Dose increase of S-Adenosyl-Methionine and escitalopram in a randomized clinical trial for major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

The optimal dose of S-adenosyl methionine (SAMe) for major depressive disorder (MDD) remains unclear. The objective of this analysis was to address whether a dose increase provided further improvement in cases of insufficient response using data from an existing randomized clinical trial.

METHODS

Sixty-five patients with MDD who failed to respond to SAMe 1,600 mg/day, escitalopram 10 mg/day, or placebo for 6 weeks were treated with doubled doses of the allocated treatments for the following 6 weeks. Changes in 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Rated, and Systematic Assessment for Treatment Emergent Events-Specific Inquiry were compared between the lower and higher dose treatments in each treatment group and among the higher dose treatments of SAMe, escitalopram, and placebo.

RESULTS

Various depression severity scores decreased significantly for all three treatment arms during the higher dose treatment. No within-group and between-group differences were found in any of the efficacy measures when comparing the doses and treatments. There was a significant difference in reported abdominal discomfort among patients receiving the higher dose of SAMe (31.3%), compared to escitalopram (8.7%) and placebo (3.8%) (χ2=7.32, p = 0.026).

LIMITATIONS

The sample size was relatively small. The study duration for dose increase was relatively short.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with MDD failing to respond to 1,600 mg/day of SAMe may improve after increasing the dose to 3,200 mg/day, but we cannot rule out the contribution of a placebo effect and time-related improvement. The risk of abdominal discomfort may be increased with higher doses of SAMe.

Nicotine Bitartrate Reduces Falls and Freezing of Gait in Parkinson Disease: A Reanalysis

Objective: Determine if NC001, an oral formulation of nicotine that reduces levodopa-induced dyskinesias (LIDs) in MPTP-Parkinson monkeys, could reduce falls, freezing of gait (FOG), and LIDs in Parkinson disease (PD) patients.

Methods: Previously collected data from a study analyzing the effects of NC001 on LIDs in PD patients were reanalyzed. Because indirect-acting cholinergic drugs are sometimes helpful in reducing falls, we hypothesized that NC001, a direct-acting cholinergic agonist, could reduce falls in PD. The original 12-center, double-blind, randomized trial enrolled 65 PD patients. NC001 or placebo was administered 4 times per day for 10 weeks, beginning at 4 mg/day and escalating to 24 mg/day. Assessments included the Unified Dyskinesia Rating Scale (UDysRS) and Parts II-III of the original Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS).

Results: Randomization (1:1) resulted in 35 patients on NC001 and 30 on placebo at baseline. Thirty and 27 patients, respectively, had data available for an intent-to-treat analysis. NC001 was safe and well-tolerated. After 10 weeks, NC001 patients (14/30) had a significant reduction in falls vs. placebo patients (3/27) (p = 0.0041) as assessed by UPDRS Part II. NC001 patients (12/30) also had significantly reduced FOG vs. placebo patients (4/27) (p = 0.0043). NC001 patients, compared with placebo patients, had a significant improvement (p = 0.01) in UDysRS ambulation subtest (40% vs. 3%, respectively). Although NC001 patients had a greater reduction in dyskinesias on the UDysRS than placebo patients (30% vs. 19%, respectively), this was not significant (p = 0.09).

Conclusions: NC001 significantly improved two refractory symptoms of PD, falls and FOG. The reduction in falls and FOG is attributed to selective stimulation of nicotinic receptors.

Clinical Trial Registration: Conducted under IND 105, 268, serial number 0000. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00957918.

Serum GFAP and UCH-L1 for prediction of absence of intracranial injuries on head CT (ALERT-TBI): a multicentre observational study

BACKGROUND

More than 50 million people worldwide sustain a traumatic brain injury (TBI) annually. Detection of intracranial injuries relies on head CT, which is overused and resource intensive. Blood-based brain biomarkers hold the potential to predict absence of intracranial injury and thus reduce unnecessary head CT scanning. We sought to validate a test combining ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase-L1 (UCH-L1) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), at predetermined cutoff values, to predict traumatic intracranial injuries on head CT scan acutely after TBI.

