User login
Erik Greb joined the staff of Neurology Reviews in January 2012. Since then, he has attended scientific conferences, conducted video interviews, and written about clinical research in multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, stroke, and other neurologic disorders. In addition to news articles, Erik has written investigative stories about multiple sclerosis, headache, and epilepsy. He previously wrote about pharmaceutical manufacturing, drug formulation and delivery, quality assurance, and regulation for Pharmaceutical Technology.
Vaccination and antiviral treatment do not affect stroke risk following shingles
HONOLULU – according to findings from a retrospective study of Medicare beneficiaries with shingles and ischemic stroke.
The findings suggest that primary prevention of shingles through vaccination might be the most effective approach to prevent shingles-associated acute ischemic stroke, said the researchers, who presented the study at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association.
Almost one in three people in the United States will develop shingles, also known as herpes zoster, in their lifetime, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Previous research has not simultaneously examined the effect of shingles vaccination and antiviral treatment following shingles onset on the risk of acute ischemic stroke.
Quanhe Yang, PhD, a senior scientist at the CDC, and his colleagues examined data for 35,186 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries who were 66 years or older, diagnosed with shingles during 2008-2014, and diagnosed with acute ischemic stroke within a year of shingles diagnosis. Using a self-controlled case series design, the investigators analyzed the association between shingles and stroke. Dr. Yang and his colleagues estimated the incident rate ratio (IRR) by comparing the incidence of stroke during risk periods (i.e., periods following shingles), compared with control periods. To minimize confounding by age, they restricted their analyses to approximately 365 days from the shingles index date.
To investigate how vaccination against shingles with Zostavax and antiviral treatment following shingles affected stroke risk, the researchers classified beneficiaries into the following four groups: Group 1 had no vaccination and no antiviral treatment (49% of beneficiaries), Group 2 had vaccination only (9%), Group 3 had antiviral treatment only (34%), and Group 4 had vaccination and antiviral treatment (8%). The researchers tested for interaction to examine the changes in IRRs across the four groups.
IRRs for stroke progressively declined as time passed from the index shingles date, from 1.61 at 0-14 days following shingles to 1.35 at 15-30 days, 1.16 at 31-90 days, and 1.05 at 91-180 days. The researchers found no evidence that shingles vaccination and antiviral treatment modified the risk of acute ischemic stroke. The association between shingles and risk for acute ischemic stroke was consistent across age groups (i.e., 66-74 years, 75-84 years, and 85 years or older), sex, and race (i.e., non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic, other).
One of the study’s strengths was that its sample was a large national cohort of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, Dr. Yang said. In addition, the study design eliminated all fixed confounding effects. Potential weaknesses, however, included the fact that herpes zoster diagnosis was based on administrative data and that the vaccine’s efficacy declines over time.
The findings suggest that the importance of following the recommended shingles vaccination protocol in the prevention of shingles, Dr. Yang said. Shingrix, a vaccine that the Food and Drug Administration approved in 2017, prevents shingles with an efficacy greater than 90%, he added.
The investigators reported no funding source or disclosures for this study.
SOURCE: Yang Q et al. Circulation. 2019;50(Suppl_1): Abstract 39
HONOLULU – according to findings from a retrospective study of Medicare beneficiaries with shingles and ischemic stroke.
The findings suggest that primary prevention of shingles through vaccination might be the most effective approach to prevent shingles-associated acute ischemic stroke, said the researchers, who presented the study at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association.
Almost one in three people in the United States will develop shingles, also known as herpes zoster, in their lifetime, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Previous research has not simultaneously examined the effect of shingles vaccination and antiviral treatment following shingles onset on the risk of acute ischemic stroke.
Quanhe Yang, PhD, a senior scientist at the CDC, and his colleagues examined data for 35,186 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries who were 66 years or older, diagnosed with shingles during 2008-2014, and diagnosed with acute ischemic stroke within a year of shingles diagnosis. Using a self-controlled case series design, the investigators analyzed the association between shingles and stroke. Dr. Yang and his colleagues estimated the incident rate ratio (IRR) by comparing the incidence of stroke during risk periods (i.e., periods following shingles), compared with control periods. To minimize confounding by age, they restricted their analyses to approximately 365 days from the shingles index date.
To investigate how vaccination against shingles with Zostavax and antiviral treatment following shingles affected stroke risk, the researchers classified beneficiaries into the following four groups: Group 1 had no vaccination and no antiviral treatment (49% of beneficiaries), Group 2 had vaccination only (9%), Group 3 had antiviral treatment only (34%), and Group 4 had vaccination and antiviral treatment (8%). The researchers tested for interaction to examine the changes in IRRs across the four groups.
IRRs for stroke progressively declined as time passed from the index shingles date, from 1.61 at 0-14 days following shingles to 1.35 at 15-30 days, 1.16 at 31-90 days, and 1.05 at 91-180 days. The researchers found no evidence that shingles vaccination and antiviral treatment modified the risk of acute ischemic stroke. The association between shingles and risk for acute ischemic stroke was consistent across age groups (i.e., 66-74 years, 75-84 years, and 85 years or older), sex, and race (i.e., non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic, other).
One of the study’s strengths was that its sample was a large national cohort of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, Dr. Yang said. In addition, the study design eliminated all fixed confounding effects. Potential weaknesses, however, included the fact that herpes zoster diagnosis was based on administrative data and that the vaccine’s efficacy declines over time.
The findings suggest that the importance of following the recommended shingles vaccination protocol in the prevention of shingles, Dr. Yang said. Shingrix, a vaccine that the Food and Drug Administration approved in 2017, prevents shingles with an efficacy greater than 90%, he added.
The investigators reported no funding source or disclosures for this study.
SOURCE: Yang Q et al. Circulation. 2019;50(Suppl_1): Abstract 39
HONOLULU – according to findings from a retrospective study of Medicare beneficiaries with shingles and ischemic stroke.
The findings suggest that primary prevention of shingles through vaccination might be the most effective approach to prevent shingles-associated acute ischemic stroke, said the researchers, who presented the study at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association.
Almost one in three people in the United States will develop shingles, also known as herpes zoster, in their lifetime, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Previous research has not simultaneously examined the effect of shingles vaccination and antiviral treatment following shingles onset on the risk of acute ischemic stroke.
Quanhe Yang, PhD, a senior scientist at the CDC, and his colleagues examined data for 35,186 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries who were 66 years or older, diagnosed with shingles during 2008-2014, and diagnosed with acute ischemic stroke within a year of shingles diagnosis. Using a self-controlled case series design, the investigators analyzed the association between shingles and stroke. Dr. Yang and his colleagues estimated the incident rate ratio (IRR) by comparing the incidence of stroke during risk periods (i.e., periods following shingles), compared with control periods. To minimize confounding by age, they restricted their analyses to approximately 365 days from the shingles index date.
To investigate how vaccination against shingles with Zostavax and antiviral treatment following shingles affected stroke risk, the researchers classified beneficiaries into the following four groups: Group 1 had no vaccination and no antiviral treatment (49% of beneficiaries), Group 2 had vaccination only (9%), Group 3 had antiviral treatment only (34%), and Group 4 had vaccination and antiviral treatment (8%). The researchers tested for interaction to examine the changes in IRRs across the four groups.
IRRs for stroke progressively declined as time passed from the index shingles date, from 1.61 at 0-14 days following shingles to 1.35 at 15-30 days, 1.16 at 31-90 days, and 1.05 at 91-180 days. The researchers found no evidence that shingles vaccination and antiviral treatment modified the risk of acute ischemic stroke. The association between shingles and risk for acute ischemic stroke was consistent across age groups (i.e., 66-74 years, 75-84 years, and 85 years or older), sex, and race (i.e., non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic, other).
One of the study’s strengths was that its sample was a large national cohort of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries, Dr. Yang said. In addition, the study design eliminated all fixed confounding effects. Potential weaknesses, however, included the fact that herpes zoster diagnosis was based on administrative data and that the vaccine’s efficacy declines over time.
The findings suggest that the importance of following the recommended shingles vaccination protocol in the prevention of shingles, Dr. Yang said. Shingrix, a vaccine that the Food and Drug Administration approved in 2017, prevents shingles with an efficacy greater than 90%, he added.
The investigators reported no funding source or disclosures for this study.
SOURCE: Yang Q et al. Circulation. 2019;50(Suppl_1): Abstract 39
REPORTING FROM ISC 2019
Key clinical point: After a patient develops shingles, prior vaccination or treatment with antiviral medication does not change the risk of acute ischemic stroke.
Major finding: Stroke incidence increased by 61% within 14 days after shingles onset.
Study details: A self-controlled case series of 35,186 Medicare beneficiaries with shingles and acute ischemic stroke.
Disclosures: The authors reported no funding source or disclosures for this study.
Source: Yang Q et al. Circulation. 2019;50(Suppl_1), Abstract 39
Cilostazol plus aspirin or clopidogrel reduces the risk of recurrent stroke
HONOLULU – The combination also entails a similar risk of major bleeding, compared with aspirin and clopidogrel alone, according to results from the Cilostazol Stroke Prevention Study for Antiplatelet Combination (CSPS.com).
Dual-antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel reduced the rate of recurrent stroke in previous studies. The benefit of this drug combination is relatively short-lived, however, and long-term concomitant use of aspirin and clopidogrel entails a risk of major bleeding. Other data have indicated that cilostazol, which is approved by the Food and Drug Administration to alleviate intermittent claudication in patients with peripheral vascular disease, prevents stroke recurrence without increasing the incidence of serious bleeding, compared with aspirin, said Kazunori Toyoda, MD, PhD, who presented the results of the CSPS.com trial at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association.
Dr. Toyoda of the National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center in Osaka, Japan, and his colleagues randomized 1,879 high-risk patients at 8-180 days after the onset of noncardioembolic ischemic stroke identified on MRI to receive 81 or 100 mg aspirin or 50 or 75 mg clopidogrel alone, or a combination of cilostazol 100 mg twice daily with aspirin or clopidogrel. They conducted their open-label, parallel-group trial at 292 sites in Japan from December 2013 through March 2017.
To be considered at high risk, participants had to meet one or more of the following criteria: 50% or greater stenosis of a major intracranial artery, 50% or greater stenosis of an extracranial artery, and two or more vascular risk factors. The trial’s primary efficacy outcome was the first recurrence of ischemic stroke. Safety outcomes included severe or life-threatening bleeding.
The investigators ended the trial early because of a delay in recruiting patients. They enrolled 1,884 and randomized 1,879 of an anticipated 4,000 patients. At randomization, 41% in the dual-therapy group received aspirin and 59% clopidogrel, and in the monotherapy group, 40% received aspirin and 60% clopidogrel. Baseline characteristics were similar between the treatment groups. The population’s mean age was 70. Approximately 30% of patients were women.
During a median follow-up period of 17 months, ischemic stroke recurred in 29 of 932 patients receiving dual therapy including cilostazol for an annual rate of 2.2% and in 64 of 947 patients receiving monotherapy for an annual rate of 4.5% (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.76; P = .001). Severe or life-threatening bleeding occurred in 8 patients (0.6% per year) receiving dual therapy and 13 patients (0.9% per year) receiving monotherapy (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.27-1.60; P = .354).
The study was funded by Otsuka Pharmaceutical, which manufactures cilostazol. Dr. Toyoda reported receiving support from Bayer Yakuhin, Daiichi Sankyo, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim.
SOURCE: Toyoda K et al. ISC 2019, Abstract LB3.
HONOLULU – The combination also entails a similar risk of major bleeding, compared with aspirin and clopidogrel alone, according to results from the Cilostazol Stroke Prevention Study for Antiplatelet Combination (CSPS.com).
Dual-antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel reduced the rate of recurrent stroke in previous studies. The benefit of this drug combination is relatively short-lived, however, and long-term concomitant use of aspirin and clopidogrel entails a risk of major bleeding. Other data have indicated that cilostazol, which is approved by the Food and Drug Administration to alleviate intermittent claudication in patients with peripheral vascular disease, prevents stroke recurrence without increasing the incidence of serious bleeding, compared with aspirin, said Kazunori Toyoda, MD, PhD, who presented the results of the CSPS.com trial at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association.
Dr. Toyoda of the National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center in Osaka, Japan, and his colleagues randomized 1,879 high-risk patients at 8-180 days after the onset of noncardioembolic ischemic stroke identified on MRI to receive 81 or 100 mg aspirin or 50 or 75 mg clopidogrel alone, or a combination of cilostazol 100 mg twice daily with aspirin or clopidogrel. They conducted their open-label, parallel-group trial at 292 sites in Japan from December 2013 through March 2017.
To be considered at high risk, participants had to meet one or more of the following criteria: 50% or greater stenosis of a major intracranial artery, 50% or greater stenosis of an extracranial artery, and two or more vascular risk factors. The trial’s primary efficacy outcome was the first recurrence of ischemic stroke. Safety outcomes included severe or life-threatening bleeding.
The investigators ended the trial early because of a delay in recruiting patients. They enrolled 1,884 and randomized 1,879 of an anticipated 4,000 patients. At randomization, 41% in the dual-therapy group received aspirin and 59% clopidogrel, and in the monotherapy group, 40% received aspirin and 60% clopidogrel. Baseline characteristics were similar between the treatment groups. The population’s mean age was 70. Approximately 30% of patients were women.
During a median follow-up period of 17 months, ischemic stroke recurred in 29 of 932 patients receiving dual therapy including cilostazol for an annual rate of 2.2% and in 64 of 947 patients receiving monotherapy for an annual rate of 4.5% (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.76; P = .001). Severe or life-threatening bleeding occurred in 8 patients (0.6% per year) receiving dual therapy and 13 patients (0.9% per year) receiving monotherapy (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.27-1.60; P = .354).
The study was funded by Otsuka Pharmaceutical, which manufactures cilostazol. Dr. Toyoda reported receiving support from Bayer Yakuhin, Daiichi Sankyo, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim.
SOURCE: Toyoda K et al. ISC 2019, Abstract LB3.
HONOLULU – The combination also entails a similar risk of major bleeding, compared with aspirin and clopidogrel alone, according to results from the Cilostazol Stroke Prevention Study for Antiplatelet Combination (CSPS.com).
Dual-antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel reduced the rate of recurrent stroke in previous studies. The benefit of this drug combination is relatively short-lived, however, and long-term concomitant use of aspirin and clopidogrel entails a risk of major bleeding. Other data have indicated that cilostazol, which is approved by the Food and Drug Administration to alleviate intermittent claudication in patients with peripheral vascular disease, prevents stroke recurrence without increasing the incidence of serious bleeding, compared with aspirin, said Kazunori Toyoda, MD, PhD, who presented the results of the CSPS.com trial at the International Stroke Conference sponsored by the American Heart Association.
Dr. Toyoda of the National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center in Osaka, Japan, and his colleagues randomized 1,879 high-risk patients at 8-180 days after the onset of noncardioembolic ischemic stroke identified on MRI to receive 81 or 100 mg aspirin or 50 or 75 mg clopidogrel alone, or a combination of cilostazol 100 mg twice daily with aspirin or clopidogrel. They conducted their open-label, parallel-group trial at 292 sites in Japan from December 2013 through March 2017.
To be considered at high risk, participants had to meet one or more of the following criteria: 50% or greater stenosis of a major intracranial artery, 50% or greater stenosis of an extracranial artery, and two or more vascular risk factors. The trial’s primary efficacy outcome was the first recurrence of ischemic stroke. Safety outcomes included severe or life-threatening bleeding.
