Search

Childhood disintegrative disorder is a poorly understood neurobehavioral disorder of early childhood characterized by acute to subacute profound regression in previously developed language, social behavior, and adaptive functions. The etiology of childhood disintegrative disorder remains unknown and treatment is focused on symptomatic management. Interest in neuroinflammatory mechanisms has grown with the increased recognition of autoimmune brain diseases and similarities between the presenting symptoms of childhood disintegrative disorder and pediatric autoimmune encephalitis. Importantly, a diagnosis of pediatric autoimmune encephalitis requires evidence of inflammation on paraclinical testing, which is absent in childhood disintegrative disorder. Here we report 5 children with childhood disintegrative disorder who were initially diagnosed with possible autoimmune encephalitis and treated with immunotherapy. Two children had provocative improvements, whereas 3 did not change significantly on immunotherapy. Additionally, a sixth patient with childhood disintegrative disorder evaluated in our Autoimmune Brain Disease Clinic showed spontaneous improvement and is included to highlight the variable natural history of childhood disintegrative disorder that may mimic treatment responsiveness., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objective: To create an international consensus treatment recommendation for pediatric NMDA receptor antibody encephalitis (NMDARE)., Methods: After selection of a panel of 27 experts with representation from all continents, a 2-step Delphi method was adopted to develop consensus on relevant treatment regimens and statements, along with key definitions in pediatric NMDARE (disease severity, failure to improve, and relapse). Finally, an online face-to-face meeting was held to reach consensus (defined as ≥75% agreement)., Results: Corticosteroids are recommended in all children with NMDARE (pulsed IV preferred), with additional IV immunoglobulin or plasma exchange in severe patients. Prolonged first-line immunotherapy can be offered for up to 3-12 months (oral corticosteroids or monthly IV corticosteroids/immunoglobulin), dependent on disease severity. Second-line treatments are recommended for cases refractory to first-line therapies (rituximab preferred over cyclophosphamide) and should be considered about 2 weeks after first-line initiation. Further immunotherapies for refractory disease 1-3 months after second-line initiation include another second-line treatment (such as cyclophosphamide) and escalation to tocilizumab. Maintenance immune suppression beyond 6 months (such as rituximab redosing or mycophenolate mofetil) is generally not required, except for patients with a more severe course or prolonged impairments and hospitalization. For patients with relapsing disease, second-line and prolonged maintenance therapy should be considered. The treatment of NMDARE following herpes simplex encephalitis should be similar to idiopathic NMDARE. Broad guidance is provided for the total treatment duration (first line, second line, and maintenance), which is dictated by the severity and clinical course (i.e., median 3, 9 and 18 months in the best, average, and worst responders, respectively). Recommendations on the timing of oncologic searches are provided., Conclusion: These international consensus recommendations for the management of pediatric NMDARE aim to standardize the treatment and provide practical guidance for clinicians, rather than absolute rules. A similar recommendation could be applicable to adult patients., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology.)

Objective: To uniquely classify children with microscopic polyangiitis (MPA), to describe their demographic characteristics, presenting clinical features, and initial treatments in comparison to patients with granulomatosis with polyangiitis (Wegener's) (GPA)., Methods: The European Medicines Agency (EMA) classification algorithm was applied by computation to categorical data from patients recruited to the ARChiVe (A Registry for Childhood Vasculitis: e-entry) cohort, with the data censored to November 2015. The EMA algorithm was used to uniquely distinguish children with MPA from children with GPA, whose diagnoses had been classified according to both adult- and pediatric-specific criteria. Descriptive statistics were used for comparisons., Results: In total, 231 of 440 patients (64% female) fulfilled the classification criteria for either MPA (n = 48) or GPA (n = 183). The median time to diagnosis was 1.6 months in the MPA group and 2.1 months in the GPA group (ranging to 39 and 73 months, respectively). Patients with MPA were significantly younger than those with GPA (median age 11 years versus 14 years). Constitutional features were equally common between the groups. In patients with MPA compared to those with GPA, pulmonary manifestations were less frequent (44% versus 74%) and less severe (primarily, hemorrhage, requirement for supplemental oxygen, and pulmonary failure). Renal pathologic features were frequently found in both groups (75% of patients with MPA versus 83% of patients with GPA) but tended toward greater severity in those with MPA (primarily, nephrotic-range proteinuria, requirement for dialysis, and end-stage renal disease). Airway/eye involvement was absent among patients with MPA, because these GPA-defining features preclude a diagnosis of MPA within the EMA algorithm. Similar proportions of patients with MPA and those with GPA received combination therapy with corticosteroids plus cyclophosphamide (69% and 78%, respectively) or both drugs in combination with plasmapheresis (19% and 22%, respectively). Other treatments administered, ranging in decreasing frequency from 13% to 3%, were rituximab, methotrexate, azathioprine, and mycophenolate mofetil., Conclusion: Younger age at disease onset and, perhaps, both gastrointestinal manifestations and more severe kidney disease seem to characterize the clinical profile in children with MPA compared to those with GPA. Delay in diagnosis suggests that recognition of these systemic vasculitides is suboptimal. Compared with adults, initial treatment regimens in children were comparable, but the complete reversal of female-to-male disease prevalence ratios is a provocative finding., (© 2016, American College of Rheumatology.)

