Intravenous immunoglobulin for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy.

BACKGROUND: Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) causes progressive or relapsing weakness and numbness of the limbs, which lasts for at least two months. Uncontrolled studies have suggested that intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) could help to reduce symptoms. This is an update of a review first published in 2002 and last updated in 2013. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous immunoglobulin in people with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers on 8 March 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that tested any dose of IVIg versus placebo, plasma exchange, or corticosteroids in people with definite or probable CIDP. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was significant improvement in disability within six weeks after the start of treatment, as determined and defined by the study authors. Our secondary outcomes were change in mean disability score within six weeks, change in muscle strength (Medical Research Council (MRC) sum score) within six weeks, change in mean disability score at 24 weeks or later, frequency of serious adverse events, and frequency of any adverse events. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for our main outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We included nine RCTs with 372 participants (235 male) from Europe, North America, South America, and Israel. There was low statistical heterogeneity between the trial results, and the overall risk of bias was low for all trials that contributed data to the analysis. Five trials (235 participants) compared IVIg with placebo, one trial (20 participants) compared IVIg with plasma exchange, two trials (72 participants) compared IVIg with prednisolone, and one trial (45 participants) compared IVIg with intravenous methylprednisolone (IVMP). We included one new trial in this update, though it contributed no data to any meta-analyses. IVIg compared with placebo increases the probability of significant improvement in disability within six weeks of the start of treatment (risk ratio (RR) 2.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.72 to 3.36; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 4, 95% CI 3 to 5; 5 trials, 269 participants; high-certainty evidence). Since each trial used a different disability scale and definition of significant improvement, we were unable to evaluate the clinical relevance of the pooled effect. IVIg compared with placebo improves disability measured on the Rankin scale (0 to 6, lower is better) two to six weeks after the start of treatment (mean difference (MD) -0.26 points, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.05; 3 trials, 90 participants; high-certainty evidence). IVIg compared with placebo probably improves disability measured on the Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment (INCAT) scale (1 to 10, lower is better) after 24 weeks (MD 0.80 points, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.37; 1 trial, 117 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference between IVIg and placebo in the frequency of serious adverse events (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.87; 3 trials, 315 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The trial comparing IVIg with plasma exchange reported none of our main outcomes. IVIg compared with prednisolone probably has little or no effect on the probability of significant improvement in disability four weeks after the start of treatment (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.68; 1 trial, 29 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and little or no effect on change in mean disability measured on the Rankin scale (MD 0.21 points, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.61; 1 trial, 24 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference between IVIg and prednisolone in the frequency of serious adverse events (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.69; 1 cross-over trial, 32 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). IVIg compared with IVMP probably increases the likelihood of significant improvement in disability two weeks after starting treatment (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.40 to 5.38; 1 trial, 45 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). IVIg compared with IVMP probably has little or no effect on change in disability measured on the Rankin scale two weeks after the start of treatment (MD 0.24 points, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.63; 1 trial, 45 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or on change in mean disability measured with the Overall Neuropathy Limitation Scale (ONLS, 1 to 12, lower is better) 24 weeks after the start of treatment (MD 0.03 points, 95% CI -0.91 to 0.97; 1 trial, 45 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The frequency of serious adverse events may be higher with IVIg compared with IVMP (RR 4.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 86.78; 1 trial, 45 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from RCTs shows that IVIg improves disability for at least two to six weeks compared with placebo, with an NNTB of 4. During this period, IVIg probably has similar efficacy to oral prednisolone and IVMP. Further placebo-controlled trials are unlikely to change these conclusions. In one large trial, the benefit of IVIg compared with placebo in terms of improved disability score persisted for 24 weeks. Further research is needed to assess the long-term benefits and harms of IVIg relative to other treatments.

