Corticosteroids for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy

Prospective open-label trial with rituximab in patients with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy not responding to conventional immune therapies

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the efficacy of rituximab in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) patients not responding to conventional immune therapies.

METHODS

An open-label, prospective exploratory study was conducted with intravenous rituximab on 17 CIDP patients who had not responded to at least two first-line therapies. The primary endpoint was to determine the proportion of patients who showed improvement 6 months after rituximab therapy. The percentage of responders to rituximab, along with a 95% CI, was reported and compared with the 30% response rate after other immunosuppressive drugs previously documented in the literature.

RESULTS

13 of the 17 treated patients (76.5%) showed improvement at 6 months (95% CI 50.1 to 93.2). Among the 14 patients who completed the 12-month follow-up (2 were lost to follow-up after showing improvement at months 8 and 10, and 1 deteriorated at 6 months), 13 (92.9%) demonstrated improvement at 12 months (95% CI 66.1 to 99.8). Nerve conduction parameters improved by at least 20% in two nerves in 6 out of 15 (40%) patients at 6 months and in 7 out of 13 (53.9%) at 12 months. None of the treated patients withdrew from the study due to side effects. There was a significant reduction of circulating CD19+ cells 15 days, 2, 6 and 12 months after treatment.

CONCLUSION

Rituximab seems to be a safe therapy in most patients with CIDP not responding to conventional immune therapies. The high percentage of patients who improved in this study suggests a possible positive effect of rituximab which is worth investigating in future randomised controlled clinical trials.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05877040.

Intravenous immunoglobulin for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy

BACKGROUND

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) causes progressive or relapsing weakness and numbness of the limbs, which lasts for at least two months. Uncontrolled studies have suggested that intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) could help to reduce symptoms. This is an update of a review first published in 2002 and last updated in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous immunoglobulin in people with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registers on 8 March 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that tested any dose of IVIg versus placebo, plasma exchange, or corticosteroids in people with definite or probable CIDP.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was significant improvement in disability within six weeks after the start of treatment, as determined and defined by the study authors. Our secondary outcomes were change in mean disability score within six weeks, change in muscle strength (Medical Research Council (MRC) sum score) within six weeks, change in mean disability score at 24 weeks or later, frequency of serious adverse events, and frequency of any adverse events. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for our main outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs with 372 participants (235 male) from Europe, North America, South America, and Israel. There was low statistical heterogeneity between the trial results, and the overall risk of bias was low for all trials that contributed data to the analysis. Five trials (235 participants) compared IVIg with placebo, one trial (20 participants) compared IVIg with plasma exchange, two trials (72 participants) compared IVIg with prednisolone, and one trial (45 participants) compared IVIg with intravenous methylprednisolone (IVMP). We included one new trial in this update, though it contributed no data to any meta-analyses. IVIg compared with placebo increases the probability of significant improvement in disability within six weeks of the start of treatment (risk ratio (RR) 2.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.72 to 3.36; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 4, 95% CI 3 to 5; 5 trials, 269 participants; high-certainty evidence). Since each trial used a different disability scale and definition of significant improvement, we were unable to evaluate the clinical relevance of the pooled effect. IVIg compared with placebo improves disability measured on the Rankin scale (0 to 6, lower is better) two to six weeks after the start of treatment (mean difference (MD) -0.26 points, 95% CI -0.48 to -0.05; 3 trials, 90 participants; high-certainty evidence). IVIg compared with placebo probably improves disability measured on the Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment (INCAT) scale (1 to 10, lower is better) after 24 weeks (MD 0.80 points, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.37; 1 trial, 117 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference between IVIg and placebo in the frequency of serious adverse events (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.87; 3 trials, 315 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The trial comparing IVIg with plasma exchange reported none of our main outcomes. IVIg compared with prednisolone probably has little or no effect on the probability of significant improvement in disability four weeks after the start of treatment (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.68; 1 trial, 29 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and little or no effect on change in mean disability measured on the Rankin scale (MD 0.21 points, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.61; 1 trial, 24 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference between IVIg and prednisolone in the frequency of serious adverse events (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.04 to 4.69; 1 cross-over trial, 32 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). IVIg compared with IVMP probably increases the likelihood of significant improvement in disability two weeks after starting treatment (RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.40 to 5.38; 1 trial, 45 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). IVIg compared with IVMP probably has little or no effect on change in disability measured on the Rankin scale two weeks after the start of treatment (MD 0.24 points, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.63; 1 trial, 45 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or on change in mean disability measured with the Overall Neuropathy Limitation Scale (ONLS, 1 to 12, lower is better) 24 weeks after the start of treatment (MD 0.03 points, 95% CI -0.91 to 0.97; 1 trial, 45 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The frequency of serious adverse events may be higher with IVIg compared with IVMP (RR 4.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 86.78; 1 trial, 45 participants, moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from RCTs shows that IVIg improves disability for at least two to six weeks compared with placebo, with an NNTB of 4. During this period, IVIg probably has similar efficacy to oral prednisolone and IVMP. Further placebo-controlled trials are unlikely to change these conclusions. In one large trial, the benefit of IVIg compared with placebo in terms of improved disability score persisted for 24 weeks. Further research is needed to assess the long-term benefits and harms of IVIg relative to other treatments.

