Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:STRIVE was a 4-year, multicenter, observational, open-label, single-arm study of natalizumab treatment in anti-JC virus antibody-negative (JCV-negative) relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients with disease duration ≤ 3 years. The objective of STRIVE was to examine no evidence of disease activity (NEDA) status and predictors of NEDA in natalizumab-treated patients with early RRMS. METHODS:Proportions of patients with NEDA were evaluated along with baseline predictors of NEDA, annualized relapse rate, 24-week confirmed disability worsening (CDW), magnetic resonance imaging assessments (T2 and gadolinium-enhancing lesions), and serious adverse events. RESULTS:In years 1 and 2, 56.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 48.7-63.4%) and 73.6% (95% CI 66.2-80.2%) of patients (intent-to-treat population [N = 222]), respectively, achieved NEDA. In years 3 and 4, 84.6% (95% CI 78.0-89.9%) and 91.9% (95% CI 86.4-95.8%) of patients, respectively, achieved Clinical NEDA (no relapses or 24-week CDW). Baseline predictors of NEDA in year 4 were Expanded Disability Status Scale score ≤ 2.0 (odds ratio [OR] = 3.85 [95% CI 1.54-9.63]; p = 0.004) and T2 lesion volume > 4 cc (OR = 0.39 [95% CI 0.15-0.98]; p = 0.046), with the latter also predicting Clinical NEDA in year 4 (OR = 0.21 [95% CI 0.05-0.92]; p = 0.038). The cumulative probability of CDW at year 4 was 19.3%. Serious adverse events were reported in 11.3% of patients. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:These results support the long-term safety and effectiveness of natalizumab. Baseline predictors of NEDA help to inform benefit-risk assessments of natalizumab treatment in JCV-negative patients with early RRMS. TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01485003.

BACKGROUND:Little is known regarding long-term outcomes of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. METHODS:We conducted a prospective study of 6-month outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Patients with new neurological complications during hospitalization who survived were propensity score-matched to COVID-19 survivors without neurological complications hospitalized during the same period. The primary 6-month outcome was multivariable ordinal analysis of the modified Rankin Scale(mRS) comparing patients with or without neurological complications. Secondary outcomes included: activities of daily living (ADLs;Barthel Index), telephone Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Neuro-QoL batteries for anxiety, depression, fatigue and sleep. RESULTS:Of 606 COVID-19 patients with neurological complications, 395 survived hospitalization and were matched to 395 controls; N = 196 neurological patients and N = 186 controls completed follow-up. Overall, 346/382 (91%) patients had at least one abnormal outcome: 56% had limited ADLs, 50% impaired cognition, 47% could not return to work and 62% scored worse than average on ≥1 Neuro-QoL scale (worse anxiety 46%, sleep 38%, fatigue 36%, and depression 25%). In multivariable analysis, patients with neurological complications had worse 6-month mRS (median 4 vs. 3 among controls, adjusted OR 1.98, 95%CI 1.23-3.48, P = 0.02), worse ADLs (aOR 0.38, 95%CI 0.29-0.74, P = 0.01) and were less likely to return to work than controls (41% versus 64%, P = 0.04). Cognitive and Neuro-QOL metrics were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS:Abnormalities in functional outcomes, ADLs, anxiety, depression and sleep occurred in over 90% of patients 6-months after hospitalization for COVID-19. In multivariable analysis, patients with neurological complications during index hospitalization had significantly worse 6-month functional outcomes than those without.

