VIDEO: Dosing an important consideration when using neuromodulators in men

Article Type
Changed

 

– Using larger doses and avoiding overarching of the brows are among the considerations to keep in mind when using neuromodulators in men, advised Canadian dermatologist Katie Beleznay, MD.

In general, men have a very different anatomy with a different brow position, and have needs different from those of women, said Dr. Beleznay of the University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

One secret for successful injections of toxins in male patients: Dose matters. Men have stronger muscles in the face and need larger doses to overcome their muscular strength, Dr. Beleznay said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

On average, “if you use 20-30 units in a female glabella, maybe you’d use 40-50, maybe even 60 units in a male patient,” she said. However, the volume depends on the strength of the muscles in the area, and some men may need less to avoid a frozen look. “You can always treat less and bring them back in a couple of weeks and add more,” especially with patients who are new to treatment, Dr. Beleznay noted.

She disclosed financial relationships with Allergan, Revance, Evolus, Galderma, and Zeltiq.

SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 
Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– Using larger doses and avoiding overarching of the brows are among the considerations to keep in mind when using neuromodulators in men, advised Canadian dermatologist Katie Beleznay, MD.

In general, men have a very different anatomy with a different brow position, and have needs different from those of women, said Dr. Beleznay of the University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

One secret for successful injections of toxins in male patients: Dose matters. Men have stronger muscles in the face and need larger doses to overcome their muscular strength, Dr. Beleznay said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

On average, “if you use 20-30 units in a female glabella, maybe you’d use 40-50, maybe even 60 units in a male patient,” she said. However, the volume depends on the strength of the muscles in the area, and some men may need less to avoid a frozen look. “You can always treat less and bring them back in a couple of weeks and add more,” especially with patients who are new to treatment, Dr. Beleznay noted.

She disclosed financial relationships with Allergan, Revance, Evolus, Galderma, and Zeltiq.

SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 

 

– Using larger doses and avoiding overarching of the brows are among the considerations to keep in mind when using neuromodulators in men, advised Canadian dermatologist Katie Beleznay, MD.

In general, men have a very different anatomy with a different brow position, and have needs different from those of women, said Dr. Beleznay of the University of British Columbia, Vancouver.

One secret for successful injections of toxins in male patients: Dose matters. Men have stronger muscles in the face and need larger doses to overcome their muscular strength, Dr. Beleznay said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

On average, “if you use 20-30 units in a female glabella, maybe you’d use 40-50, maybe even 60 units in a male patient,” she said. However, the volume depends on the strength of the muscles in the area, and some men may need less to avoid a frozen look. “You can always treat less and bring them back in a couple of weeks and add more,” especially with patients who are new to treatment, Dr. Beleznay noted.

She disclosed financial relationships with Allergan, Revance, Evolus, Galderma, and Zeltiq.

SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

AT SDEF HAWAII DERMATOLOGY SEMINAR

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

VIDEO: Patient survey data yield useful information on acne and different contraceptives

Article Type
Changed

 

– A study that used patient-reported outcomes to assess the impact of different contraceptive methods on acne provided “fascinating results,” Lawrence F. Eichenfield, MD, said at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

“Progestins are present in birth control for the birth control, but they’re not usually good for the acne,” Dr. Eichenfield said in a video interview at the meeting.

Dr. Eichenfield, professor of dermatology and pediatrics at the University of California, San Diego, and his colleagues reviewed patient reports from an Internet-based survey of more than 2,000 adolescent and young adult acne patients asking whether they were on any contraceptive, and if so, how they thought the contraceptive method affected their acne.

Overall, hormonal progestin-only IUDs and some progestin-only implants correlated with worse acne. Of the combined oral contraceptives, those on the OCs containing drospirenone performed best, he said. Also of interest, the triphasic OCs, with the progestin in three phases, had a better impact on the acne than did the dual ones, he added.

The review of patient-reported outcomes can not only inform clinicians on how they should prescribe hormonal therapy, but also raises awareness of the impact of contraceptives on acne in general, Dr. Eichenfield said.

The results were published last year (J Drugs Dermatol. 2016 Jun 1;15[6]:670-4).

Dr. Eichenfield disclosed relationships with Anacor/Pfizer, Genentech, Lilly, Regeneron/Sanofi, Medimetriks, and Otsuka.

SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 
Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– A study that used patient-reported outcomes to assess the impact of different contraceptive methods on acne provided “fascinating results,” Lawrence F. Eichenfield, MD, said at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

“Progestins are present in birth control for the birth control, but they’re not usually good for the acne,” Dr. Eichenfield said in a video interview at the meeting.

Dr. Eichenfield, professor of dermatology and pediatrics at the University of California, San Diego, and his colleagues reviewed patient reports from an Internet-based survey of more than 2,000 adolescent and young adult acne patients asking whether they were on any contraceptive, and if so, how they thought the contraceptive method affected their acne.

Overall, hormonal progestin-only IUDs and some progestin-only implants correlated with worse acne. Of the combined oral contraceptives, those on the OCs containing drospirenone performed best, he said. Also of interest, the triphasic OCs, with the progestin in three phases, had a better impact on the acne than did the dual ones, he added.

The review of patient-reported outcomes can not only inform clinicians on how they should prescribe hormonal therapy, but also raises awareness of the impact of contraceptives on acne in general, Dr. Eichenfield said.

