Zonisamide for essential tremor

BACKGROUND

Essential tremor (ET) is one of the most common movement disorders. The treatment is primarily based on pharmacological agents. Although primidone and propranolol are well established treatments in clinical practice, they can be ineffective in 25% to 55% of patients, and can produce serious adverse events in a large percentage of them. For these reasons, it may be worthwhile evaluating the treatment alternatives for ET. Zonisamide has been suggested as a potentially useful agent for the treatment of ET but there is uncertainty about its efficacy and safety.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect on functional abilities and the safety profile of zonisamide in adults with essential tremor (ET).

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out a systematic search, without language restrictions to identify all relevant trials. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, NICE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) to January 2017. We searched BIOSIS Citation Index (2000 to January 2017) for conference proceedings. We handsearched grey literature and examined the reference lists of identified studies and reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of zonisamide versus placebo or any other treatment. We included studies in which the diagnosis of ET was made according to accepted and validated diagnostic criteria. We excluded studies conducted in patients presenting secondary forms of tremor or reporting only neurophysiological parameters to assess outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently collected and extracted data using a data collection form. We assessed the risk of bias and the quality of evidence.We used inverse variance methods for continuous outcomes and measurement scales. We compared differences between treatment groups as mean differences. We combined results for dichotomous outcomes using Mantel-Haenszel methods and obtained risk differences to compare treatment groups. We used Review Manager 5 software for data management and analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We only considered one study eligible for this review (20 participants). Assessments of risk of bias for most domains were unclear or low. Adverse events were only reported in participants from the zonisamide group, making it possible that they were aware of treatment group assignment. We are uncertain as to the effects of zonisamide on motor tasks (mean difference (MD) -0.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.51 to 1.51, very low-quality evidence) and functional disabilities (MD -0.30, 95% CI -1.23 to 0.63, very low-quality evidence) when compared with placebo. Three participants in the zonisamide group (30%) and two participants in the placebo group (20%) discontinued the treatment and withdrew from the study for any reason (very low-quality evidence), however the increased risk of withdrawal in the zonisamide group was statistically non-significant (risk difference (RD) 0.1, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.48). Six participants in the zonisamide group (60%) and none of the participants in the placebo group (0%) developed adverse events (AEs), with a RD of 0.60 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.92; very low quality evidence). The most common AEs, experienced with zonisamide treatment, were headache, nausea, fatigue, sleepiness, and diarrhoea. Quality of life was not assessed in the study included.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on currently available data, there is insufficient evidence to assess the efficacy and safety of zonisamide treatment for ET.

Identifying Relapses in Multiple Sclerosis Patients through Administrative Data: A Validation Study in the Lazio Region, Italy

BACKGROUND

Relapse is frequently considered an outcome measure of disease activity in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS). The objectives of this study were to identify relapse episodes in patients with MS in the Lazio region using health administrative databases and to evaluate the validity of the algorithm using patients enrolled at MS treatment centers.

METHODS

MS cases were identified in the period between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2009 using data from regional Health Information Systems (HIS). An algorithm based on HIS was used to identify relapse episodes, and patients recruited at MS centers were used to validate the algorithm. Positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) and the Cohen's kappa coefficient were calculated.

RESULTS

The overall MS population identified through HIS consisted of 6,094 patients, of whom 67.1% were female and the mean age was 41.5. Among the MS patients identified by the algorithm, 2,242 attended the centers and 3,852 did not. The PPV was 58.9%, the NPV was 76.3%, and the kappa was 0.36.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed algorithm based on health administrative databases does not seem to be able to reliably detect relapses; however, it may be a helpful tool to detect healthcare utilization, and therefore to identify the worsening condition of a patient's health.

Treatment with disease-modifying drugs for people with a first clinical attack suggestive of multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

The treatment of multiple sclerosis has changed over the last 20 years. The advent of disease-modifying drugs in the mid-1990s heralded a period of rapid progress in the understanding and management of multiple sclerosis. With the support of magnetic resonance imaging early diagnosis is possible, enabling treatment initiation at the time of the first clinical attack. As most of the disease-modifying drugs are associated with adverse events, patients and clinicians need to weigh the benefit and safety of the various early treatment options before taking informed decisions.

OBJECTIVES

1. to estimate the benefit and safety of disease-modifying drugs that have been evaluated in all studies (randomised or non-randomised) for the treatment of a first clinical attack suggestive of MS compared either with placebo or no treatment;2. to assess the relative efficacy and safety of disease-modifying drugs according to their benefit and safety;3. to estimate the benefit and safety of disease-modifying drugs that have been evaluated in all studies (randomised or non-randomised) for treatment started after a first attack ('early treatment') compared with treatment started after a second attack or at another later time point ('delayed treatment').