Manual push technique, an alternative route of subcutaneous immunoglobulin administration in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy: A proof-of-concept study

OBJECTIVE

Subcutaneous immunoglobulin (SCIg) administered through infusion pump has been reported as effective in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) patients. In this study we evaluate an alternative technique of SCIg administration, based on the delivery of lower volumes administered daily using manual push technique (MPT) in 10 CIDP patients.

METHODS

In this randomized, controlled, two-arm, crossover clinical trial, CIDP patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive SCIg either by MPT or pumps for 4 consecutive months with crossover to the other. The primary objective was to assess whether MPT had the same effectiveness as pumps. The secondary objectives were to assess whether MPT resulted in greater plasma IgG levels and improved quality of life (QoL).

RESULTS

Ten patients (mean age = 48.3) were enrolled. No significant changes were observed in the efficacy parameters (INCAT, MRC, R-ODS, and GS scales). A positive mean variation of 5.4 % in plasma IgG levels in the group treated with MPT was observed at the end of MPT periods. Treatment interference, which is one of the dimensions of the Life Quality Index, showed a significant improvement in the MPT periods.

CONCLUSION

In CIDP patients, the MPT technique was as effective as pump infusion, allowed comparable, slightly increases plasma IgG levels, and also improved the QoL.

Pericytes modulate myelination in the central nervous system

Multiple sclerosis is a highly prevalent chronic demyelinating disease of the central nervous system. Remyelination is the major therapeutic goal for this disorder. The lack of detailed knowledge about the cellular and molecular mechanisms involved in myelination restricts the design of effective treatments. A recent study by using [De La Fuente et al. (2017) Cell Reports, 20(8): 1755-1764] by using state-of-the-art techniques, including pericyte-deficient mice in combination with induced demyelination, reveal that pericytes participate in central nervous system regeneration. Strikingly, pericytes presence is essential for oligodendrocyte progenitors differentiation and myelin formation during remyelination in the brain. The emerging knowledge from this research will be important for the treatment of multiple sclerosis.

Corticosteroids for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy

BACKGROUND

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) is a progressive or relapsing and remitting paralysing illness, probably due to an autoimmune response, which should benefit from corticosteroid treatment. Non-randomised studies suggest that corticosteroids are beneficial. Two commonly used corticosteroids are prednisone and prednisolone. Both are usually given as oral tablets. Prednisone is converted into prednisolone in the liver so that the effect of the two drugs is usually the same. Another corticosteroid, dexamethasone, is more potent and is used in smaller doses. The review was first published in 2001 and last updated in 2015; we undertook this update to identify any new evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of corticosteroid treatment for CIDP compared to placebo or no treatment, and to compare the effects of different corticosteroid regimens.

