Lambert-Eaton Diagnosis: A Comprehensive Guide for Clinicians

Introduction

Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome (LEMS) is a rare autoimmune disorder affecting the neuromuscular junction, disrupting the communication between nerves and muscles. This condition can manifest as a paraneoplastic syndrome, often linked to underlying malignancy, particularly small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), or as a primary autoimmune disorder. The hallmark clinical feature of LEMS is muscle weakness, stemming from the body’s immune system mistakenly producing antibodies that target voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs) on presynaptic nerve terminals. This antibody attack impairs the crucial release of acetylcholine (ACh), the neurotransmitter essential for muscle contraction. Accurate Lambert Eaton Diagnosis is critical for timely management and improving patient outcomes. This article delves into the pathogenesis, essential diagnostic procedures, and effective treatment strategies for LEMS, emphasizing the importance of a multidisciplinary healthcare approach in managing this complex syndrome.

Etiology of Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome

The etiology of LEMS is broadly classified into two categories: paraneoplastic and non-paraneoplastic. The latter, also known as non-tumor LEMS (NT-LEMS), occurs independently of any underlying malignancy. In approximately 60% of LEMS cases, an associated tumor is identified, with the paraneoplastic form most strongly linked to SCLC. In fact, SCLC accounts for the vast majority of paraneoplastic LEMS cases.

Beyond SCLC, LEMS has been associated with other, less frequent malignancies including non-small cell lung cancer, mixed lung carcinoma, prostate cancer, thymoma, and lymphoproliferative disorders. Interestingly, the diagnosis of LEMS can precede the detection of SCLC by a considerable period, sometimes as long as 5 to 6 years, highlighting the importance of considering LEMS as a potential early indicator of malignancy. Smoking history is also recognized as a significant risk factor for developing LEMS. In NT-LEMS, a genetic predisposition is observed, with the HLA–B8–DR3 haplotype present in around 65% of younger patients. This genetic link is a key differentiator in understanding the distinct etiologies within LEMS.

Epidemiology of Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome

LEMS is considered a rare neuromuscular disorder, significantly less prevalent than myasthenia gravis (MG). While the prevalence of LEMS is about 46 times lower than MG, the annual incidence is only 10 to 14 times less, suggesting a potentially poorer prognosis and lower survival rates in LEMS, especially when associated with SCLC.

There is a notable gender disparity in LEMS epidemiology. Approximately 60% to 75% of LEMS patients are male, contrasting with MG, which shows a female predilection. The average age of onset for paraneoplastic LEMS is around 58 years. In contrast, NT-LEMS exhibits an age and gender distribution more similar to MG, with peak onset ages around 35 and a second peak around 60. Crucially, NT-LEMS carries a more favorable prognosis, with near-normal survival rates, underscoring the significant impact of malignancy association on the overall disease course and lambert eaton diagnosis prognosis.

Pathophysiology of Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome

The fundamental pathophysiology of LEMS revolves around a reduction in acetylcholine (ACh) release from presynaptic nerve terminals at the neuromuscular junction. This diminished ACh release is directly caused by autoantibodies targeting voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs) located on the presynaptic neuronal cell membrane.

To understand this process, it’s helpful to review the normal sequence of ACh release and interaction at the neuromuscular junction:

ACh Synthesis and Storage: Acetylcholine is synthesized and stored within synaptic vesicles in the motor nerve terminal.
Action Potential and Calcium Influx: When an action potential reaches the motor axon terminal, it triggers the opening of VGCCs. This opening allows calcium ions to flow into the presynaptic nerve terminal.
ACh Release and Receptor Binding: The influx of calcium ions through VGCCs initiates the release of quanta of ACh into the neuromuscular junction. ACh molecules then diffuse across the synaptic cleft and bind to ACh receptors on the postsynaptic muscle fiber membrane.
Muscle Fiber Depolarization and Contraction: ACh binding to receptors causes a rapid influx of cations, leading to depolarization of the muscle fiber endplate. This depolarization initiates a muscle fiber action potential, ultimately resulting in muscle contraction.
ACh Hydrolysis: Acetylcholinesterase, an enzyme present in the synaptic cleft, rapidly breaks down ACh molecules, terminating the signal and preparing the junction for the next nerve impulse.

