-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2011Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome (LEMS) is an autoimmune disorder of neuromuscular transmission. Treatments attempt to overcome the harmful autoimmune process, or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome (LEMS) is an autoimmune disorder of neuromuscular transmission. Treatments attempt to overcome the harmful autoimmune process, or improve residual neuromuscular transmission
OBJECTIVES
The objective was to examine the efficacy of treatment in Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (12 October 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (12 October 2010, Issue 4 2010 in the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (January 1966 to September 2010) and EMBASE (January 1980 to September 2010).
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised or quasi-randomised trials of adults and children with a diagnosis of Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome, with or without small-cell lung cancer, receiving any form of pharmacological or physical treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
All authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for missing information when possible.
MAIN RESULTS
Four controlled trials of 3,4-diaminopyridine compared with placebo in a total of 54 participants with Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome were eligible: three cross-over trials and one parallel group. Two were added at this update. One of these trials also assessed pyridostigmine in conjunction with 3,4-diaminopyridine. A further cross-over trial compared intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) to placebo in nine participants.Four trials of 3,4-diaminopyridine reported significant improvement in the primary outcome, muscle strength score, or myometric limb measurement for between hours and a week following treatment, and significant improvement in resting compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitude following 3,4-diaminopyridine, compared with placebo.A meta-analysis of the primary endpoint showed Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis (QMG) muscle score assessed between three and eight days was likely to improve by a mean of 2.44 points (95% confidence interval 3.6 to 1.22). Meta-analysis of the secondary endpoint CMAP amplitude also showed a mean improvement of 1.36 mV (95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.72) over the same period. The risk of bias was determined to be low, and quality of evidence moderate to high.A single cross-over trial reported significant improvement in myometric limb strength and non-significant improvement in mean resting CMAP amplitude with IVIg compared to placebo. Clinical improvement lasted for up to eight weeks.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Limited but moderate to high quality evidence from randomised controlled trials showed that over days 3,4-diaminopyridine, or for up to 8 weeks IVIg, improved muscle strength scores and CMAP amplitudes in participants with Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome. There are insufficient data at present to quantify this effect. Other possible treatments have not been tested in randomised controlled trials.
Topics: 4-Aminopyridine; Amifampridine; Cholinesterase Inhibitors; Humans; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous; Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome; Muscle Strength; Potassium Channel Blockers; Pyridostigmine Bromide; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 21328260
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003279.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2001Because of their ability to increase nerve conduction in demyelinated nerve fibers, potassium channel blockers 4-aminopyridine (AP) and 3,4-diaminopyridine (DAP) have... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Because of their ability to increase nerve conduction in demyelinated nerve fibers, potassium channel blockers 4-aminopyridine (AP) and 3,4-diaminopyridine (DAP) have been proposed as a symptomatic therapy for people with multiple sclerosis (MS).
OBJECTIVES
To determine the efficacy and safety of aminopyridines in improving neurological deficits in people with MS.
SEARCH STRATEGY
Computerised general (MEDLINE, EMBASE) and specialised databases (Cochrane MS Group's trials register, CCTR). Hand search of bibliographic references from retrieved studies and recent MS symposia reports. Contact with principal investigators of known studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Trials were included if they fulfilled all following criteria: randomised controlled trials (RCTs); adults with MS, out of exacerbation; AP or DAP treatment versus placebo; clinical endpoints.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We identified 26 potentially pertinent studies. Three reviewers independently extracted data and assessed trial quality from the 16 studies available as full papers.
MAIN RESULTS
Five studies (six publications) and 144 participants were considered in this review. Two more abstracts are awaiting assessment. All five studies were single-centre, double-blind, crossover trials. Four studies assessed the efficacy of AP versus placebo, one compared DAP with active placebo. The duration of treatment ranged from hours to three months. The median quality score of the studies was 3 (range 2-5). The heterogeneity of outcome assessment and the absence of information on individual study periods, allowed quantitative pooling of results for few categorical variables. Of the 144 treated patients, there were six major side effects: one acute encephalopathy, three episodes of confusion, and two seizures. Manual muscle testing was assessed in three studies (54 patients), with 29 patients (54%) improving in at least one muscular district during study treatment versus four patients (7%) during placebo (odds ratio [OR] 14.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.7-43.7). Ambulation was assessed in three studies (54 patients): 9 patients (17%) improved during study treatment versus none during placebo (p<0.001). An improvement in EDSS score was found in 13 of the 144 participants during study treatment (9%) versus none during placebo (p<0.001). No improvement in neuropsychological tests was found in the two trials that evaluated cognitive function. Finally, 47 of 136 people with MS (35%) felt improved when receiving the study drug, against 7(5%) on placebo (OR 9.7, 95% CI 4.3-22.0).
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
Based on currently available information, no unbiased statement can be made about the safety or efficacy of aminopyridines for treating MS symptoms. Furthermore, we could not obtain any data on three unpublished RCTs involving more than 300 participants. We conclude that publication bias remains a pervasive problem in this area, and that until the results of these unpublished studies are available to the scientific community, no confident estimate of effectiveness of aminopyridines in the management of MS symptoms is possible.
Topics: 4-Aminopyridine; Amifampridine; Cross-Over Studies; Humans; Multiple Sclerosis; Potassium Channel Blockers; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 11687106
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001330 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2018Acquired brain injury can cause eye movement disorders which may include: strabismus, gaze deficits and nystagmus, causing visual symptoms of double, blurred or... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
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.
Topics: 4-Aminopyridine; Abducens Nerve Diseases; Amifampridine; Amines; Baclofen; Botulinum Toxins; Brain Injuries; Cyclohexanecarboxylic Acids; Gabapentin; Humans; Neuromuscular Agents; Nystagmus, Pathologic; Ocular Motility Disorders; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vision, Binocular; Watchful Waiting; gamma-Aminobutyric Acid
PubMed: 29505103
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011290.pub2