@article{WalterReilichThieleetal.2013, author = {Walter, Maggie C. and Reilich, Peter and Thiele, Simone and Schessl, Joachim and Schreiber, Herbert and Reiners, Karlheinz and Kress, Wolfram and M{\"u}ller-Reible, Clemens and Vorgerd, Matthias and Urban, Peter and Schrank, Bertold and Deschauer, Marcus and Schlotter-Weigel, Beate and Kohnen, Ralf and Lochm{\"u}ller, Hans}, title = {Treatment of dysferlinopathy with deflazacort: a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial}, series = {Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases}, volume = {8}, journal = {Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases}, number = {26}, issn = {1750-1172}, doi = {10.1186/1750-1172-8-26}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-125663}, year = {2013}, abstract = {Background: Dysferlinopathies are autosomal recessive disorders caused by mutations in the dysferlin (DYSF) gene encoding the dysferlin protein. DYSF mutations lead to a wide range of muscular phenotypes, with the most prominent being Miyoshi myopathy (MM) and limb girdle muscular dystrophy type 2B (LGMD2B). Methods: We assessed the one-year-natural course of dysferlinopathy, and the safety and efficacy of deflazacort treatment in a double-blind, placebo-controlled cross-over trial. After one year of natural course without intervention, 25 patients with genetically defined dysferlinopathy were randomized to receive deflazacort and placebo for six months each (1 mg/kg/day in month one, 1 mg/kg every 2nd day during months two to six) in one of two treatment sequences. Results: During one year of natural course, muscle strength declined about 2\% as measured by CIDD (Clinical Investigation of Duchenne Dystrophy) score, and 76 Newton as measured by hand-held dynamometry. Deflazacort did not improve muscle strength. In contrast, there is a trend of worsening muscle strength under deflazacort treatment, which recovers after discontinuation of the study drug. During deflazacort treatment, patients showed a broad spectrum of steroid side effects. Conclusion: Deflazacort is not an effective therapy for dysferlinopathies, and off-label use is not warranted. This is an important finding, since steroid treatment should not be administered in patients with dysferlinopathy, who may be often misdiagnosed as polymyositis.}, language = {en} } @article{KristDimeoKeil2013, author = {Krist, Lilian and Dimeo, Fernando and Keil, Thomas}, title = {Can progressive resistance training twice a week improve mobility, muscle strength, and quality of life in very elderly nursing-home residents with impaired mobility? A pilot study}, series = {Clinical Interventions in Aging}, volume = {8}, journal = {Clinical Interventions in Aging}, doi = {10.2147/CIA.S42136}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-122176}, pages = {443-448}, year = {2013}, abstract = {Purpose: To determine the effects of progressive resistance training on mobility, muscle strength, and quality of life in nursing-home residents with impaired mobility. Methods: Nursing-home residents aged 77 years and older with impaired mobility were recruited in Berlin, Germany. The eight-week exercise program consisted of progressive resistance training twice a week. Mobility (primary outcome) was assessed with the Elderly Mobility Scale (zero = worst, 20 = best) at baseline and after 8 weeks. Muscle strength (secondary outcome) was determined by the eight-repetition maximum. The Short Form-36 Health Survey was used to assess quality of life. Results: Of the 15 participants (mean age 84 years, range 77-97 years), ten completed the 8-week program. Mobility (Elderly Mobility Scale mean +/- standard deviation pre 14.1 +/- 3.2 and post 17.5 +/- 3.6; P = 0.005) as well as muscle strength of upper and lower limbs improved (from 62\% at chest press up to 108\% at leg extension machine), whereas most quality of life subscales did not show considerable change. Conclusion: Resistance training twice a week over 2 months seemed to considerably improve mobility and muscle strength in persons aged 77-97 years with impaired mobility.}, language = {en} }