Levodopa Response in Patients With Early Parkinson Disease: Further Observations of the LEAP Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The Levodopa in EArly Parkinson's Disease (LEAP) study enabled us to conduct post hoc analyses concerning the effects of levodopa in patients with early Parkinson disease. METHODS: The LEAP study was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, delayed-start trial in which patients with early Parkinson disease were randomized to receive levodopa/carbidopa 300/75 mg daily for 80 weeks (early-start group) or to placebo for 40 weeks followed by levodopa/carbidopa 300/75 mg daily for 40 weeks (delayed-start group). We analyzed the effect of levodopa with the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale on bradykinesia, rigidity, and tremor. At week 80, participants answered 3 questions regarding motor response fluctuations. RESULTS: A total of 222 patients were randomized to the early-start group (mean ± SD age at baseline 64.8 ± 8.7 years; 71% male) and 223 to the delayed-start group (mean ± SD age at baseline 65.5 ± 8.8 years; 69% male). The difference between the early- and delayed-start groups in mean change from baseline to week 4, expressed as Hedges g effect size, was -0.33 for bradykinesia, -0.29 for rigidity, and -0.25 for tremor (for all symptoms indicating a small effect in favor of the early-start group); from baseline to week 22, respectively, -0.49, -0.36, and -0.44 (small to medium effect); and from baseline to week 40, respectively, -0.32, -0.19, and -0.27 (small effect). At 80 weeks, fewer patients in the early-start group (46 of 205 patients, 23%) experienced motor response fluctuations than patients in the delayed-start group (81 of 211, 38%; p < 0.01). DISCUSSION: In patients with early Parkinson disease, levodopa improves bradykinesia, rigidity, and tremor to the same order of magnitude. For all 3 symptoms, effects were larger at 22 weeks compared with 4 weeks. At 80 weeks, there were fewer patients with motor response fluctuations in the group that had started levodopa earlier. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that the effect of levodopa on bradykinesia, rigidity, and tremor is larger after 22 weeks compared with 4 weeks of treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: ISRCTN30518857, EudraCT number 2011-000678-72.

Surgical results and quality of life after subtotal petrosectomy.

PURPOSE: Few data are available regarding subjective complaints and quality of life (QoL) after subtotal petrosectomy (STP). The purpose of our study was to assess long-term surgical results after STP, and to evaluate disease-specific, patient-reported outcomes including QoL and subjective hearing. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study, including a postal survey, was performed in the Amsterdam University Medical Centers (Amsterdam UMC) location Academic Medical Centre (AMC). All patients who underwent a STP between 1990 and 2018 were included. Patient characteristics, indication for surgery, adverse events, disease recidivism, and patient-reported health outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: 181 patients (183 ears) underwent a STP for several indications. The main indication was chronic otitis media (COM) with or without cholesteatoma (69%). In the total cohort, 8 residual cholesteatoma (5%) and 6 inclusion cholesteatoma 4% were detected. Postoperative (functional) health outcomes showed a significant negative impact on QoL in the STP cohort compared to normative data. Compared to patients without ear problems, the postoperative STP patients scored worse on almost all domains of the Chronic Ear Survey (CES) (p < 0.001). SF-36 scores of postoperative STP data showed negative Z-scores in almost all subscales, indicating lower levels of QoL compared to Dutch reference values. Most subscales of the Amsterdam Inventory for Auditory Disability and Handicap (AIADH) demonstrate a large-effect size in disadvantage of the STP cohort when compared to Dutch reference values. CONCLUSION: STP is a suitable technique to tackle severe ear disease. Despite its favourable surgical results, STP has a negative impact on several domains of patient's QoL.

Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Utility of Early Levodopa in Parkinson's Disease.

BACKGROUND: In the Levodopa in EArly Parkinson's disease (LEAP) study, 445 patients were randomized to levodopa/carbidopa 100/25 mg three times per day for 80 weeks (early-start) or placebo for 40 weeks followed by levodopa/carbidopa 100/25 mg three times per day for 40 weeks (delayed-start). OBJECTIVE: This paper reports the results of the economic evaluation performed alongside the LEAP-study. METHODS: Early-start treatment was evaluated versus delayed-start treatment, in which the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) and the cost-utility analysis (CUA) were performed from the societal perspective, including health care costs among providers, non-reimbursable out-of-pocket expenses of patients, employer costs of sick leave, and lowered productivity while at work. The outcome measure for the CEA was the extra cost per unit decrease on the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale 80 weeks after baseline. The outcome measure for the CUA was the extra costs per additional quality adjusted life year (QALY) during follow-up. RESULTS: 212 patients in the early-start and 219 patients in the delayed-start group reported use of health care resources. With savings of € 59 per patient (BCa 95% CI: -829, 788) in the early-start compared to the delayed-start group, societal costs were balanced. The early-start group showed a mean of 1.30 QALYs (BCa 95% CI: 1.26, 1.33) versus 1.30 QALYs (BCa 95% CI: 1.27, 1.33) for the delayed-start group. Because of this negligible difference, incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios were not calculated. CONCLUSION: From an economic point of view, this study suggests that early treatment with levodopa is not more expensive than delayed treatment with levodopa.

Ultrasound and MR muscle imaging in new onset idiopathic inflammatory myopathies at diagnosis and after treatment: a comparative pilot study.