In LEMS, the critical VGCC function is disrupted by IgG autoantibodies that cross-link these channels. Specifically, these antibodies primarily target the P/Q subtype of VGCC. Remarkably, approximately 85% of LEMS patients have detectable antibodies against the P/Q-type VGCC. In cases of malignancy-associated LEMS, antibodies against the N-type VGCC have also been identified, although less frequently.

The autoimmune process in paraneoplastic LEMS, particularly in the context of SCLC, follows a distinct mechanism. Tumor cells in SCLC can aberrantly express VGCCs. This aberrant expression makes VGCCs tumor-associated antigens, triggering the production of autoantibodies by the immune system. These autoantibodies then exhibit cross-reactivity, mistakenly targeting and attacking the VGCCs at presynaptic nerve terminals, leading to impaired neuromuscular transmission.

NT-LEMS, in contrast, often has a genetic component associated with specific HLA alleles, including HLA-B8 (HLA class I), HLA-DR3, and HLA-DQ2 (HLA class II). These same HLA alleles are also observed in other autoimmune conditions, such as MG. However, this genetic predisposition is generally not found in LEMS cases linked to SCLC, further distinguishing the two etiological subtypes.

LEMS is fundamentally a B-cell-mediated autoimmune neurological disorder, with the VGCC-IgG antibody playing a central role in its pathogenesis. This antibody directly impairs neuromuscular transmission, manifesting clinically as muscle weakness. A characteristic feature of LEMS is the pronounced reduction or absence of deep tendon reflexes.

Beyond muscle weakness, the impact of VGCC antibody-mediated dysfunction extends to autonomic ganglia, as ACh is also a neurotransmitter in the autonomic nervous system. This autonomic involvement leads to a range of clinical manifestations, including common symptoms like constipation and atypical pupillary responses to light, highlighting the systemic nature of LEMS beyond just muscle weakness and crucial for comprehensive lambert eaton diagnosis.

History and Physical Examination in Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome

The clinical presentation of LEMS is characterized by a triad of symptoms: proximal muscle weakness, autonomic dysfunction, and reduced deep tendon reflexes. The onset of LEMS symptoms is typically gradual (insidious), with a more rapid progression observed in SCLC-associated LEMS.

Key features observed during history taking and physical examination include:

Muscle Weakness: Predominantly affects proximal lower extremities, causing difficulty rising from a seated position or climbing stairs. Muscle weakness is typically symmetrical and progresses in a proximal-to-distal and caudal-to-cranial pattern, potentially eventually affecting oculobulbar muscles. Patients may describe the weakness as a dull ache or stiffness. Clinical examination reveals hyporeflexia or areflexia with minimal muscle atrophy.
Post-Activation Facilitation: A hallmark of LEMS is the phenomenon of post-exercise or post-activation facilitation. After brief exercise or repeated muscle contractions, deep tendon reflexes and muscle strength temporarily improve. This improvement is often more noticeable after a short rest period following exertion.
Oculobulbar Weakness: Cranial nerve involvement is common in LEMS, occurring in approximately 70% of patients. The most frequent oculobulbar symptoms are ocular, such as ptosis (drooping eyelids) and diplopia (double vision). Dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) and dysarthria (difficulty speaking) can also occur, usually in later stages.
Autonomic Dysfunction: Autonomic symptoms are highly prevalent in LEMS, reported in 80% to 96% of patients. Dry mouth (xerostomia) is the most commonly reported autonomic symptom. Other autonomic manifestations include erectile dysfunction in men, constipation, orthostatic hypotension (lightheadedness upon standing), and altered sweating (anhidrosis or hyperhidrosis).
Respiratory Failure: While less common, respiratory failure can occur in advanced stages of LEMS due to respiratory muscle weakness.

