First-line immunosuppression in neuromuscular diseases.

Autoimmune neuromuscular diseases are common and often treatable causes for peripheral nervous system dysfunction. If not optimally managed, they result in meaningful impairments and disability. The treating neurologist should aim to maximise clinical recovery with minimal iatrogenic risk. This requires careful patient and medication selection, appropriate counselling and close monitoring of clinical efficacy and safety. Here, we summarise our consensus departmental approach to first-line immunosuppression in neuromuscular diseases. We combine multispecialty evidence and expertise with a focus on autoimmune neuromuscular diseases to create guidance on starting, dosing and monitoring for toxic effects of the commonly used drugs. These include corticosteroids, steroid-sparing agents and cyclophosphamide. We also provide efficacy monitoring advice, as clinical response informs dosage and drug choice. The principles of this approach could be applied across much of the spectrum of immune-mediated neurological disorders where there is significant therapeutic crossover.

CSF biomarkers for dementia.

Although cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarker testing is incorporated into some current guidelines for the diagnosis of dementia (such as England's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE)), it is not widely accessible for most patients for whom biomarkers could potentially change management. Here we share our experience of running a clinical cognitive CSF service and discuss recent developments in laboratory testing including the use of the CSF amyloid-ß 42/40 ratio and automated assay platforms. We highlight the importance of collaborative working between clinicians and laboratory staff, of preanalytical sample handling, and discuss the various factors influencing interpretation of the results in appropriate clinical contexts. We advocate for broadening access to CSF biomarkers by sharing clinical expertise, protocols and interpretation with colleagues working in psychiatry and elderly care, especially when access to CSF may be part of a pathway to disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia.

Genetic and clinical characteristics of NEFL-related Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease.

OBJECTIVES: To analyse and describe the clinical and genetic spectrum of Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease (CMT) caused by mutations in the neurofilament light polypeptide gene (NEFL). METHODS: Combined analysis of newly identified patients with NEFL-related CMT and all previously reported cases from the literature. RESULTS: Five new unrelated patients with CMT carrying the NEFL mutations P8R and N98S and the novel variant L311P were identified. Combined data from these cases and 62 kindreds from the literature revealed four common mutations (P8R, P22S, N98S and E396K) and three mutational hotspots accounting for 37 (55%) and 50 (75%) kindreds, respectively. Eight patients had de novo mutations. Loss of large-myelinated fibres was a uniform feature in a total of 21 sural nerve biopsies and 'onion bulb' formations and/or thin myelin sheaths were observed in 14 (67%) of them. The neurophysiological phenotype was broad but most patients with E90K and N98S had upper limb motor conduction velocities <38 m/s. Age of onset was ≤3 years in 25 cases. Pyramidal tract signs were described in 13 patients and 7 patients were initially diagnosed with or tested for inherited ataxia. Patients with E90K and N98S frequently presented before age 3 years and developed hearing loss or other neurological features including ataxia and/or cerebellar atrophy on brain MRI. CONCLUSIONS: NEFL-related CMT is clinically and genetically heterogeneous. Based on this study, however, we propose mutational hotspots and relevant clinical-genetic associations that may be helpful in the evaluation of NEFL sequence variants and the differential diagnosis with other forms of CMT.

