Longitudinal study of informed consent in innovative therapy research: experience and provisional recommendations from a multicenter trial of intracerebral grafting.

BACKGROUND: There is an urgent need to assess and improve the consent process in clinical trials of innovative therapies for neurodegenerative disorders. METHODS: We performed a longitudinal study of the consent of Huntington's disease patients during the Multicenter Fetal Cell Intracerebral Grafting Trial in Huntington's Disease (MIG-HD) in France and Belgium. Patients and their proxies completed a consent questionnaire at inclusion, before signing the consent form and after one year of follow-up, before randomization and transplantation. The questionnaire explored understanding of the protocol, satisfaction with the information delivered, reasons for participating in the trial and expectations regarding the transplant. Forty-six Huntington's disease patients and 27 proxies completed the questionnaire at inclusion, and 27 Huntington's disease patients and 16 proxies one year later. RESULTS: The comprehension score was high and similar for Huntington's disease patients and proxies at inclusion (72.6% vs 77.8%; P > 0.1) but only decreased in HD patients after one year. The information satisfaction score was high (73.5% vs 66.5%; P > 0.1) and correlated with understanding in both patients and proxies. The motivation and expectation profiles were similar in patients and proxies and remained unchanged after one year. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitively impaired patients with Huntington's disease were capable of consenting to participation in this trial. This consent procedure has presumably strengthened their understanding and should be proposed before signing the consent form in future gene or cell therapy trials for neurodegenerative disorders. Because of the potential cognitive decline, proxies should be designated as provisional surrogate decision-makers, even in competent patients

Insulin-Like Growth Factor-1 but Not Insulin Predicts Cognitive Decline in Huntington's Disease

BACKGROUND: Huntington\u27s disease (HD) is one of several neurodegenerative disorders that have been associated with metabolic alterations. Changes in Insulin Growth Factor 1 (IGF-1) and/or insulin input to the brain may underlie or contribute to the progress of neurodegenerative processes. Here, we investigated the association over time between changes in plasma levels of IGF-1 and insulin and the cognitive decline in HD patients. METHODS: We conducted a multicentric cohort study in 156 patients with genetically documented HD aged from 22 to 80 years. Among them, 146 patients were assessed at least twice with a follow-up of 3.5 ± 1.8 years. We assessed their cognitive decline using the Unified Huntington\u27s Disease Rating Scale, and their IGF-1 and insulin plasmatic levels, at baseline and once a year during the follow-up. Associations were evaluated using a mixed-effect linear model. RESULTS: In the cross-sectional analysis at baseline, higher levels of IGF-1 and insulin were associated with lower cognitive scores and thus with a higher degree of cognitive impairment. In the longitudinal analysis, the decrease of all cognitive scores, except the Stroop interference, was associated with the IGF-1 level over time but not of insulin. CONCLUSIONS: IGF-1 levels, unlike insulin, predict the decline of cognitive function in HD

Effectiveness of anti-psychotics and related drugs in the Huntington French-speaking group cohort.

PURPOSE: Huntington's disease is a rare condition. Patients are commonly treated with antipsychotics and tetrabenazine. The evidence of their effect on disease progression is limited and no comparative study between these drugs has been conducted. We therefore compared the effectiveness of antipsychotics on disease progression. METHODS: 956 patients from the Huntington French Speaking Group were followed for up to 8 years between 2002 and 2010. The effectiveness of treatments was assessed using Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS) scores and then compared using a mixed model adjusted on a multiple propensity score. RESULTS: 63% of patients were treated with antipsychotics during the survey period. The most commonly prescribed medications were dibenzodiazepines (38%), risperidone (13%), tetrabenazine (12%) and benzamides (12%). There was no difference between treatments on the motor and behavioural declines observed, after taking the patient profiles at the start of the drug prescription into account. In contrast, the functional decline was lower in the dibenzodiazepine group than the other antipsychotic groups (Total Functional Capacity: 0.41 ± 0.17 units per year vs. risperidone and 0.54 ± 0.19 vs. tetrabenazine, both p<0.05). Benzamides were less effective than other antipsychotics on cognitive evolution (Stroop interference, Stroop color and Literal fluency: p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Antipsychotics are widely used to treat patients with Huntington's disease. Although differences in motor or behavioural profiles between patients according to the antipsychotics used were small, there were differences in drug effectiveness on the evolution of functional and cognitive scores

Guidelines for clinical pharmacological practices in Huntington's disease

OBJECTIVE: Evidence-based medicine is a difficult goal to achieve in rare diseases where randomized controlled trials are lacking. This report provides guidelines that capitalize on both the literature and expertise of the French National Huntington Disease Reference Centre to optimalize pharmacological therapeutic interventions for Huntington\u27s disease (HD). MATERIAL AND METHODS: HD experts conducted a systematic analysis of the literature from 1965 to 2013, using a scoring procedure established by the French National Authority for Health. These experts offered their views when evidence was missing to set up provisional guidelines for care in HD. These guidelines were then scored and amended through two subsequent online questionnaires (using SurveyMonkey scoring), and one face-to-face meeting with an external multidisciplinary working group as a step towards validation. RESULTS: Except for the beneficial effects of tetrabenazine in chorea, none of the published recommendations were grounded on established scientific evidence. Second-generation antipsychotics are nevertheless the first choice for patients with psychiatric manifestations (low level of evidence). All other guidelines are based on low-level evidence and little professional agreement. CONCLUSION: Patients\u27 care has greatly improved over the last few years despite the lack of high-level evidence standards. Guidelines are based on the expertise of trained specialists from the French National Plan for Rare Diseases. This strategy should now be extended internationally to promote future studies and to harmonize worldwide care of HD

