Childhood chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy: an overview of 10 cases in the modern era

Retrospective analysis of response to rituximab in chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy refractory to first-line therapy

Few case reports/series describe the efficacy of rituximab in refractory chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP), which is preferred in the presence of anti-nodal/paranodal antibodies. We aimed at evaluating the clinical response to rituximab in a subset of patients with refractory CIDP for whom the anti-nodal/paranodal antibodies status was unknown, as not available in Iran. We retrospectively analyzed the response to rituximab in 14 Iranian patients with refractory CIDP (3 children, 11 adults), in whom the anti-nodal/paranodal antibodies status was unknown. The subjects were evaluated with the Medical Research Council (MRC) sum score (MRCSS), Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment (INCAT) disability scores, and electrophysiology, before and after treatment. Mean age was 34.4 ± 20.7 years, disease duration pre-rituximab treatment was 27.8 ± 18.8 (range: 6-60) months, and mean follow-up duration was 18.5 ± 11.0 (range: 4-36) months. Considering the INCAT sum score, one worsened during post-rituximab treatment, and three patients did not change. Considering MRCSS, notably, four patients achieved normalization of their MRCSS. Regarding the corticosteroid dose, two patients could discontinue prednisolone. As rated by a pre-defined scoring system, nerve conduction parameters improved significantly post-rituximab in the treated cohort (P = .006). All patients tolerated rituximab infusions without adverse effects. Rituximab may be effective in refractory CIDP, even though worsening may occur in some patients. Anti-nodal/paranodal antibodies assay, when available, and other criteria may help drive therapeutic decision-making on rituximab as second-line treatment.

Genetic neuropathies presenting with CIDP-like features in childhood

Inherited neuropathies are amongst the most common neuromuscular disorders. The distinction from chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) may be challenging, considering its rarity in childhood, that genetic neuropathies may show secondary inflammatory features, and that subacute CIDP presentations may closely mimic the disease course of inherited disorders. The overlap between genetic neuropathies and CIDP is increasingly recognized in adults but rarely reported in children. Here we report 4 children with a neuropathy of subacute onset, initially considered consistent with an immune-mediated neuropathy based on suggestive clinical, laboratory and neurophysiological features. None showed convincing response to intravenous immunoglobulin therapy, leading to re-evaluation and confirmation of a genetic neuropathy in each case (including PMP22, MPZ and SH3TC2 genes). A review of the few Paediatric cases reported in the literature showed similar delays in diagnosis and no significant changes to immunomodulatory treatment. Our findings emphasize the importance of considering an inherited neuropathy in children with a CIDP-like presentation. In addition to an inconclusive response to treatment, subtle details of the family and developmental history may indicate a genetic rather than an acquired background. Correct diagnostic confirmation of a genetic neuropathy in a child is crucial for appropriate management, prognostication and genetic counselling.

Efficacy and Safety of Rituximab in Refractory CIDP With or Without IgG4 Autoantibodies (RECIPE): Protocol for a Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) is an immune-mediated peripheral neuropathy that is currently classified into several clinical subtypes, which are presumed to have different pathogenic mechanisms. Recently, studies identified a subgroup of patients with CIDP who were positive for IgG4 autoantibodies against paranodal proteins, such as neurofascin-155 and contactin-1, who respond poorly to first-line therapies for typical CIDP, including intravenous immunoglobulin therapy.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous rituximab according to IgG4 autoantibody status in patients with refractory CIDP.

METHODS

The Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Rituximab in Refractory CIDP Patients with IgG4 Autoantibodies in the Exploratory Clinical (RECIPE) trial consists of 2 cohorts: a multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized study cohort of 15 patients with IgG4 autoantibody-positive CIDP (rituximab:placebo = 2:1) and an open-label trial cohort of 10 patients with antibody-negative CIDP. The primary endpoint is improvement in functional outcome assessed using the adjusted Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment Disability Scale score at 26, 38, or 52 weeks after the start of treatment with rituximab in patients with CIDP and anti-paranodal protein antibodies. Secondary outcome measures include grip strength, manual muscle testing sum scores, results of nerve conduction studies, and other functional scales.