OBJECTIVE:To update the consensus recommendations for reporting of quantitative optical coherence tomography (OCT) study results, thus revising the previously published Advised Protocol for OCT Study Terminology and Elements (APOSTEL) recommendations. METHODS:To identify studies reporting quantitative OCT results, we performed a PubMed search for the terms "quantitative" and "optical coherence tomography" from 2015 to 2017. Corresponding authors of the identified publications were invited to provide feedback on the initial APOSTEL recommendations via online surveys following the principle of a modified Delphi method. The results were evaluated and discussed by a panel of experts, and changes to the initial recommendations were proposed. A final survey was recirculated among the corresponding authors to obtain a majority vote on the proposed changes. RESULTS:One hundred sixteen authors participated in the surveys, resulting in 15 suggestions, of which 12 were finally accepted and incorporated into an updated 9-point-checklist. We harmonized the nomenclature of the outer retinal layers, added the exact area of measurement to the description of volume scans; we suggested reporting device-specific features. We advised to address potential bias in manual segmentation or manual correction of segmentation errors. References to specific reporting guidelines and room light conditions were removed. The participants' consensus with the recommendations increased from 80% for the previous APOSTEL version to greater than 90%. CONCLUSIONS:The modified Delphi method resulted in an expert-led guideline (evidence class III, GRADE criteria) concerning study protocol, acquisition device, acquisition settings, scanning protocol, fundoscopic imaging, post-acquisition data selection, post-acquisition analysis, nomenclature and abbreviations, and statistical approach. It will still be essential to update these recommendations to new research and practices regularly.

BACKGROUND:Toxic metabolic encephalopathy (TME) has been reported in 7-31% of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19); however, some reports include sedation-related delirium and few data exist on the etiology of TME. We aimed to identify the prevalence, etiologies, and mortality rates associated with TME in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-positive patients. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective, multicenter, observational cohort study among patients with reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection hospitalized at four New York City hospitals in the same health network between March 1, 2020, and May 20, 2020. TME was diagnosed in patients with altered mental status off sedation or after an adequate sedation washout. Patients with structural brain disease, seizures, or primary neurological diagnoses were excluded. The coprimary outcomes were the prevalence of TME stratified by etiology and in-hospital mortality (excluding comfort care only patients) assessed by using a multivariable time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models with adjustment for age, race, sex, intubation, intensive care unit requirement, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores, hospital location, and date of admission. RESULTS:Among 4491 patients with COVID-19, 559 (12%) were diagnosed with TME, of whom 435 of 559 (78%) developed encephalopathy immediately prior to hospital admission. The most common etiologies were septic encephalopathy (n = 247 of 559 [62%]), hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) (n = 331 of 559 [59%]), and uremia (n = 156 of 559 [28%]). Multiple etiologies were present in 435 (78%) patients. Compared with those without TME (n = 3932), patients with TME were older (76 vs. 62 years), had dementia (27% vs. 3%) or psychiatric history (20% vs. 10%), were more often intubated (37% vs. 20%), had a longer hospital length of stay (7.9 vs. 6.0 days), and were less often discharged home (25% vs. 66% [all P < 0.001]). Excluding comfort care patients (n = 267 of 4491 [6%]) and after adjustment for confounders, TME remained associated with increased risk of in-hospital death (n = 128 of 425 [30%] patients with TME died, compared with n = 600 of 3799 [16%] patients without TME; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-1.52, P = 0.031), and TME due to hypoxemia conferred the highest risk (n = 97 of 233 [42%] patients with HIE died, compared with n = 631 of 3991 [16%] patients without HIE; aHR 1.56, 95% CI 1.21-2.00, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:TME occurred in one in eight hospitalized patients with COVID-19, was typically multifactorial, and was most often due to hypoxemia, sepsis, and uremia. After we adjustment for confounding factors, TME was associated with a 24% increased risk of in-hospital mortality.