Recognizing these characteristic features during history and physical examination is crucial for raising clinical suspicion and initiating appropriate investigations for lambert eaton diagnosis.

Evaluation and Diagnostic Procedures for Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome

Clinical suspicion of LEMS, based on proximal muscle weakness, areflexia, and autonomic dysfunction, warrants a comprehensive evaluation to confirm the diagnosis. The diagnostic process for lambert eaton diagnosis typically involves serological testing for VGCC antibodies and electrodiagnostic studies (EDS).

Serological Testing

P/Q-type VGCC Antibodies: Radioimmunoassay is used to detect antibodies against P/Q-type VGCCs. These antibodies are present in 85% to 95% of individuals with LEMS. However, it’s important to note that P/Q-type VGCC antibodies are not exclusive to LEMS and can be found in other neurological and autoimmune conditions. Despite this, their presence strongly supports the diagnosis of LEMS in the appropriate clinical context.
N-type VGCC Antibodies: Antibodies targeting N-type VGCCs are less frequently observed in LEMS, present in 30% to 40% of cases.
SOX1 Antibodies: In patients with LEMS and SCLC, antibodies against SOX1, an immunogenic tumor antigen in SCLC, are found in approximately 64% of cases. SOX1 antibodies have high specificity (95%) for SCLC-associated paraneoplastic syndromes and can be a useful marker in this context.

Electrodiagnostic Testing (EDS)

EDS plays a vital role in confirming the lambert eaton diagnosis when clinical suspicion is high. EDS typically includes nerve conduction studies (NCS), electromyography (EMG), and repetitive nerve stimulation (RNS).

Nerve Conduction Studies (NCS) and Electromyography (EMG): Sensory nerve conduction studies are usually normal in LEMS, with normal nerve conduction velocities. However, motor unit amplitudes are typically reduced.
Repetitive Nerve Stimulation (RNS): RNS is a key component of EDS for LEMS. Characteristic findings include a decremental response (a decrease in CMAP amplitude) during low-frequency (2-3 Hz) repetitive nerve stimulation and an incremental response (an increase in CMAP amplitude) at high-frequency (20-50 Hz) stimulation. While these findings are generally consistent, variations can occur.
Post-Exercise or Post-Activation Facilitation on RNS: Following high-frequency RNS or brief maximal exercise, a significant incremental response is observed, often exceeding 100% increase in compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitude. A diagnostically significant increase is typically defined as ranging from 60% to 99% or greater.
Needle EMG: Needle EMG may reveal unstable action potentials, reflecting neuromuscular junction instability.
Single-Fiber EMG (SFEMG): SFEMG is the most sensitive electrodiagnostic test for neuromuscular junction disorders, including LEMS. In LEMS, SFEMG often demonstrates a marked increase in jitter (variability in the time interval between action potentials in adjacent muscle fibers) and transmission block (failure of action potential transmission), which characteristically improves at higher firing rates. While SFEMG is highly sensitive, RNS is more widely available and remains valuable in clinical practice, especially in differentiating LEMS from MG by highlighting post-exercise facilitation in LEMS versus decrement in MG.

Screening for Malignancy

Given the strong association between LEMS and malignancy, particularly SCLC, a lambert eaton diagnosis necessitates an immediate and thorough investigation for an underlying malignancy.

