BACKGROUNDSpinal muscular atrophy is an autosomal recessive neuromuscular disorder that is caused by an insufficient level of survival motor neuron (SMN) protein. Nusinersen is an antisense oligonucleotide drug that modifies pre-messenger RNA splicing of the SMN2 gene and thus promotes increased production of full-length SMN protein. METHODSWe conducted a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, phase 3 efficacy and safety trial of nusinersen in infants with spinal muscular atrophy. The primary end points were a motor-milestone response (defined according to results on the Hammersmith Infant Neurological Examination) and event-free survival (time to death or the use of permanent assisted ventilation). Secondary end points included overall survival and subgroup analyses of event-free survival according to disease duration at screening. Only the first primary end point was tested in a prespecified interim analysis. To control the overall type I error rate at 0.05, a hierarchical testing strategy was used for the second primary end point and the secondary end points in the final analysis. RESULTSIn the interim analysis, a significantly higher percentage of infants in the nusinersen group than in the control group had a motor-milestone response (21 of 51 infants [41%] vs. 0 of 27 [0%], P<0.001), and this result prompted early termination of the trial. In the final analysis, a significantly higher percentage of infants in the nusinersen group than in the control group had a motor-milestone response (37 of 73 infants [51%] vs. 0 of 37 [0%]), and the likelihood of event-free survival was higher in the nusinersen group than in the control group (hazard ratio for death or the use of permanent assisted ventilation, 0.53; P = 0.005). The likelihood of overall survival was higher in the nusinersen group than in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.37; P = 0.004), and infants with a shorter disease duration at screening were more likely than those with a longer disease duration to benefit from nusinersen. The incidence and severity of adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONSAmong infants with spinal muscular atrophy, those who received nusinersen were more likely to be alive and have improvements in motor function than those in the control group. Early treatment may be necessary to maximize the benefit of the drug. (Funded by Biogen and Ionis Pharmaceuticals; ENDEAR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02193074.)
Key Points Question What are the most effective treatments for N -methyl- d -aspartate receptor (NMDAR) antibody encephalitis? Findings In this meta-analysis of individual patient data including 1550 cases, treatment factors at first event that were significantly associated with good functional outcome 12 months from disease onset included first-line treatment with therapeutic apheresis alone, corticosteroids in combination with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), or corticosteroids in combination with IVIG and therapeutic apheresis, while lack of immunotherapy within 30 days of disease onset was significantly associated with poor outcome. Rituximab and long-term IVIG use were significantly associated with nonrelapsing disease course. Meaning Separate treatment factors are associated with functional outcomes and relapsing disease biology in those with NMDAR antibody encephalitis.
We read with great interest the study by Lim et al, 1 which aimed to develop an easily applicable scale to grade the severity of autoimmune encephalitis (AE). Nine key clinical features were identified and included in the Clinical Assessment Scale in Autoimmune Encephalitis (CASE). CASE showed good interobserver and intraobserver reliability, and internal consistency, as well as a high correlation with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS).We applied CASE retrospectively to a cohort of 60 patients with AE, admitted to our institution between 2012 and 2018, and prospectively in 3 additional patients. Median age at onset was 55 years (range = 3 months-88 years), in 13 of 63 (21%) onset was before 18 years of age, and 34 of 63 (54%) were female. All patients fulfilled the clinical diagnostic criteria for AE 2 : definite AE was diagnosed in 16 of 63 patients (25%), definite anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis in 11 of 63 (17%), definite autoimmune limbic encephalitis in 6 of 63 (10%), antibody-negative probable AE in 4 of 63 (6 %), possible AE in 25 of 63 (40%), and Hashimoto encephalopathy in 1 of 63 (2%). At the disease nadir, median mRS score was 4 (range = 3-5). We applied CASE at maximum clinical severity (median CASE score = 9, range = 3-24). In our cohort, CASE significantly correlated with mRS (p < 0.0001, r 2 = 0.5025; Fig), although the correlation strength was weaker than that reported by Lim et al. However, we encountered several issues when CASE was applied to our patients that need to be clarified. Severe clinical conditions, such as coma and status epilepticus, make other items hardly assessable (eg, gait instability, language). In such cases, it is not specified what score should be given to items that are not directly assessable (we gave the maximum score). Postictal state after seizures also interferes with the evaluation of most items. The authors should clarify how to apply the scale in these situations and whether this score is meant to be used only in clinically stable patients. Furthermore, when applying CASE to a pediatric population, some items, such as memory and language, were not easily assessable. We think that the scale is more suitable for adult patients. Moreover, it would be appropriate to develop a different scale for patients with altered consciousness.CASE is potentially a useful tool and addresses the unmet need of clinical scales to grade AE severity, as mRS is quite coarse in evaluating this condition. However, CASE needs further improvement and validation to be employed in clinical trials.
ObjectiveTo create an international consensus treatment recommendation for pediatric NMDA receptor antibody encephalitis (NMDARE).MethodsAfter selection of a panel of 27 experts with representation from all continents, a 2-step Delphi method was adopted to develop consensus on relevant treatment regimens and statements, along with key definitions in pediatric NMDARE (disease severity, failure to improve, and relapse). Finally, an online face-to-face meeting was held to reach consensus (defined as ≥75% agreement).ResultsCorticosteroids are recommended in all children with NMDARE (pulsed IV preferred), with additional IV immunoglobulin or plasma exchange in severe patients. Prolonged first-line immunotherapy can be offered for up to 3–12 months (oral corticosteroids or monthly IV corticosteroids/immunoglobulin), dependent on disease severity. Second-line treatments are recommended for cases refractory to first-line therapies (rituximab preferred over cyclophosphamide) and should be considered about 2 weeks after first-line initiation. Further immunotherapies for refractory disease 1-3 months after second-line initiation include another second-line treatment (such as cyclophosphamide) and escalation to tocilizumab. Maintenance immune suppression beyond 6 months (such as rituximab redosing or mycophenolate mofetil) is generally not required, except for patients with a more severe course or prolonged impairments and hospitalization. For patients with relapsing disease, second-line and prolonged maintenance therapy should be considered. The treatment of NMDARE following herpes simplex encephalitis should be similar to idiopathic NMDARE. Broad guidance is provided for the total treatment duration (first line, second line, and maintenance), which is dictated by the severity and clinical course (i.e., median 3, 9 and 18 months in the best, average, and worst responders, respectively). Recommendations on the timing of oncologic searches are provided.ConclusionThese international consensus recommendations for the management of pediatric NMDARE aim to standardize the treatment and provide practical guidance for clinicians, rather than absolute rules. A similar recommendation could be applicable to adult patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.