Treatments for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP): an overview of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) is a chronic progressive or relapsing and remitting disease that usually causes weakness and sensory loss. The symptoms are due to autoimmune inflammation of peripheral nerves. CIPD affects about 2 to 3 per 100,000 of the population. More than half of affected people cannot walk unaided when symptoms are at their worst. CIDP usually responds to treatments that reduce inflammation, but there is disagreement about which treatment is most effective. OBJECTIVES: To summarise the evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs) and non-Cochrane systematic reviews of any treatment for CIDP and to compare the effects of treatments. METHODS: We considered all systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any treatment for any form of CIDP. We reported their primary outcomes, giving priority to change in disability after 12 months.Two overview authors independently identified published systematic reviews for inclusion and collected data. We reported the quality of evidence using GRADE criteria. Two other review authors independently checked review selection, data extraction and quality assessments.On 31 October 2016, we searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (in theCochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL Plus for systematic reviews of CIDP. We supplemented the RCTs in the existing CSRs by searching on the same date for RCTs of any treatment of CIDP (including treatment of fatigue or pain in CIDP), in the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL Plus. MAIN RESULTS: Five CSRs met our inclusion criteria. We identified 23 randomised trials, of which 15 had been included in these CSRs. We were unable to compare treatments as originally planned, because outcomes and outcome intervals differed. CorticosteroidsIt is uncertain whether daily oral prednisone improved impairment compared to no treatment because the quality of the evidence was very low (1 trial, 28 participants). According to moderate-quality evidence (1 trial, 41 participants), six months' treatment with high-dose monthly oral dexamethasone did not improve disability more than daily oral prednisolone. Observational studies tell us that prolonged use of corticosteroids sometimes causes serious side-effects. Plasma exchangeAccording to moderate-quality evidence (2 trials, 59 participants), twice-weekly plasma exchange produced more short-term improvement in disability than sham exchange. In the largest observational study, 3.9% of plasma exchange procedures had complications. Intravenous immunoglobulinAccording to high-quality evidence (5 trials, 269 participants), intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) produced more short-term improvement than placebo. Adverse events were more common with IVIg than placebo (high-quality evidence), but serious adverse events were not (moderate-quality evidence, 3 trials, 315 participants). One trial with 19 participants provided moderate-quality evidence of little or no difference in short-term improvement of impairment with plasma exchange in comparison to IVIg. There was little or no difference in short-term improvement of disability with IVIg in comparison to oral prednisolone (moderate-quality evidence; 1 trial, 29 participants) or intravenous methylprednisolone (high-quality evidence; 1 trial, 45 participants). One unpublished randomised open trial with 35 participants found little or no difference in disability after three months of IVIg compared to oral prednisone; this trial has not yet been included in a CSR. We know from observational studies that serious adverse events related to IVIg do occur. Other immunomodulatory treatmentsIt is uncertain whether the addition of azathioprine (2 mg/kg) to prednisone improved impairment in comparison to prednisone alone, as the quality of the evidence is very low (1 trial, 27 participants). Observational studies show that adverse effects truncate treatment in 10% of people.According to low-quality evidence (1 trial, 60 participants), compared to placebo, methotrexate 15 mg/kg did not allow more participants to reduce corticosteroid or IVIg doses by 20%. Serious adverse events were no more common with methotrexate than with placebo, but observational studies show that methotrexate can cause teratogenicity, abnormal liver function, and pulmonary fibrosis.According to moderate-quality evidence (2 trials, 77 participants), interferon beta-1a (IFN beta-1a) in comparison to placebo, did not allow more people to withdraw from IVIg. According to moderate-quality evidence, serious adverse events were no more common with IFN beta-1a than with placebo.We know of no other completed trials of immunosuppressant or immunomodulatory agents for CIDP. Other treatmentsWe identified no trials of treatments for fatigue or pain in CIDP. Adverse effectsNot all trials routinely collected adverse event data; when they did, the quality of evidence was variable. Adverse effects in the short, medium, and long term occur with all interventions. We are not able to make reliable comparisons of adverse events between the interventions included in CSRs. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We cannot be certain based on available evidence whether daily oral prednisone improves impairment compared to no treatment. However, corticosteroids are commonly used, based on widespread availability, low cost, very low-quality evidence from observational studies, and clinical experience. The weakness of the evidence does not necessarily mean that corticosteroids are ineffective. High-dose monthly oral dexamethasone for six months is probably no more or less effective than daily oral prednisolone. Plasma exchange produces short-term improvement in impairment as determined by neurological examination, and probably produces short-term improvement in disability. IVIg produces more short-term improvement in disability than placebo and more adverse events, although serious side effects are probably no more common than with placebo. There is no clear difference in short-term improvement in impairment with IVIg when compared with intravenous methylprednisolone and probably no improvement when compared with either oral prednisolone or plasma exchange. According to observational studies, adverse events related to difficult venous access, use of citrate, and haemodynamic changes occur in 3% to17% of plasma exchange procedures.It is uncertain whether azathioprine is of benefit as the quality of evidence is very low. Methotrexate may not be of benefit and IFN beta-1a is probably not of benefit.We need further research to identify predictors of response to different treatments and to compare their long-term benefits, safety and cost-effectiveness. There is a need for more randomised trials of immunosuppressive and immunomodulatory agents, routes of administration, and treatments for symptoms of CIDP.

Immunotherapy for IgM anti-myelin-associated glycoprotein paraprotein-associated peripheral neuropathies.

