Search

Diagnosis of Rett syndrome (RTT) is often delayed. We sought to determine the type of physician who typically makes the RTT diagnosis and to identify risk factors for delayed diagnosis.A total of 1085 participants from the multicenter longitudinal RTT natural history study with classic and atypical RTT were recruited between 2006 and 2014. Age of diagnosis, diagnostician, diagnostic criteria, and clinical and developmental data were collected.Among 919 classic and 166 atypical RTT participants, the median diagnosis age was 2.7 years (interquartile range 2.0-4.1) in classic and 3.8 years (interquartile range 2.3-6.9) in atypical RTT. Pediatricians made the diagnosis of classic RTT rarely (5.2%); however, the proportion diagnosed by pediatricians has increased since 2006. Since the first diagnostic criteria, the age of diagnosis decreased among subspecialists but not pediatricians. Odds of a pediatrician making the diagnosis of classic RTT were higher if a child stopped responding to parental interaction, and lower if they possessed gastroesophageal reflux, specific stereotypies, lost babbling, or the ability to follow commands. Delayed acquisition of basic gross motor skills or finger feeding was associated with younger diagnosis; delayed acquisition of higher level fine motor skills, later onset of supportive features, and normal head circumference were associated with late diagnosis. Thirty-three percent with microcephaly before 2.5 years were diagnosed after the median age of 2.7 years.Age of RTT diagnosis has improved among subspecialists, and pediatricians have made the diagnosis of classic RTT more frequently since 2006. Strategies for educating diagnosticians should incorporate specific risk factors for delayed diagnosis.

Objective: To quantify pain response in girls affected by Rett syndrome (RTT) using electrodermal activity (EDA), a measure of skin conductance, reflecting sympathetic activity known to be modulated by physical and environmental stress. Methods: EDA increase, heart rate (HR) increase and Face Legs Activity Cry Consolability (FLACC) values calculated during venipuncture (invasive) and vital signs collection (non-invasive) events were compared with values calculated during a prior baseline and a RTT clinical severity score (CSS). Results: EDA and HR increase were significantly higher than baseline during venipuncture only and not significantly correlated with FLACC or CSS. EDA increase was the most sensitive measure of pain response. Conclusions: These preliminary findings revealed that motor impairment might bias non-verbal pain scales, underscore the importance of using autonomic measures when assessing pain and warrant further investigation into the utility of using EDA to objectively quantify RTT pain response to inform future RTT pain management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To measure the efficacy of mecasermin (recombinant human insulin‐like growth factor 1, rhIGF‐1), for treating symptoms of Rett syndrome (RTT) in a pediatric population using a double‐blind crossover study design. Methods: Thirty girls with classic RTT in postregression stage were randomly assigned to placebo or rhIGF‐1 in treatment period 1 and crossed over to the opposite assignment for period 2 (both 20 weeks), separated by a 28‐week washout period. The primary endpoints were as follows: Anxiety Depression and Mood Scale (ADAMS) Social Avoidance subscale, Rett Syndrome Behaviour Questionnaire (RSBQ) Fear/Anxiety subscale, Parent Target Symptom Visual Analog Scale (PTSVAS) top three concerns, Clinical Global Impression (CGI), Parent Global Impression (PGI), and the Kerr severity scale. Cardiorespiratory‐ and electroencephalography (EEG)‐based biomarkers were also analyzed. Results: There were no significant differences between randomization groups. The majority of AEs were mild to moderate, although 12 episodes of serious AEs occurred. The Kerr severity scale, ADAMS Depressed Mood subscale, Visual Analog Scale Hyperventilation, and delta average power change scores significantly increased, implying worsening of symptoms. Electroencephalography (EEG) parameters also deteriorated. A secondary analysis of subjects who were not involved in a placebo recall confirmed most of these findings. However, it also revealed improvements on a measure of stereotypic behavior and another of social communication. Interpretation As in the phase 1 trial, rhIGF‐1 was safe; however, the drug did not reveal significant improvement, and some parameters worsened.