OBJECTIVES: To prospectively compare ultrasound (US) and whole-body MRI for detection of muscle abnormalities compatible with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM). METHODS: Newly diagnosed IIM patients underwent US (14 muscles) and MRI (36 muscles) at diagnosis and after nine weeks monotherapy with intravenous immunoglobulin. Muscles were compatible with IIM when quantitative US echo-intensity (EI) z scores was ≥1.5, semi-quantitative US Heckmatt score was ≥2, qualitative US was abnormal, or when MRI showed oedema on T2-weighted images. At patient level, findings were classified as abnormal when quantitative US EI z scores was >1.5 (n = 3 muscles), >2.5 (n = 2 muscles) or >3.5 (n = 1 muscle), or if ≥3 muscles showed abnormalities as described above for the other diagnostic methods. RESULTS: At diagnosis, in 18 patients US of 252 muscles revealed abnormalities in 36 muscles (14%) with quantitative, in 153 (61%) with semi-quantitative and in 168 (67%) with qualitative analysis. MRI showed oedema in 476 out of 623 muscles (76%). Five patients (28%) reached abnormal classification with quantitative US, 16 (89%) with semi-quantitative and qualitative US, and all patients (100%) with MRI. Nine-week follow-up of 12 patients showed no change over time with quantitative US or MRI, and a decrease in abnormalities with semi-quantitative US (P <0.01), and qualitative US (P <0.01). CONCLUSION: At diagnosis, MRI was more sensitive than US to detect muscle abnormalities compatible with IIM. Semi-quantitative US and qualitative US detected abnormalities in the majority of the patients while evaluating fewer muscles than MRI and showed change over time after nine weeks of treatment.

Withdrawal of intravenous immunoglobulin in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy.

Intravenous immunoglobulins are an efficacious treatment for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy. Biomarkers for disease activity are lacking, making the need for ongoing treatment difficult to assess, leading to potential overtreatment and high health-care costs. Our objective was to determine whether intravenous immunoglobulin withdrawal is non-inferior to continuing intravenous immunoglobulin treatment and to determine how often patients are overtreated. We performed a randomized, double-blind, intravenous immunoglobulin-controlled non-inferiority trial in seven centres in the Netherlands (Trial registration: ISRCTN 13637698; www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN13637698). Adults with clinically stable chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy using intravenous immunoglobulin maintenance treatment for at least 6 months were included. Patients received either intravenous immunoglobulin withdrawal (placebo) as investigational treatment or continuation of intravenous immunoglobulin treatment (control). The primary outcome was the mean change in logit scores from baseline to 24-week follow-up on the patient-reported Inflammatory Rasch-Overall Disability Scale. The non-inferiority margin was predefined as between-group difference in mean change scores of -0.65. Patients who deteriorated could reach a relapse end point according to predefined criteria. Patients with a relapse end point after intravenous immunoglobulin withdrawal entered a restabilization phase. All patients from the withdrawal group who remained stable were included in an open-label extension phase of 52 weeks. We included 60 patients, of whom 29 were randomized to intravenous immunoglobulin withdrawal and 31 to continuation of treatment. The mean age was 58 years (SD 14.7) and 67% was male. The between-group difference in mean change Inflammatory Rasch-Overall Disability Scale scores was -0.47 (95% CI -1.24 to 0.31), indicating that non-inferiority of intravenous immunoglobulin withdrawal could not be established. In the intravenous immunoglobulin withdrawal group, 41% remained stable for 24 weeks, compared to 58% in the intravenous immunoglobulin continuation group (-17%; 95% CI -39 to 8). Of the intravenous immunoglobulin withdrawal group, 28% remained stable at the end of the extension phase. Of the patients in the restabilization phase, 94% restabilized within 12 weeks. In conclusion, it remains inconclusive whether intravenous immunoglobulin withdrawal is non-inferior compared to continuing treatment, partly due to larger than expected confidence intervals leading to an underpowered study. Despite these limitations, a considerable proportion of patients could stop treatment and almost all patients who relapsed were restabilized quickly. Unexpectedly, a high proportion of intravenous immunoglobulin-treated patients experienced a relapse end point, emphasizing the need for more objective measures for disease activity in future trials, as the patient-reported outcome measures might not have been able to identify true relapses reliably. Overall, this study suggests that withdrawal attempts are safe and should be performed regularly in clinically stable patients.

Immunoglobulin for multifocal motor neuropathy.

