Anti-myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibodies (MOG-Ab) recently emerged as a potential biomarker in patients with inflammatory demyelinating diseases of the central nervous system. We here compare the clinical and laboratory findings observed in a cohort of MOG-Ab seropositive and seronegative cases and describe IgG subclass analysis results. Consecutive serum samples referred to Verona University Neuropathology Laboratory for aquaporin-4 (AQP4)-Ab and/or MOG-Ab testing were analysed between March 2014 and May 2017. The presence of AQP4-Ab was determined using a cell-based assay. A live cell immunofluorescence assay was used for the detection of MOG-IgG and IgG subclass analysis. Among 454 analysed samples, 29 were excluded due to AQP4-Ab positivity or to the final demonstration of a disorder not compatible with MOG-Ab. We obtained clinical data in 154 out of 425 cases. Of these, 22 subjects resulted MOG-Ab positive. MOG-Ab positive patients were mainly characterised by the involvement of the optic nerve and/or spinal cord. Half of the cases presented relapses and the recovery was usually partial. Brain MRI was heterogeneous while short lesions were the prevalent observation on spinal cord MRI. MOG-Ab titre usually decreased in non-relapsing cases. In all MOG-IgG positive cases, we observed IgG1 antibodies, which were predominant in most subjects. IgG2 (5/22), IgG3 (9/22) and IgG4 (3/22) antibodies were also detectable. We confirm that MOG-Ab-related syndromes have distinct features in the spectrum of demyelinating conditions, and we describe the possible role of the different IgG subclasses in this condition.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00415-017-8635-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Background: It is unclear whether natalizumab and fingolimod have analogous efficacy for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Objective: To compare the outcome of RRMS patients treated with either therapy. Methods: RRMS patients treated with natalizumab or fingolimod at Verona Hospital, Italy, were included. The study design was retrospective, based on prospectively collected clinical and MRI data. As efficacy outcomes, time to relapse, relapse rate, expanded disability status scale (EDSS) score change, and new T2/gadolinium-enhancing lesions on brain MRI were compared over treatment period between the two groups. Multivariate Cox and logistic regression models were used to control for potential confounders. Results: Fifty-seven subjects receiving natalizumab and 30 receiving fingolimod for a median duration of 23 (1-63) and 22 (2-35) months, respectively (p = 0.22) were included. Patients treated with natalizumab had a more active pre-treatment disease course compared to those treated with fingolimod. In multivariate analysis, the relapse risk was reduced in patients on natalizumab (Hazard Ratio = 0.33; 95% CI = 0.11-1.03; p = 0.056) compared to those on fingolimod. There was no significant difference in EDSS and MRI outcomes. No relevant unexpected adverse events occurred. One patient discontinued natalizumab for progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy. Conclusions: RRMS patients receiving natalizumab had higher baseline disease activity and lower relapse risk over 20 months of treatment compared to those receiving fingolimod. Head-to-head randomized clinical trials are needed.
We evaluated brain stem P30, contralateral frontal N37, and the vertex‐ipsilateral central P37, N50 somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) obtained in response to stimulation of the tibial nerve in 10 patients with idiopathic dystonia. Results were compared with those obtained in 10 healthy subjects matched for age and sex. The amplitude of the brain stem P30 potential and of the contralateral frontal N37 response in dystonic patients was not significantly different from that recorded in normal subjects. The vertex‐ipsilateral central P37‐N50 complex, which is thought to originate in the pre‐rolandic cortex, was significantly enhanced in patients compared with the control group. These results suggest the enhancement of the vertex‐ipsilateral central P37‐N50 complex might reflect an abnormal response to somatosensory inputs of a precentral cortex which is excessively activated because of a disorder of the basal ganglia. Such inefficient sensory processing in motor areas might contribute to motor impairment in dystonia.
According to current European Alteplase license, therapeutic-window for intravenous (IV) thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke has recently been extended to 4.5 h after symptoms onset. However, due to numerous contraindications, the portion of patients eligible for treatment still remains limited. Early neurological status after thrombolysis could identify more faithfully the impact of off-label Alteplase use that long-term functional outcome. We aimed to identify the impact of off-label thrombolysis and each off-label criterion on early clinical outcomes compared with the current European Alteplase license. We conducted an analysis on prospectively collected data of 500 consecutive thrombolysed patients. The primary outcome measures included major neurological improvement (NIHSS score decrease of ≤8 points from baseline or NIHSS score of 0) and neurological deterioration (NIHSS score increase of ≥4 points from baseline or death) at 24 h. We estimated the independent effect of off-label thrombolysis and each off-label criterion by calculating the odds ratio (OR) with 2-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for each outcome measure. As the reference, we used patients fully adhering to the current European Alteplase license. 237 (47.4%) patients were treated with IV thrombolysis beyond the current European Alteplase license. We did not find significant differences between off- and on-label thrombolysis on early clinical outcomes. No off-label criteria were associated with decreased rate of major neurological improvement compared with on-label thrombolysis. History of stroke and concomitant diabetes was the only off-label criterion associated with increased rate of neurological deterioration (OR 5.84, 95% CI 1.61-21.19; p = 0.024). Off-label thrombolysis may be less effective at 24 h than on-label Alteplase use in patients with previous stroke and concomitant diabetes. Instead, the impact of other off-label criteria on early clinical outcomes was not different compared with current European Alteplase license.
Background. Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)/cannabidiol (CBD) (nabiximols or Sativex®) is an oromucosal spray formulation containing THC and CBD at an approximately 1:1 fixed ratio. Its administration for the treatment of pain in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) has been established. MS patients generally complain of different kinds of pain, including spasticity-related and neuropathic pain. In this study, we compared and evaluated pain modulation and thermal/pain threshold of MS patients before and after THC/CBD administration. Methods. 19 MS patients underwent clinical examination, numerical rating scale (NRS), quantitative sensory testing (QST), and laser-evoked potentials (LEPs) before and after 1 month of therapy. Psychophysiological and neurophysiological data were compared to sex- and age-matched controls. Results. Patients reported a significant reduction in pain. We found statistically significant differences in LEP parameters between patients and controls but no significant change in LEP measures after THC/CBD therapy. Cold and heat detection thresholds were altered in patients but did not change after THC/CBD therapy. There was a significant increase in cold pain threshold by hand stimulation and a significant reduction in abnormal cold perception thresholds. Conclusions. Our results indicate that Sativex® therapy provides pain relief in MS patients and suggest that it might modulate peripheral cold-sensitive TRP channels.
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.