No benefit of 3,4-diaminopyridine in essential tremor: a placebo-controlled crossover study

ELectronic Archimedes spiral Neural Network (ELANN)

The Archimedes spiral is a clinical tool that aids in the diagnosis and monitoring of essential tremor. However, spiral ratings may vary based on experience and training of the rating physician. This study sought to generate an objective standard model for tremor evaluation using convolutional neural networks. One senior movement disorders neurologist (Neurologist 1) with over 30 years of clinical experience used the Bain and Findley Spirography Rating Scale to rate 1653 Archimedes spiral images from 46 essential tremor patients (mild to severe tremor) and 75 control subjects (no to mild tremor). Neurologist 1's labels were used as the reference standard to train the model. After training the model, a randomly selected subset of spiral testing data was re-evaluated by Neurologist 1, by a second senior movement disorders neurologist (Neurologist 2) with over 27 years of clinical experience, and by our model. Cohen's Weighted Kappa 95% confidence intervals were calculated from all rater comparisons to determine if our model performs with the same proficiency as two senior movement disorders neurologists. The Cohen's Weighted Kappa 95% confidence intervals for the agreement between the reference standard scores and Neurologist 1's rerated scores, for the agreement between the reference standard scores and Neurologist 2's scores, and for the agreement between the reference standard scores and our model's scores were 0.93-0.98, 0.86-0.94, and 0.89-0.96, respectively. With overlapping Cohen's Weighted Kappa 95% confidence intervals for all agreement comparisons, we demonstrate that our model evaluates spirals with the same proficiency as two senior movement disorders neurologists.

Current and Future Neuropharmacological Options for the Treatment of Essential Tremor

BACKGROUND

Essential Tremor (ET) is likely the most frequent movement disorder. In this review, we have summarized the current pharmacological options for the treatment of this disorder and discussed several future options derived from drugs tested in experimental models of ET or from neuropathological data.

METHODS

A literature search was performed on the pharmacology of essential tremors using PubMed Database from 1966 to July 31, 2019.

RESULTS

To date, the beta-blocker propranolol and the antiepileptic drug primidone are the drugs that have shown higher efficacy in the treatment of ET. Other drugs tested in ET patients have shown different degrees of efficacy or have not been useful.

CONCLUSION

Injections of botulinum toxin A could be useful in the treatment of some patients with ET refractory to pharmacotherapy. According to recent neurochemical data, drugs acting on the extrasynaptic GABAA receptors, the glutamatergic system or LINGO-1 could be interesting therapeutic options in the future.