Initial Imaging: The recommended initial imaging study is a computed tomography (CT) scan or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the chest to screen for lung cancer.
Positron Emission Tomography (PET) Scan: If the initial CT scan is negative but clinical suspicion for paraneoplastic LEMS remains high, a positron emission tomography (PET) scan is often used for further screening.
Ongoing Cancer Screening: If the initial malignancy evaluation is negative, continued cancer screening is recommended every 3 to 6 months for a minimum of 2 years, especially in high-risk individuals.
DELTA-P Score and SOX Antibodies: Individuals at higher risk of SCLC-LEMS, particularly those with a Dutch-English LEMS Tumor Association Prediction (DELTA-P) score exceeding 2 or positive SOX antibodies, should undergo more frequent screening (e.g., every 3 months). The DELTA-P score utilizes factors like age at LEMS diagnosis and smoking history to stratify SCLC risk in LEMS patients, guiding the intensity and frequency of malignancy screening.

Treatment and Management of Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome

Management of LEMS requires a two-pronged approach: addressing any underlying malignancy and managing the neuromuscular symptoms. For LEMS associated with SCLC, treating the cancer is paramount and often leads to improvement in LEMS symptoms. Symptomatic treatment focuses on improving neuromuscular transmission and alleviating muscle weakness and autonomic dysfunction.

The primary symptomatic treatment strategies for lambert eaton diagnosis and management include:

Amifampridine (3,4-Diaminopyridine or 3,4-DAP): Amifampridine is considered the first-line symptomatic treatment for LEMS. It works by blocking presynaptic potassium channels, prolonging the nerve terminal action potential duration. This prolonged action potential increases presynaptic calcium influx and enhances ACh release. The typical adult dosage is 15 to 30 mg orally three times daily.
Acetylcholinesterase Inhibitors: While acetylcholinesterase inhibitors like pyridostigmine are used in MG, their effectiveness in LEMS is generally less pronounced. They can still provide some symptomatic benefit by slowing the breakdown of ACh in the neuromuscular junction, increasing the availability of ACh to bind to postsynaptic receptors. The adult dosage of pyridostigmine ranges from 30 to 120 mg every 3 to 6 hours.
Guanidine: Guanidine is another medication that can enhance ACh release following a nerve action potential. However, due to its potential for significant adverse effects and renal toxicity, guanidine is typically considered only when amifampridine is unavailable or ineffective. The recommended adult dosage is 1 g daily.

For patients with persistent weakness despite symptomatic treatments, immunomodulating or immunosuppressive therapies are considered. These therapies aim to reduce the autoimmune attack on VGCCs.

Intravenous Immunoglobulin (IVIG): IVIG is a primary immunomodulatory treatment option for refractory LEMS. Although its precise mechanism of action in LEMS is not fully understood, it is believed to neutralize autoantibodies and modulate autoreactive B cells. The standard IVIG regimen is 2 g/kg administered intravenously over 2 to 5 days.
Steroids and Other Immunosuppressants: Immunosuppressive agents such as prednisone, azathioprine, mycophenolate mofetil, and cyclosporine may be used, particularly in NT-LEMS or when IVIG is insufficient. However, their efficacy in LEMS can be variable, and potential side effects limit their widespread use.
Rituximab: Rituximab is a monoclonal antibody that targets CD20 receptors on B lymphocytes, depleting B cells. In theory, it should be effective in B-cell-mediated autoimmune diseases like LEMS. However, robust data supporting its broad use in LEMS is still evolving. Rituximab may be considered in refractory cases.
Plasma Exchange (Plasmapheresis): Plasma exchange can be beneficial in certain refractory LEMS cases by removing pathogenic antibodies from the circulation.

Differential Diagnosis of Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome

The differential diagnosis of LEMS includes several conditions that can present with muscle weakness and fatigue. Key considerations include:

