Clinical Neurology News

Biogen aims to file with the Food and Drug Administration for regulatory approval of aducanumab, an antibody under investigation for Alzheimer’s disease, in 2020 following largely positive results of a secondary analysis of two failed phase 3 trials, ENGAGE and EMERGE, the company announced Oct. 22.

Biogen’s plans reverse its March 21, 2019, decision with codeveloper Eisai to discontinue work on the drug after a futility analysis of the trials determined aducanumab was unlikely to yield significant benefit. Biogen announced the plan to file a biologic drug application following a new analysis of additional data that became available after the data lock on the futility analysis. But while primary and secondary endpoints were nearly all positive for EMERGE in the secondary analysis of the larger dataset, the same could not be said for the twin trial, ENGAGE, which had negative results for most of its endpoints. However, Biogen said that “results from a subset of patients in the phase 3 ENGAGE study who received sufficient exposure to high-dose aducanumab support the findings from EMERGE.”

Both the Alzheimer’s Association and researchers interpreted the announcement with a measured tone, saying it offered a hopeful sign for a field continually stymied in its quest for an effective treatment. More than 100 clinical trials have failed over the last 20 years.

“This really is very encouraging news,” Rebecca M. Edelmayer, PhD, director of scientific engagement at the Alzheimer’s Association, said in an interview. The secondary combined analyses showed “the largest reductions in clinical and functional decline we have seen. It’s an important moment for the patients with AD and their families, and for researchers all around the world. This deserves to be discussed and considered by the research community, but we really need to dig deep into the data. We expect to see more of them at the Clinical Trials on Alzheimer’s Disease conference,” which is set for early December.

Paul Aisen, MD, a consultant for Biogen and director of the Alzheimer’s Therapeutic Research Institute at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, was similarly measured.

“There is an enormous amount of data here and they will be very challenging to interpret, especially since both trials were stopped in a futility analysis,” he said in an interview. “We’re now interpreting data that continue to be collected after the initial data lock. But I do believe there is evidence that supports the amyloid hypothesis and the development of aducanumab.”

A deep data dive is in order before the field completely embraces aducanumab’s advancement, agreed Michael Wolfe, PhD, the Mathias P. Mertes Professor of Medicinal Chemistry at the University of Kansas, Lawrence.

“We would have to see exactly how they came up with this new data set and analysis. I have felt for many years now that these companies would try to parse and shuffle the data around until they got a statistically significant result, just to get approval. They would make billions per year but not really make a difference in people’s lives. That being said, if aducanumab truly slows the decline in activities of daily living, keeping people independent longer, that would be a worthwhile clinical result.”

Still to be considered is whether aducanumab could confer enough benefits to be worth monthly, potentially lifelong, infusions of a pricey medication that still won’t stop disease progression.

“Whether the clinical impact will be worth the anticipated cost remains to be seen,” Richard J. Caselli, MD, said in an interview. “This is likely to be a very expensive treatment for a subgroup of individuals with the hope of slowing decline, but – unless there is a huge upside surprise in data yet to be released – it is not going to halt progression and will certainly increase the cost of care dramatically.”

Dr. Caselli, clinical core director of the Alzheimer’s Disease Center at the Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, continued: “I imagine if approved, there will be a number of insurance obstacles to overcome regarding who qualifies, for how long, etc. Scientifically, this certainly supports the long-held view that beta amyloid is important in the pathophysiology of Alzheimer’s disease. But, again, unless the impact is unexpectedly huge, I don’t think this quiets those who feel there is more to the story than only a gain of beta amyloid toxicity, though this does support the idea that it plays a role, which should not surprise anyone.”

Dr. Edelmayer said the Alzheimer’s Association has raised the issue of access and cost with Biogen.

“We have had many discussions about their capacity to roll this out,” if aducanumab is approved, she said. “Those who were in the studies will be the first recipients. But Biogen is making plans to move this into the general population if approved, to all patients who meet the diagnostic criteria.”

“There is precedent out there when it comes to doing infusion medicines, and those centers are part of the planning process. In terms of pricing, this is a problem we would be happy to see, because it would mean that we have a treatment. But we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it.”
 

Secondary analysis results

The new analysis comprised 2,066 patients who had the opportunity to complete the full 18-month trials by March 20, 2019. The full intent-to-treat population of the trials comprised 3,285 patients with mild cognitive impairment caused by Alzheimer’s disease or mild Alzheimer’s disease dementia.

In the secondary analysis of EMERGE’s intent-to-treat population, patients who took the highest dose of aducanumab (10 mg/kg every month) showed 23% lower functional and cognitive decline on the trial’s primary endpoint of Clinical Dementia Rating–Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) at 18 months when compared with placebo. The rate of decline was slowed by a nonsignificant 14% among users of the lower dose (6 mg/kg monthly).Secondary endpoints for the high-dose group in EMERGE showed 27% slower cognitive decline on the 13-item cognitive subscale of the AD Assessment Scale (ADAS-Cog13) and 40% lower decline in function among patients with mild cognitive impairment based on the MCI version of the AD Cooperative Study–Activities of Daily Living Inventory (ADCS-ADL-MCI).

However, data from the ENGAGE trial, which had the same primary endpoint, were not positive. CDR-SB scores worsened 2% more among high-dose aducanumab users but low-dose users slowed decline by a nonsignificant 12% when compared with placebo.“Exposure to high-dose aducanumab was important for efficacy,” the company noted in a slide set presented at an Oct. 22 investors webcast. “Differences in exposure to high-dose aducanumab largely explain the different results between the futility analysis and the new analysis of this larger dataset, as well as the different results between the two studies.”

In EMERGE, changes in secondary endpoints among patients who had the opportunity to complete the full 18-month trials included:

• Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE): Significant 23% decrease in rate of decline in the high-dose group and nonsignificant 3% increase in decline in the low-dose group.
• ADAS-Cog13: Significant 25% decrease for high-dose users and nonsignificant 10% decrease for low dose.
• ADCS-ADL-MCI: Significant decreases of 46% for high-dose and 20% for low-dose users.

The ENGAGE secondary endpoints of high- vs. low-dose patients who completed the full trials were:

• MMSE: Significant 13% increase, nonsignificant 3% decrease.
• ADAS-Cog13: Nonsignificant 2% decrease, nonsignificant 1% decrease.
• ADCS-ADL-MCI: Significant 12% declines in both dosage groups.

All of the positive cognitive and functional results tracked along with results of amyloid PET imaging and CSF biomarkers. In EMERGE, amyloid plaque binding declined about 27% in the high-dose group and about 16% in the low-dose group, reflecting plaque clearance. Phosphorylated tau in CSF decreased by about 17 pg/mL and 10 pg/mL, respectively, and total tau decreased by 160 pg/mL and 120 pg/mL. Tau decreases indicate a slowing of neuronal damage.

In ENGAGE, amyloid plaque binding decreased by about 24% in the high-dose group and by about 16% in the low-dose group. Phosphorylated tau dropped by about 10 pg/mL and 11 pg/mL, respectively. But total tau dropped more in the low-dose group than in the high-dose group (about –100 pg/mL vs. –20 pg/mL).

Biogen said the amyloid PET imaging biomarker results and CDR-SB scores in both studies were consistent with each other in a subset of patients with “sufficient exposure to 10 mg/kg,” which was defined as “10 or more uninterrupted 10-mg/kg dosing intervals at steady-state.”

The most common adverse events were amyloid related imaging abnormalities–edema (ARIA-E), which occurred in 35%, and headache in 20%. The majority of patients who experienced ARIA-E (74%) were asymptomatic; episodes generally resolved within 4-16 weeks, typically without long-term sequelae.

Dr. Aisen is a consultant for Biogen and on the aducanumab steering committee. None of the other sources in this article have any financial relationship with Biogen or Eisai.

This article was updated 10/23/19.

msullivan@mdedge.com

Biogen aims to file with the Food and Drug Administration for regulatory approval of aducanumab, an antibody under investigation for Alzheimer’s disease, in 2020 following largely positive results of a secondary analysis of two failed phase 3 trials, ENGAGE and EMERGE, the company announced Oct. 22.

Biogen’s plans reverse its March 21, 2019, decision with codeveloper Eisai to discontinue work on the drug after a futility analysis of the trials determined aducanumab was unlikely to yield significant benefit. Biogen announced the plan to file a biologic drug application following a new analysis of additional data that became available after the data lock on the futility analysis. But while primary and secondary endpoints were nearly all positive for EMERGE in the secondary analysis of the larger dataset, the same could not be said for the twin trial, ENGAGE, which had negative results for most of its endpoints. However, Biogen said that “results from a subset of patients in the phase 3 ENGAGE study who received sufficient exposure to high-dose aducanumab support the findings from EMERGE.”

Both the Alzheimer’s Association and researchers interpreted the announcement with a measured tone, saying it offered a hopeful sign for a field continually stymied in its quest for an effective treatment. More than 100 clinical trials have failed over the last 20 years.

“This really is very encouraging news,” Rebecca M. Edelmayer, PhD, director of scientific engagement at the Alzheimer’s Association, said in an interview. The secondary combined analyses showed “the largest reductions in clinical and functional decline we have seen. It’s an important moment for the patients with AD and their families, and for researchers all around the world. This deserves to be discussed and considered by the research community, but we really need to dig deep into the data. We expect to see more of them at the Clinical Trials on Alzheimer’s Disease conference,” which is set for early December.

Paul Aisen, MD, a consultant for Biogen and director of the Alzheimer’s Therapeutic Research Institute at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, was similarly measured.

“There is an enormous amount of data here and they will be very challenging to interpret, especially since both trials were stopped in a futility analysis,” he said in an interview. “We’re now interpreting data that continue to be collected after the initial data lock. But I do believe there is evidence that supports the amyloid hypothesis and the development of aducanumab.”

A deep data dive is in order before the field completely embraces aducanumab’s advancement, agreed Michael Wolfe, PhD, the Mathias P. Mertes Professor of Medicinal Chemistry at the University of Kansas, Lawrence.

“We would have to see exactly how they came up with this new data set and analysis. I have felt for many years now that these companies would try to parse and shuffle the data around until they got a statistically significant result, just to get approval. They would make billions per year but not really make a difference in people’s lives. That being said, if aducanumab truly slows the decline in activities of daily living, keeping people independent longer, that would be a worthwhile clinical result.”

Still to be considered is whether aducanumab could confer enough benefits to be worth monthly, potentially lifelong, infusions of a pricey medication that still won’t stop disease progression.

“Whether the clinical impact will be worth the anticipated cost remains to be seen,” Richard J. Caselli, MD, said in an interview. “This is likely to be a very expensive treatment for a subgroup of individuals with the hope of slowing decline, but – unless there is a huge upside surprise in data yet to be released – it is not going to halt progression and will certainly increase the cost of care dramatically.”

Dr. Caselli, clinical core director of the Alzheimer’s Disease Center at the Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, continued: “I imagine if approved, there will be a number of insurance obstacles to overcome regarding who qualifies, for how long, etc. Scientifically, this certainly supports the long-held view that beta amyloid is important in the pathophysiology of Alzheimer’s disease. But, again, unless the impact is unexpectedly huge, I don’t think this quiets those who feel there is more to the story than only a gain of beta amyloid toxicity, though this does support the idea that it plays a role, which should not surprise anyone.”

Dr. Edelmayer said the Alzheimer’s Association has raised the issue of access and cost with Biogen.

“We have had many discussions about their capacity to roll this out,” if aducanumab is approved, she said. “Those who were in the studies will be the first recipients. But Biogen is making plans to move this into the general population if approved, to all patients who meet the diagnostic criteria.”

“There is precedent out there when it comes to doing infusion medicines, and those centers are part of the planning process. In terms of pricing, this is a problem we would be happy to see, because it would mean that we have a treatment. But we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it.”
 

Secondary analysis results

The new analysis comprised 2,066 patients who had the opportunity to complete the full 18-month trials by March 20, 2019. The full intent-to-treat population of the trials comprised 3,285 patients with mild cognitive impairment caused by Alzheimer’s disease or mild Alzheimer’s disease dementia.

In the secondary analysis of EMERGE’s intent-to-treat population, patients who took the highest dose of aducanumab (10 mg/kg every month) showed 23% lower functional and cognitive decline on the trial’s primary endpoint of Clinical Dementia Rating–Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) at 18 months when compared with placebo. The rate of decline was slowed by a nonsignificant 14% among users of the lower dose (6 mg/kg monthly).Secondary endpoints for the high-dose group in EMERGE showed 27% slower cognitive decline on the 13-item cognitive subscale of the AD Assessment Scale (ADAS-Cog13) and 40% lower decline in function among patients with mild cognitive impairment based on the MCI version of the AD Cooperative Study–Activities of Daily Living Inventory (ADCS-ADL-MCI).

