8 research outputs found

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

    Get PDF
    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

    Get PDF
    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

    Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of the 2021 EAN/PNS and 2010 EFNS/PNS diagnostic criteria for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy

    Get PDF
    Objectives To compare the sensitivity and specificity of the 2021 European Academy of Neurology/Peripheral Nerve Society (EAN/PNS) diagnostic criteria for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) with those of the 2010 European Federation of Neurological Societies/Peripheral Nerve Society (EFNS/PNS). Methods Sensitivity and specificity of the two sets of criteria were evaluated in 330 patients with CIDP and 166 axonal peripheral neuropathy controls. Comparison of the utility of nerve conduction studies with different number of nerves examined and of the sensitivity and specificity of the two criteria in typical CIDP and its variants were assessed. Results EFNS/PNS criteria had a sensitivity of 92% for possible CIDP and 85% for probable/definite CIDP, while the EAN/PNS criteria had a sensitivity of 83% for possible CIDP and 74% for CIDP. Using supportive criteria, the sensitivity of the EAN/PNS criteria for possible CIDP increased to 85% and that of CIDP to 77%, remaining lower than that of the EFNS/PNS criteria. Specificity of the EFNS/PNS criteria was 68% for possible CIDP and 84% for probable/definite CIDP, while the EAN/PNS criteria had a specificity of 88% for possible CIDP and 98% for CIDP. More extended studies increased the sensitivity of both sets of criteria by 4%-7% but reduced their specificity by 2%-3%. The EFNS/PNS criteria were more sensitive for the diagnosis of typical CIDP while the EAN/PNS criteria were more specific for the diagnosis of distal and sensory CIDP. Conclusions In our population, the EAN/PNS criteria were more specific but less sensitive than the EFNS/PNS criteria. With the EAN/PNS criteria, more extended nerve conduction studies are recommended to obtain an acceptable sensitivity while maintaining a high specificity

    Unclassified clinical presentations of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy

    No full text
    Background: To assess the ability of the 2021 European Academy of Neurology/Peripheral Nerve Society (EAN/PNS) clinical criteria for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) to include within their classification the whole spectrum of clinical heterogeneity of the disease and to define the clinical characteristics of the unclassifiable clinical forms. Methods: The 2021 EAN/PNS clinical criteria for CIDP were applied to 329 patients fulfilling the electrodiagnostic (and in some cases also the supportive) criteria for the diagnosis of CIDP. Clinical characteristics were reviewed for each patient not strictly fulfilling the clinical criteria ('unclassifiable'). Results: At study inclusion, 124 (37.5%) patients had an unclassifiable clinical presentation, including 110 (89%) with a typical CIDP-like clinical phenotype in whom some segments of the four limbs were unaffected by weakness ('incomplete typical CIDP'), 10 (8%) with a mild distal, symmetric, sensory or sensorimotor polyneuropathy confined to the lower limbs with cranial nerve involvement ('cranial nerve predominant CIDP') and 4 (1%) with a symmetric sensorimotor polyneuropathy limited to the proximal and distal areas of the lower limbs ('paraparetic CIDP'). Eighty-one (65%) patients maintained an unclassifiable presentation during the entire disease follow-up while 13 patients progressed to typical CIDP. Patients with the unclassifiable clinical forms compared with patients with typical CIDP had a milder form of CIDP, while there was no difference in the distribution patterns of demyelination. Conclusions: A proportion of patients with CIDP do not strictly fulfil the 2021 EAN/PNS clinical criteria for diagnosis. These unclassifiable clinical phenotypes may pose diagnostic challenges and thus deserve more attention in clinical practice and research

    Risk of disease relapse, safety and tolerability of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with chronic inflammatory neuropathies

    No full text
    Background and purpose: The aim was to evaluate the risk of relapse after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination, and its safety and tolerability, in patients with chronic inflammatory neuropathies. Methods: In this multicenter, cohort and case-crossover study, the risk of relapse associated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was assessed by comparing the frequency of relapse in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) and multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) patients who underwent or did not undergo vaccination. Frequency of relapse in the 3 months prior to and after vaccination, and safety and tolerability of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, were also assessed. Results: In all, 336 patients were included (278 CIDP, 58 MMN). Three hundred and seven (91%) patients underwent SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. Twenty-nine patients (9%) did not undergo vaccination. Mild and transient relapses were observed in 16 (5%) patients (13 CIDP, 3 MMN) after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and in none of the patients who did not undergo vaccination (relative risk [RR] 3.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19-52.25). There was no increase in the specific risk of relapse associated with type of vaccine or diagnosis. Comparison with the 3-month control period preceding vaccination revealed an increased risk of relapse after vaccination (RR 4.00, 95% CI 1.35-11.82), which was restricted to CIDP patients (RR 3.25, 95% CI 1.07-9.84). The safety profile of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination was characterized by short-term, mild-to-moderate local and systemic adverse events. Conclusions: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination in CIDP and MMN patients does not seem to be associated with an increased risk of relapse at the primary end-point, although a slightly increased risk in CIDP patients was found compared to the 3 months before vaccination

    Tocilizumab for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. The single-arm TOCIVID-19 prospective trial

    No full text
    BackgroundTocilizumab blocks pro-inflammatory activity of interleukin-6 (IL-6), involved in pathogenesis of pneumonia the most frequent cause of death in COVID-19 patients.MethodsA multicenter, single-arm, hypothesis-driven trial was planned, according to a phase 2 design, to study the effect of tocilizumab on lethality rates at 14 and 30 days (co-primary endpoints, a priori expected rates being 20 and 35%, respectively). A further prospective cohort of patients, consecutively enrolled after the first cohort was accomplished, was used as a secondary validation dataset. The two cohorts were evaluated jointly in an exploratory multivariable logistic regression model to assess prognostic variables on survival.ResultsIn the primary intention-to-treat (ITT) phase 2 population, 180/301 (59.8%) subjects received tocilizumab, and 67 deaths were observed overall. Lethality rates were equal to 18.4% (97.5% CI: 13.6-24.0, P=0.52) and 22.4% (97.5% CI: 17.2-28.3, P<0.001) at 14 and 30 days, respectively. Lethality rates were lower in the validation dataset, that included 920 patients. No signal of specific drug toxicity was reported. In the exploratory multivariable logistic regression analysis, older age and lower PaO2/FiO2 ratio negatively affected survival, while the concurrent use of steroids was associated with greater survival. A statistically significant interaction was found between tocilizumab and respiratory support, suggesting that tocilizumab might be more effective in patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline.ConclusionsTocilizumab reduced lethality rate at 30 days compared with null hypothesis, without significant toxicity. Possibly, this effect could be limited to patients not requiring mechanical respiratory support at baseline.Registration EudraCT (2020-001110-38); clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04317092)

    Correction to: Tocilizumab for patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. The single-arm TOCIVID-19 prospective trial

    No full text
    corecore