The investigators ended the trial early because of a delay in recruiting patients. They enrolled 1,884 and randomized 1,879 of an anticipated 4,000 patients. At randomization, 41% in the dual-therapy group received aspirin and 59% clopidogrel, and in the monotherapy group, 40% received aspirin and 60% clopidogrel. Baseline characteristics were similar between the treatment groups. The population’s mean age was 70. Approximately 30% of patients were women.
During a median follow-up period of 17 months, ischemic stroke recurred in 29 of 932 patients receiving dual therapy including cilostazol for an annual rate of 2.2% and in 64 of 947 patients receiving monotherapy for an annual rate of 4.5% (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.31-0.76; P = .001). Severe or life-threatening bleeding occurred in 8 patients (0.6% per year) receiving dual therapy and 13 patients (0.9% per year) receiving monotherapy (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.27-1.60; P = .354).
The study was funded by Otsuka Pharmaceutical, which manufactures cilostazol. Dr. Toyoda reported receiving support from Bayer Yakuhin, Daiichi Sankyo, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim.
SOURCE: Toyoda K et al. ISC 2019, Abstract LB3.
REPORTING FROM ISC
Key clinical point: Treating patients at high risk of recurrent stroke with cilostazol and aspirin or clopidogrel reduced the risk of recurrent stroke more than either aspirin or clopidogrel alone and was just as safe.
Major finding: Dual therapy with cilostazol and aspirin or clopidogrel reduced the risk of recurrent stroke by approximately half, compared with aspirin or clopidogrel alone.
Study details: A multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group trial including 1,879 patients at high risk of recurrent stroke.
Disclosures: Otsuka Pharmaceutical funded the study. The presenter reported receiving support from Bayer Yakuhin, Daiichi Sankyo, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim.
Source: Toyoda K et al. ISC 2019, Abstract LB3.
Researchers compare focused ultrasound and DBS for essential tremor
LAS VEGAS – according to two presentations delivered at the annual meeting of the North American Neuromodulation Society. The techniques’ surgical procedures, associated risks, and adverse event profiles may influence neurologists and patients in their choice of treatment.
FUS allows neurosurgeons to apply thermal ablation to create a lesion on the thalamus. MRI guidance enables precise control of the lesion location (within approximately 1 mm) and of the treatment intensity. The surgery can be performed with high-resolution stereotactic framing.
DBS entails the surgical implantation of a neurostimulator and attached leads and electrodes. The neurosurgeon drills a hole of approximately 14 mm in diameter into the skull so that the electrode can be inserted stereotactically while the patient is awake or asleep. The neurostimulator is installed separately.
Both treatments provide functional benefits
In 2016, W. Jeff Elias, MD, director of stereotactic and functional neurosurgery at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, and his colleagues published the results of a randomized controlled trial that compared FUS with sham treatment in 76 patients with essential tremor. At three months, hand tremor had improved by approximately 50% among treated patients, but controls had no significant benefit(N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 25;375[8]:730-9). The improvement among treated patients was maintained for 12 months. Disability and quality of life also improved after FUS.
A study by Schuurman et al. published in 2000 (N Engl J Med. 2000 Feb 17;342[7]:461-8) showed that DBS and FUS had similar efficacy at 1 year, said Kathryn L. Holloway, MD, professor of neurosurgery at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond. It included 45 patients with Parkinson’s disease, 13 with essential tremor, and 10 with multiple sclerosis who were randomized 1:1 to FUS or DBS. The primary outcome was activities of daily living, and blinded physicians assessed patient videos. Most of the patients who improved had received DBS, and most of the ones who worsened had received FUS, said Dr. Holloway. Among patients with essential tremor, tremor improved by between 94% and 100% with either treatment.
To find more recent data about these treatments, Dr. Holloway searched the literature for studies of FUS or DBS for essential tremor. She analyzed only studies that included unselected populations, blinded evaluations within 1 or 2 years of surgery, and tremor scores for the treated side. She found two studies of FUS, including Dr. Elias’s 2016 trial and a 2018 follow-up (Ann Neurol. 2018 Jan;83[1]:107-14). Dr. Holloway also identified three trials of DBS.
In these studies, reduction of hand tremor was 55% with FUS and between 63% and 69% with DBS. Reduction of postural tremor was approximately 72% with FUS and approximately 67% with DBS. Reduction of action tremor was about 52% with FUS and between 65% and 71% with DBS. Overall, DBS appears to be more effective, said Dr. Holloway.
A 2015 study (Mov Disord. 2015 Dec;30[14]:1937-43) that compared bilateral DBS, unilateral DBS, and unilateral FUS for essential tremor indicated that the treatments provide similar benefits on hand tremor, disability, and quality of life, said Dr. Elias. FUS is inferior to DBS, however, for total tremor and axial tremor.
Furthermore, the efficacy of FUS wanes over time, said Dr. Elias. He and his colleagues conducted a pilot study of 15 patients with essential tremor who received FUS (N Engl J Med. 2013 Aug 15;369[7]:640-8). At 6 years, 6 of 13 patients whose data were available still had a 50% improvement in tremor. “Some went on to [receive] DBS,” said Dr. Elias. “Functional improvements persisted more than the tremor improvement.”
Adverse events
In their 2016 trial of FUS, Dr. Elias and his colleagues observed 210 adverse events, which is approximately “what you would expect with a modern day, FDA-monitored clinical trial.” Sensory effects and gait disturbance accounted for most of the thalamotomy-related adverse events. Sensory problems such as numbness or parestheisa persisted at 1 year in 14% of treated patients, and gait disturbance persisted at 1 year in 9%. The investigators did not observe any hemorrhages, infections, or cavitation-related effects from FUS.
In a 2018 analysis of five clinical trials of FUS for essential tremor, Fishman et al. found that 79% of adverse events were mild and 1% were severe (Mov Disord. 2018 May;33[5]:843-7). The risk of a severe adverse event therefore can be considered low, and it may decrease as neurosurgeons gain experience with the procedure, said Dr. Elias.
In the 2000 Schuurman et al. study, the researchers observed significantly fewer adverse events overall among patients with Parkinson’s disease or essential tremor who received DBS, compared with patients who received FUS. Cognitive deterioration, severe dysarthria, and severe ataxia were more common in the FUS group than in the DBS group. Dr. Holloway’s analysis of adverse events in the five more recent trials that she identified yielded similar results.
Although MRI-guided FUS is a precise way to make lesions, functional areas in the thalamus overlap, which makes it more difficult to target only the intended region, said Dr. Holloway. The functional overlap thus increases the risk of adverse events (e.g., sensory impairments, dysarthria, or ataxia). The adverse events that result from FUS may last as long as a year. “Patients will put up anything for about a month after surgery, and then they start to get annoyed,” said Dr. Holloway.
In addition, Schuurman et al. found that FUS entailed a greater risk of permanent side effects, compared with DBS. “That’s the key point here,” said Dr. Holloway. Most of the adverse effects in the DBS group were resolved by adjusting or turning off the stimulator. Hardware issues resulting from DBS are frustrating, but reversible, but a patient with an adverse event after FUS often is “stuck with it,” said Dr. Holloway. The Schuurman et al. data indicated that, in terms of adverse events, “thalamotomy was inferior to DBS,” she added.
Implantation of DBS entails the risks inherent to surgeries that open the skull (such as seizures, air embolism, and hemorrhage). DBS entails a 2% risk of hemorrhage or infection, said Dr. Elias. Furthermore, as much as 15% of patients who undergo DBS implantation require additional surgery.
“FUS is not going to cause a life-threatening hemorrhage, but DBS certainly can,” said Dr. Holloway.
Managing disease progression
Essential tremor is a progressive disease, and older patients are more likely to have exponential progression than linear progression. Data, such as those published by Zhang et al. (J Neurosurg. 2010 Jun;112[6]:1271-6), indicate that DBS can “keep up with the progression of the disease,” said Dr. Holloway. The authors found that tremor scores did not change significantly over approximately 5 years when patients with essential tremor who had received DBS implantation had periodic assessments and increases in stimulation parameters when appropriate.
If a patient with essential tremor undergoes FUS thalamotomy and has subsequent disease progression, DBS may be considered for reducing tremor, said Dr. Holloway. Most adverse events resulting from DBS implantation are reversible with adjustment of the stimulation parameters. A second thalamotomy, however, could cause severe dysarthria and other irreversible adverse events. “Only DBS can safely address tremor progression,” said Dr. Holloway.
LAS VEGAS – according to two presentations delivered at the annual meeting of the North American Neuromodulation Society. The techniques’ surgical procedures, associated risks, and adverse event profiles may influence neurologists and patients in their choice of treatment.
FUS allows neurosurgeons to apply thermal ablation to create a lesion on the thalamus. MRI guidance enables precise control of the lesion location (within approximately 1 mm) and of the treatment intensity. The surgery can be performed with high-resolution stereotactic framing.
DBS entails the surgical implantation of a neurostimulator and attached leads and electrodes. The neurosurgeon drills a hole of approximately 14 mm in diameter into the skull so that the electrode can be inserted stereotactically while the patient is awake or asleep. The neurostimulator is installed separately.
Both treatments provide functional benefits
In 2016, W. Jeff Elias, MD, director of stereotactic and functional neurosurgery at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, and his colleagues published the results of a randomized controlled trial that compared FUS with sham treatment in 76 patients with essential tremor. At three months, hand tremor had improved by approximately 50% among treated patients, but controls had no significant benefit(N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 25;375[8]:730-9). The improvement among treated patients was maintained for 12 months. Disability and quality of life also improved after FUS.
A study by Schuurman et al. published in 2000 (N Engl J Med. 2000 Feb 17;342[7]:461-8) showed that DBS and FUS had similar efficacy at 1 year, said Kathryn L. Holloway, MD, professor of neurosurgery at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond. It included 45 patients with Parkinson’s disease, 13 with essential tremor, and 10 with multiple sclerosis who were randomized 1:1 to FUS or DBS. The primary outcome was activities of daily living, and blinded physicians assessed patient videos. Most of the patients who improved had received DBS, and most of the ones who worsened had received FUS, said Dr. Holloway. Among patients with essential tremor, tremor improved by between 94% and 100% with either treatment.
To find more recent data about these treatments, Dr. Holloway searched the literature for studies of FUS or DBS for essential tremor. She analyzed only studies that included unselected populations, blinded evaluations within 1 or 2 years of surgery, and tremor scores for the treated side. She found two studies of FUS, including Dr. Elias’s 2016 trial and a 2018 follow-up (Ann Neurol. 2018 Jan;83[1]:107-14). Dr. Holloway also identified three trials of DBS.
In these studies, reduction of hand tremor was 55% with FUS and between 63% and 69% with DBS. Reduction of postural tremor was approximately 72% with FUS and approximately 67% with DBS. Reduction of action tremor was about 52% with FUS and between 65% and 71% with DBS. Overall, DBS appears to be more effective, said Dr. Holloway.
A 2015 study (Mov Disord. 2015 Dec;30[14]:1937-43) that compared bilateral DBS, unilateral DBS, and unilateral FUS for essential tremor indicated that the treatments provide similar benefits on hand tremor, disability, and quality of life, said Dr. Elias. FUS is inferior to DBS, however, for total tremor and axial tremor.
Furthermore, the efficacy of FUS wanes over time, said Dr. Elias. He and his colleagues conducted a pilot study of 15 patients with essential tremor who received FUS (N Engl J Med. 2013 Aug 15;369[7]:640-8). At 6 years, 6 of 13 patients whose data were available still had a 50% improvement in tremor. “Some went on to [receive] DBS,” said Dr. Elias. “Functional improvements persisted more than the tremor improvement.”
Adverse events
In their 2016 trial of FUS, Dr. Elias and his colleagues observed 210 adverse events, which is approximately “what you would expect with a modern day, FDA-monitored clinical trial.” Sensory effects and gait disturbance accounted for most of the thalamotomy-related adverse events. Sensory problems such as numbness or parestheisa persisted at 1 year in 14% of treated patients, and gait disturbance persisted at 1 year in 9%. The investigators did not observe any hemorrhages, infections, or cavitation-related effects from FUS.
In a 2018 analysis of five clinical trials of FUS for essential tremor, Fishman et al. found that 79% of adverse events were mild and 1% were severe (Mov Disord. 2018 May;33[5]:843-7). The risk of a severe adverse event therefore can be considered low, and it may decrease as neurosurgeons gain experience with the procedure, said Dr. Elias.
In the 2000 Schuurman et al. study, the researchers observed significantly fewer adverse events overall among patients with Parkinson’s disease or essential tremor who received DBS, compared with patients who received FUS. Cognitive deterioration, severe dysarthria, and severe ataxia were more common in the FUS group than in the DBS group. Dr. Holloway’s analysis of adverse events in the five more recent trials that she identified yielded similar results.
Although MRI-guided FUS is a precise way to make lesions, functional areas in the thalamus overlap, which makes it more difficult to target only the intended region, said Dr. Holloway. The functional overlap thus increases the risk of adverse events (e.g., sensory impairments, dysarthria, or ataxia). The adverse events that result from FUS may last as long as a year. “Patients will put up anything for about a month after surgery, and then they start to get annoyed,” said Dr. Holloway.
In addition, Schuurman et al. found that FUS entailed a greater risk of permanent side effects, compared with DBS. “That’s the key point here,” said Dr. Holloway. Most of the adverse effects in the DBS group were resolved by adjusting or turning off the stimulator. Hardware issues resulting from DBS are frustrating, but reversible, but a patient with an adverse event after FUS often is “stuck with it,” said Dr. Holloway. The Schuurman et al. data indicated that, in terms of adverse events, “thalamotomy was inferior to DBS,” she added.
Implantation of DBS entails the risks inherent to surgeries that open the skull (such as seizures, air embolism, and hemorrhage). DBS entails a 2% risk of hemorrhage or infection, said Dr. Elias. Furthermore, as much as 15% of patients who undergo DBS implantation require additional surgery.
“FUS is not going to cause a life-threatening hemorrhage, but DBS certainly can,” said Dr. Holloway.
Managing disease progression
Essential tremor is a progressive disease, and older patients are more likely to have exponential progression than linear progression. Data, such as those published by Zhang et al. (J Neurosurg. 2010 Jun;112[6]:1271-6), indicate that DBS can “keep up with the progression of the disease,” said Dr. Holloway. The authors found that tremor scores did not change significantly over approximately 5 years when patients with essential tremor who had received DBS implantation had periodic assessments and increases in stimulation parameters when appropriate.
If a patient with essential tremor undergoes FUS thalamotomy and has subsequent disease progression, DBS may be considered for reducing tremor, said Dr. Holloway. Most adverse events resulting from DBS implantation are reversible with adjustment of the stimulation parameters. A second thalamotomy, however, could cause severe dysarthria and other irreversible adverse events. “Only DBS can safely address tremor progression,” said Dr. Holloway.
LAS VEGAS – according to two presentations delivered at the annual meeting of the North American Neuromodulation Society. The techniques’ surgical procedures, associated risks, and adverse event profiles may influence neurologists and patients in their choice of treatment.
FUS allows neurosurgeons to apply thermal ablation to create a lesion on the thalamus. MRI guidance enables precise control of the lesion location (within approximately 1 mm) and of the treatment intensity. The surgery can be performed with high-resolution stereotactic framing.
DBS entails the surgical implantation of a neurostimulator and attached leads and electrodes. The neurosurgeon drills a hole of approximately 14 mm in diameter into the skull so that the electrode can be inserted stereotactically while the patient is awake or asleep. The neurostimulator is installed separately.
Both treatments provide functional benefits
In 2016, W. Jeff Elias, MD, director of stereotactic and functional neurosurgery at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, and his colleagues published the results of a randomized controlled trial that compared FUS with sham treatment in 76 patients with essential tremor. At three months, hand tremor had improved by approximately 50% among treated patients, but controls had no significant benefit(N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 25;375[8]:730-9). The improvement among treated patients was maintained for 12 months. Disability and quality of life also improved after FUS.