BACKGROUND: Multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) is a rare, probably immune-mediated disorder characterised by slowly progressive, asymmetric, distal weakness of one or more limbs with no objective loss of sensation. It may cause prolonged periods of disability. Treatment options for MMN are few. People with MMN do not usually respond to steroids or plasma exchange. Uncontrolled studies have suggested a beneficial effect of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg). This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2005, with an amendment in 2007. We updated the review to incorporate new evidence. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous and subcutaneous immunoglobulin in people with MMN. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases on 20 April 2021: the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs, and checked the reference lists of included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered RCTs and quasi-RCTs examining the effects of any dose of IVIg and subcutaneous immunoglobulin (SCIg) in people with definite or probable MMN for inclusion in the review. Eligible studies had to have measured at least one of the following outcomes: disability, muscle strength, or electrophysiological conduction block. We used studies that reported the frequency of adverse effects to assess safety. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently reviewed the literature searches to identify potentially relevant trials, assessed risk of bias of included studies, and extracted data. We followed standard Cochrane methodology. MAIN RESULTS: Six cross-over RCTs including a total of 90 participants were suitable for inclusion in the review. Five RCTs compared IVIg to placebo, and one compared IVIg to SCIg. Four of the trials comparing IVIg versus placebo involved IVIg-naive participants (induction treatment). In the other two trials, participants were known IVIg responders receiving maintencance IVIg at baseline and were then randomised to maintenance treatment with IVIg or placebo in one trial, and IVIg or SCIg in the other. Risk of bias was variable in the included studies, with three studies at high risk of bias in at least one risk of bias domain. IVIg versus placebo (induction treatment): three RCTs including IVIg-naive participants reported a disability measure. Disability improved in seven out of 18 (39%) participants after IVIg treatment and in two out of 18 (11%) participants after placebo (risk ratio (RR) 3.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 10.12; 3 RCTs, 18 participants; low-certainty evidence). The proportion of participants with an improvement in disability at 12 months was not reported. Strength improved in 21 out of 27 (78%) IVIg-naive participants treated with IVIg and one out of 27 (4%) participants who received placebo (RR 11.00, 95% CI 2.86 to 42.25; 3 RCTs, 27 participants; low-certainty evidence). IVIg treatment may increase the proportion of people with resolution of at least one conduction block; however, the results were also consistent with no effect (RR 7.00, 95% CI 0.95 to 51.70; 4 RCTs, 28 participants; low-certainty evidence). IVIg versus placebo (maintenance treatment): a trial that included participants on maintenance IVIg treatment reported an increase in disability in 17 out of 42 (40%) people switching to placebo and seven out of 42 (17%) remaining on IVIg (RR 2.43, 95% CI 1.13 to 5.24; 1 RCT, 42 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and a decrease in grip strength in 20 out of 42 (48%) participants after a switch to placebo treatment compared to four out of 42 (10%) remaining on IVIg (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.54; 1 RCT, 42 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events, IVIg versus placebo (induction or maintenance): four trials comparing IVIg and placebo reported adverse events, of which data from two studies could be meta-analysed. Transient side effects were reported in 71% of IVIg-treated participants versus 4.8% of placebo-treated participants in these studies. The pooled RR for the development of side effects was 10.33 (95% CI 2.15 to 49.77; 2 RCTs, 21 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was only one serious side effect (pulmonary embolism) during IVIg treatment. IVIg versus SCIg (maintenance treatment): the trial that compared continuation of IVIg maintenance versus SCIg maintenance did not measure disability. The evidence was very uncertain for muscle strength (standardised mean difference 0.08, 95% CI -0.84 to 1.00; 1 RCT, 9 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence was very uncertain for the number of people with side effects attributable to treatment (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.40; 1 RCT, 9 participants; very low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Low-certainty evidence from three small RCTs shows that IVIg may improve muscle strength in people with MMN, and low-certainty evidence indicates that it may improve disability; the estimate of the magnitude of improvement of disability has wide CIs and needs further studies to secure its significance. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, it is probable that most IVIg responders deteriorate in disability and muscle strength after IVIg withdrawal. SCIg might be an alternative treatment to IVIg, but the evidence is very uncertain. More research is needed to identify people in whom IVIg withdrawal is possible and to confirm efficacy of SCIg as an alternative maintenance treatment.