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the CNS Group Trials Register, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, clinicaltrials.gov, the WHO trials registry, and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reports, and searched for unpublished studies (until December 2016).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and observational studies that evaluated one or more drugs as monotherapy in adult participants with a first clinical attack suggestive of MS. We considered evidence on alemtuzumab, azathioprine, cladribine, daclizumab, dimethyl fumarate, fingolimod, glatiramer acetate, immunoglobulins, interferon beta-1b, interferon beta-1a (Rebif®, Avonex®), laquinimod, mitoxantrone, natalizumab, ocrelizumab, pegylated interferon beta-1a, rituximab and teriflunomide.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two teams of three authors each independently selected studies and extracted data. The primary outcomes were disability-worsening, relapses, occurrence of at least one serious adverse event (AE) and withdrawing from the study or discontinuing the drug because of AEs. Time to conversion to clinically definite MS (CDMS) defined by Poser diagnostic criteria, and probability to discontinue the treatment or dropout for any reason were recorded as secondary outcomes. We synthesized study data using random-effects meta-analyses and performed indirect comparisons between drugs. We calculated odds ratios (OR) and hazard ratios (HR) along with relative 95% confidence intervals (CI) for all outcomes. We estimated the absolute effects only for primary outcomes. We evaluated the credibility of the evidence using the GRADE system.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 randomised trials, eight open-label extension studies (OLEs) and four cohort studies published between 2010 and 2016. The overall risk of bias was high and the reporting of AEs was scarce. The quality of the evidence associated with the results ranges from low to very low. Early treatment versus placebo during the first 24 months' follow-upThere was a small, non-significant advantage of early treatment compared with placebo in disability-worsening (6.4% fewer (13.9 fewer to 3 more) participants with disability-worsening with interferon beta-1a (Rebif®) or teriflunomide) and in relapses (10% fewer (20.3 fewer to 2.8 more) participants with relapses with teriflunomide). Early treatment was associated with 1.6% fewer participants with at least one serious AE (3 fewer to 0.2 more). Participants on early treatment were on average 4.6% times (0.3 fewer to 15.4 more) more likely to withdraw from the study due to AEs. This result was mostly driven by studies on interferon beta 1-b, glatiramer acetate and cladribine that were associated with significantly more withdrawals for AEs. Early treatment decreased the hazard of conversion to CDMS (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.60). Comparing active interventions during the first 24 months' follow-upIndirect comparison of interferon beta-1a (Rebif®) with teriflunomide did not show any difference on reducing disability-worsening (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.66). We found no differences between the included drugs with respect to the hazard of conversion to CDMS. Interferon beta-1a (Rebif®) and teriflunomide were associated with fewer dropouts because of AEs compared with interferon beta-1b, cladribine and glatiramer acetate (ORs range between 0.03 and 0.29, with substantial uncertainty). Early versus delayed treatmentWe did not find evidence of differences between early and delayed treatments for disability-worsening at a maximum of five years' follow-up (3% fewer participants with early treatment (15 fewer to 11.1 more)). There was important variability across interventions; early treatment with interferon beta-1b considerably reduced the odds of participants with disability-worsening during three and five years' follow-up (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.84 and OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.89). The early treatment group had 19.6% fewer participants with relapses (26.7 fewer to 12.7 fewer) compared to late treatment at a maximum of five years' follow-up and early treatment decreased the hazard of conversion to CDMS at any follow-up up to 10 years (i.e. over five years' follow-up HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.73). We did not draw any conclusions on long-term serious AEs or discontinuation due to AEs because of inadequacies in the available data both in the included OLEs and cohort studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Very low-quality evidence suggests a small and uncertain benefit with early treatment compared with placebo in reducing disability-worsening and relapses. The advantage of early treatment compared with delayed on disability-worsening was heterogeneous depending on the actual drug used and based on very low-quality evidence. Low-quality evidence suggests that the chances of relapse are less with early treatment compared with delayed. Early treatment reduced the hazard of conversion to CDMS compared either with placebo, no treatment or delayed treatment, both in short- and long-term follow-up. Low-quality evidence suggests that early treatment is associated with fewer participants with at least one serious AE compared with placebo. Very low-quality evidence suggests that, compared with placebo, early treatment leads to more withdrawals or treatment discontinuation due to AEs. Difference between drugs on short-term benefit and safety was uncertain because few studies and only indirect comparisons were available. Long-term safety of early treatment is uncertain because of inadequately reported or unavailable data.

Topiramate for essential tremor

BACKGROUND

Essential tremor (ET) is one of the most common movement disorders. The management is primarily based on pharmacological agents and in clinical practice propranolol and primidone are considered the first-line therapy. However, these treatments can be ineffective in 25% to 55% of people and are frequently associated with serious adverse events (AEs). For these reasons, it is worthwhile evaluating other treatments for ET. Topiramate has been suggested as a potentially useful agent for the treatment of ET but there is uncertainty about its efficacy and safety.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of topiramate in the treatment of ET.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out a systematic search without language restrictions to identify all relevant trials in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (January 1966 to January 2017), Embase (January 1988 to January 2017), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (1999 to January 2017), ClinicalTrials.gov (1997 to January 2017) and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; 2004 to January 2017). We searched BIOSIS Citation Index (2000 to January 2017) for conference proceedings. We handsearched grey literature and the reference lists of identified studies and reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of topiramate versus placebo/open control or any other treatments. We included studies in which the diagnosis of ET was made according to accepted and validated diagnostic criteria. We excluded studies conducted in people presenting with secondary forms of tremor or reporting only neurophysiological parameters to assess outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently collected and extracted data using a data collection form. We assessed the risk of bias and the quality of evidence. We used a fixed-effect meta-analysis for data synthesis.