A study by Schuurman et al. published in 2000 (N Engl J Med. 2000 Feb 17;342[7]:461-8) showed that DBS and FUS had similar efficacy at 1 year, said Kathryn L. Holloway, MD, professor of neurosurgery at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond. It included 45 patients with Parkinson’s disease, 13 with essential tremor, and 10 with multiple sclerosis who were randomized 1:1 to FUS or DBS. The primary outcome was activities of daily living, and blinded physicians assessed patient videos. Most of the patients who improved had received DBS, and most of the ones who worsened had received FUS, said Dr. Holloway. Among patients with essential tremor, tremor improved by between 94% and 100% with either treatment.
To find more recent data about these treatments, Dr. Holloway searched the literature for studies of FUS or DBS for essential tremor. She analyzed only studies that included unselected populations, blinded evaluations within 1 or 2 years of surgery, and tremor scores for the treated side. She found two studies of FUS, including Dr. Elias’s 2016 trial and a 2018 follow-up (Ann Neurol. 2018 Jan;83[1]:107-14). Dr. Holloway also identified three trials of DBS.
In these studies, reduction of hand tremor was 55% with FUS and between 63% and 69% with DBS. Reduction of postural tremor was approximately 72% with FUS and approximately 67% with DBS. Reduction of action tremor was about 52% with FUS and between 65% and 71% with DBS. Overall, DBS appears to be more effective, said Dr. Holloway.
A 2015 study (Mov Disord. 2015 Dec;30[14]:1937-43) that compared bilateral DBS, unilateral DBS, and unilateral FUS for essential tremor indicated that the treatments provide similar benefits on hand tremor, disability, and quality of life, said Dr. Elias. FUS is inferior to DBS, however, for total tremor and axial tremor.
Furthermore, the efficacy of FUS wanes over time, said Dr. Elias. He and his colleagues conducted a pilot study of 15 patients with essential tremor who received FUS (N Engl J Med. 2013 Aug 15;369[7]:640-8). At 6 years, 6 of 13 patients whose data were available still had a 50% improvement in tremor. “Some went on to [receive] DBS,” said Dr. Elias. “Functional improvements persisted more than the tremor improvement.”
Adverse events
In their 2016 trial of FUS, Dr. Elias and his colleagues observed 210 adverse events, which is approximately “what you would expect with a modern day, FDA-monitored clinical trial.” Sensory effects and gait disturbance accounted for most of the thalamotomy-related adverse events. Sensory problems such as numbness or parestheisa persisted at 1 year in 14% of treated patients, and gait disturbance persisted at 1 year in 9%. The investigators did not observe any hemorrhages, infections, or cavitation-related effects from FUS.
In a 2018 analysis of five clinical trials of FUS for essential tremor, Fishman et al. found that 79% of adverse events were mild and 1% were severe (Mov Disord. 2018 May;33[5]:843-7). The risk of a severe adverse event therefore can be considered low, and it may decrease as neurosurgeons gain experience with the procedure, said Dr. Elias.
In the 2000 Schuurman et al. study, the researchers observed significantly fewer adverse events overall among patients with Parkinson’s disease or essential tremor who received DBS, compared with patients who received FUS. Cognitive deterioration, severe dysarthria, and severe ataxia were more common in the FUS group than in the DBS group. Dr. Holloway’s analysis of adverse events in the five more recent trials that she identified yielded similar results.
Although MRI-guided FUS is a precise way to make lesions, functional areas in the thalamus overlap, which makes it more difficult to target only the intended region, said Dr. Holloway. The functional overlap thus increases the risk of adverse events (e.g., sensory impairments, dysarthria, or ataxia). The adverse events that result from FUS may last as long as a year. “Patients will put up anything for about a month after surgery, and then they start to get annoyed,” said Dr. Holloway.
In addition, Schuurman et al. found that FUS entailed a greater risk of permanent side effects, compared with DBS. “That’s the key point here,” said Dr. Holloway. Most of the adverse effects in the DBS group were resolved by adjusting or turning off the stimulator. Hardware issues resulting from DBS are frustrating, but reversible, but a patient with an adverse event after FUS often is “stuck with it,” said Dr. Holloway. The Schuurman et al. data indicated that, in terms of adverse events, “thalamotomy was inferior to DBS,” she added.
Implantation of DBS entails the risks inherent to surgeries that open the skull (such as seizures, air embolism, and hemorrhage). DBS entails a 2% risk of hemorrhage or infection, said Dr. Elias. Furthermore, as much as 15% of patients who undergo DBS implantation require additional surgery.
“FUS is not going to cause a life-threatening hemorrhage, but DBS certainly can,” said Dr. Holloway.
Managing disease progression
Essential tremor is a progressive disease, and older patients are more likely to have exponential progression than linear progression. Data, such as those published by Zhang et al. (J Neurosurg. 2010 Jun;112[6]:1271-6), indicate that DBS can “keep up with the progression of the disease,” said Dr. Holloway. The authors found that tremor scores did not change significantly over approximately 5 years when patients with essential tremor who had received DBS implantation had periodic assessments and increases in stimulation parameters when appropriate.
If a patient with essential tremor undergoes FUS thalamotomy and has subsequent disease progression, DBS may be considered for reducing tremor, said Dr. Holloway. Most adverse events resulting from DBS implantation are reversible with adjustment of the stimulation parameters. A second thalamotomy, however, could cause severe dysarthria and other irreversible adverse events. “Only DBS can safely address tremor progression,” said Dr. Holloway.
REPORTING FROM NANS 2019
DBS may improve nonmotor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease
LAS VEGAS – , according to a small study presented at the annual meeting of the North American Neuromodulation Society. DBS of the subthalamic nucleus (STN), however, does not significantly improve these symptoms.
“Further work will be needed to confirm whether DBS needs to be bilateral ... and whether demographic differences are significant,” said Michael Gillogly, RN, clinical research nurse in the department of neurosurgery at Albany (New York) Medical Center. “The pilot data suggest that, if all else is equal, and the patient has significant urinary dysfunction as a major complaint, GPI DBS may be preferentially considered.”
The benefits of DBS on motor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease are well documented in the literature, but the technique’s effects on nonmotor symptoms are less clear. Nonmotor symptoms – such as cognitive deficits, gastrointestinal dysfunction, genitourinary dysfunction, and sleep disturbance – are common in all stages of Parkinson’s disease and significantly impair quality of life. Data indicate that speech and neuropsychological symptoms worsen with DBS of the STN, but research into the effect of DBS of the GPI on nonmotor symptoms is limited.
Mr. Gillogly and his colleagues considered all surgical candidates at their facility for enrollment into a study evaluating nonmotor outcomes in Parkinson’s disease at baseline, before implantation, and at 6 months after DBS. Study outcomes were patient perception of urinary, swallowing, and gastrointestinal function at 6 months after DBS of the GPI, compared with DBS of the STN.
The researchers chose two tools each to measure sialorrhea, dysphagia, and genitourinary dysfunction. These tools included the Drooling Severity and Frequency Scale (DSFS), the Swallowing Disturbance Questionnaire, and the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). The investigators also collected demographic information, including sex, age at the time of surgery, duration of illness, neuropsychological profile, and medication inventory.
In all, 34 patients (12 women) were enrolled in the study and completed each outcome measure preoperatively and at 6 months postoperatively. The mean age of our subjects at the time of surgery was 64 years. Eight received DBS of the GPI, and 26 received DBS of the STN. Mr. Gillogly and his colleagues observed a significant 31% improvement in DSFS score and a significant 24% improvement on the IPSS among GPI-targeted patients. They found no significant improvements among patients who had STN targeting. When the investigators compared patients with unilateral lead placement and those with bilateral lead placement, they observed that all of the significant improvement among patients with GPI targeting occurred when treatment was bilateral.
The small sample size is a notable limitation of the study, and subset analyses were limited, said Mr. Gillogly. In addition, it was difficult to determine whether the symptoms studied were directly related to Parkinson’s disease, because they often arise as part of the natural aging process. “Other limitations of the study include lack of objective measurements, as these are all patient perception, and the innate limitations of self-reported questionnaires,” said Mr. Gillogly.
Two of the researchers reported having consulted for Medtronic, which markets a DBS system. One author received grant funding and consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Abbott, all of which make DBS devices.
LAS VEGAS – , according to a small study presented at the annual meeting of the North American Neuromodulation Society. DBS of the subthalamic nucleus (STN), however, does not significantly improve these symptoms.
“Further work will be needed to confirm whether DBS needs to be bilateral ... and whether demographic differences are significant,” said Michael Gillogly, RN, clinical research nurse in the department of neurosurgery at Albany (New York) Medical Center. “The pilot data suggest that, if all else is equal, and the patient has significant urinary dysfunction as a major complaint, GPI DBS may be preferentially considered.”
The benefits of DBS on motor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease are well documented in the literature, but the technique’s effects on nonmotor symptoms are less clear. Nonmotor symptoms – such as cognitive deficits, gastrointestinal dysfunction, genitourinary dysfunction, and sleep disturbance – are common in all stages of Parkinson’s disease and significantly impair quality of life. Data indicate that speech and neuropsychological symptoms worsen with DBS of the STN, but research into the effect of DBS of the GPI on nonmotor symptoms is limited.
Mr. Gillogly and his colleagues considered all surgical candidates at their facility for enrollment into a study evaluating nonmotor outcomes in Parkinson’s disease at baseline, before implantation, and at 6 months after DBS. Study outcomes were patient perception of urinary, swallowing, and gastrointestinal function at 6 months after DBS of the GPI, compared with DBS of the STN.
The researchers chose two tools each to measure sialorrhea, dysphagia, and genitourinary dysfunction. These tools included the Drooling Severity and Frequency Scale (DSFS), the Swallowing Disturbance Questionnaire, and the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). The investigators also collected demographic information, including sex, age at the time of surgery, duration of illness, neuropsychological profile, and medication inventory.
In all, 34 patients (12 women) were enrolled in the study and completed each outcome measure preoperatively and at 6 months postoperatively. The mean age of our subjects at the time of surgery was 64 years. Eight received DBS of the GPI, and 26 received DBS of the STN. Mr. Gillogly and his colleagues observed a significant 31% improvement in DSFS score and a significant 24% improvement on the IPSS among GPI-targeted patients. They found no significant improvements among patients who had STN targeting. When the investigators compared patients with unilateral lead placement and those with bilateral lead placement, they observed that all of the significant improvement among patients with GPI targeting occurred when treatment was bilateral.
The small sample size is a notable limitation of the study, and subset analyses were limited, said Mr. Gillogly. In addition, it was difficult to determine whether the symptoms studied were directly related to Parkinson’s disease, because they often arise as part of the natural aging process. “Other limitations of the study include lack of objective measurements, as these are all patient perception, and the innate limitations of self-reported questionnaires,” said Mr. Gillogly.
Two of the researchers reported having consulted for Medtronic, which markets a DBS system. One author received grant funding and consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Abbott, all of which make DBS devices.
LAS VEGAS – , according to a small study presented at the annual meeting of the North American Neuromodulation Society. DBS of the subthalamic nucleus (STN), however, does not significantly improve these symptoms.
“Further work will be needed to confirm whether DBS needs to be bilateral ... and whether demographic differences are significant,” said Michael Gillogly, RN, clinical research nurse in the department of neurosurgery at Albany (New York) Medical Center. “The pilot data suggest that, if all else is equal, and the patient has significant urinary dysfunction as a major complaint, GPI DBS may be preferentially considered.”
The benefits of DBS on motor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease are well documented in the literature, but the technique’s effects on nonmotor symptoms are less clear. Nonmotor symptoms – such as cognitive deficits, gastrointestinal dysfunction, genitourinary dysfunction, and sleep disturbance – are common in all stages of Parkinson’s disease and significantly impair quality of life. Data indicate that speech and neuropsychological symptoms worsen with DBS of the STN, but research into the effect of DBS of the GPI on nonmotor symptoms is limited.
Mr. Gillogly and his colleagues considered all surgical candidates at their facility for enrollment into a study evaluating nonmotor outcomes in Parkinson’s disease at baseline, before implantation, and at 6 months after DBS. Study outcomes were patient perception of urinary, swallowing, and gastrointestinal function at 6 months after DBS of the GPI, compared with DBS of the STN.
The researchers chose two tools each to measure sialorrhea, dysphagia, and genitourinary dysfunction. These tools included the Drooling Severity and Frequency Scale (DSFS), the Swallowing Disturbance Questionnaire, and the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS). The investigators also collected demographic information, including sex, age at the time of surgery, duration of illness, neuropsychological profile, and medication inventory.
In all, 34 patients (12 women) were enrolled in the study and completed each outcome measure preoperatively and at 6 months postoperatively. The mean age of our subjects at the time of surgery was 64 years. Eight received DBS of the GPI, and 26 received DBS of the STN. Mr. Gillogly and his colleagues observed a significant 31% improvement in DSFS score and a significant 24% improvement on the IPSS among GPI-targeted patients. They found no significant improvements among patients who had STN targeting. When the investigators compared patients with unilateral lead placement and those with bilateral lead placement, they observed that all of the significant improvement among patients with GPI targeting occurred when treatment was bilateral.
The small sample size is a notable limitation of the study, and subset analyses were limited, said Mr. Gillogly. In addition, it was difficult to determine whether the symptoms studied were directly related to Parkinson’s disease, because they often arise as part of the natural aging process. “Other limitations of the study include lack of objective measurements, as these are all patient perception, and the innate limitations of self-reported questionnaires,” said Mr. Gillogly.
Two of the researchers reported having consulted for Medtronic, which markets a DBS system. One author received grant funding and consulting fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Abbott, all of which make DBS devices.
REPORTING FROM NANS 2019
Key clinical point: Bilateral stimulation of the globus pallidus internus reduces sialorrhea and improves genitourinary symptoms.
Major finding: Patients reported 31% improvement in sialorrhea and 24% improvement in urinary function.
Study details: A prospective study of 34 patients receiving DBS of the STN or GPI.
Disclosures: No funding was reported.
Peripheral nerve stimulation reduces hand tremor
LAS VEGAS – In addition, sensors worn on the wrist can provide objective measures of tremor in the home environment, said the investigators, who presented their research at the annual meeting of the North American Neuromodulation Society.
The current hypothesis is that tremulous activity within a central tremor network causes essential tremor, but the specific mechanisms are unknown. Research suggests that invasive neuromodulation of deep brain structures within this tremor network provides clinical benefit. The question of whether noninvasive neuromodulation of the peripheral nerve inputs connected to this network is beneficial has received comparatively little attention, however.
Rajesh Pahwa, MD, movement disorders division chief at the University of Kansas Medical Center in Kansas City, and his colleagues examined the safety and efficacy of noninvasive neuromodulation for hand tremor in patients with essential tremor. To provide treatment, they used a wristband with three electrodes that targeted the median and radial nerves. The stimulation pattern was adjusted to interrupt each patient’s tremulous signal in the clinical setting and at home. Participants were asked to hold a certain posture for 20 seconds while the device recorded tremor frequency. After determining the peak tremor frequency, the device was able to adapt stimulation parameters to each patient.
Dr. Pahwa and his colleagues conducted an acute in-office study and an at-home study. In the in-office study, 77 participants were randomized to peripheral nerve treatment or sham stimulation of the tremor-dominant hand. The researchers evaluated tremor before and after one stimulation session using the Essential Tremor Rating Assessment Scale (TETRAS) Upper Limb Tremor Scale and the TETRAS Archimedes Spiral Rating Scale. In the at-home study, 61 participants were randomized to stimulation, sham, or standard of care for 2 weeks. After that point, all participants underwent two to five 40-minute stimulation sessions daily for 2 weeks. Patients in the treatment and sham groups had at least two sessions per day.