However, data from the ENGAGE trial, which had the same primary endpoint, were not positive. CDR-SB scores worsened 2% more among high-dose aducanumab users but low-dose users slowed decline by a nonsignificant 12% when compared with placebo.“Exposure to high-dose aducanumab was important for efficacy,” the company noted in a slide set presented at an Oct. 22 investors webcast. “Differences in exposure to high-dose aducanumab largely explain the different results between the futility analysis and the new analysis of this larger dataset, as well as the different results between the two studies.”

In EMERGE, changes in secondary endpoints among patients who had the opportunity to complete the full 18-month trials included:

• Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE): Significant 23% decrease in rate of decline in the high-dose group and nonsignificant 3% increase in decline in the low-dose group.
• ADAS-Cog13: Significant 25% decrease for high-dose users and nonsignificant 10% decrease for low dose.
• ADCS-ADL-MCI: Significant decreases of 46% for high-dose and 20% for low-dose users.

The ENGAGE secondary endpoints of high- vs. low-dose patients who completed the full trials were:

• MMSE: Significant 13% increase, nonsignificant 3% decrease.
• ADAS-Cog13: Nonsignificant 2% decrease, nonsignificant 1% decrease.
• ADCS-ADL-MCI: Significant 12% declines in both dosage groups.

All of the positive cognitive and functional results tracked along with results of amyloid PET imaging and CSF biomarkers. In EMERGE, amyloid plaque binding declined about 27% in the high-dose group and about 16% in the low-dose group, reflecting plaque clearance. Phosphorylated tau in CSF decreased by about 17 pg/mL and 10 pg/mL, respectively, and total tau decreased by 160 pg/mL and 120 pg/mL. Tau decreases indicate a slowing of neuronal damage.

In ENGAGE, amyloid plaque binding decreased by about 24% in the high-dose group and by about 16% in the low-dose group. Phosphorylated tau dropped by about 10 pg/mL and 11 pg/mL, respectively. But total tau dropped more in the low-dose group than in the high-dose group (about –100 pg/mL vs. –20 pg/mL).

Biogen said the amyloid PET imaging biomarker results and CDR-SB scores in both studies were consistent with each other in a subset of patients with “sufficient exposure to 10 mg/kg,” which was defined as “10 or more uninterrupted 10-mg/kg dosing intervals at steady-state.”

The most common adverse events were amyloid related imaging abnormalities–edema (ARIA-E), which occurred in 35%, and headache in 20%. The majority of patients who experienced ARIA-E (74%) were asymptomatic; episodes generally resolved within 4-16 weeks, typically without long-term sequelae.

Dr. Aisen is a consultant for Biogen and on the aducanumab steering committee. None of the other sources in this article have any financial relationship with Biogen or Eisai.

This article was updated 10/23/19.

msullivan@mdedge.com

Biogen aims to file with the Food and Drug Administration for regulatory approval of aducanumab, an antibody under investigation for Alzheimer’s disease, in 2020 following largely positive results of a secondary analysis of two failed phase 3 trials, ENGAGE and EMERGE, the company announced Oct. 22.

Biogen’s plans reverse its March 21, 2019, decision with codeveloper Eisai to discontinue work on the drug after a futility analysis of the trials determined aducanumab was unlikely to yield significant benefit. Biogen announced the plan to file a biologic drug application following a new analysis of additional data that became available after the data lock on the futility analysis. But while primary and secondary endpoints were nearly all positive for EMERGE in the secondary analysis of the larger dataset, the same could not be said for the twin trial, ENGAGE, which had negative results for most of its endpoints. However, Biogen said that “results from a subset of patients in the phase 3 ENGAGE study who received sufficient exposure to high-dose aducanumab support the findings from EMERGE.”

Both the Alzheimer’s Association and researchers interpreted the announcement with a measured tone, saying it offered a hopeful sign for a field continually stymied in its quest for an effective treatment. More than 100 clinical trials have failed over the last 20 years.

“This really is very encouraging news,” Rebecca M. Edelmayer, PhD, director of scientific engagement at the Alzheimer’s Association, said in an interview. The secondary combined analyses showed “the largest reductions in clinical and functional decline we have seen. It’s an important moment for the patients with AD and their families, and for researchers all around the world. This deserves to be discussed and considered by the research community, but we really need to dig deep into the data. We expect to see more of them at the Clinical Trials on Alzheimer’s Disease conference,” which is set for early December.

Paul Aisen, MD, a consultant for Biogen and director of the Alzheimer’s Therapeutic Research Institute at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, was similarly measured.

“There is an enormous amount of data here and they will be very challenging to interpret, especially since both trials were stopped in a futility analysis,” he said in an interview. “We’re now interpreting data that continue to be collected after the initial data lock. But I do believe there is evidence that supports the amyloid hypothesis and the development of aducanumab.”

A deep data dive is in order before the field completely embraces aducanumab’s advancement, agreed Michael Wolfe, PhD, the Mathias P. Mertes Professor of Medicinal Chemistry at the University of Kansas, Lawrence.

“We would have to see exactly how they came up with this new data set and analysis. I have felt for many years now that these companies would try to parse and shuffle the data around until they got a statistically significant result, just to get approval. They would make billions per year but not really make a difference in people’s lives. That being said, if aducanumab truly slows the decline in activities of daily living, keeping people independent longer, that would be a worthwhile clinical result.”

Still to be considered is whether aducanumab could confer enough benefits to be worth monthly, potentially lifelong, infusions of a pricey medication that still won’t stop disease progression.

“Whether the clinical impact will be worth the anticipated cost remains to be seen,” Richard J. Caselli, MD, said in an interview. “This is likely to be a very expensive treatment for a subgroup of individuals with the hope of slowing decline, but – unless there is a huge upside surprise in data yet to be released – it is not going to halt progression and will certainly increase the cost of care dramatically.”

Dr. Caselli, clinical core director of the Alzheimer’s Disease Center at the Mayo Clinic in Phoenix, continued: “I imagine if approved, there will be a number of insurance obstacles to overcome regarding who qualifies, for how long, etc. Scientifically, this certainly supports the long-held view that beta amyloid is important in the pathophysiology of Alzheimer’s disease. But, again, unless the impact is unexpectedly huge, I don’t think this quiets those who feel there is more to the story than only a gain of beta amyloid toxicity, though this does support the idea that it plays a role, which should not surprise anyone.”

Dr. Edelmayer said the Alzheimer’s Association has raised the issue of access and cost with Biogen.

“We have had many discussions about their capacity to roll this out,” if aducanumab is approved, she said. “Those who were in the studies will be the first recipients. But Biogen is making plans to move this into the general population if approved, to all patients who meet the diagnostic criteria.”

“There is precedent out there when it comes to doing infusion medicines, and those centers are part of the planning process. In terms of pricing, this is a problem we would be happy to see, because it would mean that we have a treatment. But we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it.”
 

Secondary analysis results

The new analysis comprised 2,066 patients who had the opportunity to complete the full 18-month trials by March 20, 2019. The full intent-to-treat population of the trials comprised 3,285 patients with mild cognitive impairment caused by Alzheimer’s disease or mild Alzheimer’s disease dementia.

In the secondary analysis of EMERGE’s intent-to-treat population, patients who took the highest dose of aducanumab (10 mg/kg every month) showed 23% lower functional and cognitive decline on the trial’s primary endpoint of Clinical Dementia Rating–Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB) at 18 months when compared with placebo. The rate of decline was slowed by a nonsignificant 14% among users of the lower dose (6 mg/kg monthly).Secondary endpoints for the high-dose group in EMERGE showed 27% slower cognitive decline on the 13-item cognitive subscale of the AD Assessment Scale (ADAS-Cog13) and 40% lower decline in function among patients with mild cognitive impairment based on the MCI version of the AD Cooperative Study–Activities of Daily Living Inventory (ADCS-ADL-MCI).

However, data from the ENGAGE trial, which had the same primary endpoint, were not positive. CDR-SB scores worsened 2% more among high-dose aducanumab users but low-dose users slowed decline by a nonsignificant 12% when compared with placebo.“Exposure to high-dose aducanumab was important for efficacy,” the company noted in a slide set presented at an Oct. 22 investors webcast. “Differences in exposure to high-dose aducanumab largely explain the different results between the futility analysis and the new analysis of this larger dataset, as well as the different results between the two studies.”

In EMERGE, changes in secondary endpoints among patients who had the opportunity to complete the full 18-month trials included:

• Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE): Significant 23% decrease in rate of decline in the high-dose group and nonsignificant 3% increase in decline in the low-dose group.
• ADAS-Cog13: Significant 25% decrease for high-dose users and nonsignificant 10% decrease for low dose.
• ADCS-ADL-MCI: Significant decreases of 46% for high-dose and 20% for low-dose users.

The ENGAGE secondary endpoints of high- vs. low-dose patients who completed the full trials were:

• MMSE: Significant 13% increase, nonsignificant 3% decrease.
• ADAS-Cog13: Nonsignificant 2% decrease, nonsignificant 1% decrease.
• ADCS-ADL-MCI: Significant 12% declines in both dosage groups.

All of the positive cognitive and functional results tracked along with results of amyloid PET imaging and CSF biomarkers. In EMERGE, amyloid plaque binding declined about 27% in the high-dose group and about 16% in the low-dose group, reflecting plaque clearance. Phosphorylated tau in CSF decreased by about 17 pg/mL and 10 pg/mL, respectively, and total tau decreased by 160 pg/mL and 120 pg/mL. Tau decreases indicate a slowing of neuronal damage.

In ENGAGE, amyloid plaque binding decreased by about 24% in the high-dose group and by about 16% in the low-dose group. Phosphorylated tau dropped by about 10 pg/mL and 11 pg/mL, respectively. But total tau dropped more in the low-dose group than in the high-dose group (about –100 pg/mL vs. –20 pg/mL).

Biogen said the amyloid PET imaging biomarker results and CDR-SB scores in both studies were consistent with each other in a subset of patients with “sufficient exposure to 10 mg/kg,” which was defined as “10 or more uninterrupted 10-mg/kg dosing intervals at steady-state.”

The most common adverse events were amyloid related imaging abnormalities–edema (ARIA-E), which occurred in 35%, and headache in 20%. The majority of patients who experienced ARIA-E (74%) were asymptomatic; episodes generally resolved within 4-16 weeks, typically without long-term sequelae.

Dr. Aisen is a consultant for Biogen and on the aducanumab steering committee. None of the other sources in this article have any financial relationship with Biogen or Eisai.

This article was updated 10/23/19.

msullivan@mdedge.com

Mortality risk associated with neurodegenerative disease is higher, and mortality risk associated with other causes lower, among former Scottish professional soccer players versus matched controls, findings from a retrospective epidemiologic analysis suggest.

Nikada/Getty Images

Former professional soccer players included in the analysis also received more dementia-related medication prescriptions than did controls, Daniel F. Mackay, PhD, of the Institute of Health and Wellbeing at the University of Glasgow (Scotland) and his colleagues reported online Oct. 21 in The New England Journal of Medicine.

Overall mortality during a median follow-up of 18 years from study entry at the age of 40 years was 15.4% among 7,676 former players, and 16.5% among 23,028 controls matched based on age, sex, and degree of social deprivation. All-cause mortality was lower among players versus controls before age 70 years, and was higher thereafter, and the mortality rates associated with ischemic heart disease and lung cancer were lower among the players (hazard ratios, 0.80 and 0.53, respectively), the investigators found.

Mortality rates from stroke or cerebrovascular disease were similar in the players and controls (HR, 0.88), they noted.

However, mortality with neurodegenerative disease listed as the primary cause was 1.7% in players versus 0.5% in controls (HR adjusted for competing risks of death, 3.45), they said. The estimated risk of death with neurodegenerative disease was highest among those with Alzheimer’s disease and lowest for those with Parkinson’s disease (HRs, 5.07 and 2.15, respectively).

Dementia-related medications also were prescribed more frequently for players vs. controls (odds ratio, 4.90).

A subgroup analysis showed no significant difference between goalkeepers and outfielders with respect to mortality with neurodegenerative disease listed as a factor (HR, 0.73), but dementia-related medications were prescribed less often to goalkeepers (OR, 0.41).

Concerns about the risk of neurodegenerative diseases among participants in contact sports have been raised, in part because of the recognition of pathologic changes of chronic traumatic encephalopathy among participants across a range of such sports, the investigators explained, noting that data regarding the risk of neurodegenerative disease among former professional soccer players are limited.

The findings of the current study, in terms of lower all-cause mortality up to the age of 70 years, are similar to those in previous studies involving elite athletes across a range of sports, and “may reflect higher levels of physical activity and lower levels of obesity and smoking in elite athletes than in the general population,” they noted.

“In contrast, mortality from neurodegenerative disease was higher among former soccer players, a finding consistent with studies involving former players in the U.S. National Football League,” they added, concluding that the findings, which “may be valuable to inform the management of risks in the sport,” require confirmation in prospective studies.

This study was supported by the Football Association and Professional Footballers’ Association, and by an NHS Research Scotland Career Researcher Fellowship. Dr. Mackay reported having no relevant financial disclosures.

sworcester@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Mackay D et al. N Engl J Med. 2019 Oct 21. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1908483.

