Search This Blog

Tuesday, August 29, 2023

Physicians Aren't Asking Enough Questions About Cannabis Use

 As more older adults turn to cannabis to alleviate medical ailments like pain, insomnia, and anxiety, many physicians are hesitant to ask their patients about the topic or advise them about possible health impacts.

The lack of questioning is concerning for both doctors and patients: while moderate use of cannabis and cannabidiol (CBD) may be safe on their own when combined with certain medications, the substance can cause serious side effects. Older adults may also be more sensitive to the drug.

The problem is magnified by a sharp increase in cannabis consumption among older Americans resulting from its legalization in 38 states across the country. One study found that use of cannabis by adults 65 years and older in the United States jumped sevenfold in the past decade. In states like California, the stark increase has resulted in a 1808% jump in the rate of cannabis-related visits by seniors to the emergency room, according to a study published this past January in the Journal of the American Geriatric Society.

As cannabis grows in popularity, doctors need to inform patients about the potential harms and benefits, experts said.

Marijuana can have serious interactions with blood-thinning medications like warfarin, resulting in a risk for internal bleeding. Its use may also cause harmful interactions with the anti-epileptic medication clobazam (Sympazan, Onfi). Use of cannabis also decreases the efficacy of smoking cessation medications like theophyllineclozapine, and olanzapine.

Anesthesia requirements are also greater in those who regularly use cannabis; therefore, if a patient is going into surgery the doctor needs to have an accurate understanding of regular use, said Peter Grinspoon, MD, a primary care physician and instructor at Harvard Medical School in Boston.

"If you don't have open communication between a doctor and patient then cannabis use can be dangerous," said Grinspoon, the author of Seeing Through the Smoke: A Cannabis Specialist Untangles the Truth About Marijuana. If doctors are aware of a patient's cannabis use, they can adjust their medications, he said.  

Many physicians are hesitant to advise their patients on cannabis use because they weren't taught about it in medical school, Grinspoon said. Only about 15% of US medical schools teach about medical marijuana and the endocannabinoid system, through which cannabis works in the body. Cannabinoid receptors are found throughout the body in tissue and organs, and they are most numerous in the brain. When cannabis is in the system it acts on these receptors, which then release brain chemicals that impact appetite, pain, mood, and memory.

"We're doing a huge disservice to doctors by not educating them on the basics of how cannabis works," Grinspoon said.

Seniors may also turn to cannabis to help with their depression and anxiety, said Thomas Kosten, MD, a professor of psychiatry at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. The drug also can serve as an appetite stimulant in depressed patients who aren't eating well and are losing weight as a result.

An April 2020 study published in the American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry found that anxiety was among the most common reasons why older patients use cannabis and that patients found it effective for alleviating symptoms. Kosten notes that older patients may sometimes experience anxiety over concerns around aging or loneliness.

Although cannabis may reduce symptoms of depression and anxiety, doctors must look below the surface at what's causing the symptoms. "Cannabis may improve your appetite but it won't necessarily make the depression that's causing it any better," Kosten said. "For that, patients may need an antidepressant."

Kosten noted that older military veterans may turn to cannabis to help ease post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Some evidence points to benefits of cannabis for PTSD, including a study published in the journal Psychiatry and Neuroscience in March 2019.

Many patients turn to cannabis because the side effects are more tolerable than other medications, Grinspoon said. Even so, doctors need to be aware of these side effects and act accordingly. "There's no free lunch," he said. "All medications have side effects."

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/995954

Biobanking Equipment to See Booming Growth 2023-2030 | Thermo Fisher, BioLife, Beckman, Panasonic

 Global Biobanking Equipment Market 2023 research report represents a detailed overview of the current market situation and forecast till 2030. The study perhaps a perfect mixture of qualitative and quantitative information highlighting key market developments, challenges, competition industry face alongside gap analysis and new opportunities available and trend within the Market. Our report is compiled in 110+ pages and tables, featuring the most valuable data and figures for the forecast period up to 2030. This report offers Market size, recent trends, growth, share, development status, government policy, market dynamics, cost structure, and competitive landscape. The research report also includes the present market and its growth potentials in the given period of forecast.


Read more: https://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/news/coherent-market-insights/biobanking-equipment-market-to-see-booming-growth-2023-2030-thermo-fisher-scientific-inc-biolife-solutions-inc-beckman-coulter-inc-panasonic-biomedical-sales#ixzz8Bp1KmZmc

'Can COVID, Flu, and RSV Shots Be Given at the Same Time?'