In the in-office study, the researchers randomized 40 patients to stimulation and 37 patients to sham. Dr. Pahwa and his colleagues determined that participants had been blinded successfully. The investigators observed a mean improvement in forward posture of approximately 0.75 points among treated patients, compared with a mean improvement of 0.3 points in the sham group. The difference between groups was statistically significant. Treated patients had significant improvements in upper limb tremor score and total performance score, compared with the sham group. The investigators also observed greater mean improvements in spiral drawing, lateral posture, and movement among treated patients, compared with the sham group, but the differences were not statistically significant.
Participants in the in-office study rated their improvement on activities of daily living. Average improvement across tasks was significantly greater for the treated group, compared to the sham group. Improvement on each individual task also was greater for the treated group than the sham group. The differences in improvement were significant for holding a cup of tea, dialing a telephone, picking up change, and unlocking a door with a key.
In the at-home study, the decrease in tremor amplitude, as measured by the wrist-worn device, was significantly greater among participants who received stimulation than in the sham group. “These randomized, controlled studies suggest that noninvasive peripheral neuromodulation may offer meaningful symptomatic relief from hand tremor in essential tremor with a favorable safety profile, compared to other available therapies,” noted Dr. Pahwa and his colleagues. “At-home monitoring may provide key insights into evaluating and treating tremor,” they added.
The studies were supported by Cala Health.
LAS VEGAS – In addition, sensors worn on the wrist can provide objective measures of tremor in the home environment, said the investigators, who presented their research at the annual meeting of the North American Neuromodulation Society.
The current hypothesis is that tremulous activity within a central tremor network causes essential tremor, but the specific mechanisms are unknown. Research suggests that invasive neuromodulation of deep brain structures within this tremor network provides clinical benefit. The question of whether noninvasive neuromodulation of the peripheral nerve inputs connected to this network is beneficial has received comparatively little attention, however.
Rajesh Pahwa, MD, movement disorders division chief at the University of Kansas Medical Center in Kansas City, and his colleagues examined the safety and efficacy of noninvasive neuromodulation for hand tremor in patients with essential tremor. To provide treatment, they used a wristband with three electrodes that targeted the median and radial nerves. The stimulation pattern was adjusted to interrupt each patient’s tremulous signal in the clinical setting and at home. Participants were asked to hold a certain posture for 20 seconds while the device recorded tremor frequency. After determining the peak tremor frequency, the device was able to adapt stimulation parameters to each patient.
Dr. Pahwa and his colleagues conducted an acute in-office study and an at-home study. In the in-office study, 77 participants were randomized to peripheral nerve treatment or sham stimulation of the tremor-dominant hand. The researchers evaluated tremor before and after one stimulation session using the Essential Tremor Rating Assessment Scale (TETRAS) Upper Limb Tremor Scale and the TETRAS Archimedes Spiral Rating Scale. In the at-home study, 61 participants were randomized to stimulation, sham, or standard of care for 2 weeks. After that point, all participants underwent two to five 40-minute stimulation sessions daily for 2 weeks. Patients in the treatment and sham groups had at least two sessions per day.
In the in-office study, the researchers randomized 40 patients to stimulation and 37 patients to sham. Dr. Pahwa and his colleagues determined that participants had been blinded successfully. The investigators observed a mean improvement in forward posture of approximately 0.75 points among treated patients, compared with a mean improvement of 0.3 points in the sham group. The difference between groups was statistically significant. Treated patients had significant improvements in upper limb tremor score and total performance score, compared with the sham group. The investigators also observed greater mean improvements in spiral drawing, lateral posture, and movement among treated patients, compared with the sham group, but the differences were not statistically significant.
Participants in the in-office study rated their improvement on activities of daily living. Average improvement across tasks was significantly greater for the treated group, compared to the sham group. Improvement on each individual task also was greater for the treated group than the sham group. The differences in improvement were significant for holding a cup of tea, dialing a telephone, picking up change, and unlocking a door with a key.
In the at-home study, the decrease in tremor amplitude, as measured by the wrist-worn device, was significantly greater among participants who received stimulation than in the sham group. “These randomized, controlled studies suggest that noninvasive peripheral neuromodulation may offer meaningful symptomatic relief from hand tremor in essential tremor with a favorable safety profile, compared to other available therapies,” noted Dr. Pahwa and his colleagues. “At-home monitoring may provide key insights into evaluating and treating tremor,” they added.
The studies were supported by Cala Health.
LAS VEGAS – In addition, sensors worn on the wrist can provide objective measures of tremor in the home environment, said the investigators, who presented their research at the annual meeting of the North American Neuromodulation Society.
The current hypothesis is that tremulous activity within a central tremor network causes essential tremor, but the specific mechanisms are unknown. Research suggests that invasive neuromodulation of deep brain structures within this tremor network provides clinical benefit. The question of whether noninvasive neuromodulation of the peripheral nerve inputs connected to this network is beneficial has received comparatively little attention, however.
Rajesh Pahwa, MD, movement disorders division chief at the University of Kansas Medical Center in Kansas City, and his colleagues examined the safety and efficacy of noninvasive neuromodulation for hand tremor in patients with essential tremor. To provide treatment, they used a wristband with three electrodes that targeted the median and radial nerves. The stimulation pattern was adjusted to interrupt each patient’s tremulous signal in the clinical setting and at home. Participants were asked to hold a certain posture for 20 seconds while the device recorded tremor frequency. After determining the peak tremor frequency, the device was able to adapt stimulation parameters to each patient.
Dr. Pahwa and his colleagues conducted an acute in-office study and an at-home study. In the in-office study, 77 participants were randomized to peripheral nerve treatment or sham stimulation of the tremor-dominant hand. The researchers evaluated tremor before and after one stimulation session using the Essential Tremor Rating Assessment Scale (TETRAS) Upper Limb Tremor Scale and the TETRAS Archimedes Spiral Rating Scale. In the at-home study, 61 participants were randomized to stimulation, sham, or standard of care for 2 weeks. After that point, all participants underwent two to five 40-minute stimulation sessions daily for 2 weeks. Patients in the treatment and sham groups had at least two sessions per day.
In the in-office study, the researchers randomized 40 patients to stimulation and 37 patients to sham. Dr. Pahwa and his colleagues determined that participants had been blinded successfully. The investigators observed a mean improvement in forward posture of approximately 0.75 points among treated patients, compared with a mean improvement of 0.3 points in the sham group. The difference between groups was statistically significant. Treated patients had significant improvements in upper limb tremor score and total performance score, compared with the sham group. The investigators also observed greater mean improvements in spiral drawing, lateral posture, and movement among treated patients, compared with the sham group, but the differences were not statistically significant.
Participants in the in-office study rated their improvement on activities of daily living. Average improvement across tasks was significantly greater for the treated group, compared to the sham group. Improvement on each individual task also was greater for the treated group than the sham group. The differences in improvement were significant for holding a cup of tea, dialing a telephone, picking up change, and unlocking a door with a key.
In the at-home study, the decrease in tremor amplitude, as measured by the wrist-worn device, was significantly greater among participants who received stimulation than in the sham group. “These randomized, controlled studies suggest that noninvasive peripheral neuromodulation may offer meaningful symptomatic relief from hand tremor in essential tremor with a favorable safety profile, compared to other available therapies,” noted Dr. Pahwa and his colleagues. “At-home monitoring may provide key insights into evaluating and treating tremor,” they added.
The studies were supported by Cala Health.
REPORTING FROM NANS 2019
Key clinical point: Two randomized trials indicate that peripheral nerve stimulation provides clinical benefits in essential tremor.
Major finding: Peripheral nerve stimulation reduced hand tremor and improved activities of daily living.
Study details: Two randomized, controlled studies including 138 patients with essential tremor and hand tremor.
Disclosures: Cala Health supported the studies.
Benefit of thrombectomy may be universal
The location of the arterial occlusive lesion and the imaging technique used to select patients for the procedure also do not influence the therapy’s benefits, the researchers said. Although the proportional benefit of thrombectomy plus medical management is uniform across subgroups, compared with medical management alone, patients may have different amounts of absolute benefit.
The results of the DEFUSE 3 (Endovascular Therapy Following Imaging Evaluation for Ischemic Stroke) trial, which were published in 2018, indicated that endovascular thrombectomy provided clinical benefits for patients with acute ischemic stroke if administered at 6-16 hours after stroke onset. As part of the trial’s prespecified analyses, Maarten G. Lansberg, MD, PhD, associate professor of neurology and neurological sciences at Stanford (Calif.) University Medical Center in California, and his colleagues sought to determine whether thrombectomy had uniform benefit among various patient subgroups (e.g., elderly people, patients with mild symptoms, and those who present late after onset).
A total of 296 patients were enrolled in the randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint DEFUSE 3 trial at 38 sites in the United States. Eligible participants had acute ischemic stroke resulting from an occlusion of the internal carotid artery or middle cerebral artery and evidence of salvageable tissue on perfusion CT or MRI. In all, 182 patients met these criteria and were randomized and included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The researchers stopped DEFUSE 3 early because of efficacy.
The study’s primary endpoint was functional outcome at day 90, as measured with the modified Rankin Scale. Dr. Lansberg and his colleagues performed multivariate ordinal logistic regression to calculate the adjusted proportional association between endovascular treatment and clinical outcome among participants of various ages, baseline stroke severities, periods between onset and treatment, locations of the arterial occlusion, and imaging modalities, such as CT or MRI, used to identify salvageable tissue.
The population’s median age was 70 years, and 51% of participants were women. The median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 16. When the researchers considered the whole sample, they found that younger age, lower baseline NIHSS score, and lower serum glucose level independently predicted better functional outcome. The common odds ratio for improved functional outcome with endovascular therapy, adjusted for these variables, was 3.1. Age, NIHSS score, time to randomization, imaging modality, and location of the arterial occlusion did not interact significantly with treatment effect.
“Our results indicate that advanced age, up to 90 years, should not be considered a contraindication to thrombectomy, provided that the patient is fully independent prior to stroke onset,” said the researchers. “Although age did not modify the treatment effect, it was a strong independent predictor of 90-day disability, which is consistent with prior studies of both tissue plasminogen activator and endovascular therapy.”
The trial’s small sample size may have allowed small differences between groups to pass unnoticed, said the reseachers. Other trials of late-window thrombectomy will be required to validate these results, they concluded.
The National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke supported the study through grants. Several investigators received consulting fees from and hold shares in iSchemaView, which manufactures the software that the investigators used for postprocessing of CT and MRI perfusion studies. Other authors received consulting fees from various pharmaceutical and medical device companies, including Genentech, Medtronic, Pfizer, and Stryker Neurovascular.
SOURCE: Lansberg MG et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 Jan 28. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2018.4587.
The location of the arterial occlusive lesion and the imaging technique used to select patients for the procedure also do not influence the therapy’s benefits, the researchers said. Although the proportional benefit of thrombectomy plus medical management is uniform across subgroups, compared with medical management alone, patients may have different amounts of absolute benefit.
The results of the DEFUSE 3 (Endovascular Therapy Following Imaging Evaluation for Ischemic Stroke) trial, which were published in 2018, indicated that endovascular thrombectomy provided clinical benefits for patients with acute ischemic stroke if administered at 6-16 hours after stroke onset. As part of the trial’s prespecified analyses, Maarten G. Lansberg, MD, PhD, associate professor of neurology and neurological sciences at Stanford (Calif.) University Medical Center in California, and his colleagues sought to determine whether thrombectomy had uniform benefit among various patient subgroups (e.g., elderly people, patients with mild symptoms, and those who present late after onset).
A total of 296 patients were enrolled in the randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint DEFUSE 3 trial at 38 sites in the United States. Eligible participants had acute ischemic stroke resulting from an occlusion of the internal carotid artery or middle cerebral artery and evidence of salvageable tissue on perfusion CT or MRI. In all, 182 patients met these criteria and were randomized and included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The researchers stopped DEFUSE 3 early because of efficacy.
The study’s primary endpoint was functional outcome at day 90, as measured with the modified Rankin Scale. Dr. Lansberg and his colleagues performed multivariate ordinal logistic regression to calculate the adjusted proportional association between endovascular treatment and clinical outcome among participants of various ages, baseline stroke severities, periods between onset and treatment, locations of the arterial occlusion, and imaging modalities, such as CT or MRI, used to identify salvageable tissue.
The population’s median age was 70 years, and 51% of participants were women. The median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 16. When the researchers considered the whole sample, they found that younger age, lower baseline NIHSS score, and lower serum glucose level independently predicted better functional outcome. The common odds ratio for improved functional outcome with endovascular therapy, adjusted for these variables, was 3.1. Age, NIHSS score, time to randomization, imaging modality, and location of the arterial occlusion did not interact significantly with treatment effect.
“Our results indicate that advanced age, up to 90 years, should not be considered a contraindication to thrombectomy, provided that the patient is fully independent prior to stroke onset,” said the researchers. “Although age did not modify the treatment effect, it was a strong independent predictor of 90-day disability, which is consistent with prior studies of both tissue plasminogen activator and endovascular therapy.”
The trial’s small sample size may have allowed small differences between groups to pass unnoticed, said the reseachers. Other trials of late-window thrombectomy will be required to validate these results, they concluded.
The National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke supported the study through grants. Several investigators received consulting fees from and hold shares in iSchemaView, which manufactures the software that the investigators used for postprocessing of CT and MRI perfusion studies. Other authors received consulting fees from various pharmaceutical and medical device companies, including Genentech, Medtronic, Pfizer, and Stryker Neurovascular.
SOURCE: Lansberg MG et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 Jan 28. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2018.4587.
The location of the arterial occlusive lesion and the imaging technique used to select patients for the procedure also do not influence the therapy’s benefits, the researchers said. Although the proportional benefit of thrombectomy plus medical management is uniform across subgroups, compared with medical management alone, patients may have different amounts of absolute benefit.
The results of the DEFUSE 3 (Endovascular Therapy Following Imaging Evaluation for Ischemic Stroke) trial, which were published in 2018, indicated that endovascular thrombectomy provided clinical benefits for patients with acute ischemic stroke if administered at 6-16 hours after stroke onset. As part of the trial’s prespecified analyses, Maarten G. Lansberg, MD, PhD, associate professor of neurology and neurological sciences at Stanford (Calif.) University Medical Center in California, and his colleagues sought to determine whether thrombectomy had uniform benefit among various patient subgroups (e.g., elderly people, patients with mild symptoms, and those who present late after onset).
A total of 296 patients were enrolled in the randomized, open-label, blinded-endpoint DEFUSE 3 trial at 38 sites in the United States. Eligible participants had acute ischemic stroke resulting from an occlusion of the internal carotid artery or middle cerebral artery and evidence of salvageable tissue on perfusion CT or MRI. In all, 182 patients met these criteria and were randomized and included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The researchers stopped DEFUSE 3 early because of efficacy.
The study’s primary endpoint was functional outcome at day 90, as measured with the modified Rankin Scale. Dr. Lansberg and his colleagues performed multivariate ordinal logistic regression to calculate the adjusted proportional association between endovascular treatment and clinical outcome among participants of various ages, baseline stroke severities, periods between onset and treatment, locations of the arterial occlusion, and imaging modalities, such as CT or MRI, used to identify salvageable tissue.
The population’s median age was 70 years, and 51% of participants were women. The median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 16. When the researchers considered the whole sample, they found that younger age, lower baseline NIHSS score, and lower serum glucose level independently predicted better functional outcome. The common odds ratio for improved functional outcome with endovascular therapy, adjusted for these variables, was 3.1. Age, NIHSS score, time to randomization, imaging modality, and location of the arterial occlusion did not interact significantly with treatment effect.