BACKGROUND: Serum monoclonal anti-myelin-associated glycoprotein (anti-MAG) antibodies may be pathogenic in some people with immunoglobulin M (IgM) paraprotein and demyelinating neuropathy. Immunotherapies aimed at reducing the level of these antibodies might be expected to be beneficial. This is an update of a review first published in 2003 and previously updated in 2006 and 2012. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of immunotherapy for IgM anti-MAG paraprotein-associated demyelinating peripheral neuropathy. SEARCH METHODS: On 1 February 2016 we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, and Embase for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We also checked trials registers and bibliographies, and contacted authors and experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs involving participants of any age treated with any type of immunotherapy for anti-MAG antibody-associated demyelinating peripheral neuropathy with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and of any severity.Our primary outcome measures were numbers of participants improved in disability assessed with either or both of the Neuropathy Impairment Scale (NIS) or the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at six months after randomisation. Secondary outcome measures were: mean improvement in disability, assessed with either the NIS or the mRS, 12 months after randomisation; change in impairment as measured by improvement in the 10-metre walk time, change in a validated linear disability measure such as the Rasch-built Overall Disability Scale (R-ODS) at six and 12 months after randomisation, change in subjective clinical scores and electrophysiological parameters at six and 12 months after randomisation; change in serum IgM paraprotein concentration or anti-MAG antibody titre at six months after randomisation; and adverse effects of treatments. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We identified eight eligible trials (236 participants), which tested intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg), interferon alfa-2a, plasma exchange, cyclophosphamide and steroids, and rituximab. Two trials of IVIg (22 and 11 participants, including 20 with antibodies against MAG), had comparable interventions and outcomes, but both were short-term trials. We also included two trials of rituximab with comparable interventions and outcomes.There were very few clinical or statistically significant benefits of the treatments used on the outcomes predefined for this review, but not all the predefined outcomes were used in every included trial and more responsive outcomes are being developed. A well-performed trial of IVIg, which was at low risk of bias, showed a statistical benefit in terms of improvement in mRS at two weeks and 10-metre walk time at four weeks, but these short-term outcomes are of questionable clinical significance. Cyclophosphamide failed to show any benefit in the single trial's primary outcome, and showed a barely significant benefit in the primary outcome specified here, but some toxic adverse events were identified.Two trials of rituximab (80 participants) have been published, one of which (26 participants) was at high risk of bias. In the meta-analysis, although the data are of low quality, rituximab is beneficial in improving disability scales (Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment (INCAT) improved at eight to 12 months (risk ratio (RR) 3.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30 to 9.45; 73 participants)) and significantly more participants improve in the global impression of change score (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.71; 70 participants). Other measures did not improve significantly, but wide CIs do not preclude some effect. Reported adverse effects of rituximab were few, and mostly minor.There were few serious adverse events in the other trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is inadequate reliable evidence from trials of immunotherapies in anti-MAG paraproteinaemic neuropathy to form an evidence base supporting any particular immunotherapy treatment. IVIg has a statistically but probably not clinically significant benefit in the short term. The meta-analysis of two trials of rituximab provides, however, low-quality evidence of a benefit from this agent. The conclusions of this meta-analysis await confirmation, as one of the two included studies is of very low quality. We require large well-designed randomised trials of at least 12 months' duration to assess existing or novel therapies, preferably employing unified, consistent, well-designed, responsive, and valid outcome measures.

Adverse effects of biologics: a network meta-analysis and Cochrane overview.