SEARCH METHODS

On 8 November 2016, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase for randomised trials of corticosteroids for CIDP. We searched clinical trials registries for ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs of treatment with any corticosteroid or adrenocorticotrophic hormone for CIDP, diagnosed by an internationally accepted definition.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted data from included studies and assessed the risk of bias independently. The intended primary outcome was change in disability, with change in impairment after 12 weeks and side effects as secondary outcomes. We assessed strength of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

One non-blinded RCT comparing prednisone with no treatment in 35 eligible participants did not measure the primary outcome for this systematic review. The trial had a high risk of bias. Neuropathy Impairment Scale scores after 12 weeks improved in 12 of 19 participants randomised to prednisone, compared with five of 16 participants randomised to no treatment (risk ratio (RR) for improvement 2.02 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 4.52; very low-quality evidence). The trial did not report side effects in detail, but one prednisone-treated participant died.A double-blind RCT comparing daily standard-dose oral prednisolone with monthly high-dose oral dexamethasone in 40 participants reported none of the prespecified outcomes for this review. The trial had a low risk of bias, but the quality of evidence was limited as it came from a single small study. There was little or no difference in number of participants who achieved remission (RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.50 to 2.45 in favour of monthly dexamethasone; moderate-quality evidence), or change in disability or impairment after one year (low-quality evidence). Change of grip strength or Medical Research Council (MRC) scores demonstrated little or no difference between groups (moderate-quality to low-quality evidence). Eight of 16 people in the prednisolone group and seven of 24 people in the dexamethasone group deteriorated. Side effects were similar with each regimen, except that sleeplessness was less common with monthly dexamethasone (low-quality evidence) as was moon facies (moon-shaped appearance of the face) (moderate-quality evidence).Experience from large non-randomised studies suggests that corticosteroids are beneficial, but long-term use causes serious side effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are very uncertain about the effects of oral prednisone compared with no treatment, because the quality of evidence from the only RCT that exists is very low. Nevertheless, corticosteroids are commonly used in practice, supported by very low-quality evidence from observational studies. We also know from observational studies that corticosteroids carry the long-term risk of serious side effects. The efficacy of high-dose monthly oral dexamethasone is probably little different from that of daily standard-dose oral prednisolone. Most side effects occurred with similar frequencies in both groups, but with high-dose monthly oral dexamethasone moon facies is probably less common and sleeplessness may be less common than with oral prednisolone. We need further research to identify factors that predict response.

Intravenous immunoglobulin: pharmacological properties and use in polyneuropathies

INTRODUCTION

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) is increasingly used for the treatment of autoimmune and systemic inflammatory diseases with both licensed and off-label indications. The mechanism of action is complex and not fully understood, involving the neutralization of pathological antibodies, Fc receptor blockade, complement inhibition, immunoregulation of dendritic cells, B cells and T cells and the modulation of apoptosis. Areas covered: First, this review describes the pharmacological properties of IVIg, including the composition, mechanism of action, and adverse events. The second part gives an overview of some of the immune-mediated polyneuropathies, with special focus on the pathomechanism and clinical trials assessing the efficacy of IVIg. A literature search on PubMed was performed using the terms IVIg, IVIg preparations, side effects, mechanism of action, clinical trials, GBS, CIDP. Expert opinion: Challenges associated with IVIg therapy and the treatment possibilities for immune-mediated polyneuropathies are discussed. The availability of IVIg is limited, the expenses are high, and, in several diseases, a chronic therapy is necessary to maintain the immunomodulatory effect. The better understanding of the mechanism of action of IVIg could open the possibility of the development of disease-specific, targeted immune therapies.

Steroids for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy: evidence base and clinical practice

Evidence-based therapies for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) consist of corticosteroids, intravenous immunglobulins (IVIg), and plasma exchange. Steroids represent the oldest treatment used historically. In countries where readily available and affordable, IVIg tends to be favored as first-line treatment. The reason for this preference, despite substantially higher costs, is the perception that IVIg is more efficacious and safer than corticosteroids. However, the unselected use of IVIg as a first-line treatment option in all cases of CIDP raises issues of cost-effectiveness in the long-term. Furthermore, serious although rare, particularly thromboembolic side effects may result from their use. Recent data from randomized trials suggest pulsed corticosteroids to have a higher potential in achieving therapy-free remission or longer remission-free periods compared with IVIg, as well as relatively low rates of serious side effects when given as pulsed intravenous infusions during short periods of time. These specific advantages suggest that pulsed steroids could in many cases be used, as the first, rather than second choice of treatment when initiating immunomodulation in CIDP, primarily in hopes of achieving a remission after the short-term use. This article reviews the evidence base for the use of corticosteroids in its various forms in CIDP and factors that may influence clinicians' choice between IVIg and pulsed steroid treatment. The issue of efficacy, relapse rate and time, and side effect profile are analyzed, and some aspects from the authors' experience are discussed in relation to the possibility of using the steroid option as first-line therapy in a large proportion of patients with CIDP.