“Our results indicate that advanced age, up to 90 years, should not be considered a contraindication to thrombectomy, provided that the patient is fully independent prior to stroke onset,” said the researchers. “Although age did not modify the treatment effect, it was a strong independent predictor of 90-day disability, which is consistent with prior studies of both tissue plasminogen activator and endovascular therapy.”
The trial’s small sample size may have allowed small differences between groups to pass unnoticed, said the reseachers. Other trials of late-window thrombectomy will be required to validate these results, they concluded.
The National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke supported the study through grants. Several investigators received consulting fees from and hold shares in iSchemaView, which manufactures the software that the investigators used for postprocessing of CT and MRI perfusion studies. Other authors received consulting fees from various pharmaceutical and medical device companies, including Genentech, Medtronic, Pfizer, and Stryker Neurovascular.
SOURCE: Lansberg MG et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 Jan 28. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2018.4587.
FROM JAMA NEUROLOGY
Key clinical point: Age, symptom severity, and serum glucose do not influence the benefit of thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke.
Major finding: The adjusted common odds ratio for improved functional outcome with endovascular therapy was 3.1.
Study details: The randomized, open-label, blinded-end-point DEFUSE 3 trial included 182 patients.
Disclosures: The National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke funded the study through grants.
Source: Lansberg MG et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 Jan 28. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2018.4587.
DBS provides long-term benefits for patients with Parkinson’s disease
LAS VEGAS – , according to a large-scale collection of outcome data. The treatment improves motor function and quality of life and has an acceptable safety profile. The analysis was presented at the annual meeting of the North American Neuromodulation Society.
Research by Okun et al. in 2012 and Schuepbach et al. in 2013 demonstrated that DBS effectively reduces the motor complications of Parkinson’s disease. To monitor the treatment’s efficacy and safety on a large scale, investigators established a prospective registry of patients with levodopa-responsive Parkinson’s disease who underwent DBS implantation. An aim of the registry is to improve understanding of the clinical use and outcomes of DBS in this population. As many as 1,000 patients have been implanted with Vercise DBS systems at 70 international sites. These systems enable multiple independent current source control.
Participants presented for clinical visits at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years after surgery. Jan Vesper, MD, PhD, professor of neurosurgery at Heinrich Heine University in Düsseldorf, Germany, and his colleagues analyzed patient outcomes, including the Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39), Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS), Clinical Global Impression of Change (as assessed by the patient, caregiver, and clinician), and the Schwab and England (SE) scale. The researchers also reported adverse events.
As of November 2018, 403 participants had been enrolled in the registry, and 359 had undergone DBS implantation. At baseline, mean age was 59.6 years, and approximately 70% of participants were male. Mean disease duration was 10.4 years. Without medication, mean MDS-UPDRS III score was 44.8, and mean PDQ-39 Summary Index score was 28.8.
At 1 year, participants’ mean off-medication MDS-UPDRS III score was 29.7. This result represented a significant 34% improvement in motor performance.
PDQ-39 Summary Index score was improved by 6.7 points at 6 months, 4.7 points at 1 year, and 3.0 points at 2 years, which represented a sustained benefit for participants’ quality of life. Improvements in activities of daily living were sustained throughout the 2-year period. Cognition was improved at 6 months, but not at subsequent visits. Mobility, stigma, and bodily discomfort were improved at 6 months and 1 year, but not at 2 years. Furthermore, more than 80% of patients, caregivers, and clinicians observed improvements in Parkinson’s disease symptoms at all time points.
The investigators did not find any unanticipated adverse events. In all, 217 serious adverse events occurred in 121 participants. Of these events, 60 were related to stimulation. No lead fractures or breakages occurred.
“This registry represents the first large-scale collection of outcomes using a DBS system capable of multiple independent current source control,” said Dr. Vesper and colleagues.
The investigators did not report any conflicts of interest.
LAS VEGAS – , according to a large-scale collection of outcome data. The treatment improves motor function and quality of life and has an acceptable safety profile. The analysis was presented at the annual meeting of the North American Neuromodulation Society.
Research by Okun et al. in 2012 and Schuepbach et al. in 2013 demonstrated that DBS effectively reduces the motor complications of Parkinson’s disease. To monitor the treatment’s efficacy and safety on a large scale, investigators established a prospective registry of patients with levodopa-responsive Parkinson’s disease who underwent DBS implantation. An aim of the registry is to improve understanding of the clinical use and outcomes of DBS in this population. As many as 1,000 patients have been implanted with Vercise DBS systems at 70 international sites. These systems enable multiple independent current source control.
Participants presented for clinical visits at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years after surgery. Jan Vesper, MD, PhD, professor of neurosurgery at Heinrich Heine University in Düsseldorf, Germany, and his colleagues analyzed patient outcomes, including the Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39), Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS), Clinical Global Impression of Change (as assessed by the patient, caregiver, and clinician), and the Schwab and England (SE) scale. The researchers also reported adverse events.
As of November 2018, 403 participants had been enrolled in the registry, and 359 had undergone DBS implantation. At baseline, mean age was 59.6 years, and approximately 70% of participants were male. Mean disease duration was 10.4 years. Without medication, mean MDS-UPDRS III score was 44.8, and mean PDQ-39 Summary Index score was 28.8.
At 1 year, participants’ mean off-medication MDS-UPDRS III score was 29.7. This result represented a significant 34% improvement in motor performance.
PDQ-39 Summary Index score was improved by 6.7 points at 6 months, 4.7 points at 1 year, and 3.0 points at 2 years, which represented a sustained benefit for participants’ quality of life. Improvements in activities of daily living were sustained throughout the 2-year period. Cognition was improved at 6 months, but not at subsequent visits. Mobility, stigma, and bodily discomfort were improved at 6 months and 1 year, but not at 2 years. Furthermore, more than 80% of patients, caregivers, and clinicians observed improvements in Parkinson’s disease symptoms at all time points.
The investigators did not find any unanticipated adverse events. In all, 217 serious adverse events occurred in 121 participants. Of these events, 60 were related to stimulation. No lead fractures or breakages occurred.
“This registry represents the first large-scale collection of outcomes using a DBS system capable of multiple independent current source control,” said Dr. Vesper and colleagues.
The investigators did not report any conflicts of interest.
LAS VEGAS – , according to a large-scale collection of outcome data. The treatment improves motor function and quality of life and has an acceptable safety profile. The analysis was presented at the annual meeting of the North American Neuromodulation Society.
Research by Okun et al. in 2012 and Schuepbach et al. in 2013 demonstrated that DBS effectively reduces the motor complications of Parkinson’s disease. To monitor the treatment’s efficacy and safety on a large scale, investigators established a prospective registry of patients with levodopa-responsive Parkinson’s disease who underwent DBS implantation. An aim of the registry is to improve understanding of the clinical use and outcomes of DBS in this population. As many as 1,000 patients have been implanted with Vercise DBS systems at 70 international sites. These systems enable multiple independent current source control.
Participants presented for clinical visits at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years after surgery. Jan Vesper, MD, PhD, professor of neurosurgery at Heinrich Heine University in Düsseldorf, Germany, and his colleagues analyzed patient outcomes, including the Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39), Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS), Clinical Global Impression of Change (as assessed by the patient, caregiver, and clinician), and the Schwab and England (SE) scale. The researchers also reported adverse events.
As of November 2018, 403 participants had been enrolled in the registry, and 359 had undergone DBS implantation. At baseline, mean age was 59.6 years, and approximately 70% of participants were male. Mean disease duration was 10.4 years. Without medication, mean MDS-UPDRS III score was 44.8, and mean PDQ-39 Summary Index score was 28.8.
At 1 year, participants’ mean off-medication MDS-UPDRS III score was 29.7. This result represented a significant 34% improvement in motor performance.
PDQ-39 Summary Index score was improved by 6.7 points at 6 months, 4.7 points at 1 year, and 3.0 points at 2 years, which represented a sustained benefit for participants’ quality of life. Improvements in activities of daily living were sustained throughout the 2-year period. Cognition was improved at 6 months, but not at subsequent visits. Mobility, stigma, and bodily discomfort were improved at 6 months and 1 year, but not at 2 years. Furthermore, more than 80% of patients, caregivers, and clinicians observed improvements in Parkinson’s disease symptoms at all time points.
The investigators did not find any unanticipated adverse events. In all, 217 serious adverse events occurred in 121 participants. Of these events, 60 were related to stimulation. No lead fractures or breakages occurred.
“This registry represents the first large-scale collection of outcomes using a DBS system capable of multiple independent current source control,” said Dr. Vesper and colleagues.
The investigators did not report any conflicts of interest.
REPORTING FROM NANS 2019
Key clinical point: DBS provides sustained improvements in motor and nonmotor symptoms over 2 years.
Major finding: At 1 year, DBS had significantly improved motor scores by 34%.
Study details: An analysis of prospective registry data for 359 patients with Parkinson’s disease who underwent DBS implantation.
Disclosures: The authors reported no study funding or conflicts of interest.
Frailty may affect the expression of dementia
according to research published online ahead of print Jan. 17 in Lancet Neurology. Data suggest that frailty reduces the threshold for Alzheimer’s disease pathology to cause cognitive decline. Frailty also may contribute to other mechanisms that cause dementia, such as inflammation and immunosenescence, said the investigators.
“While more research is needed, given that frailty is potentially reversible, it is possible that helping people to maintain function and independence in later life could reduce both dementia risk and the severity of debilitating symptoms common in this disease,” said Professor Kenneth Rockwood, MD, of the Nova Scotia Health Authority and Dalhousie University in Halifax, N.S., in a press release.
More susceptible to dementia?
The presence of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles is not a sufficient condition for the clinical expression of dementia. Some patients with a high degree of Alzheimer’s disease pathology have no apparent cognitive decline. Other factors therefore may modify the relationship between pathology and dementia.
Most people who develop Alzheimer’s disease dementia are older than 65 years, and many of these patients are frail. Frailty is understood as a decreased physiologic reserve and an increased risk for adverse health outcomes. Dr. Rockwood and his colleagues hypothesized that frailty moderates the clinical expression of dementia in relation to Alzheimer’s disease pathology.
To test their hypothesis, the investigators performed a cross-sectional analysis of data from the Rush Memory and Aging Project, which collects clinical and pathologic data from adults older than 59 years without dementia at baseline who live in Illinois. Since 1997, participants have undergone annual clinical and neuropsychological evaluations, and the cohort has been followed for 21 years. For their analysis, Dr. Rockwood and his colleagues included participants without dementia or with Alzheimer’s dementia at their last clinical assessment. Eligible participants had died, and complete autopsy data were available for them.
The researchers measured Alzheimer’s disease pathology using a summary measure of neurofibrillary tangles and neuritic and diffuse plaques. Clinical diagnoses of Alzheimer’s dementia were based on clinician consensus. Dr. Rockwood and his colleagues retrospectively created a 41-item frailty index from variables (e.g., symptoms, signs, comorbidities, and function) that were obtained at each clinical evaluation.
Logistic regression and moderation modeling allowed the investigators to evaluate relationships between Alzheimer’s disease pathology, frailty, and Alzheimer’s dementia. Dr. Rockwood and hus colleagues adjusted all analyses for age, sex, and education.
In all, 456 participants were included in the analysis. The sample’s mean age at death was 89.7 years, and 69% of participants were women. At participants’ last clinical assessment, 242 (53%) had possible or probable Alzheimer’s dementia.
The sample’s mean frailty index was 0.42. The median frailty index was 0.41, a value similar to the threshold commonly used to distinguish between moderate and severe frailty. People with high frailty index scores (i.e., 0.41 or greater) were older, had lower Mini-Mental State Examination scores, were more likely to have a diagnosis of dementia, and had a higher Braak stage than those with moderate or low frailty index scores.
Significant interaction between frailty and Alzheimer’s disease
After the investigators adjusted for age, sex, and education, frailty (odds ratio, 1.76) and Alzheimer’s disease pathology (OR, 4.81) were independently associated with Alzheimer’s dementia. When the investigators added frailty to the model for the relationship between Alzheimer’s disease pathology and Alzheimer’s dementia, the model fit improved. They found a significant interaction between frailty and Alzheimer’s disease pathology (OR, 0.73). People with a low amount of frailty were better able to tolerate Alzheimer’s disease pathology, and people with higher amounts of frailty were more likely to have more Alzheimer’s disease pathology and clinical dementia.
One of the study’s limitations is that it is a secondary analysis, according to Dr. Rockwood and his colleagues. In addition, frailty was measured close to participants’ time of death, and the measurements may thus reflect terminal decline. Participant deaths resulting from causes other than those related to dementia might have confounded the results. Finally, the sample came entirely from people living in retirement homes in Illinois, which might have introduced bias. Future research should use a population-based sample, said the authors.
Frailty could be a basis for risk stratification and could inform the management and treatment of older adults, said Dr. Rockwood and his colleagues. The study results have “the potential to improve our understanding of disease expression, explain failures in pharmacologic treatment, and aid in the development of more appropriate therapeutic targets, approaches, and measurements of success,” they concluded.
The study had no source of funding. The authors reported receiving fees and grants from DGI Clinical, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, and Sanofi. Authors also received support from governmental bodies such as the National Institutes of Health and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
SOURCE: Wallace LMK et al. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18:177-84.
The results of the study by Rockwood and colleagues confirm the strong links between frailty and Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias, said Francesco Panza, MD, PhD, of the University of Bari (Italy) Aldo Moro, and his colleagues in an accompanying editorial.
Frailty is primary or preclinical when it is not directly associated with a specific disease or when the patient has no substantial disability. Frailty is considered secondary or clinical when it is associated with known comorbidities (e.g., cardiovascular disease or depression). “This distinction is central in identifying frailty phenotypes with the potential to predict and prevent dementia, using novel models of risk that introduce modifiable factors,” wrote Dr. Panza and his colleagues.
“In light of current knowledge on the cognitive frailty phenotype, secondary preventive strategies for cognitive impairment and physical frailty can be suggested,” they added. “For instance, individualized multidomain interventions can target physical, nutritional, cognitive, and psychological domains that might delay the progression to overt dementia and secondary occurrence of adverse health-related outcomes, such as disability, hospitalization, and mortality.”
Dr. Panza, Madia Lozupone, MD, PhD , and Giancarlo Logroscino, MD, PhD , are affiliated with the neurodegenerative disease unit in the department of basic medicine, neuroscience, and sense organs at the University of Bari (Italy) Aldo Moro. The above remarks come from an editorial that these authors wrote to accompany the study by Rockwood et al. The authors declared no competing interests.
The results of the study by Rockwood and colleagues confirm the strong links between frailty and Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias, said Francesco Panza, MD, PhD, of the University of Bari (Italy) Aldo Moro, and his colleagues in an accompanying editorial.
Frailty is primary or preclinical when it is not directly associated with a specific disease or when the patient has no substantial disability. Frailty is considered secondary or clinical when it is associated with known comorbidities (e.g., cardiovascular disease or depression). “This distinction is central in identifying frailty phenotypes with the potential to predict and prevent dementia, using novel models of risk that introduce modifiable factors,” wrote Dr. Panza and his colleagues.
“In light of current knowledge on the cognitive frailty phenotype, secondary preventive strategies for cognitive impairment and physical frailty can be suggested,” they added. “For instance, individualized multidomain interventions can target physical, nutritional, cognitive, and psychological domains that might delay the progression to overt dementia and secondary occurrence of adverse health-related outcomes, such as disability, hospitalization, and mortality.”