BACKGROUND: Biologics are used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis and many other conditions. While the efficacy of biologics has been established, there is uncertainty regarding the adverse effects of this treatment. Since serious risks such as tuberculosis (TB) reactivation, serious infections, and lymphomas may be common to the biologics but occur in small numbers across the various indications, we planned to combine the results from biologics used in many conditions to obtain the much needed risk estimates. OBJECTIVES: To compare the adverse effects of tumor necrosis factor blocker (etanercept, adalimumab, infliximab, golimumab, certolizumab), interleukin (IL)-1 antagonist (anakinra), IL-6 antagonist (tocilizumab), anti-CD28 (abatacept), and anti-B cell (rituximab) therapy in patients with any disease condition except human immunodeficiency disease (HIV/AIDS). METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs) and open-label extension (OLE) studies that studied one of the nine biologics for use in any indication (with the exception of HIV/AIDS) and that reported our pre-specified adverse outcomes were considered for inclusion. We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE (to January 2010). Identifying search results and data extraction were performed independently and in duplicate. For the network meta-analysis, we performed mixed-effects logistic regression using an arm-based, random-effects model within an empirical Bayes framework. MAIN RESULTS: We included 163 RCTs with 50,010 participants and 46 extension studies with 11,954 participants. The median duration of RCTs was six months and 13 months for OLEs. Data were limited for tuberculosis (TB) reactivation, lymphoma, and congestive heart failure. Adjusted for dose, biologics as a group were associated with a statistically significant higher rate of total adverse events (odds ratio (OR) 1.19, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.30; number needed to treat to harm (NNTH) = 30, 95% CI 21 to 60) and withdrawals due to adverse events (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.64; NNTH = 37, 95% CI 19 to 190) and an increased risk of TB reactivation (OR 4.68, 95% CI 1.18 to 18.60; NNTH = 681, 95% CI 143 to 14706) compared to control.The rate of serious adverse events, serious infections, lymphoma, and congestive heart failure were not statistically significantly different between biologics and control treatment. Certolizumab pegol was associated with significantly higher risk of serious infections compared to control treatment (OR 3.51, 95% CI 1.59 to 7.79; NNTH = 17, 95% CI 7 to 68). Infliximab was associated with significantly higher risk of withdrawals due to adverse events compared to control (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.43 to 2.91; NNTH = 12, 95% CI 8 to 28). Indirect comparisons revealed that abatacept and anakinra were associated with a significantly lower risk of serious adverse events compared to most other biologics.  Although the overall numbers are relatively small, certolizumab pegol was associated with significantly higher odds of serious infections compared to etanercept, adalimumab, abatacept, anakinra, golimumab, infliximab, and rituximab; abatacept was significantly less likely than infliximab and tocilizumab to be associated with serious infections.  Abatacept, adalimumab, etanercept and golimumab were significantly less likely than infliximab to result in withdrawals due to adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, in the short term biologics were associated with significantly higher rates of total adverse events, withdrawals due to adverse events and TB reactivation. Some biologics had a statistically higher association with certain adverse outcomes compared to control, but there was no consistency across the outcomes so caution is needed in interpreting these results.There is an urgent need for more research regarding the long-term safety of biologics and the comparative safety of different biologics. National and international registries and other types of large databases are relevant sources for providing complementary evidence regarding the short- and longer-term safety of biologics. 

Quinine for muscle cramps.

BACKGROUND: Muscle cramps can occur anywhere and for many reasons. Quinine has been used to treat cramps of all causes. However, controversy continues about its efficacy and safety. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of quinine in treating muscle cramps. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched The Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 3, 2010), MEDLINE, EMBASE and reference lists of articles up to July 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of people of all ages with muscle cramps in any location and of any cause, treated with quinine or its derivatives. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three authors independently selected trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 23 trials with a total of 1586 participants. Fifty-eight per cent of these participants were from five unpublished studies. Quinine was compared to placebo (20 trials, n =1140), vitamin E (four trials, n = 543), a quinine-vitamin E combination (three trials, n = 510), a quinine-theophylline combination (one trial, n = 77), and xylocaine injections into the gastrocnemius muscle (one trial, n = 24). The most commonly used quinine dosage was 300 mg/day (range 200 to 500 mg).Compared to placebo, quinine significantly reduced cramp number over two weeks by 28%, cramp intensity by 10%, and cramp days by 20%. Cramp duration was not significantly affected.A significantly greater number of people suffered minor adverse events on quinine than placebo (risk difference +3%, 95% confidence intervals 0% to 6%), mainly gastrointestinal symptoms. Overdoses of quinine have been reported elsewhere to cause potentially fatal adverse effects, but in the included trials there was no significant difference in major adverse events compared with placebo (risk difference 0%, 95% confidence intervals -1% to 2%). One participant suffered from thrombocytopenia (0.12% risk) on quinine.A quinine-vitamin E combination, vitamin E alone, and xylocaine injections into gastrocnemius were not significantly different to quinine across all outcomes, including adverse effects. Based on a single trial comparison, quinine alone was significantly less effective than a quinine-theophylline combination but with no significant differences in adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is moderate quality evidence that quinine significantly reduces cramp frequency, intensity and cramp days in dosages between 200 and 500 mg/day. There is moderate quality evidence that with use up to 60 days, the incidence of serious adverse events is not significantly greater than for placebo in the identified trials. Further research is required on the optimal dose and duration of use, and also on alternative treatments.