Interventions for eye movement disorders due to acquired brain injury

BACKGROUND

Acquired brain injury can cause eye movement disorders which may include: strabismus, gaze deficits and nystagmus, causing visual symptoms of double, blurred or 'juddery' vision and reading difficulties. A wide range of interventions exist that have potential to alleviate or ameliorate these symptoms. There is a need to evaluate the effectiveness of these interventions and the timing of their implementation.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the effectiveness of any intervention and determine the effect of timing of intervention in the treatment of strabismus, gaze deficits and nystagmus due to acquired brain injury. We considered restitutive, substitutive, compensatory or pharmacological interventions separately and compared them to control, placebo, alternative treatment or no treatment for improving ocular alignment or motility (or both).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (containing the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2017, Issue 5), MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, CINAHL EBSCO, AMED Ovid, PsycINFO Ovid, Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) database, PsycBITE (Psychological Database for Brain Impairment Treatment Efficacy), ISRCTN registry, ClinicalTrials.gov, Health Services Research Projects in Progress (HSRProj), National Eye Institute Clinical Studies Database and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). The databases were last searched on 26 June 2017. No date or language restrictions were used in the electronic searches for trials. We manually searched the Australian Orthoptic Journal, British and Irish Orthoptic Journal, and ESA, ISA and IOA conference proceedings. We contacted researchers active in this field for information about further published or unpublished studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any intervention for ocular alignment or motility deficits (or both) due to acquired brain injury.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We used standard methods expected by Cochrane. We employed the GRADE approach to interpret findings and assess the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We found five RCTs (116 participants) that were eligible for inclusion. These trials included conditions of acquired nystagmus, sixth cranial nerve palsy and traumatic brain injury-induced ocular motility defects. We did not identify any relevant studies of restitutive interventions.We identified one UK-based trial of a substitutive intervention, in which botulinum toxin was compared with observation in 47 people with acute sixth nerve palsy. At four months after entry into the trial, people given botulinum toxin were more likely to make a full recovery (reduction in angle of deviation within 10 prism dioptres), compared with observation (risk ratio 1.19, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.48; low-certainty evidence). These same participants also achieved binocular single vision. In the injection group only, there were 2 cases of transient ptosis out of 22 participants (9%), and 4 participants out of 22 (18%) with transient vertical deviation; a total complication rate of 24% per injection and 27% per participant. All adverse events recovered. We judged the certainty of evidence as low, downgrading for risk of bias and imprecision. It was not possible to mask investigators or participants to allocation, and the follow-up between groups varied.We identified one USA-based cross-over trial of a compensatory intervention. Oculomotor rehabilitation was compared with sham training in 12 people with mild traumatic brain injury, at least one year after the injury. We judged the evidence from this study to be very low-certainty. The study was small, data for the sham training group were not fully reported, and it was unclear if a cross-over study design was appropriate as this is an intervention with potential to have a permanent effect.We identified three cross-over studies of pharmacological interventions for acquired nystagmus, which took place in Germany and the USA. These studies investigated two classes of pharmacological interventions: GABAergic drugs (gabapentin, baclofen) and aminopyridines (4-aminopyridines (AP), 3,4-diaminopyridine (DAP)). We judged the evidence from all three studies as very low-certainty because of small numbers of participants (which led to imprecision) and risk of bias (they were cross-over studies which did not report data in a way that permitted estimation of effect size).One study compared gabapentin (up to 900 mg/day) with baclofen (up to 30 mg/day) in 21 people with pendular and jerk nystagmus. The follow-up period was two weeks. This study provides very low-certainty evidence that gabapentin may work better than baclofen in improving ocular motility and reducing participant-reported symptoms (oscillopsia). These effects may be different in pendular and jerk nystagmus, but without formal subgroup analysis it is unclear if the difference between the two types of nystagmus was chance finding. Quality of life was not reported. Ten participants with pendular nystagmus chose to continue treatment with gabapentin, and one with baclofen. Two participants with jerk nystagmus chose to continue treatment with gabapentin, and one with baclofen. Drug intolerance was reported in one person receiving gabapentin and in four participants receiving baclofen. Increased ataxia was reported in three participants receiving gabapentin and two participants receiving baclofen.One study compared a single dose of 3,4-DAP (20 mg) with placebo in 17 people with downbeat nystagmus. Assessments were made 30 minutes after taking the drug. This study provides very low-certainty evidence that 3,4-DAP may reduce the mean peak slow-phase velocity, with less oscillopsia, in people with downbeat nystagmus. Three participants reported transient side effects of minor perioral/distal paraesthesia.One study compared a single dose of 4-AP with a single dose of 3,4-DAP (both 10 mg doses) in eight people with downbeat nystagmus. Assessments were made 45 and 90 minutes after drug administration. This study provides very low-certainty evidence that both 3,4-DAP and 4-AP may reduce the mean slow-phase velocity in people with downbeat nystagmus. This effect may be stronger with 4-AP.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The included studies provide insufficient evidence to inform decisions about treatments specifically for eye movement disorders that occur following acquired brain injury. No information was obtained on the cost of treatment or measures of participant satisfaction relating to treatment options and effectiveness. It was possible to describe the outcome of treatment in each trial and ascertain the occurrence of adverse events.

