Longitudinal analysis of serum neurofilament light chain levels as marker for neuronal damage in hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate serum neurofilament light chain (sNfL) as biomarker of disease onset, progression and treatment effect in hereditary transthyretin (ATTRv) amyloidosis patients and TTR variant (TTRv) carriers. METHODS: sNfL levels were assessed longitudinally in persistently asymptomatic TTRv carriers (N = 12), persistently asymptomatic ATTRv amyloidosis patients (defined as asymptomatic patients but with amyloid detectable in subcutaneous abdominal fat tissue) (N = 8), in TTRv carriers who developed polyneuropathy (N = 7) and in ATTRv amyloidosis patients with polyneuropathy on treatment (TTR-stabiliser (N = 20) or TTR-silencer (N = 18)). Polyneuropathy was confirmed by nerve conduction studies or quantitative sensory testing. sNfL was analysed using a single-molecule array assay. RESULTS: sNfL increased over 2 years in persistently asymptomatic ATTRv amyloidosis patients, but did not change in persistently asymptomatic TTRv carriers. In all TTRv carriers who developed polyneuropathy, sNfL increased from 8.4 to 49.8 pg/mL before the onset of symptoms and before polyneuropathy could be confirmed neurophysiologically. In symptomatic ATTRv amyloidosis patients on a TTR-stabiliser, sNfL remained stable over 2 years. In patients on a TTR-silencer, sNfL decreased after 1 year of treatment. CONCLUSION: sNfL is a biomarker of early neuronal damage in ATTRv amyloidosis already before the onset of polyneuropathy. Current data support the use of sNfL in screening asymptomatic TTRv carriers and in monitoring of disease progression and treatment effect.

Drug treatment for spinal muscular atrophy types II and III.