Assessment of disability in idiopathic inflammatory myopathy: a call for linearity.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinimetric properties of the Academic Medical Centre Disability Score (ALDS) in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (IIM). METHODS: We used prospectively collected data of IIM patients who completed a phase-2 study with first-line IVIG monotherapy. The ALDS is a patient-reported questionnaire which contains 25 items relevant for disability in myositis. ALDS and all core set measures (CSMs) for myositis [including HAQ-Disability Index (HAQ-DI)] were evaluated at baseline and 9 weeks follow-up. In addition, the 2016 ACR/EULAR myositis response criteria outcome called Total Improvement Score (TIS) was evaluated at 9 weeks. We examined floor/ceiling effects, reliability and construct validity of the ALDS. To examine known-group validity, ALDS change scores over time were compared with TIS and physician impression of clinical response. RESULTS: Nineteen patients with IIM [median age 59 years, 12 (63%) female] were enrolled. At baseline, ALDS showed a median score of 65.4 (IQR 58.2-73.5), good Cronbach's alpha (α = 0.84) and a small ceiling effect (11%). Construct validity was confirmed by moderate to strong correlations between ALDS and HAQ-DI [rs = -0.57 (baseline); -0.86 (follow-up)]. ALDS change score correlated with TIS (rs = 0.70), discriminated between responders and non-responders (TIS ≥ 40; P = 0.001), between groups based on physician impression of clinical response (P = 0.03), and detected deterioration. CONCLUSION: The ALDS showed promising clinimetric properties and detected relevant changes in disability in patients with myositis. These results warrant further investigations.

Rivastigmine for minor visual hallucinations in Parkinson's disease: A randomized controlled trial with 24 months follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Visual hallucinations are common in patients with Parkinson's disease and represent probably the major independent predictor for cognitive deterioration and nursing home placement. OBJECTIVE: To investigate if treatment of minor visual hallucinations in Parkinson's disease with rivastigmine delays the progression to psychosis. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted which aimed to recruit 168 patients with Parkinson's disease reporting minor visual hallucinations 4 weeks before it. Important exclusion criteria were Parkinson's disease dementia, current delirium, and treatment with antipsychotics or drugs that have significant anti-cholinergic side effects. Subjects were randomized to rivastigmine capsules, 3-6 mg twice a day, or placebo for 24 months. The primary outcome was the time to Parkinson's disease psychosis, which was defined as the need to start with antipsychotics. RESULTS: The trial was stopped prematurely because of slow recruitment. Ninety-one patients were randomized: 46 patients were assigned to rivastigmine and 45 patients to placebo. No effect of rivastigmine could be demonstrated on the transition time to psychosis or dementia during the 24-month follow-up period. After 6 months of study treatment, cognition, mood, motor performance, and non-motor performance did not differ significantly between the rivastigmine-group and the placebo-group. CONCLUSIONS: Because the study was terminated early, it was insufficiently powered to properly evaluate the primary outcome. The limited data of the study favor a wait and see approach instead of early treatment with rivastigmine in PD patients with minor VH.

Intravenous immunoglobulins as first-line treatment in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVES: We explored efficacy and safety of IVIg as first-line treatment in patients with an idiopathic inflammatory myopathy. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated phase 2 open-label study, we included 20 adults with a newly diagnosed, biopsy-proven idiopathic inflammatory myopathy, and a disease duration of less than 9 months. Patients with IBM and prior use of immunosuppressants were excluded. The standard treatment regimen consisted of IVIg (Privigen) monotherapy for 9 weeks: a loading dose (2 g/kg body weight) and two subsequent maintenance doses (1 g/kg body weight) with a 3-week interval. The primary outcome was the number of patients with at least moderate improvement on the 2016 ACR/EULAR Total Improvement Score. Secondary outcomes included time to improvement, the number of patients requiring rescue medication and serious adverse events. RESULTS: We included patients with DM (n = 9), immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy (n = 6), non-specific myositis/overlap myositis (n = 4) and anti-synthetase syndrome (n = 1). One patient was excluded from analyses because of minimal weakness resulting in a ceiling effect. Eight patients (8/19 = 42.0%; Clopper-Pearson 95% CI: 19.6, 64.6) had at least moderate improvement by 9 weeks. Of these, six reached improvement by 3 weeks. Seven patients required rescue medication due to insufficient efficacy and prematurely ended the study. Three serious adverse events occurred, of which one was pulmonary embolism. CONCLUSION: First-line IVIg monotherapy led to at least moderate improvement in nearly half of patients with a fast clinical response in the majority of responders. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register identifier, NTR6160.

