Assessment timing and choice of outcome measure in determining treatment response in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy: a post-hoc analysis of the PRISM trial

Introduction/Aims: Treatment response and its timing are variable in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP). In this study we assessed the variability using multiple outcome measures. Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis of the PRISM trial, a 24-week prospective, multicenter, single-arm, open-label, phase III study of a 10% intravenous immunoglobulin preparation for CIDP. We ascertained timing of response with primary/secondary outcome measures. Results: At 6 weeks after treatment initiation, 13 of 40 subjects (32.5%) were defined as responders on the primary outcome measure, the adjusted Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause And Treatment (INCAT) scale. This increased to 20 of 41 (48.8%) at 12 weeks and to 32 of 42 (76.2%) at 24 weeks. Use of minimal important difference (MID)-determined amelioration of the inflammatory Rasch-built Overall Disability Scale (I-RODS), or of the Medical Research Council sum score (MRCSS), or of dominant hand-grip strength, in addition to the adjusted INCAT, indicated a sensitivity of 41.7% in identifying adjusted INCAT nonresponders at week 12 who subsequently responded at week 24. Specificity was 60% vs INCAT nonresponders at week 24. Consideration of amelioration of any amplitude on any secondary outcome measure indicated a 75% sensitivity, but only 30% specificity vs adjusted INCAT nonresponders at week 24. Discussion: Immunoglobulin treatment continuation may be justified for up to 24 weeks in CIDP. Additional outcome measures may help in the early treatment stages to predict delayed response on the adjusted INCAT. However, their use is limited by high false-positive rates. More robust, reliable, and relevant outcome measures are needed to detect early improvement in immunoglobulin-treated CIDP

The circular RNA landscape in multiple sclerosis: Disease-specific associated variants and exon methylation shape circular RNA expression profile

BACKGROUND: Circular RNAs (circRNAs) are a class of non-coding RNAs increasingly emerging as crucial actors in the pathogenesis of human diseases, including autoimmune and neurological disorders as multiple sclerosis (MS). Despite several efforts, the mechanisms regulating circRNAs expression are still largely unknown and the circRNA profile and regulation in MS-relevant cell models has not been completely investigated. In this work, we aimed at exploring the global landscape of circRNA expression in MS patients, also evaluating a possible correlation with their genetic and epigenetic background. METHODS: We performed RNA-seq experiments on circRNA-enriched samples, derived from peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) of 10 MS patients and 10 matched controls and performed differential circRNA expression. The genetic background was evaluated using array genotyping, and an expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) analysis was carried out. RESULTS: Expression analysis revealed 166 differentially expressed circRNAs in MS patients, 125 of which are downregulated. One of the top dysregulated circRNAs, hsa_circ_0007990, derives from the PGAP3 gene, encoding a protein relevant for the control of autoimmune responses. The downregulation of this circRNA was confirmed in two independent replication cohorts, suggesting its implementation as a possible RNA-based biomarker. The eQTL analysis evidenced a significant association between 89 MS-associated loci and the expression of at least one circRNA, suggesting that MS-associated variants could impact on disease pathogenesis by altering circRNA profiles. Finally, we found a significant correlation between exon methylation and circRNA expression levels, supporting the hypothesis that epigenetic features may play an important role in the definition of the cell circRNA pool. CONCLUSION: We described the circRNA expression profile of PBMCs in MS patients, suggesting that MS-associated variants may tune the expression levels of circRNAs acting as circ-QTLs , and proposing a role for exon-based DNA methylation in regulating circRNA expression

European Academy of Neurology/Peripheral Nerve Society Guideline on diagnosis and treatment of Guillain–Barré syndrome

