Muscles in “Concert”: Study of Primary Motor Cortex Upper Limb Functional Topography

BACKGROUND: Previous studies with Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) have focused on the cortical representation of limited group of muscles. No attempts have been carried out so far to get simultaneous recordings from hand, forearm and arm with TMS in order to disentangle a 'functional' map providing information on the rules orchestrating muscle coupling and overlap. The aim of the present study is to disentangle functional associations between 12 upper limb muscles using two measures: cortical overlapping and cortical covariation of each pair of muscles. Interhemispheric differences and the influence of posture were evaluated as well. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: TMS mapping studies of 12 muscles belonging to hand, forearm and arm were performed. Findings demonstrate significant differences between the 66 pairs of muscles in terms of cortical overlapping: extremely high for hand-forearm muscles and very low for arm vs hand/forearm muscles. When right and left hemispheres were compared, overlapping between all possible pairs of muscles in the left hemisphere (62.5%) was significantly higher than in the right one (53.5% ). The arm/hand posture influenced both measures of cortical association, the effect of Position being significant [p = .021] on overlapping, resulting in 59.5% with prone vs 53.2% with supine hand, but only for pairs of muscles belonging to hand and forearm, while no changes occurred in the overlapping of proximal muscles with those of more distal districts. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Larger overlapping in the left hemisphere could be related to its lifetime higher training of all twelve muscles studied with respect to the right hemisphere, resulting in larger intra-cortical connectivity within primary motor cortex. Altogether, findings with prone hand might be ascribed to mechanisms facilitating coupling of muscles for object grasping and lifting -with more proximal involvement for joint stabilization- compared to supine hand facilitating actions like catching. TMS multiple-muscle mapping studies permit a better understanding of motor control and 'plastic' reorganization of motor system

The SANAD II study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam, zonisamide, or lamotrigine for newly diagnosed focal epilepsy: an open-label, non-inferiority, multicentre, phase 4, randomised controlled trial

Background: Levetiracetam and zonisamide are licensed as monotherapy for patients with focal epilepsy, but there is uncertainty as to whether they should be recommended as first-line treatments because of insufficient evidence of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. We aimed to assess the long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam and zonisamide compared with lamotrigine in people with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy. Methods: This randomised, open-label, controlled trial compared levetiracetam and zonisamide with lamotrigine as first-line treatment for patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy. Adult and paediatric neurology services across the UK recruited participants aged 5 years or older (with no upper age limit) with two or more unprovoked focal seizures. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1:1) using a minimisation programme with a random element utilising factor to receive lamotrigine, levetiracetam, or zonisamide. Participants and investigators were not masked and were aware of treatment allocation. SANAD II was designed to assess non-inferiority of both levetiracetam and zonisamide to lamotrigine for the primary outcome of time to 12-month remission. Anti-seizure medications were taken orally and for participants aged 12 years or older the initial advised maintenance doses were lamotrigine 50 mg (morning) and 100 mg (evening), levetiracetam 500 mg twice per day, and zonisamide 100 mg twice per day. For children aged between 5 and 12 years the initial daily maintenance doses advised were lamotrigine 1·5 mg/kg twice per day, levetiracetam 20 mg/kg twice per day, and zonisamide 2·5 mg/kg twice per day. All participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. The per-protocol (PP) analysis excluded participants with major protocol deviations and those who were subsequently diagnosed as not having epilepsy. Safety analysis included all participants who received one dose of any study drug. The non-inferiority limit was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·329, which equates to an absolute difference of 10%. A HR greater than 1 indicated that an event was more likely on lamotrigine. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 30294119 (EudraCt number: 2012-001884-64). Findings: 990 participants were recruited between May 2, 2013, and June 20, 2017, and followed up for a further 2 years. Patients were randomly assigned to receive lamotrigine (n=330), levetiracetam (n=332), or zonisamide (n=328). The ITT analysis included all participants and the PP analysis included 324 participants randomly assigned to lamotrigine, 320 participants randomly assigned to levetiracetam, and 315 participants randomly assigned to zonisamide. Levetiracetam did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis of time to 12-month remission versus lamotrigine (HR 1·18; 97·5% CI 0·95–1·47) but zonisamide did meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis versus lamotrigine (1·03; 0·83–1·28). The PP analysis showed that 12-month remission was superior with lamotrigine than both levetiracetam (HR 1·32 [97·5% CI 1·05 to 1·66]) and zonisamide (HR 1·37 [1·08–1·73]). There were 37 deaths during the trial. Adverse reactions were reported by 108 (33%) participants who started lamotrigine, 144 (44%) participants who started levetiracetam, and 146 (45%) participants who started zonisamide. Lamotrigine was superior in the cost-utility analysis, with a higher net health benefit of 1·403 QALYs (97·5% central range 1·319–1·458) compared with 1·222 (1·110–1·283) for levetiracetam and 1·232 (1·112, 1·307) for zonisamide at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per QALY. Cost-effectiveness was based on differences between treatment groups in costs and QALYs. Interpretation: These findings do not support the use of levetiracetam or zonisamide as first-line treatments for patients with focal epilepsy. Lamotrigine should remain a first-line treatment for patients with focal epilepsy and should be the standard treatment in future trials. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme

The SANAD II study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of valproate versus levetiracetam for newly diagnosed generalised and unclassifiable epilepsy: an open-label, non-inferiority, multicentre, phase 4, randomised controlled trial

Background: Valproate is a first-line treatment for patients with newly diagnosed idiopathic generalised or difficult to classify epilepsy, but not for women of child-bearing potential because of teratogenicity. Levetiracetam is increasingly prescribed for these patient populations despite scarcity of evidence of clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness. We aimed to compare the long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam compared with valproate in participants with newly diagnosed generalised or unclassifiable epilepsy. Methods: We did an open-label, randomised controlled trial to compare levetiracetam with valproate as first-line treatment for patients with generalised or unclassified epilepsy. Adult and paediatric neurology services (69 centres overall) across the UK recruited participants aged 5 years or older (with no upper age limit) with two or more unprovoked generalised or unclassifiable seizures. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either levetiracetam or valproate, using a minimisation programme with a random element utilising factors. Participants and investigators were aware of treatment allocation. For participants aged 12 years or older, the initial advised maintenance doses were 500 mg twice per day for levetiracetam and valproate, and for children aged 5–12 years, the initial daily maintenance doses advised were 25 mg/kg for valproate and 40 mg/kg for levetiracetam. All drugs were administered orally. SANAD II was designed to assess the non-inferiority of levetiracetam compared with valproate for the primary outcome time to 12-month remission. The non-inferiority limit was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·314, which equates to an absolute difference of 10%. A HR greater than 1 indicated that an event was more likely on valproate. All participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Per-protocol (PP) analyses excluded participants with major protocol deviations and those who were subsequently diagnosed as not having epilepsy. Safety analyses included all participants who received one dose of any study drug. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 30294119 (EudraCt number: 2012-001884-64). Findings: 520 participants were recruited between April 30, 2013, and Aug 2, 2016, and followed up for a further 2 years. 260 participants were randomly allocated to receive levetiracetam and 260 participants to receive valproate. The ITT analysis included all participants and the PP analysis included 255 participants randomly allocated to valproate and 254 randomly allocated to levetiracetam. Median age of participants was 13·9 years (range 5·0–94·4), 65% were male and 35% were female, 397 participants had generalised epilepsy, and 123 unclassified epilepsy. Levetiracetam did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis of time to 12-month remission (HR 1·19 [95% CI 0·96–1·47]); non-inferiority margin 1·314. The PP analysis showed that the 12-month remission was superior with valproate than with levetiracetam. There were two deaths, one in each group, that were unrelated to trial treatments. Adverse reactions were reported by 96 (37%) participants randomly assigned to valproate and 107 (42%) participants randomly assigned to levetiracetam. Levetiracetam was dominated by valproate in the cost-utility analysis, with a negative incremental net health benefit of −0·040 (95% central range −0·175 to 0·037) and a probability of 0·17 of being cost-effectiveness at a threshold of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Cost-effectiveness was based on differences between treatment groups in costs and quality-adjusted life-years. Interpretation: Compared with valproate, levetiracetam was found to be neither clinically effective nor cost-effective. For girls and women of child-bearing potential, these results inform discussions about benefit and harm of avoiding valproate. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme

Therapeutic Cleavage of Anti-Aquaporin-4 Autoantibody in Neuromyelitis Optica by an IgG-Selective Proteinase