 Many adults ages 60 and up will be eligible for three vaccines this fall -- a COVID booster

opens in a new tab or window, the flu shot, and the new respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccineopens in a new tab or window -- so the big question is, can they get them all at once?

Since there are no data on giving this trio of vaccines at the same time, most experts advise a different strategy.

Take flu and COVID together, they told MedPage Today. The CDC endorses thisopens in a new tab or window, as there's evidence and experience that people can take this combination just fine.

There's also some evidence from the clinical trials of the two RSV vaccines that it's okay to give flu and RSV shots together, said William Schaffner, MD, of Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee, who is also a spokesperson for the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA).

But Schaffner told MedPage Today that some practitioners may be "a little bit more cautious about giving RSV along with the others," and there "may not be too many people who want to get all three at the same time."

"If there's one [shot] that doctors might want to treat separately, it might be this newbie [RSV], because there simply hasn't been that much experience with it," he said.

It's a single-dose vaccine, so that means seniors would need just two appointments this fall: one for COVID and flu, and the other for RSV.

Schaffner and other experts recommended getting the RSV vaccine at least 2 weeks on either side of the COVID and flu combination, and getting the RSV shot as soon as possible, since it's currently available, and since its protection is likely to sustain through the entire winter and RSV season.

"We can start giving this right now because it's supposed to, according to the data, provide substantial long-term protection through at least one RSV season, and maybe longer," Schaffner said. "It looks as though there is indeed longer-term protection than we get with flu or COVID [vaccines]."

That said, it's OK to give all three at once if that is the only opportunity to do so, said Aaron Glatt, MD, of Mount Sinai South Nassau in Oceanside, New York, who is also a spokesperson for IDSA.

"We don't have a ton of data, but if someone is really that sick, I'd want them to get all those vaccines," Glatt told MedPage Today. "The problem with waiting is, will they get the vaccine? If they need three visits to the doctor, how many people are willing to do that?"

Unlike the second dose of the original COVID vaccine, experts didn't seem concerned about similar side effects with the RSV vaccine.

Currently, there are two RSV vaccines approved for people ages 60 and up: one from Pfizer

opens in a new tab or window (Abrysvo) and one from GSKopens in a new tab or window (Arexvy).

Trials did turn up signals that physicians should keep an eye out for, including Guillain-Barré syndrome, which occurred in trials of both vaccines and was likely related to vaccination, according to the FDA and trial investigators. In addition, for Arexvy, atrial fibrillation within 30 days was reported in 10 vaccine recipients versus four placebo patients.

"Of course you're giving [the vaccine] to a very high-risk population," Schaffner said. "Older persons are the ones who get [atrial fibrillation], but that will be looked at very carefully going forward."

CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) didn't give a blanket recommendation that every 60-year-old should get the RSV vaccine. Instead, the group recommended shared clinical decision makingopens in a new tab or window for adults 60 and older, noting that those in this age group at highest risk for severe disease include those with chronic conditions such as lung diseases, heart failure and coronary artery disease, immunocompromise, and other conditions.

"Not every 60-year-old needs to get this vaccine," said Glatt. "I would definitely give it to a 62-year-old with lung disease. I wouldn't give it to a 72-year-old who's perfectly healthy otherwise. But if they want to get it, no problem."

ACIP has yet to weigh in on recommendations for fall COVID boosters, though experts expectopens in a new tab or window that they will be strongly recommended for at-risk groups, including older people.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/106112

Company Selling Unproven Insulin Infusions in Legal Battle Over Money, Control

 Behind the scenes of an outpatient insulin infusion procedure

opens in a new tab or window that medical experts say advertises unproven claims sits a nasty legal drama involving feuding leaders of Well Cell Global of Houston, also known as Diabetes Relief.

The companyopens in a new tab or window has been selling pumps, protocols, and licenses for the infusions, marketed as Physiologic Insulin Resensitization, or PIR, to clinics or physician practices around the nation. Its co-founder and CEO, Scott Hepford, maintains the treatments can improve health outcomes for people with a variety of medical conditions, from diabetes to psoriasis to Parkinson's.

Perhaps unbeknownst to investors, licensees, or patients, however, is the turmoil that has plagued the company.

Three years ago, Hepford's original partner, Hunter Carr, filed a lawsuitopens in a new tab or window against him and a newer partner, internist Stanley T. Lewis, MD, as well as several other newer company officials. Carr claimed he was a victim of a July 24, 2020 scheme to push him out without paying him his share of the company's worth. He said the assets of Diabetes Relief were moved into Well Cell Global, a new company, and out of his control, and he was removed from Diabetes Relief that month.