The results were published last year (J Drugs Dermatol. 2016 Jun 1;15[6]:670-4).

Dr. Eichenfield disclosed relationships with Anacor/Pfizer, Genentech, Lilly, Regeneron/Sanofi, Medimetriks, and Otsuka.

SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 

 

– A study that used patient-reported outcomes to assess the impact of different contraceptive methods on acne provided “fascinating results,” Lawrence F. Eichenfield, MD, said at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

“Progestins are present in birth control for the birth control, but they’re not usually good for the acne,” Dr. Eichenfield said in a video interview at the meeting.

Dr. Eichenfield, professor of dermatology and pediatrics at the University of California, San Diego, and his colleagues reviewed patient reports from an Internet-based survey of more than 2,000 adolescent and young adult acne patients asking whether they were on any contraceptive, and if so, how they thought the contraceptive method affected their acne.

Overall, hormonal progestin-only IUDs and some progestin-only implants correlated with worse acne. Of the combined oral contraceptives, those on the OCs containing drospirenone performed best, he said. Also of interest, the triphasic OCs, with the progestin in three phases, had a better impact on the acne than did the dual ones, he added.

The review of patient-reported outcomes can not only inform clinicians on how they should prescribe hormonal therapy, but also raises awareness of the impact of contraceptives on acne in general, Dr. Eichenfield said.

The results were published last year (J Drugs Dermatol. 2016 Jun 1;15[6]:670-4).

Dr. Eichenfield disclosed relationships with Anacor/Pfizer, Genentech, Lilly, Regeneron/Sanofi, Medimetriks, and Otsuka.

SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM SDEF HAWAII DERMATOLOGY SEMINAR

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

VIDEO: New dermal fillers add flexibility

Article Type
Changed

 

– Two hyaluronic acid products now available in the United States are “much more stretchable and flexible” than other fillers, according to Nowell Solish, MD, of the University of Toronto.

The dermal fillers, Restylane Defyne and Restylane Refyne, have been available in Canada, and Dr. Solish was involved in a Canadian study of the fillers in patients in motion. With the new fillers, “animation looks more natural after than before the fillers,” he said at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar, provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation. In addition to providing a more natural look, the new fillers may also help prevent the development of lines in certain areas, such as around the mouth, he noted.

In a video interview at the meeting, Dr. Solish explained that when he treats a patient, he looks for where there is “too much activity,” such as frequent pursing of the lips, and puts filler in to balance the activity.

He disclosed relationships with Allergan, Galderma (the manufacturer of Restylane products), and Revance.

SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 
Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– Two hyaluronic acid products now available in the United States are “much more stretchable and flexible” than other fillers, according to Nowell Solish, MD, of the University of Toronto.

The dermal fillers, Restylane Defyne and Restylane Refyne, have been available in Canada, and Dr. Solish was involved in a Canadian study of the fillers in patients in motion. With the new fillers, “animation looks more natural after than before the fillers,” he said at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar, provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation. In addition to providing a more natural look, the new fillers may also help prevent the development of lines in certain areas, such as around the mouth, he noted.

In a video interview at the meeting, Dr. Solish explained that when he treats a patient, he looks for where there is “too much activity,” such as frequent pursing of the lips, and puts filler in to balance the activity.

He disclosed relationships with Allergan, Galderma (the manufacturer of Restylane products), and Revance.

SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 

 

– Two hyaluronic acid products now available in the United States are “much more stretchable and flexible” than other fillers, according to Nowell Solish, MD, of the University of Toronto.

The dermal fillers, Restylane Defyne and Restylane Refyne, have been available in Canada, and Dr. Solish was involved in a Canadian study of the fillers in patients in motion. With the new fillers, “animation looks more natural after than before the fillers,” he said at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar, provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation. In addition to providing a more natural look, the new fillers may also help prevent the development of lines in certain areas, such as around the mouth, he noted.

In a video interview at the meeting, Dr. Solish explained that when he treats a patient, he looks for where there is “too much activity,” such as frequent pursing of the lips, and puts filler in to balance the activity.

He disclosed relationships with Allergan, Galderma (the manufacturer of Restylane products), and Revance.

SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

AT SDEF HAWAII DERMATOLOGY SEMINAR

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

Expanding APRN practice and more

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
Expanding APRN practice and more

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Shulkin currently is Under Secretary of Health, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Issue
February 2017
Publications
Topics
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Shulkin currently is Under Secretary of Health, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Shulkin currently is Under Secretary of Health, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Issue
February 2017
Issue
February 2017
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Expanding APRN practice and more
Display Headline
Expanding APRN practice and more
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

VIDEO: Don’t miss reservoirs when treating recurrent onychomycosis

Article Type
Changed

 

– Patients attribute every nail problem to nail fungus, but part of the problem with nails is concomitant tinea pedis, tinea corporis, and other reservoirs of infection, according to Neal Bhatia, MD, director of clinical dermatology at Therapeutics Clinical Research in San Diego.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– Patients attribute every nail problem to nail fungus, but part of the problem with nails is concomitant tinea pedis, tinea corporis, and other reservoirs of infection, according to Neal Bhatia, MD, director of clinical dermatology at Therapeutics Clinical Research in San Diego.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel

 

– Patients attribute every nail problem to nail fungus, but part of the problem with nails is concomitant tinea pedis, tinea corporis, and other reservoirs of infection, according to Neal Bhatia, MD, director of clinical dermatology at Therapeutics Clinical Research in San Diego.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

AT SDEF HAWAII DERMATOLOGY SEMINAR

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

VIDEO: Consider PPIs as a cause of cutaneous reactions

Article Type
Changed

 

– Any proton pump inhibitor (PPI) has the potential to cause skin reactions, so it is important to ask patients about their use, according to J. Mark Jackson, MD, of the University of Louisville (Ky.).

