Clinical Recommendations for the use of Neurotropic B vitamins (B1, B6, and B12) for the Management of Peripheral Neuropathy: Consensus from a Multidisciplinary Expert Panel.

INTRODUCTION: Peripheral neuropathy (PN) is an insidious disease that is often asymptomatic during the early stages but which can have a significant impact on quality of life at later stages when nerve damage occurs. There is currently no guidance on the use of neurotropic B vitamins (B1, B6, and B12) for the management of asymptomatic and symptomatic PN. OBJECTIVE: To provide guidance to primary care physicians on an integrated approach to managing PN with neurotropic B vitamins (B1, B6, and B12). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of eight experts participated in an iterative quasi-anonymous Delphi survey consisting of two rounds of questions and a virtual meeting. A literature review formed the basis of the survey questions. The first round included multiple select, qualitative, and Likert Scale questions; the subsequent round consisted of 2-point scale (agree or disagree) questions that sought to develop consensus-based statements refined from the first round and recommendations derived from discussions during the virtual expert panel meeting. RESULTS: Clinical recommendations for the use of neurotropic B vitamins (B1, B6, and B12) have been developed for the prevention of PN progression or to delay onset in patients at high risk of developing PN. Recommendations have also been provided for the assessment of PN etiology and considerations for the use of loading dose (high dose) and maintenance dose (lower dose) of these neurotropic B vitamins (B1, B6, and B12). CONCLUSION: These clinical recommendations provide an initial step towards formulating comprehensive guidelines for the early and long-term management of PN with neurotropic B vitamins (B1, B6, and B12) and move beyond addressing only neuropathic pain associated with the late stages of PN.

Conventional and unconventional therapies in typical and atypical chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy with different clinical course of progression.

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), corticosteroids and therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) are evidence-based conventional treatments for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP). In many centres, unconventional treatments are frequently used as alternatives. We evaluated the outcome of conventional and unconventional therapies in 31 CIDP patients. Overall response rate with conventional first-line immunotherapies was 77% (20/26), comparable between IVIG and corticosteroids (80% vs 70%). Use of TPE was limited. Treatment response among typical and atypical CIDP were comparable (76 vs 80%). Non-responders were patients with progressive form of typical CIDP and DADS. Majority (21/26, 81%) of patients with persistent neurological deficits received maintenance therapy. Two subgroups of patients frequently treated with maintenance immunosuppressants were those with improving or stable disease following first-line treatment (12, 57%) and those with progressive form of CIDP (2, 10%). Primary indications for immunosuppressant use were corticosteroids-sparing and additional immunosuppression effects. Nine (64%) patients with improving or stable disease given azathioprine were taken off corticosteroids after a median duration of 14 months (range 12-108). Two (14%) eventually achieved cure or clinical remission without treatment. Maintenance IVIg was given to 6 (29%) relapsing CIDP patients; none of achieved cure or remission after similar median duration of treatment. Less potent immunosuppressant drugs (azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, and methotrexate) were frequently used, with moderate adverse effect profiles. In resource limited setting, unconventional treatments were commonly used among CIDP patients with different clinical course of progression. In most cases, careful risk-benefit re-assessment is required to justify its further use.