vs 10.9%; absolute risk difference, 10.0%; 95% CI, 3.7%-21.2%), and neonatal intravenous glucose therapy was administered more frequently to those randomized to oral agents (6.4% vs 3.2%). Exploratory analysis not powered for definitive conclusions of participants requiring only metformin (no glyburide) showed a somewhat lower LGA rate (19.7%).
Conclusions: A sequential oral pharmacotherapy strategy—beginning with metformin and adding glyburide if needed—did not meet noninferiority criteria compared to insulin for preventing LGA births in GDM. While oral agents can reduce the overall need for insulin, the higher rate of maternal hypoglycemia, the higher rate of neonatal hypoglycemia requiring intravenous glucose therapy, and the borderline higher LGA incidence underscore the continued importance of insulin-based strategies, especially considering that the results support a larger body of evidence that glyburide is a suboptimal treatment for gestational diabetes. These results reinforce that insulin remains the preferred first-line pharmacological treatment for GDM, in line with current guidelines. Although patient satisfaction can be higher with oral agents, clinicians should carefully weigh the risks. Further research is needed to clarify the role of metformin-only approaches in GDM management.
Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include a large multicenter design and a clear noninferiority framework. Limitations include the open-label design, which introduces the possibility of bias in treatment allocation and outcome assessment, the reliance on local clinical protocols for insulin adjustments, and variations in diagnostic criteria.
Future Research: Ongoing trials are examining whether metformin alone might match insulin’s efficacy for GDM. Further studies should address long-term offspring outcomes.
Reference:
Rademaker D, de Wit L, Duijnhoven RG, et al. Oral Glucose-Lowering Agents vs Insulin for Gestational Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. Published online January 6, 2025. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.23410
Powe CE. For Gestational Diabetes Pharmacotherapy, Insulin Reigns Supreme (Editorial). JAMA. Published online January 6, 2025. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.27148
Clinical Overview of Cervical Cancer: Screening, Treatment, and Future Directions
6 Jan, 2025 | 10:00h | UTCIntroduction: This summary provides a concise review of a comprehensive guideline on cervical cancer, covering its epidemiology, risk factors, clinical presentation, and current therapeutic strategies. The aim is to highlight best practices for prevention, screening, and management, as well as emerging treatments that may shift the standard of care.
Key Recommendations:
- Prevention and Screening
- Encourage HPV vaccination before exposure, ideally in adolescence.
- Perform regular screening with a Papanicolaou test, HPV testing, or both, based on national guidelines.
- Use colposcopy and directed biopsies for women with abnormal screening results.
- Early-Stage Disease (FIGO IA to IB2)
- Offer radical hysterectomy plus pelvic lymphadenectomy; ovarian preservation may be considered for endocrine benefits.
- Less radical surgery (simple hysterectomy or conization) is now acceptable for smaller tumors (<2 cm) confirmed by imaging and pathology.
- In selected cases, fertility-sparing radical trachelectomy can be considered, though the SHAPE trial supports more conservative approaches for certain early tumors.
- Locally Advanced Disease (FIGO IB3 to IVA)
- Recommend concurrent chemoradiation therapy (daily external-beam radiotherapy, brachytherapy, and weekly cisplatin).
- Immunotherapy (pembrolizumab) is approved in combination with chemoradiation for FIGO III to IVA disease, demonstrating improved survival.
- Ensure treatment completion within optimal time frames to maximize therapeutic efficacy.
- Pelvic Exenteration
- Consider total pelvic exenteration for isolated central recurrence in patients without distant disease.
- Thorough psychosocial evaluation is critical before proceeding with this extensive procedure.
- Metastatic or Recurrent Disease (First-Line Therapy)
- A platinum-based regimen (cisplatin or carboplatin) combined with paclitaxel, with or without bevacizumab, remains a standard option.
- For PD-L1–positive tumors, adding pembrolizumab has shown a survival advantage.
- Bispecific immunotherapy and novel therapeutic regimens are under investigation to improve outcomes further.
- Second-Line Therapy
- Tissue factor–directed antibody–drug conjugates (e.g., tisotumab vedotin) are effective for patients whose disease progresses after frontline therapy.
- HER2-targeted therapies (e.g., trastuzumab deruxtecan) may benefit individuals with HER2-overexpressing cervical tumors.
- Immune checkpoint inhibitors (cemiplimab, nivolumab) can be used in PD-L1–positive recurrent disease, although prior treatment with pembrolizumab may affect efficacy.
Conclusion: By combining targeted vaccination, robust screening programs, and multidisciplinary treatment strategies, cervical cancer can be dramatically reduced worldwide. Advanced management incorporates state-of-the-art surgical procedures, chemoradiation, immunotherapies, and emerging targeted therapies to extend survival and enhance quality of life. Ongoing research aims to optimize treatment sequencing, define new biomarkers, and advance global eradication efforts.
Reference:
Tewari KS. Cervical Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. (2025). Link: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra2404457
Guideline: Doxycycline Postexposure Prophylaxis to Reduce Bacterial STI Incidence in High-Risk Populations
19 Dec, 2024 | 22:32h | UTCIntroduction: This summary presents key recommendations from the 2024 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines on using doxycycline postexposure prophylaxis (doxyPEP) to prevent bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs), including syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia. Targeting men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender women with at least one bacterial STI in the past 12 months, these guidelines aim to reduce recurrence rates and improve sexual health outcomes through timely prophylactic intervention.
Key Recommendations:
- Offer doxyPEP counseling to MSM and transgender women with a recent bacterial STI history, addressing the benefits, harms, and uncertainties of prophylactic doxycycline use.
- Advise eligible patients to take a single 200 mg dose of doxycycline as soon as possible (ideally within 72 hours) following condomless oral, anal, or vaginal sexual exposure to reduce their subsequent STI risk.
- Reinforce periodic screening (every 3–6 months) for STI markers, including syphilis and HIV serologies, as well as nucleic acid amplification tests for gonorrhea and chlamydia at relevant anatomical sites.
- Integrate doxyPEP into comprehensive sexual health services that include risk-reduction counseling, condom use, recommended immunizations, and linkage to HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) or HIV care, thereby enhancing overall prevention strategies.
- Consider extending doxyPEP to other high-risk groups, including heterosexual individuals with recurrent STIs, guided by clinical judgment and shared decision-making.
- Monitor and address adverse events, particularly gastrointestinal symptoms, and acknowledge the potential for antimicrobial resistance. Continued vigilance is warranted given the risk of resistance in commensal flora and key STI pathogens, such as Neisseria gonorrhoeae.
