Current treatment practice of Guillain-Barré syndrome

Objective: To define the current treatment practice of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS). Methods: The study was based on prospective observational data from the first 1,300 patients included in the International GBS Outcome Study. We described the treatment practice of GBS in general, and for (1) severe forms (unable to walk independently), (2) no recovery after initial treatment, (3) treatment-related fluctuations, (4) mild forms (able to walk independently), and (5) variant forms including Miller Fisher syndrome, taking patient characteristics and hospital type into account. Results: We excluded 88 (7%) patients because of missing data, protocol violation, or alternative diagnosis. Patients from Bangladesh (n = 189, 15%) were described separately because 83% were not treated. IV immunoglobulin (IVIg), plasma exchange (PE), or other immunotherapy was provided in 941 (92%) of the remaining 1,023 patients, including patients with severe GBS (724/743, 97%), mild GBS (126/168, 75%), Miller Fisher syndrome (53/70, 76%), and other variants (33/40, 83%). Of 235 (32%) patients who did not improve after their initial treatment, 82 (35%) received a second immune modulatory treatment. A treatment-related fluctuation was observed in 53 (5%) of 1,023 patients, of whom 36 (68%) were re-treated with IVIg or PE. Conclusions: In current practice, patients with mild and variant forms of GBS, or with treatment-related fluctuations and treatment failures, are frequently treated, even in absence of trial data to support this choice. The variability in treatment practice can be explained in part by the lack of evidence and guidelines for effective treatment in these situations

Guillain-Barre syndrome after SARS-CoV-2 infection in an international prospective cohort study

In the wake of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, an increasing number of patients with neurological disorders, including Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), have been reported following this infection. It remains unclear, however, if these cases are coincidental or not, as most publications were case reports or small regional retrospective cohort studies. The International GBS Outcome Study is an ongoing prospective observational cohort study enrolling patients with GBS within 2 weeks from onset of weakness. Data from patients included in this study, between 30 January 2020 and 30 May 2020, were used to investigate clinical and laboratory signs of a preceding or concurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection and to describe the associated clinical phenotype and disease course. Patients were classified according to the SARS-CoV-2 case definitions of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and laboratory recommendations of the World Health Organization. Forty-nine patients with GBS were included, of whom eight (16%) had a confirmed and three (6%) a probable SARS-CoV-2 infection. Nine of these 11 patients had no serological evidence of other recent preceding infections associated with GBS, whereas two had serological evidence of a recent Campylobacter jejuni infection. Patients with a confirmed or probable SARS-CoV-2 infection frequently had a sensorimotor variant 8/11 (73%) and facial palsy 7/11 (64%). The eight patients who underwent electrophysiological examination all had a demyelinating subtype, which was more prevalent than the other patients included in the same time window [14/30 (47%), P = 0.012] as well as historical region and age-matched control subjects included in the International GBS Outcome Study before the pandemic [23/44 (52%), P = 0.016]. The median time from the onset of infection to neurological symptoms was 16 days (interquartile range 12-22). Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection shared uniform neurological features, similar to those previously described in other post-viral GBS patients. The frequency (22%) of a preceding SARS-CoV-2 infection in our study population was higher than estimates of the contemporaneous background prevalence of SARS-CoV-2, which may be a result of recruitment bias during the pandemic, but could also indicate that GBS may rarely follow a recent SARS-CoV-2 infection. Consistent with previous studies, we found no increase in patient recruitment during the pandemic for our ongoing International GBS Outcome Study compared to previous years, making a strong relationship of GBS with SARS-CoV-2 unlikely. A case-control study is required to determine if there is a causative link or not

Validation and adjustment of modified Erasmus GBS outcome score in Bangladesh

Objective: We have assessed and improved the performance of the modified Erasmus GBS Outcome Score (mEGOS) among patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) from Bangladesh. Methods: Validation cohort consisted of patients with GBS from two prospective cohort studies in Bangladesh. Poor outcome was defined as being unable to walk independently at week 4 and week 26. We excluded patients able to walk independently, patients who died within the first week, or with missing GBS disability scores. Performance of mEGOS at entry and week 1 was determined based on the discriminative ability (ability to differentiate between patients able and unable to walk independently; measured using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves [AUC]) and calibration (observed probability versus predicted probability of poor outcome). Results: A total of 506 patients aged ≥6-year-old were enrolled, with 471 and 366 patients included in mEGOS validation analysis at entry and week 1, respectively. The AUC values for predicting poor outcome (1) at week 4 were 0.69 (mEGOS entry) and 0.78 (mEGOS week 1) and (2) at week 26 were 0.67 (mEGOS entry) and 0.70 (mEGOS week 1). Mean predicted probabilities of poor outcome corresponded with observed outcomes except for the probability of poor outcome at week 4 which was overestimated by mEGOS week 1. This was resolved by updating the model intercept. Interpretation: The mEGOS shows valid outcome predictions among patients with GBS from Bangladesh. The model can aid the identification of patients at high risk of poor outcome and help to adequately allocate healthcare resources in low-resource settings

International Validation of the Erasmus Guillain-Barré Syndrome Respiratory Insufficiency Score.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to validate the Erasmus Guillain-Barré Syndrome Respiratory Insufficiency Score in the International Guillain-Barré Syndrome Outcome Study cohort, and to improve its performance and region-specificity. METHODS: We examined data from the first 1,500 included patients, aged ≥6 years and not ventilated prior to study entry. Patients with a clinical variant or mild symptoms were also included. Outcome was mechanical ventilation within the first week from study entry. Model performance was assessed regarding the discriminative ability (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) and the calibration (observed vs predicted probability of mechanical ventilation), in the full cohort and in Europe/North America and Asia separately. We recalibrated the model to improve its performance and region-specificity. RESULTS: In the group of 1,023 eligible patients (Europe/North America n = 842, Asia n = 104, other n = 77), 104 (10%) required mechanical ventilation within the first week from study entry. Area under the curve values were ≥0.80 for all validation subgroups. Mean observed proportions of mechanical ventilation were lower than predicted risks: full cohort 10% versus 21%, Europe/North America 9% versus 21%, and Asia 17% versus 23%. After recalibration, predicted risks for the full cohort and Europe/North America corresponded to observed proportions. INTERPRETATION: This prospective, international cohort study validated the Erasmus Guillain-Barré Syndrome Respiratory Insufficiency Score, and showed that the model can be used in the full spectrum of Guillain-Barré syndrome patients. In addition, a more accurate, region-specific version of the model was developed for patients from Europe/North America. ANN NEUROL 2022;91:521-531