MAIN RESULTS

This review included three trials comparing topiramate to placebo (309 participants). They were all at high overall risk of bias. The quality of evidence ranged from very low to low. Compared to placebo, participants treated with topiramate showed a significant improvement in functional disability and an increased risk of withdrawal (risk ratio (RR) 1.78, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23 to 2.60). There were more AEs for topiramate-treated participants, particularly paraesthesia, weight loss, appetite decrease and memory difficulty.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review highlighted the presence of limited data and very low to low quality evidence to support the apparent efficacy and the occurrence of treatment-limiting AEs in people with ET treated with topiramate. Further research to assess topiramate efficacy and safety on ET is needed.

Pregabalin for essential tremor

BACKGROUND

Essential tremor is one of the most common movement disorders. Treatment primarily consists of pharmacological agents. While primidone and propranolol are well-established treatments in clinical practice, they may be ineffective in 25% to 55% of patients and can produce serious adverse events in a large percentage of them. For these reasons, it is worth evaluating the treatment alternatives for essential tremor. Some specialists have suggested that pregabalin could be a potentially useful agent, but there is uncertainty about its efficacy and safety.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of pregabalin versus placebo or other treatment for essential tremor in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a systematic search without language restrictions to identify all relevant trials up to December 2015. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, NICE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We handsearched grey literature and examined the reference lists of identified studies and reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of pregabalin versus placebo or any other treatments. We included studies in which the diagnosis of ET was made according to accepted and validated diagnostic criteria. We excluded studies conducted in patients presenting secondary forms of tremor or reporting only neurophysiological parameters to assess outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently collected and extracted data using a data collection form. We assessed the risk of bias of the body of evidence, and we used inverse variance methods to analyse continuous outcomes and measurement scales. We compared the mean difference between treatment groups, and we combined results for dichotomous outcomes using Mantel-Haenszel methods and risk differences We used Review Manager software for data management and analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We only found one study eligible for this review (22 participants). We assessed the risk of bias for most domains as unclear. We graded the overall quality of evidence as very low. Compared to placebo, patients treated with pregabalin showed no significant improvement of motor tasks on the 36-point subscale of the Fahn-Tolosa-Marin Tremor Rating Scale (TRS) (MD -2.15 points; 95% CI -9.16 to 4.86) or on the 32-point functional abilities subscale of the TRS (MD -0.66 points; 95% CI -2.90 to 1.58).The limited evidence showed no difference in study withdrawal (Mantel-Haenszel RD -0.09; 95% CI -0.48 to 0.30) and presentation of adverse events between pregabalin and placebo (Mantel-Haenszel RD 0.18; 95% CI -0.13 to 0.50).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The effects of pregabalin for treating essential tremor are uncertain because the quality of the evidence is very low. One small study did not highlight any effect of this treatment; however, the high risk of bias and the lack of other studies on this topic limit further conclusion.

Online health information seeking: how people with multiple sclerosis find, assess and integrate treatment information to manage their health

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The Internet is increasingly prominent as a source of health information for people with multiple sclerosis (MS). But there has been little exploration of the needs, experiences and preferences of people with MS for integrating treatment information into decision making, in the context of searching on the Internet. This was the aim of our study.

DESIGN

Sixty participants (51 people with MS; nine family members) took part in a focus group or online forum. They were asked to describe how they find and assess reliable treatment information (particularly online) and how this changes over time. Thematic analysis was underpinned by a coding frame.

RESULTS

Participants described that there was both too much information online and too little that applied to them. They spoke of wariness and scepticism but also empowerment. The availability of up-to-date and unbiased treatment information, including practical and lifestyle-related information, was important to many. Many participants were keen to engage in a 'research partnership' with health professionals and developed a range of strategies to enhance the trustworthiness of online information. We use the term 'self-regulation' to capture the variations in information seeking behaviour that participants described over time, as they responded to their changing information needs, their emotional state and growing expertise about MS.

CONCLUSIONS

People with MS have developed a number of strategies to both find and integrate treatment information from a range of sources. Their reflections informed the development of an evidence-based consumer web site based on summaries of MS Cochrane reviews.

