Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews Protocol - Intervention

Physical training for McArdle disease

This is not the most recent version

Collapse all Expand all

Abstract

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:

The objective of this review is to systematically assess the evidence for physical training to improve exercise capacity and function in daily life in people who have McArdle Disease.

Background

Description of the condition

McArdle disease (Glycogen Storage disease type V, GSDV) is a rare metabolic disorder of skeletal muscle which affects about 1:100,000 people. Symptoms are frequently reported from early childhood, although the diagnosis is rarely made before the second or third decade. The condition is relatively stable throughout life, however, with advancing age some people develop muscle wasting and mild proximal weakness. The condition is caused by autosomal recessive mutations in the muscle glycogen phosphorylase gene (PYGM), which is located on chromosome 11q13. The gene spans 20 exons and, by December 2006, more than 80 mutations have been identified, many of which are population specific (Andreu 2007; Quinlivan 2007). To date there is no reported correlation between genotype and phenotype severity (Aquaron 2007; Deschauer 2007). The most common mutation affecting people originating from Northern Europe and North America is a nonsense mutation at Arg50X (R50X) in exon 1 (previously referred to as R49X) (Bartram 1993). The diagnosis of McArdle disease is confirmed by finding a raised serum creatine kinase, muscle biopsy demonstrating an increase in subsarcolemmal glycogen with histochemistry and biochemical analysis demonstrating a virtual absence of the enzyme muscle glycogen phosphorylase and DNA analysis identifying homozygous or compound heterozygous mutations in PYGM.

Symptoms are caused by an inability to produce the enzyme muscle glycogen phosphorylase which is crucial for glyconeogenesis (the metabolic pathway which converts glycogen to glucose‐1‐phosphate) and is essential to provide substrate (fuel) for energy through glycolysis (the metabolic pathway that converts glucose to pyruvate) during anaerobic exercise. In the resting state and during low‐intensity aerobic activity, skeletal muscle is mainly dependent upon aerobic energy metabolism (oxidative phosphorylation), which utilizes free fatty acids as the primary energy substrate. During higher intensity aerobic and anaerobic eccentric exercise, skeletal muscle is dependent upon glycolysis for energy. Thus, in people with McArdle disease during short‐term moderate to vigorous physical exertion, when there is a need for anaerobic metabolism and a high glycolytic flux for oxidative combustion, an acute energy crisis occurs. Under such circumstances within minutes of initiating exercise, and when exercise increases in intensity, unpleasant symptoms occur which include: tachycardia, severe muscle pain and fatigue. If exercise continues at the same intensity despite these symptoms, a muscle contracture (which is a painful paralysis) occurs and will lead to muscle tenderness, swelling and muscle damage, which when severe, is termed rhabdomyolysis. Rhabdomyolysis leads to the release of the muscle protein, myoglobin, which is excreted in the kidneys causing a reddish black discolouration of the urine known as myoglobinuria. Myoglobinuria can lead to reversible acute renal failure requiring dialysis and intensive care.

By pacing the intensity of physical activity, affected people will notice that after a few minutes of low‐intensity activity, the symptoms of pain and fatigue begin to ease and exercise can continue safely. This is known as the second wind phenomenon, and it is universally present in people with McArdle disease. The phenomenon is attributable to a better supply of extra‐muscular fuels (glucose from the liver and fatty acids from adipose tissue) to the contracting muscles, as exercise progresses (Vissing 2003).

People with McArdle disease also have a secondary impairment of oxidative phosphorylation, which further impedes the ability of people with the condition to achieve physical fitness. This effect is due to a virtual absence of pyruvate which would normally be generated as a by‐product of glycolysis (Haller 1985). In the absence of regular physical training, people with McArdle disease may have a relatively limited capacity for fatty acid oxidation during exercise (De Stefano 1996), even though absolute levels of fat oxidation are enhanced in this disease (Orngreen 2009). The effect of this diminished oxidative phosphorylation is a reduction in oxygen consumption to approximately 35% of normal and a disproportionate increase in heart rate during exercise when compared with normal controls (Vissing 1998).

