OBJECTIVE: To survey the current global clinical practice of clinicians treating MOGAD.
METHOD: Neurologists worldwide with expertise in treating MOGAD participated in an online survey (February-April 2019).
RESULTS: Fifty-two responses were received (response rate 60.5%) from 86 invited experts, comprising adult (78.8%, 41/52) and paediatric (21.2%, 11/52) neurologists in 22 countries. All treat acute attacks with high dose corticosteroids. If recovery is incomplete, 71.2% (37/52) proceed next to plasma exchange (PE). 45.5% (5/11) of paediatric neurologists use IV immunoglobulin (IVIg) in preference to PE. Following an acute attack, 55.8% (29/52) of respondents typically continue corticosteroids for ≥ 3 months; though less commonly when treating children. After an index event, 60% (31/51) usually start steroid-sparing maintenance therapy (MT); after ≥ 2 attacks 92.3% (48/52) would start MT. Repeat MOG antibody status is used by 52.9% (27/51) to help decide on MT initiation. Commonly used first line MTs in adults are azathioprine (30.8%, 16/52), mycophenolate mofetil (25.0%, 13/52) and rituximab (17.3%, 9/52). In children, IVIg is the preferred first line MT (54.5%; 6/11). Treatment response is monitored by MRI (53.8%; 28/52), optical coherence tomography (23.1%; 12/52) and MOG antibody titres (36.5%; 19/52). Regardless of monitoring results, 25.0% (13/52) would not stop MT.
CONCLUSION: Current treatment of MOGAD is highly variable, indicating a need for consensus-based treatment guidelines, while awaiting definitive clinical trials.
CASE PRESENTATION: We report a case of a middle-aged lady who presented with severe pain and morning stiffness over the small joints of the left hand for 3 months and painless deformity of the affected joints 1 year before. She was under treatment for pruritic rash over her ankles and knees for the past 1 year as well. Physical examination revealed a fixed flexion deformity, swelling and tenderness of the left ring and little fingers' distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints. Left hand radiograph showed sclerotic joint margin, narrowed joint space and marginal osteophytes of the affected DIP joints. Dermoscopic examination showed red- violaceous, flat-topped papules and plaques with minimal scales on both ankles; hyperpigmented scaly plaques over both knees and vertical fingernail ridges. Serum autoimmune screening and inflammatory markers were unremarkable. Left ankle skin biopsy showed features consistent of psoriasis. PsA was diagnosed. Weekly titrated oral methotrexate and topical steroid were started. The patient showed significant improvement after 1 month of treatment.
CONCLUSION: PsA is a great mimicker. Dermoscopy is an accessible and valuable tool to assess skin lesions in greater detail. Clinicians should be aware of coexisting diseases or misdiagnosis when patients do not respond to treatment.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of umeclidinium bromide versus placebo for people with stable COPD.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (CAGR), ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal, and the GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Clinical Study Register, using prespecified terms, as well as the reference lists of all identified studies. Searches are current to April 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of parallel design comparing umeclidinium bromide versus placebo in people with COPD, for at least 12 weeks.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. If we noted significant heterogeneity in the meta-analyses, we subgrouped studies by umeclidinium dose.
MAIN RESULTS: We included four studies of 12 to 52 weeks' duration, involving 3798 participants with COPD. Mean age of participants ranged from 60.1 to 64.6 years; most were males with baseline mean smoking pack-years of 39.2 to 52.3. They had moderate to severe COPD and baseline mean post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) ranging from 44.5% to 55.1% of predicted normal. As all studies were systematically conducted according to prespecified protocols, we assessed risk of selection, performance, detection, attrition, and reporting biases as low.Compared with those given placebo, participants in the umeclidinium group had a lesser likelihood of developing moderate exacerbations requiring a short course of steroids, antibiotics, or both (odds ratio (OR) 0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 0.80; four studies, N = 1922; GRADE: high), but not specifically requiring hospitalisations due to severe exacerbations (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.92; four studies, N = 1922, GRADE: low). The number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) to prevent an acute exacerbation requiring steroids, antibiotics, or both was 18 (95% CI 13 to 37). Quality of life was better in the umeclidinium group (mean difference (MD) -4.79, 95% CI -8.84 to -0.75; three studies, N = 1119), and these participants had a significantly higher chance of achieving a minimal clinically important difference of at least four units in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score compared with those in the placebo group (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.82; three studies, N = 1397; GRADE: moderate). The NNTB to achieve one person with a clinically meaningful improvement was 11 (95% CI 7 to 29). The likelihood of all-cause mortality, non-fatal serious adverse events (OR 1.33; 95% CI 0.89 to 2.00; four studies, N = 1922, GRADE: moderate), and adverse events (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.31; four studies, N = 1922; GRADE: moderate) did not differ between umeclidinium and placebo groups. The umeclidinium group demonstrated significantly greater improvement in change from baseline in trough FEV1 compared with the placebo group (MD 0.14, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.17; four studies, N = 1381; GRADE: high). Symptomatic improvement was more likely in the umeclidinium group than in the placebo group, as determined by Transitional Dyspnoea Index (TDI) focal score (MD 0.76, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.09; three studies, N = 1193), and the chance of achieving a minimal clinically important difference of at least one unit improvement was significantly higher with umeclidinium than with placebo (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.15; three studies, N = 1141; GRADE: high). The NNTB to attain one person with clinically important symptomatic improvement was 8 (95% CI 5 to 14). The likelihood of rescue medication usage (change from baseline in the number of puffs per day) was significantly less for the umeclidinium group than for the placebo group (MD -0.45, 95% CI -0.76 to -0.14; four studies, N = 1531).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Umeclidinium reduced acute exacerbations requiring steroids, antibiotics, or both, although no evidence suggests that it decreased the risk of hospital admission due to exacerbations. Moreover, umeclidinium demonstrated significant improvement in quality of life, lung function, and symptoms, along with lesser use of rescue medications. Studies reported no differences in adverse events, non-fatal serious adverse events, or mortality between umeclidinium and placebo groups; however, larger studies would yield a more precise estimate for these outcomes.