Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0016053 (fibromyalgia)
 4,687 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

Persons with single copies of common alpha-1-antitrypsin polymorphisms such as S and Z are often considered "silent carriers". Published evidence however supports a complex behavioral phenotype or trait - intense creative energy ("ICE")-associated with A1AT polymorphisms. We now confirm that phenotype and present an association of fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) and A1AT in a consecutive series of neurological patients. This is a retrospective case control series of 3176 consecutive patients presenting to Duke University Memory Clinic (747 patients) and to regional community-based Caldwell Hospital Neurology and Memory center (2429 patients). Work-up included medical history and examination, psychological evaluation, and genetic analysis. Chronic widespread pain (CWP) or FMS were diagnosed according to clinical guidelines, mostly as secondary diagnoses. Neurological patients carrying A1AT polymorphisms were common (ca 16% prevalence) and carriers had significantly higher use of inhaler and anxiolytic medications. Patients with ICE phenotype had a significantly higher proportion of A1AT polymorphisms (42%) compared to non-ICE patients (13%). Presence of CWP or FMS was common (14-22%) with average age at presentation of 56 years old and mostly female gender (82%). Patients with CWP/FMS had again significantly higher proportion of A1AT polymorphisms (38%) compared to other neurological patients (13%). Patients with anxiety disorders, bipolar I or bipolar II disorders or PTSD also had increased proportion of A1AT polymorphisms and significant overlap with ICE and FMS phenotype. Significant reductions in CWP/FMS prevalence are seen in apolipoprotein E4 carriers and methylene tetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) mutation homozygotes. Since ICE phenotype is reported as a lifelong behavioral attribute, the presumption is that A1AT carriers have fundamental differences in brain development and inflammatory response. In support of this concept is finding those persons reporting a diagnosis of juvenile rheumatoid or idiopathic arthritis (JRA, JIA) had a significantly high proportion of A1AT polymorphisms (63%), suggesting a spectrum for JRA to later FMS presentations. Likewise, persons reporting a history of attention deficit disorder (ADD) had an increased proportion of A1AT polymorphisms (26%) compared to non-ADD persons (13%). Toxic environmental exposures are common (23%) and associated with diagnoses of PSP, PPA, FTD, FTD-PD, PD and ADVD. A1AT carriers were increased in cases of toxic exposure and PSP, PPA and FTD-PD. Our findings support the ICE behavioral phenotype for A1AT polymorphism carriers and the reported association with anxiety and bipolar spectrum disorders. We now extend that phenotype to apparent vulnerability to inflammatory muscle disease in a spectrum from JRA to fibromyalgia (FMS) and specific behavioral subsets of ADD, PTSD, and specific late onset neurological syndromes (FTD-PD and PPA). High and low risk FMS subsets can be defined using A1AT, MTHFR and APOE genotyping. Clinical diagnoses associated with A1AT polymorphisms included fibromyalgia, JRA/JIA, bipolar disorder, PTSD, primary progressive aphasia and FTDPD, but not most Alzheimer Disease subtypes. These results support an extended phenotype for A1AT mutation carriers beyond liver and lung vulnerability to selective advantages: ICE phenotype and disadvantages: fibromyalgia, affective disorders, and selected late onset neurological syndromes.
 ...
PMID:Fibromyalgia, mood disorders, and intense creative energy: A1AT polymorphisms are not always silent. 2241 31

A group of European experts was commissioned by the European Chapter of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology to gather knowledge about the state of the art of the therapeutic use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) from studies published up until September 2016, regarding pain, Parkinson's disease, other movement disorders, motor stroke, poststroke aphasia, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, consciousness disorders, Alzheimer's disease, tinnitus, depression, schizophrenia, and craving/addiction. The evidence-based analysis included only studies based on repeated tDCS sessions with sham tDCS control procedure; 25 patients or more having received active treatment was required for Class I, while a lower number of 10-24 patients was accepted for Class II studies. Current evidence does not allow making any recommendation of Level A (definite efficacy) for any indication. Level B recommendation (probable efficacy) is proposed for: (i) anodal tDCS of the left primary motor cortex (M1) (with right orbitofrontal cathode) in fibromyalgia; (ii) anodal tDCS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) (with right orbitofrontal cathode) in major depressive episode without drug resistance; (iii) anodal tDCS of the right DLPFC (with left DLPFC cathode) in addiction/craving. Level C recommendation (possible efficacy) is proposed for anodal tDCS of the left M1 (or contralateral to pain side, with right orbitofrontal cathode) in chronic lower limb neuropathic pain secondary to spinal cord lesion. Conversely, Level B recommendation (probable inefficacy) is conferred on the absence of clinical effects of: (i) anodal tDCS of the left temporal cortex (with right orbitofrontal cathode) in tinnitus; (ii) anodal tDCS of the left DLPFC (with right orbitofrontal cathode) in drug-resistant major depressive episode. It remains to be clarified whether the probable or possible therapeutic effects of tDCS are clinically meaningful and how to optimally perform tDCS in a therapeutic setting. In addition, the easy management and low cost of tDCS devices allow at home use by the patient, but this might raise ethical and legal concerns with regard to potential misuse or overuse. We must be careful to avoid inappropriate applications of this technique by ensuring rigorous training of the professionals and education of the patients.
 ...
PMID:Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS). 2786 20

A group of European experts reappraised the guidelines on the therapeutic efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) previously published in 2014 [Lefaucheur et al., Clin Neurophysiol 2014;125:2150-206]. These updated recommendations take into account all rTMS publications, including data prior to 2014, as well as currently reviewed literature until the end of 2018. Level A evidence (definite efficacy) was reached for: high-frequency (HF) rTMS of the primary motor cortex (M1) contralateral to the painful side for neuropathic pain; HF-rTMS of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) using a figure-of-8 or a H1-coil for depression; low-frequency (LF) rTMS of contralesional M1 for hand motor recovery in the post-acute stage of stroke. Level B evidence (probable efficacy) was reached for: HF-rTMS of the left M1 or DLPFC for improving quality of life or pain, respectively, in fibromyalgia; HF-rTMS of bilateral M1 regions or the left DLPFC for improving motor impairment or depression, respectively, in Parkinson's disease; HF-rTMS of ipsilesional M1 for promoting motor recovery at the post-acute stage of stroke; intermittent theta burst stimulation targeted to the leg motor cortex for lower limb spasticity in multiple sclerosis; HF-rTMS of the right DLPFC in posttraumatic stress disorder; LF-rTMS of the right inferior frontal gyrus in chronic post-stroke non-fluent aphasia; LF-rTMS of the right DLPFC in depression; and bihemispheric stimulation of the DLPFC combining right-sided LF-rTMS (or continuous theta burst stimulation) and left-sided HF-rTMS (or intermittent theta burst stimulation) in depression. Level A/B evidence is not reached concerning efficacy of rTMS in any other condition. The current recommendations are based on the differences reached in therapeutic efficacy of real vs. sham rTMS protocols, replicated in a sufficient number of independent studies. This does not mean that the benefit produced by rTMS inevitably reaches a level of clinical relevance.
 ...
PMID:Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS): An update (2014-2018). 3212 66