- Assess social and ethical dimensions of doxyPEP implementation, ensuring equitable access and minimizing potential harms, including stigma or intimate partner violence related to prophylaxis disclosure.
Conclusion: Implementing doxyPEP for MSM and transgender women who have experienced a recent bacterial STI can substantially lower the incidence of recurrent infections. By combining prophylactic doxycycline with routine surveillance, comprehensive preventive services, and careful consideration of resistance patterns, clinicians may enhance patient care and strengthen STI control efforts. Further investigation is needed to establish efficacy in cisgender women, transgender men, nonbinary persons, and other populations at risk. Longer-term, population-based studies focused on antimicrobial resistance and community-level effects will help guide sustainable and equitable use of this prevention strategy.
Noninferiority RCT: Omitting Sentinel-Lymph-Node Biopsy Maintains 5-Year Invasive Disease–Free Survival in Early-Stage Breast Cancer
13 Dec, 2024 | 15:15h | UTCBackground: While axillary surgical staging using sentinel-lymph-node biopsy has been a mainstay in early-stage breast cancer management, its necessity in clinically node-negative patients undergoing breast-conserving therapy has been called into question. With tumor biology increasingly guiding treatment decisions, reducing surgical interventions without compromising survival is a major goal.
Objective: To determine whether omitting sentinel-lymph-node biopsy in patients with clinically node-negative, T1 or T2 (≤5 cm) invasive breast cancer undergoing breast-conserving surgery is noninferior to performing sentinel-lymph-node biopsy in terms of 5-year invasive disease–free survival.
Methods: In this prospective, randomized, noninferiority trial, 5502 eligible patients were randomized in a 1:4 ratio to omission of axillary surgery versus sentinel-lymph-node biopsy. The per-protocol population included 4858 patients. All patients received whole-breast irradiation. Invasive disease–free survival, defined as time to any invasive disease event or death, was the primary endpoint. Noninferiority required a 5-year invasive disease–free survival rate ≥85% and a hazard ratio upper limit <1.271.
Results: After a median follow-up of 73.6 months, the 5-year invasive disease–free survival was 91.9% (95% CI, 89.9–93.5) in the omission group and 91.7% (95% CI, 90.8–92.6) in the sentinel-biopsy group (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.73–1.14), meeting noninferiority criteria. Axillary recurrences were slightly higher in the omission group (1.0% vs. 0.3%), though without detrimental effects on overall survival. Patients who omitted axillary surgery experienced lower rates of lymphedema, better arm mobility, and less pain than those undergoing sentinel-lymph-node biopsy.
Conclusions: For appropriately selected patients with clinically node-negative, early-stage breast cancer undergoing breast-conserving surgery, omitting sentinel-lymph-node biopsy did not compromise 5-year invasive disease–free survival and yielded fewer surgical complications and better quality of life outcomes.
Implications for Practice: Omitting axillary staging may be considered in low-risk patients, particularly older individuals with small, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative tumors. However, clinicians should balance the lack of nodal information against potential alterations in adjuvant therapy decisions, especially regarding radiotherapy and systemic treatment recommendations.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include a large patient population, rigorous prospective randomization, and substantial follow-up. Limitations include a predominance of low-risk, small, HR-positive/HER2-negative tumors, potentially limiting generalizability. While omitting sentinel-lymph-node biopsy reduces surgical morbidity, the absence of nodal status may influence adjuvant treatment planning.
Future Research: Further studies should assess the applicability of omission strategies to younger patients, larger tumors, or more aggressive subtypes, and explore whether novel biomarkers or imaging methods can reliably guide treatment decisions without axillary surgery.
Cohort Study: Oral Hormone Therapy and Tibolone Increase Cardiovascular Risk in Menopausal Women
28 Nov, 2024 | 18:42h | UTCBackground: Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality worldwide, with incidence in women increasing notably during the menopausal transition. Menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) effectively alleviates menopausal symptoms but has been associated with cardiovascular risks in previous studies. The impact of contemporary MHT formulations and administration routes on cardiovascular disease risk in women aged 50–58 remains unclear.
Objective: To assess the effect of different types of contemporary MHT on the risk of cardiovascular disease, focusing on various hormone combinations and administration methods.
Methods: This nationwide register-based emulated target trial included 919,614 Swedish women aged 50–58 years between 2007 and 2020 who had not used MHT in the previous two years. Participants were assigned to one of eight treatment groups—including oral and transdermal therapies—or to a non-initiator group. The primary outcomes were hazard ratios (HRs) for venous thromboembolism (VTE), ischemic heart disease (IHD), cerebral infarction, and myocardial infarction, analyzed separately and as a composite cardiovascular disease outcome.
Results: Among the participants, 77,512 were MHT initiators and 842,102 were non-initiators. During follow-up, 24,089 cardiovascular events occurred. In intention-to-treat analyses, tibolone was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.08) compared with non-initiators. Initiation of tibolone or oral estrogen-progestin therapy was linked to a higher risk of IHD (HRs 1.46 and 1.21, respectively). A higher risk of VTE was observed with oral continuous estrogen-progestin therapy (HR 1.61), sequential therapy (HR 2.00), and estrogen-only therapy (HR 1.57). Per protocol analyses showed that tibolone use was associated with increased risks of cerebral infarction (HR 1.97) and myocardial infarction (HR 1.94).
Conclusions: Use of oral estrogen-progestin therapy was associated with increased risks of IHD and VTE, while tibolone was linked to higher risks of IHD, cerebral infarction, and myocardial infarction but not VTE. These findings underscore the varying cardiovascular risks associated with different MHT types and administration methods.
Implications for Practice: Clinicians should exercise caution when prescribing oral estrogen-progestin therapy or tibolone for menopausal symptom relief, considering the elevated cardiovascular risks. Alternative MHT options, such as transdermal therapies, may offer a safer profile and should be considered.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the large, nationwide cohort and the emulated target trial design, which reduces selection bias and confounding. Limitations involve the lack of data on menopausal status, smoking, and body mass index, which may affect cardiovascular risk. Potential misclassification of exposure and adherence could also impact results.
Future Research: Further studies should investigate the cardiovascular effects of specific progestins within MHT formulations and explore the impact of different doses and durations of therapy.
RCT: Twice-Yearly Lenacapavir Reduces HIV Incidence in Men and Gender-Diverse Persons Background
28 Nov, 2024 | 12:38h | UTCBackground: Although preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) effectively reduces HIV transmission, adherence to daily oral regimens is suboptimal among high-risk populations. Lenacapavir, a long-acting HIV-1 capsid inhibitor administered subcutaneously every six months, has shown efficacy in cisgender women, but its efficacy in men and gender-diverse individuals remains unclear.
Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of twice-yearly subcutaneous lenacapavir compared to background HIV incidence and daily oral emtricitabine–tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (F/TDF) in preventing HIV infection among men and gender-diverse persons.
Methods: In this phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial, 3,271 HIV-negative participants were assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive subcutaneous lenacapavir every 26 weeks or daily oral F/TDF, with matching placebos. Participants were cisgender men, transgender women and men, and gender-nonbinary persons aged 16 or older who have sex with male-assigned partners. The primary endpoint compared HIV incidence in the lenacapavir group to background incidence; secondary analysis compared lenacapavir to F/TDF.
Results: In the modified intention-to-treat analysis (n=3,265), HIV infections occurred in 2 participants in the lenacapavir group (0.10 per 100 person-years) and 9 in the F/TDF group (0.93 per 100 person-years). The background HIV incidence was 2.37 per 100 person-years. Lenacapavir significantly reduced HIV incidence compared to background (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.04; 95% CI, 0.01–0.18; P<0.001) and F/TDF (IRR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02–0.51; P=0.002). No significant safety concerns emerged. Injection-site reactions led to discontinuation in 1.2% of lenacapavir recipients and 0.3% of F/TDF recipients.
Conclusions: Twice-yearly subcutaneous lenacapavir significantly reduced HIV incidence compared to both the background incidence and daily oral F/TDF among men and gender-diverse persons. These findings support lenacapavir as an effective PrEP option in this population.
Implications for Practice: The introduction of a long-acting, twice-yearly injectable PrEP option like lenacapavir could improve adherence and uptake among populations challenged by daily oral regimens.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include a large, diverse participant population with significant representation of transgender and gender-nonbinary persons, and the use of an active comparator. The novel counterfactual design estimating background HIV incidence avoided ethical issues of placebo controls but may have limitations in accuracy. Limitations include a relatively short follow-up and potential impact of injection-site reactions on adherence. The emergence of resistance mutations in participants who acquired HIV while on lenacapavir is a concern needing further investigation.
Future Research: Further studies should assess the long-term safety, efficacy, and resistance patterns associated with lenacapavir use. Research into optimizing injection techniques to minimize injection-site reactions and exploring lenacapavir’s applicability in other at-risk populations is recommended.
RCT: Fezolinetant Reduces Vasomotor Symptoms in Menopausal Individuals Unfit for Hormone Therapy
24 Nov, 2024 | 19:29h | UTCBackground: Vasomotor symptoms (VMS), including hot flushes and night sweats, are prevalent and often debilitating during menopause. Hormone therapy (HT) is effective but contraindicated or unsuitable for many due to medical conditions or personal choice, creating a need for safe, non-hormonal treatments.
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of fezolinetant, a non-hormonal neurokinin 3 receptor antagonist, in treating moderate to severe VMS in menopausal individuals unsuitable for HT.
Methods: This phase 3b, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted across 16 countries. A total of 453 individuals aged 40-65 years with moderate to severe VMS unsuitable for HT were randomized 1:1 to receive fezolinetant 45 mg once daily or placebo for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was the mean change in daily frequency of moderate to severe VMS from baseline to week 24. Secondary endpoints included changes in VMS severity, sleep disturbance, and safety evaluations.
Results: Of the 452 participants who received at least one dose of the study drug (fezolinetant n=226, placebo n=226), 370 (81.7%) completed the study. The mean age was 54.5 years, and most participants were white (96.7%) and categorized as either HT averse or requiring caution with HT. At week 24, fezolinetant significantly reduced the frequency of VMS compared with placebo (least squares mean difference [LSMD] –1.93 episodes/day; 95% CI –2.64 to –1.22; P<0.001). It also significantly reduced VMS severity (LSMD –0.39; 95% CI –0.57 to –0.21; P<0.001) and improved sleep disturbance scores (LSMD –2.5; 95% CI –3.9 to –1.1; P<0.001). Improvements were observed as early as week 1 and sustained throughout the study. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was similar between the fezolinetant and placebo groups (65.0% vs. 61.1%, respectively). No significant safety concerns, including liver toxicity, were identified.
Conclusions: Fezolinetant was effective and well-tolerated over 24 weeks in reducing moderate to severe VMS in menopausal individuals unsuitable for HT.
Implications for Practice: Fezolinetant offers a promising alternative for managing VMS in individuals who cannot or choose not to use HT. Clinicians should consider this option but remain cautious due to limited long-term safety data. Individual patient preferences, risk factors, and the novelty of the medication should be weighed in clinical decision-making.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the large sample size and extended placebo-controlled duration. Limitations involve the predominantly white study population, potentially limiting generalizability to more diverse groups. The exclusion of individuals over 65 years old and the lack of direct comparison with other non-hormonal treatments also constrain the applicability of the findings.
Future Research: Further studies are needed to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of fezolinetant, particularly in diverse populations and older individuals.
Cohort Study: High Rate of Preventable Adverse Events in Surgical Inpatients
16 Nov, 2024 | 17:29h | UTCBackground: Adverse events during hospital admissions, particularly in surgical settings, remain a significant cause of patient harm despite efforts to improve patient safety since the “To Err is Human” report. Advances in surgical techniques and patient care necessitate an updated assessment of the current state of perioperative safety.
Objective: To estimate the frequency, severity, and preventability of adverse events associated with perioperative care in surgical inpatients and to identify the settings and healthcare professionals involved.
Methods: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted across 11 US hospitals in Massachusetts. A weighted random sample of 1,009 patients was selected from 64,121 adults admitted for surgery in 2018. Trained nurses reviewed electronic health records to identify adverse events, which were then adjudicated by physicians. Adverse events were classified by type, severity, preventability, setting, and professions involved.
Results: Adverse events occurred in 38.0% of patients (95% CI, 32.6–43.4%), with major adverse events in 15.9% (12.7–19.0%). Among 593 adverse events identified, 59.5% were potentially preventable, and 20.7% were definitely or probably preventable. The most common events were surgery-related (49.3%), adverse drug events (26.6%), healthcare-associated infections (12.4%), and patient care events (11.2%). Adverse events most frequently occurred in general care units (48.8%) and involved attending physicians (89.5%) and nurses (58.9%).
Conclusions: More than one-third of surgical inpatients experienced adverse events, with nearly half classified as major and most potentially preventable. These findings highlight the critical need for ongoing improvement in patient safety throughout perioperative care involving all healthcare professionals.