There is considerable heterogeneity in the severity of symptoms in people with McArdle disease, even in individuals carrying the same genetic mutations. The exact reasons are unclear, but could relate to the co‐existence of modifying genes which affect one's normal response to exercise such as the angiotensin converting enzyme gene phenotype (ACE) and alpha actinin 3 (ACTN3) and C34T muscle adenosine monophosphate deaminase (AMPD1) (Gomez‐Gallego 2008; Lucia 2007; Martinuzzi 2003; Rubio 2007). However, differences in dietary habits, fitness and psychological factors may also be key determinants of disease severity. In a study of 99 Spanish people with McArdle disease there was a significant gender effect, with females being more severely affected than males (Rubio 2007). Polymorphic variants leading to insertions or deletions (I/D) in the ACE gene may possibly affect the efficiency of muscle adaptation to training. Reduced ACE activity is associated with the I allelle and is associated with enhanced performance after aerobic training (Gomez‐Gallego 2008; Martinuzzi 2003). These people with McArdle disease may potentially benefit the most from aerobic training.

Description of the intervention

This review will focus upon the effects of physical training in people with McArdle disease. Physical training will include a regular programme of aerobic activities such as swimming, jogging, walking, cycling and /or flexibility training conducted over a 12‐week period of time. Strength training will not be included as it is likely to be detrimental to people with McArdle disease.

How the intervention might work

Physical exercise training may improve the delivery of extramuscular fuels to contracting muscle and also improve the ability to use free fatty acids as an alternative fuel for muscle exercise. This may then allow people with McArdle disease to be more active and to function better in everyday life.

Why it is important to do this review

A systematic review of pharmacological and nutritional treatment found no effective treatment for McArdle disease ( Quinlivan 2008 ). A symptomatic benefit can be obtained from sucrose ingestion prior to planned exercise (Vissing 2003), and a diet rich in carbohydrate may be superior to a high protein diet (Andersen 2008). Many people who have McArdle disease shun exercise, because they fear the consequences of exercise‐induced pain and rhabdomyolysis. However, paradoxically, a regular aerobic training programme could improve their metabolic capacity and their exercise tolerance by conditioning their muscles for oxidative phosphorylation.

Objectives

The objective of this review is to systematically assess the evidence for physical training to improve exercise capacity and function in daily life in people who have McArdle Disease.

Methods

Criteria for considering studies for this review

Types of studies

We shall include randomised and quasi‐randomised controlled studies including crossover studies and will compare the effects of a regular physical training programme with no training. Studies including a second intervention such as dietary manipulation will be excluded, unless the same intervention has been given to both groups. Relevant open studies and single case reports which describe the same diagnostic criteria, intervention and outcomes as those selected for inclusion for randomised controlled trials will be described in the Discussion, but will not be included in the review.

Types of participants

All people, of any age, with a diagnosis of McArdle disease will be included. Diagnosis will have been confirmed by muscle biopsy demonstrating a complete or virtual absence of muscle glycogen phosphorylase and /or DNA analysis confirming homozygous or compound heterozygous mutations in PYGM. If a sufficiently large population of subjects exists, then an analysis of subgroups dependent upon gender and modifying gene subtypes, namely ACE, alpha actin and AMPD1 will be undertaken.

Types of interventions

All forms of physical training, including aerobic training in the form of swimming, cycling, walking or jogging and flexibility training, all of which will be undertaken on a regular basis for a period of at least 12 weeks, but with no upper time limit.

Types of outcome measures

Primary outcomes

The primary outcome measure measured over a 12‐week period will be a statistically significant percentage increase in the maximal or submaximal endurance objectively measured during any form of exercise by one of the following in order of preference:

1. An increased VO2 max (aerobic capacity).

2. Reduction in maximum heart rate, reduced BORG ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) (Borg 1998) or for a given submaximal exercise intensity.

3. A statistically significant increase in timed walking distance.

If a study uses more than one of these functional outcomes, then only one of these will be assessed in accordance with the above order of preference. For trials identified where duration of treatment is either less or more than 12 weeks, we will assume linearity and the results will be scaled accordingly.

Secondary outcomes

Secondary outcome measures also measured over a 12‐week period will be:
1. Statistically significant reduction of biochemical markers of muscle damage including serum creatine kinase and episodes of myoglobinuria.
2. Statistically significant measurable metabolic alterations in muscle measured by 31phosphorus‐magnetic resonance spectroscopy (31P‐MRS).

3. Statistically significant improvement in muscle strength measured by myometry.

4. Statistically significant reduction in muscle fatiguability measured neurophysiologically.

5. Statistically significant improvement in the following subjective measures:

(a) Quality of life measure (SF 36)

(b) Record of mean daily expenditure (DEE) (Ollivier 2005).

6. Adverse events especially episodes of contracture, acute rhabdomyolysis, episodes requiring critical care and mortality.