BACKGROUND: Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is caused by a homozygous deletion of the survival motor neuron 1 (SMN1) gene on chromosome 5, or a heterozygous deletion in combination with a (point) mutation in the second SMN1 allele. This results in degeneration of anterior horn cells, which leads to progressive muscle weakness. Children with SMA type II do not develop the ability to walk without support and have a shortened life expectancy, whereas children with SMA type III develop the ability to walk and have a normal life expectancy. This is an update of a review first published in 2009 and previously updated in 2011. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate if drug treatment is able to slow or arrest the disease progression of SMA types II and III, and to assess if such therapy can be given safely. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and ISI Web of Science conference proceedings in October 2018. In October 2018, we also searched two trials registries to identify unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought all randomised or quasi-randomised trials that examined the efficacy of drug treatment for SMA types II and III. Participants had to fulfil the clinical criteria and have a homozygous deletion or hemizygous deletion in combination with a point mutation in the second allele of the SMN1 gene (5q11.2-13.2) confirmed by genetic analysis. The primary outcome measure was change in disability score within one year after the onset of treatment. Secondary outcome measures within one year after the onset of treatment were change in muscle strength, ability to stand or walk, change in quality of life, time from the start of treatment until death or full-time ventilation and adverse events attributable to treatment during the trial period. Treatment strategies involving SMN1-replacement with viral vectors are out of the scope of this review, but a summary is given in Appendix 1. Drug treatment for SMA type I is the topic of a separate Cochrane Review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methodology. MAIN RESULTS: The review authors found 10 randomised, placebo-controlled trials of treatments for SMA types II and III for inclusion in this review, with 717 participants. We added four of the trials at this update. The trials investigated creatine (55 participants), gabapentin (84 participants), hydroxyurea (57 participants), nusinersen (126 participants), olesoxime (165 participants), phenylbutyrate (107 participants), somatotropin (20 participants), thyrotropin-releasing hormone (TRH) (nine participants), valproic acid (33 participants), and combination therapy with valproic acid and acetyl-L-carnitine (ALC) (61 participants). Treatment duration was from three to 24 months. None of the studies investigated the same treatment and none was completely free of bias. All studies had adequate blinding, sequence generation and reporting of primary outcomes. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, intrathecal nusinersen improved motor function (disability) in children with SMA type II, with a 3.7-point improvement in the nusinersen group on the Hammersmith Functional Motor Scale Expanded (HFMSE; range of possible scores 0 to 66), compared to a 1.9-point decline on the HFMSE in the sham procedure group (P < 0.01; n = 126). On all motor function scales used, higher scores indicate better function. Based on moderate-certainty evidence from two studies, the following interventions had no clinically important effect on motor function scores in SMA types II or III (or both) in comparison to placebo: creatine (median change 1 higher, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1 to 2; on the Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM), scale 0 to 264; n = 40); and combination therapy with valproic acid and carnitine (mean difference (MD) 0.64, 95% CI -1.1 to 2.38; on the Modified Hammersmith Functional Motor Scale (MHFMS), scale 0 to 40; n = 61). Based on low-certainty evidence from other single studies, the following interventions had no clinically important effect on motor function scores in SMA types II or III (or both) in comparison to placebo: gabapentin (median change 0 in the gabapentin group and -2 in the placebo group on the SMA Functional Rating Scale (SMAFRS), scale 0 to 50; n = 66); hydroxyurea (MD -1.88, 95% CI -3.89 to 0.13 on the GMFM, scale 0 to 264; n = 57), phenylbutyrate (MD -0.13, 95% CI -0.84 to 0.58 on the Hammersmith Functional Motor Scale (HFMS) scale 0 to 40; n = 90) and monotherapy of valproic acid (MD 0.06, 95% CI -1.32 to 1.44 on SMAFRS, scale 0 to 50; n = 31). Very low-certainty evidence suggested that the following interventions had little or no effect on motor function: olesoxime (MD 2, 95% -0.25 to 4.25 on the Motor Function Measure (MFM) D1 + D2, scale 0 to 75; n = 160) and somatotropin (median change at 3 months 0.25 higher, 95% CI -1 to 2.5 on the HFMSE, scale 0 to 66; n = 19). One small TRH trial did not report effects on motor function and the certainty of evidence for other outcomes from this trial were low or very low. Results of nine completed trials investigating 4-aminopyridine, acetyl-L-carnitine, CK-2127107, hydroxyurea, pyridostigmine, riluzole, RO6885247/RG7800, salbutamol and valproic acid were awaited and not available for analysis at the time of writing. Various trials and studies investigating treatment strategies other than nusinersen (e.g. SMN2-augmentation by small molecules), are currently ongoing. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Nusinersen improves motor function in SMA type II, based on moderate-certainty evidence. Creatine, gabapentin, hydroxyurea, phenylbutyrate, valproic acid and the combination of valproic acid and ALC probably have no clinically important effect on motor function in SMA types II or III (or both) based on low-certainty evidence, and olesoxime and somatropin may also have little to no clinically important effect but evidence was of very low-certainty. One trial of TRH did not measure motor function.

Drug treatment for spinal muscular atrophy type I.