Mortality risk associated with neurodegenerative disease is higher, and mortality risk associated with other causes lower, among former Scottish professional soccer players versus matched controls, findings from a retrospective epidemiologic analysis suggest.

Nikada/Getty Images

Former professional soccer players included in the analysis also received more dementia-related medication prescriptions than did controls, Daniel F. Mackay, PhD, of the Institute of Health and Wellbeing at the University of Glasgow (Scotland) and his colleagues reported online Oct. 21 in The New England Journal of Medicine.

Overall mortality during a median follow-up of 18 years from study entry at the age of 40 years was 15.4% among 7,676 former players, and 16.5% among 23,028 controls matched based on age, sex, and degree of social deprivation. All-cause mortality was lower among players versus controls before age 70 years, and was higher thereafter, and the mortality rates associated with ischemic heart disease and lung cancer were lower among the players (hazard ratios, 0.80 and 0.53, respectively), the investigators found.

Mortality rates from stroke or cerebrovascular disease were similar in the players and controls (HR, 0.88), they noted.

However, mortality with neurodegenerative disease listed as the primary cause was 1.7% in players versus 0.5% in controls (HR adjusted for competing risks of death, 3.45), they said. The estimated risk of death with neurodegenerative disease was highest among those with Alzheimer’s disease and lowest for those with Parkinson’s disease (HRs, 5.07 and 2.15, respectively).

Dementia-related medications also were prescribed more frequently for players vs. controls (odds ratio, 4.90).

A subgroup analysis showed no significant difference between goalkeepers and outfielders with respect to mortality with neurodegenerative disease listed as a factor (HR, 0.73), but dementia-related medications were prescribed less often to goalkeepers (OR, 0.41).

Concerns about the risk of neurodegenerative diseases among participants in contact sports have been raised, in part because of the recognition of pathologic changes of chronic traumatic encephalopathy among participants across a range of such sports, the investigators explained, noting that data regarding the risk of neurodegenerative disease among former professional soccer players are limited.

The findings of the current study, in terms of lower all-cause mortality up to the age of 70 years, are similar to those in previous studies involving elite athletes across a range of sports, and “may reflect higher levels of physical activity and lower levels of obesity and smoking in elite athletes than in the general population,” they noted.

“In contrast, mortality from neurodegenerative disease was higher among former soccer players, a finding consistent with studies involving former players in the U.S. National Football League,” they added, concluding that the findings, which “may be valuable to inform the management of risks in the sport,” require confirmation in prospective studies.

This study was supported by the Football Association and Professional Footballers’ Association, and by an NHS Research Scotland Career Researcher Fellowship. Dr. Mackay reported having no relevant financial disclosures.

sworcester@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Mackay D et al. N Engl J Med. 2019 Oct 21. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1908483.

Mortality risk associated with neurodegenerative disease is higher, and mortality risk associated with other causes lower, among former Scottish professional soccer players versus matched controls, findings from a retrospective epidemiologic analysis suggest.

Nikada/Getty Images

Former professional soccer players included in the analysis also received more dementia-related medication prescriptions than did controls, Daniel F. Mackay, PhD, of the Institute of Health and Wellbeing at the University of Glasgow (Scotland) and his colleagues reported online Oct. 21 in The New England Journal of Medicine.

Overall mortality during a median follow-up of 18 years from study entry at the age of 40 years was 15.4% among 7,676 former players, and 16.5% among 23,028 controls matched based on age, sex, and degree of social deprivation. All-cause mortality was lower among players versus controls before age 70 years, and was higher thereafter, and the mortality rates associated with ischemic heart disease and lung cancer were lower among the players (hazard ratios, 0.80 and 0.53, respectively), the investigators found.

Mortality rates from stroke or cerebrovascular disease were similar in the players and controls (HR, 0.88), they noted.

However, mortality with neurodegenerative disease listed as the primary cause was 1.7% in players versus 0.5% in controls (HR adjusted for competing risks of death, 3.45), they said. The estimated risk of death with neurodegenerative disease was highest among those with Alzheimer’s disease and lowest for those with Parkinson’s disease (HRs, 5.07 and 2.15, respectively).

Dementia-related medications also were prescribed more frequently for players vs. controls (odds ratio, 4.90).

A subgroup analysis showed no significant difference between goalkeepers and outfielders with respect to mortality with neurodegenerative disease listed as a factor (HR, 0.73), but dementia-related medications were prescribed less often to goalkeepers (OR, 0.41).

Concerns about the risk of neurodegenerative diseases among participants in contact sports have been raised, in part because of the recognition of pathologic changes of chronic traumatic encephalopathy among participants across a range of such sports, the investigators explained, noting that data regarding the risk of neurodegenerative disease among former professional soccer players are limited.

The findings of the current study, in terms of lower all-cause mortality up to the age of 70 years, are similar to those in previous studies involving elite athletes across a range of sports, and “may reflect higher levels of physical activity and lower levels of obesity and smoking in elite athletes than in the general population,” they noted.

“In contrast, mortality from neurodegenerative disease was higher among former soccer players, a finding consistent with studies involving former players in the U.S. National Football League,” they added, concluding that the findings, which “may be valuable to inform the management of risks in the sport,” require confirmation in prospective studies.

This study was supported by the Football Association and Professional Footballers’ Association, and by an NHS Research Scotland Career Researcher Fellowship. Dr. Mackay reported having no relevant financial disclosures.

sworcester@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Mackay D et al. N Engl J Med. 2019 Oct 21. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1908483.

COPENHAGEN – Selected antidiabetes medications appear to blunt the increased risk of dementia associated with type 2 diabetes, according to a Danish national case control registry study.

Boarding1Now/Thinkstock

This benefit applies to the newer antidiabetic agents – specifically, the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) inhibitors, the glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP1) analogs, and the sodium-glucose transport protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors – and metformin as well, Merete Osler, MD, PhD, reported at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.

In contrast, neither insulin nor the sulfonylureas showed any signal of a protective effect against development of dementia. In fact, the use of sulfonylureas was associated with a small but statistically significant 7% increased risk, added Dr. Osler, of the University of Copenhagen.

Elsewhere at the meeting, investigators tapped a Swedish national registry to demonstrate that individuals with type 1 diabetes have a sharply reduced risk of developing schizophrenia.
 

Type 2 diabetes medications and dementia

Dr. Osler and colleagues are among several groups of investigators who have previously shown that patients with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of dementia.

“This has raised the question of the role of dysregulated glucose metabolism in the development of this neurodegenerative disorder, and the possible effect of antidiabetic medications,” she noted.

To further explore this issue, which links two great ongoing global epidemics, Dr. Osler and coinvestigators conducted a nested case-control study including all 176,250 patients with type 2 diabetes in the comprehensive Danish National Diabetes Register for 1995-2012. The 11,619 patients with type 2 diabetes who received a dementia diagnosis were matched with 46,476 type 2 diabetes patients without dementia. The objective was to determine associations between dementia and ever-use and cumulative dose of antidiabetes drugs, alone and in combination, in logistic regression analyses adjusted for demographics, comorbid conditions, marital status, diabetic complications, and year of dementia diagnosis.

Patients who had ever used metformin had an adjusted 6% reduction in the likelihood of dementia compared with metformin nonusers, a modest but statistically significant difference. Those on a DPP4 inhibitor had a 20% reduction in risk. The GLP1 analogs were associated with a 42% decrease in risk. So were the SGLT2 inhibitors. A dose-response relationship was evident: The higher the cumulative exposure to these agents, the lower the odds of dementia.

Combination therapy is common in type 2 diabetes, so the investigators scrutinized the impact of a variety of multidrug combinations. The clear winner in terms of the magnitude of associated reduction in dementia risk were the combinations including an SGLT2 inhibitor, with a 62% relative risk reduction. Combinations including a DPP4 inhibitor or GLP1 analog were also associated with significantly reduced dementia risk.

Records of glycemic control in the form of hemoglobin A_1c values were available on only 1,446 type 2 diabetic dementia patients and 4,003 matched controls. An analysis that incorporated this variable showed that the observed anti-dementia effect of selected diabetes drugs was independent of glycemic control, according to Dr. Osler.

The protective effect appeared to extend to both Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementias, although firm conclusions can’t be drawn on this score because the study was insufficiently powered to address that issue.

Dr. Osler noted that the Danish study confirms a recent Taiwanese study showing an apparent protective effect against dementia for metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes (Aging Dis. 2019 Feb 1;10(1):37-48).

“Ours is the first study on the newer diabetic drugs, so our results need to be confirmed,” she pointed out.

If confirmed, however, it would warrant exploration of these drugs more generally as potential interventions to prevent dementia. That could open a whole new chapter in the remarkable story of the SGLT2 inhibitors, a class of drugs originally developed for treatment of type 2 diabetes but which in major randomized clinical trials later proved to be so effective in the treatment of heart failure that they are now considered cardiology drugs first.

Asked if she thinks these antidiabetes agents have a general neuroprotective effect or, instead, that the observed reduced risk of dementia is a function of patients being treated better early on with modern drugs, the psychiatrist replied, “I think it might be a combination of both, especially because we find different risk estimates between the drugs.”

Dr. Osler reported having no financial conflicts of interest regarding the study, which was funded by the Danish Diabetes Foundation, the Danish Medical Association, and several other foundations.

The full study details were published online shortly before her presentation at ECNP 2019 (Eur J Endocrinol. 2019 Aug 1. pii: EJE-19-0259.R1. doi: 10.1530/EJE-19-0259).

Type 1 diabetes and schizophrenia risk

Kristina Melkersson, MD, PhD, presented a cohort study that utilized Swedish national registries to examine the relationship between type 1 diabetes and schizophrenia. The study comprised 1,745,977 individuals, of whom 10,117 had type 1 diabetes, who were followed for a median of 9.7 and maximum of 18 years from their 13th birthday. During follow-up, 1,280 individuals were diagnosed with schizophrenia and 649 others with schizoaffective disorder. The adjusted risk of schizophrenia was 70% lower in patients with type 1 diabetes. However, there was no difference in the risk of schizoaffective disorder in the type 1 diabetic versus nondiabetic subjects.

The Swedish data confirm the findings of an earlier Finnish national study showing that the risk of schizophrenia is reduced in patients with type 1 diabetes (Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007 Aug;64(8):894-9). These findings raise the intriguing possibility that autoimmunity somehow figures into the etiology of the psychiatric disorder. Other investigators have previously reported a reduced prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with schizophrenia, noted Dr. Melkersson of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm.

She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her study.

bjancin@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Osler M. ECNP Abstract P180. Melkersson K. Abstract 81.

COPENHAGEN – Selected antidiabetes medications appear to blunt the increased risk of dementia associated with type 2 diabetes, according to a Danish national case control registry study.

Boarding1Now/Thinkstock

This benefit applies to the newer antidiabetic agents – specifically, the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) inhibitors, the glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP1) analogs, and the sodium-glucose transport protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors – and metformin as well, Merete Osler, MD, PhD, reported at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.

In contrast, neither insulin nor the sulfonylureas showed any signal of a protective effect against development of dementia. In fact, the use of sulfonylureas was associated with a small but statistically significant 7% increased risk, added Dr. Osler, of the University of Copenhagen.

Elsewhere at the meeting, investigators tapped a Swedish national registry to demonstrate that individuals with type 1 diabetes have a sharply reduced risk of developing schizophrenia.
 

Type 2 diabetes medications and dementia

Dr. Osler and colleagues are among several groups of investigators who have previously shown that patients with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of dementia.

“This has raised the question of the role of dysregulated glucose metabolism in the development of this neurodegenerative disorder, and the possible effect of antidiabetic medications,” she noted.

To further explore this issue, which links two great ongoing global epidemics, Dr. Osler and coinvestigators conducted a nested case-control study including all 176,250 patients with type 2 diabetes in the comprehensive Danish National Diabetes Register for 1995-2012. The 11,619 patients with type 2 diabetes who received a dementia diagnosis were matched with 46,476 type 2 diabetes patients without dementia. The objective was to determine associations between dementia and ever-use and cumulative dose of antidiabetes drugs, alone and in combination, in logistic regression analyses adjusted for demographics, comorbid conditions, marital status, diabetic complications, and year of dementia diagnosis.

Patients who had ever used metformin had an adjusted 6% reduction in the likelihood of dementia compared with metformin nonusers, a modest but statistically significant difference. Those on a DPP4 inhibitor had a 20% reduction in risk. The GLP1 analogs were associated with a 42% decrease in risk. So were the SGLT2 inhibitors. A dose-response relationship was evident: The higher the cumulative exposure to these agents, the lower the odds of dementia.

Combination therapy is common in type 2 diabetes, so the investigators scrutinized the impact of a variety of multidrug combinations. The clear winner in terms of the magnitude of associated reduction in dementia risk were the combinations including an SGLT2 inhibitor, with a 62% relative risk reduction. Combinations including a DPP4 inhibitor or GLP1 analog were also associated with significantly reduced dementia risk.