Myasthenia Gravis (MG): MG is the most important differential diagnosis. Distinguishing features of LEMS include areflexia, autonomic dysfunction, and post-exercise facilitation, which are less prominent or absent in MG. Conversely, fatigability and ocular muscle involvement are often more pronounced in MG. Electrodiagnostic testing (RNS and SFEMG) and antibody testing (AChR and MuSK antibodies in MG vs. VGCC antibodies in LEMS) are crucial for differentiation.
Myopathies: Various myopathies (muscle diseases) can cause proximal muscle weakness. However, myopathies typically do not present with areflexia or autonomic dysfunction, and electrodiagnostic studies help differentiate them from neuromuscular junction disorders like LEMS.
Polyneuropathies and Polyradiculopathies: These conditions affect peripheral nerves or nerve roots and can cause weakness. However, the presence of sensory symptoms (numbness, tingling, pain) is more characteristic of polyneuropathies and polyradiculopathies than LEMS. Electrodiagnostic studies can help distinguish these conditions.
Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS): GBS is an acute inflammatory polyneuropathy that can cause rapidly progressive weakness and areflexia. However, GBS typically follows an infectious illness, progresses more rapidly, and often involves sensory symptoms, aiding in differentiation from LEMS.

Careful clinical evaluation, electrodiagnostic testing, and antibody studies are essential for accurate lambert eaton diagnosis and differentiation from these conditions.

Prognosis of Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome

The prognosis for patients with LEMS varies depending on whether it is paraneoplastic or non-paraneoplastic. Patients with LEMS often experience a reduced quality of life due to muscle weakness, autonomic symptoms, and potential treatment side effects. However, LEMS generally responds favorably to symptomatic and immunosuppressive therapies. With treatment, approximately 60% of patients are independent in daily activities at diagnosis, increasing to 85% within a year of treatment.

Non-Tumor LEMS (NT-LEMS): Patients with NT-LEMS typically have a life expectancy similar to the general population, reflecting a more benign disease course.
Paraneoplastic LEMS: The prognosis for paraneoplastic LEMS is largely determined by the prognosis of the underlying malignancy, most commonly SCLC. Interestingly, individuals with LEMS-SCLC have shown more favorable survival rates compared to those with SCLC without LEMS, although the reasons for this are not fully understood. Median survival for LEMS-SCLC is reported around 17 months, compared to 7 months for non-LEMS SCLC. Early lambert eaton diagnosis and treatment of the underlying cancer are critical for improving prognosis in paraneoplastic LEMS.

Complications of Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome

Complications in LEMS can arise from the disease itself or from its treatment.

Disease-Related Complications:
- Weakness-related: Falls, fractures, aspiration pneumonia due to muscle weakness.
- Autonomic dysfunction-related: Dry mouth (dental problems, difficulty speaking/eating), constipation (bowel obstruction), dysphagia (malnutrition, aspiration), erectile dysfunction (psychological impact).
- Weight loss and emaciation can occur due to dysphagia and reduced oral intake.
Treatment-Related Complications:
- Amifampridine: Tingling, numbness, seizures (rare).
- Immunosuppressants (Steroids, Azathioprine, Mycophenolate, Cyclosporine, Rituximab): Increased risk of infections, cytopenias (decreased blood cell counts), organ toxicity (depending on specific agent).
- IVIG: Infusion reactions, thromboembolic events (rare), renal dysfunction (rare).
- Plasma exchange: Catheter-related infections, bleeding complications, electrolyte imbalances.

Careful monitoring for and management of these potential complications are essential components of LEMS care.

Deterrence and Patient Education in Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome

LEMS typically presents with a gradual onset and progressive course. Patients often report disproportionate fatigue relative to objective muscle weakness on examination. A high index of clinical suspicion is crucial for timely lambert eaton diagnosis. Clinicians should be particularly vigilant for autonomic symptoms, especially dry mouth, erectile dysfunction, and constipation.

Given that LEMS diagnosis can precede SCLC diagnosis by years, prompt and accurate lambert eaton diagnosis, facilitated by electrophysiological testing and VGCC antibody assays, should trigger a thorough search for underlying malignancy.

Patient education is paramount. Patients and their families should receive comprehensive information about LEMS, its diagnosis, treatment options, prognosis, and potential treatment-related adverse effects. Empowering patients with knowledge helps them understand their condition, manage expectations, and actively participate in their care.