Implications for Practice: Healthcare providers should enhance patient safety protocols across all perioperative settings, not just in operating rooms. Emphasis should be placed on preventing surgery-related complications, adverse drug events, and healthcare-associated infections by fostering teamwork and continuous monitoring.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include a comprehensive review of medical records and systematic classification of adverse events by trained professionals. Limitations involve the study’s confinement to Massachusetts hospitals in 2018, potential variability in documentation practices, and limited sample size affecting generalizability and specialty-specific estimates.
Future Research: Further studies are needed to assess adverse event rates in diverse geographic locations and healthcare systems, explore effective interventions to reduce preventable harm, and evaluate long-term trends in surgical patient safety.
Guideline: Management of Urinary Tract Infections in Pediatrics and Adults
5 Nov, 2024 | 18:59h | UTCIntroduction: Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are among the most common infections worldwide, significantly impacting patient quality of life and imposing substantial clinical and economic burdens. Despite advancements in diagnosis and treatment, UTIs continue to cause high morbidity and mortality, ranging from simple cystitis to life-threatening sepsis. Addressing the discrepancy between evidence quality and recommendation strength in existing guidelines, the WikiGuidelines Group has developed a consensus statement. This guideline aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for the prevention, diagnosis, and management of UTIs across diverse clinical settings.
Key Recommendations:
- Cranberry Products:
- Recommendation: Cranberry juice or supplements are recommended for preventing symptomatic, culture-verified UTIs in women with recurrent UTIs, children, and individuals susceptible after interventions.
- Quality of Evidence: Moderate
- Recommendation Strength: Strong
- Methenamine Hippurate:
- Recommendation: Methenamine hippurate is recommended as an alternative to prophylactic antibiotics for preventing recurrent UTIs in patients with intact bladder anatomy.
- Quality of Evidence: Moderate
- Recommendation Strength: Strong
- Topical Estrogen:
- Recommendation: Vaginal estrogen therapy is recommended for postmenopausal women to reduce recurrent UTIs by restoring the vaginal microbiome.
- Quality of Evidence: High
- Recommendation Strength: Strong
- Empirical Treatment Regimens:
- Recommendation: For uncomplicated cystitis, nitrofurantoin is recommended as a first-line agent. For pyelonephritis, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole or a first-generation cephalosporin are reasonable first-line agents, depending on local resistance rates.
- Quality of Evidence: Moderate
- Recommendation Strength: Strong
- Treatment Duration for Acute Cystitis in Adults:
- Recommendation:
- Nitrofurantoin: 5 days
- Trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole: 3 days
- Oral fosfomycin: Single dose
- Quality of Evidence: High
- Recommendation Strength: Strong
- Recommendation:
- Treatment Duration for Acute Pyelonephritis in Adults:
- Recommendation:
- Fluoroquinolones: 5–7 days
- Dose-optimized β-lactams: 7 days
- Quality of Evidence: High
- Recommendation Strength: Strong
- Recommendation:
- Antimicrobial Stewardship:
- Recommendation: De-escalation of antibiotics and the use of mostly or all oral treatment regimens are recommended to optimize antimicrobial use and reduce adverse effects.
- Quality of Evidence: High
- Recommendation Strength: Strong
Conclusion: The consensus highlights a significant lack of high-quality prospective data in many areas related to UTIs, limiting the ability to provide clear recommendations. Implementing these evidence-based guidelines can enhance patient care by promoting effective prevention strategies, accurate diagnosis based on clinical symptoms, appropriate treatment durations, and robust antimicrobial stewardship. This approach is expected to improve clinical outcomes, reduce antimicrobial resistance, and preserve the effectiveness of current treatments.
Cohort Study: Levonorgestrel IUD Use Linked to Increased Breast Cancer Risk in Premenopausal Women
20 Oct, 2024 | 18:13h | UTCBackground: Levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systems (LNG-IUSs) are increasingly used, especially among Danish premenopausal women over 30 years old, as a preferred method of hormonal contraception. Previous studies have suggested an increased risk of breast cancer with LNG-IUS use but did not adequately address the duration of continuous use or account for other hormonal contraceptive exposures.
Objective: To assess the risk of breast cancer associated with continuous use of LNG-IUSs, accounting for other hormonal exposures.
Methods: In this nationwide Danish cohort study, 78,595 first-time LNG-IUS users aged 15–49 years from 2000 to 2019 were identified and matched 1:1 by birth year to nonusers of hormonal contraceptives. Exclusion criteria included prior hormonal contraceptive use within 5 years, previous cancer, postmenopausal hormone therapy, and pregnancy at baseline. Participants were followed from initiation until breast cancer diagnosis, other cancer, pregnancy, hormone therapy initiation, emigration, death, or December 31, 2022. Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for confounders estimated hazard ratios (HRs) for breast cancer associated with continuous LNG-IUS use.
Results: During a mean follow-up of 6.8 years, 1,617 breast cancer cases occurred: 720 among LNG-IUS users and 897 among nonusers. The mean age was 38 years. Continuous LNG-IUS use was associated with a higher breast cancer risk compared to nonuse (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2–1.5). HRs by duration were 1.3 (95% CI, 1.1–1.5) for 0–5 years, 1.4 (95% CI, 1.1–1.7) for >5–10 years, and 1.8 (95% CI, 1.2–2.6) for >10–15 years. Excess breast cancer cases per 10,000 users were 14 (95% CI, 6–23), 29 (95% CI, 9–50), and 71 (95% CI, 15–127), respectively. The trend test for duration was not statistically significant (P = .15).
Conclusions: Continuous use of LNG-IUSs was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer among women aged 15–49 years compared to nonuse of hormonal contraceptives. The absolute increase in risk was low.
Implications for Practice: Healthcare providers should inform women about the potential increased breast cancer risk associated with LNG-IUS use, especially considering its widespread and long-term use among premenopausal women. While the absolute risk increase is small, this information is essential for making informed contraceptive choices.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the large, nationwide cohort and adjustment for multiple confounders. Limitations include potential underestimation of risk due to unrecorded LNG-IUS removals before the recommended duration, lack of a statistically significant trend with duration suggesting possible low statistical precision or non-causal association, and the possibility of unmeasured confounding.
Future Research: Further studies are needed to confirm these findings, clarify the causal relationship, and understand the mechanisms underlying the potential increased breast cancer risk with LNG-IUS use.
Summary: Perioperative Management of Patients Taking Direct Oral Anticoagulants
19 Sep, 2024 | 21:12h | UTCDirect oral anticoagulants (DOACs)—including apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban, and dabigatran—are increasingly used for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation and for treating venous thromboembolism. Effective perioperative management of DOACs is essential to minimize bleeding and thromboembolic risks during surgical and nonsurgical procedures. Below are practical recommendations focused on the perioperative management of patients taking DOACs, based on a recent JAMA review article.