Guillain–Barré syndrome (GBS) is an acute polyradiculoneuropathy. Symptoms may vary greatly in presentation and severity. Besides weakness and sensory disturbances, patients may have cranial nerve involvement, respiratory insufficiency, autonomic dysfunction and pain. To develop an evidence-based guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of GBS, using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, a Task Force (TF) of the European Academy of Neurology (EAN) and the Peripheral Nerve Society (PNS) constructed 14 Population/Intervention/Comparison/Outcome questions (PICOs) covering diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of GBS, which guided the literature search. Data were extracted and summarised in GRADE Summaries of Findings (for treatment PICOs) or Evidence Tables (for diagnostic and prognostic PICOs). Statements were prepared according to GRADE Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) frameworks. For the six intervention PICOs, evidence-based recommendations are made. For other PICOs, good practice points (GPPs) are formulated. For diagnosis, the principal GPPs are: GBS is more likely if there is a history of recent diarrhoea or respiratory infection; CSF examination is valuable, particularly when the diagnosis is less certain; electrodiagnostic testing is advised to support the diagnosis; testing for anti-ganglioside antibodies is of limited clinical value in most patients with typical motor-sensory GBS, but anti-GQ1b antibody testing should be considered when Miller Fisher syndrome (MFS) is suspected; nodal–paranodal antibodies should be tested when autoimmune nodopathy is suspected; MRI or ultrasound imaging should be considered in atypical cases; and changing the diagnosis to acute-onset chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (A-CIDP) should be considered if progression continues after 8 weeks from onset, which occurs in around 5% of patients initially diagnosed with GBS. For treatment, the TF recommends intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) 0.4 g/kg for 5 days, in patients within 2 weeks (GPP also within 2–4 weeks) after onset of weakness if unable to walk unaided, or a course of plasma exchange (PE) 12–15 L in four to five exchanges over 1–2 weeks, in patients within 4 weeks after onset of weakness if unable to walk unaided. The TF recommends against a second IVIg course in GBS patients with a poor prognosis; recommends against using oral corticosteroids, and weakly recommends against using IV corticosteroids; does not recommend PE followed immediately by IVIg; weakly recommends gabapentinoids, tricyclic antidepressants or carbamazepine for treatment of pain; does not recommend a specific treatment for fatigue. To estimate the prognosis of individual patients, the TF advises using the modified Erasmus GBS outcome score (mEGOS) to assess outcome, and the modified Erasmus GBS Respiratory Insufficiency Score (mEGRIS) to assess the risk of requiring artificial ventilation. Based on the PICOs, available literature and additional discussions, we provide flow charts to assist making clinical decisions on diagnosis, treatment and the need for intensive care unit admission.</p

European Academy of Neurology/Peripheral Nerve Society Guideline on diagnosis and treatment of Guillain–Barré syndrome

Guillain–Barré syndrome (GBS) is an acute polyradiculoneuropathy. Symptoms may vary greatly in presentation and severity. Besides weakness and sensory disturbances, patients may have cranial nerve involvement, respiratory insufficiency, autonomic dysfunction and pain. To develop an evidence-based guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of GBS, using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology a Task Force (TF) of the European Academy of Neurology (EAN) and the Peripheral Nerve Society (PNS) constructed 14 Population/Intervention/Comparison/Outcome questions (PICOs) covering diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of GBS, which guided the literature search. Data were extracted and summarised in GRADE Summaries of Findings (for treatment PICOs) or Evidence Tables (for diagnostic and prognostic PICOs). Statements were prepared according to GRADE Evidence-to-Decision (EtD) frameworks. For the six intervention PICOs, evidence-based recommendations are made. For other PICOs, good practice points (GPPs) are formulated. For diagnosis, the principal GPPs are: GBS is more likely if there is a history of recent diarrhoea or respiratory infection; CSF examination is valuable, particularly when the diagnosis is less certain; electrodiagnostic testing is advised to support the diagnosis; testing for anti-ganglioside antibodies is of limited clinical value in most patients with typical motor-sensory GBS, but anti-GQ1b antibody testing should be considered when Miller Fisher syndrome (MFS) is suspected; nodal–paranodal antibodies should be tested when autoimmune nodopathy is suspected; MRI or ultrasound imaging should be considered in atypical cases; and changing the diagnosis to acute-onset chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (A-CIDP) should be considered if progression continues after 8 weeks from onset, which occurs in around 5% of patients initially diagnosed with GBS. For treatment, the TF recommends intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) 0.4 g/kg for 5 days, in patients within 2 weeks (GPP also within 2–4 weeks) after onset of weakness if unable to walk unaided, or a course of plasma exchange (PE) 12–15 L in four to five exchanges over 1–2 weeks, in patients within 4 weeks after onset of weakness if unable to walk unaided. The TF recommends against a second IVIg course in GBS patients with a poor prognosis; recommends against using oral corticosteroids, and weakly recommends against using IV corticosteroids; does not recommend PE followed immediately by IVIg; weakly recommends gabapentinoids, tricyclic antidepressants or carbamazepine for treatment of pain; does not recommend a specific treatment for fatigue. To estimate the prognosis of individual patients, the TF advises using the modified Erasmus GBS outcome score (mEGOS) to assess outcome, and the modified Erasmus GBS Respiratory Insufficiency Score (mEGRIS) to assess the risk of requiring artificial ventilation. Based on the PICOs, available literature and additional discussions, we provide flow charts to assist making clinical decisions on diagnosis, treatment and the need for intensive care unit admission.</p