If patients are going to react to a PPI, they usually will do so within 3 or 4 months of starting treatment, rather than in the first week or so of treatment, Dr. Jackson said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

Skin reactions to PPIs are often maculopapular, with a flat and a raised component that can be nonspecific, Dr. Jackson noted.

Interestingly, he added, many times patients can switch to a different PPI and not get a skin reaction. However, there are some patients who develop a lupuslike reaction on the skin, and in these cases, there tends to be cross reactivity, “so they couldn’t switch to a different PPI and be risk-free” of the same reaction, he noted.

Dr. Jackson disclosed financial relationships with companies including AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Dermira, Galderma, Genentech, Janssen, Lilly, Medimetriks, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Promius, and Top MD.

SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 
Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– Any proton pump inhibitor (PPI) has the potential to cause skin reactions, so it is important to ask patients about their use, according to J. Mark Jackson, MD, of the University of Louisville (Ky.).

If patients are going to react to a PPI, they usually will do so within 3 or 4 months of starting treatment, rather than in the first week or so of treatment, Dr. Jackson said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

Skin reactions to PPIs are often maculopapular, with a flat and a raised component that can be nonspecific, Dr. Jackson noted.

Interestingly, he added, many times patients can switch to a different PPI and not get a skin reaction. However, there are some patients who develop a lupuslike reaction on the skin, and in these cases, there tends to be cross reactivity, “so they couldn’t switch to a different PPI and be risk-free” of the same reaction, he noted.

Dr. Jackson disclosed financial relationships with companies including AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Dermira, Galderma, Genentech, Janssen, Lilly, Medimetriks, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Promius, and Top MD.

SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 

 

– Any proton pump inhibitor (PPI) has the potential to cause skin reactions, so it is important to ask patients about their use, according to J. Mark Jackson, MD, of the University of Louisville (Ky.).

If patients are going to react to a PPI, they usually will do so within 3 or 4 months of starting treatment, rather than in the first week or so of treatment, Dr. Jackson said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

Skin reactions to PPIs are often maculopapular, with a flat and a raised component that can be nonspecific, Dr. Jackson noted.

Interestingly, he added, many times patients can switch to a different PPI and not get a skin reaction. However, there are some patients who develop a lupuslike reaction on the skin, and in these cases, there tends to be cross reactivity, “so they couldn’t switch to a different PPI and be risk-free” of the same reaction, he noted.

Dr. Jackson disclosed financial relationships with companies including AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Dermira, Galderma, Genentech, Janssen, Lilly, Medimetriks, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Promius, and Top MD.

SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

AT SDEF HAWAII DERMATOLOGY SEMINAR

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

VIDEO: Experts offer patch testing tips for AD patients

Article Type
Changed

 

– Many atopic dermatitis patients with refractory disease may have also developed allergic contact dermatitis, according to Jonathan Silverberg, MD, of Northwestern University in Chicago.

Clinically, there is often overlap between AD and allergic contact dermatitis, said Dr. Silverberg, who was involved in the development of recent consensus guidelines on when to do patch testing in the setting of AD.

For many patients with severe disease, “sometimes when we patch test, we can find a relevant allergen for the patient to avoid, [and] within a few months, their disease just goes down a notch, gets much better, and really starts to respond to topical and more conservative approaches,” Dr. Silverberg said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation. Or patients may respond well to AD treatment on certain parts of the body, but there may be other areas that don’t respond as well, suggesting a possible component of allergic contact dermatitis, he added

The guidelines sought to sort out scenarios “where it makes sense to patch test” and to provide direction on best practices, noted Dr. Silverberg, who is director of the Northwestern Medicine Multidisciplinary Eczema Center, and director of the patch testing clinic, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago.

He disclosed relationships with companies including AbbVie, Anacor, Celgene, Chugai, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, MedImmune-AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, Puricore, and Regeneron-Sanofi.SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 
Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– Many atopic dermatitis patients with refractory disease may have also developed allergic contact dermatitis, according to Jonathan Silverberg, MD, of Northwestern University in Chicago.

Clinically, there is often overlap between AD and allergic contact dermatitis, said Dr. Silverberg, who was involved in the development of recent consensus guidelines on when to do patch testing in the setting of AD.

For many patients with severe disease, “sometimes when we patch test, we can find a relevant allergen for the patient to avoid, [and] within a few months, their disease just goes down a notch, gets much better, and really starts to respond to topical and more conservative approaches,” Dr. Silverberg said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation. Or patients may respond well to AD treatment on certain parts of the body, but there may be other areas that don’t respond as well, suggesting a possible component of allergic contact dermatitis, he added

The guidelines sought to sort out scenarios “where it makes sense to patch test” and to provide direction on best practices, noted Dr. Silverberg, who is director of the Northwestern Medicine Multidisciplinary Eczema Center, and director of the patch testing clinic, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago.

