Search

Patient: Female, 51-year-old Final Diagnosis: Diabetic ketoacidosis Symptoms: Abdominal pain • diarrhea Medication: Pembrolizumab Clinical Procedure: — Specialty: Endocrinology and Metabolic Objective: Unusual or unexpected effect of treatment Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) are a novel class of antibodies, which have been increasingly utilized in cancer immunotherapies. Pembrolizumab is a humanized IgG4 monoclonal antibody, which acts against programmed cell death (PD)-1 receptors to help restore the body’s T-cell and immune response. Case Report: In this case, we present a 51-year-old woman with a past medical history of lung adenocarcinoma and triple-positive breast cancer who was actively receiving therapy with pembrolizumab. Following her second chemo-therapy cycle, she developed a severe case of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), with concern for new-onset auto-immune type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), secondary to her recent ICI therapy. The patient was initiated on a high-dose insulin infusion for rapid glycemic control and was successfully transitioned to a subcutaneous regimen approximately 24 h after presentation. She additionally developed other autoimmune-related complications, including hepatoxicity, duodenitis, and a maculopapular rash, which all resolved upon discontinuation of the ICI treatment. Her laboratory test results were consistent with positive anti-glutamic acid decarboxylase (anti-GAD) antibodies and undetectable c-peptides, illustrating the uniqueness of an ICI potentially precipitating an autoimmune T1DM. Conclusions: Immune-related adverse events from ICI therapy warrant further investigation to acknowledge the risk of potentially life-threatening adverse reactions, such as the development of DKA. Patients receiving ICI therapy should be educated on signs and symptoms of hyperglycemia, and routine measurements of blood glucose levels should be completed during each chemotherapy cycle. Future research in assessing potential biomarkers of beta cell dysfunction, such as anti-GAD antibodies and c-peptides, is of interest, particularly for patients receiving ICI therapies.

Background ABSSSI are a frequent cause of emergency room visits. Physicians (PHY) and Advanced Practice Providers (APP) have many decisions to make during the initial treatment of ABSSSI, including intravenous (IV) vs. oral (PO) ABX, and hospital admission vs. discharge home. There are limited data, however, on factors that influence the provider’s decision for the treatment of ABSSSI. Methods An anonymous survey was offered to EM providers at 5 hospitals across the US. The survey presented patient cases with ABSSSI ≥ 75cm2 and escalating clinical scenarios including relapse, controlled diabetes (DM), and SIRS. For each case, participants were queried on their decision for admission vs. discharge, ABX therapy (IV, PO, or both), and to rank factors that influenced their ABX decision. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used for analyses. Results Across the 5 hospitals, 104 providers completed the survey; 59 (56.7%) were PHY and 45 (43.3%) were APP. Experience was evenly represented with 50 (48.1%) providers practicing for ≥5 years and 54 (51.9%) less than 5 years. For the first case with no relapse, DM, or SIRS, most providers selected PO ABX [95 (91.4%)] and discharge [100 (96.2%)]. In case 2, the presence of relapse resulted in PO ABX for 50 (48.1%) and discharge in 54 (51.9%) of responses. In case 3, the presence of controlled DM resulted in PO ABX for 55 (53.4%) and discharge home in 65 (63.1%) of responses. Four (3.8%) and 13 (12.5%) providers chose to give 1–2 IV doses followed by PO and discharge the relapsed and DM cases, respectively. Compared with APP, PHY more frequently prescribed PO ABX for the DM case (62.7% vs. 40.9%, P = 0.046) and incorporated PO ABX into the treatment of the SIRS case (48.3% vs. 22.7%, P = 0.015). The addition of SIRS criteria in case 4 resulted in initiation with IV ABX [97 (95.1%)] and admission [100 (96.2%)]. The highest ranked factors influencing ABX selection were infection severity and co-morbidities; the lowest were patient convenience, adverse events, and cost. Conclusion These data highlight factors influencing EM provider decisions in the treatment of ABSSSI. Variability in responses to patient cases suggests opportunities for education and the development of an ABSSSI clinical pathway to guide treatment. Disclosures K. R. Keyloun, Allergan: Employee, Salary. D. P. Nicolau, Allergan: Grant Investigator, Scientific Advisor and Speaker’s Bureau, Consulting fee, Research grant and Speaker honorarium. J. L. Kuti, Allergan: Grant Investigator, Investigator, Scientific Advisor and Speaker’s Bureau, Consulting fee, Research grant and Speaker honorarium