Elective Surgical or Nonsurgical Procedures
Classify Bleeding Risk of Procedures:
- Minimal Risk:
- Minor dental procedures (e.g., cleaning, extractions)
- Minor dermatologic procedures (e.g., skin lesion removal)
- Cataract surgery
- Low to Moderate Risk:
- Endoscopic procedures without high-risk interventions
- Cholecystectomy
- Inguinal hernia repair
- High Risk:
- Major surgery (e.g., cancer surgery, joint replacement)
- Procedures involving neuraxial anesthesia
- Endoscopic procedures with high-risk interventions (e.g., large polyp removal)
DOAC Management Strategies:
- Minimal Bleeding Risk Procedures:
- Option 1: Continue DOACs without interruption.
- Option 2: For added safety, withhold the morning dose on the day of the procedure (especially for twice-daily DOACs like apixaban and dabigatran).
- Low to Moderate Bleeding Risk Procedures:
- Preoperative:
- Discontinue DOACs 1 day before the procedure.
- This allows approximately 2 half-lives for drug clearance.
- Postoperative:
- Resume DOACs 1 day after the procedure, ensuring adequate hemostasis.
- Preoperative:
- High Bleeding Risk Procedures:
- Preoperative:
- Discontinue DOACs 2 days before the procedure.
- This allows approximately 4-5 half-lives for drug clearance.
- Postoperative:
- Resume DOACs 2-3 days after the procedure, based on bleeding risk and hemostasis.
- Preoperative:
Evidence Supporting These Strategies:
- The PAUSE study demonstrated that standardized interruption protocols without heparin bridging result in low rates of:
- Thromboembolism: 0.2%–0.4%
- Major Bleeding: 1%–2%
Postoperative DOAC Resumption:
- Assess surgical-site hemostasis before resuming DOACs.
- Delay resumption if there is ongoing bleeding or concerns about hemostasis.
- For high bleeding risk procedures, consider a longer delay (2–3 days).
Perioperative Heparin Bridging:
- Not recommended for patients on DOACs.
- Bridging increases bleeding risk without reducing thromboembolism.
- DOACs have rapid offset and onset, making bridging unnecessary.
Special Considerations
Patients with Impaired Renal Function:
- For CrCl 30–50 mL/min:
- Dabigatran: Extend preoperative discontinuation by an additional day.
- For CrCl <30 mL/min:
- Dabigatran is contraindicated.
- For other DOACs, consider extending discontinuation to 3–4 days before surgery.
Patients Undergoing Neuraxial Anesthesia:
- Discontinue DOACs for 3 days (apixaban, edoxaban, rivaroxaban) or 4 days (dabigatran) before the procedure.
- Minimizes risk of spinal or epidural hematoma.
Dental Procedures:
- Generally safe to continue DOACs.
- For added safety:
- Omit or delay the dose on the day of the procedure.
- Employ local hemostatic measures (e.g., tranexamic acid mouthwash).
Endoscopic Procedures:
- Low-risk procedures (e.g., diagnostic endoscopy without biopsy):
- Follow standard DOAC interruption for low to moderate bleeding risk.
- High-risk procedures (e.g., polypectomy of large polyps):
- Extend DOAC discontinuation by an additional day pre- and post-procedure.
Patients Unable to Resume Oral Medications Postoperatively:
- Use prophylactic low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) until oral intake is possible.
- Avoid therapeutic-dose LMWH due to bleeding risk.
Emergent, Urgent, or Semiurgent Procedures
Risks:
- Higher bleeding risk: Up to 23%
- Thromboembolism risk: Up to 11%
Management Strategies:
- Assess Time Since Last DOAC Dose:
- If within 48 hours, consider that significant anticoagulant effect may persist.
- Laboratory Testing (if available):
- DOAC Level Testing:
- ≥50 ng/mL: Consider using reversal agents.
- <50 ng/mL: May proceed without reversal agents.
- DOAC Level Testing:
- Use of Reversal Agents:
- For Dabigatran:
- Idarucizumab (5 g IV)
- For Factor Xa Inhibitors (apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban):
- Andexanet alfa (dosing based on last dose timing and amount)
- Prothrombin Complex Concentrates (PCCs): If andexanet alfa is unavailable or contraindicated.
- For Dabigatran:
- Proceeding Without Testing:
- If testing is unavailable and last DOAC dose was within 48 hours, consider reversal agents.
- If >48 hours since last dose, may proceed without reversal.
Considerations:
- Reversal agents are expensive and may carry thrombotic risks.
- Use should be judicious, weighing risks and benefits.
- Consult hematology or thrombosis experts when possible.
Key Takeaways
- Elective Procedures:
- Utilize standardized protocols based on procedural bleeding risk.
- Routine preoperative DOAC level testing is unnecessary.
- Avoid heparin bridging.
- Emergent/Urgent Procedures:
- Reversal agents may be appropriate when significant DOAC levels are present.
- Decision to use reversal agents should consider bleeding risk, time since last dose, and availability of DOAC level testing.
- Patient Communication:
- Ensure patients understand the plan for DOAC interruption and resumption.
- Provide clear instructions regarding timing and dosing.
- Interdisciplinary Coordination:
- Collaborate with surgical teams, anesthesiologists, and pharmacists.
- Use electronic medical records and clinical decision support tools to enhance communication.
Conclusion
By applying standardized perioperative management protocols, clinicians can effectively balance the risks of bleeding and thromboembolism in patients taking DOACs who require surgical or nonsurgical procedures. These strategies simplify decision-making, avoid unnecessary interventions like heparin bridging, and promote patient safety.
RCT: Pembrolizumab Plus Chemotherapy Improved Overall Survival in Early-Stage Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
18 Sep, 2024 | 16:08h | UTCBackground: Early-stage triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is an aggressive subtype with limited treatment options and poor prognosis. The phase 3 KEYNOTE-522 trial previously demonstrated that adding pembrolizumab to chemotherapy improved pathological complete response rates and event-free survival in this population.
Objective: To determine whether neoadjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab improves overall survival compared to neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone in patients with early-stage TNBC.
Methods: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial (KEYNOTE-522), 1174 patients with previously untreated stage II or III TNBC were randomized 2:1 to receive neoadjuvant pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks) plus chemotherapy (paclitaxel and carboplatin, followed by doxorubicin–cyclophosphamide or epirubicin–cyclophosphamide) or placebo plus the same chemotherapy regimen. After surgery, patients received adjuvant pembrolizumab or placebo every 3 weeks for up to nine cycles. The primary endpoints were pathological complete response and event-free survival; overall survival was a key secondary endpoint.