Enhancing Healthcare Team Outcomes in Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome

Due to the multifaceted clinical presentation of LEMS and its potential association with malignancy, a collaborative interprofessional healthcare team approach is essential for optimal patient care. The team ideally includes:

Neurologist: For lambert eaton diagnosis, neuromuscular management, and electrodiagnostic expertise.
Oncologist/Pulmonologist: To manage underlying malignancy, particularly SCLC.
Surgeon: For surgical resection of tumors when indicated.
Hematologist/Oncologist: For chemotherapy and other systemic cancer treatments.
Ophthalmologist: To manage ocular manifestations like ptosis and diplopia.
Primary Care Provider: For general medical care and coordination of care.
Nurse Practitioner/Physician Assistant: To provide ongoing patient monitoring, education, and support.
Rehabilitation specialists (Physical Therapist, Occupational Therapist, Speech Therapist): To address muscle weakness, functional limitations, and swallowing difficulties.

The initial treatment focus, regardless of malignancy association, is symptomatic management to improve ACh levels and neuromuscular transmission. In cases of refractory weakness, IVIG is often the first-line immunosuppressive therapy. Other options include prednisone, rituximab, azathioprine, or plasma exchange.

The prognosis is significantly influenced by the presence and stage of underlying malignancy. While complete recovery is often not attainable, symptomatic improvement and improved quality of life are realistic goals with appropriate multidisciplinary management. Early lambert eaton diagnosis and coordinated care are key to maximizing patient outcomes in LEMS.

Review Questions

(Original article includes review questions – these are omitted from this rewritten version as per instruction)

References

(References from the original article are retained)

1.Graus F, Vogrig A, Muñiz-Castrillo S, Antoine JG, Desestret V, Dubey D, Giometto B, Irani SR, Joubert B, Leypoldt F, McKeon A, Prüss H, Psimaras D, Thomas L, Titulaer MJ, Vedeler CA, Verschuuren JJ, Dalmau J, Honnorat J. Updated Diagnostic Criteria for Paraneoplastic Neurologic Syndromes. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm. 2021 Jul;8(4) [PMC free article: PMC8237398] [PubMed: 34006622]

2.Kitanosono H, Motomura M, Tomita H, Iwanaga H, Iwanaga N, Irioka T, Shiraishi H, Tsujino A. [Paraneoplastic Cerebellar Degeneration with Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome: A Report of an Effectively Treated Case and Systematic Review of Japanese Cases]. Brain Nerve. 2019 Feb;71(2):167-174. [PubMed: 30718446]

3.Mansukhani SA, Bothun ED, Diehl NN, Mohney BG. Incidence and Ocular Features of Pediatric Myasthenias. Am J Ophthalmol. 2019 Apr;200:242-249. [PMC free article: PMC6587184] [PubMed: 30653958]

4.Nakatani Y, Tanaka N, Enami T, Minami S, Okazaki T, Komuta K. Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome Caused by Nivolumab in a Patient with Squamous Cell Lung Cancer. Case Rep Neurol. 2018 Sep-Dec;10(3):346-352. [PMC free article: PMC6323386] [PubMed: 30627102]

5.Montes-Chinea NI, Guan Z, Coutts M, Vidal C, Courel S, Rebelo AP, Abreu L, Zuchner S, Littleton JT, Saporta MA. Identification of a new SYT2 variant validates an unusual distal motor neuropathy phenotype. Neurol Genet. 2018 Dec;4(6):e282. [PMC free article: PMC6244021] [PubMed: 30533528]

6.Dean S, McCracken J, Kosmider S, Herath D. Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome developing post-diagnosis of small-cell lung cancer. Intern Med J. 2018 Dec;48(12):1541-1542. [PubMed: 30518000]

7.Wirtz PW, Willcox N, van der Slik AR, Lang B, Maddison P, Koeleman BP, Giphart MJ, Wintzen AR, Roep BO, Verschuuren JJ. HLA and smoking in prediction and prognosis of small cell lung cancer in autoimmune Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome. J Neuroimmunol. 2005 Feb;159(1-2):230-7. [PubMed: 15652424]