METHODS

This prospective, multicentre observational trial included adults (≥18 years) presenting to participating emergency departments with suspected, non-penetrating TBI and a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 9-15. Patients were eligible if they had undergone head CT as part of standard emergency care and blood collection within 12 h of injury. UCH-L1 and GFAP were measured in serum and analysed using prespecified cutoff values of 327 pg/mL and 22 pg/mL, respectively. UCH-L1 and GFAP assay results were combined into a single test result that was compared with head CT results. The primary study outcomes were the sensitivity and the negative predictive value (NPV) of the test result for the detection of traumatic intracranial injury on head CT.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 6, 2012, and March 20, 2014, 1977 patients were recruited, of whom 1959 had analysable data. 125 (6%) patients had CT-detected intracranial injuries and eight (<1%) had neurosurgically manageable injuries. 1288 (66%) patients had a positive UCH-L1 and GFAP test result and 671 (34%) had a negative test result. For detection of intracranial injury, the test had a sensitivity of 0·976 (95% CI 0·931-0·995) and an NPV of 0·996 (0·987-0·999). In three (<1%) of 1959 patients, the CT scan was positive when the test was negative.

INTERPRETATION

These results show the high sensitivity and NPV of the UCH-L1 and GFAP test. This supports its potential clinical role for ruling out the need for a CT scan among patients with TBI presenting at emergency departments in whom a head CT is felt to be clinically indicated. Future studies to determine the value added by this biomarker test to head CT clinical decision rules could be warranted.

FUNDING

Banyan Biomarkers and US Army Medical Research and Materiel Command.

Oral pharmacological chaperone migalastat compared with enzyme replacement therapy in Fabry disease: 18-month results from the randomised phase III ATTRACT study

Background

Fabry disease is an X-linked lysosomal storage disorder caused by GLA mutations, resulting in α-galactosidase (α-Gal) deficiency and accumulation of lysosomal substrates. Migalastat, an oral pharmacological chaperone being developed as an alternative to intravenous enzyme replacement therapy (ERT), stabilises specific mutant (amenable) forms of α-Gal to facilitate normal lysosomal trafficking.

Methods

The main objective of the 18-month, randomised, active-controlled ATTRACT study was to assess the effects of migalastat on renal function in patients with Fabry disease previously treated with ERT. Effects on heart, disease substrate, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and safety were also assessed.

Results

Fifty-seven adults (56% female) receiving ERT (88% had multiorgan disease) were randomised (1.5:1), based on a preliminary cell-based assay of responsiveness to migalastat, to receive 18 months open-label migalastat or remain on ERT. Four patients had non-amenable mutant forms of α-Gal based on the validated cell-based assay conducted after treatment initiation and were excluded from primary efficacy analyses only. Migalastat and ERT had similar effects on renal function. Left ventricular mass index decreased significantly with migalastat treatment (−6.6 g/m² (−11.0 to −2.2)); there was no significant change with ERT. Predefined renal, cardiac or cerebrovascular events occurred in 29% and 44% of patients in the migalastat and ERT groups, respectively. Plasma globotriaosylsphingosine remained low and stable following the switch from ERT to migalastat. PROs were comparable between groups. Migalastat was generally safe and well tolerated.

Conclusions

Migalastat offers promise as a first-in-class oral monotherapy alternative treatment to intravenous ERT for patients with Fabry disease and amenable mutations.

Trial registration number:

NCT00925301; Pre-results.

Treatment of Fabry's Disease with the Pharmacologic Chaperone Migalastat

BACKGROUND

Fabry's disease, an X-linked disorder of lysosomal α-galactosidase deficiency, leads to substrate accumulation in multiple organs. Migalastat, an oral pharmacologic chaperone, stabilizes specific mutant forms of α-galactosidase, increasing enzyme trafficking to lysosomes.