BACKGROUND: Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is caused by a homozygous deletion of the survival motor neuron 1 (SMN1) gene on chromosome 5, or a heterozygous deletion in combination with a point mutation in the second SMN1 allele. This results in degeneration of anterior horn cells, which leads to progressive muscle weakness. By definition, children with SMA type I are never able to sit without support and usually die or become ventilator dependent before the age of two years. There have until very recently been no drug treatments to influence the course of SMA. We undertook this updated review to evaluate new evidence on emerging treatments for SMA type I. The review was first published in 2009 and previously updated in 2011. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of any drug therapy designed to slow or arrest progression of spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) type I. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and ISI Web of Science conference proceedings in October 2018. We also searched two trials registries to identify unpublished trials (October 2018). SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs that examined the efficacy of drug treatment for SMA type I. Included participants had to fulfil clinical criteria and have a genetically confirmed deletion or mutation of the SMN1 gene (5q11.2-13.2). The primary outcome measure was age at death or full-time ventilation. Secondary outcome measures were acquisition of motor milestones, i.e. head control, rolling, sitting or standing, motor milestone response on disability scores within one year after the onset of treatment, and adverse events and serious adverse events attributable to treatment during the trial period. Treatment strategies involving SMN1 gene replacement with viral vectors are out of the scope of this review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methodology. MAIN RESULTS: We identified two RCTs: one trial of intrathecal nusinersen in comparison to a sham (control) procedure in 121 randomised infants with SMA type I, which was newly included at this update, and one small trial comparing riluzole treatment to placebo in 10 children with SMA type I. The RCT of intrathecally-injected nusinersen was stopped early for efficacy (based on a predefined Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination-Section 2 (HINE-2) response). At the interim analyses after 183 days of treatment, 41% (21/51) of nusinersen-treated infants showed a predefined improvement on HINE-2, compared to 0% (0/27) of participants in the control group. This trial was largely at low risk of bias. Final analyses (ranging from 6 months to 13 months of treatment), showed that fewer participants died or required full-time ventilation (defined as more than 16 hours daily for 21 days or more) in the nusinersen-treated group than the control group (hazard ratio (HR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32 to 0.89; N = 121; a 47% lower risk; moderate-certainty evidence). A proportion of infants in the nusinersen group and none of 37 infants in the control group achieved motor milestones: 37/73 nusinersen-treated infants (51%) achieved a motor milestone response on HINE-2 (risk ratio (RR) 38.51, 95% CI 2.43 to 610.14; N = 110; moderate-certainty evidence); 16/73 achieved head control (RR 16.95, 95% CI 1.04 to 274.84; moderate-certainty evidence); 6/73 achieved independent sitting (RR 6.68, 95% CI 0.39 to 115.38; moderate-certainty evidence); 7/73 achieved rolling over (RR 7.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 131.29); and 1/73 achieved standing (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.06 to 36.92; moderate-certainty evidence). Seventy-one per cent of nusinersen-treated infants versus 3% of infants in the control group were responders on the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia Infant Test of Neuromuscular Disorders (CHOP INTEND) measure of motor disability (RR 26.36, 95% CI 3.79 to 183.18; N = 110; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events and serious adverse events occurred in the majority of infants but were no more frequent in the nusinersen-treated group than the control group (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.05 and RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.89, respectively; N = 121; moderate-certainty evidence). In the riluzole trial, three of seven children treated with riluzole were still alive at the ages of 30, 48, and 64 months, whereas all three children in the placebo group died. None of the children in the riluzole or placebo group developed the ability to sit, which was the only milestone reported. There were no adverse effects. The certainty of the evidence for all measured outcomes from this study was very low, because the study was too small to detect or rule out an effect, and had serious limitations, including baseline differences. This trial was stopped prematurely because the pharmaceutical company withdrew funding. Various trials and studies investigating treatment strategies other than nusinersen, such as SMN2 augmentation by small molecules, are ongoing. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the very limited evidence currently available regarding drug treatments for SMA type 1, intrathecal nusinersen probably prolongs ventilation-free and overall survival in infants with SMA type I. It is also probable that a greater proportion of infants treated with nusinersen than with a sham procedure achieve motor milestones and can be classed as responders to treatment on clinical assessments (HINE-2 and CHOP INTEND). The proportion of children experiencing adverse events and serious adverse events on nusinersen is no higher with nusinersen treatment than with a sham procedure, based on evidence of moderate certainty. It is uncertain whether riluzole has any effect in patients with SMA type I, based on the limited available evidence. Future trials could provide more high-certainty, longer-term evidence to confirm this result, or focus on comparing new treatments to nusinersen or evaluate them as an add-on therapy to nusinersen.

Drug therapy for chronic idiopathic axonal polyneuropathy.