Results: After a median follow-up of 75.1 months, the estimated 5-year overall survival was 86.6% in the pembrolizumab–chemotherapy group versus 81.7% in the placebo–chemotherapy group (hazard ratio for death, 0.66; P=0.002). The 5-year event-free survival was 81.2% versus 72.2%, respectively (hazard ratio for event or death, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.51–0.83). Grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events occurred in 77.1% of patients receiving pembrolizumab–chemotherapy and 73.3% receiving placebo–chemotherapy. Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 34.1% and 20.1% of patients, respectively.
Conclusions: Neoadjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab significantly improved overall survival compared to chemotherapy alone in patients with early-stage TNBC.
Implications for Practice: The addition of pembrolizumab to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy, followed by adjuvant pembrolizumab, should be considered a new standard of care for patients with high-risk, early-stage TNBC, offering a significant survival benefit.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the large, international, randomized design, the use of a placebo control, and long-term follow-up. Limitations include the inability to isolate the effects of neoadjuvant versus adjuvant pembrolizumab and the exclusion of adjuvant capecitabine from the treatment protocol.
Future Research: Further studies should focus on identifying biomarkers predictive of response to pembrolizumab, optimizing the sequencing and duration of immunotherapy, and evaluating the addition of other agents to improve outcomes in early-stage TNBC.
Meta-Analysis: Moderate Hypofractionation Improves Safety and Cosmesis Over Conventional Fractionation in Breast Cancer Radiotherapy
17 Sep, 2024 | 11:14h | UTCBackground:
Breast cancer remains the most prevalent malignancy among women worldwide, with postoperative radiation therapy playing a crucial role in reducing locoregional recurrence and improving survival outcomes. Conventional fractionation (CF), involving a total dose of approximately 50 Gy delivered over five to six weeks in daily fractions of 1.8–2 Gy, has been the historical standard. In recent years, hypofractionated regimens—including moderate hypofractionation (MHF) and ultra-hypofractionation (UHF)—have emerged as alternatives that offer shorter treatment durations. Despite evidence supporting hypofractionation, its adoption varies due to concerns about potential side effects, cosmetic outcomes, and the limited long-term data on UHF.
Objective:
To provide a comprehensive assessment of various radiation dose fractionation schemes—CF, MHF, and UHF—in breast cancer, focusing on side effects, cosmesis, quality of life, recurrence risks, and survival outcomes.
Methods:
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted by searching Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to 23 October 2023. Randomized controlled trials comparing CF (daily fractions of 1.8–2 Gy over 5–6 weeks), MHF (fractions of 2.65–3.3 Gy over 3–5 weeks), and UHF (five fractions) were included. Two independent investigators screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool and the GRADE approach. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. A network meta-analysis integrated all available evidence.
Results:
From 1,754 studies, 35 trials encompassing 20,237 patients were included. Compared with CF, MHF significantly reduced the risk of grade ≥2 acute radiation dermatitis:
- All patients: RR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.51–0.69; P<0.001.
- Breast-Conserving Therapy: RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.49–0.61; P<0.001.
- Post-Mastectomy: RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.49–0.93; P=0.02.
MHF also showed lower incidences of:
- Hyperpigmentation: RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62–0.95; P=0.02.
- Grade ≥2 Breast Shrinkage: RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.85–0.99; P=0.03.
MHF was associated with improved cosmesis and quality of life compared to CF. Survival and recurrence outcomes were similar across UHF, MHF, and CF regimens. While UHF demonstrated comparable safety and efficacy profiles, data were less conclusive due to fewer trials and shorter follow-up periods.
Conclusions:
Moderate hypofractionation improves safety profiles, cosmetic outcomes, and quality of life compared with conventional fractionation while maintaining equivalent oncological efficacy. Ultra-hypofractionation shows promise with similar short-term safety and effectiveness but requires further research for definitive conclusions.
Implications for Practice:
- Preferred Regimen: MHF should be considered the preferred radiation therapy regimen for breast cancer patients due to reduced side effects, improved cosmesis, shorter treatment duration, and maintained oncological outcomes.
- Ultra-Hypofractionation Potential: UHF offers advantages of further reduced treatment times and patient convenience but requires additional long-term data before widespread adoption.
- Resource Utilization: Adoption of hypofractionated regimens can improve healthcare resource utilization and enhance patient quality of life.
Study Strengths and Limitations:
Strengths include a comprehensive assessment of both clinical and patient-centered outcomes across a large number of randomized controlled trials, providing a multidimensional perspective crucial for informed clinical decision-making.
Limitations involve potential risk of bias due to lack of blinding in some studies, variability in outcome reporting across trials, and limited long-term data on UHF regimens.
Future Research:
Further studies are needed to solidify the evidence base for UHF, particularly regarding long-term safety and efficacy. Research should focus on optimizing fractionation regimens tailored to patient-specific factors, such as breast size and smoking status, to enhance outcomes.
Reference:
Cohort Study: Prenatal Exposure to Buprenorphine with Naloxone Appears Safe and More Effective than Buprenorphine Alone for Neonates and Mothers – JAMA
18 Aug, 2024 | 18:06h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This population-based cohort study used healthcare data from Medicaid-insured pregnancies in the US between 2000 and 2018. The study included 8,695 pregnant individuals linked to their liveborn infants. Participants were exposed to either buprenorphine combined with naloxone or buprenorphine alone during the first trimester.
Main Findings: The study found that prenatal exposure to buprenorphine with naloxone was associated with a lower risk of neonatal abstinence syndrome (37.4% vs 55.8%) and modest reductions in neonatal intensive care unit admission (30.6% vs 34.9%) and small for gestational age (10.0% vs 12.4%) compared to buprenorphine alone. No significant differences were observed for congenital malformations, low birth weight, preterm birth, respiratory symptoms, or cesarean delivery.
Implications for Practice: These findings suggest that buprenorphine combined with naloxone is a safe and potentially preferable option for treating opioid use disorder during pregnancy, providing more flexibility in treatment choices for pregnant individuals.
CDC Updates Contraceptive Guidelines for 2024 – Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
18 Aug, 2024 | 13:51h | UTCIntroduction: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has released updated recommendations in the “U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2024” and “U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2024.” These guidelines provide healthcare providers with the latest evidence-based recommendations to support patient-centered contraceptive care, aiming to remove unnecessary barriers and ensure equitable access to contraception.
Key Points:
1 – Intrauterine Device (IUD) Placement:
– Routine use of misoprostol is not recommended for IUD placement, except in selected cases. Lidocaine (topical or paracervical block) is newly recommended to reduce patient pain during IUD placement.