What Hepford and Lewis did was "a classic ambush," Carr's attorney Christopher Stevenson said in an interview with MedPage Today. According to Carr's attorney, "[t]hey lied to him ... and negotiated these deals in secret behind his back. But the worst thing they did was they sold the assets of the company to a company they owned for well below the value of these assets."

Stevenson said Carr now wants 40.9% -- his share of the company when he was forced out -- of the value an analyst said the company had at the time, between $16.5 million and $27 million. Carr's share, Stevenson said, is in the ballpark of $6.91 million.

Some of Carr's court filings also name threeopens in a new tab or window other defendants: Roy Hinman, MD, of St. Augustine, Florida, a company investor who runs several PIR clinics; Brian Loveridge, MD, who began Diabetes Relief clinicsopens in a new tab or window in Utah; and the company's marketing head, Glenn Massey.

The reason Carr had to be removed, Hepford said in his August 21, 2021 depositionopens in a new tab or window, was allegedly because Carr had blockedopens in a new tab or window many of the license deals that the company was trying to sign with various clinics. Carr was frequently argumentative, with "screaming, yelling," Hepford said. Other testimony from a Diabetes Relief nurse practitioner alleged Carr demonstrated "belligerent" and "aggressiveopens in a new tab or window" behavior toward staff.

As clinic owners and potential customers were recruited with promises of remarkable patient benefits as well as profits, Hepford said in his deposition that Diabetes Relief was "hemorrhaging money, that we were completely incapable internally of having a functional operation, that we were being held hostage in a corporate lockup scenario. And every time we tried to put something in place, the negative control that your client [Carr] exerted would not allow that to happen."

"Go look up textbook personality narcissist, right – narcissistic personality disorder, and he checks every box," Hepford said in the deposition. "It was like walking in a minefield and threading needles for a living working with him."

Documents filed in Harris County District Court reveal a number of inconsistencies in claims Hepford and some PIR licensees have made about PIR and its origins, specifically with respect to Trina, a network of insulin clinics marketed as "artificial pancreas," which leading endocrinology experts labeled a scamopens in a new tab or window. Trina, the subject of a series of stories published by MedPage Today and inewsource in 2018, flourished brieflyopens in a new tab or window between five and 10 years ago.

That PIR clinics are now flourishing, with Medicare and insurance companies reportedly reimbursing for the insulin infusions, is a concern. In 2009, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services reviewed data submitted to it and determined

opens in a new tab or window that outpatient IV insulin therapy, or OIVIT, administered in pulses and balanced with intermittent glucose, did not benefit patients and refused to pay for it.

Hepford and his representatives insisted in several recent emails to MedPage Today that Well Cell is nothing like Trinaopens in a new tab or window, whose clinics folded after Medicare and insurance companies -- which initially paid between $450 and $700 per infusion -- realized the treatments were the same as OIVIT and stopped paying.

Hepford declined several requests to explain how PIR as a treatment differs from OIVIT, although sources told MedPage Today the infusions -- pulsed IV insulin balanced with glucose -- appear to be essentially the same.

The now-disbarred attorney behind Trina, G. Ford Gilbert, went to prison on a federal briberyopens in a new tab or window charge, convicted of trying to persuade an Alabama lawmaker to order insurance companies to pay for it after they had refused. Additionally, a California court found that Gilbert's infusions were copied from a California endocrinologist's experimental therapy and ordered him to pay him back $8 million

Hepford told MedPage Today that he and Carr had considered making a deal for the West Houston Trina Clinic in 2014 but that the deal didn't go through

opens in a new tab or window.

But court documents in this case suggest Well Cell and Diabetes Relief indeed are rooted in the Trina Clinic in West Houston, which ran under the name Health Restoration Partners. In a sworn statement, Carr stated that he and Hepford acquiredopens in a new tab or window it in 2014 and rebranded it as Diabetes Relief the following January, with a new website. In his depositionopens in a new tab or window, Hepford acknowledged that he and Carr took over the business and carried it forward under a new name, Diabetes Relief.

According to business data and analytics company Dun & Bradstreet's filingopens in a new tab or window online, Health Restoration Partners was listed under the name "Trina Health West Houston."

Hepford said in his deposition that "over the course of many months we were able to uncover that they had probably been taken advantage of by a bad actor based out of California that, I guess, got them into the space. The medical records were terrible, based on the consultants we brought in to look. The billing practices were a debacle. Their operational systems and processes were just very – beyond distressed asset is probably a good way to describe what it – what it was."

After paying numerous experts to advise them, Hepford continued, "we had identified and/or discovered and/or created enough that it deemed us going and protecting it and getting our own patents."

