Wingerchuk, Dean M.

Background: In the N-MOmentum trial, the risk of an adjudicated neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) attack was significantly reduced with inebilizumab compared with placebo. Objective: To demonstrate the robustness of this finding, using pre-specified sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Methods: N-MOmentum is a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-masked trial of inebilizumab, an anti-CD19 monoclonal B-cell-depleting antibody, in patients with NMOSD. Pre-planned and post hoc analyses were performed to evaluate the primary endpoint across a range of attack definitions and demographic groups, as well as key secondary endpoints. Results: In the N-MOmentum trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02200770), 174 participants received inebilizumab and 56 received placebo. Attack risk for inebilizumab versus placebo was consistently and significantly reduced, regardless of attack definition, type of attack, baseline disability, ethnicity, treatment history, or disease course (all with hazard ratios < 0.4 favoring inebilizumab, p < 0.05). Analyses of secondary endpoints showed similar trends. Conclusion: N-MOmentum demonstrated that inebilizumab provides a robust reduction in the risk of NMOSD attacks regardless of attack evaluation method, attack type, patient demographics, or previous therapy. The N-MOmentum study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT2200770.

Background and Purpose: The diagnosis of spontaneous spinal cord infarction (SCI) is limited by the lack of diagnostic biomarkers and MRI features that often overlap with those of other myelopathies, especially acute myelitis. We investigated whether the ratio between serum neurofilament light chain levels and MRI T2-lesion area (neurofilament light chain/area ratio—NAR) differentiates SCI from acute myelitis of similar severity. Methods: We retrospectively identified Mayo Clinic patients (January 1, 2000–December 31, 2019) with (1) SCI, (2) AQP4 (aquaporin 4)-IgG or MOG (myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein)-IgG-associated myelitis at disease clinical presentation, or (3) idiopathic transverse myelitis from a previously identified population-based cohort of patients seronegative for AQP4-IgG and MOG-IgG. Serum neurofilament light chain levels (pg/mL) were assessed at the Verona University (SIMOA, Quanterix) in a blinded fashion on available stored samples obtained ≤3 months from myelopathy presentation. For each patient, the largest spinal cord lesion area (mm 2 ) was manually outlined by 2 independent raters on sagittal T2-weighted MRI images, and the mean value was used to determine NAR (pg/[mL·mm 2 ]). Results: Forty-eight patients were included SCI, 20 (definite, 11; probable, 6; possible, 3); acute myelitis, 28 (AQP4-IgG-associated, 17; MOG-IgG-associated, 5; idiopathic transverse myelitis, 6). The median expanded disability status scale score (range) at myelopathy nadir were 7.75 (2–8.5) and 5.5 (2–8), respectively. Serum neurofilament light chain levels (median [range] pg/mL) in patients with SCI (188 [14.3–2793.4]) were significantly higher compared with patients with AQP4-IgG-associated myelitis (37 [0.8–6942.9]), MOG-IgG-associated myelitis (45.8 [4–283.8]), and idiopathic transverse myelitis (15.6 [0.9–217.8]); P =0.01. NAR showed the highest accuracy for identification of SCI versus acute myelitis with values ≥0.35 pg/(mL·mm 2 ) yielding 86% specificity and 95% sensitivity (area under the curve=0.93). The positive and negative likelihood ratios were 6.67 and 0.06, respectively. NAR remained independently associated with SCI after adjusting for age, gender, immunotherapy before sampling, and days from myelopathy symptoms onset to sampling ( P =0.0007). Conclusions: NAR is a novel and promising clinical biomarker for differentiation of SCI from acute myelitis.

Background: Noninvasive neuromodulation devices have been used for a variety of headache disorders, including cluster and migraine, since recently being cleared by the Federal Drug Administration. Although these devices have been touted as low-risk options for improved headache control, the data behind actual efficacy endpoints remain unclear. Objective: To critically assess current evidence regarding the efficacy of the noninvasive vagus nerve stimulator (nVNS) device for acute migraine management. Methods: The objective was addressed through the development of a structured critically appraised topic. This included a clinical scenario with a clinical question, literature search strategy, critical appraisal, results, evidence summary, commentary, and bottom line conclusions. Participants included consultant and resident neurologists, a medical librarian, clinical epidemiologists, and a content expert in the field of headache. Results: A randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled clinical trial was selected for critical appraisal. In this trial, the primary endpoint (pain freedom at 120 min after use of nVNS for first acute migraine attack) was not met when compared with sham device (30.4% for nVNS vs. 19.7% for sham; P=0.067). However, there were statistically significant differences found for various secondary endpoints favoring nVNS, such as pain freedom rates at 30 and 60 minutes, pain relief at 120 minutes, and mean percentage pain score reduction rates at 60 and 120 minutes. Conclusions: When comparing nVNS with sham, no statistically significant differences were found with regards to the primary endpoint of pain freedom at 120 minutes, although differences were found with various secondary endpoints and post hoc analysis. nVNS is likely a safe alternative to medications.

Alternating electrical fields can disrupt mitosis leading to apoptosis of rapidly dividing cancer cells. The device that utilizes this mechanism is known as tumor-treating fields (TTFields). TTFields can be applied by ceramic transducer arrays on a shaved scalp to deliver the alternating electric activity to patients with glioblastoma (GBM). It has FDA approval for use in both recurrent and newly diagnosed GBM. The objective is to critically appraise the current evidence for the use of TTFields as adjunctive treatment to newly diagnosed GBM. The objective was addressed through the development of a structured, critically appraised topic. We incorporated a clinical scenario, background information, a structured question, literature search strategy, evidence summary, clinical bottom lines, and expert discussion. Participants included consultant and resident neurologists, a medical librarian, clinical epidemiologists, and content experts in the field of neurooncology. A randomized controlled trial was selected for critical appraisal. Patients with newly diagnosed GBM completing standard radiation and chemotherapy with temozolomide (TMZ) were subsequently randomized to receive maintenance TMZ with TTFields, or TMZ alone. With the addition of TTFields, median progression-free survival was 6.7 months compared with 4 months without the addition of TTFields (95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.76; P<0.001) and overall survival was 20.9 months compared with 16.0 months without the addition of TTFields (95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.76; P<0.001). TTFields may increase both progression-free and overall survival in patients receiving standard chemoradiation therapy for GBM.