AAV1.NT-3 gene therapy attenuates spontaneous autoimmune peripheral polyneuropathy

The spontaneous autoimmune peripheral polyneuropathy (SAPP) model in B7-2 knockout non-obese diabetic mice shares clinical and histological features with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP). Secondary axonal loss is prominent in the progressive phase of this neuropathy. Neurotrophin 3 (NT-3) is an important autocrine factor supporting Schwann cell survival and differentiation and stimulates neurite outgrowth and myelination. The anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects of NT-3 raised considerations of potential efficacy in the SAPP model that could be applicable to CIDP. For this study, scAAV1.tMCK.NT-3 was delivered to the gastrocnemius muscle of 25-week-old SAPP mice. Measurable NT-3 levels were found in the serum at 7-week postgene delivery. The outcome measures included functional, electrophysiological and histological assessments. At week 32, NT-3-treated mice showed increased hind limb grip strength that correlated with improved compound muscle action potential amplitude. Myelinated fiber density was 1.9 times higher in the NT-3-treated group compared with controls and the number of demyelinated axons was significantly lower. The remyelinated nerve fiber population was significantly increased. These improved histopathological parameters from scAAV1.tMCK.NT-3 treatment occurred in the setting of reduced sciatic nerve inflammation. Collectively, these findings suggest a translational application to CIDP.

Immunotherapy in Peripheral Neuropathies

Immunotherapy has been investigated in a small subset of peripheral neuropathies, including an acute one, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and 3 chronic forms: chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy, multifocal motor neuropathy, and neuropathy associated with IgM anti-myelin-associated glycoprotein. Several experimental studies and clinical data are strongly suggestive of an immune-mediated pathogenesis. Either cell-mediated mechanisms or antibody responses to Schwann cell, compact myelin, or nodal antigens are considered to act together in an aberrant immune response to cause damage to peripheral nerves. Immunomodulatory treatments used in these neuropathies aim to act at various steps of this pathogenic process. However, there are many phenotypic variants and, consequently, there is a significant difference in the response to immunotherapy between these neuropathies, as well as a need to improve our knowledge and long-term management of chronic forms.

[Intravenous immunoglobulin in treatment of autoimmune neurological diseases in children]

Though the mechanisms of action of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) are not completely understood, these drugs are widely used in treatment of autoimmune diseases. In this review, we have analyzed the literature on the use of IVIG in the treatment of autoimmune diseases of the nervous system in children and discuss the management of patients basing on the recommendation of the European Federation of Neurological Societies. The efficacy of IVIG in children has been shown as first line treatment in Guillain-Barre syndrome, chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, multifocal motor neuropathy, dermatomyositis as a second-line drug in the combination with prednisolone or immunosuppressors in patients refractory to treatment with corticosteroids and cytostatics, myasthenic crisis in myasthenia gravis, exacerbations and short-term treatment of severe forms, non-responsiveness to acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, multiple sclerosis as second or third line of treatment in patients with relapsing-remitting course with intolerance to standard immunomodulatory therapy, acute multiple encephalomyelitis with no response to the treatment with high doses of corticosteroids, paraneoplastic syndromes, pharmacoresistant epilepsy and autoimmune encephalitis. Because the right choice of the drug plays a key role, in particular, in children, that determines the efficacy and safety of the treatment, we present the main approaches to the choice of the drug and schemes of treatment of autoimmune diseases of the nervous system in children.

Plasma exchange for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy

BACKGROUND

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) is an uncommon progressive or relapsing paralysing disease caused by inflammation of the peripheral nerves. If the hypothesis that it is due to autoimmunity is correct, removal of autoantibodies in the blood by plasma exchange should be beneficial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of plasma exchange for treating CIDP.