Effect of Endovascular Treatment With Medical Management vs Standard Care on Severe Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: The TO-ACT Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: To date, only uncontrolled studies have evaluated the efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment (EVT) in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT), leading to the lack of recommendations on EVT for CVT. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of EVT in patients with a severe form of CVT. Design, Setting, and Participants: TO-ACT (Thrombolysis or Anticoagulation for Cerebral Venous Thrombosis) was a multicenter, open-label, blinded end point, randomized clinical trial conducted in 8 hospitals in 3 countries (the Netherlands, China, and Portugal). Patients were recruited from September 2011 to October 2016, and follow-up began in March 2012 and was completed in December 2017. Adult patients with radiologically confirmed CVT who had at least 1 risk factor for a poor outcome (mental status disorder, coma state, intracerebral hemorrhage, or thrombosis of the deep venous system) were included. Data were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle from March 2018 to February 2019. The trial was halted after the first interim analysis for reasons of futility. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive either EVT with standard medical care (intervention group) or guideline-based standard medical care only (control group). The EVT consisted of mechanical thrombectomy, local intrasinus application of alteplase or urokinase, or a combination of both strategies. Patients in the intervention group underwent EVT as soon as possible but no later than 24 hours after randomization. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end point was the proportion of patients with a good outcome at 12 months (recovered without a disability; modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score of 0-1). Secondary end points were the proportion of patients with an mRS score of 0 to 1 at 6 months and an mRS score of 0 to 2 at 6 and 12 months, outcome on the mRS across the ordinal continuum at 12 months, recanalization rate, and surgical interventions in relation to CVT. Safety end points included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Results: Of the 67 patients enrolled and randomized, 33 (49%) were randomized to the intervention group and 34 (51%) were randomized to the control group. Patients in the intervention group vs those in the control group were slightly older (median [interquartile range (IQR)] age, 43 [33-50] years vs 38 [23-48] years) and comprised fewer women (23 women [70%] vs 27 women [79%]). The median (IQR) baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 12 (7-20) in the EVT group and 12 (5-20) in the standard care group. At the 12-month follow-up, 22 intervention patients (67%) had an mRS score of 0 to 1 compared with 23 control patients (68%) (relative risk ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.71-1.38). Mortality was not statistically significantly higher in the EVT group (12% [n = 4] vs 3% [n = 1]; P = .20). The frequency of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage was not statistically significantly lower in the intervention group (3% [n = 1] vs 9% [n = 3]; P = .61). Conclusions and Relevance: The TO-ACT trial showed that EVT with standard medical care did not appear to improve functional outcome of patients with CVT. Given the small sample size, the possibility exists that future studies will demonstrate better recovery rates after EVT for this patient population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01204333.

Favourable outcome without psychotherapy in patients with functional neurologic disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether patients with functional neurologic disorder (FND) may improve without psychotherapy as was suggested by a retrospective study. METHODS: We prospectively studied patients with newly diagnosed FND. At baseline and at 12 months participants filled out a set of self-reported health questionnaires. During the one-year follow up we recorded the use of psychotherapy. RESULTS: The study group consisted of 193 included participants. After 12 months 60 participants (60/193 = 31.1%) perceived a favourable outcome. Sixty participants (60/191 = 31.4%) were referred for psychotherapy. Multivariable logistic regression showed that participants with a high level of somatisation were less likely to have a favourable outcome (adjusted OR = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.29 to 1.04; p = 0.07). We could not demonstrate an independent significant impact of the use of psychotherapy on favourable outcome (adjusted OR = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.33 to 1.30; p = 0.22). CONCLUSION: Our study confirms the results of the retrospective study. The association between a high level of somatisation and a less favourable outcome suggests that neurologists should pay more attention to symptoms other than the neurological, but this does not necessarily mean referral for a psychological intervention.

Botulinum neurotoxin treatment in jerky and tremulous functional movement disorders: a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial with an open-label extension.