Transducer-based evaluation of tremor

The International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society established a task force on tremor that reviewed the use of transducer-based measures in the quantification and characterization of tremor. Studies of accelerometry, electromyography, activity monitoring, gyroscopy, digitizing tablet-based measures, vocal acoustic analysis, and several other transducer-based methods were identified by searching PubMed.gov. The availability, use, acceptability, reliability, validity, and responsiveness were reviewed for each measure using the following criteria: (1) used in the assessment of tremor; (2) used in published studies by people other than the developers; and (3) adequate clinimetric testing. Accelerometry, gyroscopy, electromyography, and digitizing tablet-based measures fulfilled all three criteria. Compared to rating scales, transducers are far more sensitive to changes in tremor amplitude and frequency, but they do not appear to be more capable of detecting a change that exceeds random variability in tremor amplitude (minimum detectable change). The use of transducer-based measures requires careful attention to their limitations and validity in a particular clinical or research setting. © 2016 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

The treatment of tremor

Tremor is a hyperkinetic movement disorder characterized by rhythmic oscillations of one or more body parts. It can be disabling and may impair quality of life. Various etiological subtypes of tremor are recognized, with essential tremor (ET) and Parkinsonian tremor being the most common. Here we review the current literature on tremor treatment regarding ET and head and voice tremor, as well as dystonic tremor, orthostatic tremor, tremor due to multiple sclerosis (MS) or lesions in the brainstem or thalamus, neuropathic tremor, and functional (psychogenic) tremor, and summarize main findings. Most studies are available for ET and only few studies specifically focused on other tremor forms. Controlled trials outside ET are rare and hence most of the recommendations are based on a low level of evidence. For ET, propranolol and primidone are considered drugs of first choice with a mean effect size of approximately 50 % tremor reduction. The efficacy of topiramate is also supported by a large double-blind placebo-controlled trial, while other drugs have less supporting evidence. With a mean effect size of about 90 % deep brain stimulation in the nucleus ventralis intermedius or the subthalamic nucleus may be the most potent treatment; however, there are no controlled trials and it is reserved for severely affected patients. Dystonic limb tremor may respond to anticholinergics. Botulinum toxin improves head and voice tremor. Gabapentin and clonazepam are often recommended for orthostatic tremor. MS tremor responds only poorly to drug treatment. For patients with severe MS tremor, thalamic deep brain stimulation has been recommended. Patients with functional tremor may benefit from antidepressants and are best be treated in a multidisciplinary setting. Several tremor syndromes can already be treated with success. But new drugs specifically designed for tremor treatment are needed. ET is most likely covering different entities and their delineation may also improve treatment. Modern study designs and long-term studies are needed.

Treatment with 4-aminopyridine improves upper limb tremor of a patient with multiple sclerosis: a video case report

The reversible potassium channel blocker 4-aminopyridine is effective in the treatment of numerous cerebellar dysfunctions, such as episodic ataxia type 2 and downbeat nystagmus syndrome. In 2011, its sustained release form, dalfampridine, was admitted in Europe for the treatment of walking difficulties in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). Here we report the case of a 44-year old patient with a progressive MS whose upper limb tremor was markedly reduced under treatment with 4-aminopyridine, as documented in a Tremor Activities of Daily Living questionnaire and in the 9-Hole Peg test. Hand accelerations decreased in the left hand from 10.9 m/sec(2) to 2.2 m/sec(2) and in the right hand from 4.2 m/sec(2) to 0.9 m/sec(2). This case report indicates for the first time that 4-aminopyridine might be effective in the symptomatic treatment of tremor entities in patients with MS. The finding calls for further prospective studies to determine the usefulness of 4-aminopyridine or its sustained-release form dalfampridine in treating patients with tremor and MS.

Evidence-based guideline update: treatment of essential tremor: report of the Quality Standards subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology

BACKGROUND

This evidence-based guideline is an update of the 2005 American Academy of Neurology practice parameter on the treatment of essential tremor (ET).

