Immunosuppressant and immunomodulatory treatments for multifocal motor neuropathy

• Published in: Cochrane database of systematic reviews no. 4; p. CD003217
• Main Authors: Umapathi, T, Hughes, Richard A C, Nobile-Orazio, Eduardo, Léger, Jean-Marc
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England 18-04-2012
• Subjects: Drug Therapy, Combination - methods; Humans; Immunoglobulins, Intravenous - therapeutic use; Immunologic Factors - therapeutic use; Immunosuppressive Agents - therapeutic use; Motor Neuron Disease - drug therapy; Mycophenolic Acid - analogs & derivatives; Mycophenolic Acid - therapeutic use; Polyneuropathies - drug therapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
• ISSN: 1469-493X
• DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003217.pub4

Multifocal motor neuropathy is characterised by progressive, predominantly distal, asymmetrical limb weakness and usually multiple partial motor nerve conduction blocks. Intravenous immunoglobulin is beneficial but the role of immunosuppressive agents is uncertain. This is an update of a review first published in 2002 and previously updated in 2003, 2005 and 2008.
To provide the best available evidence from randomised controlled trials on the role of immunosuppressive agents for the treatment of multifocal motor neuropathy.
We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register (4 October 2011), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2011, Issue 3 in The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (January 1966 to September 2011), EMBASE (January 1980 to September 2011), and LILACS (January 1982 to September 2011) for trials of multifocal motor neuropathy.
We planned to include randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials. We considered prospective and retrospective case series and case reports in the Discussion.
Two review authors searched the titles and abstracts of the articles identified and extracted the data independently.
Only one randomised controlled trial of an immunosuppressive or immunomodulatory agent has been performed in multifocal motor neuropathy. This study randomised 28 participants and showed that mycophenolate mofetil, when used with intravenous immunoglobulin, did not significantly improve strength, function or reduce the need for intravenous immunoglobulin. No serious adverse events were observed. The study was deemed at low risk of bias. We summarised the results of retrospective and prospective case series in the discussion.
According to moderate quality evidence, mycophenolate mofetil did not produce significant benefit in terms of reducing need for intravenous immunoglobulin or improving muscle strength. Trials of other immunosuppressants should be undertaken.