Records of glycemic control in the form of hemoglobin A_1c values were available on only 1,446 type 2 diabetic dementia patients and 4,003 matched controls. An analysis that incorporated this variable showed that the observed anti-dementia effect of selected diabetes drugs was independent of glycemic control, according to Dr. Osler.

The protective effect appeared to extend to both Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementias, although firm conclusions can’t be drawn on this score because the study was insufficiently powered to address that issue.

Dr. Osler noted that the Danish study confirms a recent Taiwanese study showing an apparent protective effect against dementia for metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes (Aging Dis. 2019 Feb 1;10(1):37-48).

“Ours is the first study on the newer diabetic drugs, so our results need to be confirmed,” she pointed out.

If confirmed, however, it would warrant exploration of these drugs more generally as potential interventions to prevent dementia. That could open a whole new chapter in the remarkable story of the SGLT2 inhibitors, a class of drugs originally developed for treatment of type 2 diabetes but which in major randomized clinical trials later proved to be so effective in the treatment of heart failure that they are now considered cardiology drugs first.

Asked if she thinks these antidiabetes agents have a general neuroprotective effect or, instead, that the observed reduced risk of dementia is a function of patients being treated better early on with modern drugs, the psychiatrist replied, “I think it might be a combination of both, especially because we find different risk estimates between the drugs.”

Dr. Osler reported having no financial conflicts of interest regarding the study, which was funded by the Danish Diabetes Foundation, the Danish Medical Association, and several other foundations.

The full study details were published online shortly before her presentation at ECNP 2019 (Eur J Endocrinol. 2019 Aug 1. pii: EJE-19-0259.R1. doi: 10.1530/EJE-19-0259).

Type 1 diabetes and schizophrenia risk

Kristina Melkersson, MD, PhD, presented a cohort study that utilized Swedish national registries to examine the relationship between type 1 diabetes and schizophrenia. The study comprised 1,745,977 individuals, of whom 10,117 had type 1 diabetes, who were followed for a median of 9.7 and maximum of 18 years from their 13th birthday. During follow-up, 1,280 individuals were diagnosed with schizophrenia and 649 others with schizoaffective disorder. The adjusted risk of schizophrenia was 70% lower in patients with type 1 diabetes. However, there was no difference in the risk of schizoaffective disorder in the type 1 diabetic versus nondiabetic subjects.

The Swedish data confirm the findings of an earlier Finnish national study showing that the risk of schizophrenia is reduced in patients with type 1 diabetes (Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007 Aug;64(8):894-9). These findings raise the intriguing possibility that autoimmunity somehow figures into the etiology of the psychiatric disorder. Other investigators have previously reported a reduced prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with schizophrenia, noted Dr. Melkersson of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm.

She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her study.

bjancin@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Osler M. ECNP Abstract P180. Melkersson K. Abstract 81.

COPENHAGEN – Selected antidiabetes medications appear to blunt the increased risk of dementia associated with type 2 diabetes, according to a Danish national case control registry study.

Boarding1Now/Thinkstock

This benefit applies to the newer antidiabetic agents – specifically, the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) inhibitors, the glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP1) analogs, and the sodium-glucose transport protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors – and metformin as well, Merete Osler, MD, PhD, reported at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.

In contrast, neither insulin nor the sulfonylureas showed any signal of a protective effect against development of dementia. In fact, the use of sulfonylureas was associated with a small but statistically significant 7% increased risk, added Dr. Osler, of the University of Copenhagen.

Elsewhere at the meeting, investigators tapped a Swedish national registry to demonstrate that individuals with type 1 diabetes have a sharply reduced risk of developing schizophrenia.
 

Type 2 diabetes medications and dementia

Dr. Osler and colleagues are among several groups of investigators who have previously shown that patients with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of dementia.

“This has raised the question of the role of dysregulated glucose metabolism in the development of this neurodegenerative disorder, and the possible effect of antidiabetic medications,” she noted.

To further explore this issue, which links two great ongoing global epidemics, Dr. Osler and coinvestigators conducted a nested case-control study including all 176,250 patients with type 2 diabetes in the comprehensive Danish National Diabetes Register for 1995-2012. The 11,619 patients with type 2 diabetes who received a dementia diagnosis were matched with 46,476 type 2 diabetes patients without dementia. The objective was to determine associations between dementia and ever-use and cumulative dose of antidiabetes drugs, alone and in combination, in logistic regression analyses adjusted for demographics, comorbid conditions, marital status, diabetic complications, and year of dementia diagnosis.

Patients who had ever used metformin had an adjusted 6% reduction in the likelihood of dementia compared with metformin nonusers, a modest but statistically significant difference. Those on a DPP4 inhibitor had a 20% reduction in risk. The GLP1 analogs were associated with a 42% decrease in risk. So were the SGLT2 inhibitors. A dose-response relationship was evident: The higher the cumulative exposure to these agents, the lower the odds of dementia.

Combination therapy is common in type 2 diabetes, so the investigators scrutinized the impact of a variety of multidrug combinations. The clear winner in terms of the magnitude of associated reduction in dementia risk were the combinations including an SGLT2 inhibitor, with a 62% relative risk reduction. Combinations including a DPP4 inhibitor or GLP1 analog were also associated with significantly reduced dementia risk.

Records of glycemic control in the form of hemoglobin A_1c values were available on only 1,446 type 2 diabetic dementia patients and 4,003 matched controls. An analysis that incorporated this variable showed that the observed anti-dementia effect of selected diabetes drugs was independent of glycemic control, according to Dr. Osler.

The protective effect appeared to extend to both Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementias, although firm conclusions can’t be drawn on this score because the study was insufficiently powered to address that issue.

Dr. Osler noted that the Danish study confirms a recent Taiwanese study showing an apparent protective effect against dementia for metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes (Aging Dis. 2019 Feb 1;10(1):37-48).

“Ours is the first study on the newer diabetic drugs, so our results need to be confirmed,” she pointed out.

If confirmed, however, it would warrant exploration of these drugs more generally as potential interventions to prevent dementia. That could open a whole new chapter in the remarkable story of the SGLT2 inhibitors, a class of drugs originally developed for treatment of type 2 diabetes but which in major randomized clinical trials later proved to be so effective in the treatment of heart failure that they are now considered cardiology drugs first.

Asked if she thinks these antidiabetes agents have a general neuroprotective effect or, instead, that the observed reduced risk of dementia is a function of patients being treated better early on with modern drugs, the psychiatrist replied, “I think it might be a combination of both, especially because we find different risk estimates between the drugs.”

Dr. Osler reported having no financial conflicts of interest regarding the study, which was funded by the Danish Diabetes Foundation, the Danish Medical Association, and several other foundations.

The full study details were published online shortly before her presentation at ECNP 2019 (Eur J Endocrinol. 2019 Aug 1. pii: EJE-19-0259.R1. doi: 10.1530/EJE-19-0259).

Type 1 diabetes and schizophrenia risk

Kristina Melkersson, MD, PhD, presented a cohort study that utilized Swedish national registries to examine the relationship between type 1 diabetes and schizophrenia. The study comprised 1,745,977 individuals, of whom 10,117 had type 1 diabetes, who were followed for a median of 9.7 and maximum of 18 years from their 13th birthday. During follow-up, 1,280 individuals were diagnosed with schizophrenia and 649 others with schizoaffective disorder. The adjusted risk of schizophrenia was 70% lower in patients with type 1 diabetes. However, there was no difference in the risk of schizoaffective disorder in the type 1 diabetic versus nondiabetic subjects.

The Swedish data confirm the findings of an earlier Finnish national study showing that the risk of schizophrenia is reduced in patients with type 1 diabetes (Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007 Aug;64(8):894-9). These findings raise the intriguing possibility that autoimmunity somehow figures into the etiology of the psychiatric disorder. Other investigators have previously reported a reduced prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with schizophrenia, noted Dr. Melkersson of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm.

She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her study.

bjancin@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Osler M. ECNP Abstract P180. Melkersson K. Abstract 81.

ST. LOUIS – Children who have background EEG asymmetry while on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) have worse outcomes even after adjustment for recent cardiac arrest and EEG suppression, according to a review of 41 children treated at Washington University, St. Louis.

ECMO is a last-ditch heart/lung bypass for patients near death, be it from infection, trauma, cardiac abnormalities, or any other issue. Children can be on it for days or weeks while problems are addressed and the body attempts to recover. Sometimes ECMO works, and children make a remarkable recovery, but other times they die or are left with severe disabilities, and no one really knows why.

Because of this, the investigators in this review sought to identify predictors of poor outcomes with an eye toward identifying modifiable risk factors, said senior investigator Kristin Guilliams, MD, an assistant professor of pediatric critical care medicine.

“We are trying to figure out why some kids do fantastically, and others don’t. We were looking at whether EEG can give us any clues and new ways to think about modifiable risk factors so that every kid rescued by ECMO can go back to their normal life,” she said at the American Neurological Association annual meeting.

The 41 children had an EEG within a day or 2 of starting ECMO; 22 did well, but 19 had bad outcomes, defined in the study as either dying in the hospital or being discharged with a Functional Status Score above 12, meaning mild dysfunction across six domains or more severe disability in particular ones.

The finding that all four children with EEG suppression – overall low brain activity – did poorly was not surprising, but the fact that EEG background asymmetry – one side of the brain being much less active than the other or giving different signals – in five children predicted poor outcomes, even after adjustment for cardiac arrest and overall suppression, was “a big surprise,” Dr. Guilliams said (odds ratio, 29.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.2-398.3; P = .003).

“The asymmetry tells me that we need to look more closely into brain blood flow patterns on ECMO,” she said. There might be a way to change delivery that could help, but “it’s not obvious right now.” The issue warrants further investigation, Dr. Guilliams said.

Twelve children had ECMO during chest compressions for cardiac arrest, which as expected, also predicted poor outcomes (OR, 9.5; 95% CI 1.6-58.2; P = .008).

Neuroimaging was available for 34 children. Abnormalities (n = 13; P = .2), including ischemia (n = 8; P = .1), hemorrhage (n = 8; P = .06), and seizures (n = 4; P = .2) did not predict poor outcomes, nor did sex, age, and mode of ECMO delivery (veno-arterial versus veno-venous).

As of about a year ago, EEGs at the university are now standard for children on ECMO, with special software to pick out asymmetries. “We are paying more attention to” EEGs, Dr. Guilliams said.

Children were a median of about 10 years old, and subjects were at least 1 year old. There were about equal numbers of boys and girls; 25 children were alive at discharge.

There was no external funding, and Dr. Guilliams didn’t have any disclosures.
 

aotto@mdedge.com

ST. LOUIS – Children who have background EEG asymmetry while on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) have worse outcomes even after adjustment for recent cardiac arrest and EEG suppression, according to a review of 41 children treated at Washington University, St. Louis.

ECMO is a last-ditch heart/lung bypass for patients near death, be it from infection, trauma, cardiac abnormalities, or any other issue. Children can be on it for days or weeks while problems are addressed and the body attempts to recover. Sometimes ECMO works, and children make a remarkable recovery, but other times they die or are left with severe disabilities, and no one really knows why.

Because of this, the investigators in this review sought to identify predictors of poor outcomes with an eye toward identifying modifiable risk factors, said senior investigator Kristin Guilliams, MD, an assistant professor of pediatric critical care medicine.

“We are trying to figure out why some kids do fantastically, and others don’t. We were looking at whether EEG can give us any clues and new ways to think about modifiable risk factors so that every kid rescued by ECMO can go back to their normal life,” she said at the American Neurological Association annual meeting.

The 41 children had an EEG within a day or 2 of starting ECMO; 22 did well, but 19 had bad outcomes, defined in the study as either dying in the hospital or being discharged with a Functional Status Score above 12, meaning mild dysfunction across six domains or more severe disability in particular ones.

The finding that all four children with EEG suppression – overall low brain activity – did poorly was not surprising, but the fact that EEG background asymmetry – one side of the brain being much less active than the other or giving different signals – in five children predicted poor outcomes, even after adjustment for cardiac arrest and overall suppression, was “a big surprise,” Dr. Guilliams said (odds ratio, 29.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.2-398.3; P = .003).

“The asymmetry tells me that we need to look more closely into brain blood flow patterns on ECMO,” she said. There might be a way to change delivery that could help, but “it’s not obvious right now.” The issue warrants further investigation, Dr. Guilliams said.

Twelve children had ECMO during chest compressions for cardiac arrest, which as expected, also predicted poor outcomes (OR, 9.5; 95% CI 1.6-58.2; P = .008).

Neuroimaging was available for 34 children. Abnormalities (n = 13; P = .2), including ischemia (n = 8; P = .1), hemorrhage (n = 8; P = .06), and seizures (n = 4; P = .2) did not predict poor outcomes, nor did sex, age, and mode of ECMO delivery (veno-arterial versus veno-venous).