Fingolimod for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Fingolimod was approved in 2010 for the treatment of patients with the relapsing-remitting (RR) form of multiple sclerosis (MS). It was designed to reduce the frequency of exacerbations and to delay disability worsening. Issues on its safety and efficacy, mainly as compared to other disease modifying drugs (DMDs), have been raised.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the safety and benefit of fingolimod versus placebo, or other disease-modifying drugs (DMDs), in reducing disease activity in people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the Central Nervous System (CNS) Group's Specialised Trials Register and US Food and Drug Administration reports (15 February 2016).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the beneficial and harmful effects of fingolimod versus placebo or other approved DMDs in people with RRMS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Six RCTs met our selection criteria. The overall population included 5152 participants; 1621 controls and 3531 treated with fingolimod at different doses; 2061 with 0.5 mg, 1376 with 1.25 mg, and 94 with 5.0 mg daily. Among the controls, 923 participants were treated with placebo and 698 with others DMDs. The treatment duration was six months in three, 12 months in one, and 24 months in two trials. One study was at high risk of bias for blinding, three studies were at high risk of bias for incomplete outcome reporting, and four studies were at high risk of bias for other reasons (co-authors were affiliated with the pharmaceutical company). We retrieved 10 ongoing trials; four of them have been completed.Comparing fingolimod administered at the approved dose of 0.5 mg to placebo, we found that the drug at 24 months increased the probability of being relapse-free (risk ratio (RR) 1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.28 to 1.63); moderate quality of evidence), but it might lead to little or no difference in preventing disability progression (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.11; primary clinical endpoints; low quality evidence). Benefit was observed for other measures of inflammatory disease activity including clinical (annualised relapse rate): rate ratio 0.50, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.62; moderate quality evidence; and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) activity (gadolinium-enhancing lesions): RR of being free from (MRI) gadolinium-enhancing lesions: 1.36, 95% CI 1.27 to 1.45; low quality evidence.The mean change of MRI T2-weighted lesion load favoured fingolimod at 12 and 24 months.No significant increased risk of discontinuation due to adverse events was observed for fingolimod 0.5 mg compared to placebo at six and 24 months. The risk of fingolimod discontinuation was significantly higher compared to placebo for the dose 1.25 mg at 24 months (RR 1.93, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.52).No significant increased risk of discontinuation due to serious adverse events was observed for fingolimod 0.5 mg compared to placebo at six and 24 months. A significant increased risk of discontinuation due to serious adverse events was found for fingolimod 5.0 mg (RR 2.77, 95% CI 1.04 to 7.38) compared to placebo at six months.Comparing fingolimod 0.5 mg to intramuscular interferon beta-1a, we found moderate quality evidence that the drug at one year slightly increased the number of participants free from relapse (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.27) or from gadolinium-enhancing lesions (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.19), and decreased the relapse rate (rate ratio 0.48, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.70). We did not detect any advantage for preventing disability progression (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.06; low quality evidence). We did not detect any significant difference for MRI T2-weighted lesion load change.We found a greater likelihood of participants discontinuing fingolimod, as compared to other DMDs, due to adverse events in the short-term (six months) (RR 3.21, 95% CI 1.16 to 8.86), but there was no significant difference versus interferon beta-1a at 12 months (RR 1.51, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.80; moderate quality evidence). A higher incidence of adverse events was suggestive of the lower tolerability rate of fingolimod compared to interferon-beta 1a.Quality of life was improved in participants after switching from a different DMD to fingolimod at six months, but this effect was not found compared to placebo at 24 months.All studies were sponsored by Novartis Pharma.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with fingolimod compared to placebo in RRMS patients is effective in reducing inflammatory disease activity, but it may lead to little or no difference in preventing disability worsening. The risk of withdrawals due to adverse events requires careful monitoring of patients over time. The evidence on the risk/benefit profile of fingolimod compared with intramuscular interferon beta-1a was uncertain, based on a low number of head-to-head RCTs with short follow-up duration. The ongoing trial results will possibly satisfy these issues.

Development and assessment of a website presenting evidence-based information for people with multiple sclerosis: the IN-DEEP project

Background

People with multiple sclerosis (MS) are increasingly using the Internet in the daily management of their condition. They search for high-quality information in plain language, from independent sources, based on reliable and up-to-date evidence. The Integrating and Deriving Evidence, Experiences and Preferences (IN-DEEP) project in Italy and Australia aimed to provide people with MS and family members with an online source of evidence-based information, starting from their information needs. This paper reports on the Italian project’s website.

Methods

Contents, layout and wording were developed with people with MS and pilot-tested. The website was evaluated using an online 29-item questionnaire for ease of language, contents, navigation, and usefulness of information aimed at people with MS, family members and the general population.

Results

The website (http://indeep.istituto-besta.it/) is structured in multiple levels of information. The first topic was interferons-β for people with relapsing-remitting MS. In all, 433 people responded to the survey (276 people with MS, 68 family members and 89 others). The mean age was 45 years, almost 90 % had a high school diploma, about 80 % had relapsing-remitting MS, and the median disease duration was seven years. About 90 % judged the website clear, understandable, useful, and easy to navigate. Ninety percent of people with MS and family members would recommend it to others. Sixty-two percent reported they felt confident in making decisions on interferons-β after reading the website.