METHODS

The initial assay of mutant α-galactosidase forms that we used to categorize 67 patients with Fabry's disease for randomization to 6 months of double-blind migalastat or placebo (stage 1), followed by open-label migalastat from 6 to 12 months (stage 2) plus an additional year, had certain limitations. Before unblinding, a new, validated assay showed that 50 of the 67 participants had mutant α-galactosidase forms suitable for targeting by migalastat. The primary end point was the percentage of patients who had a response (≥50% reduction in the number of globotriaosylceramide inclusions per kidney interstitial capillary) at 6 months. We assessed safety along with disease substrates and renal, cardiovascular, and patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

The primary end-point analysis, involving patients with mutant α-galactosidase forms that were suitable or not suitable for migalastat therapy, did not show a significant treatment effect: 13 of 32 patients (41%) who received migalastat and 9 of 32 patients (28%) who received placebo had a response at 6 months (P=0.30). Among patients with suitable mutant α-galactosidase who received migalastat for up to 24 months, the annualized changes from baseline in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and measured GFR were -0.30±0.66 and -1.51±1.33 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) of body-surface area, respectively. The left-ventricular-mass index decreased significantly from baseline (-7.7 g per square meter; 95% confidence interval [CI], -15.4 to -0.01), particularly when left ventricular hypertrophy was present (-18.6 g per square meter; 95% CI, -38.2 to 1.0). The severity of diarrhea, reflux, and indigestion decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

Among all randomly assigned patients (with mutant α-galactosidase forms that were suitable or not suitable for migalastat therapy), the percentage of patients who had a response at 6 months did not differ significantly between the migalastat group and the placebo group. (Funded by Amicus Therapeutics; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00925301 [study AT1001-011] and NCT01458119 [study AT1001-041].).

Randomized phase 2 trial of NP001-a novel immune regulator: Safety and early efficacy in ALS

Objective:

To assess the safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy of NP001, a novel immune regulator of inflammatory monocytes/macrophages, for slowing progression of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).

Methods:

This was a phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of NP001 in 136 patients with ALS of <3 years' duration and forced vital capacity ≥70%. Participants received NP001 2 mg/kg, NP001 1 mg/kg, or placebo for 6 months. Safety, tolerability, and inflammatory biomarkers were assessed throughout the study. Preliminary efficacy was evaluated using the ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R) slope and change from baseline, with and without matched historical placebo controls, after 6 months of treatment. A post hoc analysis of the percentage of patients (“responders”) whose ALSFRS-R did not change from baseline was also conducted.

Results:

NP001 was generally safe and well-tolerated, except for infusion site pain and dizziness. No significant slowing of decline in the primary or secondary measures was observed. However, slowing of progression was observed in the high-dose group in patients with greater inflammation (wide range C-reactive protein). Moreover, NP001 may have dose dependently halted symptom progression in a subset of patients. More than 2 times as many patients on high-dose NP001 (25%) did not progress during 6 months of treatment compared with those on placebo (11%). Most “responders” had an elevated biomarker of inflammation, interleukin-18, and were positive for lipopolysaccharide at baseline, which decreased after treatment with NP001.

Conclusion:

The arresting of progression of ALS symptoms by NP001 in a subset of patients with marked neuroinflammation, as observed here, will represent a novel therapeutic approach for patients with ALS, if confirmed.

Classification of evidence:

This study provides Class I evidence that for patients with ALS, NP001 is safe and did not significantly slow progression of the disease (difference in slope of the ALSFRS-R/month 0.12 favoring NP001, p = 0.55). The study lacks the precision to exclude an important effect of NP001.

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of S-adenosyl-L-methionine (SAMe) versus escitalopram in major depressive disorder

OBJECTIVE

To examine the comparative antidepressant efficacy of S-adenosyl-L-methionine (SAMe) and escitalopram in a placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind clinical trial.

