Sensitivity and specificity of blood-fluid levels for oral anticoagulant-associated intracerebral haemorrhage

Intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) is a life-threatening emergency, the incidence of which has increased in part due to an increase in the use of oral anticoagulants. A blood-fluid level within the haematoma, as revealed by computed tomography (CT), has been suggested as a marker for oral anticoagulant-associated ICH (OAC-ICH), but the diagnostic specificity and prognostic value of this finding remains unclear. In 855 patients with CT-confirmed acute ICH scanned within 48 h of symptom onset, we investigated the sensitivity and specificity of the presence of a CT-defined blood-fluid level (rated blinded to anticoagulant status) for identifying concomitant anticoagulant use. We also investigated the association of the presence of a blood-fluid level with six-month case fatality. Eighteen patients (2.1%) had a blood-fluid level identified on CT; of those with a blood-fluid level, 15 (83.3%) were taking anticoagulants. The specificity of blood-fluid level for OAC-ICH was 99.4%; the sensitivity was 4.2%. We could not detect an association between the presence of a blood-fluid level and an increased risk of death at six months (OR = 1.21, 95% CI 0.28–3.88, p = 0.769). The presence of a blood-fluid level should alert clinicians to the possibility of OAC-ICH, but absence of a blood-fluid level is not useful in excluding OAC-ICH

Immunotherapy with ponezumab for probable cerebral amyloid angiopathy

Objective: Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) is caused by cerebrovascular deposition of β‐amyloid fragments leading to cerebrovascular dysfunction and other brain injuries. This phase 2, randomized, double–blind trial in patients with probable CAA assessed the efficacy and safety of ponezumab, a novel monoclonal antibody against Aβ1–40. Methods: Thirty‐six participants aged 55–80 years with probable CAA received intravenous placebo (n = 12) or ponezumab (n = 24). The change from baseline to Days 2 and 90 in cerebrovascular reactivity (CVR) was measured in the visual cortex as the natural log of the rising slope of the BOLD fMRI response to a visual stimulus. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. Results: The mean change from baseline to Day 90 was 0.817 (ponezumab) and 0.958 (placebo): a mean ratio of 0.852 (90% CI 0.735–0.989) representing a trend towards reduced CVR in the ponezumab group. This trend was not present at Day 2. There was one asymptomatic occurrence of amyloid–related imaging abnormality–edema in the ponezumab group. The total number of new cerebral microbleeds from baseline to day 90 did not differ between groups. The ponezumab group had a participant with nonfatal new cerebral hemorrhage with aphasia and a participant with subdural hemorrhage that site investigators deemed to be nondrug related. In the placebo group one participant had a fatal intracerebral hemorrhage and one participant had migraine with aura

Cortical and cerebellar activation induced by reflexive and voluntary saccades

Reflexive saccades are driven by visual stimulation whereas voluntary saccades require volitional control. Behavioral and lesional studies suggest that there are two separate mechanisms involved in the generation of these two types of saccades. This study investigated differences in cerebral and cerebellar activation between reflexive and self-paced voluntary saccadic eye movements using functional magnetic resonance imaging. In two experiments (whole brain and cerebellum) using the same paradigm, differences in brain activations induced by reflexive and self-paced voluntary saccades were assessed. Direct comparison of the activation patterns showed that the frontal eye fields, parietal eye field, the motion-sensitive area (MT/V5), the precuneus (V6), and the angular and the cingulate gyri were more activated in reflexive saccades than in voluntary saccades. No significant difference in activation was found in the cerebellum. Our results suggest that the alleged separate mechanisms for saccadic control of reflexive and self-paced voluntary are mainly observed in cerebral rather than cerebellar areas

Neuroprotection by adenosine in the brain: From A1 receptor activation to A2A receptor blockade

Adenosine is a neuromodulator that operates via the most abundant inhibitory adenosine A1 receptors (A1Rs) and the less abundant, but widespread, facilitatory A2ARs. It is commonly assumed that A1Rs play a key role in neuroprotection since they decrease glutamate release and hyperpolarize neurons. In fact, A1R activation at the onset of neuronal injury attenuates brain damage, whereas its blockade exacerbates damage in adult animals. However, there is a down-regulation of central A1Rs in chronic noxious situations. In contrast, A2ARs are up-regulated in noxious brain conditions and their blockade confers robust brain neuroprotection in adult animals. The brain neuroprotective effect of A2AR antagonists is maintained in chronic noxious brain conditions without observable peripheral effects, thus justifying the interest of A2AR antagonists as novel protective agents in neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease, ischemic brain damage and epilepsy. The greater interest of A2AR blockade compared to A1R activation does not mean that A1R activation is irrelevant for a neuroprotective strategy. In fact, it is proposed that coupling A2AR antagonists with strategies aimed at bursting the levels of extracellular adenosine (by inhibiting adenosine kinase) to activate A1Rs might constitute the more robust brain neuroprotective strategy based on the adenosine neuromodulatory system. This strategy should be useful in adult animals and especially in the elderly (where brain pathologies are prevalent) but is not valid for fetus or newborns where the impact of adenosine receptors on brain damage is different