SEARCH METHODS

On 30 June 2015, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, and LILACS. We also scrutinised the bibliographies of the trials, contacted the trial authors and other disease experts, and searched trials registries for ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs in participants of any age comparing plasma exchange with sham treatment or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected the trials, extracted the data, and assessed risk of bias. Where possible the review authors combined data according to the methods of the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Review Group.

MAIN RESULTS

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

one cross-over trial including 18 participants showed after four weeks, 2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.8 to 3.0) points more improvement on an 11-point disability scale with plasma exchange (10 exchanges over four weeks) than with sham exchange. Rapid deterioration after plasma exchange occurred in eight of 12 who had improved.

SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

when we combined the results of this cross-over trial and a trial with 29 participants treated in a parallel-group design, there were 31 points (95% CI 16 to 45) more improvement on an impairment scale (maximum score 280) after plasma exchange (six exchanges over three weeks) than after sham exchange. There were significant improvements in both trials in an electrophysiological measure, the proximally evoked compound muscle action potential, after three or four weeks. Nonrandomised evidence indicates that plasma exchange induces adverse events in 3% to 17% of procedures. These events are sometimes serious. Both trials had a low risk of bias. A trial that showed no significant difference in the benefit between plasma exchange and intravenous immunoglobulin is included in the Cochrane review of intravenous immunoglobulin for this condition.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate- to high-quality evidence from two small trials shows that plasma exchange provides significant short-term improvement in disability, clinical impairment, and motor nerve conduction velocity in CIDP but rapid deterioration may occur afterwards. Adverse events related to difficulty with venous access, use of citrate, and haemodynamic changes are not uncommon. We need more research to identify agents that will prolong the beneficial action of plasma exchange.

Corticosteroids for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy

BACKGROUND

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) is a progressive or relapsing and remitting paralysing illness probably due to an autoimmune response which should benefit from corticosteroids. Non-randomised studies suggest that corticosteroids are beneficial. Two commonly used corticosteroids are prednisone and prednisolone. Both are usually given as oral tablets. Prednisone is converted into prednisolone in the liver so that the effect of the two drugs is usually the same. Another corticosteroid, called dexamethasone, is more potent and is used in smaller doses.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of corticosteroid treatment compared to placebo or no treatment for CIDP and to compare the effects of different corticosteroid regimes.

SEARCH METHODS

On 27 October 2014 we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE for randomised trials of corticosteroids for CIDP. We searched three other databases for information to include in the Discussion, and clinical trials registries for ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised or quasi-randomised trials of treatment with any form of corticosteroids or adrenocorticotrophic hormone for CIDP, diagnosed by an internationally accepted definition.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors extracted the data and assessed risk of bias independently. The primary outcome was intended to be change in disability, with change in impairment after 12 weeks as a secondary outcome, and adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

In one non-blinded randomised controlled trial (RCT) with 35 eligible participants, the primary outcome for this review was not available. The trial had a high risk of bias. Twelve of 19 participants treated with prednisone, compared with five of 16 participants randomised to no treatment, had improved neuropathy impairment scores after 12 weeks; the risk ratio (RR) for improvement was 2.02 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 4.52). Adverse events were not reported in detail, but one prednisone-treated participant died.In a double-blind RCT comparing daily standard-dose oral prednisolone with monthly high-dose oral dexamethasone in 40 participants, none of the outcomes for this review were available. The trial had a low risk of bias. There were no significant differences in remission (RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.50 to 2.45 in favour of monthly dexamethasone) or change in disability or impairment after one year. Eight of 16 in the prednisolone, and seven of 24 in the dexamethasone group deteriorated. Adverse events were similar with each regimen, except that sleeplessness and moon facies (moon-shaped appearance of the face) were significantly less common with monthly dexamethasone.Experience from large non-randomised studies suggests that corticosteroids are beneficial, but long-term use causes serious side effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Very low quality evidence from one small, randomised trial did not show a statistically significant benefit from oral prednisone compared with no treatment. Nevertheless, corticosteroids are commonly used in practice. According to moderate quality evidence from one RCT, the efficacy of high-dose monthly oral dexamethasone was not statistically different from that of daily standard-dose oral prednisolone. Most adverse events occurred with similar frequencies in both groups, but sleeplessness and moon facies were significantly less common with monthly dexamethasone. Further research is needed to identify factors which predict response.