OBJECTIVE:We sought to review the literature on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) testing in patients with COVID-19 for evidence of viral neuroinvasion by SARS-CoV-2. METHODS:We performed a systematic review of Medline and Embase between December 1, 2019 and November 18, 2020 to identify case reports or series of patients who had COVID-19 diagnosed based on positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or serologic testing and had CSF testing due to a neurologic symptom. RESULTS:We identified 242 relevant documents which included 430 patients with COVID-19 who had acute neurological symptoms prompting CSF testing. Of those, 321 (75%) patients had symptoms that localized to the central nervous system (CNS). Of 304 patients whose CSF was tested for SARS-CoV-2 PCR, there were 17 (6%) whose test was positive, all of whom had symptoms that localized to the central nervous system (CNS). The majority (13/17, 76%) of these patients were admitted to the hospital because of neurological symptoms. Of 58 patients whose CSF was tested for SARS-CoV-2 antibody, 7 (12%) had positive antibodies with evidence of intrathecal synthesis, all of whom had symptoms that localized to the CNS. Of 132 patients who had oligoclonal bands evaluated, 3 (2%) had evidence of intrathecal antibody synthesis. Of 77 patients tested for autoimmune antibodies in the CSF, 4 (5%) had positive findings. CONCLUSION:Detection of SARS-CoV-2 in CSF via PCR or evaluation for intrathecal antibody synthesis appears to be rare. Most neurological complications associated with SARS- CoV-2 are unlikely to be related to direct viral neuroinvasion.

Objective/UNASSIGNED:The Mobile Universal Lexicon Evaluation System (MULES) is a rapid picture naming task that captures extensive brain networks involving neurocognitive, afferent/efferent visual, and language pathways. Many of the factors captured by MULES may be abnormal in sleep-deprived residents. This study investigates the effect of sleep deprivation in post-call residents on MULES performance. Methods/UNASSIGNED: = 18) and a group of similar-aged controls not taking call (n = 18). Differences in times between baseline and follow-up MULES scores were compared between the two groups. Results/UNASSIGNED: < 0.001, Wilcoxon rank sum test). The change in MULES time from baseline was significantly correlated to the change in subjective level of sleepiness for call residents and to the amount of sleep obtained in the 24 h prior to follow-up testing for the entire cohort. For call residents, the duration of sleep obtained during call did not significantly correlate with change in MULES scores. There was no significant correlation between MULES change and sleep quality questionnaire score for the entire cohort. Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:The MULES is a novel test for effects of sleep deprivation on neurocognition and vision pathways. Sleep deprivation significantly worsens MULES performance. Subjective sleepiness may also affect MULES performance. MULES may serve as a useful performance assessment tool for sleep deprivation in residents.

ABSTRACT/UNASSIGNED:A collection of instructional videos that illustrate a step by step approach to tele-neuro-ophthalmology and neuro-otology visits. These videos provide instruction for patient preparation for their video visit, patient and provider interface with an electronic medical record associated video platform, digital applications to assist with vision testing, and practical advice for detailed remote neuro-ophthalmologic and neuro-otologic examinations.

Background: Sideline diagnostic tests for concussion are vulnerable to volitional poor performance ("sandbagging") on baseline assessments, motivated by desire to subvert concussion detection and potential removal from play. We investigated eye movements during sandbagging versus best effort on the King-Devick (KD) test, a rapid automatized naming (RAN) task. Methods: Participants performed KD testing during oculography following instructions to sandbag or give best effort. Results: Twenty healthy participants without concussion history were included (mean age 27 ± 8 years). Sandbagging resulted in longer test times (89.6 ± 39.2 s vs 48.2 ± 8.5 s, p < .001), longer inter-saccadic intervals (459.5 ± 125.4 ms vs 311.2 ± 79.1 ms, p < .001) and greater numbers of saccades (171.4 ± 47 vs 138 ± 24.2, p < .001) and reverse saccades (wrong direction for reading) (21.2% vs 11.3%, p < .001). Sandbagging was detectable using a logistic model with KD times as the only predictor, though more robustly detectable using eye movement metrics. Conclusions: KD sandbagging results in eye movement differences that are detectable by eye movement recordings and suggest an invalid test score. Objective eye movement recording during the KD test shows promise for distinguishing between best effort and post-injury performance, as well as for identifying sandbagging red flags.