METHODS

A literature review using MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, and CINAHL was performed to identify clinical trials in patients with ET published between 2004 and April 2010.

RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Conclusions and recommendations for the use of propranolol, primidone (Level A, established as effective); alprazolam, atenolol, gabapentin (monotherapy), sotalol, topiramate (Level B, probably effective); nadolol, nimodipine, clonazepam, botulinum toxin A, deep brain stimulation, thalamotomy (Level C, possibly effective); and gamma knife thalamotomy (Level U, insufficient evidence) are unchanged from the previous guideline. Changes to conclusions and recommendations from the previous guideline include the following: 1) levetiracetam and 3,4-diaminopyridine probably do not reduce limb tremor in ET and should not be considered (Level B); 2) flunarizine possibly has no effect in treating limb tremor in ET and may not be considered (Level C); and 3) there is insufficient evidence to support or refute the use of pregabalin, zonisamide, or clozapine as treatment for ET (Level U).

Validation of digital spiral analysis as outcome parameter for clinical trials in essential tremor

Essential tremor, one of the most prevalent movement disorders, is characterized by kinetic and postural tremor affecting activities of daily living. Spiral drawing is commonly used to visually rate tremor intensity, as part of the routine clinical assessment of tremor and as a tool in clinical trials. We present a strategy to quantify tremor severity from spirals drawn on a digitizing tablet. We validate our method against a well-established visual spiral rating method and compare both methods on their capacity to capture a therapeutic effect, as defined by the change in clinical essential tremor rating scale after an ethanol challenge. Fifty-four Archimedes spirals were drawn using a digitizing tablet by nine ethanol-responsive patients with essential tremor before and at five consecutive time points after the administration of ethanol in a standardized treatment intervention. Quantitative spiral tremor severity was estimated from the velocity tremor peak amplitude after numerical derivation and Fourier transformation of pen-tip positions. In randomly ordered sets, spirals were scored by seven trained raters, using Bain and Findley's 0 to 10 rating scale. Computerized scores correlated with visual ratings (P < 0.0001). The correlation was significant at each time point before and after ethanol (P < 0.005). Quantitative ratings provided better sensitivity than visual rating to capture the effects of an ethanol challenge (P < 0.05). Using a standardized treatment approach, we were able to demonstrate that spirography time-series analysis is a valid, reliable method to document tremor intensity and a more sensitive measure for small effects than currently available visual spiral rating methods.

3,4-diaminopyridine safety in clinical practice: an observational, retrospective cohort study

Fatigue is one of the most common and disabling symptoms of multiple sclerosis (MS) and has a significant, often underestimated, impact on patients' quality of life. Current management is mainly symptomatic. 3,4-diaminopyridine (3,4-DAP) is a voltage-dependent potassium channel blocker that has been used on a named patient basis in Europe for many years to improve motor function and fatigue in patients with MS and other neuromuscular disorders, and it is undergoing the European approval process for Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome (LEMS). The efficacy and safety of 3,4-DAP as symptomatic therapy in MS have not been widely evaluated. This study aimed to assess the safety profile of 3,4-DAP in routine clinical practice in an observational, retrospective study. The study involved 669 patients of the Rennes Multiple Sclerosis Clinic, France, who were treated with 3,4-DAP for the relief of fatigue during the period 1998-2003. Overall, 18.2% of patients presented adverse drug reactions (ADRs) while using moderate doses of 3,4-DAP (20-30 mg daily or up to 80 mg daily for patients with LEMS) for periods of up to 51 months. The majority of ADRs were mild to moderate and transient or reversible at the end of treatment (mean treatment duration = two months) or after dose adjustment. Most did not require discontinuation. The most commonly observed ADRs were paraesthesias. There was one case of epileptic seizure, one of hepatotoxicity and one of heart palpitations thought 'possibly' to be linked to 3,4-DAP. These underline the need for continued monitoring during treatment with 3,4-DAP.