Dr. Panza, Madia Lozupone, MD, PhD , and Giancarlo Logroscino, MD, PhD , are affiliated with the neurodegenerative disease unit in the department of basic medicine, neuroscience, and sense organs at the University of Bari (Italy) Aldo Moro. The above remarks come from an editorial that these authors wrote to accompany the study by Rockwood et al. The authors declared no competing interests.
The results of the study by Rockwood and colleagues confirm the strong links between frailty and Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias, said Francesco Panza, MD, PhD, of the University of Bari (Italy) Aldo Moro, and his colleagues in an accompanying editorial.
Frailty is primary or preclinical when it is not directly associated with a specific disease or when the patient has no substantial disability. Frailty is considered secondary or clinical when it is associated with known comorbidities (e.g., cardiovascular disease or depression). “This distinction is central in identifying frailty phenotypes with the potential to predict and prevent dementia, using novel models of risk that introduce modifiable factors,” wrote Dr. Panza and his colleagues.
“In light of current knowledge on the cognitive frailty phenotype, secondary preventive strategies for cognitive impairment and physical frailty can be suggested,” they added. “For instance, individualized multidomain interventions can target physical, nutritional, cognitive, and psychological domains that might delay the progression to overt dementia and secondary occurrence of adverse health-related outcomes, such as disability, hospitalization, and mortality.”
Dr. Panza, Madia Lozupone, MD, PhD , and Giancarlo Logroscino, MD, PhD , are affiliated with the neurodegenerative disease unit in the department of basic medicine, neuroscience, and sense organs at the University of Bari (Italy) Aldo Moro. The above remarks come from an editorial that these authors wrote to accompany the study by Rockwood et al. The authors declared no competing interests.
according to research published online ahead of print Jan. 17 in Lancet Neurology. Data suggest that frailty reduces the threshold for Alzheimer’s disease pathology to cause cognitive decline. Frailty also may contribute to other mechanisms that cause dementia, such as inflammation and immunosenescence, said the investigators.
“While more research is needed, given that frailty is potentially reversible, it is possible that helping people to maintain function and independence in later life could reduce both dementia risk and the severity of debilitating symptoms common in this disease,” said Professor Kenneth Rockwood, MD, of the Nova Scotia Health Authority and Dalhousie University in Halifax, N.S., in a press release.
More susceptible to dementia?
The presence of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles is not a sufficient condition for the clinical expression of dementia. Some patients with a high degree of Alzheimer’s disease pathology have no apparent cognitive decline. Other factors therefore may modify the relationship between pathology and dementia.
Most people who develop Alzheimer’s disease dementia are older than 65 years, and many of these patients are frail. Frailty is understood as a decreased physiologic reserve and an increased risk for adverse health outcomes. Dr. Rockwood and his colleagues hypothesized that frailty moderates the clinical expression of dementia in relation to Alzheimer’s disease pathology.
To test their hypothesis, the investigators performed a cross-sectional analysis of data from the Rush Memory and Aging Project, which collects clinical and pathologic data from adults older than 59 years without dementia at baseline who live in Illinois. Since 1997, participants have undergone annual clinical and neuropsychological evaluations, and the cohort has been followed for 21 years. For their analysis, Dr. Rockwood and his colleagues included participants without dementia or with Alzheimer’s dementia at their last clinical assessment. Eligible participants had died, and complete autopsy data were available for them.
The researchers measured Alzheimer’s disease pathology using a summary measure of neurofibrillary tangles and neuritic and diffuse plaques. Clinical diagnoses of Alzheimer’s dementia were based on clinician consensus. Dr. Rockwood and his colleagues retrospectively created a 41-item frailty index from variables (e.g., symptoms, signs, comorbidities, and function) that were obtained at each clinical evaluation.
Logistic regression and moderation modeling allowed the investigators to evaluate relationships between Alzheimer’s disease pathology, frailty, and Alzheimer’s dementia. Dr. Rockwood and hus colleagues adjusted all analyses for age, sex, and education.
In all, 456 participants were included in the analysis. The sample’s mean age at death was 89.7 years, and 69% of participants were women. At participants’ last clinical assessment, 242 (53%) had possible or probable Alzheimer’s dementia.
The sample’s mean frailty index was 0.42. The median frailty index was 0.41, a value similar to the threshold commonly used to distinguish between moderate and severe frailty. People with high frailty index scores (i.e., 0.41 or greater) were older, had lower Mini-Mental State Examination scores, were more likely to have a diagnosis of dementia, and had a higher Braak stage than those with moderate or low frailty index scores.
Significant interaction between frailty and Alzheimer’s disease
After the investigators adjusted for age, sex, and education, frailty (odds ratio, 1.76) and Alzheimer’s disease pathology (OR, 4.81) were independently associated with Alzheimer’s dementia. When the investigators added frailty to the model for the relationship between Alzheimer’s disease pathology and Alzheimer’s dementia, the model fit improved. They found a significant interaction between frailty and Alzheimer’s disease pathology (OR, 0.73). People with a low amount of frailty were better able to tolerate Alzheimer’s disease pathology, and people with higher amounts of frailty were more likely to have more Alzheimer’s disease pathology and clinical dementia.
One of the study’s limitations is that it is a secondary analysis, according to Dr. Rockwood and his colleagues. In addition, frailty was measured close to participants’ time of death, and the measurements may thus reflect terminal decline. Participant deaths resulting from causes other than those related to dementia might have confounded the results. Finally, the sample came entirely from people living in retirement homes in Illinois, which might have introduced bias. Future research should use a population-based sample, said the authors.
Frailty could be a basis for risk stratification and could inform the management and treatment of older adults, said Dr. Rockwood and his colleagues. The study results have “the potential to improve our understanding of disease expression, explain failures in pharmacologic treatment, and aid in the development of more appropriate therapeutic targets, approaches, and measurements of success,” they concluded.
The study had no source of funding. The authors reported receiving fees and grants from DGI Clinical, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, and Sanofi. Authors also received support from governmental bodies such as the National Institutes of Health and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
SOURCE: Wallace LMK et al. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18:177-84.
according to research published online ahead of print Jan. 17 in Lancet Neurology. Data suggest that frailty reduces the threshold for Alzheimer’s disease pathology to cause cognitive decline. Frailty also may contribute to other mechanisms that cause dementia, such as inflammation and immunosenescence, said the investigators.
“While more research is needed, given that frailty is potentially reversible, it is possible that helping people to maintain function and independence in later life could reduce both dementia risk and the severity of debilitating symptoms common in this disease,” said Professor Kenneth Rockwood, MD, of the Nova Scotia Health Authority and Dalhousie University in Halifax, N.S., in a press release.
More susceptible to dementia?
The presence of amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles is not a sufficient condition for the clinical expression of dementia. Some patients with a high degree of Alzheimer’s disease pathology have no apparent cognitive decline. Other factors therefore may modify the relationship between pathology and dementia.
Most people who develop Alzheimer’s disease dementia are older than 65 years, and many of these patients are frail. Frailty is understood as a decreased physiologic reserve and an increased risk for adverse health outcomes. Dr. Rockwood and his colleagues hypothesized that frailty moderates the clinical expression of dementia in relation to Alzheimer’s disease pathology.
To test their hypothesis, the investigators performed a cross-sectional analysis of data from the Rush Memory and Aging Project, which collects clinical and pathologic data from adults older than 59 years without dementia at baseline who live in Illinois. Since 1997, participants have undergone annual clinical and neuropsychological evaluations, and the cohort has been followed for 21 years. For their analysis, Dr. Rockwood and his colleagues included participants without dementia or with Alzheimer’s dementia at their last clinical assessment. Eligible participants had died, and complete autopsy data were available for them.
The researchers measured Alzheimer’s disease pathology using a summary measure of neurofibrillary tangles and neuritic and diffuse plaques. Clinical diagnoses of Alzheimer’s dementia were based on clinician consensus. Dr. Rockwood and his colleagues retrospectively created a 41-item frailty index from variables (e.g., symptoms, signs, comorbidities, and function) that were obtained at each clinical evaluation.
Logistic regression and moderation modeling allowed the investigators to evaluate relationships between Alzheimer’s disease pathology, frailty, and Alzheimer’s dementia. Dr. Rockwood and hus colleagues adjusted all analyses for age, sex, and education.
In all, 456 participants were included in the analysis. The sample’s mean age at death was 89.7 years, and 69% of participants were women. At participants’ last clinical assessment, 242 (53%) had possible or probable Alzheimer’s dementia.
The sample’s mean frailty index was 0.42. The median frailty index was 0.41, a value similar to the threshold commonly used to distinguish between moderate and severe frailty. People with high frailty index scores (i.e., 0.41 or greater) were older, had lower Mini-Mental State Examination scores, were more likely to have a diagnosis of dementia, and had a higher Braak stage than those with moderate or low frailty index scores.
Significant interaction between frailty and Alzheimer’s disease
After the investigators adjusted for age, sex, and education, frailty (odds ratio, 1.76) and Alzheimer’s disease pathology (OR, 4.81) were independently associated with Alzheimer’s dementia. When the investigators added frailty to the model for the relationship between Alzheimer’s disease pathology and Alzheimer’s dementia, the model fit improved. They found a significant interaction between frailty and Alzheimer’s disease pathology (OR, 0.73). People with a low amount of frailty were better able to tolerate Alzheimer’s disease pathology, and people with higher amounts of frailty were more likely to have more Alzheimer’s disease pathology and clinical dementia.
One of the study’s limitations is that it is a secondary analysis, according to Dr. Rockwood and his colleagues. In addition, frailty was measured close to participants’ time of death, and the measurements may thus reflect terminal decline. Participant deaths resulting from causes other than those related to dementia might have confounded the results. Finally, the sample came entirely from people living in retirement homes in Illinois, which might have introduced bias. Future research should use a population-based sample, said the authors.
Frailty could be a basis for risk stratification and could inform the management and treatment of older adults, said Dr. Rockwood and his colleagues. The study results have “the potential to improve our understanding of disease expression, explain failures in pharmacologic treatment, and aid in the development of more appropriate therapeutic targets, approaches, and measurements of success,” they concluded.
The study had no source of funding. The authors reported receiving fees and grants from DGI Clinical, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, and Sanofi. Authors also received support from governmental bodies such as the National Institutes of Health and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
SOURCE: Wallace LMK et al. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18:177-84.
FROM LANCET NEUROLOGY
Key clinical point: Frailty modifies the association between Alzheimer’s disease pathology and Alzheimer dementia.
Major finding: Frailty index score (odds ratio, 1.76) is independently associated with dementia status.
Study details: A cross-sectional analysis of 456 deceased participants in the Rush Memory and Aging Project.
Disclosures: The study had no outside funding.
Source: Wallace LMK et al. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18:177-84.
DMTs, stem cell transplants both reduce disease progression in MS
Disease-modifying therapies give patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis a lower risk of developing secondary progressive disease that may only be topped in specific patients with highly active disease by the use of nonmyeloablative hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, according to findings from two studies published online Jan. 15 in JAMA.
The first study found that interferon-beta, glatiramer acetate (Copaxone), fingolimod (Gilenya), natalizumab (Tysabri), and alemtuzumab (Lemtrada) are associated with a lower risk of conversion to secondary progressive MS, compared with no treatment. Initial treatment with the newer therapies provided a greater risk reduction, compared with initial treatment with interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate.
The second study, described as “the first randomized trial of HSCT [nonmyeloablative hematopoietic stem cell transplantation] in patients with relapsing-remitting MS,” suggests that HSCT prolongs the time to disease progression, compared with disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). It also suggests that HSCT can lead to clinical improvement.
DMTs reduced risk of conversion to secondary progressive MS
Few previous studies have examined the association between DMTs and the risk of conversion from relapsing-remitting MS to secondary progressive MS. Those that have analyzed this association have not used a validated definition of secondary progressive MS. J. William L. Brown, MD, of the University of Cambridge, England, and his colleagues used a validated definition of secondary progressive MS that was published in 2016 to investigate how DMTs affect the rate of conversion, compared with no treatment. The researchers also compared the risk reduction provided by fingolimod, alemtuzumab, or natalizumab with that provided by interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate.
Dr. Brown and his colleagues analyzed prospectively collected clinical data from an international observational cohort study called MSBase. Eligible participants had relapsing-remitting MS, the complete MSBase minimum data set, at least one Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score recorded within 6 months before baseline, and at least two EDSS scores recorded after baseline. Participants initiated a DMT or began clinical monitoring during 1988-2012. The population had a minimum follow-up duration of 4 years. Patients who stopped their initial therapy within 6 months and those participating in clinical trials were excluded.
The primary outcome was conversion to secondary progressive MS. Dr. Brown and his colleagues defined this outcome as an EDSS increase of 1 point for participants with a baseline EDSS score of 5.5 or less and as an increase of 0.5 points for participants with a baseline EDSS score higher than 5.5. This increase had to occur in the absence of relapses and be confirmed at a subsequent visit 3 or fewer months later. In addition, the increased EDSS score had to be 4 or more.
After excluding ineligible participants, the investigators matched 1,555 patients from 68 centers in 21 countries. Each therapy analyzed was associated with reduced risk of converting to secondary progressive MS, compared with no treatment. The hazard ratios for conversion were 0.71 for interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate, 0.37 for fingolimod, 0.61 for natalizumab, and 0.52 for alemtuzumab, compared with no treatment.
Treatment with interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate within 5 years of disease onset was associated with a reduced risk of conversion (HR, 0.77), compared with treatment later than 5 years after disease onset. Similarly, patients who escalated treatment from interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate to any of the other three DMTs within 5 years of disease onset had a significantly lower risk of conversion (HR, 0.76) than did those who escalated later. Furthermore, initial treatment with fingolimod, alemtuzumab, or natalizumab was associated with a significantly reduced risk of conversion (HR, 0.66), compared with initial treatment with interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate.
One of the study’s limitations is its observational design, which precludes the determination of causality, Dr. Brown and his colleagues said. In addition, functional score subcomponents of the EDSS were unavailable, which prevented the researchers from using the definition of secondary progressive MS with the best combination of sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Some analyses were limited by small numbers of patients, and the study did not evaluate the risks associated with DMTs. Nevertheless, “these findings, considered along with these therapies’ risks, may help inform decisions about DMT selection,” the authors concluded.
Financial support for this study was provided by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and the University of Melbourne. Dr. Brown received a Next Generation Fellowship funded by the Grand Charity of the Freemasons and an MSBase 2017 Fellowship. Alemtuzumab studies conducted in Cambridge were supported by the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre and the MS Society UK.
HSCT delayed disease progression
In a previous case series, Richard K. Burt, MD, of Northwestern University in Chicago, and his colleagues found that patients with relapsing-remitting MS who underwent nonmyeloablative HSCT had neurologic improvement and a 70% likelihood of having a 4-year period of disease remission. Dr. Burt and his colleagues undertook the MS international stem cell transplant trial to compare the effects of nonmyeloablative HSCT with those of continued DMT treatment on disease progression in participants with highly active relapsing-remitting MS.
The researchers enrolled 110 participants at four international centers into their open-label trial. Eligible participants had two or more clinical relapses or one relapse and at least one gadolinium-enhancing lesion at a separate time within the previous 12 months, despite DMT treatment. The investigators also required participants to have an EDSS score between 2.0 and 6.0. Patients with primary or secondary progressive MS were excluded.
Dr. Burt and his colleagues randomized participants to receive HSCT or an approved DMT that was more effective or in a different class than the one they were receiving at baseline. Ocrelizumab (Ocrevus) was not administered during the study because it had not yet been approved. The investigators excluded alemtuzumab because of its association with persistent lymphopenia and autoimmune disorders. After 1 year of treatment, patients receiving a DMT who had disability progression could cross over to the HSCT arm. Patients randomized to HSCT stopped taking their usual DMT.