"We were trying to figure out how to take a medical technology to the market," he said in his deposition. Hepford said he and Carr agreed, "We need to put this – all of – all of our efforts into a new, different company."

It remains unclear what, if anything, Diabetes Relief or Well Cell changed about the infusions from when they were administered under the Trina "artificial pancreas" brand.

Hepford also insisted that his company doesn't administer infusions itself but merely sells the tools to clinics. But Hepford said in his deposition that Diabetes Relief received an NPI number to run clinics in several locations, and hired a medical assistant and a registered nurse, a billing collector and a physician, Dr. Dunn, who left the company.

A Google search shows Kimberly Dunn, MD, is listed as having worked at the Diabetes Relief clinic at the same Houston address

opens in a new tab or window as Carr and Hepford's Trina Health West Houstonopens in a new tab or window clinic, at the same address advertised on the Trina Health websiteopens in a new tab or window in 2014, and in the same building as Well Cell Global's current offices.

Dunn did not return requests for comment about her involvement or the reasons for her departure.

Hepford and Lewis declined comment citing pending litigation. Carr did not return calls and emails requesting his response. And Kevin Leyendecker, Hepford's attorney, did not consent to be interviewed.

Stevenson was asked whether what Carr is asking for in his lawsuit might be unrealistic if Medicare and private insurance companies determine that PIR is basically OIVIT and stop paying, claw back money already reimbursed, and bankrupt clinic investors file lawsuits.

"Even if it was determined that there was rampant fraud in Diabetes Relief, and (investors) were bankrupted because they were miscoding the treatments, and that spilled over into Well Cell Global and their other business partners and killed this business ... if that happened, what would be the impact on Mr. Carr?" Stevenson asked rhetorically.

"The answer to that is nothing. Because again, the measure of damages is based on the value of the company as of July 24, 2020. Not on anything that happened subsequently."

Stevenson acknowledged the issue with reimbursement and that PIR is unproven.

Some clinic websitesopens in a new tab or window boast the infusions can restore erectile function, control weight, help with dementia symptoms, and improve sleep and mood.

And during a May town hall at a rural Texas hospital that is administering PIR to some 215 patients, Hepford called the infusions "cutting edge," and said they are "literally creating energy in every single cell in the entire human body."

There is, he said, "a lot of anecdotal evidence that these treatments do work," Stevenson told MedPage Today. "But the problem is that it has not been adequately researched by whatever qualifications, whatever medical schools, whatever trials ... have to get subjected to in order to gain the acceptance of the medical community and to be approved treatments and be paid for by Medicare and insurance companies. That simply has not been done yet. And so, you know, no one can say today, yes they work or no, they don't because the studies haven't been completed."

Carr's lawsuit was scheduled for a 2-week jury trial this month with nearly 400 filings in the docket. But Stevenson said the case is now being rescheduled, and the parties may soon begin mediation.

https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/106103

Why Emergent BioSolutions Stock Is Tumbling

Emergent BioSolutions (EBS -7.92%) was tumbling 10.6% lower as of 11:29 a.m. ET on Tuesday. The decline came after S&P Global's S&P Dow Jones Indices announced that Advance Auto Parts will replace Emergent BioSolutions in the S&P SmallCap 600 index.

S&P Dow Jones Indices said that the change will be effective before the market opens on Friday, Aug. 25. The company's reason for the replacement was that "Emergent BioSolutions is no longer representative of the small-cap market space" while Avance Auto Parts is.

Any exchange-traded funds (ETFs) or mutual funds that track the S&P SmallCap 600 will sell their positions in Emergent BioSolutions and buy shares of Advance Auto Parts. Such moves can cause downward pressure on Emergent's share price. But getting booted from the S&P SmallCap 600 is more of a result of Emergent BioSolutions' woes than a cause of them.

The company's business challenges have caused many investors to throw in the towel. Emergent's share price has plunged 64% so far this year and is down nearly 97% below the high set in 2020. Its market cap now stands at close to $220 million, low enough to spur S&P Dow Jones Indices to seek another member for its S&P SmallCap 600.

Emergent BioSolutions is taking steps to right the ship. The company announced earlier this month that it will focus on its core products going forward and deemphasize its contract development and manufacturing organization (CDMO) business. These moves could help turn things around, but it's too soon to predict if or when the stock will rebound. 

https://www.fool.com/investing/2023/08/22/why-emergent-biosolutions-stock-is-tumbling-today

Jordan Peterson Hits Back After Canada Forces Him Into "Coaching Program" Over Controversial Statements

 Clinical psychologist and Daily Wire contributor Dr. Jordan Peterson has been cast into Canadian outer darkness for thought crimes.

