Prognostic Factors and Treatments Efficacy in Spinal Cord Sarcoidosis: An Observational Cohort With Long-term Follow-up

Neurosarcoidosis and Neurologic Complications of Sarcoidosis Treatment

Sarcoidosis is an immune-mediated multisystem granulomatous disorder. Neurosarcoidosis (NS) accounts for 5% to 35% of cases. The diagnostic evaluation of NS can be a clinical challenge. Gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the gold standard to evaluate central nervous system NS. In almost all cases treatment is warranted. Although glucocorticoids remain the first-line therapy in patients with sarcoidosis, in NS timely initiation of second- or third-line treatment is strongly recommended. Of these, tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors are the most promising. However, the treatment itself may be responsible for/associated with developing neurologic symptoms mimicking NS. Thus, it is important to consider the possibility of drug-induced neurologic symptoms in sarcoidosis.

Anti-inflammatory Therapy for Sarcoidosis

Over 50% of patients with sarcoidosis will require anti-inflammatory therapy at some point in their disease course. Indications for therapy are to improve health-related quality of life, prevent or arrest organ dysfunction (or organ failure) or avoid death. Recently published treatment guidelines recommended a stepwise approach to therapy however there are some patients for whom up front combination or more intense therapy maybe reasonable. The last decade has seen an explosion of studies and trials evaluating novel therapeutic agents and treatment strategies. Currently available anti-inflammatory therapies and several novel therapies are discussed here.

[Neurological involvement of sarcoidosis: current diagnostic and therapeutic strategies]

Neurosarcoidosis (NS) is a rare but severe form of sarcoidosis. NS is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Mortality is about 10% at 10 years with more than 30% of patients who have a significant disability. The most frequent features are cranial neuropathy (the facial and optic nerve most commonly affected), cranial parenchymal lesions, meningitis, spinal corn abnormalities (20-30%) and more rarely peripheral neuropathy (approximately 10-15%). The challenge of diagnosis is to eliminate other diagnoses. Atypical presentations should make to discuss the need for cerebral biopsy in order to highlight the presence of granulomatous lesions while eliminating alternative diagnosis. Therapeutic management is based on corticosteroid therapy and immunomodulators. There are no comparative prospective study to allow us to define the first-line immunosuppressive treatment and the therapeutic strategy in refractory patients. Conventional immunosuppressants such as methotrexate, mycophenolate mofetil and cyclophosphamide are commonly used. Data on the efficacy of anti-TNFα (including infliximab) in refractory and/or severe forms are increasing during the last ten years. Additional data is necessary to assess their interest in first line in patients with severe involvement and a significant risk of relapse.

Epidemiology, clinical presentation, treatment, and outcome of neurosarcoidosis: A mono-centric retrospective study and literature review

Introduction

Neurosarcoidosis is a rare granulomatous disorder, and treatment guidelines are mainly based on retrospective studies.

Materials and methods

This retrospective study was performed to provide a detailed description of the clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes of patients with neurosarcoidosis followed at Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc in Belgium. The second objective of our study was to perform a comparative literature review of neurosarcoidosis, with a focus on treatment outcomes with the use of TNF-α antagonist.

Results

Among 180 patients with sarcoidosis followed in our hospital, 22 patients with neurosarcoidosis were included in the final analysis. Our literature research identified 776 articles of which 35 articles met our inclusion criteria, including 1,793 patients diagnosed with neurosarcoidosis. In our cohort, the majority of patients (86%) were diagnosed with systemic sarcoidosis which was similar to that reported in the literature (83%). Serum CRP and calcemia were elevated only in 33 and 18% of patients, respectively. Serum lysozyme and angiotensin-converting enzyme were elevated in 79 and 16% of patients, respectively. Lumbar puncture and CSF fluid analysis were performed in 15/22 patients and were abnormal in all patients. Brain MRI was performed in 21/22 patients and showed abnormalities in 16 patients consisting of parenchymal lesions in 63%, hypothalamic-pituitary axis lesions in 38%, and meningeal enhancement in 31%. In both cohort patients, methotrexate was the most frequently used treatment (>45% of cases) with a favorable outcome in an average of 50% of patients. A TNF-α antagonist was administered in 9% of patients in our cohort and in 27% of patients in the literature review. The proportion of favorable outcomes in literature research was significantly higher in patients treated with TNF-α antagonists compared to methotrexate (p < 0.0001), mycophenolate mofetil (p < 0.0001), or azathioprine (p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

The results of our cohort and literature review confirm that neurosarcoidosis occurred most frequently in the context of systemic sarcoidosis. Methotrexate is the most frequent second-line therapy. The effectiveness of therapy with TNF-α antagonists is well-demonstrated and associated with a better outcome. Their earlier use during the disease course among aggressive and/or refractory neurosarcoidosis should be considered.

Hit-hard and early versus step-up treatment in severe sarcoidosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The treatment of sarcoidosis remains uncertain, despite 70 years of study. The conventional approach is to initiate corticosteroids in individuals who require treatment. The position of more aggressive regimes is unknown.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent recognition that many patients will require prolonged therapy, and the observation that corticosteroids lead to overt and insidious toxicities, have led to suggestions that steroid-sparing medications be used earlier in the management of sarcoidosis. Individuals with poor prognostic features, designated as 'high-risk' sarcoidosis may, especially benefit from a broader palette of therapeutic options in the initial treatment regimen. An even more aggressive approach, known as 'top-down' or 'hit-hard and early' therapy has emerged in the fields of gastroenterology and rheumatology in the past 15 years, on the premise that highly effective early control of inflammation leads to better outcomes. These regimens typically involve early initiation of biologic therapies.

SUMMARY

For certain subpopulations of sarcoidosis patients, 'top-down' therapy could be helpful. Severe pulmonary sarcoidosis, neurosarcoidosis, cardiac sarcoidosis and multiorgan sarcoidosis are phenotypes that may be most relevant for revised therapeutic algorithms. Precision medicine approaches and randomized trials will be necessary to confirm a role for top-down therapy in the routine management of sarcoidosis.