Causes of encephalitis and differences in their clinical presentations in England: a multicentre, population-based prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Encephalitis has many causes, but for most patients the cause is unknown. We aimed to establish the cause and identify the clinical differences between causes in patients with encephalitis in England. METHODS: Patients of all ages and with symptoms suggestive of encephalitis were actively recruited for 2 years (staged start between October, 2005, and November, 2006) from 24 hospitals by clinical staff. Systematic laboratory testing included PCR and antibody assays for all commonly recognised causes of infectious encephalitis, investigation for less commonly recognised causes in immunocompromised patients, and testing for travel-related causes if indicated. We also tested for non-infectious causes for acute encephalitis including autoimmunity. A multidisciplinary expert team reviewed clinical presentation and hospital tests and directed further investigations. Patients were followed up for 6 months after discharge from hospital. FINDINGS: We identified 203 patients with encephalitis. Median age was 30 years (range 0-87). 86 patients (42%, 95% CI 35-49) had infectious causes, including 38 (19%, 14-25) herpes simplex virus, ten (5%, 2-9) varicella zoster virus, and ten (5%, 2-9) Mycobacterium tuberculosis; 75 (37%, 30-44) had unknown causes. 42 patients (21%, 15-27) had acute immune-mediated encephalitis. 24 patients (12%, 8-17) died, with higher case fatality for infections from M tuberculosis (three patients; 30%, 7-65) and varicella zoster virus (two patients; 20%, 2-56). The 16 patients with antibody-associated encephalitis had the worst outcome of all groups-nine (56%, 30-80) either died or had severe disabilities. Patients who died were more likely to be immunocompromised than were those who survived (OR = 3·44). INTERPRETATION: Early diagnosis of encephalitis is crucial to ensure that the right treatment is given on time. Extensive testing substantially reduced the proportion with unknown cause, but the proportion of cases with unknown cause was higher than that for any specific identified cause. FUNDING: The Policy Research Programme, Department of Health, UK.

Duloxetine for treating painful neuropathy or chronic pain.

BACKGROUND: Duloxetine is a balanced serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor licensed for the treatment of major depressive disorders, urinary stress incontinence and the management of neuropathic pain associated with diabetic peripheral neuropathy. A number of trials have been conducted to investigate the use of duloxetine in neuropathic and nociceptive painful conditions. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of duloxetine for treating painful neuropathy and different types of chronic pain. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched The Cochrane Neuromuscular Group Specialized Register (10 March 2009), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2009), MEDLINE (January 1966 to March 2009), EMBASE (January 1980 to March 2009), and www.clinicaltrials.gov to March 2009 and the reference lists of identified publications for trials of duloxetine used for the treatment of painful peripheral neuropathy or chronic pain. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected all randomised or quasi-randomised trials of any formulation of duloxetine, used for the treatment of painful peripheral neuropathy or chronic pain in adult participants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors extracted data independently onto a specially designed proforma and cross checked them. MAIN RESULTS: Six trials were identified including 2220 participants. Three studies included participants with painful diabetic neuropathy and three treated participants with fibromyalgia. Duloxetine at 60 mg daily is effective in treating painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy in the short-term to 12 weeks with a risk ratio (RR) for 50% pain reduction at 12 weeks of 1.65 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.34 to 2.03), number needed to treat (NNT) 6 (95% CI 5 to 10). Duloxetine at 60 mg daily is also effective in fibromyalgia over 12 weeks (RR 50% reduction in pain 1.57, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.06; NNT 8, 95% CI 5 to 17) and 28 weeks (RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.27). Adverse events were common in both treatment and placebo arms but more common in the treatment arm with a dose dependent effect. Most side effects were minor, but 16% of participants stopped the drug due to side effects. Serious adverse events were rare. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is moderately strong evidence that duloxetine 60 mg and 120 mg daily are efficacious for treating pain in diabetic peripheral neuropathy and fibromyalgia but 20 mg daily is not. Minor side effects are common at therapeutic doses but serious side effects are rare. Direct comparisons of duloxetine with other antidepressants and with other drugs already shown to be efficacious in neuropathic pain would be appropriate and should include unbiased economic analyses.