Devine, Michelle F.

We provide an overview of the varied presentations of paraneoplastic neurological syndromes. We also review the onconeural antibodies and their particular oncological and neurological associations. Recognition of these syndromes and their oncological associations is crucial, as early diagnosis and management has been associated with better patient outcomes. Specific management strategies and prognosis vary widely depending on the underlying etiology. An understanding of the relevant clinical details, imaging findings, and other diagnostic information can help tailor treatment approaches. We provide an outline of the diagnostic evaluation and treatment of various paraneoplastic neurological disorders, presenting with central and/or peripheral nervous system involvement. We briefly discuss neurologic immune checkpoint inhibitor-related adverse events, which can occasionally present with paraneoplastic neurological syndrome phenotypes.

Abstract Introduction Sleep disturbances, including rapid eye movement (REM) behavior disorder (RBD), are known manifestations of voltage-gated-potassium-channel-complex VGKC-IgG seropositivity (VGKC+). Discovery of leucine-rich, glioma inactivated protein 1 (LGI1) and contactin-associated protein 2 (CASPR2) have refined our understanding of VGKC+. VGKC+ without LGI1/CASPR2-IgG (“double-negative”) has lost its clinical significance. Previous detailed sleep analysis of these subtypes has been limited. Methods We performed a retrospective study to characterize clinical and polysomnographic features of LGI1/CASPR2 seropositive (LGI1+/CASPR2+) and VGKC double-negative patients, including quantitative REM sleep without atonia (RSWA). Quantified RSWA was compared to matched controls and normative RSWA percentiles. Results Eleven LGI1+/CASPR2+ (LGI1+, 9) and twelve VGKC double-negative patients were analyzed. Insomnia was seen in 55% of LGI1+/CASPR2+ and 8% of VGKC double-negative patients (p=0.05). The LGI1+/CASPR2+ group had reduced slow wave sleep compared to the VGKC double-negative group. Five LGI1+ patients had clinical dream enactment behavior (DEB). Eight LGI1+ patients met quantitative diagnostic levels of RSWA. Higher RSWA levels were seen in the LGI1+/CASPR2+ group. Ten LGI1+/CASPR2+ patients received immunotherapy; all ten neurologically benefited with sleep benefits in 6/10. Conclusion Sleep disorders such as insomnia and RBD are part of the LGI1/CASPR2 autoimmune phenotype. Objective sleep manifestations can be seen on polysomnogram in the form of reduced N3 and elevated RSWA as compared to controls. Quantitative RSWA analysis identified RBD in more LGI1+ patients than clinical report or qualitative RSWA. In this study, RBD was only seen with LGI1+, not CASPR2+. The intermediate RSWA levels of the VGKC double-negative patients may suggest a spectrum of abnormal motor activity in these related antibodies. Additional studies are needed to further explore the biomarker potential of quantitative RSWA in autoimmune neurological conditions. Support This project was supported by the National Center forResearch Resources, National Institutes of Health, through Grant Number 1 UL1 RR024150- 01.

ObjectiveDrug‐resistant seizures are common in patients with leucine‐rich, glioma‐inactivated 1 (LGI1)‐IgG associated and contactin‐associated protein‐like 2 (CASPR2)‐IgG associated encephalitis. We performed the first randomized double‐blind placebo‐controlled trial to evaluate efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) in reducing seizure frequency.MethodsOur enrollment goal was 30 LGI1/CASPR2‐IgG–seropositive adult patients with ≥2 seizures per week. Patients were randomized to receive IVIG (0.5g/kg day 1, 1g/kg day 2, 0.6g/kg weeks 3 and 5) or volume‐matched intravenous normal saline. Following the blinded phase, the nonresponders in the placebo group received IVIG. The primary clinical outcome was 50% reduction in seizure frequency from baseline to 5 weeks.ResultsAfter enrollment of 17 patients (LGI1‐IgG, 14; CASPR2‐IgG, 3) over 34 months, the study was terminated due to slow enrollment. Six of 8 patients in the IVIG group were responders, compared to 2 of 9 in the placebo group (p = 0.044, odds ratio = 10.5, 95% confidence interval = 1.1–98.9). For the LGI1‐IgG seropositive subgroup, 6 of 8 patients in the IVIG group were responders, compared to zero of 6 in the placebo group. Two LGI1‐IgG–seropositive patients receiving IVIG, but none receiving placebo, were seizure‐free at the end of the blinded phase. Four of the 6 patients entering the open‐label IVIG arm reported ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency. There were no correlations with LGI1/CASPR2‐IgG1–4 subclasses.InterpretationSuperiority of IVIG to placebo reached statistical significance for the primary endpoint for all patients and the subset with LGI1‐IgG. These results have to be interpreted with the caveat that the study did not reach its originally selected sample size. ANN NEUROL 2020;87:313–323