He disclosed relationships with companies including AbbVie, Anacor, Celgene, Chugai, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, MedImmune-AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, Puricore, and Regeneron-Sanofi.SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 

 

– Many atopic dermatitis patients with refractory disease may have also developed allergic contact dermatitis, according to Jonathan Silverberg, MD, of Northwestern University in Chicago.

Clinically, there is often overlap between AD and allergic contact dermatitis, said Dr. Silverberg, who was involved in the development of recent consensus guidelines on when to do patch testing in the setting of AD.

For many patients with severe disease, “sometimes when we patch test, we can find a relevant allergen for the patient to avoid, [and] within a few months, their disease just goes down a notch, gets much better, and really starts to respond to topical and more conservative approaches,” Dr. Silverberg said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation. Or patients may respond well to AD treatment on certain parts of the body, but there may be other areas that don’t respond as well, suggesting a possible component of allergic contact dermatitis, he added

The guidelines sought to sort out scenarios “where it makes sense to patch test” and to provide direction on best practices, noted Dr. Silverberg, who is director of the Northwestern Medicine Multidisciplinary Eczema Center, and director of the patch testing clinic, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago.

He disclosed relationships with companies including AbbVie, Anacor, Celgene, Chugai, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, MedImmune-AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, Puricore, and Regeneron-Sanofi.SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

AT SDEF HAWAII DERMATOLOGY SEMINAR

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

VIDEO: Dermatologists often miss adult onset atopic dermatitis

Article Type
Changed

 

– Evidence from several recent studies suggests that the prevalence of adult onset atopic dermatitis in the United States may be as high as 7%-10%, said Jonathan I. Silverberg, MD, of the department of dermatology, preventive medicine, and medical social sciences, Northwestern University, Chicago.

Many features are similar to atopic dermatitis (AD) seen in childhood, but in adults the eczema is more likely to affect the hands and the eyelids. “We often have a hard time telling that apart from contact dermatitis,” Dr. Silverberg said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

Some adults may have forgotten they had AD as children and don’t recognize it if it reappears in adulthood, but sometimes AD appears with no childhood history, he noted. “There’s a skepticism that if it is adult onset, it must not be atopic dermatitis,” but he has found that is not always the case.

A take-home message for clinicians: “Don’t be surprised when a patient walks in the door as an adult meeting all criteria for atopic dermatitis. It can be, and you can diagnose them comfortably,” said Dr. Silverberg, who is also director of the Northwestern Medicine Multidisciplinary Eczema Center, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago.

Most of the treatments for adult AD “cover many different arms of the immune system,” and include topical steroids and immunosuppressants, he added.

Dr. Silverberg disclosed relationships with companies including AbbVie, Anacor, Celgene, Chugai, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, MedImmune-AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, Puricore, and Regeneron-Sanofi. SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 
Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– Evidence from several recent studies suggests that the prevalence of adult onset atopic dermatitis in the United States may be as high as 7%-10%, said Jonathan I. Silverberg, MD, of the department of dermatology, preventive medicine, and medical social sciences, Northwestern University, Chicago.

Many features are similar to atopic dermatitis (AD) seen in childhood, but in adults the eczema is more likely to affect the hands and the eyelids. “We often have a hard time telling that apart from contact dermatitis,” Dr. Silverberg said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

Some adults may have forgotten they had AD as children and don’t recognize it if it reappears in adulthood, but sometimes AD appears with no childhood history, he noted. “There’s a skepticism that if it is adult onset, it must not be atopic dermatitis,” but he has found that is not always the case.

A take-home message for clinicians: “Don’t be surprised when a patient walks in the door as an adult meeting all criteria for atopic dermatitis. It can be, and you can diagnose them comfortably,” said Dr. Silverberg, who is also director of the Northwestern Medicine Multidisciplinary Eczema Center, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago.

Most of the treatments for adult AD “cover many different arms of the immune system,” and include topical steroids and immunosuppressants, he added.

Dr. Silverberg disclosed relationships with companies including AbbVie, Anacor, Celgene, Chugai, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, MedImmune-AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, Puricore, and Regeneron-Sanofi. SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 

 

– Evidence from several recent studies suggests that the prevalence of adult onset atopic dermatitis in the United States may be as high as 7%-10%, said Jonathan I. Silverberg, MD, of the department of dermatology, preventive medicine, and medical social sciences, Northwestern University, Chicago.

Many features are similar to atopic dermatitis (AD) seen in childhood, but in adults the eczema is more likely to affect the hands and the eyelids. “We often have a hard time telling that apart from contact dermatitis,” Dr. Silverberg said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

Some adults may have forgotten they had AD as children and don’t recognize it if it reappears in adulthood, but sometimes AD appears with no childhood history, he noted. “There’s a skepticism that if it is adult onset, it must not be atopic dermatitis,” but he has found that is not always the case.

A take-home message for clinicians: “Don’t be surprised when a patient walks in the door as an adult meeting all criteria for atopic dermatitis. It can be, and you can diagnose them comfortably,” said Dr. Silverberg, who is also director of the Northwestern Medicine Multidisciplinary Eczema Center, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago.

