IN MEMORIAM
Donald Gilden, MD: A Unique Neurologist And Scientist

Donald Gilden, MD

Donald Gilden, MD

By Donald H. Silberberg, MD

For Donald Gilden, MD, his beginnings in Baltimore in many ways foreshadowed what was to become a distinguished career in neurology and virology. Don excelled in his studies while developing into a talented baseball pitcher, good enough to receive an offer from the Baltimore Orioles to join its leading farm team as a prospective big-leaguer. When Don broke the exciting news to his father, his father looked at him — an ace student who had been accepted to Dartmouth College — and said he was destined for great things: in college, not on a baseball field. Don accepted his father’s advice, bringing his combination of a competitive spirit, persistence, and teamwork when he enrolled at Dartmouth. So, how did his early years contribute to the development of such a remarkable career?

Don returned to Baltimore for medical school and the University of Maryland, which later recognized him as one of its most distinguished alumni. He trained in neurology at the University of Chicago, which recognized him as a distinguished alumnus. There he met his wife Audrey and began their devoted 49 years together. He then spent two years as a neurologist at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. He correctly saw that the field of neurovirology held great promise with so many unanswered questions. In 1969, he began his scientific career as a fellow in neurovirology at the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. In 1970, his background uniquely qualified him for the faculty of the University of Pennsylvania’s department of neurology and its affiliate the Wistar Institute to attempt to find the virus that causes multiple sclerosis. Penn and Wistar had just established the first comprehensive research and clinical care center for MS, and Don quickly became a key member of the team.

A powerful technique at that time for detecting latent viruses was so-called co-cultivation, growing human cells that might contain a virus together with well-characterized lines of cells that had been maintained for many generations in vitro, and were known to be free of viruses. This required finding fresh brain and spinal cord tissue from recently deceased individuals with MS and from individuals known to not have MS. A brain bank registry was established. Don made countless trips to autopsy suites throughout Pennsylvania, often on short notice in the middle of the night. The nearby Philadelphia medical examiner’s office became a source of control tissues. In the course of these many unrewarding attempts to find an MS virus, Don discovered that the two principal human herpes viruses, Herpes simplex virus (HSV) and varicella zoster virus (VZV), could be found in latent forms in virtually all dorsal root and trigeminal ganglia at postmortem, whether from individuals with MS or controls.

This remarkable finding soon became a major focus of Don’s research: How did the virions remained latent, what activated them, and how could VZV cause chicken pox in children and then shingles later in life? In order to further develop his molecular biology skills, in 1980 and 1981 Don joined Yechiel Becker’s laboratory in the department of molecular virology at the Hebrew University-Hadassah Medical Center in Jerusalem as a visiting professor. While in Jerusalem, Don found time to join a fast pitch softball league and become captain of the Israeli team with teammates who were 15 to 20 years younger than Don, playing the position of catcher. They played in the Maccabiah Games, Israel’s Olympics.

Returning to Penn, he began to explore the many facets of VZV, leading to landmark discoveries that link the virus to giant cell arteritis in its many clinical phenotypes, shingles, temporal arteritis, ischemic optic neuropathy, cerebral and multi-organ vasculitis, and, most recently, Takayasu’s arteritis. This opened the way to revolutionize treatment. At the ztime of his death, scores of colleagues throughout the United States who had provided biopsy samples, or were aware of his findings, reported to Don that their patients who were doing poorly with conventional corticosteroid treatment responded quickly to anti-viral agents, e.g. valacyclovir. This reinforced what he was seeing at the University Colorado, and undoubtedly will be the subject of clinical trials (if they are really needed) and future publications.

While conducting his research at Penn, Don quickly gained the reputation as a go-to neurologist for colleagues in many departments throughout Philadelphia, and ultimately the United States, for help in solving difficult neurological problems as an expert clinician  and later as a neurovirologist. He was a true triple threat in every respect, an outstanding teacher, astute clinician, and extraordinary scientist.

In 1985, Don became professor and chair of the department of neurology at the University of Colorado, remaining chair until 2009. Notably, he expanded his successful research program while developing a nationally prominent department of neurology. His abilities and energy as a teacher were recognized when he received the Outstanding Teacher Award from neurology residents four times. Don was honored with many other national and international awards, including the Alumni Award for Distinguished Service from the University of Chicago, the Pioneer Award of the International Society of Neurovirology, and the 2008 Honor Award and Gold Key for outstanding contributions to medicine and distinguished service to mankind from the University of Maryland School of Medicine. He was elected to the Association of American Physicians, to fellowship in the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and to the Johns Hopkins Society of Scholars. He held leadership positions in many professional societies during his career, and he remained active on many editorial boards, with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Multiple Sclerosis Society study sections until his death.