Conclusions

The model was judged clear and useful. It could be adapted to other topics and diseases. Clinicians may find it useful in their relationship with patients.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12883-016-0552-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Prevalence of multiple sclerosis in the Lazio region, Italy: use of an algorithm based on health information systems

Compared with other areas of the country, very limited data are available on multiple sclerosis (MS) prevalence in Central Italy. We aimed to estimate MS prevalence in the Lazio region and its geographical distribution using regional health information systems (HIS). To identify MS cases we used data from drug prescription, hospital discharge and ticket exemption registries. Crude, age- and gender-specific prevalence estimates on December 31, 2011 were calculated. To compare MS prevalence between different areas within the region, we calculated age- and gender-adjusted prevalence and prevalence ratios using a multivariate Poisson regression model. Crude prevalence rate was 130.5/100,000 (95 % CI 127.5–133.5): 89.7/100,000 for males and 167.9/100,000 for females. The overall prevalence rate standardized to the European Standard Population was 119.6/100,000 (95 % CI 116.8–122.4). We observed significant differences in MS prevalence within the region, with estimates ranging from 96.3 (95 % CI 86.4–107.3) for Latina to 169.6 (95 % CI 147.6–194.9) for Rieti. Most districts close to the coast showed lower prevalence estimates compared to those situated in the eastern mountainous area of the region. In conclusion, this study produced a MS prevalence estimate at regional level using population-based health administrative databases. Our results showed the Lazio region is a high-risk area for MS, although with an uneven geographical distribution. While some limitations must be considered including possible prevalence underestimation, HIS represent a valuable source of information to measure the burden of SM, useful for epidemiological surveillance and healthcare planning.

Association of Immunotherapies With Outcomes in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis

CLINICAL QUESTION

What immunotherapies for multiple sclerosis are associated with the greatest benefit and highest risk of discontinuation due to adverse events in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis?

BOTTOM LINE

Alemtuzumab, natalizumab, and fingolimod were associated with the greatest benefit with regard to relapse prevention. Their association with prevention of disability worsening was unclear. Fingolimod was associated with a high risk of treatment discontinuation due to adverse events.

Alprazolam for essential tremor

BACKGROUND

Essential tremor (ET) is one of the most common movement disorders. Treatment is based primarily on pharmacological agents. On this basis, although primidone and propranolol are well-established treatments in clinical practice, they could be ineffective in 25% to 55% of patients and can produce serious adverse events (AEs) in a large percentage of individuals. For these reasons, evaluating treatment alternatives for ET may be a worthwhile pursuit. Alprazolam has been suggested as a potentially useful agent for treatment of individuals with ET, but its efficacy and safety are uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

PrimaryTo assess the efficacy and safety of alprazolam in the treatment of individuals with ET. SecondaryTo examine effects of alprazolam treatment on the quality of life of people with ET.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out a systematic search without language restrictions to identify all relevant trials. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (January 1966 to September 2015), EMBASE (January 1988 to September 2015), the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (1999 to September 2015), ClinicalTrials.gov (1997 to September 2015) and the World Health Organiza tion (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (2004 to September 2015). We handsearched grey literature and examined the reference lists of identified studies and reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of alprazolam versus placebo or any other treatment. We included studies in which ET was diagnosed according to accepted and validated diagnostic criteria. We excluded studies that included patients presenting with secondary forms of tremor or reporting only neurophysiological parameters for the pur p ose of assessing outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently collected and extracted data using a data collection form. We assessed risk of bias and the body of evidence. We used inverse variance methods for continuous outcomes and measurement scales. We compared differences between treatment groups as mean differences. We used Review Manager software for management and analysis of data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included in this review one trial that compared alprazolam versus placebo (24 participants). It was judged to have high overall risk of bias. We graded the overall quality of evidence as very low. Compared with those given placebo, participants treated with alprazolam showed a significant reduction in tremor severity (mean difference (MD) -0.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.83 to -0.67). Nine alprazolam-treated participants (75%) developed AEs, mainly represented by sedation (50%), constipation (17%) and dry mouth (9%). No participants in the alprazolam group and no p articipants in the placebo group discontinued treatment and dropped out of the study.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently available data reveal evidence insufficient for assessment of the efficacy and safety of alprazolam treatment for individuals with ET.

The MITOS system predicts long-term survival in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

OBJECTIVE

The choice of adequate proxy for long-term survival, the ultimate outcome in randomised clinical trials (RCT) assessing disease-modifying treatments for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), is a key issue. The intrinsic limitations of the ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R), including non-linearity, multidimensionality and floor-effect, have emerged and its usefulness argued. The ALS Milano-Torino staging (ALS-MITOS) system was proposed as a novel tool to measure the progression of ALS and overcome these limitations. This study was performed to validate the ALS-MITOS as a 6-month proxy of survival in 200 ALS patients followed up to 18 months.