Time to disease progression was the study’s primary endpoint. The investigators defined disease progression as an increase in EDSS score of at least 1 point on two evaluations 6 months apart after at least 1 year of treatment. The increase was required to result from MS. The neurologist who recorded participants’ EDSS evaluations was blinded to treatment group assignment.
The researchers randomized 55 patients to each study arm. Approximately 66% of participants were women, and the sample’s mean age was 36 years. There were no significant baseline differences between groups on demographic, clinical, or imaging characteristics. Three patients in the HSCT group were withdrawn from the study, and four in the DMT group were lost to follow-up after seeking HSCT at outside facilities.
Three patients in the HSCT group and 34 patients in the DMT group had disease progression. Mean follow-up duration was 2.8 years. The investigators could not calculate the median time to progression in the HSCT group because too few events occurred. Median time to progression was 24 months in the DMT group (HR, 0.07). During the first year, mean EDSS scores decreased (indicating improvement) from 3.38 to 2.36 in the HSCT group. Mean EDSS scores increased from 3.31 to 3.98 in the DMT group. No participants died, and no patients who received HSCT-developed nonhematopoietic grade 4 toxicities.
“To our knowledge, this is the first randomized trial of HSCT in patients with relapsing-remitting MS,” Dr. Burt and his colleagues said. Although observational studies have found similar EDSS improvements following HSCT, “this degree of improvement has not been demonstrated in pharmaceutical trials even with more intensive DMT such as alemtuzumab,” they concluded.
The Danhakl Family Foundation, the Cumming Foundation, the McNamara Purcell Foundation, Morgan Stanley, and the National Institute for Health Research Sheffield Clinical Research Facility provided financial support for this study. No pharmaceutical companies supported the study.
SOURCEs: Brown JWL et al. JAMA. 2019;321(2):175-87. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.20588.; and Burt RK et al. JAMA. 2019;321(2):165-74. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.18743.
The study by Brown et al. provides evidence that DMTs slow the appearance of persistent disabilities in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), Harold Atkins, MD, wrote in an accompanying editorial (JAMA. 2019 Jan 15;321[2]:153-4). Although disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) may suppress clinical signs of disease activity for long periods in some patients, these therapies slow MS rather than halt it. DMTs require long-term administration and may cause intolerable side effects that impair patients’ quality of life. These therapies also may result in complications such as severe depression or progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy.
“The study by Burt et al. ... provides a rigorous indication that HSCT [hematopoietic stem cell transplantation] can be an effective treatment for selected patients with MS,” Dr. Atkins said. Treating physicians, however, have concerns about this procedure, which is resource-intensive and “requires specialized medical and nursing expertise and dedicated hospital infrastructure to minimize its risks.” Many patients in the study had moderate to severe acute toxicity following treatment, and patient selection thus requires caution.
An important limitation of the study is that participants did not have access to alemtuzumab or ocrelizumab, which arguably are the most effective DMTs, Dr. Atkins said. The study began in 2005, when fewer DMTs were available. “The inclusion of patients who were less than optimally treated in the DMT group needs to be considered when interpreting the results of this study,” Dr. Atkins said.
Furthermore, Burt and colleagues studied patients with highly active MS, but “only a small proportion of the MS patient population exhibits this degree of activity,” he added. The results therefore may not be generalizable. Nevertheless, “even with the limitations of the trial, the results support a role for HSCT delivered at centers that are experienced in the clinical care of patients with highly active MS,” Dr. Atkins concluded.
Dr. Atkins is affiliated with the Ottawa Hospital Blood and Marrow Transplant Program at the University of Ottawa in Ontario. He reported no conflicts of interest.
The study by Brown et al. provides evidence that DMTs slow the appearance of persistent disabilities in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), Harold Atkins, MD, wrote in an accompanying editorial (JAMA. 2019 Jan 15;321[2]:153-4). Although disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) may suppress clinical signs of disease activity for long periods in some patients, these therapies slow MS rather than halt it. DMTs require long-term administration and may cause intolerable side effects that impair patients’ quality of life. These therapies also may result in complications such as severe depression or progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy.
“The study by Burt et al. ... provides a rigorous indication that HSCT [hematopoietic stem cell transplantation] can be an effective treatment for selected patients with MS,” Dr. Atkins said. Treating physicians, however, have concerns about this procedure, which is resource-intensive and “requires specialized medical and nursing expertise and dedicated hospital infrastructure to minimize its risks.” Many patients in the study had moderate to severe acute toxicity following treatment, and patient selection thus requires caution.
An important limitation of the study is that participants did not have access to alemtuzumab or ocrelizumab, which arguably are the most effective DMTs, Dr. Atkins said. The study began in 2005, when fewer DMTs were available. “The inclusion of patients who were less than optimally treated in the DMT group needs to be considered when interpreting the results of this study,” Dr. Atkins said.
Furthermore, Burt and colleagues studied patients with highly active MS, but “only a small proportion of the MS patient population exhibits this degree of activity,” he added. The results therefore may not be generalizable. Nevertheless, “even with the limitations of the trial, the results support a role for HSCT delivered at centers that are experienced in the clinical care of patients with highly active MS,” Dr. Atkins concluded.
Dr. Atkins is affiliated with the Ottawa Hospital Blood and Marrow Transplant Program at the University of Ottawa in Ontario. He reported no conflicts of interest.
The study by Brown et al. provides evidence that DMTs slow the appearance of persistent disabilities in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), Harold Atkins, MD, wrote in an accompanying editorial (JAMA. 2019 Jan 15;321[2]:153-4). Although disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) may suppress clinical signs of disease activity for long periods in some patients, these therapies slow MS rather than halt it. DMTs require long-term administration and may cause intolerable side effects that impair patients’ quality of life. These therapies also may result in complications such as severe depression or progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy.
“The study by Burt et al. ... provides a rigorous indication that HSCT [hematopoietic stem cell transplantation] can be an effective treatment for selected patients with MS,” Dr. Atkins said. Treating physicians, however, have concerns about this procedure, which is resource-intensive and “requires specialized medical and nursing expertise and dedicated hospital infrastructure to minimize its risks.” Many patients in the study had moderate to severe acute toxicity following treatment, and patient selection thus requires caution.
An important limitation of the study is that participants did not have access to alemtuzumab or ocrelizumab, which arguably are the most effective DMTs, Dr. Atkins said. The study began in 2005, when fewer DMTs were available. “The inclusion of patients who were less than optimally treated in the DMT group needs to be considered when interpreting the results of this study,” Dr. Atkins said.
Furthermore, Burt and colleagues studied patients with highly active MS, but “only a small proportion of the MS patient population exhibits this degree of activity,” he added. The results therefore may not be generalizable. Nevertheless, “even with the limitations of the trial, the results support a role for HSCT delivered at centers that are experienced in the clinical care of patients with highly active MS,” Dr. Atkins concluded.
Dr. Atkins is affiliated with the Ottawa Hospital Blood and Marrow Transplant Program at the University of Ottawa in Ontario. He reported no conflicts of interest.
Disease-modifying therapies give patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis a lower risk of developing secondary progressive disease that may only be topped in specific patients with highly active disease by the use of nonmyeloablative hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, according to findings from two studies published online Jan. 15 in JAMA.
The first study found that interferon-beta, glatiramer acetate (Copaxone), fingolimod (Gilenya), natalizumab (Tysabri), and alemtuzumab (Lemtrada) are associated with a lower risk of conversion to secondary progressive MS, compared with no treatment. Initial treatment with the newer therapies provided a greater risk reduction, compared with initial treatment with interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate.
The second study, described as “the first randomized trial of HSCT [nonmyeloablative hematopoietic stem cell transplantation] in patients with relapsing-remitting MS,” suggests that HSCT prolongs the time to disease progression, compared with disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). It also suggests that HSCT can lead to clinical improvement.
DMTs reduced risk of conversion to secondary progressive MS
Few previous studies have examined the association between DMTs and the risk of conversion from relapsing-remitting MS to secondary progressive MS. Those that have analyzed this association have not used a validated definition of secondary progressive MS. J. William L. Brown, MD, of the University of Cambridge, England, and his colleagues used a validated definition of secondary progressive MS that was published in 2016 to investigate how DMTs affect the rate of conversion, compared with no treatment. The researchers also compared the risk reduction provided by fingolimod, alemtuzumab, or natalizumab with that provided by interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate.
Dr. Brown and his colleagues analyzed prospectively collected clinical data from an international observational cohort study called MSBase. Eligible participants had relapsing-remitting MS, the complete MSBase minimum data set, at least one Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score recorded within 6 months before baseline, and at least two EDSS scores recorded after baseline. Participants initiated a DMT or began clinical monitoring during 1988-2012. The population had a minimum follow-up duration of 4 years. Patients who stopped their initial therapy within 6 months and those participating in clinical trials were excluded.
The primary outcome was conversion to secondary progressive MS. Dr. Brown and his colleagues defined this outcome as an EDSS increase of 1 point for participants with a baseline EDSS score of 5.5 or less and as an increase of 0.5 points for participants with a baseline EDSS score higher than 5.5. This increase had to occur in the absence of relapses and be confirmed at a subsequent visit 3 or fewer months later. In addition, the increased EDSS score had to be 4 or more.
After excluding ineligible participants, the investigators matched 1,555 patients from 68 centers in 21 countries. Each therapy analyzed was associated with reduced risk of converting to secondary progressive MS, compared with no treatment. The hazard ratios for conversion were 0.71 for interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate, 0.37 for fingolimod, 0.61 for natalizumab, and 0.52 for alemtuzumab, compared with no treatment.
Treatment with interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate within 5 years of disease onset was associated with a reduced risk of conversion (HR, 0.77), compared with treatment later than 5 years after disease onset. Similarly, patients who escalated treatment from interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate to any of the other three DMTs within 5 years of disease onset had a significantly lower risk of conversion (HR, 0.76) than did those who escalated later. Furthermore, initial treatment with fingolimod, alemtuzumab, or natalizumab was associated with a significantly reduced risk of conversion (HR, 0.66), compared with initial treatment with interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate.
One of the study’s limitations is its observational design, which precludes the determination of causality, Dr. Brown and his colleagues said. In addition, functional score subcomponents of the EDSS were unavailable, which prevented the researchers from using the definition of secondary progressive MS with the best combination of sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Some analyses were limited by small numbers of patients, and the study did not evaluate the risks associated with DMTs. Nevertheless, “these findings, considered along with these therapies’ risks, may help inform decisions about DMT selection,” the authors concluded.
Financial support for this study was provided by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and the University of Melbourne. Dr. Brown received a Next Generation Fellowship funded by the Grand Charity of the Freemasons and an MSBase 2017 Fellowship. Alemtuzumab studies conducted in Cambridge were supported by the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre and the MS Society UK.
HSCT delayed disease progression
In a previous case series, Richard K. Burt, MD, of Northwestern University in Chicago, and his colleagues found that patients with relapsing-remitting MS who underwent nonmyeloablative HSCT had neurologic improvement and a 70% likelihood of having a 4-year period of disease remission. Dr. Burt and his colleagues undertook the MS international stem cell transplant trial to compare the effects of nonmyeloablative HSCT with those of continued DMT treatment on disease progression in participants with highly active relapsing-remitting MS.
The researchers enrolled 110 participants at four international centers into their open-label trial. Eligible participants had two or more clinical relapses or one relapse and at least one gadolinium-enhancing lesion at a separate time within the previous 12 months, despite DMT treatment. The investigators also required participants to have an EDSS score between 2.0 and 6.0. Patients with primary or secondary progressive MS were excluded.
Dr. Burt and his colleagues randomized participants to receive HSCT or an approved DMT that was more effective or in a different class than the one they were receiving at baseline. Ocrelizumab (Ocrevus) was not administered during the study because it had not yet been approved. The investigators excluded alemtuzumab because of its association with persistent lymphopenia and autoimmune disorders. After 1 year of treatment, patients receiving a DMT who had disability progression could cross over to the HSCT arm. Patients randomized to HSCT stopped taking their usual DMT.
Time to disease progression was the study’s primary endpoint. The investigators defined disease progression as an increase in EDSS score of at least 1 point on two evaluations 6 months apart after at least 1 year of treatment. The increase was required to result from MS. The neurologist who recorded participants’ EDSS evaluations was blinded to treatment group assignment.
The researchers randomized 55 patients to each study arm. Approximately 66% of participants were women, and the sample’s mean age was 36 years. There were no significant baseline differences between groups on demographic, clinical, or imaging characteristics. Three patients in the HSCT group were withdrawn from the study, and four in the DMT group were lost to follow-up after seeking HSCT at outside facilities.
Three patients in the HSCT group and 34 patients in the DMT group had disease progression. Mean follow-up duration was 2.8 years. The investigators could not calculate the median time to progression in the HSCT group because too few events occurred. Median time to progression was 24 months in the DMT group (HR, 0.07). During the first year, mean EDSS scores decreased (indicating improvement) from 3.38 to 2.36 in the HSCT group. Mean EDSS scores increased from 3.31 to 3.98 in the DMT group. No participants died, and no patients who received HSCT-developed nonhematopoietic grade 4 toxicities.
“To our knowledge, this is the first randomized trial of HSCT in patients with relapsing-remitting MS,” Dr. Burt and his colleagues said. Although observational studies have found similar EDSS improvements following HSCT, “this degree of improvement has not been demonstrated in pharmaceutical trials even with more intensive DMT such as alemtuzumab,” they concluded.
The Danhakl Family Foundation, the Cumming Foundation, the McNamara Purcell Foundation, Morgan Stanley, and the National Institute for Health Research Sheffield Clinical Research Facility provided financial support for this study. No pharmaceutical companies supported the study.
SOURCEs: Brown JWL et al. JAMA. 2019;321(2):175-87. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.20588.; and Burt RK et al. JAMA. 2019;321(2):165-74. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.18743.
Disease-modifying therapies give patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis a lower risk of developing secondary progressive disease that may only be topped in specific patients with highly active disease by the use of nonmyeloablative hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, according to findings from two studies published online Jan. 15 in JAMA.
The first study found that interferon-beta, glatiramer acetate (Copaxone), fingolimod (Gilenya), natalizumab (Tysabri), and alemtuzumab (Lemtrada) are associated with a lower risk of conversion to secondary progressive MS, compared with no treatment. Initial treatment with the newer therapies provided a greater risk reduction, compared with initial treatment with interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate.
The second study, described as “the first randomized trial of HSCT [nonmyeloablative hematopoietic stem cell transplantation] in patients with relapsing-remitting MS,” suggests that HSCT prolongs the time to disease progression, compared with disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). It also suggests that HSCT can lead to clinical improvement.
DMTs reduced risk of conversion to secondary progressive MS
Few previous studies have examined the association between DMTs and the risk of conversion from relapsing-remitting MS to secondary progressive MS. Those that have analyzed this association have not used a validated definition of secondary progressive MS. J. William L. Brown, MD, of the University of Cambridge, England, and his colleagues used a validated definition of secondary progressive MS that was published in 2016 to investigate how DMTs affect the rate of conversion, compared with no treatment. The researchers also compared the risk reduction provided by fingolimod, alemtuzumab, or natalizumab with that provided by interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate.
Dr. Brown and his colleagues analyzed prospectively collected clinical data from an international observational cohort study called MSBase. Eligible participants had relapsing-remitting MS, the complete MSBase minimum data set, at least one Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score recorded within 6 months before baseline, and at least two EDSS scores recorded after baseline. Participants initiated a DMT or began clinical monitoring during 1988-2012. The population had a minimum follow-up duration of 4 years. Patients who stopped their initial therapy within 6 months and those participating in clinical trials were excluded.