METHOD

One hundred eighty-nine outpatients (49.7% female, mean [SD] age = 45 [15] years) with DSM-IV-diagnosed major depressive disorder (MDD) were recruited from April 13, 2005, to December 22, 2009, at the Massachusetts General Hospital and at Butler Hospital. Patients were randomized for 12 weeks to SAMe 1,600-3,200 mg/d, escitalopram 10-20 mg/d, or placebo. Doses were escalated at 6 weeks in the event of nonresponse. The main outcome measure was the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17). Tolerability was assessed by the Systematic Assessment for Treatment of Emergent Events-Specific Inquiry (SAFTEE-SI).

RESULTS

All 3 treatment arms demonstrated a significant improvement of about 5-6 points in HDRS-17 scores (P < .001 for all), and no significant differences were observed between the treatment arms (P > .05 for all). Response rates in the intent-to-treat sample were 36% for SAMe, 34% for escitalopram, and 30% for placebo. Remission rates were 28% for SAMe, 28% for escitalopram, and 17% for placebo. No comparisons between treatment groups attained significance (P > .05 for all). Tolerability was good, with gastrointestinal side effects (19% for stomach discomfort and 20% for diarrhea) as the most common in the SAMe arm. Significant differences were observed between treatment groups for dizziness, anorgasmia, diminished mental acuity, and hot flashes (P < .05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

The results fail to support an advantage over placebo for either the investigational treatment SAMe or the standard treatment escitalopram for MDD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00101452.

Improved postprandial glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes from subcutaneous injection of insulin lispro with hyaluronidase

BACKGROUND

Coinjection of hyaluronidase has been shown to accelerate insulin absorption in healthy volunteers and patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. This study was undertaken to compare the postprandial glycemic response of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) administered insulin lispro with and without recombinant human hyaluronidase (rHuPH20) and regular human insulin (RHI) with rHuPH20.

METHODS

This double-blind three-way crossover study compared the insulin pharmacokinetics and glucodynamic response to a standardized liquid meal (80 g of carbohydrate) in 21 patients with T2DM who received subcutaneous injections of individually optimized doses of lispro±rHuPH20 and RHI+rHuPH20. The optimum dose (targeting postprandial glucose [PPG] of 70-140 mg/dL) of each preparation was selected by the investigator following a fixed-dose escalation procedure in three dose-finding meals.

RESULTS

Co-injection of lispro+rHuPH20 accelerated pharmacokinetics relative to lispro alone (time to peak insulin concentration, 43 vs. 74 min; P=0.0045) with increased exposure in the first hour (184% of control; P<0.0001) and reduced exposure after 2 h (67% of control; P=0.0001). These accelerated pharmacokinetics improved both total hyperglycemic excursions (area under the curve for 0-4 h >140 mg/dL, 56% of control; P=0.048) and hypoglycemic excursions (area under the curve for 0-8 h <70 mg/dL, 34% of control; P=0.033), allowing over three times as many patients to reach the American Diabetes Association's target of peak PPG <180 mg/dL without requiring glucose treatment for hypoglycemia. The mean optimum dose of lispro was reduced 8% from 0.275 U/kg without rHuPH20 to 0.254 U/kg with rHuPH20 (P=0.04). RHI+rHuPH20 had responses and optimum doses comparable to insulin lispro alone. All insulin preparations were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Lispro+rHuPH20 provided superior control of glycemic excursion compared with lispro alone, with lower insulin requirements and reduced hypoglycemic excursions.