8.Hoffman BM, Zeid NA, Alam U, Caress JB. Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome associated with alemtuzumab administration. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019 Jan;27:131-132. [PubMed: 30384197]

9.Cetin H, Vincent A. Pathogenic Mechanisms and Clinical Correlations in Autoimmune Myasthenic Syndromes. Semin Neurol. 2018 Jun;38(3):344-354. [PubMed: 30011414]

10.Bussat A, Langner-Lemercier S, Salmon A, Mouriaux F. Paraneoplastic syndromes in ophthalmology. J Fr Ophtalmol. 2018 May;41(5):e181-e185. [PubMed: 29784239]

11.Vabanesi M, Pinto AL, Vogrig A, Goncalves D, Rogemond V, Joubert B, Fabien N, Honnorat J, Muñiz-Castrillo S. SOX1 antibody-related paraneoplastic neurological syndromes: clinical correlates and assessment of laboratory diagnostic techniques. J Neurol. 2023 Mar;270(3):1691-1701. [PubMed: 36512064]

12.Maddison P, Lipka AF, Gozzard P, Sadalage G, Ambrose PA, Lang B, Verschuuren JJ. Lung cancer prediction in Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome in a prospective cohort. Sci Rep. 2020 Jun 29;10(1):10546. [PMC free article: PMC7324357] [PubMed: 32601396]

13.Kesner VG, Oh SJ, Dimachkie MM, Barohn RJ. Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome. Neurol Clin. 2018 May;36(2):379-394. [PMC free article: PMC6690495] [PubMed: 29655456]

14.Lorenzoni PJ, Kay CSK, Werneck LC, Scola RH. Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome: the 60th anniversary of Eaton and Lambert’s pioneering article. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2018 Feb;76(2):124-126. [PubMed: 29489969]

15.Meisel A, Sieb JP, Le Masson G, Postila V, Sacconi S. The European Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome Registry: Long-Term Outcomes Following Symptomatic Treatment. Neurol Ther. 2022 Sep;11(3):1071-1083. [PMC free article: PMC9338181] [PubMed: 35511347]

16.Pascuzzi RM, Bodkin CL. Myasthenia Gravis and Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome: New Developments in Diagnosis and Treatment. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2022;18:3001-3022. [PMC free article: PMC9792103] [PubMed: 36578903]

17.Lipka AF, Boldingh MI, van Zwet EW, Schreurs MWJ, Kuks JBM, Tallaksen CM, Titulaer MJ, Verschuuren JJGM. Long-term follow-up, quality of life, and survival of patients with Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome. Neurology. 2020 Feb 04;94(5):e511-e520. [PMC free article: PMC7080283] [PubMed: 31831596]

18.Ivanovski T, Miralles F. Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic syndrome: early diagnosis is key. Degener Neurol Neuromuscul Dis. 2019;9:27-37. [PMC free article: PMC6524763] [PubMed: 31191084]

19.Portaro S, Brizzi T, Sinicropi S, Cacciola A, De Cola MC, Bramanti A, Milardi D, Lupica A, Bramanti P, Toscano A, Rodolico C. Five years experience on 3,4-diaminopyridine phosphate in Lambert-Eaton syndrome: Case reports. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017 Sep;96(38):e7839. [PMC free article: PMC5617689] [PubMed: 28930822]

20.Schneider I, Kornhuber ME, Hanisch F. Long-term observation of incremental response and antibodies to voltage-gated calcium channels in patients with Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome: two case reports. J Med Case Rep. 2015 Mar 14;9:59. [PMC free article: PMC4376498] [PubMed: 25885033]

Disclosures

(Disclosures from the original article are retained)

Disclosure: Apoorva Jayarangaiah declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

Disclosure: Forshing Lui declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

Disclosure: Pramod Theetha Kariyanna declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.