Most of the treatments for adult AD “cover many different arms of the immune system,” and include topical steroids and immunosuppressants, he added.

Dr. Silverberg disclosed relationships with companies including AbbVie, Anacor, Celgene, Chugai, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, MedImmune-AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Procter & Gamble, Puricore, and Regeneron-Sanofi. SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

AT SDEF HAWAII DERMATOLOGY SEMINAR

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

VIDEO: Pattern recognition provides clues to rheumatologic diagnoses

Article Type
Changed

 

Several patterns can provide clues to diagnoses of rheumatologic diseases, according to Daniel E. Furst, MD, professor of rheumatology, University of Washington, Seattle.

Dermatology and rheumatology share the use of pattern recognition when making a diagnosis, he said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation. An important pattern is the idea of polyarticular versus monoarticular disease. Rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, autoimmune diseases, and gout and crystalline diseases, he said, encompass “about 80% of the cases with polyarticular arthritis.”

Another pattern to consider is symmetry versus asymmetry. Osteoarthritis and gout will be asymmetric, while autoimmune diseases and RA will be symmetrical, Dr. Furst pointed out. Also consider areas of involvement, such as upper and lower parts of the body. “Lower tends to be more gout and more OA,” while upper-extremity involvement is more likely to be autoimmune diseases and RA, he said.

“You don’t have to be Einstein to be a rheumatologist; just remember some simple stuff,” added Dr. Furst, who also discusses the use of lab tests in the interview.

Dr. Furst is also professor emeritus, University of California, Los Angeles, and is affiliated with the University of Florence (Italy) Medical School.

He disclosed financial relationships with companies including AbbVie, Actelion, Amgen, BMS, Cytori, Genentech/Roche, Novartis, and Pfizer.

SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 
Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

Several patterns can provide clues to diagnoses of rheumatologic diseases, according to Daniel E. Furst, MD, professor of rheumatology, University of Washington, Seattle.

Dermatology and rheumatology share the use of pattern recognition when making a diagnosis, he said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation. An important pattern is the idea of polyarticular versus monoarticular disease. Rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, autoimmune diseases, and gout and crystalline diseases, he said, encompass “about 80% of the cases with polyarticular arthritis.”

Another pattern to consider is symmetry versus asymmetry. Osteoarthritis and gout will be asymmetric, while autoimmune diseases and RA will be symmetrical, Dr. Furst pointed out. Also consider areas of involvement, such as upper and lower parts of the body. “Lower tends to be more gout and more OA,” while upper-extremity involvement is more likely to be autoimmune diseases and RA, he said.

“You don’t have to be Einstein to be a rheumatologist; just remember some simple stuff,” added Dr. Furst, who also discusses the use of lab tests in the interview.

Dr. Furst is also professor emeritus, University of California, Los Angeles, and is affiliated with the University of Florence (Italy) Medical School.

He disclosed financial relationships with companies including AbbVie, Actelion, Amgen, BMS, Cytori, Genentech/Roche, Novartis, and Pfizer.

SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 

 

Several patterns can provide clues to diagnoses of rheumatologic diseases, according to Daniel E. Furst, MD, professor of rheumatology, University of Washington, Seattle.

Dermatology and rheumatology share the use of pattern recognition when making a diagnosis, he said in a video interview at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation. An important pattern is the idea of polyarticular versus monoarticular disease. Rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, autoimmune diseases, and gout and crystalline diseases, he said, encompass “about 80% of the cases with polyarticular arthritis.”

Another pattern to consider is symmetry versus asymmetry. Osteoarthritis and gout will be asymmetric, while autoimmune diseases and RA will be symmetrical, Dr. Furst pointed out. Also consider areas of involvement, such as upper and lower parts of the body. “Lower tends to be more gout and more OA,” while upper-extremity involvement is more likely to be autoimmune diseases and RA, he said.

“You don’t have to be Einstein to be a rheumatologist; just remember some simple stuff,” added Dr. Furst, who also discusses the use of lab tests in the interview.

Dr. Furst is also professor emeritus, University of California, Los Angeles, and is affiliated with the University of Florence (Italy) Medical School.

He disclosed financial relationships with companies including AbbVie, Actelion, Amgen, BMS, Cytori, Genentech/Roche, Novartis, and Pfizer.

SDEF and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
 
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM SDEF HAWAII DERMATOLOGY SEMINAR

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME

VIDEO: Sofosbuvir with velpatasvir beat other HCV GT3 regimens

Study offers insight into HCV GT3 treatment difficulty
Article Type
Changed

 

Regimens containing sofosbuvir and velpatasvir were most effective for treating both cirrhotic and noncirrhotic genotype 3 hepatitis C virus infection (HCV GT3), according to a meta-analysis reported in the March issue of Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology (doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.10.03).

“Our analyses indicated that ribavirin significantly increases SVR [sustained viral response] rates and should be considered, if tolerated,” added Floor A.C. Berden, MD, of Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands, and her associates.

SOURCE: AMERICAN GASTROENTEROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

Direct-acting antiviral regimens successfully treat chronic HCV infection, but tend to perform suboptimally in HCV GT3, especially when patients are treatment experienced and have cirrhosis. Options for HCV GT3 infection include sofosbuvir combined with ribavirin, daclatasvir, or velpatasvir. But head-to-head trials of these regimens are lacking, and are unlikely to occur, in part because the Food and Drug Administration permits single-arm trials with historical controls as the comparator, the investigators said.