A measure of the friendship and loyalty that he inspired was the fact that his principal laboratory assistants who joined his laboratory in the late 1970s stayed as members of his team, from Philadelphia, to Jerusalem, to Denver, and until their retirements over the last several years.

Don continued his research even after discovering that he had an aggressive renal carcinoma, enduring a difficult 18 months of therapies, finally succumbing on Aug. 22, 2016. In his last months, he identified five genes actively expressed during the process of latency. This was consistent with his having lived his life to the fullest. As late as early August, he worked with his colleagues to ensure that his grants would continue funding the research team and that the decades of advances he made in unraveling the nature of the varicella zoster virus would continue.

To cite some numbers: Don was an author on more 420 papers and remained the principal investigator on both an NIH Program Project Grant and an R01 until his death. He trained 26 graduate students and postdoctoral fellows, all of whom but the most recent hold important faculty positions in the United States, Canada, Japan, and Norway. He was mentor to countless medical students and residents, and consultant to his peers throughout the world. He held leadership positions in numerous professional societies and remained active on many editorial boards and NIH study sections until his death.

Don played to win at everything he did. He enjoyed skiing, becoming so accomplished that one could mistake him for a professional. He enjoyed teaching his friends and colleagues (including me) how to better navigate the slopes.

He was a serious violinist, never traveling without his instrument and practicing every day, even throughout his illness. In addition to recitals at national meetings, I enjoyed hearing him practice in hotel rooms in many countries as we attended meetings and in his home in Denver. When possible, Don added attendance each year to a national or international violin competition, including the International Violin Competition of Indianapolis, to his neurology and virology meetings schedules.

Don had a warm and engaging personality that endeared him to many of us. He and his wife maintained enduring friendships and were extremely hospitable to those of us who showed up in Denver from time to time.

However, where Don really devoted his energies and love was with his family, Audrey, their sons Daniel, Adam, and Paul, and their families. He and Audrey have been fully involved in their lives, leading to incredibly close ties among all of them. Although theirs is the greatest loss, Don’s passing leaves a tremendous void in neurology and virology, and he will be sorely missed by his many students, trainees, friends, and colleagues. May he rest in peace.

Don Silberberg, MD, is an emeritus professor and chair of the department of neurology at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

References

  • Gilden, D.H., Rozenman, Y., Murray, R., Devlin, M., Vafai, A.: Detection of Varicella Zoster Virus Nucleic Acid In Neurons of Normal Human Thoracic Ganglia. Ann. Neurol. 22:377-380, 1987
  • Gilden, D.H., Devlin, M., Wellish, M., Mahalingam, R., Huff, C., Hayward, A., Vafai, A.: Persistence of Varicella Zoster Virus DNA in Blood Mononuclear Cells of Patients With Varicella Or Zoster. Virus Genes 2:299-305, 1988.
  • Gilden, D., White, T.M., Nagae, L., Gurdin, W.H., Boyer, P.J., Nagel, M.A.: Successful antiviral treatment of giant cell arteritis and Takayasu’s arteritis. JAMA Neurology, 72:943-6,2015.
  • Golas, L., Bennett, J.L., White, T.M., Skarf, B., Lesser, R., Nagel, M.A., Gilden, D.: Varicella Zoster Virus in Ischemic Optic Neuropathy. Ophthalmology, 122: 2142-5, 2015.

From the Editors

Walter Struhal

Walter Struhal, MD

STEVEN L. LEWIS, MD

Steven L. Lewis, MD

By Steven L. Lewis, MD, Editor, and Walter Struhal, MD, Co-Editor

We are very pleased to introduce the November/December 2016 issue of World Neurology, which starts with the report from the Sept 12, 2016, Council of Delegates meeting that was held in Prague, Czech Republic. In his President’s Column, Raad Shakir, MD, describes the close relationship and tight collaboration of the World Federation of Neurology (WFN) and the six WFN regional organizations and the role of the World Congress of Neurology in enhancing the regions.

Wolfgang Grisold, MD, the secretary-general of the WFN, reports on the activities of the Austrian Society of Neurology related to the July 22, 2016 third Day of the Brain, and Federico Pelli-Noble, MD, reports on the Day of the Brain activities that occurred on the same day in Tucuman, Argentina. Christopher Gardner-Thorpe, MD, also provides a thoughtful discussion on neurology and international relations.