BACKGROUND: Chronic idiopathic axonal polyneuropathy (CIAP) is an insidiously progressive sensory or sensorimotor polyneuropathy that affects elderly people. Although severe disability or handicap does not occur, CIAP reduces quality of life. CIAP is diagnosed in 10% to 25% of people referred for evaluation of polyneuropathy. There is a need to gather and review emerging evidence on treatments, as the number of people affected is likely to increase in ageing populations. This is an update of a review first published in 2004 and previously updated in 2006, 2008, 2011 and 2013. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of drug therapy for chronic idiopathic axonal polyneuropathy for reducing disability and ameliorating neurological symptoms and associated impairments, and to assess any adverse effects of treatment. SEARCH METHODS: In July 2016, we searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Web of Science. We searched two trials registries for ongoing trials. We also handsearched the reference lists of relevant articles, reviews and textbooks identified electronically, and we would have contacted authors and other experts in the field to identify additional studies if this seemed useful. SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought all randomised or quasi-randomised (alternate or other systematic treatment allocation) trials that examined the effects of any drug therapy in people with CIAP at least one year after the onset of treatment. People with CIAP had to fulfil the following criteria: age 40 years or older, distal sensory or sensorimotor polyneuropathy, absence of systemic or other neurological disease, chronic clinical course not reaching a nadir in less than two months, exclusion of any recognised cause of the polyneuropathy by medical history taking, clinical or laboratory investigations, and electrophysiological studies in agreement with axonal polyneuropathy, without evidence of demyelinating features. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with a significant improvement in disability. Secondary outcomes were change in the mean disability score, change in the proportion of participants who make use of walking aids, change in the mean Medical Research Council sum score, degree of pain relief and/or reduction of other positive sensory symptoms, change in the proportion of participants with pain or other positive sensory symptoms, and frequency of adverse effects. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently reviewed the results of the literature search and extracted details of trial methodology and outcome data of all potentially relevant trials. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 39 studies and assessed them for possible inclusion in the review, but we excluded all of them because of insufficient quality or lack of relevance. We summarised evidence from non-randomised studies in the Discussion. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Even though CIAP has been clearly described and delineated, no adequate randomised or quasi-randomised controlled clinical treatment trials have been performed. In their absence there is no proven efficacious drug therapy.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is not a risk factor for polyneuropathy: A prospective controlled study.

Polyneuropathy has been observed in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). If polyneuropathy occurs as a complication or extrapulmonary manifestation of COPD, one would expect an increased prevalence among patients with a cryptogenic axonal polyneuropathy. This case-control study aimed to investigate the association between COPD and polyneuropathy. We prospectively included 345 patients with cryptogenic axonal polyneuropathy and 465 controls. A standardized questionnaire assessed the presence of COPD and we verified this diagnosis by contacting the family physician. The severity of COPD was based on the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease classification. The prevalence of COPD did not differ between patients with polyneuropathy and controls (15/345 vs. 12/465 respectively; odds ratio (OR) 1.7; 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.8-3.7]). Adjusting for age, gender and possible confounders did not affect these results (adjusted OR 1.7, 95% CI 0.7-4.1). The severity of COPD was similar between patients with polyneuropathy and controls. This study does not support the hypothesis that COPD is a risk factor for polyneuropathy.

Drug treatment for spinal muscular atrophy type I.