As of about a year ago, EEGs at the university are now standard for children on ECMO, with special software to pick out asymmetries. “We are paying more attention to” EEGs, Dr. Guilliams said.

Children were a median of about 10 years old, and subjects were at least 1 year old. There were about equal numbers of boys and girls; 25 children were alive at discharge.

There was no external funding, and Dr. Guilliams didn’t have any disclosures.
 

aotto@mdedge.com

ST. LOUIS – Children who have background EEG asymmetry while on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) have worse outcomes even after adjustment for recent cardiac arrest and EEG suppression, according to a review of 41 children treated at Washington University, St. Louis.

ECMO is a last-ditch heart/lung bypass for patients near death, be it from infection, trauma, cardiac abnormalities, or any other issue. Children can be on it for days or weeks while problems are addressed and the body attempts to recover. Sometimes ECMO works, and children make a remarkable recovery, but other times they die or are left with severe disabilities, and no one really knows why.

Because of this, the investigators in this review sought to identify predictors of poor outcomes with an eye toward identifying modifiable risk factors, said senior investigator Kristin Guilliams, MD, an assistant professor of pediatric critical care medicine.

“We are trying to figure out why some kids do fantastically, and others don’t. We were looking at whether EEG can give us any clues and new ways to think about modifiable risk factors so that every kid rescued by ECMO can go back to their normal life,” she said at the American Neurological Association annual meeting.

The 41 children had an EEG within a day or 2 of starting ECMO; 22 did well, but 19 had bad outcomes, defined in the study as either dying in the hospital or being discharged with a Functional Status Score above 12, meaning mild dysfunction across six domains or more severe disability in particular ones.

The finding that all four children with EEG suppression – overall low brain activity – did poorly was not surprising, but the fact that EEG background asymmetry – one side of the brain being much less active than the other or giving different signals – in five children predicted poor outcomes, even after adjustment for cardiac arrest and overall suppression, was “a big surprise,” Dr. Guilliams said (odds ratio, 29.3; 95% confidence interval, 2.2-398.3; P = .003).

“The asymmetry tells me that we need to look more closely into brain blood flow patterns on ECMO,” she said. There might be a way to change delivery that could help, but “it’s not obvious right now.” The issue warrants further investigation, Dr. Guilliams said.

Twelve children had ECMO during chest compressions for cardiac arrest, which as expected, also predicted poor outcomes (OR, 9.5; 95% CI 1.6-58.2; P = .008).

Neuroimaging was available for 34 children. Abnormalities (n = 13; P = .2), including ischemia (n = 8; P = .1), hemorrhage (n = 8; P = .06), and seizures (n = 4; P = .2) did not predict poor outcomes, nor did sex, age, and mode of ECMO delivery (veno-arterial versus veno-venous).

As of about a year ago, EEGs at the university are now standard for children on ECMO, with special software to pick out asymmetries. “We are paying more attention to” EEGs, Dr. Guilliams said.

Children were a median of about 10 years old, and subjects were at least 1 year old. There were about equal numbers of boys and girls; 25 children were alive at discharge.

There was no external funding, and Dr. Guilliams didn’t have any disclosures.
 

aotto@mdedge.com

AUSTIN, TEX. – Patients with peripheral neuropathy may benefit from genetic testing to determine of the cause of their neuropathy even if they do not have a family history of the condition, according to new research.

The same research identified more than 80 genetic variants in patients with neuropathy who lacked any other known genetic mutations, potentially representing not-yet-identified pathogenic mutations.

Sasa Zivkovic, MD, PhD, of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC), and associates shared a poster of their findings at the annual meeting of the American Association for Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine.

The researchers conducted next-generation sequencing (NGS) on 85 adult patients with peripheral neuropathy at the UPMC Neuromuscular Clinic during May 2017–Feb. 2019. The targeted NGS panel included 70 genes. The patients, aged 60 years on average, were primarily from Allegheny County, Pa., and had neuropathy either suspected to be hereditary or of unknown etiology.

Among the 19% of patients (n = 16) who tested positive for a known pathogenic mutation, half had Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 1A (CMT1A). Two patients – 13% of those with pathogenic variants – had hereditary neuropathy with liability to pressure palsies, and two had CMT1X. The remaining four patients had CMT1B, CMT2B1, CMT2E, and hereditary sensory and autonomic neuropathy mutations.

Another 4% of the overall patient sample (n = 3) had likely pathogenic mutations in genes associated with CMT2S, CMT4C and CMT4F. A third of the patients (32%) tested negative for the full NGS panel, and, comprising the largest proportion of patients, 46% had variants of unknown significance.

“The high occurrence of variants of unknown significance has uncertain significance but some variations may represent unrecognized pathogenic mutations,” the authors noted.

They identified 81 of these variants, with the DST, PLEKHG5, and SPG11 genes most commonly affected, each found in six patients. Four patients had a variant in the next most commonly affected gene, SBF2. The following variants occurred in three people each: BICD2, NEFL3, PRX, SCN11A, SCN9A, SLC52A2, and WNK1.

Among the 73 patients who underwent electrodiagnostic testing, 44 had sporadic axonal neuropathy, 17 had sporadic demyelinating neuropathy, and 11 had mixed neuropathies; the 1 remaining patient was not accounted for. Positive genetic testing occurred in a third (32%) of those with familial neuropathy (n = 28) and in 12% of those with sporadic neuropathy (n = 57).

No external funding was noted, and the authors had no disclosures.

SOURCE: Zivkovic S et al. AANEM 2019. Abstract 160. Targeted genetic testing in the evaluation of neuropathy .

AUSTIN, TEX. – Patients with peripheral neuropathy may benefit from genetic testing to determine of the cause of their neuropathy even if they do not have a family history of the condition, according to new research.

The same research identified more than 80 genetic variants in patients with neuropathy who lacked any other known genetic mutations, potentially representing not-yet-identified pathogenic mutations.

Sasa Zivkovic, MD, PhD, of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC), and associates shared a poster of their findings at the annual meeting of the American Association for Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine.

The researchers conducted next-generation sequencing (NGS) on 85 adult patients with peripheral neuropathy at the UPMC Neuromuscular Clinic during May 2017–Feb. 2019. The targeted NGS panel included 70 genes. The patients, aged 60 years on average, were primarily from Allegheny County, Pa., and had neuropathy either suspected to be hereditary or of unknown etiology.

Among the 19% of patients (n = 16) who tested positive for a known pathogenic mutation, half had Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 1A (CMT1A). Two patients – 13% of those with pathogenic variants – had hereditary neuropathy with liability to pressure palsies, and two had CMT1X. The remaining four patients had CMT1B, CMT2B1, CMT2E, and hereditary sensory and autonomic neuropathy mutations.

Another 4% of the overall patient sample (n = 3) had likely pathogenic mutations in genes associated with CMT2S, CMT4C and CMT4F. A third of the patients (32%) tested negative for the full NGS panel, and, comprising the largest proportion of patients, 46% had variants of unknown significance.

“The high occurrence of variants of unknown significance has uncertain significance but some variations may represent unrecognized pathogenic mutations,” the authors noted.

They identified 81 of these variants, with the DST, PLEKHG5, and SPG11 genes most commonly affected, each found in six patients. Four patients had a variant in the next most commonly affected gene, SBF2. The following variants occurred in three people each: BICD2, NEFL3, PRX, SCN11A, SCN9A, SLC52A2, and WNK1.

Among the 73 patients who underwent electrodiagnostic testing, 44 had sporadic axonal neuropathy, 17 had sporadic demyelinating neuropathy, and 11 had mixed neuropathies; the 1 remaining patient was not accounted for. Positive genetic testing occurred in a third (32%) of those with familial neuropathy (n = 28) and in 12% of those with sporadic neuropathy (n = 57).

No external funding was noted, and the authors had no disclosures.

SOURCE: Zivkovic S et al. AANEM 2019. Abstract 160. Targeted genetic testing in the evaluation of neuropathy .

AUSTIN, TEX. – Patients with peripheral neuropathy may benefit from genetic testing to determine of the cause of their neuropathy even if they do not have a family history of the condition, according to new research.

The same research identified more than 80 genetic variants in patients with neuropathy who lacked any other known genetic mutations, potentially representing not-yet-identified pathogenic mutations.

Sasa Zivkovic, MD, PhD, of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC), and associates shared a poster of their findings at the annual meeting of the American Association for Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine.

The researchers conducted next-generation sequencing (NGS) on 85 adult patients with peripheral neuropathy at the UPMC Neuromuscular Clinic during May 2017–Feb. 2019. The targeted NGS panel included 70 genes. The patients, aged 60 years on average, were primarily from Allegheny County, Pa., and had neuropathy either suspected to be hereditary or of unknown etiology.

Among the 19% of patients (n = 16) who tested positive for a known pathogenic mutation, half had Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 1A (CMT1A). Two patients – 13% of those with pathogenic variants – had hereditary neuropathy with liability to pressure palsies, and two had CMT1X. The remaining four patients had CMT1B, CMT2B1, CMT2E, and hereditary sensory and autonomic neuropathy mutations.

Another 4% of the overall patient sample (n = 3) had likely pathogenic mutations in genes associated with CMT2S, CMT4C and CMT4F. A third of the patients (32%) tested negative for the full NGS panel, and, comprising the largest proportion of patients, 46% had variants of unknown significance.

“The high occurrence of variants of unknown significance has uncertain significance but some variations may represent unrecognized pathogenic mutations,” the authors noted.

They identified 81 of these variants, with the DST, PLEKHG5, and SPG11 genes most commonly affected, each found in six patients. Four patients had a variant in the next most commonly affected gene, SBF2. The following variants occurred in three people each: BICD2, NEFL3, PRX, SCN11A, SCN9A, SLC52A2, and WNK1.

Among the 73 patients who underwent electrodiagnostic testing, 44 had sporadic axonal neuropathy, 17 had sporadic demyelinating neuropathy, and 11 had mixed neuropathies; the 1 remaining patient was not accounted for. Positive genetic testing occurred in a third (32%) of those with familial neuropathy (n = 28) and in 12% of those with sporadic neuropathy (n = 57).

No external funding was noted, and the authors had no disclosures.

SOURCE: Zivkovic S et al. AANEM 2019. Abstract 160. Targeted genetic testing in the evaluation of neuropathy .

Despite improvement, more work needs to be done in the National Institutes of Health’s work in overseeing financial conflicts of interest in extramural research, the Department of Health & Human Services’ Office of Inspector General reported.

Kativ/iStockphoto

In highlighting the improvement in a September 2019 report, “NIH has made strides in reviewing financial conflicts of interest in extramural research, but could do more,” the OIG noted that, in the past 10 years, “NIH has strengthened its reporting requirements and developed an online system for collecting, reviewing, and storing financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) that institutions report. These changes resulted in improvements in how NIH tracks and reviews FCOIs that institutions report.”

That being said, OIG also highlighted some ongoing issues with NIH’s FCOI oversight.

“Across the three NIH Institutes and Centers (ICs) that we reviewed, staff differed in the level of scrutiny they applied to their review of FCOIs,” the report states.

For example, the report notes that 15 of the 25 ICs have written procedures related to FCOI reviews and the documentation shared by the three ICs showed different levels of detail and instruction.

“Only one of the three guidance documents provided IC staff with specific criteria aimed at standardizing the review of FCOIs,” the report stated. Two of the three ICs also reported using external resources to aid in the review.

Review times also varied significantly, with two of the three ICs reporting that they spend generally 5-30 minutes per review, while the third said staff spends several hours on reviews.

The OIG also reported that “NIH lacks quality assurance procedures in its review process. Specifically, NIH central management and the three ICs that we reviewed do not perform any systematic analyses or even ad hoc checks to determine whether staff accurately and consistently review reported FCOIs, and OIG found a small number of inconsistencies in the FCOI data that institutions reported, which might highlight the need for more oversight of the review process.”

The report notes that there is a process in place to provide oversight of ICs’ review of reported FCOIs, but there is no longer sufficient staff to continue this oversight.

The “OER [Office of Extramural Research] now relies on IC staff to seek guidance when needed and does not conduct regular oversight of the ICs. Similarly, none of the three ICs we reviewed perform quality checks to ensure the thoroughness or consistency of review by program officials. Staff members from one IC stated that while they do not conduct quality checks, the IC provides new program officials more guidance during their first few reviews.”

The HHS watchdog also noted that NIH cannot identify whether FCOIs involve foreign entities even though investigators must disclose financial interests from foreign investments.

“The HHS regulations on FCOI do not require institutions to designate whether FCOIs involve foreign entities, and NIH reported that it has no plans to expand these regulations to include such a requirement,” the OIG reported.

The OIG recommended that NIH perform periodic quality assurance reviews of FCOI information to ensure adequacy of oversight and suggested it use “information regarding foreign affiliations and support that it collects during the pre-award process to decide whether to revise its FCOI review process to address concerns regarding foreign influence.”

gtwachtman@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Murrin S. Office of Inspector General. 2019 Sep 25. OEI-03-19-00150.