METHODS

Analyses were performed on data from the recombinant human erythropoietin RCT that failed to demonstrate differences between groups for both primary and secondary outcomes. The ALS-MITOS system is composed of four key domains included in the ALSFRS-R scale (walking/self-care, swallowing, communicating and breathing), each with a threshold reflecting the loss of function in the specific ALSFRS-R subscores. Sensitivity, specificity and the area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic curves of the ALS-MITOS system stages and ALSFRS-R decline at 6 months were calculated and compared with the primary outcome (survival, tracheotomy or >23-hour non-invasive ventilation) at 12 and 18 months Predicted probabilities of the ALS-MITO system at 6 months for any event at 12 and 18 months were computed through logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Disease progression from baseline to 6 months as defined by the ALS-MITOS system predicted death, tracheotomy or >23-hour non-invasive ventilation at 12 months with 82% sensitivity (95% CI 71% to 93%, n=37/45) and 63% specificity (95% CI 55% to 71%, n=92/146), and at 18 months with 71% sensitivity (95% CI 61% to 82%, n=50/70) and 68% specificity (95% CI 60% to 77%, n=76/111). The analysis of ALS-MITOS and ALSFRS-R progression at 6-month follow-up showed that the best cut-off to predict survival at 12 and 18 months was 1 for the ALS-MITOS (ie, loss of at least one function) and a decline ranging from 6 to 9 points for the ALSFRS-R.

CONCLUSIONS

The ALS-MITOS system can reliably predict the course of ALS up to 18 months and can be considered a novel and valid outcome measure in RCTs.

Immunomodulators and immunosuppressants for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Different therapeutic strategies are available for the treatment of people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), including immunomodulators, immunosuppressants and biologics. Although there is consensus that these therapies reduce the frequency of relapses, their relative benefit in delaying new relapses or disability worsening remains unclear due to the limited number of direct comparison trials.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefit and acceptability of interferon beta-1b, interferon beta-1a (Avonex, Rebif), glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, mitoxantrone, fingolimod, teriflunomide, dimethyl fumarate, alemtuzumab, pegylated interferon beta-1a, daclizumab, laquinimod, azathioprine and immunoglobulins for the treatment of people with RRMS and to provide a ranking of these treatments according to their benefit and acceptability, defined as the proportion of participants who withdrew due to any adverse event.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the CNS Group Trials Register, which contains trials from CENTRAL (2014, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1966 to 2014), EMBASE (1974 to 2014), CINAHL (1981 to 2014), LILACS (1982 to 2014), clinicaltrials.gov and the WHO trials registry, and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reports. We ran the most recent search in September 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that studied one or more of the 15 treatments as monotherapy, compared to placebo or to another active agent, for use in adults with RRMS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently identified studies from the search results and performed data extraction. We performed data synthesis by pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis. We assessed the quality of the body of evidence for outcomes within the network meta-analysis according to GRADE, as very low, low, moderate or high.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 39 studies in this review, in which 25,113 participants were randomised. The majority of the included trials were short-term studies, with a median duration of 24 months. Twenty-four (60%) were placebo-controlled and 15 (40%) were head-to-head studies.Network meta-analysis showed that, in terms of a protective effect against the recurrence of relapses in RRMS during the first 24 months of treatment, alemtuzumab, mitoxantrone, natalizumab, and fingolimod outperformed other drugs. The most effective drug was alemtuzumab (risk ratio (RR) versus placebo 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 0.55; surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) 96%; moderate quality evidence), followed by mitoxantrone (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.81; SUCRA 92%; very low quality evidence), natalizumab (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.66; SUCRA 88%; high quality evidence), and fingolimod (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.81; SUCRA 71%; moderate quality evidence).Disability worsening was based on a surrogate marker, defined as irreversible worsening confirmed at three-month follow-up, measured during the first 24 months in the majority of included studies. Both direct and indirect comparisons revealed that the most effective treatments were mitoxantrone (RR versus placebo 0.20, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.84; SUCRA 96%; low quality evidence), alemtuzumab (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.48; SUCRA 94%; low quality evidence), and natalizumab (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.85; SUCRA 74%; moderate quality evidence).Almost all of the agents included in this review were associated with a higher proportion of participants who withdrew due to any adverse event compared to placebo. Based on the network meta-analysis methodology, the corresponding RR estimates versus placebo over the first 24 months of follow-up were: mitoxantrone 9.92 (95% CI 0.54 to 168.84), fingolimod 1.69 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.17), natalizumab 1.53 (95% CI 0.93 to 2.53), and alemtuzumab 0.72 (95% CI 0.32 to 1.61).Information on serious adverse events (SAEs) was scanty, characterised by heterogeneous results and based on a very low number of events observed during the short-term duration of the trials included in this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Conservative interpretation of these results is warranted, since most of the included treatments have been evaluated in few trials. The GRADE approach recommends providing implications for practice based on moderate to high quality evidence. Our review shows that alemtuzumab, natalizumab, and fingolimod are the best choices for preventing clinical relapses in people with RRMS, but this evidence is limited to the first 24 months of follow-up. For the prevention of disability worsening in the short term (24 months), only natalizumab shows a beneficial effect on the basis of moderate quality evidence (all of the other estimates were based on low to very low quality evidence). Currently, therefore, insufficient evidence is available to evaluate treatments for the prevention of irreversible disability worsening.There are two additional major concerns that have to be considered. First, the benefit of all of these treatments beyond two years is uncertain and this is a relevant issue for a disease with a duration of 30 to 40 years. Second, short-term trials provide scanty and poorly reported safety data and do not provide useful evidence in order to obtain a reliable risk profile of treatments. In order to provide long-term information on the safety of the treatments included in this review, it will be necessary also to evaluate non-randomised studies and post-marketing reports released from the regulatory agencies. Finally, more than 70% of the studies included in this review were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies and this may have influenced the results.There are three needs that the research agenda should address. First, randomised trials of direct comparisons between active agents would be useful, avoiding further placebo-controlled studies. Second, follow-up of the original trial cohorts should be mandatory. Third, more studies are needed to assess the medium and long-term benefit and safety of immunotherapies and the comparative safety of different agents.