Efficacy and safety of doxepin 6 mg in a four-week outpatient trial of elderly adults with chronic primary insomnia

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy and safety of doxepin (DXP), a histamine H(1) receptor antagonist, was evaluated in elderly adults with sleep maintenance insomnia.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled outpatient trial. Elderly adults meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for primary insomnia were randomized to four weeks of nightly treatment with either DXP 6 mg (N=130) or placebo (PBO; N=124). Efficacy was assessed using patient self-report instruments and clinician ratings. Patient-reported endpoints included subjective total sleep time (sTST), subjective wake after sleep onset (sWASO), latency to sleep onset (LSO), sleep quality, and a Patient Global Impression scale (PGI). The primary endpoint was sTST at week 1.

RESULTS

DXP 6 mg produced significantly more sTST and less sWASO at week 1 (both p-values <0.0001) than PBO. These significant improvements versus placebo were maintained at weeks 2-4 (all p-values <0.05). There were no significant differences in LSO for DXP 6 mg versus PBO. DXP 6 mg significantly improved sleep quality (weeks 1, 3, and 4, p<0.05) and several outcome-related parameters, including several items on the PGI, the severity and improvement items of the Clinician Global Impression scale (CGI; weeks 1 and 2) and the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI; weeks 1-4), all versus PBO. There were no reports of anticholinergic effects (e.g., dry mouth) or memory impairment. The safety profile of DXP 6 mg was comparable to that of PBO.

CONCLUSIONS

In elderly adults with insomnia, DXP 6 mg produced significant improvements in sleep maintenance, sleep duration, and sleep quality endpoints that were sustained throughout the trial. These data suggest that DXP 6 mg is effective for treating sleep maintenance insomnia and is well-tolerated in elderly adults with chronic primary insomnia.

Efficacy and safety of doxepin 3 and 6 mg in a 35-day sleep laboratory trial in adults with chronic primary insomnia

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of doxepin (DXP) 3 mg and 6 mg in adults diagnosed with primary insomnia.

DESIGN AND METHODS

The study was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial. Patients meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for primary insomnia were randomized to 35 days of nightly treatment with DXP 3 mg (n=75), DXP 6 mg (n=73), or placebo (PBO; n=73), followed by 2 nights of single-blind PBO to evaluate discontinuation (DC) effects. Efficacy was assessed using polysomnography (PSG) and patient reports. Efficacy data were examined for Night (N) 1, N15, and N29. Safety assessments were conducted throughout the study.

RESULTS

Compared with PBO, DXP 3 and 6 mg significantly improved wake time after sleep onset (WASO) on N1 (3 mg and 6 mg; P<0.0001), N15 (3 mg P=0.0025; 6 mg P=0.0009), and N29 (3 mg P=0.0248; 6 mg P=0.0009), latency to persistent sleep (LPS) on N1 (3 mg P=0.0047; 6 mg P=0.0007), and total sleep time (TST) on N1 (3 mg and 6 mg P<0.0001), N15 (6 mg P=0.0035), and N29 (3 mg P=0.0261; 6 mg P<0.0001). In terms of early morning awakenings, DXP 3 and 6 mg demonstrated significant improvements in SE in the final quarter of the night on N1, N15, and N29, with the exception of 3 mg on N29 (P=0.0691). Rates of discontinuation were low, and the safety profiles were comparable across the 3 treatment groups. There were no significant next-day residual effects, and there were no spontaneous reports of memory impairment, complex sleep behaviors, anticholinergic effects, weight gain, or increased appetite. Additionally, there was no evidence of rebound insomnia after DXP discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

Five weeks of nightly administration of DXP 3 mg and 6 mg to adults with chronic primary insomnia resulted in significant and sustained improvements in sleep maintenance and early morning awakenings (with the exception of SE in the final quarter of the night on N29 for 3 mg [P=0.0691]). These sleep improvements were not accompanied by next-day residual effects or followed by rebound insomnia or withdrawal effects upon discontinuation. These findings confirm the unique profile of sleep maintenance efficacy and safety of DXP observed in prior studies.