OBJECTIVE: To study the effect of botulinum neurotoxin (BoNT) treatment in jerky and tremulous functional movement disorders (FMD). METHODS: Patients with invalidating, chronic (>1 year) symptoms were randomly assigned to two subsequent treatments with BoNT or placebo every 3 months with stratification according to symptom localisation. Improvement on the dichotomised Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale (CGI-I) (improvement vs no change or worsening) at 4 months, assessed by investigators blinded to the allocated treatment was the primary outcome. Subsequently all patients were treated with BoNT in a ten month open-label phase. RESULTS: Between January 2011 and February 2015 a total of 239 patients were screened for eligibility of whom 48 patients were included. No difference was found on the primary outcome (BoNT 16 of 25 (64.0%) vs Placebo 13 of 23 patients (56.5%); proportional difference 0.075 (95% CI -0.189 to 0.327; p=0.77). Secondary outcomes (symptom severity, disease burden, disability, quality of life and psychiatric symptoms) showed no between-group differences. The open-label phase showed improvement on the CGI-I in 19/43 (44.2%) of remaining patients, with a total of 35/43 (81.4%) improvement compared with baseline. CONCLUSIONS: In this double-blind randomised controlled trial of BoNT for chronic jerky and tremulous FMD, we found no evidence of improved outcomes compared with placebo. Motor symptoms improved in a large proportion in both groups which was sustained in the open-label phase. This study underlines the substantial potential of chronic jerky and tremulous FMD patients to recover and may stimulate further exploration of placebo-therapies in these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR2478.

Randomized Delayed-Start Trial of Levodopa in Parkinson's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Levodopa is the main treatment for symptoms of Parkinson's disease. Determining whether levodopa also has a disease-modifying effect could provide guidance as to when in the course of the disease the treatment with this drug should be initiated. METHODS: In a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, delayed-start trial, we randomly assigned patients with early Parkinson's disease to receive levodopa (100 mg three times per day) in combination with carbidopa (25 mg three times per day) for 80 weeks (early-start group) or placebo for 40 weeks followed by levodopa in combination with carbidopa for 40 weeks (delayed-start group). The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the mean change from baseline to week 80 in the total score on the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS; scores range from 0 to 176, with higher scores signifying more severe disease). Secondary analyses included the progression of symptoms, as measured by the UPDRS score, between weeks 4 and 40 and the noninferiority of early initiation of treatment to delayed initiation between weeks 44 and 80, with a noninferiority margin of 0.055 points per week. RESULTS: A total of 445 patients were randomly assigned: 222 to the early-start group and 223 to the delayed-start group. The mean (±SD) UPDRS score at baseline was 28.1±11.4 points in the early-start group and 29.3±12.1 points in the delayed-start group. The change in UPDRS score from baseline to week 80 was -1.0±13.1 points and -2.0±13.0 points, respectively (difference, 1.0 point; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.5 to 3.5; P=0.44); this finding of no significant between-group difference at week 80 implies that levodopa had no disease-modifying effect. Between weeks 4 and 40, the rate of progression of symptoms, as measured in UPDRS points per week, was 0.04±0.23 in the early-start group and 0.06±0.34 in the delayed-start group (difference, -0.02; 95% CI, -0.07 to 0.03). The corresponding rates between weeks 44 and 80 were 0.10±0.25 and 0.03±0.28 (difference, 0.07; two-sided 90% CI, 0.03 to 0.10); the difference in the rate of progression between weeks 44 and 80 did not meet the criterion for noninferiority of early receipt of levodopa to delayed receipt. The rates of dyskinesia and levodopa-related fluctuations in motor response did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with early Parkinson's disease who were evaluated over the course of 80 weeks, treatment with levodopa in combination with carbidopa had no disease-modifying effect. (Funded by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development and others; LEAP Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN30518857 .).

The cognitive profile of behavioural variant FTD and its similarities with ALS: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Approximately 30% of patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) have cognitive impairment and 8%-14% fulfil the criteria for behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia (bv-FTD). The cognitive profiles of ALS and bv-FTD have been reported to be comparable, but this has never been systematically investigated. We aimed to determine the cognitive profile of bv-FTD and examine its similarities with that of ALS, to provide evidence for the existence of a cognitive disease continuum encompassing bv-FTD and ALS. We therefore systematically reviewed neuropsychological studies on bv-FTD patients and healthy volunteers. Neuropsychological tests were divided in 10 cognitive domains and effect sizes were calculated for all domains and compared with the cognitive profile of ALS by means of a visual comparison and a Pearson's r correlation coefficient. We included 120 studies, totalling 2425 bv-FTD patients and 2798 healthy controls. All cognitive domains showed substantial effect sizes, indicating cognitive impairment in bv-FTD patients compared to healthy controls. The cognitive domains with the largest effect sizes were social cognition, verbal memory and fluency (1.77-1.53). The cognitive profiles of bv-FTD and ALS (10 cognitive domains, 1287 patients) showed similarities on visual comparison and a moderate correlation 0.58 (p=0.13). When social cognition, verbal memory, fluency, executive functions, language and visuoperception were considered, i.e. the cognitive profile of ALS, Pearson's r was 0.73 (p=0.09), which raised to 0.92 (p=0.03), when language was excluded in this systematic analysis of patients with a non-language subtype of FTD. The cognitive profile of bv-FTD consists of deficits in social cognition, verbal memory, fluency and executive functions and shows similarities with the cognitive profile of ALS. These findings support a cognitive continuum encompassing ALS and bv-FTD.