And by Canadian outer darkness, we mean "social media sensitivity training" for his controversial (practical) statements, which a panel of three Ontario Divisional Court judges agreed have been "unprofessional."

According to court documents, the "coaching program" will require Peterson to "reflect on, and ameliorate [his] professionalism in public statements."

"The order is not disciplinary and does not prevent Dr. Peterson from expressing himself on controversial topics; it has a minimal impact on his right to freedom of expression," wrote Justice Paul Schabas.

Peterson, a former professor of psychology for the University of Toronto, went viral in 2016 for a lecture in which he condemned the use of pronouns, and slammed Canadian lawmakers over legislation on gender identity or expression, The Federalist Papers reports, citing the BBC.

In making their decision, the court weighed several of Peterson’s controversial comments to decide if they were in compliance with the College’s Standards of Professional Conduct.

The first example cited by the court was a tweet from Jan. 2, 2022, in which Peterson responded to an individual concerned about overpopulation by stating: “You’re free to leave at any point.”

Less than a month later, during an appearance on “The Joe Rogan Experience,” Peterson reportedly referred to a former client of his as “vindictive,” and said that their complaint against him was a “pack of lies.” In the same episode, while speaking about air pollution and child deaths, Peterson reportedly also said: “it’s just poor children, and the world has too many people on it anyways.”

Another controversial comment of Peterson’s was in response to news of actress Elliot Page, formerly Ellen, identifying as a man and undergoing gender-affirming breast removal surgery.

“Remember when pride was a sin? And Ellen Page just had her breasts removed by a criminal physician,” the June 2022 tweet reportedly read. He was consequently suspended from Twitter for misgendering and “deadnaming” the actor. -The Federalist Papers

Reacting to the ruling, Peterson says he's perplexed by the contradiction in the court decision which initially acknowledges the "fundamental reality of freedom of speech for Canadians," only to later stipulate that professional organizations like the College of Psychologists can impose restrictions on such freedoms.

"Not only do I not see what I did wrong, I think what I've done on the Public Communication front is my responsibility as a clinician to tell the truth about what I see," said Peterson, adding "Apparently the college has the right to decide that I can be re-educated forcibly with the risk of my license essentially because I made political statements that the members of the college don't agree with."

As Peterson points out, the very fabric of Canadian democracy is now in question. "That shows you all you Canadians who are listening and everyone outside of the country who might be the least bit interested in Canada that shows you exactly what our bloody Constitution is worth."

"I think I have a responsibility to say what I think and I think many people agree with that and I think the fundamental consequence of that around the world has been massively beneficial to people," Peterson continued.

"I think Professionals in Canada no longer have the right to express their thoughts which makes which invalidates them as useful professionals."

Watch:

TScan: Application for TSC-203-A0201 Targeting PRAME Cleared

 SC-203-A0201 is TScan’s fourth TCR-T cell product cleared for use in its solid tumor program, designed to enable customized, multiplexed TCR-T cell therapy

 TScan Therapeutics, Inc. (Nasdaq: TCRX), a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company focused on the development of T cell receptor (TCR)-engineered T cell therapies (TCR-T) for the treatment of patients with cancer, today announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has cleared its investigational new drug (IND) application for TSC-203-A0201, a TCR-T targeting PReferentially expressed Antigen in Melanoma (PRAME). In addition to being expressed in ~90% of melanomas, PRAME is also frequently expressed in various other solid tumors, including ~90% of head & neck cancers and ~50% of non-small cell lung cancers. TSC-203-A0201 is specific for patients with HLA type A*02:01, which represents over 40% of people in the U.S. TSC-203-A0201 is the fourth TCR-T cleared for clinical development in the Company’s solid tumor program, following TSC-200-A0201, TSC-204-A0201, and TSC-204-C0702, which target human papillomavirus 16 (HPV16) presented on HLA type A*02:01, and MAGE-A1 presented on HLA types A*02:01 and C*07:02, respectively.

All four TCR-T cell products are designed to be used in combination with each other and are being developed under a single master clinical trial protocol. Each agent is an enhanced, autologous T cell therapy product that includes the cancer antigen-specific TCR, along with CD8α/ĂŸ to engage helper T cells and a dominant negative form of TGFĂŸ receptor II to promote T-cell persistence. Patients are administered specific combinations of TCR-T cell agents based on which targets and HLAs are expressed in their tumors. In the Phase 1 clinical trial, each agent will first be tested singly at two dose levels to establish safety, and then will be eligible to be combined with any other TCR-T cell product.