RESULTS

We plan to enroll 25 cases for the full analysis set. Recruitment is ongoing, with 14 patients enrolled as of January 2020. Enrollment will close in September 2020, and the study is planned to end in December 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

This randomized controlled trial will determine if rituximab is safe and effective in patients with anti-paranodal antibodies. An open-label study will provide additional data on the effects of rituximab in patients with antibody-negative CIDP. The results of the RECIPE trial are expected to provide evidence for the positioning of rituximab as a pathogenesis-based therapeutic for refractory CIDP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03864185, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03864185 ; The Japan Registry of Clinical Trials jRCT2041180037, https://jrct.niph.go.jp/en-latest-detail/jRCT2041180037.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/17117.

Pediatric CIDP: Clinical Features and Response to Treatment

OBJECTIVES

Childhood chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) responds favorably to immunomodulatory treatment. However, the optimal sequencing and selection of immunotherapy is uncertain.

METHODS

Using accepted diagnostic criteria, pediatric patients with CIDP seen at our center from 1999 to 2015 were identified retrospectively through medical record review. Clinical details and treatment responses were tabulated.

RESULTS

Ten patients (age 4-16, 6 women) with definite (N = 8) or possible (N = 2) CIDP met criteria. All were initially treated with IVIg; 6 responded but 4 did not. All 4 IVIG nonresponders improved with twice-weekly high-dose oral prednisone, as did 1 IVIg responder who was also treated with twice-weekly oral prednisone when IVIg was discontinued. Pulse steroids were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Pulse oral corticosteroid therapy holds promise as an alternative treatment to IVIG in pediatric CIDP. Future multicenter studies are warranted to determine the comparative efficacy and safety of weekly pulse oral corticosteroids versus IVIg in pediatric CIDP.

Immunomodulatory treatment other than corticosteroids, immunoglobulin and plasma exchange for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy

BACKGROUND

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) is a disease that causes progressive or relapsing and remitting weakness and numbness. It is probably caused by an autoimmune process. Immunosuppressive or immunomodulatory drugs would be expected to be beneficial. This review was first published in 2003 and has been updated most recently in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of immunomodulatory and immunosuppressive agents other than corticosteroids, immunoglobulin, and plasma exchange in CIDP.

SEARCH METHODS

On 24 May 2016, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 4) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and LILACS for completed trials, and clinical trial registers for ongoing trials. We contacted the authors of the trials identified and other disease experts seeking other published and unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We sought randomised and quasi-randomised trials of all immunosuppressive agents, such as azathioprine, cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, ciclosporin, mycophenolate mofetil, and rituximab, and all immunomodulatory agents, such as interferon (IFN) alfa and IFN beta, in participants fulfilling standard diagnostic criteria for CIDP. We included all comparisons of these agents with placebo, another treatment, or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We wanted to measure the change in disability after one year as our primary outcome. Our secondary outcomes were change in disability after four or more weeks (from randomisation); change in impairment after at least one year; change in maximum motor nerve conduction velocity and compound muscle action potential amplitude after one year; and for participants who were receiving corticosteroids or intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg), the amount of this medication given during at least one year after randomisation. Participants with one or more serious adverse events during the first year was also a secondary outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