Is dosing of therapeutic immunoglobulins optimal? A review of a three-decade long debate in europe

The consumption of immunoglobulins (Ig) is increasing due to better recognition of antibody deficiencies, an aging population, and new indications. This review aims to examine the various dosing regimens and research developments in the established and in some of the relevant off-label indications in Europe. The background to the current regulatory settings in Europe is provided as a backdrop for the latest developments in primary and secondary immunodeficiencies and in immunomodulatory indications. In these heterogeneous areas, clinical trials encompassing different routes of administration, varying intervals, and infusion rates are paving the way toward more individualized therapy regimens. In primary antibody deficiencies, adjustments in dosing and intervals will depend on the clinical presentation, effective IgG trough levels and IgG metabolism. Ideally, individual pharmacokinetic profiles in conjunction with the clinical phenotype could lead to highly tailored treatment. In practice, incremental dosage increases are necessary to titrate the optimal dose for more severely ill patients. Higher intravenous doses in these patients also have beneficial immunomodulatory effects beyond mere IgG replacement. Better understanding of the pharmacokinetics of Ig therapy is leading to a move away from simplistic "per kg" dosing. Defective antibody production is common in many secondary immunodeficiencies irrespective of whether the causative factor was lymphoid malignancies (established indications), certain autoimmune disorders, immunosuppressive agents, or biologics. This antibody failure, as shown by test immunization, may be amenable to treatment with replacement Ig therapy. In certain immunomodulatory settings [e.g., idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP)], selection of patients for Ig therapy may be enhanced by relevant biomarkers in order to exclude non-responders and thus obtain higher response rates. In this review, the developments in dosing of therapeutic immunoglobulins have been limited to high and some medium priority indications such as ITP, Kawasaki' disease, Guillain-Barré syndrome, chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy, myasthenia gravis, multifocal motor neuropathy, fetal alloimmune thrombocytopenia, fetal hemolytic anemia, and dermatological diseases.

Central and peripheral demyelination

Several conditions cause damage to the inherently normal myelin of central nervous system, perepheral nervous system or both central and perepheral nervous system and hence termed as central demyelinating diseases, perepheral demyelinating diseases and combined central and perepheral demyelinating diseases respectively. Here we analysed and foccused on the etiology, prevalance, incidence and age of these demyelinating disorders. Clinical attention and various diagnostic tests are needed to adequately assess all these possibilities.

Disease-modifying therapy in multiple sclerosis and chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy: common and divergent current and future strategies

Multiple sclerosis (MS) and chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) represent chronic, autoimmune demyelinating disorders of the central and peripheral nervous system. Although both disorders share some fundamental pathogenic elements, treatments do not provide uniform effects across both disorders. We aim at providing an overview of current and future disease-modifying strategies in these disorders to demonstrate communalities and distinctions. Intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIG) have demonstrated short- and long-term beneficial effects in CIDP but are not effective in MS. Dimethyl fumarate (BG-12), teriflunomide and laquinimod are orally administered immunomodulatory drugs that are already approved or likely to be approved in the near future for the basic therapy of patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) due to positive results in Phase III clinical trials. However, clinical trials with these drugs in CIDP have not (yet) been initiated. Natalizumab and fingolimod are approved for the treatment of RRMS, and trials to evaluate their safety and efficacy in CIDP are now planned. Alemtuzumab, ocrelizumab and daclizumab respresent monoclonal antibodies in advanced stages of clinical development for their use in RRMS patients. Attempts to study the safety and efficacy of alemtuzumab and B cell-depleting anti-CD20 antibodies, i.e. rituximab, ocrelizumab or ofatumumab, in CIDP patients are currently under way. We provide an overview of the mechanism of action and clinical data available on disease-modifying immunotherapy options for MS and CIDP. Enhanced understanding of the relative effects of therapies in these two disorders may aid rational treatment selection and the development of innovative treatment approaches in the future.