Therefore, they searched PubMed, Embase, and the Web of Science database through March 15, 2016, for randomized trials and real-world studies of at least one direct-acting antiviral agent in adults with chronic HCV GT3 infection. They also manually searched abstracts presented at the 2015 conferences of the European Association for the Study of the Liver and the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. This work yielded 27 studies: 16 randomized controlled trials, 6 single-arm studies, and 5 observational cohort studies. The researchers used a Bayesian analysis based on Markov chain Monte Carlo methods.
 

 

For patients without cirrhosis, sofosbuvir and velpatasvir with ribavirin yielded the highest estimated likelihood of SVR (99%; 95% confidence interval, 98%-100%), followed by sofosbuvir and velpatasvir without ribavirin (97%; 95% CI, 95%-99%), sofosbuvir and daclatasvir with ribavirin (96%; 95% CI, 92%-98%), and sofosbuvir and peginterferon with ribavirin (95%; 95% CI, 91%-98%), all for 12 weeks, the investigators reported.

For patients with cirrhosis, the most effective regimen was sofosbuvir with velpatasvir for 24 weeks (estimated SVR, 96%; 95% CI, 92%-99%), followed by sofosbuvir and daclatasvir with ribavirin for 24 weeks (94%; 95% CI, 87%-98%), sofosbuvir and velpatasvir and ribavirin for 12 weeks (94%; 95% CI, 86%-98%). The estimated efficacy of sofosbuvir and velpatasvir held up in sensitivity analyses that honed in on studies with a low risk of bias, approved regimens, or those under regulatory evaluation, patients without decompensated cirrhosis, and patients without HIV coinfection.

Adding ribavirin to a direct-acting antiviral regimen improved the odds of SVR about 2.6-fold (95% CI, 1.3-4.7) among noncirrhotic patients and by about 4.5 times in cirrhotic patients (95% CI, 2.5-7.7), the investigators reported. “In clinical practice, choice of treatment may depend on several factors, such as availability and price of direct-acting antivirals, tolerance of ribavirin, risk of adverse events or drug-drug interactions, and the presence of resistance-associated substitutions,” they added. Nonetheless, these findings can help prioritize therapies for HCV GT3 infection in both clinical guidelines and practice, they emphasized.

Dr. Berden and four coinvestigators had no relevant financial disclosures. Senior author Joost Drenth, MD, PhD, disclosed serving on advisory boards and receiving research grants from several pharmaceutical companies.

Body

The rapid development of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) to treat hepatitis C has yielded many surprises and left some gaps in our knowledge.

One of the surprises was that genotype 3, previously considered “easier to treat,” proved quite resistant to the first generation of DAAs. One of the gaps in knowledge was a lack of randomized and head-to-head trials for current medications. One could argue that randomized trials have limited utility in a disease with essentially no spontaneous cures, and that head-to-head trials are pointless in a rapidly evolving field where regimens may be obsolete by the time the study is completed.

On the bright side, a hard endpoint like sustained virologic response (SVR) makes comparison between trials possible. The paper by Bergen et al. offers some guidance in closing the knowledge gap. Their meta-analysis using Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods examined the effectiveness of currently available antiviral agents in 27 studies that focused entirely on genotype 3. All studies used antiviral agents that are currently available in the United States, and effectiveness was tested in both noncirrhotic and cirrhotic patients.  

Dr. Norman Sussman
The results were uniformly excellent – 94%-99% SVR, substantially higher than reported in clinical trials. The analysis also showed that sofosbuvir plus velpatasvir was superior to sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir or sofosbuvir plus interferon plus ribavirin. This result conforms to in vitro data that show good inhibitory activity of velpatasvir against the NS5A replication complex inhibitor in genotype 3 replicons. The study also showed that the addition of ribavirin improved SVR in all groups, all durations of treatment, and with all drug combinations – not bad for a weak antiviral agent with an unknown mode of action.

The evolution of antiviral therapy has been amazing. After decades of incremental gains, we entered an era of dizzying progress.  Genotype 3 went from great news to bad news, and genotype 1 went from a scourge to a piece of cake.

Norman L. Sussman, MD, is associate professor of surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston; director, Project ECHO. He has received speaking and consulting fees for AbbVie, BMS, Gilead, and Merck.

Publications
Topics
Sections
Body

The rapid development of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) to treat hepatitis C has yielded many surprises and left some gaps in our knowledge.

One of the surprises was that genotype 3, previously considered “easier to treat,” proved quite resistant to the first generation of DAAs. One of the gaps in knowledge was a lack of randomized and head-to-head trials for current medications. One could argue that randomized trials have limited utility in a disease with essentially no spontaneous cures, and that head-to-head trials are pointless in a rapidly evolving field where regimens may be obsolete by the time the study is completed.

On the bright side, a hard endpoint like sustained virologic response (SVR) makes comparison between trials possible. The paper by Bergen et al. offers some guidance in closing the knowledge gap. Their meta-analysis using Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods examined the effectiveness of currently available antiviral agents in 27 studies that focused entirely on genotype 3. All studies used antiviral agents that are currently available in the United States, and effectiveness was tested in both noncirrhotic and cirrhotic patients.  