A Multicentric Prospective Incidence Study of Guillain-Barré Syndrome in Italy. The ITANG Study

Background: To assess Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) incidence we relied on the Italian Network for the study of GBS (ITANG) established in 2010 in 7 Italian regions to analyse the association between influenza vaccination and GBS. Methods: All individuals aged ≥18 years, presenting with clinical manifestations that suggested GBS according to the universally accepted Asbury's diagnostic criteria (1990) were prospectively notified to a centralised database by ITANG neurologists over the period October 1, 2010-September 30, 2011. Through a telephone survey, 9 trained interviewers followed up the cases to diagnosis and then for 1 year since hospital discharge. Validation of case reporting was performed with the support of administrative data in 5 regions. Results: We found 365 cases fulfilling the definition for GBS or one of its variants over 19,846,068 population ≥18 years of age, yielding an annual incidence rate of 1.84 per 100,000 (95% CI 1.65-2.03), 2.30 (95% CI 1.99-2.60) in men and 1.41 (95% CI 1.18-1.64) in women. A highly significant peak of incidence was observed in February 2011 as compared to reference month (September 2011, rate ratio 3.3:1, p < 0.01). Conclusions: In Italy, GBS incidence was among the highest reported in Europe and higher than previously observed in Italian studies.

Accuracy of a questionnaire for identifying respiratory allergies in epidemiological studies

BACKGROUND

The assessment of allergic asthma (AA) and allergic rhinitis (AR) in epidemiological studies is often challenging. We performed a cross-sectional study to test the accuracy of a Questionnaire aimed at Identifying subjects with Respiratory Allergy (QIRA) in a simple and fast way.

METHODS

One hundred-thirty subjects, 18-76 years of age, admitted consecutively at the Allergy Center of the Niguarda Ca` Granda Hospital of Milan were included. The questionnaire (index test) investigated the presence of AA and AR with seven questions enquiring history of symptoms, diagnosis made by a doctor, allergy tests performed, and treatments. After completing the questionnaire, all subjects were subsequently diagnosed by an allergist (reference standard).

RESULTS

The accuracy of the questionnaire for the diagnosis of AA and AR was high (sensitivity 94.7% [95% confidence interval CI: 74.0-99.9] and specificity 99.1% [95% CI 95.1-100.0] for AA; sensitivity 82.8% [95% CI 71.3-91.1] and specificity 98.5% [95% CI 91.8-100.0] for AR).

CONCLUSION

The questionnaire significantly distinguished subjects with respiratory allergy from those without. The QIRA represents a valid and accurate tool for classifying subjects as having or not AA and/or AR in epidemiological studies.

Erythropoietin in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a multicentre, randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, phase III study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of recombinant human erythropoietin (rhEPO) in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS).

METHODS

Patients with probable laboratory-supported, probable or definite ALS were enrolled by 25 Italian centres and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous rhEPO 40,000 IU or placebo fortnightly as add-on treatment to riluzole 100 mg daily for 12 months. The primary composite outcome was survival, tracheotomy or >23 h non-invasive ventilation (NIV). Secondary outcomes were ALSFRS-R, slow vital capacity (sVC) and quality of life (ALSAQ-40) decline. Tolerability was evaluated analysing adverse events (AEs) causing withdrawal. The randomisation sequence was computer-generated by blocks, stratified by centre, disease severity (ALSFRS-R cut-off score of 33) and onset (spinal or bulbar). The main outcome analysis was performed in all randomised patients and by intention-to-treat for the entire population and patients stratified by severity and onset. The study is registered, EudraCT 2009-016066-91.

RESULTS

We randomly assigned 208 patients, of whom 5 (1 rhEPO and 4 placebo) withdrew consent and 3 (placebo) became ineligible (retinal thrombosis, respiratory insufficiency, SOD1 mutation) before receiving treatment; 103 receiving rhEPO and 97 placebo were eligible for analysis. At 12 months, the annualised rate of death (rhEPO 0.11, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.20; placebo: 0.08, CI 0.04 to 0.17), tracheotomy or >23 h NIV (rhEPO 0.16, CI 0.10 to 0.27; placebo 0.18, CI 0.11 to 0.30) did not differ between groups, also after stratification by onset and ALSFRS-R at baseline. Withdrawal due to AE was 16.5% in rhEPO and 8.3% in placebo. No differences were found for secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

RhEPO 40,000 IU fortnightly did not change the course of ALS.