Assessment of diagnostic criteria for multifocal motor neuropathy in patients included in the Italian database

Background and purposeThis study aimed to assess the diagnostic criteria, ancillary investigations and treatment response using real-life data in multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) patients.MethodsClinical and laboratory data were collected from 110 patients enrolled in the Italian MMN database through a structured questionnaire. Twenty-six patients were excluded due to the unavailability of nerve conduction studies or the presence of clinical signs and symptoms and electrodiagnostic abnormalities inconsistent with the MMN diagnosis. Analyses were conducted on 73 patients with a confirmed MMN diagnosis and 11 patients who did not meet the diagnostic criteria.ResultsThe European Federation of Neurological Societies/Peripheral Nerve Society (EFNS/PNS) diagnostic criteria were variably applied. AUTHOR:When applying the American Association of Electrodiagnostic Medicine criteria, an additional 17% of patients fulfilled the criteria for probable/definite diagnosis whilst a further 9.5% missed the diagnosis. In 17% of the patients only compound muscle action potential amplitude, but not area, was measured and subsequently recorded in the database by the treating physician. Additional investigations, including anti-GM1 immunoglobulin M antibodies, cerebrospinal fluid analysis, nerve ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging, supported the diagnosis in 46%-83% of the patients. Anti-GM1 immunoglobulin M antibodies and nerve ultrasound demonstrated the highest sensitivity. Additional tests were frequently performed outside the EFNS/PNS guideline recommendations.ConclusionsThis study provides insights into the real-world diagnostic and management strategies for MMN, highlighting the challenges in applying diagnostic criteria

Impact of 2021 European Academy of Neurology/Peripheral Nerve Society diagnostic criteria on diagnosis and therapy of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy variants

Background and purpose: there are different criteria for the diagnosis of different variants of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP). The 2021 European Academy of Neurology/Peripheral Nerve Society (EAN/PNS) guidelines provide specific clinical criteria for each CIDP variant even if their therapeutical impact has not been investigated. Methods: we applied the clinical criteria for CIDP variants of the 2021 EAN/PNS guidelines to 369 patients included in the Italian CIDP database who fulfilled the 2021 EAN/PNS electrodiagnostic criteria for CIDP. Results: according to the 2021 EAN/PNS clinical criteria, 245 patients achieved a clinical diagnosis of typical CIDP or CIDP variant (66%). We identified 106 patients with typical CIDP (29%), 62 distal CIDP (17%), 28 multifocal or focal CIDP (7%), four sensory CIDP (1%), 27 sensory-predominant CIDP (7%), 10 motor CIDP (3%), and eight motor-predominant CIDP (2%). Patients with multifocal, distal, and sensory CIDP had milder impairment and symptoms. Patients with multifocal CIDP had less frequently reduced conduction velocity and prolonged F-wave latency and had lower levels of cerebrospinal fluid protein. Patients with distal CIDP more frequently had reduced distal compound muscle action potentials. Patients with motor CIDP did not improve after steroid therapy, whereas those with motor-predominant CIDP did. None of the patients with sensory CIDP responded to steroids, whereas most of those with sensory-predominant CIDP did. Conclusions: the 2021 EAN/PNS criteria for CIDP allow a better characterization of CIDP variants, permitting their distinction from typical CIDP and more appropriate treatment for patients