Search methods for identification of studies

Electronic searches

We plan to search the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Trials Register for randomised trials using the following search terms: 'McArdle Disease', 'Glycogen Storage Disease Type V' , 'GSDV', 'Muscle Phosphorylase Deficiency' or 'myophosphorylase' AND exercise, endurance training, aerobic exercise, exercise test, exertion, physical fitness, sport, muscle training, aerobic conditioning, walk, swim, jog, cycle.

We will also search MEDLINE (from January 1966 to present), EMBASE (from January 1980 to present) and the Cochrane Central Register of Trials (CENTRAL) using the same search terms. We will search for randomised controlled trials and quasi‐randomised controlled trials. We will also search for open trials, single case studies and anecdotal reports which may be used as part of the Discussion. The search strategies for MEDLINE and EMBASE are in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2.

Searching other resources

We will contact authors of unpublished studies presented at meetings and conferences.

Data collection and analysis

We do not plan to subdivide the patient cohort into any subcategories. If appropriate data are available from more than one study, we plan to undertake meta‐analysis using the Cochrane Review Manager 5.0 (RevMan) software to combine risk ratios, or differences in means as a weighted mean difference, with 95% confidence intervals to provide pooled estimates.

Selection of studies

Two authors will independently review abstracts in order to identify potential studies for inclusion. All authors will assess and agree the complete manuscripts for suitability for inclusion. The whole team will resolve disagreement by consensus discussion. We will check the bibliographies of included studies to ensure that all potential studies have been identified. All reasonable means will be taken to translate foreign language reviews into English.

Data extraction and management

Two authors will independently extract data on pre‐agreed data extraction forms. We will check the data for discrepancies. We will recheck any discrepancies and achieve consensus by discussion with all four authors.

Assessment of risk of bias in included studies

Four authors will assess included studies for risk of bias using pre‐agreed data extraction forms which will grade each aspect for risk of bias as high risk (no), lack of information or uncertainty (unclear) or low risk (yes) for the following domains:
Sequence generation
Allocation concealment
Blinding of investigator and outcome assessors.
Incomplete outcome data: intention to treat analysis, number lost to follow up.
Selective outcome reporting
Other sources of bias
All four authors will discuss any disagreement and we will report the consensus opinion. We will complete a risk of bias table for each included study, as recommended by the Cochrane Handbook (Higgins 2008).

Measures of treatment effect

Measures of treatment effect for primary outcome measures will include: V02max , maximal heart rate in beats per minute, RPP and RPE scales. Data will be analysed using the statistical package RevMan 5, for dichotomous data we will derive risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each outcome. For continuous variables we will calculate mean differences and 95% CI for each outcome. We will use a fixed‐effect model to calculate pooled estimates and their 95% CI.

Unit of analysis issues

Each participant may produce data from one or more of the measures of effect. For crossover designs, a potential source of bias might occur if the training arm precedes no training because of the effect of conditioning. For this reason, only the first arm of the study will be analysed.

Dealing with missing data

Where possible, we will obtain details of missing data from the trial authors: this will include details of drop outs, whether an intention‐to‐treat analysis was performed and any missing statistical data.

Assessment of heterogeneity

The authors will carefully evaluate all aspects of possible heterogeneity including: clinical, methodological and statistical diversity. All four authors will assess and agree heterogeneity and statistical analysis will include the Chi2 statistic and I2 statistic. Chi2 values of P = 0.1 or less will be considered to be indicative of significant heterogeneity.

Assessment of reporting biases

Blinding of participants will not be possible but assessors could be blinded. Compliance may be difficult to assess. For studies designed to evaluate multiple outcomes but where only significant results are reported, we will attempt to contact the trial authors for missing data.

Data synthesis

We will analyse data from more than one randomised controlled trial by meta‐analysis. Because of the potential difficulties of performing randomised controlled trials of this nature, we considered, but decided against using data from non‐randomised studies.

Subgroup analysis and investigation of heterogeneity

We do not intend to subdivide the cohort into any subcategories unless large‐scale studies are identified which would allow subdivision of the cohort into groups by gender and modifying disease genotype.

Sensitivity analysis

A sensitivity analysis will be used to examine the results of meta‐analysis to ensure their robustness. This might include omitting results from studies where there is some uncertainty such as reporting inconsistencies or by re‐analysing the data using a different statistical approached eg using a random‐effects model instead of a fixed‐effect model.