Cardiovascular and blood glucose parameters in infants during propranolol initiation for treatment of symptomatic infantile hemangiomas

Objectives: We sought to determine the effect of propranolol on cardiovascular and blood glucose parameters in infants with symptomatic infantile hemangiomas who were hospitalized for initiation of treatment, and to analyze adverse effects of propranolol throughout the course of inpatient and outpatient treatment. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on 50 infants (age less than 12 months) with symptomatic infantile hemangiomas who were hospitalized for propranolol initiation between 2008 and 2012. Demographic data and disease characteristics were recorded. Systolic and diastolic blood pressures, heart rate, blood glucose values, and adverse events recorded during hospitalization were analyzed. An additional cohort of 200 consecutively treated children was also assessed for adverse events associated with outpatient propranolol use. Results: The median age among the inpatient cohort was 3.4 months (range, 0.8 to 12.0 months). Infants older than 6 months were more likely to exhibit bradycardia than were younger infants (p ≤ 0.001). Hypotensive and/or bradycardic periods were infrequent and were not associated with observable clinical symptoms. The mean systolic and diastolic blood pressures and the mean heart rate decreased significantly from day 1 of hospitalization to day 2 (p = 0.004; p = 0.008; p ≤ 0.001), but not from day 2 to day 3, when the propranolol dose was increased to target. Hypoglycemia was rare (0.3% incidence.) Among the 250 outpatients, 2 infants developed lethargy and hypoglycemia during a viral illness and recovered without sequelae. One infant experienced recurrent bronchospasm with viral illnesses and required concomitant bronchodilator therapy. Conclusions: Frequent deviations from normal ranges of blood pressure and heart rate occur upon initiation of propranolol, but are clinically asymptomatic. These findings support that outpatient initiation of propranolol in healthy, normotensive infants appears to be a relatively safe alternative to inpatient initiation. Hypoglycemia is rare, but can occur throughout the treatment period; parent counseling is of paramount importance. All rights reserved © 2013 Annals Publishing Company

Propranolol vs prednisolone for symptomatic proliferating infantile hemangiomas: A randomized clinical trial

IMPORTANCE: While propranolol is touted as superior to prednisolone for treating infantile hemangiomas (IH), a randomized clinical trial (RCT) comparing the outcome and tolerability of these medications for symptomatic, proliferating IH has not been reported. OBJECTIVES: To determine if oral propranolol is more efficacious and better tolerated than prednisolone in treating symptomatic, proliferating IH and to determine the feasibility of conducting a multi-institutional, RCT comparing efficacy and tolerability of both medications. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Phase 2, investigator-blinded, multi-institutional RCT conducted in 3 academic vascular anomalies clinics on 19 of 44 eligible infants aged between 2 weeks and 6 months. All participating patients had symptomatic proliferating IH treated between September 1, 2010, and August 1, 2012. INTERVENTIONS: Treatment with oral propranolol vs prednisolone (2.0mg/kg/d) until halted owing to toxic effects or clinical response. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcome was change in IH size after 4 months of therapy. Secondary outcomes were response rate and frequency and severity of adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: The primary outcome showed no difference in lesion size or affected skin area after 4 months of therapy: 41% and 1.32 mm2 for prednisolone vs 64%and 0.55 mm 2 for propranolol (P = .12 for lesion size, and P = .56 for affected skin area). Longitudinal analyses showed a faster response in total lesion outer dimension with prednisolone (P = .03), but this advantage over time was not noted when central clearing and outer dimension were included in the analysis (P = .91). The overall frequency of AEs was similar (44 for prednisolone vs 32 for propranolol) (P = .84), but prednisolone-treated participants had more grade 3 severe AEs (11 vs 1) (P = .01), particularly growth retardation resulting in size and weight below the fifth percentile. Early study withdrawal owing to AEs occurred in 6 (75%) of 8 patients in the prednisolone group but 0 of 11 propranolol-treated participants. The mean duration of therapy was shorter for prednisolone (141 vs 265 days), reflecting the higher rate of early withdrawals. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Both medications show similar efficacy for reducing the area of symptomatic, proliferating IH. Although prednisolone showed a faster response rate, propranolol was better tolerated with significantly fewer severe AEs. Propranolol should be the first line of therapy for symptomatic IH unless contraindicated or unless future studies demonstrate severe AEs from propranolol. Recruiting participants for a phase 3 RCT would be difficult owing to safety profiles measured here and emerging trends favoring propranolol. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00967226. Copyright 2014 American Medical Association. All rights reserved