Accuracy of a questionnaire for identifying respiratory allergies in epidemiological studies

Background: The assessment of allergic asthma (AA) and allergic rhinitis (AR) in epidemiological studies is often challenging. We performed a cross-sectional study to test the accuracy of a Questionnaire aimed at Identifying subjects with Respiratory Allergy (QIRA) in a simple and fast way. Methods: One hundred-thirty subjects, 18-76 years of age, admitted consecutively at the Allergy Center of the Niguarda Ca` Granda Hospital of Milan were included. The questionnaire (index test) investigated the presence of AA and AR with seven questions enquiring history of symptoms, diagnosis made by a doctor, allergy tests performed, and treatments. After completing the questionnaire, all subjects were subsequently diagnosed by an allergist (reference standard). Results: The accuracy of the questionnaire for the diagnosis of AA and AR was high (sensitivity 94.7% [95% confidence interval CI: 74.0-99.9] and specificity 99.1% [95% CI 95.1-100.0] for AA; sensitivity 82.8% [95% CI 71.3-91.1] and specificity 98.5% [95% CI 91.8-100.0] for AR). Conclusion: The questionnaire significantly distinguished subjects with respiratory allergy from those without. The QIRA represents a valid and accurate tool for classifying subjects as having or not AA and/or AR in epidemiological studies.

Development and evaluation of a clinical staging system for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Staging of disease severity is useful for prognosis, decision-making and resource planning. However, no commonly used, validated staging system exists for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Our purpose was to develop an ALS staging system (ALS Milano-Torino Staging) that captures the observed progressive loss of independence and function.

METHODS

Clinical milestones in ALS progression were defined by loss of independence in four key domains on the ALS Functional Rating Scale (ALSFRS): swallowing, walking/self-care, communicating and breathing. Stages were defined as follows: stage 0, functional involvement but no loss of independence on any domain; stages 1-4, number of domains in which independence was lost; and stage 5, death. Staging criteria were applied to patients enrolled in a Quality of Care in ALS (QOC) study; endpoints included function (ALSFRS), quality of life (QOL; Short Form-36) and health service costs. Between-stage transition probabilities were assessed in the QOC study and in a second clinical study of lithium carbonate in ALS.

RESULTS

70/118 (59.3%) participants in the QOC study progressed to higher stages of disease at 12 months compared with their baseline stage. Functional (ALSFRS) and QOL measures were inversely related to disease stage. Health service costs were directly related to increasing disease stages from 0 to 4 (p<0.001). Probabilities for transitioning from a given stage at baseline in both studies were usually greatest for the next highest stage.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed ALS Milano-Torino Staging system correlates well with assessments of function, QOL and health service costs. Further studies are warranted to validate this system.

Biologics, colchicine, corticosteroids, immunosuppressants and interferon-alpha for Neuro-Behçet's Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Neuro-Behçet Syndrome (NBS) is a severe chronic inflammatory vascular disease involving the Central Nervous System (CNS), and it is an invalidating condition with disability and a huge impact on quality of life. Recommendations on treatments for NBS include the use of disease-modifying therapies in general, although they are not supported by a systematic review of the evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefit and harms of available treatments for NBS, including biologics, colchicine, corticosteroids, immunosuppressants and interferon-alpha.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to 30 September 2014: Trials Specialised Register of The Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the Central Nervous System Group, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, ORPHANET, Clinicaltrials.gov and World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Portal.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), prospective and retrospective controlled cohort studies were eligible to assess the benefit. Patients over 13 years of age with a diagnosis of NBS. For assessment of harms, open-label extension (OLE), case-control studies, population-based registries, case-series and case-reports were additionally planned to be evaluated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Selection of studies, data extraction and assessment of risk of bias were planned to be carried out independently by two review authors. Standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration were followed. We planned to perform standard pair-wise meta-analyses for RCTs, and meta-analyses based on the adjusted estimates using the inverse-variance weighted average method for non-randomised studies (NRSs). We planned to present the main results of the review in a 'Summary of Findings' table using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

No RCTs, CCTs or controlled cohort studies on the benefit of the treatments for NBS met the inclusion criteria of the review. Only one potentially eligible study was identified, but it did not report sufficient details on the patient characteristics. The author of this study did not provide additional data on request, and therefore it was excluded. Hence, no studies were included in the present review. Since no studies were included in the assessment of benefit, no further search was performed in order to collect data on harms.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence to support or refute the benefit of biologics, colchicine, corticosteroids, immunosuppressants and interferon-alpha for the treatment of patients with NBS. Thus, well-designed multicentre RCTs are needed in order to inform and guide clinical practice.