2 – Bleeding Irregularities with Implants:
– Hormonal treatments and antifibrinolytic agents may improve bleeding irregularities associated with implant use, although bleeding often recurs after stopping treatment. NSAIDs and selective estrogen-receptor modulators may also be effective, with benefits persisting post-treatment.
3 – Testosterone Use and Pregnancy Risk:
– Testosterone therapy may not prevent pregnancy in transgender, gender-diverse, and nonbinary individuals with a uterus. Contraceptive counseling and services should be offered to those at risk of pregnancy who do not desire it.
4 – Self-Administration of Injectable Contraceptives:
– Subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA-SC) should be available for self-administration, providing an additional option for those seeking injectable contraception.
5 – Updates in Medical Eligibility Criteria:
– The 2024 guidelines include revised recommendations for patients with chronic kidney disease, updates for those who are breastfeeding, postpartum, or post-abortion, and considerations for individuals with obesity, cardiovascular conditions, and other comorbidities.
6 – Patient-Centered Counseling:
– The guidelines emphasize the importance of providing contraceptive care in a noncoercive manner, supporting the individual’s values, goals, and reproductive autonomy. Healthcare providers are encouraged to recognize and address structural inequities and avoid discrimination in contraceptive counseling.
Conclusion: These updated guidelines from the CDC are designed to support healthcare providers in delivering equitable, patient-centered contraceptive care. By removing unnecessary barriers and providing clear guidance on managing complex contraceptive issues, the recommendations aim to improve access to contraception and support informed, autonomous decision-making among patients.
Guideline Reference: Curtis, K. M., Nguyen, A. T., Tepper, N. K., et al. (2024). U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2024. MMWR Recommendations and Reports, 73(3).
Meta-analysis: SSRIs Significantly Reduce Symptoms but Increase Adverse Events in Premenstrual Syndrome – Cochrane Database Syst Rev
17 Aug, 2024 | 16:04h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This systematic review and meta-analysis included 34 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 4,563 women diagnosed with premenstrual syndrome (PMS) or premenstrual dysphoric disorder (PMDD). The studies primarily focused on evaluating the efficacy and safety of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) compared to placebo. The trials involved a diverse population, predominantly from Western countries, with participants aged between 18 and 49 years.
Main Findings: SSRIs likely reduce overall self-rated premenstrual symptoms in women with PMS and PMDD, with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of -0.57 (95% CI: -0.72 to -0.42). Continuous SSRI administration was more effective than luteal phase administration (SMD -0.69 vs. -0.39). However, SSRIs were associated with a higher risk of adverse events, including nausea (OR 3.30), insomnia (OR 1.99), sexual dysfunction (OR 2.32), and fatigue (OR 1.52).
Implications for Practice: SSRIs are an effective treatment option for reducing premenstrual symptoms in women with PMS and PMDD, particularly when administered continuously. However, the increased risk of adverse events must be carefully considered, and patients should be monitored closely. Further research is necessary to confirm these findings and explore long-term safety.
Systematic Review: Uncertain Impact of Vitamin D Supplementation During Pregnancy on Key Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes – Cochrane Database Syst Rev
11 Aug, 2024 | 12:42h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This Cochrane systematic review evaluates the effects of vitamin D supplementation alone or in combination with calcium and other vitamins/minerals during pregnancy. The analysis included 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a total of 2,313 pregnant women. The review excluded 20 studies from previous versions due to trustworthiness concerns and incorporated one new study.
Main Findings: The evidence regarding vitamin D supplementation alone was very uncertain for its impact on pre-eclampsia, gestational diabetes, preterm birth, and nephritic syndrome. There is low-certainty evidence suggesting that vitamin D may reduce the risk of severe postpartum hemorrhage and low birthweight, though the possibility of increased risk cannot be excluded. Supplementation with vitamin D plus calcium showed very uncertain effects on preterm birth and low birthweight, with no conclusive data on pre-eclampsia, gestational diabetes, or maternal adverse events. The combination of vitamin D, calcium, and other vitamins/minerals also yielded very uncertain evidence for all outcomes examined.
Implications for Practice: The current evidence does not provide strong support for routine vitamin D supplementation during pregnancy due to the low and very uncertain evidence on key outcomes. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to better understand the effects, particularly concerning maternal adverse events and neonatal health.
Cohort Studies: Metformin During Early Pregnancy or Spermatogenesis is Safe Regarding Congenital Malformation Risks – Ann Intern Med
10 Aug, 2024 | 20:05h | UTCStudy Design and Population: Two observational cohort studies assessed the safety of metformin, focusing on early pregnancy and paternal use during spermatogenesis. The first study involved 12,489 pregnant women with pregestational type 2 diabetes, comparing those on insulin monotherapy to those on insulin plus metformin. The second study analyzed 383,851 live births in Israel, examining the impact of paternal metformin use during spermatogenesis on congenital malformations in newborns.
Main Findings: The first study found no significant increase in the risk of nonlive births when continuing metformin in early pregnancy compared to switching to insulin monotherapy. The risk of congenital malformations was also comparable between the two groups. The second study showed that paternal metformin use in monotherapy did not raise the risk of major congenital malformations, though a slight risk increase was observed with metformin in polytherapy, potentially due to underlying cardiometabolic conditions.
Implications for Practice: These findings suggest that metformin use, either during early pregnancy or spermatogenesis, poses minimal risk for congenital malformations. However, clinicians should consider the overall cardiometabolic profile and diabetes management when prescribing metformin, especially in combination with other antidiabetic medications.
References:
AAN updated practice guidelines for epilepsy and pregnancy – Neurology
27 May, 2024 | 20:23h | UTCIntroduction:
The American Academy of Neurology (AAN), the American Epilepsy Society (AES), and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) have published a comprehensive guideline focusing on the management of epilepsy in individuals of childbearing potential. This guideline addresses the use of antiseizure medications (ASMs) and the impact of folic acid supplementation on major congenital malformations (MCMs), perinatal outcomes, and neurodevelopmental outcomes.
Key Points:
- Optimizing ASM Therapy Preconceptionally: Clinicians should recommend ASMs and doses that optimize both seizure control and fetal outcomes should pregnancy occur, ideally starting this process preconceptionally.
- Minimizing Convulsive Seizures During Pregnancy: It is crucial to minimize convulsive seizures in pregnant individuals to reduce risks to both the parent and the fetus.
- Monitoring and Adjusting ASM Levels: ASM levels should be monitored throughout pregnancy, and doses should be adjusted based on serum levels and seizure control.