ABSTRACT Neuromyelitis optica (NMO) is an inflammatory demyelinating disease of the central nervous system caused by binding of pathogenic IgG autoantibodies (NMO-IgG) to astrocyte water channel aquaporin-4 (AQP4). Astrocyte damage and downstream inflammation require NMO-IgG effector function to initiate complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) and antibodydependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC). Here, we evaluated the potential therapeutic utility of the bacterial enzyme IdeS (IgG-degrading enzyme of Streptococcus pyogenes), which selectively cleaves IgG antibodies to yield Fc and F(ab9) 2 fragments. In AQP4-expressing cell cultures, IdeS treatment of monoclonal NMO-IgGs and NMO patient sera abolished CDC and ADCC, even when IdeS was added after NMO-IgG was bound to AQP4. Binding of NMO-IgG to AQP4 was similar to that of the NMO-F(ab9) 2 generated by IdeS cleavage. NMO-F(ab9) 2 competitively displaced pathogenic NMO-IgG, preventing cytotoxicity, and the Fc fragments generated by IdeS cleavage reduced CDC and ADCC. IdeS efficiently cleaved NMO-IgG in mice in vivo, and greatly reduced NMO lesions in mice administered NMO-IgG and human complement. IgGselective cleavage by IdeS thus neutralizes NMO-IgG pathogenicity, and yields therapeutic F(ab9) 2 and Fc fragments. IdeS treatment, by therapeutic apheresis or direct administration, may be beneficial in NMO

Potential therapeutic benefit of C1-esterase inhibitor in neuromyelitis optica evaluated in vitro and in an experimental rat model.

Neuromyelitis optica (NMO) is an autoimmune demyelinating disease of the central nervous system in which binding of anti-aquaporin-4 (AQP4) autoantibodies (NMO-IgG) to astrocytes causes complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC) and inflammation resulting in oligodendrocyte and neuronal injury. There is compelling evidence for a central role of complement in NMO pathogenesis. Here, we evaluated the potential of C1-esterase inhibitor (C1-inh) for complement-targeted therapy of NMO. C1-inh is an anti-inflammatory plasma protein with serine protease inhibition activity that has a broad range of biological activities on the contact (kallikrein), coagulation, fibrinolytic and complement systems. C1-inh is approved for therapy of hereditary angioedema (HAE) and has been studied in a small safety trial in acute NMO relapses (NCT 01759602). In vitro assays of NMO-IgG-dependent CDC showed C1-inh inhibition of human and rat complement, but with predicted minimal complement inhibition activity at a dose of 2000 units in humans. Inhibition of complement by C1-inh was potentiated by ∼10-fold by polysulfated macromolecules including heparin and dextran sulfate. In rats, intravenous C1-inh at a dose 30-fold greater than that approved to treat HAE inhibited serum complement activity by <5%, even when supplemented with heparin. Also, high-dose C1-inh did not reduce pathology in a rat model of NMO produced by intracerebral injection of NMO-IgG. Therefore, although C1r and C1s are targets of C1-inh, our in vitro data with human serum and in vivo data in rats suggest that the complement inhibition activity of C1-inh in serum is too low to confer clinical benefit in NMO

Hemispace differences in the visual perception of size in left hemi-Parkinson's disease

The visual perception of size in different regions of external space was studied in Parkinson's disease (PD). A group of patients with worse left-sided symptoms (LPD) was compared with a group with worse right-sided symptoms (RPD) and with a group of age-matched controls on judgements of the relative height or width of two rectangles presented in different regions of external space. The relevant dimension of one rectangle (the 'standard') was held constant, while that of the other (the 'variable') was varied in a method of constant stimuli. The point of subjective equality (PSE) of rectangle width or height was obtained by probit analysis as the mean of the resulting psychometric function. When the standard was in left space, the PSE of the LPD group occurred when the variable was smaller, and when the standard was in right space, when the variable was larger. Similarly, when the standard rectangle was presented in upper space, and the variable in lower space, the PSE occurred when the variable was smaller, an effect which was similar in both left and right spaces. In all these experiments, the PSEs for both the controls and the RPD group did not differ significantly, and were close to a physical match, and the slopes of the psychometric functions were steeper in the controls than the patients, though not significantly so. The data suggest that objects appear smaller in the left and upper visual spaces in LPD, probably because of right hemisphere impairment. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

Progressive encephalomyelitis with rigidity and myoclonus: Glycine and NMDA receptor antibodies

BACKGROUND: The syndrome of progressive encephalopathy with limb rigidity has been historically termed progressive encephalomyelitis with rigidity and myoclonus (PERM) or stiff-person syndrome plus. METHODS: The case is presented of a previously healthy 28-year-old man with a rapidly fatal form of PERM developing over 2 months. RESULTS: Serum antibodies to both NMDA receptors (NMDAR) and glycine receptors (GlyR) were detected postmortem, and examination of the brain confirmed an autoimmune encephalomyelitis, with particular involvement of hippocampal pyramidal and cerebellar Purkinje cells and relative sparing of the neocortex. No evidence for an underlying systemic neoplasm was found. CONCLUSION: This case displayed not only the clinical features of PERM, previously associated with GlyR antibodies, but also some of the features associated with NMDAR antibodies. This unusual combination of antibodies may be responsible for the particularly progressive course and sudden death