Despite improvement, more work needs to be done in the National Institutes of Health’s work in overseeing financial conflicts of interest in extramural research, the Department of Health & Human Services’ Office of Inspector General reported.

Kativ/iStockphoto

In highlighting the improvement in a September 2019 report, “NIH has made strides in reviewing financial conflicts of interest in extramural research, but could do more,” the OIG noted that, in the past 10 years, “NIH has strengthened its reporting requirements and developed an online system for collecting, reviewing, and storing financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) that institutions report. These changes resulted in improvements in how NIH tracks and reviews FCOIs that institutions report.”

That being said, OIG also highlighted some ongoing issues with NIH’s FCOI oversight.

“Across the three NIH Institutes and Centers (ICs) that we reviewed, staff differed in the level of scrutiny they applied to their review of FCOIs,” the report states.

For example, the report notes that 15 of the 25 ICs have written procedures related to FCOI reviews and the documentation shared by the three ICs showed different levels of detail and instruction.

“Only one of the three guidance documents provided IC staff with specific criteria aimed at standardizing the review of FCOIs,” the report stated. Two of the three ICs also reported using external resources to aid in the review.

Review times also varied significantly, with two of the three ICs reporting that they spend generally 5-30 minutes per review, while the third said staff spends several hours on reviews.

The OIG also reported that “NIH lacks quality assurance procedures in its review process. Specifically, NIH central management and the three ICs that we reviewed do not perform any systematic analyses or even ad hoc checks to determine whether staff accurately and consistently review reported FCOIs, and OIG found a small number of inconsistencies in the FCOI data that institutions reported, which might highlight the need for more oversight of the review process.”

The report notes that there is a process in place to provide oversight of ICs’ review of reported FCOIs, but there is no longer sufficient staff to continue this oversight.

The “OER [Office of Extramural Research] now relies on IC staff to seek guidance when needed and does not conduct regular oversight of the ICs. Similarly, none of the three ICs we reviewed perform quality checks to ensure the thoroughness or consistency of review by program officials. Staff members from one IC stated that while they do not conduct quality checks, the IC provides new program officials more guidance during their first few reviews.”

The HHS watchdog also noted that NIH cannot identify whether FCOIs involve foreign entities even though investigators must disclose financial interests from foreign investments.

“The HHS regulations on FCOI do not require institutions to designate whether FCOIs involve foreign entities, and NIH reported that it has no plans to expand these regulations to include such a requirement,” the OIG reported.

The OIG recommended that NIH perform periodic quality assurance reviews of FCOI information to ensure adequacy of oversight and suggested it use “information regarding foreign affiliations and support that it collects during the pre-award process to decide whether to revise its FCOI review process to address concerns regarding foreign influence.”

gtwachtman@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Murrin S. Office of Inspector General. 2019 Sep 25. OEI-03-19-00150.

Despite improvement, more work needs to be done in the National Institutes of Health’s work in overseeing financial conflicts of interest in extramural research, the Department of Health & Human Services’ Office of Inspector General reported.

Kativ/iStockphoto

In highlighting the improvement in a September 2019 report, “NIH has made strides in reviewing financial conflicts of interest in extramural research, but could do more,” the OIG noted that, in the past 10 years, “NIH has strengthened its reporting requirements and developed an online system for collecting, reviewing, and storing financial conflicts of interest (FCOIs) that institutions report. These changes resulted in improvements in how NIH tracks and reviews FCOIs that institutions report.”

That being said, OIG also highlighted some ongoing issues with NIH’s FCOI oversight.

“Across the three NIH Institutes and Centers (ICs) that we reviewed, staff differed in the level of scrutiny they applied to their review of FCOIs,” the report states.

For example, the report notes that 15 of the 25 ICs have written procedures related to FCOI reviews and the documentation shared by the three ICs showed different levels of detail and instruction.

“Only one of the three guidance documents provided IC staff with specific criteria aimed at standardizing the review of FCOIs,” the report stated. Two of the three ICs also reported using external resources to aid in the review.

Review times also varied significantly, with two of the three ICs reporting that they spend generally 5-30 minutes per review, while the third said staff spends several hours on reviews.

The OIG also reported that “NIH lacks quality assurance procedures in its review process. Specifically, NIH central management and the three ICs that we reviewed do not perform any systematic analyses or even ad hoc checks to determine whether staff accurately and consistently review reported FCOIs, and OIG found a small number of inconsistencies in the FCOI data that institutions reported, which might highlight the need for more oversight of the review process.”

The report notes that there is a process in place to provide oversight of ICs’ review of reported FCOIs, but there is no longer sufficient staff to continue this oversight.

The “OER [Office of Extramural Research] now relies on IC staff to seek guidance when needed and does not conduct regular oversight of the ICs. Similarly, none of the three ICs we reviewed perform quality checks to ensure the thoroughness or consistency of review by program officials. Staff members from one IC stated that while they do not conduct quality checks, the IC provides new program officials more guidance during their first few reviews.”

The HHS watchdog also noted that NIH cannot identify whether FCOIs involve foreign entities even though investigators must disclose financial interests from foreign investments.

“The HHS regulations on FCOI do not require institutions to designate whether FCOIs involve foreign entities, and NIH reported that it has no plans to expand these regulations to include such a requirement,” the OIG reported.

The OIG recommended that NIH perform periodic quality assurance reviews of FCOI information to ensure adequacy of oversight and suggested it use “information regarding foreign affiliations and support that it collects during the pre-award process to decide whether to revise its FCOI review process to address concerns regarding foreign influence.”

gtwachtman@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Murrin S. Office of Inspector General. 2019 Sep 25. OEI-03-19-00150.

AUSTIN, TEX. – Dichlorphenamide continues to reduce attacks from primary periodic paralysis (PPP) through 1 year with mild or moderate paresthesia and cognition-related adverse events, according to new research.

“These adverse events rarely resulted in discontinuation from the study and were sometimes managed by dichlorphenamide dose reductions,” concluded Nicholas E. Johnson, MD, of Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, and colleagues. “Reduction in dose was frequently associated with resolution of these events, suggesting a potential intervention to hasten resolution.” Dr. Johnson presented the findings in an abstract at the annual meeting of the American Association for Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine.

Dichlorphenamide (Keveyis) was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2015 for treating primary hyperkalemic and hypokalemic periodic paralysis and similar variants. The original hyperkalemic/hypokalemic PPP trial was a phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that lasted 9 weeks and assessed the efficacy of dichlorphenamide in reducing PPP attacks and its adverse events. In the dichlorphenamide group, 47% experienced paresthesia, compared with 14% in the placebo group, and 19% experienced cognitive disorder, compared with 7% in the placebo.

In a 52-week open-label extension, participants who had been receiving the placebo switched to receiving 50 mg of dichlorphenamide twice daily. The intervention group continued with the dose they had been receiving when the 9-week double-blind phase ended. (During the initial intervention, they took either 50 mg twice daily or the dose they had at baseline for those taking it before the study began.)

The researchers then tracked rates of attacks and their severity over the next year – through week 61 after baseline – to compare these endpoints both within the intervention groups and between them.

Among the 63 predominantly white (84.1%) male (61.9%) adults who began the trial, 36 received dichlorphenamide and 27 received placebo. Just over two-thirds (68.3%) had hypokalemic PPP. Among the 47 patients (74.6%) who completed the open-label extension phase, 26 had been in the original dichlorphenamide group and 21 had been in the placebo group.

The median weekly attack rate in the dichlorphenamide group dropped from 1.75 at baseline to 0.06 at week 61 (median decrease 1.00, 93.8%; P less than .0001). In the placebo group that switched over to dichlorphenamide at week 9, the median weekly attack rate dropped from 3.00 at baseline to 0.25 at week 61 (median decrease 0.63, 75%; P = .01).

The median attack rate weighted for severity in the dichlorphenamide group dropped from 2.25 at baseline to 0.06 at week 61 (median decrease 2.25, 97.1%; P less than .0001). In the placebo group, it dropped from 5.88 to 0.50 (median decrease 1.69, 80.8%; P = .01).

No significant difference in median weekly attack rates and severity-weighted attack rates was found between the intervention groups through week 61.

Across all patients during the extension, 39.7% patients experienced at least one paresthesia adverse event, none of which were determined to be severe and resulting in one discontinuation.

A quarter of the participants (25.4%) experienced at least one cognition-related adverse event, and four patients (6.3%) discontinued because of these side effects. Most (14.3%) were mild with 7.9% reporting moderate and 3.2% reporting severe effects.

Dr. Johnson has received research support from or consulted with a variety of pharmaceutical companies including Strongbridge Biopharma, the manufacturer of the drug. Other authors consulted for several pharmaceutical companies, and one author is an employee of Strongbridge Biopharma.
 

SOURCE: Johnson NE et al. AANEM 2019. Abstract 102. Long-term efficacy and adverse event characterization of dichlorphenamide for the treatment of primary periodic paralysis.

AUSTIN, TEX. – Dichlorphenamide continues to reduce attacks from primary periodic paralysis (PPP) through 1 year with mild or moderate paresthesia and cognition-related adverse events, according to new research.

“These adverse events rarely resulted in discontinuation from the study and were sometimes managed by dichlorphenamide dose reductions,” concluded Nicholas E. Johnson, MD, of Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, and colleagues. “Reduction in dose was frequently associated with resolution of these events, suggesting a potential intervention to hasten resolution.” Dr. Johnson presented the findings in an abstract at the annual meeting of the American Association for Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine.

Dichlorphenamide (Keveyis) was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2015 for treating primary hyperkalemic and hypokalemic periodic paralysis and similar variants. The original hyperkalemic/hypokalemic PPP trial was a phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that lasted 9 weeks and assessed the efficacy of dichlorphenamide in reducing PPP attacks and its adverse events. In the dichlorphenamide group, 47% experienced paresthesia, compared with 14% in the placebo group, and 19% experienced cognitive disorder, compared with 7% in the placebo.

In a 52-week open-label extension, participants who had been receiving the placebo switched to receiving 50 mg of dichlorphenamide twice daily. The intervention group continued with the dose they had been receiving when the 9-week double-blind phase ended. (During the initial intervention, they took either 50 mg twice daily or the dose they had at baseline for those taking it before the study began.)

The researchers then tracked rates of attacks and their severity over the next year – through week 61 after baseline – to compare these endpoints both within the intervention groups and between them.

Among the 63 predominantly white (84.1%) male (61.9%) adults who began the trial, 36 received dichlorphenamide and 27 received placebo. Just over two-thirds (68.3%) had hypokalemic PPP. Among the 47 patients (74.6%) who completed the open-label extension phase, 26 had been in the original dichlorphenamide group and 21 had been in the placebo group.

The median weekly attack rate in the dichlorphenamide group dropped from 1.75 at baseline to 0.06 at week 61 (median decrease 1.00, 93.8%; P less than .0001). In the placebo group that switched over to dichlorphenamide at week 9, the median weekly attack rate dropped from 3.00 at baseline to 0.25 at week 61 (median decrease 0.63, 75%; P = .01).

The median attack rate weighted for severity in the dichlorphenamide group dropped from 2.25 at baseline to 0.06 at week 61 (median decrease 2.25, 97.1%; P less than .0001). In the placebo group, it dropped from 5.88 to 0.50 (median decrease 1.69, 80.8%; P = .01).

No significant difference in median weekly attack rates and severity-weighted attack rates was found between the intervention groups through week 61.

Across all patients during the extension, 39.7% patients experienced at least one paresthesia adverse event, none of which were determined to be severe and resulting in one discontinuation.

A quarter of the participants (25.4%) experienced at least one cognition-related adverse event, and four patients (6.3%) discontinued because of these side effects. Most (14.3%) were mild with 7.9% reporting moderate and 3.2% reporting severe effects.

Dr. Johnson has received research support from or consulted with a variety of pharmaceutical companies including Strongbridge Biopharma, the manufacturer of the drug. Other authors consulted for several pharmaceutical companies, and one author is an employee of Strongbridge Biopharma.
 

SOURCE: Johnson NE et al. AANEM 2019. Abstract 102. Long-term efficacy and adverse event characterization of dichlorphenamide for the treatment of primary periodic paralysis.

AUSTIN, TEX. – Dichlorphenamide continues to reduce attacks from primary periodic paralysis (PPP) through 1 year with mild or moderate paresthesia and cognition-related adverse events, according to new research.

“These adverse events rarely resulted in discontinuation from the study and were sometimes managed by dichlorphenamide dose reductions,” concluded Nicholas E. Johnson, MD, of Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, and colleagues. “Reduction in dose was frequently associated with resolution of these events, suggesting a potential intervention to hasten resolution.” Dr. Johnson presented the findings in an abstract at the annual meeting of the American Association for Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine.

Dichlorphenamide (Keveyis) was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2015 for treating primary hyperkalemic and hypokalemic periodic paralysis and similar variants. The original hyperkalemic/hypokalemic PPP trial was a phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that lasted 9 weeks and assessed the efficacy of dichlorphenamide in reducing PPP attacks and its adverse events. In the dichlorphenamide group, 47% experienced paresthesia, compared with 14% in the placebo group, and 19% experienced cognitive disorder, compared with 7% in the placebo.