Intravenous immunoglobulin for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy

BACKGROUND

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) causes progressive or relapsing weakness and numbness of the limbs, developing over at least two months. Uncontrolled studies suggest that intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) helps. This review was first published in 2002 and has since been updated, most recently in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To review systematically the evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) concerning the efficacy and safety of IVIg in CIDP.

SEARCH METHODS

On 4 December 2012, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (2012, issue 11 in the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE and EMBASE to December 2012 and ISI from January 1985 to May 2008. We searched for ongoing trials through two metaRegistries (World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal and Current Controlled Trials).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected RCTs testing any dose of IVIg versus placebo, plasma exchange or corticosteroids in definite or probable CIDP.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors reviewed literature searches to identify potentially relevant RCTs, scored their quality and extracted data independently. We contacted authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We considered eight RCTs, including 332 participants, to be eligible for inclusion in the review. These trials were homogeneous and the overall risk of bias low. Five studies, in a total of 235 participants compared IVIg against placebo. One trial with 20 participants compared IVIg with plasma exchange, one trial compared IVIg with prednisolone in 32 participants, and one trial, newly included at this update, compared IVIg with intravenous methylprednisolone in 46 participants.A significantly higher proportion of participants improved in disability within one month after IVIg treatment as compared with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 2.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.72 to 3.36; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome 3.03 (95% CI 2.33 to 4.55), high quality evidence). Whether all these improvements are equally clinically relevant cannot be deduced from this analysis because each trial used different disability scales and definitions of significant improvement. In three trials, including 84 participants, the disability score could be transformed to the modified Rankin score, on which improvement of one point after IVIg treatment compared to placebo was barely significant (RR 2.40, 95% CI 0.98 to 5.83) (moderate quality evidence). Only one placebo-controlled study included in this review had a long-term follow-up. The results of this study suggest that IVIg improves disability more than placebo over 24 and 48 weeks.The mean disability score revealed no significant difference between IVIg and plasma exchange at six weeks (moderate quality evidence). There was no significant difference in improvement in disability on prednisolone compared with IVIg after two or six weeks, or on methylprednisolone compared to IVIg after two weeks or six months (moderate quality evidence).There were no statistically significant differences in frequencies of side effects between the three types of treatment for which data were available (IVg versus placebo or steroids). (moderate or high quality evidence) Mild and transient adverse events were found in 49% of participants treated with IVIg, while serious adverse events were found in six per cent.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence from RCTs shows that IVIg improves disability for at least two to six weeks compared with placebo, with an NNTB of three. During this period it has similar efficacy to plasma exchange, oral prednisolone and intravenous methylprednisolone. In one large trial, the benefit of IVIg persisted for 24 and possibly 48 weeks. Further research is needed to compare the long-term benefits as well as side effects of IVIg with other treatments.

Epimedium flavonoids counteract the side effects of glucocorticoids on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis

Our previous studies demonstrated that the epimedium herb, when simultaneously used with GCs, counteracted suppressive effects of GCs on the HPA axis without adverse influence on the therapeutic action of GCs. Here, total flavones were extracted from the epimedium flavonoids (EFs) and then used to investigate whether EFs provide protective effects on the HPA axis. We found that GCs induced a significant decrease in body weight gain, adrenal gland weight gain, and plasma adrenocorticotropin (ACTH) and corticosterone levels. After treatment with EFs, body weight gain, adrenal gland weight gain, and plasma corticosterone level were significantly restored, whilst plasma ACTH level was partially elevated. EFs were also shown to promote cell proliferation in the outer layer of adrenal cortex and to enhance the migration of newly divided cells toward the inner layer. To elucidate the underlying mechanisms, the mRNA expression of insulin-like growth factor II (IGF-II) was measured, and EFs significantly upregulated IGF-II expression. Our results indicated that EFs counteract the suppression of the HPA axis induced by GCs. This may involve both the ACTH and IGF-II pathways and thereby promote regeneration of the adrenal cortex suggesting a potential clinical application of EFs against the suppressive effects of GCs on the HPA axis.