Dr. Norman Sussman
The results were uniformly excellent – 94%-99% SVR, substantially higher than reported in clinical trials. The analysis also showed that sofosbuvir plus velpatasvir was superior to sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir or sofosbuvir plus interferon plus ribavirin. This result conforms to in vitro data that show good inhibitory activity of velpatasvir against the NS5A replication complex inhibitor in genotype 3 replicons. The study also showed that the addition of ribavirin improved SVR in all groups, all durations of treatment, and with all drug combinations – not bad for a weak antiviral agent with an unknown mode of action.

The evolution of antiviral therapy has been amazing. After decades of incremental gains, we entered an era of dizzying progress.  Genotype 3 went from great news to bad news, and genotype 1 went from a scourge to a piece of cake.

Norman L. Sussman, MD, is associate professor of surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston; director, Project ECHO. He has received speaking and consulting fees for AbbVie, BMS, Gilead, and Merck.

Body

The rapid development of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) to treat hepatitis C has yielded many surprises and left some gaps in our knowledge.

One of the surprises was that genotype 3, previously considered “easier to treat,” proved quite resistant to the first generation of DAAs. One of the gaps in knowledge was a lack of randomized and head-to-head trials for current medications. One could argue that randomized trials have limited utility in a disease with essentially no spontaneous cures, and that head-to-head trials are pointless in a rapidly evolving field where regimens may be obsolete by the time the study is completed.

On the bright side, a hard endpoint like sustained virologic response (SVR) makes comparison between trials possible. The paper by Bergen et al. offers some guidance in closing the knowledge gap. Their meta-analysis using Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods examined the effectiveness of currently available antiviral agents in 27 studies that focused entirely on genotype 3. All studies used antiviral agents that are currently available in the United States, and effectiveness was tested in both noncirrhotic and cirrhotic patients.  

Dr. Norman Sussman
The results were uniformly excellent – 94%-99% SVR, substantially higher than reported in clinical trials. The analysis also showed that sofosbuvir plus velpatasvir was superior to sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir or sofosbuvir plus interferon plus ribavirin. This result conforms to in vitro data that show good inhibitory activity of velpatasvir against the NS5A replication complex inhibitor in genotype 3 replicons. The study also showed that the addition of ribavirin improved SVR in all groups, all durations of treatment, and with all drug combinations – not bad for a weak antiviral agent with an unknown mode of action.

The evolution of antiviral therapy has been amazing. After decades of incremental gains, we entered an era of dizzying progress.  Genotype 3 went from great news to bad news, and genotype 1 went from a scourge to a piece of cake.

Norman L. Sussman, MD, is associate professor of surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston; director, Project ECHO. He has received speaking and consulting fees for AbbVie, BMS, Gilead, and Merck.

Title
Study offers insight into HCV GT3 treatment difficulty
Study offers insight into HCV GT3 treatment difficulty

 

Regimens containing sofosbuvir and velpatasvir were most effective for treating both cirrhotic and noncirrhotic genotype 3 hepatitis C virus infection (HCV GT3), according to a meta-analysis reported in the March issue of Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology (doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.10.03).

“Our analyses indicated that ribavirin significantly increases SVR [sustained viral response] rates and should be considered, if tolerated,” added Floor A.C. Berden, MD, of Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands, and her associates.

SOURCE: AMERICAN GASTROENTEROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

Direct-acting antiviral regimens successfully treat chronic HCV infection, but tend to perform suboptimally in HCV GT3, especially when patients are treatment experienced and have cirrhosis. Options for HCV GT3 infection include sofosbuvir combined with ribavirin, daclatasvir, or velpatasvir. But head-to-head trials of these regimens are lacking, and are unlikely to occur, in part because the Food and Drug Administration permits single-arm trials with historical controls as the comparator, the investigators said.

Therefore, they searched PubMed, Embase, and the Web of Science database through March 15, 2016, for randomized trials and real-world studies of at least one direct-acting antiviral agent in adults with chronic HCV GT3 infection. They also manually searched abstracts presented at the 2015 conferences of the European Association for the Study of the Liver and the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. This work yielded 27 studies: 16 randomized controlled trials, 6 single-arm studies, and 5 observational cohort studies. The researchers used a Bayesian analysis based on Markov chain Monte Carlo methods.
 

 

For patients without cirrhosis, sofosbuvir and velpatasvir with ribavirin yielded the highest estimated likelihood of SVR (99%; 95% confidence interval, 98%-100%), followed by sofosbuvir and velpatasvir without ribavirin (97%; 95% CI, 95%-99%), sofosbuvir and daclatasvir with ribavirin (96%; 95% CI, 92%-98%), and sofosbuvir and peginterferon with ribavirin (95%; 95% CI, 91%-98%), all for 12 weeks, the investigators reported.

For patients with cirrhosis, the most effective regimen was sofosbuvir with velpatasvir for 24 weeks (estimated SVR, 96%; 95% CI, 92%-99%), followed by sofosbuvir and daclatasvir with ribavirin for 24 weeks (94%; 95% CI, 87%-98%), sofosbuvir and velpatasvir and ribavirin for 12 weeks (94%; 95% CI, 86%-98%). The estimated efficacy of sofosbuvir and velpatasvir held up in sensitivity analyses that honed in on studies with a low risk of bias, approved regimens, or those under regulatory evaluation, patients without decompensated cirrhosis, and patients without HIV coinfection.