In a 52-week open-label extension, participants who had been receiving the placebo switched to receiving 50 mg of dichlorphenamide twice daily. The intervention group continued with the dose they had been receiving when the 9-week double-blind phase ended. (During the initial intervention, they took either 50 mg twice daily or the dose they had at baseline for those taking it before the study began.)

The researchers then tracked rates of attacks and their severity over the next year – through week 61 after baseline – to compare these endpoints both within the intervention groups and between them.

Among the 63 predominantly white (84.1%) male (61.9%) adults who began the trial, 36 received dichlorphenamide and 27 received placebo. Just over two-thirds (68.3%) had hypokalemic PPP. Among the 47 patients (74.6%) who completed the open-label extension phase, 26 had been in the original dichlorphenamide group and 21 had been in the placebo group.

The median weekly attack rate in the dichlorphenamide group dropped from 1.75 at baseline to 0.06 at week 61 (median decrease 1.00, 93.8%; P less than .0001). In the placebo group that switched over to dichlorphenamide at week 9, the median weekly attack rate dropped from 3.00 at baseline to 0.25 at week 61 (median decrease 0.63, 75%; P = .01).

The median attack rate weighted for severity in the dichlorphenamide group dropped from 2.25 at baseline to 0.06 at week 61 (median decrease 2.25, 97.1%; P less than .0001). In the placebo group, it dropped from 5.88 to 0.50 (median decrease 1.69, 80.8%; P = .01).

No significant difference in median weekly attack rates and severity-weighted attack rates was found between the intervention groups through week 61.

Across all patients during the extension, 39.7% patients experienced at least one paresthesia adverse event, none of which were determined to be severe and resulting in one discontinuation.

A quarter of the participants (25.4%) experienced at least one cognition-related adverse event, and four patients (6.3%) discontinued because of these side effects. Most (14.3%) were mild with 7.9% reporting moderate and 3.2% reporting severe effects.

Dr. Johnson has received research support from or consulted with a variety of pharmaceutical companies including Strongbridge Biopharma, the manufacturer of the drug. Other authors consulted for several pharmaceutical companies, and one author is an employee of Strongbridge Biopharma.
 

SOURCE: Johnson NE et al. AANEM 2019. Abstract 102. Long-term efficacy and adverse event characterization of dichlorphenamide for the treatment of primary periodic paralysis.

AUSTIN, TEX. – Patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease (CMT) receive a range of supportive care that includes physical therapy, surgery, medications, orthoses, and walking aids, according to patient-reported data presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine. Patients describe approaches to CMT management that are broadly consistent with guidelines, researchers said.

“The range of different CMT treatments was wide,” reported Tjalf Ziemssen, MD, PhD, a researcher at Technische Universität Dresden in Germany, and colleagues. “Of note, high proportions of respondents had received pain medication, and a relatively high number had also visited pain specialists. These results indicate that pain may have a substantial impact on people with CMT.”

The data also suggest that “lower-limb problems and mobility issues have a considerable impact on people with CMT,” they said.

CMT is a rare, progressive neuropathy that leads to distal muscle weakness, muscle atrophy, and sensory loss. There is no cure, and patients rely on supportive care. Until recently, few studies have assessed the impact of CMT on patients’ lives.

An ongoing, international, 2-year observational study is collecting data from adults with CMT. Patients report data via an app called CMT & Me.

To examine patient-reported treatment patterns and care standards for CMT in the United States and the United Kingdom, Dr. Ziemssen and colleagues analyzed data through Aug. 5, 2019, about 9.5 months into the study. Their interim analysis included data from 439 patients, including 222 patients in the United Kingdom and 217 in the United States.

More than 70% of participants visit a family doctor each year, and a similar proportion visit a neurologist. About 40% visit physical therapists, orthotists, or podiatrists. Other health care professionals seen by patients include occupational therapists (20%), orthopedic surgeons (nearly 20%), and pain specialists (about 15%).

About 70% of participants had received rehabilitation therapy such as physical therapy or occupational therapy, and about 70% had used medications, most frequently nonopioid analgesics (about 50%) and antidepressants (about 30%).

More than 80% used orthoses or walking aids, most commonly ankle or leg braces, insoles, or walking sticks.

In addition, about half of respondents had undergone a surgery for CMT. The most common procedures were osteotomy, hammertoe correction, and plantar fascia release.

Together, patients saw about a dozen types of health care professionals. “Small proportions of participants had visited each professional, which suggests that the care requirements of CMT patients are varied,” the researchers said.

The study was sponsored by Pharnext. Dr. Ziemssen and coauthors received compensation for participating in the study. Other coauthors are employees of Pharnext or Vitaccess, the company that developed the app used in the study.

jremaly@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Ziemssen T et al. AANEM 2019. Abstract 83. Treatment of Charcot-Marie-Tooth Disease in the United Kingdom and United States.

AUSTIN, TEX. – Patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease (CMT) receive a range of supportive care that includes physical therapy, surgery, medications, orthoses, and walking aids, according to patient-reported data presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine. Patients describe approaches to CMT management that are broadly consistent with guidelines, researchers said.

“The range of different CMT treatments was wide,” reported Tjalf Ziemssen, MD, PhD, a researcher at Technische Universität Dresden in Germany, and colleagues. “Of note, high proportions of respondents had received pain medication, and a relatively high number had also visited pain specialists. These results indicate that pain may have a substantial impact on people with CMT.”

The data also suggest that “lower-limb problems and mobility issues have a considerable impact on people with CMT,” they said.

CMT is a rare, progressive neuropathy that leads to distal muscle weakness, muscle atrophy, and sensory loss. There is no cure, and patients rely on supportive care. Until recently, few studies have assessed the impact of CMT on patients’ lives.

An ongoing, international, 2-year observational study is collecting data from adults with CMT. Patients report data via an app called CMT & Me.

To examine patient-reported treatment patterns and care standards for CMT in the United States and the United Kingdom, Dr. Ziemssen and colleagues analyzed data through Aug. 5, 2019, about 9.5 months into the study. Their interim analysis included data from 439 patients, including 222 patients in the United Kingdom and 217 in the United States.

More than 70% of participants visit a family doctor each year, and a similar proportion visit a neurologist. About 40% visit physical therapists, orthotists, or podiatrists. Other health care professionals seen by patients include occupational therapists (20%), orthopedic surgeons (nearly 20%), and pain specialists (about 15%).

About 70% of participants had received rehabilitation therapy such as physical therapy or occupational therapy, and about 70% had used medications, most frequently nonopioid analgesics (about 50%) and antidepressants (about 30%).

More than 80% used orthoses or walking aids, most commonly ankle or leg braces, insoles, or walking sticks.

In addition, about half of respondents had undergone a surgery for CMT. The most common procedures were osteotomy, hammertoe correction, and plantar fascia release.

Together, patients saw about a dozen types of health care professionals. “Small proportions of participants had visited each professional, which suggests that the care requirements of CMT patients are varied,” the researchers said.

The study was sponsored by Pharnext. Dr. Ziemssen and coauthors received compensation for participating in the study. Other coauthors are employees of Pharnext or Vitaccess, the company that developed the app used in the study.

jremaly@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Ziemssen T et al. AANEM 2019. Abstract 83. Treatment of Charcot-Marie-Tooth Disease in the United Kingdom and United States.

AUSTIN, TEX. – Patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease (CMT) receive a range of supportive care that includes physical therapy, surgery, medications, orthoses, and walking aids, according to patient-reported data presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine. Patients describe approaches to CMT management that are broadly consistent with guidelines, researchers said.

“The range of different CMT treatments was wide,” reported Tjalf Ziemssen, MD, PhD, a researcher at Technische Universität Dresden in Germany, and colleagues. “Of note, high proportions of respondents had received pain medication, and a relatively high number had also visited pain specialists. These results indicate that pain may have a substantial impact on people with CMT.”

The data also suggest that “lower-limb problems and mobility issues have a considerable impact on people with CMT,” they said.

CMT is a rare, progressive neuropathy that leads to distal muscle weakness, muscle atrophy, and sensory loss. There is no cure, and patients rely on supportive care. Until recently, few studies have assessed the impact of CMT on patients’ lives.

An ongoing, international, 2-year observational study is collecting data from adults with CMT. Patients report data via an app called CMT & Me.

To examine patient-reported treatment patterns and care standards for CMT in the United States and the United Kingdom, Dr. Ziemssen and colleagues analyzed data through Aug. 5, 2019, about 9.5 months into the study. Their interim analysis included data from 439 patients, including 222 patients in the United Kingdom and 217 in the United States.

More than 70% of participants visit a family doctor each year, and a similar proportion visit a neurologist. About 40% visit physical therapists, orthotists, or podiatrists. Other health care professionals seen by patients include occupational therapists (20%), orthopedic surgeons (nearly 20%), and pain specialists (about 15%).

About 70% of participants had received rehabilitation therapy such as physical therapy or occupational therapy, and about 70% had used medications, most frequently nonopioid analgesics (about 50%) and antidepressants (about 30%).

More than 80% used orthoses or walking aids, most commonly ankle or leg braces, insoles, or walking sticks.

In addition, about half of respondents had undergone a surgery for CMT. The most common procedures were osteotomy, hammertoe correction, and plantar fascia release.

Together, patients saw about a dozen types of health care professionals. “Small proportions of participants had visited each professional, which suggests that the care requirements of CMT patients are varied,” the researchers said.

The study was sponsored by Pharnext. Dr. Ziemssen and coauthors received compensation for participating in the study. Other coauthors are employees of Pharnext or Vitaccess, the company that developed the app used in the study.

jremaly@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Ziemssen T et al. AANEM 2019. Abstract 83. Treatment of Charcot-Marie-Tooth Disease in the United Kingdom and United States.

AUSTIN – Lack of upper motor neuron signs on examination, presence of sensory symptoms, and absence of tongue fasciculations are common causes of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) misdiagnosis, according to an investigation presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine.

designer491/Thinkstock

Because its initial presenting symptoms vary, ALS can be difficult for clinicians to diagnose. A diagnostic error may prompt clinicians and patients to pursue ineffective and potentially harmful medical or surgical interventions. Research suggests that surgery, for example, hastens the progression of ALS.

Catherine Rodriguez, a medical student at University of Missouri in Columbia, and colleagues conducted a study to identify the clinical factors and types of cognitive errors that can result in misdiagnosis of ALS. The researchers analyzed electronic medical records of 88 patients with a diagnosis of ALS who were receiving treatment at the University of Missouri Hospital during 2011-2017 with at least 1 year of follow-up. They collected demographic information and clinical characteristics (e.g., ALS Functional Rating Scale and site of symptom onset) for each patient. If a patient received an incorrect diagnosis, Ms. Rodriguez and colleagues recorded the number of physicians he or she had seen, the incorrect diagnosis, the treatment, the type of diagnostic error, the clinical factors contributing to the misdiagnosis, and the type of physician who gave the incorrect diagnosis.

The investigators classed diagnostic errors according to the four categories of cognitive bias of the Patient Safety Network. The categories are availability heuristic (i.e., the diagnosis of a current patient is biased by the clinician’s experience with previous cases), anchoring heuristic (i.e., relying on the initial impression despite the emergence of evidence that may contradict it), framing effects (i.e., subtle cues and collateral information bias the diagnosis), and blind obedience (i.e., undue reliance on test results or expert opinion). Ms. Rodriguez and colleagues used Fisher’s exact test to perform a statistical analysis of the data.

Thirty-four (39%) of the 88 patients were female, and the populations average age was about 60 years. Eighty patients (91%) were white, six (7%) were black, and two (2%) were Hispanic. Twenty patients (23%) received an incorrect diagnosis. Common incorrect diagnoses included spinal abnormality, Bell’s palsy, myasthenia gravis, ulnar neuropathy, autoimmune motor neuropathy, and stroke.

The investigators observed significant differences in the reasons for misdiagnosis, depending on patient characteristics. Veterans were misdiagnosed because of the availability heuristic, while nonveterans were misdiagnosed because of the anchoring heuristic. Lower-limb onset was most commonly misdiagnosed because of the anchoring heuristic. Bulbar onset was most commonly misdiagnosed because of the availability heuristic. Surgical intervention was the most common treatment for an incorrect diagnosis.

The data serve as a reminder of the prevalence of cognitive biases, said Ms. Rodriguez. “Common things are common, so we tend to stick with those [diagnoses]. Especially with ALS, nobody wants to give anyone that diagnosis.” Clinicians should “recognize that incorrect diagnoses have equally bad outcomes for those patients,” she concluded.

The study was supported by a University of Missouri School of Medicine Summer Research Fellowship Program.

egreb@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Rodriguez C et al. AANEM 2019. Abstract 10. Diagnostic errors and the implications for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients.