Efficacy and Safety of Doxepin 1 mg and 3 mg in a 12-week Sleep Laboratory and Outpatient Trial of Elderly Subjects with Chronic Primary Insomnia

STUDY OBJECTIVES

to evaluate the efficacy and safety of doxepin 1 mg and 3 mg in elderly subjects with chronic primary insomnia.

DESIGN AND METHODS

the study was a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial. Subjects meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for primary insomnia were randomized to 12 weeks of nightly treatment with doxepin (DXP) 1 mg (n = 77) or 3 mg (n = 82), or placebo (PBO; n = 81). Efficacy was assessed using polysomnography (PSG), patient reports, and clinician ratings. Objective efficacy data are reported for Nights (N) 1, 29, and 85; subjective efficacy data during Weeks 1, 4, and 12; and Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale and Patient Global Impression (PGI) scale data after Weeks 2, 4, and 12 of treatment. Safety assessments were conducted throughout the study.

RESULTS

DXP 3 mg led to significant improvement versus PBO on N1 in wake time after sleep onset (WASO; P < 0.0001; primary endpoint), total sleep time (TST; P < 0.0001), overall sleep efficiency (SE; P < 0.0001), SE in the last quarter of the night (P < 0.0001), and SE in Hour 8 (P < 0.0001). These improvements were sustained at N85 for all variables, with significance maintained for WASO, TST, overall SE, and SE in the last quarter of the night. DXP 3 mg significantly improved patient-reported latency to sleep onset (Weeks 1, 4, and 12), subjective TST (Weeks 1, 4, and 12), and sleep quality (Weeks 1, 4, and 12). Several global outcome-related variables were significantly improved, including the severity and improvement items of the CGI (Weeks 2, 4, and 12), and all 5 items of the PGI (Week 12; 4 items after Weeks 2 and 4). Significant improvements were observed for DXP 1 mg for several measures including WASO, TST, overall SE, and SE in the last quarter of the night at several time points. Rates of discontinuation were low, and the safety profiles were comparable across the 3 treatment groups. There were no significant next-day residual effects; additionally, there were no reports of memory impairment, complex sleep behaviors, anticholinergic effects, weight gain, or increased appetite.

CONCLUSIONS

DXP 1 mg and 3 mg administered nightly to elderly chronic insomnia patients for 12 weeks resulted in significant and sustained improvements in most endpoints. These improvements were not accompanied by evidence of next-day residual sedation or other significant adverse effects. DXP also demonstrated improvements in both patient- and physician-based ratings of global insomnia outcome. The efficacy of DXP at the doses used in this study is noteworthy with respect to sleep maintenance and early morning awakenings given that these are the primary sleep complaints of the elderly. This study, the longest placebo-controlled, double-blind, polysomnographic trial of nightly pharmacotherapy for insomnia in the elderly, provides the best evidence to date of the sustained efficacy and safety of an insomnia medication in older adults.

Effect of leukotriene modifier drugs on the safety of oral aspirin challenges

BACKGROUND

Aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease can be diagnosed with oral aspirin challenges and treated with aspirin desensitization.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether controller medications, particularly leukotriene modifier drugs, taken during oral aspirin challenges can reduce the risk of severe asthmatic responses.

METHODS

The medical records of 676 patients who had undergone oral aspirin challenges, followed by aspirin desensitization, were reviewed. Asthmatic responses were stratified based on severity of bronchospastic response or lack of response. The effect of pretreatment with controller medications on the outcome of oral aspirin challenges was measured.

RESULTS

Leukotriene modifier drugs had the most significant effect in protecting the lower airways from severe reactions (P = .004). The protective effect of leukotriene modifier drugs was observed in patients already taking systemic corticosteroids, where the addition of leukotriene modifier drugs significantly shifted the response toward a milder asthmatic response (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Protection from significant aspirin-induced bronchospasm during oral aspirin challenge can be accomplished with leukotriene modifier drugs. The use of a combination of inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting beta-agonists, systemic corticosteroids, and leukotriene modifier drugs stabilized underlying airways in preparation for a reasonably safe and accurate oral aspirin challenge. However, only pretreatment with leukotriene modifier drugs enhanced the safety of oral aspirin challenge in patients with aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease by significantly decreasing the degree of asthmatic responses. Therefore, outpatient oral aspirin challenges in most well-selected patients appear to be a reasonable decision.

