Life Style

Sexual Dysfunction in Women

Author/s: 
Susan R Davis

The Clinical Problem
Because there is no universal definition of normal sexual function, what constitutes sexual difficulty is determined by a person’s subjective definition of unsatisfactory sexual well-being. The condition is usually described as unsatisfactory interest, arousal, orgasm, or other aspects of sexuality (e.g., sexual self-image), and the symptoms often coexist. The term “sexual dysfunction” is used when at least one of the symptoms is of substantial concern to the affected person. Sexual dysfunction negatively affects mental health, vitality, and social functioning and has an overall effect on quality of life that is of similar magnitude to that associated with chronic back pain or diabetes.

Obesity in Adolescents: A Review

Author/s: 
Aaron S Kelly, Sarah C Armstrong, Marc P Michalsky, Claudia K Fox

Importance: Obesity affects approximately 21% of US adolescents and is associated with insulin resistance, hypertension, dyslipidemia, sleep disorders, depression, and musculoskeletal problems. Obesity during adolescence has also been associated with an increased risk of mortality from cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes in adulthood.

Observations: Obesity in adolescents aged 12 to younger than 18 years is commonly defined as a body mass index (BMI) at the 95th or greater age- and sex-adjusted percentile. Comprehensive treatment in adolescents includes lifestyle modification therapy, pharmacotherapy, and metabolic and bariatric surgery. Lifestyle modification therapy, which includes dietary, physical activity, and behavioral counseling, is first-line treatment; as monotherapy, lifestyle modification requires more than 26 contact hours over 1 year to elicit approximately 3% mean BMI reduction. Newer antiobesity medications, such as liraglutide, semaglutide, and phentermine/topiramate, in combination with lifestyle modification therapy, can reduce mean BMI by approximately 5% to 17% at 1 year of treatment. Adverse effects vary, but severe adverse events from these newer antiobesity medications are rare. Surgery (Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and vertical sleeve gastrectomy) for severe adolescent obesity (BMI ≥120% of the 95th percentile) reduces mean BMI by approximately 30% at 1 year. Minor and major perioperative complications, such as reoperation and hospital readmission for dehydration, are experienced by approximately 15% and 8% of patients, respectively. Determining the long-term durability of all obesity treatments warrants future research.

Conclusions and relevance: The prevalence of adolescent obesity is approximately 21% in the US. Treatment options for adolescents with obesity include lifestyle modification therapy, pharmacotherapy, and metabolic and bariatric surgery. Intensive lifestyle modification therapy reduces BMI by approximately 3% while pharmacotherapy added to lifestyle modification therapy can attain BMI reductions ranging from 5% to 17%. Surgery is the most effective intervention for adolescents with severe obesity and has been shown to achieve BMI reduction of approximately 30%.

Approach to Obesity Treatment in Primary Care: A Review

Author/s: 
Susan Z Yanovski, Jack A Yanovski

Importance: More than 40% of US adults have obesity, which increases the risks for multiple chronic diseases and premature mortality. Historically, nonsurgical interventions often have not led to sufficient weight loss and maintenance to improve health, but highly effective antiobesity medications (AOMs) have recently become available, and additional effective therapeutics are under development. Given that most medical care for adults with obesity is delivered in primary care settings, guidance for integrating weight-management approaches is needed.

Observations: Lifestyle interventions can lead to a mean weight loss of 2% to 9% of initial weight at 1 year and increase the likelihood of weight loss of 5% or more, but weight regain over time is common even with continued treatment. Adjunctive treatments, including AOMs and surgical approaches, can lead to larger, more sustained weight loss and improvements in numerous obesity-associated medical conditions. Highly effective AOMs, including nutrient-stimulated hormone-based therapies, induce mean weight loss of 15% or more. Barriers to intervention, including access to care, have a disproportionate influence on populations most affected by obesity and its consequences.

Conclusions and relevance: Primary care clinicians play a vital role in the assessment, management, and support of patients with obesity. With careful clinical assessment and shared decision-making, a flexible treatment plan can be developed that reflects evidence of treatment efficacy, patient preference, and feasibility of implementation. Adjunctive therapies to lifestyle interventions, including more effective pharmacotherapeutics for obesity, offer hope to patients and the potential for considerable improvements in health and quality of life.

Once-Weekly Semaglutide in Adults with Overweight or Obesity

Author/s: 
Wilding, John P.H., Batterham, Rachel L., Calanna, Salvatore, Davies, Melanie, Van Gaal, Luc F., Lingvay, Ildiko, McGowan, Barbara M., Rosenstock, Julio, Tran, Marie T.D., Wadden, Thomas A.,, Sean, Yokote, Koutaro, Zeuthen, Niels, Kushner, Robert F., STEP 1 Study Group

Background: Obesity is a global health challenge with few pharmacologic options. Whether adults with obesity can achieve weight loss with once-weekly semaglutide at a dose of 2.4 mg as an adjunct to lifestyle intervention has not been confirmed.

