Lewis, Richard A.

ABSTRACTBackground and AimsLeucine Zipper 4 (LUZP4)‐immunoglobulin G (IgG) is a novel antibody implicated in germ cell tumor‐related paraneoplastic neurologic syndrome. We report a case of painful, progressive tetraparesis associated with testicular seminoma and LUZP4‐IgG seropositivity.Case ReportA 51‐year‐old male presented with a 5‐week history of lower limb predominant progressive weakness. Nerve conduction studies (NCS) and electromyography (EMG) revealed a subacute axonal polyradiculoneuropathy. MRI lumbar spine showed thickening of the cauda equina and enhancement of the lower thoracic spinal cord/conus. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) showed a lymphocytic pleocytosis, three oligoclonal bands, and mildly elevated protein. Initial treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) and prednisone produced temporary improvement. CT targeted retroperitoneal lymph node biopsy revealed a seminoma, which was treated with orchiectomy and chemotherapy. The testicular tissue was consistent with a regressed germ cell tumor. His course was subsequently refractory to IVIG, prednisone, and plasma exchange. LUZP4 antibodies were detected in serum, prompting treatment with cyclophosphamide and prednisone. At the 4‐month follow‐up, the patient had significant improvement in hand strength and had transitioned from walker to cane.InterpretationLUZP4‐IgG seropositivity and identification of retroperitoneal seminoma confirmed a paraneoplastic neurologic syndrome, which is a CD8+ T‐cell‐mediated disorder. Aggressive immunotherapy was initiated, resulting in clinical improvement. This case underscores the importance of identifying specific serologic biomarkers that can inform therapeutic decisions and improve outcomes.

ImportanceMyeloperoxidase is one of the most abundant peroxidase enzymes in activated myeloid cells. Myeloperoxidase inhibitors may have a clinical benefit in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) by slowing neurodegeneration via reduced neuroinflammation and oxidative stress.ObjectiveTo determine the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of verdiperstat, a selective myeloperoxidase inhibitor, in ALS.Design, Settings, and ParticipantsVerdiperstat was tested as a regimen of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, a multicenter, double-blind, perpetual platform design, randomized clinical trial, with sharing of trial infrastructure and placebo data across multiple regimens. The study was conducted at 54 ALS referral centers across the US from July 2020 to April 2022. Adult participants with a diagnosis of clinically possible, probable, laboratory-supported probable, or definite ALS defined by the revised El Escorial criteria were randomized to verdiperstat or regimen-specific placebo. An additional group of participants concurrently randomized to placebo from other regimens was included in the analyses.InterventionsEligible participants were randomized in a 3:1 ratio to receive oral verdiperstat, 600 mg, twice daily or matching placebo for a planned placebo-controlled duration of 24 weeks.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary efficacy outcome was change from baseline through week 24 in disease severity, as measured by a joint model of ALS Functional Rating Scale–Revised and survival, with the treatment effect quantified by the disease rate ratio (DRR), with DRR less than 1 indicating a slowing in disease progression of verdiperstat relative to placebo.ResultsA total of 167 participants (mean [SD] age, 58.5 [11.4] years; 59 [35.3%] female; 108 [64.6%] male) were randomized to either verdiperstat (126 [75.4%]) or to placebo (41 [25.6%]). Among the participants randomized to the verdiperstat regimen, 130 (78%) completed the trial. The estimated DRR was 0.98 (95% credible interval, 0.77-1.24; posterior probability = 0.57 for slowing of disease progression [DRR <1]). Verdiperstat was estimated to slow progression by 2% vs placebo (95% credible interval, −23% to 24%; posterior probability 0.57). Verdiperstat was overall safe and well tolerated. Common adverse events in the verdiperstat group were nausea, insomnia, and elevated thyrotropin levels.Conclusions and RelevanceResults demonstrate that treatment with verdiperstat was unlikely to alter disease progression in ALS.Trial RegistrationClinical Trial Identifiers: NCT04297683 and NCT04436510

ImportanceAmyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a fatal disease. The sigma-1 (σ1) receptor emerged as a target for intervention.ObjectiveTo determine the effects of pridopidine, a σ1-receptor agonist, in ALS.Design, Settings, and ParticipantsPridopidine was tested as a regimen of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, a phase 2/3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, platform trial. The study was conducted at 54 sites in the US from January 2021 to July 2022 (final follow-up, July 14, 2022). A total of 163 participants with ALS were randomized to receive pridopidine or placebo. An additional 122 concurrently randomized participants were assigned to receive placebo in other regimens and included in the analyses.InterventionsEligible participants were randomized 3:1 to receive oral pridopidine 45 mg twice daily (n = 121) or matching oral placebo (n = 42) for a planned duration of 24 weeks.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary efficacy outcome was change from baseline through week 24 in ALS disease severity, analyzed using a bayesian shared parameter model, which has components for function (Revised Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale [ALSFRS-R]) and survival that were linked through an integrated estimate of treatment-dependent disease slowing across these 2 components. This was denoted as the disease rate ratio (DRR), with DRR less than 1 indicating a slowing in disease progression on pridopidine relative to placebo. There were 5 key secondary end points: time to 2-point or greater reduction in ALSFRS-R total score among participants with bulbar dysfunction at baseline, rate of decline in slow vital capacity among participants with bulbar dysfunction at baseline, percentage of participants with no worsening in the ALSFRS-R bulbar domain score, time to 1-point or greater change in the ALSFRS-R bulbar domain score, and time to death or permanent assisted ventilation.ResultsAmong 162 patients (mean age, 57.5 years; 35% female) who were randomized to receive the pridopidine regimen and included in the primary efficacy analysis, 136 (84%) completed the trial. In the primary analysis comparing pridopidine vs the combined placebo groups, there was no significant difference between pridopidine and placebo in the primary end point (DRR, 0.99 [95% credible interval, 0.80-1.21]; probability of DRR <1, 0.55) and no differences were seen in the components of ALSFRS-R or survival. There was no benefit of pridopidine on the secondary end points. In the safety dataset (pridopidine, n = 121; placebo, n = 163), the most common adverse events were falls (28.1% vs 29.3%, respectively) and muscular weakness (24.0% vs 31.7%, respectively).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this 24-week study, pridopidine did not impact the progression of ALS.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT04297683, NCT04615923

Importance The etiology of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), a fatal neurodegenerative disease, is unknown. However, neuroinflammation and complement activation may play a role in disease progression. Objective To determine the effects of zilucoplan, an inhibitor of complement C5, in individuals with ALS. Design, Setting, and Participants Zilucoplan was tested as regimen A of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial, a phase 2 to 3 multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled perpetual platform clinical trial with sharing of trial infrastructure and placebo data across multiple regimens. Regimen A was conducted from August 17, 2020, to May 4, 2022. A total of 162 participants were randomized to receive zilucoplan (122 [75.3%]) or regimen-specific placebo (40 [24.7%]). An additional 124 concurrently randomized participants were randomized to receive placebo in other regimens. Interventions Eligible participants were randomized in a 3:1 ratio to receive zilucoplan or matching placebo within strata of edaravone and/or riluzole use for a planned duration of 24 weeks. Active drug (zilucoplan, 0.3 mg/kg) and placebo were provided for daily subcutaneous dosing. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was change in disease severity from baseline through 24 weeks as measured by the Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale–Revised (ALSFRS-R) total score and survival, analyzed using a bayesian shared-parameter model and reported as disease rate ratio (DRR; <1 indicating treatment benefit). The study included prespecified rules for early stopping for futility. Outcome analyses were performed in the full analysis set comparing the zilucoplan group with the total shared placebo group (n = 164). Results Among the 162 participants who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 59.6 [11.3]; 99 [61.1%] male), 115 (71.0%) completed the trial. The estimated DRR common to ALSFRS-R and survival was 1.08 (95% credible interval, 0.87-1.31; posterior probability of superiority, 0.24). The trial was stopped early for futility. No unexpected treatment-related risks were identified. Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial of zilucoplan in ALS, treatment did not alter disease progression. The adaptive platform design of the HEALEY ALS Platform Trial made it possible to test a new investigational product with efficient use of time and resources. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04297683