Management of patients with functional neurological symptoms: a single-centre randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Is health-related quality of life 12 months after randomisation in participants with functional neurological symptoms better after discussion of the diagnosis by trained neurologists who schedule at least two follow-up visits (intervention group) than after the same discussion of the diagnosis by these neurologists and immediate referral to the general practitioner (control group)? METHODS: A single-centre randomised controlled trial at one academic outpatient department of neurology. Participants were randomised 1:1, stratified for type of functional symptoms. The study sample consisted of 100 participants in the intervention group, and 95 participants in the control group. Primary outcome was the mean change 36-Item Short Form Health Survery (SF-36) scores from baseline to 12 months. RESULTS: Participants in both treatment groups showed improvements on most SF-36 subscales and secondary outcomes measures but without significant between-group differences in mean change scores. Neither was there a difference between the treatment arms with regard to the number of participants who reported their symptoms at 12 months to have greatly improved compared with baseline: 29 participants (29/98=29.6%; two missing values) in the intervention group versus 31 participants (31/95=32.6%) in the control group (95% CI of the difference between proportions: from -16.1% to 10%). CONCLUSION: This study showed that after a neurologist has established the diagnosis and briefly explained and thereafter has sent the patient to a neurologist with a special training who scheduled half an hour to discuss the diagnosis, more sessions by this neurologist do not improve outcome. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR 2570.

Orthostatic Hypotension in Parkinson's Disease: The Relation of Blood Pressure Tests and Symptoms in Daily Life.

BACKGROUND: Orthostatic hypotension (OH) is common in Parkinson's disease (PD), but the relation between the results of orthostatic blood pressure tests and orthostatic symptoms in daily life is not clear. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study in an incident nontertiary care cohort of PD patients with additional recruitment of PD patients from our own outpatient clinic. We recruited sex- and age-matched controls. All participants underwent orthostatic blood pressure tests using continuous blood pressure measurements. Orthostatic symptoms experienced in daily life were assessed using autonomic symptom questionnaires (SCOPA-AUT and COMPASS-31). RESULTS: A total of 83 PD patients and 35 controls were included. Mean patient age was 69.2 years (standard deviation [SD]: 10.0). Mean disease duration was 6.6 years (SD, 0.8). The estimated prevalence of OH in PD was 24.1% (95% confidence interval: 16.2-34.3). There was no significant difference between PD patients with and without OH regarding reported daily orthostatic symptoms. Alternative OH criteria did not substantially improve this. CONCLUSIONS: Perceived orthostatic symptoms in daily life have no clear association with the results of a single orthostatic blood pressure test. Better diagnostic strategies are needed.

Clinical decision-making in functional and hyperkinetic movement disorders.

OBJECTIVE: Functional or psychogenic movement disorders (FMD) present a diagnostic challenge. To diagnose FMD, clinicians must have experience with signs typical of FMD and distinguishing features from other hyperkinetic disorders. The aim of this study was to clarify the decision-making process of expert clinicians while diagnosing FMD, myoclonus, and tics. METHODS: Thirty-nine movement disorders experts rated 60 patients using a standardized web-based survey resembling clinical practice. It provided 5 steps of incremental information: (1) visual first impression of the patient, (2) medical history, (3) neurologic examination on video, (4) the Bereitschaftspotential (BP), and (5) psychiatric evaluation. After full evaluation of each case, experts were asked which diagnostic step was decisive. In addition, interim switches in diagnosis after each informational step were calculated. RESULTS: After full evaluation, the experts annotated the first impression of the patients as decisive in 18.5% of cases. Medical history was considered decisive in 33.3% of cases. Neurologic examination was considered decisive in 39.7%, the BP in 8%, and the psychiatric interview in 0.5% of cases. Most diagnostic switches occurred after addition of the medical history (34.5%). Addition of the neurologic examination led to 13.8% of diagnostic switches. The BP results led to diagnostic switches in 7.2% of cases. Psychiatric evaluation resulted in the lowest number of diagnostic switches (2.7% of cases). CONCLUSIONS: Experts predominantly rely on clinical assessment to diagnose FMD. Importantly, ancillary tests do not determine the final diagnosis of this expert panel. In general, the experts infrequently changed their differential diagnosis.