How to Capitalize on the Retest Effect in Future Trials on Huntington's Disease

The retest effect-improvement of performance on second exposure to a task-may impede the detection of cognitive decline in clinical trials for neurodegenerative diseases. We assessed the impact of the retest effect in Huntington\u27s disease trials, and investigated its possible neutralization. We enrolled 54 patients in the Multicentric Intracerebral Grafting in Huntington\u27s Disease (MIG-HD) trial and 39 in the placebo arm of the Riluzole trial in Huntington\u27s Disease (RIL-HD). All were assessed with the Unified Huntington\u27s Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS) plus additional cognitive tasks at baseline (A1), shortly after baseline (A2) and one year later (A3). We used paired t-tests to analyze the retest effect between A1 and A2. For each task of the MIG-HD study, we used a stepwise algorithm to design models predictive of patient performance at A3, which we applied to the RIL-HD trial for external validation. We observed a retest effect in most cognitive tasks. A decline in performance at one year was detected in 3 of the 15 cognitive tasks with A1 as the baseline, and 9 of the 15 cognitive tasks with A2 as the baseline. We also included the retest effect in performance modeling and showed that it facilitated performance prediction one year later for 14 of the 15 cognitive tasks. The retest effect may mask cognitive decline in patients with neurodegenerative diseases. The dual baseline can improve clinical trial design, and better prediction should homogenize patient groups, resulting in smaller numbers of participants being required

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating cysteamine in Huntington's disease

BACKGROUND: Cysteamine has been demonstrated as potentially effective in numerous animal models of Huntington\u27s disease. METHODS: Ninety-six patients with early-stage Huntington\u27s disease were randomized to 1200 mg delayed-release cysteamine bitartrate or placebo daily for 18 months. The primary end point was the change from baseline in the UHDRS Total Motor Score. A linear mixed-effects model for repeated measures was used to assess treatment effect, expressed as the least-squares mean difference of cysteamine minus placebo, with negative values indicating less deterioration relative to placebo. RESULTS: At 18 months, the treatment effect was not statistically significant - least-squares mean difference, -1.5 ± 1.71 (P = 0.385) - although this did represent less mean deterioration from baseline for the treated group relative to placebo. Treatment with cysteamine was safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy of cysteamine was not demonstrated in this study population of patients with Huntington\u27s disease. Post hoc analyses indicate the need for definitive future studies. © 2017 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society

A phase II, open-label evaluation of cysteamine tolerability in patients with Huntington's disease

o

The Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale for Advanced Patients: Validation and Follow-Up Study

Neurological Motor Disorder

Guidelines for clinical pharmacological practices in Huntington's disease.

International audienceOBJECTIVE: Evidence-based medicine is a difficult goal to achieve in rare diseases where randomized controlled trials are lacking. This report provides guidelines that capitalize on both the literature and expertise of the French National Huntington Disease Reference Centre to optimalize pharmacological therapeutic interventions for Huntington's disease (HD).MATERIAL AND METHODS: HD experts conducted a systematic analysis of the literature from 1965 to 2013, using a scoring procedure established by the French National Authority for Health. These experts offered their views when evidence was missing to set up provisional guidelines for care in HD. These guidelines were then scored and amended through two subsequent online questionnaires (using SurveyMonkey scoring), and one face-to-face meeting with an external multidisciplinary working group as a step towards validation.RESULTS: Except for the beneficial effects of tetrabenazine in chorea, none of the published recommendations were grounded on established scientific evidence. Second-generation antipsychotics are nevertheless the first choice for patients with psychiatric manifestations (low level of evidence). All other guidelines are based on low-level evidence and little professional agreement.CONCLUSION: Patients' care has greatly improved over the last few years despite the lack of high-level evidence standards. Guidelines are based on the expertise of trained specialists from the French National Plan for Rare Diseases. This strategy should now be extended internationally to promote future studies and to harmonize worldwide care of HD.</p

International guidelines for the treatment of Huntington's disease

The European Huntington's Disease Network (EHDN) commissioned an international task force to provide global evidence-based recommendations for everyday clinical practice for treatment of Huntington's disease (HD). The objectives of such guidelines are to standardize pharmacological, surgical and non-pharmacological treatment regimen and improve care and quality of life of patients. A formalized consensus method, adapted from the French Health Authority recommendations was used. First, national committees (French and English Experts) reviewed all studies published between 1965 and 2015 included dealing with HD symptoms classified in motor, cognitive, psychiatric, and somatic categories. Quality grades were attributed to these studies based on levels of scientific evidence. Provisional recommendations were formulated based on the strength and the accumulation of scientific evidence available. When evidence was not available, recommendations were framed based on professional agreement. A European Steering committee supervised the writing of the final recommendations through a consensus process involving two rounds of online questionnaire completion with international multidisciplinary HD health professionals. Patients' associations were invited to review the guidelines including the HD symptoms. Two hundred and nineteen statements were retained in the final guidelines. We suggest to use this adapted method associating evidence base-medicine and expert consensus to other rare diseases