Methods: In this double-blind trial, we enrolled 1961 adults with a body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) of 30 or greater (≥27 in persons with ≥1 weight-related coexisting condition), who did not have diabetes, and randomly assigned them, in a 2:1 ratio, to 68 weeks of treatment with once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide (at a dose of 2.4 mg) or placebo, plus lifestyle intervention. The coprimary end points were the percentage change in body weight and weight reduction of at least 5%. The primary estimand (a precise description of the treatment effect reflecting the objective of the clinical trial) assessed effects regardless of treatment discontinuation or rescue interventions.

Results: The mean change in body weight from baseline to week 68 was -14.9% in the semaglutide group as compared with -2.4% with placebo, for an estimated treatment difference of -12.4 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], -13.4 to -11.5; P<0.001). More participants in the semaglutide group than in the placebo group achieved weight reductions of 5% or more (1047 participants [86.4%] vs. 182 [31.5%]), 10% or more (838 [69.1%] vs. 69 [12.0%]), and 15% or more (612 [50.5%] vs. 28 [4.9%]) at week 68 (P<0.001 for all three comparisons of odds). The change in body weight from baseline to week 68 was -15.3 kg in the semaglutide group as compared with -2.6 kg in the placebo group (estimated treatment difference, -12.7 kg; 95% CI, -13.7 to -11.7). Participants who received semaglutide had a greater improvement with respect to cardiometabolic risk factors and a greater increase in participant-reported physical functioning from baseline than those who received placebo. Nausea and diarrhea were the most common adverse events with semaglutide; they were typically transient and mild-to-moderate in severity and subsided with time. More participants in the semaglutide group than in the placebo group discontinued treatment owing to gastrointestinal events (59 [4.5%] vs. 5 [0.8%]).

Conclusions: In participants with overweight or obesity, 2.4 mg of semaglutide once weekly plus lifestyle intervention was associated with sustained, clinically relevant reduction in body weight. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; STEP 1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03548935).

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Liraglutide for Adolescents With Obesity

Author/s: 
Kelly, AS, Auerbach, P, Barrientos-Perez, M, Gies, I, Hale, PM, Marcus, C, Mastrandrea, LD, Prabhu, N, Arslanian, S, NN8022-4180 Trial Investigators

Background: Obesity is a chronic disease with limited treatment options in pediatric patients. Liraglutide may be useful for weight management in adolescents with obesity.

Methods: In this randomized, double-blind trial, which consisted of a 56-week treatment period and a 26-week follow-up period, we enrolled adolescents (12 to <18 years of age) with obesity and a poor response to lifestyle therapy alone. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either liraglutide (3.0 mg) or placebo subcutaneously once daily, in addition to lifestyle therapy. The primary end point was the change from baseline in the body-mass index (BMI; the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) standard-deviation score at week 56.

Results: A total of 125 participants were assigned to the liraglutide group and 126 to the placebo group. Liraglutide was superior to placebo with regard to the change from baseline in the BMI standard-deviation score at week 56 (estimated difference, -0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.37 to -0.08; P = 0.002). A reduction in BMI of at least 5% was observed in 51 of 113 participants in the liraglutide group and in 20 of 105 participants in the placebo group (estimated percentage, 43.3% vs. 18.7%), and a reduction in BMI of at least 10% was observed in 33 and 9, respectively (estimated percentage, 26.1% vs. 8.1%). A greater reduction was observed with liraglutide than with placebo for BMI (estimated difference, -4.64 percentage points) and for body weight (estimated difference, -4.50 kg [for absolute change] and -5.01 percentage points [for relative change]). After discontinuation, a greater increase in the BMI standard-deviation score was observed with liraglutide than with placebo (estimated difference, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.23). More participants in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group had gastrointestinal adverse events (81 of 125 [64.8%] vs. 46 of 126 [36.5%]) and adverse events that led to discontinuation of the trial treatment (13 [10.4%] vs. 0). Few participants in either group had serious adverse events (3 [2.4%] vs. 5 [4.0%]). One suicide, which occurred in the liraglutide group, was assessed by the investigator as unlikely to be related to the trial treatment.

Conclusions: In adolescents with obesity, the use of liraglutide (3.0 mg) plus lifestyle therapy led to a significantly greater reduction in the BMI standard-deviation score than placebo plus lifestyle therapy. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; NN8022-4180 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02918279.).

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Liraglutide for Adolescents With Obesity

Author/s: 
Kelly, A.S., Auerbach, P., Barrientos-Perez, M., Gies, I., Hale, P.M., Marcus, C., Mastrandrea, L.D., Prabhu, N., Arslanian, S.

Background: Obesity is a chronic disease with limited treatment options in pediatric patients. Liraglutide may be useful for weight management in adolescents with obesity.

Methods: In this randomized, double-blind trial, which consisted of a 56-week treatment period and a 26-week follow-up period, we enrolled adolescents (12 to <18 years of age) with obesity and a poor response to lifestyle therapy alone. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either liraglutide (3.0 mg) or placebo subcutaneously once daily, in addition to lifestyle therapy. The primary end point was the change from baseline in the body-mass index (BMI; the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) standard-deviation score at week 56.