Propranolol vs prednisolone for symptomatic proliferating infantile hemangiomas: A randomized clinical trial

IMPORTANCE: While propranolol is touted as superior to prednisolone for treating infantile hemangiomas (IH), a randomized clinical trial (RCT) comparing the outcome and tolerability of these medications for symptomatic, proliferating IH has not been reported. OBJECTIVES: To determine if oral propranolol is more efficacious and better tolerated than prednisolone in treating symptomatic, proliferating IH and to determine the feasibility of conducting a multi-institutional, RCT comparing efficacy and tolerability of both medications. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Phase 2, investigator-blinded, multi-institutional RCT conducted in 3 academic vascular anomalies clinics on 19 of 44 eligible infants aged between 2 weeks and 6 months. All participating patients had symptomatic proliferating IH treated between September 1, 2010, and August 1, 2012. INTERVENTIONS: Treatment with oral propranolol vs prednisolone (2.0mg/kg/d) until halted owing to toxic effects or clinical response. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcome was change in IH size after 4 months of therapy. Secondary outcomes were response rate and frequency and severity of adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: The primary outcome showed no difference in lesion size or affected skin area after 4 months of therapy: 41% and 1.32 mm2 for prednisolone vs 64%and 0.55 mm 2 for propranolol (P = .12 for lesion size, and P = .56 for affected skin area). Longitudinal analyses showed a faster response in total lesion outer dimension with prednisolone (P = .03), but this advantage over time was not noted when central clearing and outer dimension were included in the analysis (P = .91). The overall frequency of AEs was similar (44 for prednisolone vs 32 for propranolol) (P = .84), but prednisolone-treated participants had more grade 3 severe AEs (11 vs 1) (P = .01), particularly growth retardation resulting in size and weight below the fifth percentile. Early study withdrawal owing to AEs occurred in 6 (75%) of 8 patients in the prednisolone group but 0 of 11 propranolol-treated participants. The mean duration of therapy was shorter for prednisolone (141 vs 265 days), reflecting the higher rate of early withdrawals. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Both medications show similar efficacy for reducing the area of symptomatic, proliferating IH. Although prednisolone showed a faster response rate, propranolol was better tolerated with significantly fewer severe AEs. Propranolol should be the first line of therapy for symptomatic IH unless contraindicated or unless future studies demonstrate severe AEs from propranolol. Recruiting participants for a phase 3 RCT would be difficult owing to safety profiles measured here and emerging trends favoring propranolol. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00967226. Copyright 2014 American Medical Association. All rights reserved

Initiation and use of propranolol for infantile hemangioma: Report of a consensus conference

Infantile hemangiomas (IHs) are common neoplasms composed of proliferating endothelial-like cells. Despite the relative frequency of IH and the potential severity of complications, there are currently no uniform guidelines for treatment. Although propranolol has rapidly been adopted, there is significant uncertainty and divergence of opinion regarding safety monitoring, dose escalation, and its use in PHACE syndrome (PHACE = posterior fossa, hemangioma, arterial lesions, cardiac abnormalities, eye abnormalities; a cutaneous neurovascular syndrome characterized by large, segmental hemangiomas of the head and neck along with congenital anomalies of the brain, heart, eyes and/or chest wall). A consensus conference was held on December 9, 2011. The multidisciplinary team reviewed existing data on the pharmacologic properties of propranolol and all published reports pertaining to the use of propranolol in pediatric patients. Workgroups were assigned specific topics to propose protocols on the following subjects: contraindications, special populations, pretreatment evaluation, dose escalation, and monitoring. Consensus protocols were recorded during the meeting and refined after the meeting. When appropriate, protocol clarifications and revision were made and agreed upon by the group via teleconference. Because of the absence of high-quality clinical research data, evidence-based recommendations are not possible at present. However, the team agreed on a number of recommendations that arose from a review of existing evidence, including when to treat complicated IH; contraindications and pretreatment evaluation protocols; propranolol use in PHACE syndrome; formulation, target dose, and frequency of propranolol; initiation of propranolol in infants; cardiovascular monitoring; ongoing monitoring; and prevention of hypoglycemia. Where there was considerable controversy, the more conservative approach was selected. We acknowledge that the recommendations are conservative in nature and anticipate that they will be revised as more data are made available. Copyright © 2013 by the American Academy of Pediatrics