Question

List the common pharmacology interventions for Acute inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculopathy and state the category the drug belongs as well as the actions and side effects

Answer 1

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) is a chronic progressive or relapsing and remitting disease that usually causes weakness and sensory loss. The symptoms are due to autoimmune inflammation of peripheral nerves. CIPD affects about 2 to 3 per 100,000 of the population. More than half of affected people cannot walk unaided when symptoms are at their worst. CIDP usually responds to treatments that reduce inflammation, but there is disagreement about which treatment is most effective.

Objectives

To summarise the evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs) and non‐Cochrane systematic reviews of any treatment for CIDP and to compare the effects of treatments.

Methods

We considered all systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any treatment for any form of CIDP. We reported their primary outcomes, giving priority to change in disability after 12 months.

Two overview authors independently identified published systematic reviews for inclusion and collected data. We reported the quality of evidence using GRADE criteria. Two other review authors independently checked review selection, data extraction and quality assessments.

On 31 October 2016, we searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (in theCochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL Plus for systematic reviews of CIDP. We supplemented the RCTs in the existing CSRs by searching on the same date for RCTs of any treatment of CIDP (including treatment of fatigue or pain in CIDP), in the Cochrane Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL Plus.

Main results

Five CSRs met our inclusion criteria. We identified 23 randomised trials, of which 15 had been included in these CSRs. We were unable to compare treatments as originally planned, because outcomes and outcome intervals differed.

Corticosteroids

It is uncertain whether daily oral prednisone improved impairment compared to no treatment because the quality of the evidence was very low (1 trial, 28 participants). According to moderate‐quality evidence (1 trial, 41 participants), six months' treatment with high‐dose monthly oral dexamethasone did not improve disability more than daily oral prednisolone. Observational studies tell us that prolonged use of corticosteroids sometimes causes serious side‐effects.

Plasma exchange

According to moderate‐quality evidence (2 trials, 59 participants), twice‐weekly plasma exchange produced more short‐term improvement in disability than sham exchange. In the largest observational study, 3.9% of plasma exchange procedures had complications.

Intravenous immunoglobulin

According to high‐quality evidence (5 trials, 269 participants), intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) produced more short‐term improvement than placebo. Adverse events were more common with IVIg than placebo (high‐quality evidence), but serious adverse events were not (moderate‐quality evidence, 3 trials, 315 participants). One trial with 19 participants provided moderate‐quality evidence of little or no difference in short‐term improvement of impairment with plasma exchange in comparison to IVIg. There was little or no difference in short‐term improvement of disability with IVIg in comparison to oral prednisolone (moderate‐quality evidence; 1 trial, 29 participants) or intravenous methylprednisolone (high‐quality evidence; 1 trial, 45 participants). One unpublished randomised open trial with 35 participants found little or no difference in disability after three months of IVIg compared to oral prednisone; this trial has not yet been included in a CSR. We know from observational studies that serious adverse events related to IVIg do occur.

Other immunomodulatory treatments

It is uncertain whether the addition of azathioprine (2 mg/kg) to prednisone improved impairment in comparison to prednisone alone, as the quality of the evidence is very low (1 trial, 27 participants). Observational studies show that adverse effects truncate treatment in 10% of people.

According to low‐quality evidence (1 trial, 60 participants), compared to placebo, methotrexate 15 mg/kg did not allow more participants to reduce corticosteroid or IVIg doses by 20%. Serious adverse events were no more common with methotrexate than with placebo, but observational studies show that methotrexate can cause teratogenicity, abnormal liver function, and pulmonary fibrosis.

According to moderate‐quality evidence (2 trials, 77 participants), interferon beta‐1a (IFN beta‐1a) in comparison to placebo, did not allow more people to withdraw from IVIg. According to moderate‐quality evidence, serious adverse events were no more common with IFN beta‐1a than with placebo.

We know of no other completed trials of immunosuppressant or immunomodulatory agents for CIDP.

Other treatments

We identified no trials of treatments for fatigue or pain in CIDP.

Adverse effects

Not all trials routinely collected adverse event data; when they did, the quality of evidence was variable. Adverse effects in the short, medium, and long term occur with all interventions. We are not able to make reliable comparisons of adverse events between the interventions included in CSRs

PLEASE DO LIKE