Risk factors for Candida species colonization of neonatal intensive care unit patients

BACKGROUND

Candida spp. are increasingly important pathogens in neonatal intensive care units (NICU). Prior colonization is a major risk factor for candidemia, but few studies have focused on risk factors for colonization, particularly in NICU patients.

METHODS

A prospective, multicenter cohort study was performed in six NICUs to determine risk factors for Candida colonization. Infant gastrointestinal tracts were cultured on admission and weekly until NICU discharge and health care worker hands were cultured monthly for Candida spp.

RESULTS

The prevalence of Candida spp. colonization was 23% (486 of 2157 infants); 299 (14%), 151 (7%) and 74 (3%) were colonized with Candida albicans, Candida parapsilosis and other Candida spp., respectively. Multiple logistic regression analysis adjusting for length of stay, birth weight < or = 1000 g and gestational age < 32 weeks revealed that use of third generation cephalosporins was associated with either C. albicans (155 incident cases) or C. parapsilosis (104 incident cases) colonization. Use of central venous catheters or intravenous lipids were risk factors for C. albicans, whereas delivery by cesarean section was protective. Use of H2 blockers was an independent risk factor for C. parapsilosis. Of 2989 cultures from health care workers' hands, 150 (5%) were positive for C. albicans and 575 (19%) for C. parapsilosis, but carriage rates did not correlate with NICU site-specific rates for infant colonization.

CONCLUSIONS

We speculate that NICU patients acquire Candida spp., particularly C. parapsilosis, from the hands of health care workers. H2 blockers, third generation cephalosporins and delayed enteral feedings alter gastrointestinal tract ecology, thereby facilitating colonization.

Drawbacks of GENEHUNTER for larger pedigrees: application to panic disorder

Large pedigrees can pose a problem for GENEHUNTER linkage analysis software. Differences in two-point and multipoint lodscores were observed when comparing GENEHUNTER to other linkage software. Careful consideration must be given when selecting linkage analysis programs. Am. J. Med. Genet. (Neuropsychiatr. Genet.) 96:781-783, 2000.

Risk factors for candidemia in Neonatal Intensive Care Unit patients. The National Epidemiology of Mycosis Survey study group

BACKGROUND

Candida species are important nosocomial pathogens in neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) patients.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was performed in six geographically diverse NICUs from 1993 to 1995 to determine the incidence of and risk factors for candidemia, including the role of gastrointestinal (GI) tract colonization. Study procedures included rectal swabs to detect fungal colonization and active surveillance to identify risk factors for candidemia. Candida strains obtained from the GI tract and blood were analyzed by pulsed field gel electrophoresis to determine whether colonizing strains caused candidemia.

RESULTS

In all, 2,847 infants were enrolled and 35 (1.2%) developed candidemia (12.3 cases per 1,000 patient discharges or 0.63 case per 1,000 catheter days) including 23 of 421 (5.5%) babies < or =1,000 g. After adjusting for birth weight and abdominal surgery, forward multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated significant risk factors, including gestational age <32 weeks, 5-min Apgar <5; shock, disseminated intravascular coagulopathy, prior use of intralipid, parenteral nutrition, central venous catheters, H2 blockers, intubation or length of stay > 7 days before candidemia (P < 0.05). Catheters, steroids and GI tract colonization were not independent risk factors, but GI tract colonization preceded candidemia in 15 of 35 (43%) case patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Candida spp. are an important cause of late onset sepsis in NICU patients. The incidence of candidemia might be decreased by the judicious use of treatments identified as risk factors and avoiding H2 blockers.