Background: Due to a limited number and disparate distribution of pediatric rheumatologists in the US, a variety of physician types provide care to children with rheumatologic diseases. However, little is known about how that care may differ across prescribing physician groups. Our objective was to compare medication claims for children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) by type of prescribing physician., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of children with JIA using Michigan Medicaid data for 7/1/2005-6/30/2007, employing descriptive and bivariate analyses by age, medication type, and prescriber type., Results: Among 397 children, there was no difference in the frequency of medication claims for children with internist versus pediatric rheumatologist prescribers. Children with non-rheumatologist prescribers were less likely to have claims for disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and biologic agents., Conclusion: Differential use of DMARDs and biologic agents by rheumatologists indicates the importance of referring children with JIA for specialty care.

Objective: To review the performance characteristics of the instruments most commonly used to measure clinical outcomes in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), including global assessments, articular indices, functional/disability assessments, and quality of life measures., Methods: As part of an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality comparative effectiveness review of antirheumatic drugs, we explored the characteristics of commonly used outcome measures for JIA. English-language studies of children with JIA were identified from Medline and Embase. Two independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts, with subsequent full-text review of studies selected based on predetermined criteria., Results: We included 35 publications describing 34 unique studies and involving 14,831 patients. The Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire (C-HAQ) was the most extensively studied instrument and had high reliability, but only moderate correlations with other indices of disease activity and poor responsiveness to change in disease status. The physician global assessment of disease activity (PGA) and articular indices had the strongest association with disease activity and were the most responsive to change. Measures of psychosocial function and quality of life were moderately associated with measures of disease activity, but were less responsive to changes in disease status., Conclusion: In children with JIA, no single instrument was superior in reliability or validity or in describing the impact of JIA. Although the C-HAQ has been extensively evaluated, the PGA and articular indices appear to have the highest responsiveness to change and, therefore, the highest potential for detecting important differences in treatment response., (Copyright © 2012 by the American College of Rheumatology.)

Background: Treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) may improve outcomes compared to conventional therapy (e.g., non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, intra-articular corticosteroids). The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of DMARDs versus conventional therapy and versus other DMARDs., Results: A systematic evidence review of 156 reports identified in MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, and by hand searches. There is some evidence that methotrexate is superior to conventional therapy. Among children who have responded to a biologic DMARD, randomized discontinuation trials suggest that continued treatment decreases the risk of having a flare. However, these studies evaluated DMARDs with different mechanisms of action (abatacept, adalimumab, anakinra, etanercept, intravenous immunoglobulin, tocilizumab) and used varying comparators and follow-up periods. Rates of serious adverse events are similar between DMARDs and placebo in published trials. This review identified 11 incident cases of cancer among several thousand children treated with one or more DMARD., Conclusions: Few data are available to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of either specific DMARDs or general classes of DMARDs. However, based on the overall number, quality, and consistency of studies, there is moderate strength of evidence to support that DMARDs improve JIA-associated symptoms. Limited data suggest that short-term risk of cancer is low.