Autonomic function testing in spinocerebellar ataxia type 2

Clinical Autonomic Research - To assess whether autonomic failure belongs to the clinical spectrum of spinocerebellar ataxia type 2 (SCA2), an autosomal dominant genetic disorder showing...     

Molecular diversity of combined and complex dystonia: insights from diagnostic exome sequencing

Combined and complex dystonias are heterogeneous movement disorders combining dystonia with other motor and/or systemic signs. Although we are beginning to understand the diverse molecular causes of these disease entities, clinical pattern recognition and conventional genetic workup achieve an etiological diagnosis only in a minority of cases. Our goal was to provide a window into the variable genetic origins and distinct clinical patterns of combined/complex dystonia more broadly. Between August 2016 and January 2017, we applied whole-exome sequencing to a cohort of nine patients with varied combined and/or complex dystonic presentations, being on a diagnostic odyssey. Bioinformatics analyses, co-segregation studies, and sequence-interpretation algorithms were employed to detect causative mutations. Comprehensive clinical review was undertaken to define the phenotypic spectra and optimal management strategies. On average, we observed a delay in diagnosis of 23 years before whole-exome analysis enabled determination of each patient’s genetic defect. Whereas mutations in ACTB, ATP1A3, ADCY5, and SGCE were associated with particular phenotypic clues, trait manifestations arising from mutations in PINK1, MRE11A, KMT2B, ATM, and SLC6A1 were different from those previously reported in association with these genes. Apart from improving counseling for our entire cohort, genetic findings had actionable consequences on preventative measures and therapeutic interventions for five patients. Our investigation confirms unique genetic diagnoses, highlights key clinical features and phenotypic expansions, and suggests whole-exome sequencing as a first-tier diagnostic for combined/complex dystonia. These results might stimulate independent teams to extend the scope of agnostic genetic screening to this particular phenotypic group that remains poorly characterized through existing studies.     

The Movement Disorder Society Evidence-Based Medicine Review Update: Treatments for the motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease

The objective was to update previous evidence-based medicine reviews of treatments for motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease published between 2002 and 2005. Level I (randomized, controlled trial) reports of pharmacological, surgical, and nonpharmacological interventions for the motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease between January 2004 (2001 for nonpharmacological) and December 2010 were reviewed. Criteria for inclusion, clinical indications, ranking, efficacy conclusions, safety, and implications for clinical practice followed the original program outline and adhered to evidence-based medicine methodology. Sixty-eight new studies qualified for review. Piribedil, pramipexole, pramipexole extended release, ropinirole, rotigotine, cabergoline, and pergolide were all efficacious as symptomatic monotherapy; ropinirole prolonged release was likely efficacious. All were efficacious as a symptomatic adjunct except pramipexole extended release, for which there is insufficient evidence. For prevention/delay of motor fluctuations, pramipexole and cabergoline were efficacious, and for prevention/delay of dyskinesia, pramipexole, ropinirole, ropinirole prolonged release, and cabergoline were all efficacious, whereas pergolide was likely efficacious. Duodenal infusion of levodopa was likely efficacious in the treatment of motor complications, but the practice implication is investigational. Entacapone was nonefficacious as a symptomatic adjunct to levodopa in nonfluctuating patients and nonefficacious in the prevention/delay of motor complications. Rasagiline conclusions were revised to efficacious as a symptomatic adjunct, and as treatment for motor fluctuations. Clozapine was efficacious in dyskinesia, but because of safety issues, the practice implication is possibly useful. Bilateral subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation, bilateral globus pallidus stimulation, and unilateral pallidotomy were updated to efficacious for motor complications. Physical therapy was revised to likely efficacious as symptomatic adjunct therapy. This evidence-based medicine review updates the field and highlights gaps for research.     

The Movement Disorder Society Evidence-Based Medicine Review Update: Treatments for the non-motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease

The Movement Disorder Society (MDS) Task Force on Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) Review of Treatments for Parkinson's Disease (PD) was first published in 2002 and was updated in 2005 to cover clinical trial data up to January 2004 with the focus on motor symptoms of PD. In this revised version the MDS task force decided it was necessary to extend the review to non-motor symptoms. The objective of this work was to update previous EBM reviews on treatments for PD with a focus on non-motor symptoms. Level-I (randomized controlled trial, RCT) reports of pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions for the non-motor symptoms of PD, published as full articles in English between January 2002 and December 2010 were reviewed. Criteria for inclusion and ranking followed the original program outline and adhered to EBM methodology. For efficacy conclusions, treatments were designated: efficacious, likely efficacious, unlikely efficacious, non-efficacious, or insufficient evidence. Safety data were catalogued and reviewed. Based on the combined efficacy and safety assessment, Implications for clinical practice were determined using the following designations: clinically useful, possibly useful, investigational, unlikely useful, and not useful. Fifty-four new studies qualified for efficacy review while several other studies covered safety issues. Updated and new efficacy conclusions were made for all indications. The treatments that are efficacious for the management of the different non-motor symptoms are as follows: pramipexole for the treatment of depressive symptoms, clozapine for the treatment of psychosis, rivastigmine for the treatment of dementia, and botulinum toxin A (BTX-A) and BTX-B as well as glycopyrrolate for the treatment of sialorrhea. The practical implications for these treatments, except for glycopyrrolate, are that they are clinically useful. Since there is insufficient evidence of glycopyrrolate for the treatment of sialorrhea exceeding 1 week, the practice implication is that it is possibly useful. The treatments that are likely efficacious for the management of the different non-motor symptoms are as follows: the tricyclic antidepressants nortriptyline and desipramine for the treatment of depression or depressive symptoms and macrogol for the treatment of constipation. The practice implications for these treatments are possibly useful. For most of the other interventions there is insufficient evidence to make adequate conclusions on their efficacy. This includes the tricyclic antidepressant amitriptyline, all selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) reviewed (paroxetine, citalopram, sertraline, and fluoxetine), the newer antidepressants atomoxetine and nefazodone, pergolide, Ω-3 fatty acids as well as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for the treatment of depression or depressive symptoms; methylphenidate and modafinil for the treatment of fatigue; amantadine for the treatment of pathological gambling; donepezil, galantamine, and memantine for the treatment of dementia; quetiapine for the treatment of psychosis; fludrocortisone and domperidone for the treatment of orthostatic hypotension; sildenafil for the treatment of erectile dysfunction, ipratropium bromide spray for the treatment of sialorrhea; levodopa/carbidopa controlled release (CR), pergolide, eszopiclone, melatonin 3 to 5 mg and melatonin 50 mg for the treatment of insomnia and modafinil for the treatment of excessive daytime sleepiness. Due to safety issues the practice implication is that pergolide and nefazodone are not useful for the above-mentioned indications. Due to safety issues, olanzapine remains not useful for the treatment of psychosis. As none of the studies exceeded a duration of 6 months, the recommendations given are for the short-term management of the different non-motor symptoms. There were no RCTs that met inclusion criteria for the treatment of anxiety disorders, apathy, medication-related impulse control disorders and related behaviors other than pathological gambling, rapid eye movement (REM) sleep behavior disorder (RBD), sweating, or urinary dysfunction. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence for the treatment of these indications. This EBM review of interventions for the non-motor symptoms of PD updates the field, but, because several RCTs are ongoing, a continual updating process is needed. Several interventions and indications still lack good quality evidence, and these gaps offer an opportunity for ongoing research. ? 2011 Movement Disorder Society.     

A Double‐Blind,Randomized, Placebo and Active‐Controlled Study of Nebicapone for the Treatment of Motor Fluctuations in Parkinson's Disease

To determine the efficacy, safety and tolerability of nebicapone, a new catechol‐O‐methyltransferase inhibitor for the treatment of motor fluctuations in Parkinson's disease (PD), we conducted a multicenter, randomized, 8‐week double‐blind, placebo‐ and active‐controlled, parallel‐group study comparing nebicapone 50 mg, 100 mg, or 150 mg, entacapone 200 mg (active control) or placebo administered concomitantly with levodopa/carbidopa or levodopa/benserazide. Two hundred and fifty‐two PD patients with motor fluctuations treated with levodopa/carbidopa or levodopa/benserazide (4–8 daily doses) were enrolled and 250 patients were eligible for intention‐to‐treat (ITT) analysis on the basis of having at least one efficacy assessment. The primary endpoint was 8‐week change from baseline in absolute “Off” time duration noted in self‐scoring diaries. At 8 weeks of treatment the mean daily “Off” time decreased significantly compared to placebo for nebicapone 150 mg (?106 min; 95%CI: ?192; ?21) and entacapone 200 mg (?81 min; 95%CI: ?142; ?19). The decrease in “Off” time with nebicapone 50 mg or 100 mg did not reach statistical significance. Treatment‐emergent adverse events were reported by 32% to 49% of patients in any treatment group, with no observed dose relationship in the nebicapone groups. Clinically relevant elevations in aspartate transaminase (AST) and/or alanine transaminase (ALT) were observed in 4 of 46 patients with the nebicapone 150 mg dose. The results of this study show that nebicapone 150 mg is efficacious for the treatment of motor fluctuations in PD patients. However, the risk of increasing liver transaminases and its clinically relevance deserves further evaluation.