Four trials fulfilled the selection criteria: one of azathioprine (27 participants), two of IFN beta-1a (77 participants in total) and one of methotrexate (60 participants). The risk of bias was considered low in the trials of IFN beta-1a and methotrexate but high in the trial of azathioprine. None of the trials showed significant benefit in any of the outcomes selected by their authors. The results of the outcomes which approximated most closely to the primary outcome for this review were as follows.In the azathioprine trial there was a median improvement in the Neuropathy Impairment Scale (scale range 0 to 280) after nine months of 29 points (range 49 points worse to 84 points better) in the azathioprine and prednisone treated participants compared with 30 points worse (range 20 points worse to 104 points better) in the prednisone alone group. There were no reports of adverse events.In a cross-over trial of IFN beta-1a with 20 participants, the treatment periods were 12 weeks. The median improvement in the Guy's Neurological Disability Scale (range 1 to 10) was 0.5 grades (interquartile range (IQR) 1.8 grades better to zero grade change) in the IFN beta-1a treatment period and 0.5 grades (IQR 1.8 grades better to 1.0 grade worse) in the placebo treatment period. There were no serious adverse events in either treatment period.In a parallel group trial of IFN beta-1a with 67 participants, none of the outcomes for this review was available. The trial design involved withdrawal from ongoing IVIg treatment. The primary outcome used by the trial authors was total IVIg dose administered from week 16 to week 32 in the placebo group compared with the IFN beta-1a groups. This was slightly but not significantly lower in the combined IFN beta-1a groups (1.20 g/kg) compared with the placebo group (1.34 g/kg, P = 0.75). There were four participants in the IFN beta-1a group and none in the placebo group with one or more serious adverse events, risk ratio (RR) 4.50 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to 80.05).The methotrexate trial had a similar design involving withdrawal from ongoing corticosteroid or IVIg treatment. At the end of the trial (approximately 40 weeks) there was no significant difference in the change in the Overall Neuropathy Limitations Scale, a disability scale (scale range 0 to 12), the median change being 0 (IQR -1 to 0) in the methotrexate group and 0 (IQR -0.75 to 0) in the placebo group. These changes in disability might have been confounded by the reduction in corticosteroid or IVIg dose required by the protocol. There were three participants in the methotrexate group and one in the placebo with one or more serious adverse events, RR 3.56 (95% CI 0.39 to 32.23).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-quality evidence from randomised trials does not show significant benefit from azathioprine or interferon beta-1a and moderate-quality evidence from one randomised trial does not show significant benefit from a relatively low dose of methotrexate for the treatment of CIDP. None of the trials was large enough to rule out small or moderate benefit. The evidence from observational studies is insufficient to avoid the need for randomised controlled trials to discover whether these drugs are beneficial. Future trials should have improved designs, more sensitive outcome measures relevant to people with CIDP, and longer treatment durations.

Are electrophysiological criteria useful in distinguishing childhood demyelinating neuropathies?

Childhood chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) needs to be differentiated from hereditary neuropathy. We aimed to validate existing CIDP nerve conduction study (NCS) criteria in a group of children with demyelinating neuropathies of chronic or subacute onset. Retrospective analysis of clinical and NCS results in 18 children with CIDP, 7 with hereditary neuropathy with pressure palsy (HNPP), and 24 with Charcot-Marie-Tooth 1a (CMT1a). AAN and EFNS electrodiagnostic CIDP criteria were fulfilled in 17 of 18 CIDP, 3 of 7 HNPP, and 23 of 24 CMT1a patients. A distal compound muscle action potential (dCMAP) of >9 ms was observed in 14 of 18 CIDP patients but not in any patients with HNPP. Abnormal median/normal sural SNAP (AMNS) and a 10 m/s difference between conduction velocities (CV) of two corresponding nerves were not observed in any CMT1a patients. NCS in CMT1a, HNPP, and CIDP reflect demyelination. dCMAP duration, sensory AMNS, and a 10 m/s CV difference parameter are most useful in the differential diagnosis of pediatric CIDP.

Treatment of pediatric chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy: Challenges, controversies and questions

Pediatric chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) is an uncommon acquired disorder of unknown cause, presumed to have an immunological basis. We report 20 patients seen at Children's Hospital Los Angeles over a period of 10 years. The outcome of our patients was favorable in a vast majority with good response to various treatments instituted. However, residual neurologic deficit was common. The choice of treatment modality was empirical and selected by the treating neurologist. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) and corticosteroids were most commonly utilized for treatment. Plasmapheresis, mycophenolate mofetil, rituximab, cyclophosphamide, azathioprine, and abatacept were added if the patients were refractory to IVIG or became corticosteroid dependent. The spectrum of disease severity ranged from a single monophasic episode, to multiphasic with infrequent relapses with good response to IVIG, to progressive disease refractory to multiple therapies.

Spinal Nerve Root Enhancement on MRI Scans in Children: A Review

Spinal nerve root enhancement in pediatric patients is generally nonspecific, and clinical and laboratory correlation is essential. Nerve root enhancement indicates lack of integrity of the blood-nerve barrier. In this review, we will present a range of pediatric conditions that can present with spinal nerve root enhancement including inflammatory, infectious, hereditary, and neoplastic causes. Familiarity with the various pathologic entities associated with spinal nerve root enhancement is important for a concise differential diagnosis in the appropriate clinical setting. This will avoid unnecessary additional investigations.