Wearable sensors in Huntington disease:a pilot study

Background: The Unified Huntington’s Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS) is the principal means of assessing motor impairment in Huntington disease but is subjective and generally limited to in-clinic assessments. Objective: To evaluate the feasibility and ability of wearable sensors to measure motor impairment in individuals with Huntington disease in the clinic and at home. Methods: Participants with Huntington disease and controls were asked to wear five accelerometer-based sensors attached to the chest and each limb for standardized, in-clinic assessments and for one day at home. A secondchest sensor was worn for six additional days at home. Gait measures were compared between controls, participants with Huntington disease, and participants with Huntington disease grouped by UHDRS total motor score using Cohen’s d values. Results: Fifteen individuals with Huntington disease and five controls completed the study. Sensor data were successfully captured from 18 of the 20 participants at home. In the clinic, the standard deviation of step time (timebetween consecutive steps) was increased in Huntington disease (p<0.0001; Cohen’s d=2.61) compared to controls. At home with additional observations, significant differences were observed in seven additional gait measures. The gait of individuals with higher total motor scores (50 or more) differed significantly from those with lower total motor scores (below 50) on multiple measures at home. Conclusions: In this pilot study, the use of wearable sensors in clinic and at home was feasible and demonstrated gait differences between controls, participants with Huntington disease, and participants with Huntington diseasegrouped by motor impairment.

Cholinesterase inhibitors for dementia with Lewy bodies, Parkinson's disease dementia and cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease

Background - Previous Cochrane reviews have considered the use of cholinesterase inhibitors in both Parkinson's disease with dementia (PDD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). The clinical features of DLB and PDD have much in common and are distinguished primarily on the basis of whether or not parkinsonism precedes dementia by more than a year. Patients with both conditions have particularly severe deficits in cortical levels of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine. Therefore, blocking its breakdown using cholinesterase inhibitors may lead to clinical improvement. Objectives - To assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of cholinesterase inhibitors in dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), Parkinson’s disease with dementia (PDD), and cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease falling short of dementia (CIND-PD) (considered as separate phenomena and also grouped together as Lewy body disease). Search methods - The trials were identified from a search of ALOIS, the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (on 30 August 2011) using the search terms Lewy, Parkinson, PDD, DLB, LBD. This register consists of records from major healthcare databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL) and many ongoing trial databases and is updated regularly. Reference lists of relevant studies were searched for additional trials. Selection criteria - Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials assessing the efficacy of treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors in DLB, PDD and cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease (CIND-PD). Data collection and analysis - Data were extracted from published reports by one review author (MR). The data for each 'condition' (that is DLB, PDD or CIND-PD) were considered separately and, where possible, also pooled together. Statistical analysis was conducted using Review Manager version 5.0. Main results - Six trials met the inclusion criteria for this review, in which a total of 1236 participants were randomised. Four of the trials were of a parallel group design and two cross-over trials were included. Four of the trials included participants with a diagnosis of Parkinson's disease with dementia (Aarsland 2002a; Dubois 2007; Emre 2004; Ravina 2005), of which Dubois 2007 remains unpublished. Leroi 2004 included patients with cognitive impairment and Parkinson's disease (both with and without dementia). Patients with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) were included in only one of the trials (McKeith 2000). For global assessment, three trials comparing cholinesterase inhibitor treatment to placebo in PDD (Aarsland 2002a; Emre 2004; Ravina 2005) reported a difference in the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (ADCS-CGIC) score of -0.38, favouring the cholinesterase inhibitors (95% CI -0.56 to -0.24, P < 0.0001). For cognitive function, a pooled estimate of the effect of cholinesterase inhibitors on cognitive function measures was consistent with the presence of a therapeutic benefit (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.34, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.23, P < 0.00001). There was evidence of a positive effect of cholinesterase inhibitors on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in patients with PDD (WMD 1.09, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.73, P = 0.0008) and in the single PDD and CIND-PD trial (WMD 1.05, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.68, P = 0.01) but not in the single DLB trial. For behavioural disturbance, analysis of the pooled continuous data relating to behavioural disturbance rating scales favoured treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.36 to -0.04, P = 0.01). For activities of daily living, combined data for the ADCS and the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) activities of daily living rating scales favoured treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.02, P = 0.03). For safety and tolerability, those taking a cholinesterase inhibitor were more likely to experience an adverse event (318/452 versus 668/842; odds ratio (OR) 1.64, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.15, P = 0.0003) and to drop out (128/465 versus 45/279; OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.84, P = 0.0006). Adverse events were more common amongst those taking rivastigmine (357/421 versus 173/240; OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.38, P < 0.0001) but not those taking donepezil (311/421 versus 145/212; OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.80, P = 0.25). Parkinsonian symptoms in particular tremor (64/739 versus 12/352; OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.44 to 5.09, P = 0.002), but not falls (P = 0.39), were reported more commonly in the treatment group but this did not have a significant impact on the UPDRS (total and motor) scores (P = 0.71). Fewer deaths occurred in the treatment group than in the placebo group (4/465 versus 9/279; OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.84, P = 0.03). Authors' conclusions - The currently available evidence supports the use of cholinesterase inhibitors in patients with PDD, with a positive impact on global assessment, cognitive function, behavioural disturbance and activities of daily living rating scales. The effect in DLB remains unclear. There is no current disaggregated evidence to support their use in CIND-PD.

Oscillatory beta activity mediates neuroplastic effects of motor cortex stimulation in humans

Continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) is a repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation protocol that can inhibithumanmotor cortex (M1) excitability and impair movement for ≤1 h. While offering valuable insights into brain function and potential therapeutic benefits, these neuroplastic effects are highly variable between individuals. The source of this variability, and the electrophysiological mechanisms underlying the inhibitory after-effects, are largely unknown. In this regard, oscillatory activity at beta frequency (15-35 Hz) is of particular interest as it is elevated in motor disorders such as Parkinson's disease and modulated during the generation of movements. Here, we used a source-level magnetoencephalography approach to investigate the hypothesis that the presence of neuroplastic effects following cTBS is associated with concurrent changes in oscillatory M1 beta activity. M1 cortices were localized with a synthetic aperture magnetometry beamforming analysis of visually cued index finger movements. Virtual electrode analysis was used to reconstruct the spontaneous and movement-related oscillatory activity in bilateral M1 cortices, before and from 10 to 45 min after cTBS. We demonstrate that 40 s of cTBS applied over left M1 reduced corticospinal excitability in the right index finger of 8/16 participants. In these responder participants only, cTBS increased the power of the spontaneous beta oscillations in stimulated M1 and delayed reaction times in the contralateral index finger. No further changes were observed in the latency or power of movement-related beta oscillations. These data provide insights into the electrophysiological mechanisms underlying cTBS-mediated impairment of motor function and demonstrate the association between spontaneous oscillatory beta activity in M1 and the inhibition of motor function. © 2013 the authors.