No abstract

ObjectiveTo identify molecular signatures in muscle from patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) that could provide insight into the disease process and serve as biomarkers.MethodsRNA sequencing was performed on ALS and control muscle samples to identify Smad family members as potential markers of disease. Validation studies were performed in a cohort of 27 ALS patients and 33 controls. The markers were assessed in the G93A superoxide dismutase (SOD)1 mouse at different stages of disease and in a model of sciatic nerve injury.ResultsSmad8, and to a lesser extent Smad1 and 5, mRNAs were significantly elevated in human ALS muscle samples. The markers displayed a remarkably similar pattern in the G93A SOD1 mouse model of ALS with increases detected at preclinical stages. Expression at the RNA and protein levels as well as protein activation (phosphorylation) significantly increased with disease progression in the mouse. The markers were also elevated to a lesser degree in gastrocnemius muscle following sciatic nerve injury, but then reverted to baseline during the muscle reinnervation phase.InterpretationThese data indicate that Smad1, 5, 8 mRNA and protein levels, as well as Smad phosphorylation, are elevated in ALS muscle and could potentially serve as markers of disease progression or regression.

This study provides Class I evidence of efficacy of amifampridine phosphate as a symptomatic treatment for LEMS.

We recently identified Smads1, 5 and 8 as muscle biomarkers in human ALS. In the ALS mouse, these markers are elevated and track disease progression. Smads are signal transducers and become activated upon receptor engagement of ligands from the TGF-β superfamily. Here, we sought to characterize ligands linked to activation of Smads in ALS muscle and their role as biomarkers of disease progression. RNA sequencing data of ALS muscle samples were mined for TGF-β superfamily ligands. Candidate targets were validated by qRT-PCR in a large cohort of human ALS muscle biopsy samples and in the G93A SOD1 mouse. Protein expression was evaluated by Western blot, ELISA and immunohistochemistry. C2C12 muscle cells were used to assess Smad activation and induction. TGF-β1, 2 and 3 mRNAs were increased in ALS muscle samples compared to controls and correlated with muscle strength and Smads1, 2, 5 and 8. In the G93A SOD1 mouse, the temporal pattern of TGF-β expression paralleled the Smads and increased with disease progression. TGF-β1 immunoreactivity was detected in mononuclear cells surrounding muscle fibers in ALS samples. In muscle cells, TGF-β ligands were capable of activating Smads. In conclusion, TGF-β1, 2 and 3 are novel biomarkers of ALS in skeletal muscle. Their correlation with weakness in human ALS and their progressive increase with advancing disease in the ALS mouse suggest that they, as with the Smads, can track disease progression. These ligands are capable of upregulating and activating Smads and thus may contribute to the Smad signaling pathway in ALS muscle.

ObjectivesChronic inflammatory axonal polyneuropathy (CIAP) is defined on the basis of the clinical, electrophysiological and nerve biopsy findings and therapeutic responses of ‘immunotherapy responding chronic axonal polyneuropathy (IR-CAP)’.MethodsThe diagnosis of IR-CAP was made when all of three of the following mandatory criterion were met: (1) acquired, chronic progressive or relapsing symmetrical or asymmetrical polyneuropathy with duration of progression >2 months; (2) electrophysiological evidence of axonal neuropathy in at least two nerves without any evidence of ‘strict criteria of demyelination’; and (3) definite responsiveness to immunotherapy.ResultsThirty-three patients with IR-CAP showed similar clinical features of chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) except ‘motor neuropathy subtype’. High spinal fluid protein was found in 27/32 (78%) cases. ‘Inflammatory axonal neuropathy’ was proven in 14 (45%) of 31 sural nerve biopsies.DiscussionsIR-CAP could well be ‘axonal CIDP’ in view of clinical similarity, but not proven as yet. Thus, IR-CAP is best described as CIAP, a distinct entity that deserves its recognition in view of responsiveness to immunotherapy.ConclusionDiagnosis of CIAP can be made by additional documentation of ‘inflammation’ by high spinal fluid protein or nerve biopsy in addition to the first two diagnostic criteria of IR-CAP.