Adding ribavirin to a direct-acting antiviral regimen improved the odds of SVR about 2.6-fold (95% CI, 1.3-4.7) among noncirrhotic patients and by about 4.5 times in cirrhotic patients (95% CI, 2.5-7.7), the investigators reported. “In clinical practice, choice of treatment may depend on several factors, such as availability and price of direct-acting antivirals, tolerance of ribavirin, risk of adverse events or drug-drug interactions, and the presence of resistance-associated substitutions,” they added. Nonetheless, these findings can help prioritize therapies for HCV GT3 infection in both clinical guidelines and practice, they emphasized.

Dr. Berden and four coinvestigators had no relevant financial disclosures. Senior author Joost Drenth, MD, PhD, disclosed serving on advisory boards and receiving research grants from several pharmaceutical companies.

 

Regimens containing sofosbuvir and velpatasvir were most effective for treating both cirrhotic and noncirrhotic genotype 3 hepatitis C virus infection (HCV GT3), according to a meta-analysis reported in the March issue of Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology (doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.10.03).

“Our analyses indicated that ribavirin significantly increases SVR [sustained viral response] rates and should be considered, if tolerated,” added Floor A.C. Berden, MD, of Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands, and her associates.

SOURCE: AMERICAN GASTROENTEROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

Direct-acting antiviral regimens successfully treat chronic HCV infection, but tend to perform suboptimally in HCV GT3, especially when patients are treatment experienced and have cirrhosis. Options for HCV GT3 infection include sofosbuvir combined with ribavirin, daclatasvir, or velpatasvir. But head-to-head trials of these regimens are lacking, and are unlikely to occur, in part because the Food and Drug Administration permits single-arm trials with historical controls as the comparator, the investigators said.

Therefore, they searched PubMed, Embase, and the Web of Science database through March 15, 2016, for randomized trials and real-world studies of at least one direct-acting antiviral agent in adults with chronic HCV GT3 infection. They also manually searched abstracts presented at the 2015 conferences of the European Association for the Study of the Liver and the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. This work yielded 27 studies: 16 randomized controlled trials, 6 single-arm studies, and 5 observational cohort studies. The researchers used a Bayesian analysis based on Markov chain Monte Carlo methods.
 

 

For patients without cirrhosis, sofosbuvir and velpatasvir with ribavirin yielded the highest estimated likelihood of SVR (99%; 95% confidence interval, 98%-100%), followed by sofosbuvir and velpatasvir without ribavirin (97%; 95% CI, 95%-99%), sofosbuvir and daclatasvir with ribavirin (96%; 95% CI, 92%-98%), and sofosbuvir and peginterferon with ribavirin (95%; 95% CI, 91%-98%), all for 12 weeks, the investigators reported.

For patients with cirrhosis, the most effective regimen was sofosbuvir with velpatasvir for 24 weeks (estimated SVR, 96%; 95% CI, 92%-99%), followed by sofosbuvir and daclatasvir with ribavirin for 24 weeks (94%; 95% CI, 87%-98%), sofosbuvir and velpatasvir and ribavirin for 12 weeks (94%; 95% CI, 86%-98%). The estimated efficacy of sofosbuvir and velpatasvir held up in sensitivity analyses that honed in on studies with a low risk of bias, approved regimens, or those under regulatory evaluation, patients without decompensated cirrhosis, and patients without HIV coinfection.

Adding ribavirin to a direct-acting antiviral regimen improved the odds of SVR about 2.6-fold (95% CI, 1.3-4.7) among noncirrhotic patients and by about 4.5 times in cirrhotic patients (95% CI, 2.5-7.7), the investigators reported. “In clinical practice, choice of treatment may depend on several factors, such as availability and price of direct-acting antivirals, tolerance of ribavirin, risk of adverse events or drug-drug interactions, and the presence of resistance-associated substitutions,” they added. Nonetheless, these findings can help prioritize therapies for HCV GT3 infection in both clinical guidelines and practice, they emphasized.

Dr. Berden and four coinvestigators had no relevant financial disclosures. Senior author Joost Drenth, MD, PhD, disclosed serving on advisory boards and receiving research grants from several pharmaceutical companies.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

FROM CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point. Regimens containing sofosbuvir and velpatasvir were more effective than were other direct-acting antiviral combinations for treating genotype 3 hepatitis C virus infection, regardless of cirrhosis status.

Major finding: For patients without cirrhosis, sofosbuvir and velpatasvir with ribavirin for 12 weeks yielded the highest estimated likelihood of sustained viral response (99%). For patients with cirrhosis, the most effective regimen was sofosbuvir with velpatasvir for 24 weeks (estimated SVR, 96%).

Data source: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 27 studies: 16 randomized controlled trials, 6 single-arm studies, and 5 observational cohort studies.

Disclosures: Dr. Berden and four coinvestigators had no relevant financial disclosures. Senior author Joost Drenth, MD, PhD, disclosed serving on advisory boards and receiving research grants from several pharmaceutical companies.