ABSTRACTBackground and AimsChronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) is difficult to distinguish from mimicking disorders, with misdiagnosis resulting in IVIG overutilization. We evaluate a clinical‐electrophysiological model to facilitate CIDP versus mimic neuropathy prediction.MethodsUsing the European Academy of Neurology/Peripheral Nerve Society (EAN/PNS) 2021 CIDP guidelines we derived 26 clinical and 144 nerve conduction variables. The model was generated and validated utilizing total CIDP (n = 129) and mimics (n = 309); including (1) IgG4‐nodopathies; (2) POEMS (polyneuropathy–organomegaly–endocrinopathy–monoclonal protein‐skin changes); (3) anti‐myelin‐associated‐glycoprotein; (4) paraneoplastic; (5) Waldenström B‐cell lymphoma; (6) diabetic neuropathies; (7) amyloidosis; (8) Charcot–Marie–Tooth; (9) motor neuropathies/neuronopathies; and (10) idiopathic‐inflammatory‐myopathies.ResultsWe analyzed 9282 clinical and 51 408 electrophysiological data points. Univariate analysis identified 11 of 26 clinical variables with significant odds ratios. A multivariate regression model using four clinical and two electrophysiologic variables achieved 93% area‐under‐curve (95% CI 91–95): progression over 8 weeks (OR 40.66, 95% CI 5.31–311.36), absent autonomic involvement (OR 17.82, 95% CI 2.93–108.24), absent muscle atrophy (OR 16.65, 95% CI 3.27–84.73), proximal weakness (OR 3.63, 95% CI 1.58–8.33), ulnar motor conduction velocity slowing < 35.7 m/s (OR 5.21, 95% CI 2.13–12.76), and ulnar motor conduction block (OR 13.37, 95% CI 2.47–72.40). A web‐based probability calculator (https://news.mayocliniclabs.com/cidp‐calculator/) was developed, with 100% sensitivity and 68% specificity at a 92% probability threshold. Specificity improved to 93% when considering “red flags,” electrophysiologic criteria, and laboratory testing.InterpretationA probability calculator using clinical electrophysiological variables assists CIDP differentiation from mimics, with scores below 92% unlikely to have CIDP. The highest specificity is achieved by considering clinical “red flags,” electrophysiologic demyelination, and laboratory testing.

Background: Transbronchial lung forceps biopsy (TBLF) is of limited value for the diagnosis of interstitial lung disease (ILD). However, in cases with predominantly peribronchial pathology, such as sarcoidosis, TBLF is considered to be diagnostic in most cases. The present study examines whether transbronchial lung cryobiopsy (TBLC) is superior to TBLF in terms of diagnostic yield in cases of sarcoidosis. Methods: In this post hoc analysis of a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicentre study, 359 patients with ILD requiring diagnostic bronchoscopic tissue sampling were included. TBLF and TBLC were both used for each patient in a randomized order. Histological assessment was undertaken on each biopsy and determined whether sarcoid was a consideration. Results: A histological diagnosis of sarcoidosis was established in 17 of 272 cases for which histopathology was available. In 6 out of 17 patients, compatible findings were seen with both TBLC and TBLF. In 10 patients, where the diagnosis of sarcoidosis was confirmed by TBLC, TBLF did not provide a diagnosis. In one patient, TBLF but not TBLC confirmed the diagnosis of sarcoidosis. Conclusions: In this post hoc analysis, the histological diagnosis of sarcoidosis was made significantly more often by TBLC than by TBLF. As in other idiopathic interstitial pneumonias (IIPs), the use of TBLC should be considered when sarcoidosis is suspected.