AUSTIN – Lack of upper motor neuron signs on examination, presence of sensory symptoms, and absence of tongue fasciculations are common causes of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) misdiagnosis, according to an investigation presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine.

designer491/Thinkstock

Because its initial presenting symptoms vary, ALS can be difficult for clinicians to diagnose. A diagnostic error may prompt clinicians and patients to pursue ineffective and potentially harmful medical or surgical interventions. Research suggests that surgery, for example, hastens the progression of ALS.

Catherine Rodriguez, a medical student at University of Missouri in Columbia, and colleagues conducted a study to identify the clinical factors and types of cognitive errors that can result in misdiagnosis of ALS. The researchers analyzed electronic medical records of 88 patients with a diagnosis of ALS who were receiving treatment at the University of Missouri Hospital during 2011-2017 with at least 1 year of follow-up. They collected demographic information and clinical characteristics (e.g., ALS Functional Rating Scale and site of symptom onset) for each patient. If a patient received an incorrect diagnosis, Ms. Rodriguez and colleagues recorded the number of physicians he or she had seen, the incorrect diagnosis, the treatment, the type of diagnostic error, the clinical factors contributing to the misdiagnosis, and the type of physician who gave the incorrect diagnosis.

The investigators classed diagnostic errors according to the four categories of cognitive bias of the Patient Safety Network. The categories are availability heuristic (i.e., the diagnosis of a current patient is biased by the clinician’s experience with previous cases), anchoring heuristic (i.e., relying on the initial impression despite the emergence of evidence that may contradict it), framing effects (i.e., subtle cues and collateral information bias the diagnosis), and blind obedience (i.e., undue reliance on test results or expert opinion). Ms. Rodriguez and colleagues used Fisher’s exact test to perform a statistical analysis of the data.

Thirty-four (39%) of the 88 patients were female, and the populations average age was about 60 years. Eighty patients (91%) were white, six (7%) were black, and two (2%) were Hispanic. Twenty patients (23%) received an incorrect diagnosis. Common incorrect diagnoses included spinal abnormality, Bell’s palsy, myasthenia gravis, ulnar neuropathy, autoimmune motor neuropathy, and stroke.

The investigators observed significant differences in the reasons for misdiagnosis, depending on patient characteristics. Veterans were misdiagnosed because of the availability heuristic, while nonveterans were misdiagnosed because of the anchoring heuristic. Lower-limb onset was most commonly misdiagnosed because of the anchoring heuristic. Bulbar onset was most commonly misdiagnosed because of the availability heuristic. Surgical intervention was the most common treatment for an incorrect diagnosis.

The data serve as a reminder of the prevalence of cognitive biases, said Ms. Rodriguez. “Common things are common, so we tend to stick with those [diagnoses]. Especially with ALS, nobody wants to give anyone that diagnosis.” Clinicians should “recognize that incorrect diagnoses have equally bad outcomes for those patients,” she concluded.

The study was supported by a University of Missouri School of Medicine Summer Research Fellowship Program.

egreb@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Rodriguez C et al. AANEM 2019. Abstract 10. Diagnostic errors and the implications for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients.

AUSTIN – Lack of upper motor neuron signs on examination, presence of sensory symptoms, and absence of tongue fasciculations are common causes of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) misdiagnosis, according to an investigation presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine.

designer491/Thinkstock

Because its initial presenting symptoms vary, ALS can be difficult for clinicians to diagnose. A diagnostic error may prompt clinicians and patients to pursue ineffective and potentially harmful medical or surgical interventions. Research suggests that surgery, for example, hastens the progression of ALS.

Catherine Rodriguez, a medical student at University of Missouri in Columbia, and colleagues conducted a study to identify the clinical factors and types of cognitive errors that can result in misdiagnosis of ALS. The researchers analyzed electronic medical records of 88 patients with a diagnosis of ALS who were receiving treatment at the University of Missouri Hospital during 2011-2017 with at least 1 year of follow-up. They collected demographic information and clinical characteristics (e.g., ALS Functional Rating Scale and site of symptom onset) for each patient. If a patient received an incorrect diagnosis, Ms. Rodriguez and colleagues recorded the number of physicians he or she had seen, the incorrect diagnosis, the treatment, the type of diagnostic error, the clinical factors contributing to the misdiagnosis, and the type of physician who gave the incorrect diagnosis.

The investigators classed diagnostic errors according to the four categories of cognitive bias of the Patient Safety Network. The categories are availability heuristic (i.e., the diagnosis of a current patient is biased by the clinician’s experience with previous cases), anchoring heuristic (i.e., relying on the initial impression despite the emergence of evidence that may contradict it), framing effects (i.e., subtle cues and collateral information bias the diagnosis), and blind obedience (i.e., undue reliance on test results or expert opinion). Ms. Rodriguez and colleagues used Fisher’s exact test to perform a statistical analysis of the data.

Thirty-four (39%) of the 88 patients were female, and the populations average age was about 60 years. Eighty patients (91%) were white, six (7%) were black, and two (2%) were Hispanic. Twenty patients (23%) received an incorrect diagnosis. Common incorrect diagnoses included spinal abnormality, Bell’s palsy, myasthenia gravis, ulnar neuropathy, autoimmune motor neuropathy, and stroke.

The investigators observed significant differences in the reasons for misdiagnosis, depending on patient characteristics. Veterans were misdiagnosed because of the availability heuristic, while nonveterans were misdiagnosed because of the anchoring heuristic. Lower-limb onset was most commonly misdiagnosed because of the anchoring heuristic. Bulbar onset was most commonly misdiagnosed because of the availability heuristic. Surgical intervention was the most common treatment for an incorrect diagnosis.

The data serve as a reminder of the prevalence of cognitive biases, said Ms. Rodriguez. “Common things are common, so we tend to stick with those [diagnoses]. Especially with ALS, nobody wants to give anyone that diagnosis.” Clinicians should “recognize that incorrect diagnoses have equally bad outcomes for those patients,” she concluded.

The study was supported by a University of Missouri School of Medicine Summer Research Fellowship Program.

egreb@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Rodriguez C et al. AANEM 2019. Abstract 10. Diagnostic errors and the implications for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients.

AUSTIN, TEX. – Patients with suspected myasthenia gravis are more likely to have positive repetitive nerve stimulation (RNS) findings if they undergo testing in an inpatient setting, are seropositive, or are classified as Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Class III or higher, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine.

Low-frequency RNS is a common test that neurologists perform to evaluate a patient for myasthenia gravis. The effects of various clinical factors on the diagnostic yield of this test are unknown, however.

Myasthenia gravis is “mostly a clinical diagnosis,” study first author Tingting Hua, a medical student at the University of Missouri in Columbia, said in an interview. “RNS is just one of the helpful diagnostic tests for it. If we can find out in what kind of populations of patients this test is more helpful, maybe that would help cut down unnecessary tests in patients for whom it’s not necessarily helpful.”

Ms. Hua and her colleagues conducted research to assess the effects of clinical, serologic, and demographic factors on the diagnostic yield of RNS. They retrospectively analyzed patients with an established diagnosis of myasthenia gravis and at least 1 year of follow-up. The variables that the investigators examined were demographic characteristics, MGFA class, RNS study results, antibody test results, thymoma status, and treatments received.

Ms. Hua and her colleagues included 65 patients in their analysis. Thirty-one patients were female. Fifty-five patients were white, eight were black, and two were categorized as “unknown.” Of this population, 32 patients (49.2%) were in MGFA Class I, 14 (21.5%) were in MGFA Class IIa, 13 (20.0%) were in MGFA Class IIb, and the remaining 6 (9.2%) were in MGFA Classes IIIa through V. Twenty-seven patients (42%) had positive RNS studies. Twenty-one patients (32%) were seropositive for myasthenia gravis antibodies.

Eleven patients underwent RNS in an inpatient setting, and 54 were tested in an outpatient setting. Acetylcholine receptor (AChR) binding antibody titer ranged from 0.12 nmol/L to 118 nmol/L. The RNS results were significantly more likely to be positive for seropositive patients, compared with seronegative patients. Patients with MGFA Class III or higher also had higher likelihood of positive RNS results, compared with patients in lower classes. Finally, the diagnostic yield was highest for patients with MGFA Class III or higher who were tested in an inpatient setting.

The study was supported by a Missouri School of Medicine Summer Research Fellowship.

egreb@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Hua T et al. AANEM 2019, Abstract 9.

AUSTIN, TEX. – Patients with suspected myasthenia gravis are more likely to have positive repetitive nerve stimulation (RNS) findings if they undergo testing in an inpatient setting, are seropositive, or are classified as Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Class III or higher, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine.

Low-frequency RNS is a common test that neurologists perform to evaluate a patient for myasthenia gravis. The effects of various clinical factors on the diagnostic yield of this test are unknown, however.

Myasthenia gravis is “mostly a clinical diagnosis,” study first author Tingting Hua, a medical student at the University of Missouri in Columbia, said in an interview. “RNS is just one of the helpful diagnostic tests for it. If we can find out in what kind of populations of patients this test is more helpful, maybe that would help cut down unnecessary tests in patients for whom it’s not necessarily helpful.”

Ms. Hua and her colleagues conducted research to assess the effects of clinical, serologic, and demographic factors on the diagnostic yield of RNS. They retrospectively analyzed patients with an established diagnosis of myasthenia gravis and at least 1 year of follow-up. The variables that the investigators examined were demographic characteristics, MGFA class, RNS study results, antibody test results, thymoma status, and treatments received.

Ms. Hua and her colleagues included 65 patients in their analysis. Thirty-one patients were female. Fifty-five patients were white, eight were black, and two were categorized as “unknown.” Of this population, 32 patients (49.2%) were in MGFA Class I, 14 (21.5%) were in MGFA Class IIa, 13 (20.0%) were in MGFA Class IIb, and the remaining 6 (9.2%) were in MGFA Classes IIIa through V. Twenty-seven patients (42%) had positive RNS studies. Twenty-one patients (32%) were seropositive for myasthenia gravis antibodies.

Eleven patients underwent RNS in an inpatient setting, and 54 were tested in an outpatient setting. Acetylcholine receptor (AChR) binding antibody titer ranged from 0.12 nmol/L to 118 nmol/L. The RNS results were significantly more likely to be positive for seropositive patients, compared with seronegative patients. Patients with MGFA Class III or higher also had higher likelihood of positive RNS results, compared with patients in lower classes. Finally, the diagnostic yield was highest for patients with MGFA Class III or higher who were tested in an inpatient setting.

The study was supported by a Missouri School of Medicine Summer Research Fellowship.

egreb@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Hua T et al. AANEM 2019, Abstract 9.

AUSTIN, TEX. – Patients with suspected myasthenia gravis are more likely to have positive repetitive nerve stimulation (RNS) findings if they undergo testing in an inpatient setting, are seropositive, or are classified as Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America (MGFA) Class III or higher, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine.

Low-frequency RNS is a common test that neurologists perform to evaluate a patient for myasthenia gravis. The effects of various clinical factors on the diagnostic yield of this test are unknown, however.

Myasthenia gravis is “mostly a clinical diagnosis,” study first author Tingting Hua, a medical student at the University of Missouri in Columbia, said in an interview. “RNS is just one of the helpful diagnostic tests for it. If we can find out in what kind of populations of patients this test is more helpful, maybe that would help cut down unnecessary tests in patients for whom it’s not necessarily helpful.”

Ms. Hua and her colleagues conducted research to assess the effects of clinical, serologic, and demographic factors on the diagnostic yield of RNS. They retrospectively analyzed patients with an established diagnosis of myasthenia gravis and at least 1 year of follow-up. The variables that the investigators examined were demographic characteristics, MGFA class, RNS study results, antibody test results, thymoma status, and treatments received.

Ms. Hua and her colleagues included 65 patients in their analysis. Thirty-one patients were female. Fifty-five patients were white, eight were black, and two were categorized as “unknown.” Of this population, 32 patients (49.2%) were in MGFA Class I, 14 (21.5%) were in MGFA Class IIa, 13 (20.0%) were in MGFA Class IIb, and the remaining 6 (9.2%) were in MGFA Classes IIIa through V. Twenty-seven patients (42%) had positive RNS studies. Twenty-one patients (32%) were seropositive for myasthenia gravis antibodies.

Eleven patients underwent RNS in an inpatient setting, and 54 were tested in an outpatient setting. Acetylcholine receptor (AChR) binding antibody titer ranged from 0.12 nmol/L to 118 nmol/L. The RNS results were significantly more likely to be positive for seropositive patients, compared with seronegative patients. Patients with MGFA Class III or higher also had higher likelihood of positive RNS results, compared with patients in lower classes. Finally, the diagnostic yield was highest for patients with MGFA Class III or higher who were tested in an inpatient setting.

The study was supported by a Missouri School of Medicine Summer Research Fellowship.

egreb@mdedge.com

SOURCE: Hua T et al. AANEM 2019, Abstract 9.