Clinical and Laboratory Features in Anti-NF155 Autoimmune Nodopathy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To study the clinical and laboratory features of antineurofascin-155 (NF155)-positive autoimmune nodopathy (AN). METHODS: Patients with anti-NF155 antibodies detected on routine immunologic testing were included. Clinical characteristics, treatment response, and functional scales (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] and Inflammatory Rasch-built Overall Disability Scale [I-RODS]) were retrospectively collected at baseline and at the follow-up. Autoantibody and neurofilament light (NfL) chain levels were analyzed at baseline and at the follow-up. RESULTS: Forty NF155+ patients with AN were included. Mean age at onset was 42.4 years. Patients presented with a progressive (75%), sensory motor (87.5%), and symmetric distal-predominant weakness in upper (97.2%) and lower extremities (94.5%), with tremor and ataxia (75%). Patients received a median of 3 (2-4) different treatments in 46 months of median follow-up. Response to IV immunoglobulin (86.8%) or steroids (72.2%) was poor in most patients, whereas 77.3% responded to rituximab. HLA-DRB1*15 was detected in 91.3% of patients. IgG4 anti-NF155 antibodies were predominant in all patients; anti-NF155 titers correlated with mRS within the same patient (r = 0.41, p = 0.004). Serum NfL (sNfL) levels were higher in anti-NF155+ AN than in healthy controls (36.47 vs 7.56 pg/mL, p < 0.001) and correlated with anti-NF155 titers (r = 0.43, p = 0.001), with I-RODS at baseline (r = -0.88, p < 0.001) and with maximum I-RODS achieved (r = -0.58, p = 0.01). Anti-NF155 titers and sNfL levels decreased in all rituximab-treated patients. DISCUSSION: Anti-NF155 AN presents a distinct clinical profile and good response to rituximab. Autoantibody titers and sNfL are useful to monitor disease status in these patients. The use of untagged-NF155 plasmids minimizes the detection of false anti-NF155+ cases. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class IV evidence that anti-NF155 antibodies associate with a specific phenotype and response to rituximab

COVID-19 Severity in Multiple Sclerosis: Putting Data Into Context

Background and objectives: It is unclear how multiple sclerosis (MS) affects the severity of COVID-19. The aim of this study is to compare COVID-19-related outcomes collected in an Italian cohort of patients with MS with the outcomes expected in the age- and sex-matched Italian population. Methods: Hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and death after COVID-19 diagnosis of 1,362 patients with MS were compared with the age- and sex-matched Italian population in a retrospective observational case-cohort study with population-based control. The observed vs the expected events were compared in the whole MS cohort and in different subgroups (higher risk: Expanded Disability Status Scale [EDSS] score &gt; 3 or at least 1 comorbidity, lower risk: EDSS score ≤ 3 and no comorbidities) by the χ2 test, and the risk excess was quantified by risk ratios (RRs). Results: The risk of severe events was about twice the risk in the age- and sex-matched Italian population: RR = 2.12 for hospitalization (p &lt; 0.001), RR = 2.19 for ICU admission (p &lt; 0.001), and RR = 2.43 for death (p &lt; 0.001). The excess of risk was confined to the higher-risk group (n = 553). In lower-risk patients (n = 809), the rate of events was close to that of the Italian age- and sex-matched population (RR = 1.12 for hospitalization, RR = 1.52 for ICU admission, and RR = 1.19 for death). In the lower-risk group, an increased hospitalization risk was detected in patients on anti-CD20 (RR = 3.03, p = 0.005), whereas a decrease was detected in patients on interferon (0 observed vs 4 expected events, p = 0.04). Discussion: Overall, the MS cohort had a risk of severe events that is twice the risk than the age- and sex-matched Italian population. This excess of risk is mainly explained by the EDSS score and comorbidities, whereas a residual increase of hospitalization risk was observed in patients on anti-CD20 therapies and a decrease in people on interferon