Results: A total of 125 participants were assigned to the liraglutide group and 126 to the placebo group. Liraglutide was superior to placebo with regard to the change from baseline in the BMI standard-deviation score at week 56 (estimated difference, -0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.37 to -0.08; P = 0.002). A reduction in BMI of at least 5% was observed in 51 of 113 participants in the liraglutide group and in 20 of 105 participants in the placebo group (estimated percentage, 43.3% vs. 18.7%), and a reduction in BMI of at least 10% was observed in 33 and 9, respectively (estimated percentage, 26.1% vs. 8.1%). A greater reduction was observed with liraglutide than with placebo for BMI (estimated difference, -4.64 percentage points) and for body weight (estimated difference, -4.50 kg [for absolute change] and -5.01 percentage points [for relative change]). After discontinuation, a greater increase in the BMI standard-deviation score was observed with liraglutide than with placebo (estimated difference, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.23). More participants in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group had gastrointestinal adverse events (81 of 125 [64.8%] vs. 46 of 126 [36.5%]) and adverse events that led to discontinuation of the trial treatment (13 [10.4%] vs. 0). Few participants in either group had serious adverse events (3 [2.4%] vs. 5 [4.0%]). One suicide, which occurred in the liraglutide group, was assessed by the investigator as unlikely to be related to the trial treatment.

Conclusions: In adolescents with obesity, the use of liraglutide (3.0 mg) plus lifestyle therapy led to a significantly greater reduction in the BMI standard-deviation score than placebo plus lifestyle therapy. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; NN8022-4180 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02918279.).

Clinical Practice Guideline: Ménière's Disease Executive Summary

Author/s: 
Basura, GJ, Adams, ME, Monfared, A, Schwartz, SR, Antonelli, PJ, Burkard, R, Bush, ML, Bykowski, J, Colandrea, M, Derebery, J, Kelly, EA, Kerber, KA, Koopman, CF, Kuch, AA, Marcolini, E, McKinnon, BJ, Ruckenstein, MJ, Valenzuela, CV, Vosooney,A, Walsh, SA, Nnacheta, LC, Dhepyasuwan, N, Buchanan, EM

OBJECTIVE:

Ménière's disease (MD) is a clinical condition defined by spontaneous vertigo attacks (each lasting 20 minutes to 12 hours) with documented low- to midfrequency sensorineural hearing loss in the affected ear before, during, or after one of the episodes of vertigo. It also presents with fluctuating aural symptoms (hearing loss, tinnitus, or ear fullness) in the affected ear. The underlying etiology of MD is not completely clear, yet it has been associated with inner ear fluid volume increases, culminating in episodic ear symptoms (vertigo, fluctuating hearing loss, tinnitus, and aural fullness). Physical examination findings are often unremarkable, and audiometric testing may or may not show low- to midfrequency sensorineural hearing loss. Imaging, if performed, is also typically normal. The goals of MD treatment are to prevent or reduce vertigo severity and frequency; relieve or prevent hearing loss, tinnitus, and aural fullness; and improve quality of life. Treatment approaches to MD are many, and approaches typically include modifications of lifestyle factors (eg, diet) and medical, surgical, or a combination of therapies.

PURPOSE:

The primary purpose of this clinical practice guideline is to improve the quality of the diagnostic workup and treatment outcomes of MD. To achieve this purpose, the goals of this guideline are to use the best available published scientific and/or clinical evidence to enhance diagnostic accuracy and appropriate therapeutic interventions (medical and surgical) while reducing unindicated diagnostic testing and/or imaging.

Can We Say What Diet Is Best for Health?

Author/s: 
Katz, DL, Meller, S

Diet is established among the most important influences on health in modern societies. Injudicious diet figures among the leading causes of premature death and chronic disease. Optimal eating is associated with increased life expectancy, dramatic reduction in lifetime risk of all chronic disease, and amelioration of gene expression. In this context, claims abound for the competitive merits of various diets relative to one another. Whereas such claims, particularly when attached to commercial interests, emphasize distinctions, the fundamentals of virtually all eating patterns associated with meaningful evidence of health benefit overlap substantially. There have been no rigorous, long-term studies comparing contenders for best diet laurels using methodology that precludes bias and confounding, and for many reasons such studies are unlikely. In the absence of such direct comparisons, claims for the established superiority of any one specific diet over others are exaggerated. The weight of evidence strongly supports a theme of healthful eating while allowing for variations on that theme. A diet of minimally processed foods close to nature, predominantly plants, is decisively associated with health promotion and disease prevention and is consistent with the salient components of seemingly distinct dietary approaches. Efforts to improve public health through diet are forestalled not for want of knowledge about the optimal feeding of Homo sapiens but for distractions associated with exaggerated claims, and our failure to convert what we reliably know into what we routinely do. Knowledge in this case is not, as of yet, power; would that it were so.

Subscribe to Life Style