- Preferred ASMs for Pregnancy: Lamotrigine, levetiracetam, and oxcarbazepine are recommended when appropriate, as they are associated with lower risks of MCMs compared to other ASMs.
- Avoiding Certain ASMs: Valproic acid should be avoided to minimize risks of MCMs, neural tube defects, and poor neurodevelopmental outcomes. Topiramate should also be avoided due to risks of offspring being born small for gestational age.
- Folic Acid Supplementation: At least 0.4 mg of folic acid should be prescribed daily preconceptionally and during pregnancy to decrease the risk of neural tube defects and possibly improve neurodevelopmental outcomes.
- Counseling on Risks and Monitoring: Clinicians must counsel patients on the potential risks associated with different ASMs and ensure regular fetal screenings to detect congenital malformations early.
Conclusion:
These guidelines provide essential, evidence-based recommendations for managing epilepsy in individuals of childbearing potential, emphasizing the importance of preconception planning, careful medication selection, and ongoing monitoring to optimize both maternal and fetal health outcomes.
Guideline Reference (link to free full-text):
Randomized Clinical Trial: Dequalinium chloride demonstrates noninferiority to metronidazole in treating bacterial vaginosis – JAMA Netw Open
25 May, 2024 | 19:55h | UTCThis randomized clinical trial investigated the efficacy of dequalinium chloride compared to metronidazole for treating bacterial vaginosis in premenopausal women. Conducted across multiple centers from July 2021 to August 2022, the study involved 147 participants who were randomly assigned to receive either dequalinium chloride vaginal tablets or oral metronidazole. The primary outcome measured was the clinical cure rate shortly after treatment completion. Results showed that dequalinium chloride achieved a 92.8% cure rate, which was statistically noninferior to metronidazole’s 93.2% rate. Additionally, dequalinium chloride was better tolerated, with fewer adverse events reported compared to metronidazole. These findings suggest that dequalinium chloride is as effective as traditional antibiotic treatments for bacterial vaginosis and could be considered a viable non-antibiotic alternative due to its similar efficacy and enhanced tolerability.
Reference (link to free full-text):
Cohort Study: Prenatal opioid exposure linked to modest increase in neuropsychiatric disorders – The BMJ
25 May, 2024 | 19:50h | UTCThis nationwide birth cohort study from South Korea investigated the impact of prenatal opioid exposure on the risk of neuropsychiatric disorders among children. The study followed 3,128,571 infants born between 2010 and 2017 until the end of 2020. Researchers found that infants exposed to opioids prenatally showed a slightly increased risk of developing neuropsychiatric disorders, including mood disorders, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and intellectual disability. The increased risk was more pronounced with higher opioid doses, longer duration of use, and exposure during the first trimester of pregnancy. However, this association was not significant in sibling comparison cohorts, indicating a modest overall clinical impact. The study emphasizes the need for cautious interpretation due to its observational design and the specific conditions under which risk increases.
Reference (link to free full-text):
RCT: Omission of axillary dissection noninferior to complete dissection in clinically node-negative breast cancer with sentinel-node metastases – N Engl J Med
25 May, 2024 | 18:57h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This noninferiority trial explored the effects of omitting completion axillary-lymph-node dissection in patients with clinically node-negative primary T1 to T3 breast cancer who had one or two sentinel-node macrometastases. A total of 2766 patients were enrolled and randomized 1:1 to either undergo sentinel-node biopsy only or completion dissection. Patients received adjuvant treatment and radiation therapy as per national guidelines, focusing on recurrence-free survival as a secondary end point.
Main Findings: The study reported that the 5-year recurrence-free survival rates were 89.7% in the sentinel-node biopsy-only group and 88.7% in the dissection group, with a country-adjusted hazard ratio for recurrence or death at 0.89 (95% CI, 0.66 to 1.19), significantly below the noninferiority margin (P<0.001). This outcome demonstrates the noninferiority of the less invasive sentinel-node biopsy approach compared to the traditional dissection method in managing sentinel-node macrometastases.
Implications for Practice: The findings suggest that for clinically node-negative breast cancer patients with sentinel-node macrometastases, omitting axillary-lymph-node dissection could be considered a viable treatment option, potentially reducing the surgical burden without compromising recurrence-free survival outcomes. This could lead to adjustments in surgical practice and patient care strategies, emphasizing a less invasive approach while maintaining clinical efficacy.
Reference (link to abstract – $ for full-text):
Cohort Study: First-trimester screening protocol achieves higher detection rates for preterm preeclampsia in nulliparous women – Hypertension
25 May, 2024 | 18:53h | UTCThis study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the Fetal Medicine Foundation’s (FMF) first-trimester screening protocol for predicting preterm preeclampsia in nulliparous women. A prospective multicenter cohort study was conducted involving 7554 nulliparous women, recruited at 11 to 14 weeks of pregnancy. Screening included assessing maternal characteristics, mean arterial blood pressure, pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A), placental growth factor (PlGF), and uterine artery pulsatility index. The risk assessment was performed by a third party, blinded to pregnancy outcomes, using receiver operating characteristic curves. Of the participants, 7325 remained eligible beyond 20 weeks of gestation. Among these, 65 (0.9%) developed preterm preeclampsia and 22 (0.3%) early-onset preeclampsia. The FMF screening test achieved a detection rate of 63.1% for preterm and 77.3% for early-onset preeclampsia at a false-positive rate of 15.8%. In comparison, using criteria from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the detection rates were 61.5% and 59.1%, respectively, but at a higher false-positive rate of 34.3%. The findings suggest that the FMF screening test is a more accurate and efficient method for predicting preterm preeclampsia in the first trimester among nulliparous women.
Reference (link to abstract – $ for full-text):
Review: Key findings from the Women’s Health Initiative studies on postmenopausal interventions – JAMA
3 May, 2024 | 13:34h | UTCThe Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) studied the impact of various interventions on postmenopausal women aged 50-79, using data from 161,808 participants between 1993 and 2018. The findings suggest that hormone therapy, specifically with conjugated equine estrogens and medroxyprogesterone acetate, does not reduce the risk of cardiovascular diseases, dementia, or other chronic conditions in postmenopausal women. It is, however, effective for managing severe menopausal symptoms when initiated before age 60 in women without contraindications. The trials also concluded that universal supplementation of calcium and vitamin D does not effectively prevent fractures and should be limited to those not meeting dietary intake recommendations. Furthermore, a low-fat diet rich in fruits, vegetables, and grains did not reduce the incidence of breast or colorectal cancer, though it may decrease breast cancer mortality rates, indicating the need for further investigation.
Reference (link to free full-text for a limited period):