The primary outcome was conversion to secondary progressive MS. Dr. Brown and his colleagues defined this outcome as an EDSS increase of 1 point for participants with a baseline EDSS score of 5.5 or less and as an increase of 0.5 points for participants with a baseline EDSS score higher than 5.5. This increase had to occur in the absence of relapses and be confirmed at a subsequent visit 3 or fewer months later. In addition, the increased EDSS score had to be 4 or more.
After excluding ineligible participants, the investigators matched 1,555 patients from 68 centers in 21 countries. Each therapy analyzed was associated with reduced risk of converting to secondary progressive MS, compared with no treatment. The hazard ratios for conversion were 0.71 for interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate, 0.37 for fingolimod, 0.61 for natalizumab, and 0.52 for alemtuzumab, compared with no treatment.
Treatment with interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate within 5 years of disease onset was associated with a reduced risk of conversion (HR, 0.77), compared with treatment later than 5 years after disease onset. Similarly, patients who escalated treatment from interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate to any of the other three DMTs within 5 years of disease onset had a significantly lower risk of conversion (HR, 0.76) than did those who escalated later. Furthermore, initial treatment with fingolimod, alemtuzumab, or natalizumab was associated with a significantly reduced risk of conversion (HR, 0.66), compared with initial treatment with interferon-beta or glatiramer acetate.
One of the study’s limitations is its observational design, which precludes the determination of causality, Dr. Brown and his colleagues said. In addition, functional score subcomponents of the EDSS were unavailable, which prevented the researchers from using the definition of secondary progressive MS with the best combination of sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Some analyses were limited by small numbers of patients, and the study did not evaluate the risks associated with DMTs. Nevertheless, “these findings, considered along with these therapies’ risks, may help inform decisions about DMT selection,” the authors concluded.
Financial support for this study was provided by the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and the University of Melbourne. Dr. Brown received a Next Generation Fellowship funded by the Grand Charity of the Freemasons and an MSBase 2017 Fellowship. Alemtuzumab studies conducted in Cambridge were supported by the National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre and the MS Society UK.
HSCT delayed disease progression
In a previous case series, Richard K. Burt, MD, of Northwestern University in Chicago, and his colleagues found that patients with relapsing-remitting MS who underwent nonmyeloablative HSCT had neurologic improvement and a 70% likelihood of having a 4-year period of disease remission. Dr. Burt and his colleagues undertook the MS international stem cell transplant trial to compare the effects of nonmyeloablative HSCT with those of continued DMT treatment on disease progression in participants with highly active relapsing-remitting MS.
The researchers enrolled 110 participants at four international centers into their open-label trial. Eligible participants had two or more clinical relapses or one relapse and at least one gadolinium-enhancing lesion at a separate time within the previous 12 months, despite DMT treatment. The investigators also required participants to have an EDSS score between 2.0 and 6.0. Patients with primary or secondary progressive MS were excluded.
Dr. Burt and his colleagues randomized participants to receive HSCT or an approved DMT that was more effective or in a different class than the one they were receiving at baseline. Ocrelizumab (Ocrevus) was not administered during the study because it had not yet been approved. The investigators excluded alemtuzumab because of its association with persistent lymphopenia and autoimmune disorders. After 1 year of treatment, patients receiving a DMT who had disability progression could cross over to the HSCT arm. Patients randomized to HSCT stopped taking their usual DMT.
Time to disease progression was the study’s primary endpoint. The investigators defined disease progression as an increase in EDSS score of at least 1 point on two evaluations 6 months apart after at least 1 year of treatment. The increase was required to result from MS. The neurologist who recorded participants’ EDSS evaluations was blinded to treatment group assignment.
The researchers randomized 55 patients to each study arm. Approximately 66% of participants were women, and the sample’s mean age was 36 years. There were no significant baseline differences between groups on demographic, clinical, or imaging characteristics. Three patients in the HSCT group were withdrawn from the study, and four in the DMT group were lost to follow-up after seeking HSCT at outside facilities.
Three patients in the HSCT group and 34 patients in the DMT group had disease progression. Mean follow-up duration was 2.8 years. The investigators could not calculate the median time to progression in the HSCT group because too few events occurred. Median time to progression was 24 months in the DMT group (HR, 0.07). During the first year, mean EDSS scores decreased (indicating improvement) from 3.38 to 2.36 in the HSCT group. Mean EDSS scores increased from 3.31 to 3.98 in the DMT group. No participants died, and no patients who received HSCT-developed nonhematopoietic grade 4 toxicities.
“To our knowledge, this is the first randomized trial of HSCT in patients with relapsing-remitting MS,” Dr. Burt and his colleagues said. Although observational studies have found similar EDSS improvements following HSCT, “this degree of improvement has not been demonstrated in pharmaceutical trials even with more intensive DMT such as alemtuzumab,” they concluded.
The Danhakl Family Foundation, the Cumming Foundation, the McNamara Purcell Foundation, Morgan Stanley, and the National Institute for Health Research Sheffield Clinical Research Facility provided financial support for this study. No pharmaceutical companies supported the study.
SOURCEs: Brown JWL et al. JAMA. 2019;321(2):175-87. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.20588.; and Burt RK et al. JAMA. 2019;321(2):165-74. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.18743.
FROM JAMA
Population-level rate of SUDEP may have decreased
NEW ORLEANS – according to data described at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. Whether this decrease resulted from an improved understanding of SUDEP risk or a focus on risk-reduction strategies is unknown, said Daniel Friedman, MD, associate professor of neurology at the New York University Langone Health.
In addition, the rates of SUDEP in various populations differ according to their socioeconomic status. Differences in access to care are a potential, but unconfirmed, explanation for this association, said Dr. Friedman. Another possible explanation is that confounders such as mental health disorders, substance abuse, and insufficient social support affect individuals’ ability to manage their disorder.
Dr. Friedman and colleagues initially examined SUDEP rates over time in a cohort of patients who received vagus nerve stimulator (VNS) implantation for drug-resistant epilepsy. They analyzed data for 40,443 patients who underwent surgery during 1988-2012. The age-adjusted SUDEP rate per 1,000 person-years of follow-up decreased significantly from 2.47 in years 1-2 to 1.68 in years 3-10. “There was no control group, so we couldn’t necessarily attribute the SUDEP rate reduction to the intervention,” said Dr. Friedman. A study by Tomson et al of patients with epilepsy who received VNS implantation had similar findings.
The literature about the mechanisms of SUDEP and reduction of SUDEP risk has increased in recent years. Neurologists have advocated for greater disclosure to patients of SUDEP risk, as well as better risk counseling. Dr. Friedman and his colleagues decided to investigate whether these factors have affected the risk of SUDEP during the past decade.
They retrospectively examined data for people whose deaths had been investigated at medical examiner’s offices in New York City, San Diego County, and Maryland. They focused on decedents for whom epilepsy or seizure was listed as a cause or contributor to death or as a comorbid condition on the death certificate. They reviewed all available reports, including investigator notes, autopsy reports, and medical records. Next, Dr. Friedman and his colleagues calculated the annual SUDEP rate as a proportion of the general population, estimated using annual Census and American Community Survey data. They used the Mann-Kendall test to analyze the trends in SUDEP rate during 2009-2015.
Of 1,466 deaths in people with epilepsy during this period, 1,124 were classified as definite SUDEP, probable SUDEP, or near SUDEP. Approximately 63% of SUDEP cases were male, and 45% were African-American. The mean age at death was 38 years.
Dr. Friedman’s group found a significant decrease in the overall incidence of SUDEP in the total population during 2009-2015. When they examined the three regions separately, they found decreases in SUDEP incidence in New York City and Maryland, but not in San Diego County. They found no difference in SUDEP rates by season or by day of the week.
In a subsequent analysis, Dr. Friedman and his colleagues adjudicated all deaths related to seizure and epilepsy in the three regions during 2009-2010 and 2014-2015 and identified all cases of definite and probable SUDEP. The estimated rate of SUDEP decreased by about 36% from the first period to the second period. SUDEP rates as a proportion of the total population in those regions also declined.
The investigators also examined differences in estimated SUDEP rates in the United States according to median household income. In New York, the zip codes with the highest SUDEP rates tended to have the lowest median household incomes. The zip codes in the lowest quartile of family household income had a SUDEP rate more than twice as high as that in the zip codes in the highest income quartile. This association held true for the period from 2009-2010 and for 2014-2015.
Dr. Friedman and colleagues received funding from Finding a Cure for Epilepsy and Seizures, which is affiliated with the NYU Comprehensive Epilepsy Center and NYU Langone Health.
SOURCE: Cihan E et al. AES 2018, Abstract 2.419.
NEW ORLEANS – according to data described at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. Whether this decrease resulted from an improved understanding of SUDEP risk or a focus on risk-reduction strategies is unknown, said Daniel Friedman, MD, associate professor of neurology at the New York University Langone Health.
In addition, the rates of SUDEP in various populations differ according to their socioeconomic status. Differences in access to care are a potential, but unconfirmed, explanation for this association, said Dr. Friedman. Another possible explanation is that confounders such as mental health disorders, substance abuse, and insufficient social support affect individuals’ ability to manage their disorder.
Dr. Friedman and colleagues initially examined SUDEP rates over time in a cohort of patients who received vagus nerve stimulator (VNS) implantation for drug-resistant epilepsy. They analyzed data for 40,443 patients who underwent surgery during 1988-2012. The age-adjusted SUDEP rate per 1,000 person-years of follow-up decreased significantly from 2.47 in years 1-2 to 1.68 in years 3-10. “There was no control group, so we couldn’t necessarily attribute the SUDEP rate reduction to the intervention,” said Dr. Friedman. A study by Tomson et al of patients with epilepsy who received VNS implantation had similar findings.
The literature about the mechanisms of SUDEP and reduction of SUDEP risk has increased in recent years. Neurologists have advocated for greater disclosure to patients of SUDEP risk, as well as better risk counseling. Dr. Friedman and his colleagues decided to investigate whether these factors have affected the risk of SUDEP during the past decade.
They retrospectively examined data for people whose deaths had been investigated at medical examiner’s offices in New York City, San Diego County, and Maryland. They focused on decedents for whom epilepsy or seizure was listed as a cause or contributor to death or as a comorbid condition on the death certificate. They reviewed all available reports, including investigator notes, autopsy reports, and medical records. Next, Dr. Friedman and his colleagues calculated the annual SUDEP rate as a proportion of the general population, estimated using annual Census and American Community Survey data. They used the Mann-Kendall test to analyze the trends in SUDEP rate during 2009-2015.
Of 1,466 deaths in people with epilepsy during this period, 1,124 were classified as definite SUDEP, probable SUDEP, or near SUDEP. Approximately 63% of SUDEP cases were male, and 45% were African-American. The mean age at death was 38 years.
Dr. Friedman’s group found a significant decrease in the overall incidence of SUDEP in the total population during 2009-2015. When they examined the three regions separately, they found decreases in SUDEP incidence in New York City and Maryland, but not in San Diego County. They found no difference in SUDEP rates by season or by day of the week.
In a subsequent analysis, Dr. Friedman and his colleagues adjudicated all deaths related to seizure and epilepsy in the three regions during 2009-2010 and 2014-2015 and identified all cases of definite and probable SUDEP. The estimated rate of SUDEP decreased by about 36% from the first period to the second period. SUDEP rates as a proportion of the total population in those regions also declined.
The investigators also examined differences in estimated SUDEP rates in the United States according to median household income. In New York, the zip codes with the highest SUDEP rates tended to have the lowest median household incomes. The zip codes in the lowest quartile of family household income had a SUDEP rate more than twice as high as that in the zip codes in the highest income quartile. This association held true for the period from 2009-2010 and for 2014-2015.
Dr. Friedman and colleagues received funding from Finding a Cure for Epilepsy and Seizures, which is affiliated with the NYU Comprehensive Epilepsy Center and NYU Langone Health.
SOURCE: Cihan E et al. AES 2018, Abstract 2.419.
NEW ORLEANS – according to data described at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. Whether this decrease resulted from an improved understanding of SUDEP risk or a focus on risk-reduction strategies is unknown, said Daniel Friedman, MD, associate professor of neurology at the New York University Langone Health.
In addition, the rates of SUDEP in various populations differ according to their socioeconomic status. Differences in access to care are a potential, but unconfirmed, explanation for this association, said Dr. Friedman. Another possible explanation is that confounders such as mental health disorders, substance abuse, and insufficient social support affect individuals’ ability to manage their disorder.
Dr. Friedman and colleagues initially examined SUDEP rates over time in a cohort of patients who received vagus nerve stimulator (VNS) implantation for drug-resistant epilepsy. They analyzed data for 40,443 patients who underwent surgery during 1988-2012. The age-adjusted SUDEP rate per 1,000 person-years of follow-up decreased significantly from 2.47 in years 1-2 to 1.68 in years 3-10. “There was no control group, so we couldn’t necessarily attribute the SUDEP rate reduction to the intervention,” said Dr. Friedman. A study by Tomson et al of patients with epilepsy who received VNS implantation had similar findings.
The literature about the mechanisms of SUDEP and reduction of SUDEP risk has increased in recent years. Neurologists have advocated for greater disclosure to patients of SUDEP risk, as well as better risk counseling. Dr. Friedman and his colleagues decided to investigate whether these factors have affected the risk of SUDEP during the past decade.
They retrospectively examined data for people whose deaths had been investigated at medical examiner’s offices in New York City, San Diego County, and Maryland. They focused on decedents for whom epilepsy or seizure was listed as a cause or contributor to death or as a comorbid condition on the death certificate. They reviewed all available reports, including investigator notes, autopsy reports, and medical records. Next, Dr. Friedman and his colleagues calculated the annual SUDEP rate as a proportion of the general population, estimated using annual Census and American Community Survey data. They used the Mann-Kendall test to analyze the trends in SUDEP rate during 2009-2015.
Of 1,466 deaths in people with epilepsy during this period, 1,124 were classified as definite SUDEP, probable SUDEP, or near SUDEP. Approximately 63% of SUDEP cases were male, and 45% were African-American. The mean age at death was 38 years.
Dr. Friedman’s group found a significant decrease in the overall incidence of SUDEP in the total population during 2009-2015. When they examined the three regions separately, they found decreases in SUDEP incidence in New York City and Maryland, but not in San Diego County. They found no difference in SUDEP rates by season or by day of the week.
In a subsequent analysis, Dr. Friedman and his colleagues adjudicated all deaths related to seizure and epilepsy in the three regions during 2009-2010 and 2014-2015 and identified all cases of definite and probable SUDEP. The estimated rate of SUDEP decreased by about 36% from the first period to the second period. SUDEP rates as a proportion of the total population in those regions also declined.
The investigators also examined differences in estimated SUDEP rates in the United States according to median household income. In New York, the zip codes with the highest SUDEP rates tended to have the lowest median household incomes. The zip codes in the lowest quartile of family household income had a SUDEP rate more than twice as high as that in the zip codes in the highest income quartile. This association held true for the period from 2009-2010 and for 2014-2015.
Dr. Friedman and colleagues received funding from Finding a Cure for Epilepsy and Seizures, which is affiliated with the NYU Comprehensive Epilepsy Center and NYU Langone Health.
SOURCE: Cihan E et al. AES 2018, Abstract 2.419.
REPORTING FROM AES 2018
Key clinical point: Data indicate a decline over time in the incidence of SUDEP.
Major finding: The incidence of SUDEP declined by 36% from 2009-2010 to 2014-2015.
Study details: A retrospective analysis of medical examiner data on 1,466 deaths in people with epilepsy.
Disclosures: Finding a Cure for Epilepsy and Seizures provided funding for the study.
Source: Cihan E et al. AES 2018, Abstract 2.419.