BACKGROUND: Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is caused by degeneration of anterior horn cells of the spinal cord, which leads to progressive muscle weakness. Children with SMA type I will never be able to sit without support and usually die by the age of two years. There are no known efficacious drug treatments that influence the course of the disease. This is an update of a review first published in 2009. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether drug treatment is able to slow or arrest the disease progression of SMA type I, and to assess if such therapy can be given safely. Drug treatment for SMA types II and III is the topic of a separate updated Cochrane review. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (8 March 2011), CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 1), MEDLINE (January 1991 to February 2011), EMBASE (January 1991 to February 2011) and ISI Web of Knowledge (January 1991 to 8 March 2011). We searched the Clinical Trials Registry of the U.S. National Institute of Health (www.ClinicalTrials.gov) (8 March 2011) to identify additional trials that had not yet been published. SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought all randomised or quasi-randomised trials that examined the efficacy of drug treatment for SMA type I. Participants had to fulfil the clinical criteria and have a deletion or mutation of the SMN1 gene (5q11.2-13.2) confirmed by genetic analysis.The primary outcome measure was time from birth until death or full time ventilation. Secondary outcome measures were development of rolling, sitting or standing within one year after the onset of treatment, and adverse events attributable to treatment during the trial period. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors (RW and AV) independently reviewed and extracted data from all potentially relevant trials. For included studies, pooled relative risks and standardised mean differences were to be calculated to assess treatment efficacy. MAIN RESULTS: One small randomised controlled study comparing riluzole treatment to placebo for 10 SMA type 1 children was identified and included in the original review. No further trials were identified for the update in 2011. Regarding the primary outcome measure, three of seven children treated with riluzole were still alive at the ages of 30, 48 and 64 months, whereas all three children in the placebo group died; but the difference was not statistically significant. Regarding the secondary outcome measures, none of the children in the riluzole or placebo group developed the ability to roll, sit or stand, and no adverse effects were observed. For several reasons the overall quality of the study was low, mainly because the study was too small to detect an effect and because of baseline differences. Follow-up of the 10 included children was complete. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No drug treatment for SMA type I has been proven to have significant efficacy.

Drug treatment for spinal muscular atrophy types II and III.

BACKGROUND: Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is caused by degeneration of anterior horn cells, which leads to progressive muscle weakness. Children with SMA type II do not develop the ability to walk without support and have a shortened life expectancy, whereas children with SMA type III develop the ability to walk and have a normal life expectancy. There are no known efficacious drug treatments that influence the disease course of SMA. This is an update of a review first published in 2009. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether drug treatment is able to slow or arrest the disease progression of SMA types II and III and to assess if such therapy can be given safely. Drug treatment for SMA type I is the topic of a separate updated Cochrane review. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (8 March 2011), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 1), MEDLINE (January 1991 to February 2011), EMBASE (January 1991 to February 2011) and ISI Web of Knowledge (January 1991 to March 8 2011). We also searched clinicaltrials.gov to identify as yet unpublished trials (8 March 2011). SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought all randomised or quasi-randomised trials that examined the efficacy of drug treatment for SMA types II and III. Participants had to fulfil the clinical criteria and have a deletion or mutation of the survival motor neuron 1 (SMN1) gene (5q11.2-13.2) that was confirmed by genetic analysis.The primary outcome measure was to be change in disability score within one year after the onset of treatment. Secondary outcome measures within one year after the onset of treatment were to be change in muscle strength, ability to stand or walk, change in quality of life, time from the start of treatment until death or full time ventilation and adverse events attributable to treatment during the trial period. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently reviewed and extracted data from all potentially relevant trials. Pooled relative risks and pooled standardised mean differences were to be calculated to assess treatment efficacy. Risk of bias was systematically analysed. MAIN RESULTS: Six randomised placebo-controlled trials on treatment for SMA types II and III were found and included in the review: the four in the original review and two trials added in this update. The treatments were creatine (55 participants), phenylbutyrate (107 participants), gabapentin (84 participants), thyrotropin releasing hormone (9 participants), hydroxyurea (57 participants), and combination therapy with valproate and acetyl-L-carnitine (61 participants). None of these studies were completely free of bias. All studies had adequate blinding, sequence generation and reports of primary outcomes.None of the included trials showed any statistically significant effects on the outcome measures in participants with SMA types II and III. One participant died due to suffocation in the hydroxyurea trial and one participant died in the creatine trial. No participants in any of the other four trials died or reached the state of full time ventilation. Serious side effects were infrequent. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no proven efficacious drug treatment for SMA types II and III.