Biopsy findings link multifocal motor neuropathy to chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy

D. Krendel
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.410400626
IF: 11.2
1996-12-01
Annals of Neurology
Abstract:those not so treated by an average of 9 months in the length of time before they required levodopa symptomatic treatment, the same as for the whole DATATOP cohort [2]. However, the groups did not differ in their degree of impairment at the final evaluation, nor in their rate of developing levodopa-related treatment complications (Table). Since these disease-matched subgroups were very similar to those of the group as a whole, it seems that differences in disease severity do not account for our finding that prior deprenyl therapy did not influence the development of levodopainduced adverse effects. After our initial findings favoring deprenyl [2], the conversion of all DATATOP subjects to open-label deprenyl excluded an ongoing placebo-controlled trial. In retrospect, our follow-up studies would have benefited from a placebo comparison group. However, the initial results of the DATATOP trial were so dramatic that it was not clinically justifiable to deny deprenyl to our research subjects. We did maintain the investigators’ and subjects’ blindness with regard to the initial treatment assignment. Our study had the advantage of having all subjects on deprenyl at the end of the evaluation period so that its symptomatic effects were the same across all groups. Thus, we could examine possible neuroprotective effects of prior deprenyl therapy in the presence of the symptomatic effects of ongoing deprenyl therapy. These symptomatic effects could well account for the reduced need for levodopa that the correspondents observed in their studies. Indeed, a longer study should make subtle differences between groups more apparent. However, the large number of subjects in our study should have compensated somewhat for the relatively short 18-month difference between the groups with respect to initial deprenyl treatment. Somerset Pharmaceuticals (Tampa, FL) has supported a follow-up study of the DATATOP cohort involving a second randomization of our subjects to continue on or withdraw from deprenyl and follow-up for an additional 2 years. This study should provide longer time differences for exposure to deprenyl. We are unable to comment on the findings of three cited but unpublished studies whose design and results have not been disclosed. We look forward to peer-reviewed reports of the European studies cited by Orion so that readers may form their own judgments about whether their results differ from ours. Meanwhile, we stand by our recommendation that both the initial benefit of deprenyl [ I , 21 and the less encouraging longer term results [3, 41 should be weighed in the decision to prescribe deprenyl.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?