Kate Riney, MD, PhD, updates us on epilepsydiagnosis.org, an extensive and unique online tool for diagnostic information on the epilepsies, which can be of benefit to all neurologists (and our patients) globally. There are also a number of book reviews in this issue, including one from Edward J. Fine, MD, on Brain Renaissance from Vesalius to Modern Neuroscience. Dr. Grisold reviews Teaching and Tuition of Neurology and Neurosurgery in Indonesia During One Century: 1850-1950, and Yuri Takeuchi, MD, reviews Mentored by a Madman: The William Burroughs Experiment.

Also in this issue, Mustapha El Alaoui Faris, MD, provides us with an overview of the Continuum program in Morocco, as a model for other regional programs based on Continuum, the official continuing medical education publication of the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) and with which a joint AAN-WFN effort helps provide Continuum to user groups in various countries where this resource is needed. We look forward to future contributions from other regional Continuum user groups to highlight how this important educational resource is being utilized to support neurologic education and patient care. Also, in what we hope will be the model of many similar contributions for future issues, we know readers will appreciate seeing a “Photo of the Issue” that was provided by Dr. Shakir, showing Jun Kimura, MD, giving a recent EMG workshop at the Lebanese Society of Neurology in Beirut.

John D. England, MD, provides his editor-in-chief’s update from the Journal of the Neurological Sciences, the official journal of the WFN, and personally reflects on the recent loss of two leaders in academic neurology, Donald Gilden, MD, and Omar Khan, MD, Finally, Donald Silberberg, MD, the past editor of World Neurology, provides an extemely heartfelt tribute in his obituary for Dr. Gilden.

We sincerely hope that you will enjoy the articles in this issue, and we continue to encourage your outstanding submissions and helpful suggestions for the benefit of all of the readers of World Neurology.

Austrian Day of the Brain Sheds Light on Neurology Issues

By Wolfgang Grisold, MD

Wolfgang Grisold, MD, (from left) WFN secretary general, Elisabeth Fertl, MD, OEGN president; and Reinhold Schmidt, MD, OEGN past president, represent the OEGN during the World Brain Day 2016 press conference.

Wolfgang Grisold, MD, (from left) WFN secretary general, Elisabeth Fertl, MD, OEGN president, and Reinhold Schmidt, MD, OEGN past president, represent the OEGN during the World Brain Day 2016 press conference.

The Austrian Society of Neurology (OEGN) participated in the third Day of the Brain July 22, 2016, by discussing important topics at a press conference. The OEGN was represented by Elisabeth Fertl, MD, OEGN president, Reinhold Schmidt, MD, OEGN past president, and Wolfgang Grisold, MD, World Federation of Neurology (WFN) secretary general.

In Europe, 220 million people suffer from one or several neurological diseases. This is important because with increasing age, individuals experience disorders such as dementia, Parkinson’s disease, and stroke more frequently.

Austrian neurology, represented by the OEGN, has a strong presence with 970 neurologists, including previous neuropsychiatrists. Within Austria, there is a network of 38 acute departments with stroke units, a growing number of neurological rehabilitation centers, and other neurological centers devoted to care and rehabilitation. All stroke units are connected in a nationwide data and quality assurance system, and they have incorporated intravenous thrombolysis in their procedures. In 11 stroke units, interventional procedures can be performed for patients with acute stroke.

Dr. Schmidt gave an overview on dementia, emphasizing that efforts are needed to maintain cognitive abilities with age and in aged persons. In particular, in 75- and 80-year-old individuals, more risk for cognitive changes can be expected. The aim and strategy must be to identify the factors that positively enhance cognitive reserve. Increasingly, activity training of cognitive abilities and maintenance of social networks have been identified as positive factors.

Age is often identified as a burden (e.g., related to the burden of disease)and a contributor to increasing health care costs. This is, however, a naturally occurring phase in the life cycle with increasing needs. It is the duty of neurologists to act as advocates for our patients, to see the importance of these neurological needs for our patients, and to avoid classifying age as a burden.

Another important task in neurology is palliative care. Several neurological diseases need palliative settings of different types and time courses. For example, palliative care can be a long-term project in patients with degenerative diseases or a shorter time course in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and brain tumors. Palliative care is not the same as end-of-life care, and it is important to include these concepts into neurology worldwide.

Worldwide, the WFN is engaged in intensive cooperation with the World Health Organization, including with ICD 11, noncommunicable diseases, and the present state of the Zika infection, where the WFN has created an international expert group.

The Austrian society had a strong echo in the media after the press conference, including several follow-up radio interviews.

WFN Council of Delegates Meets in Prague

: Emilio Perucca, MD, (right) president of the International League Against Epilepsy, welcomes the WFN Council of Delegates to Prague. Also pictured (from left): William Carroll, MD, WFN vice president, and Raad Shakir, MD, WFN president.

Emilio Perucca, MD, (right) president of the International League Against Epilepsy, welcomes the WFN Council of Delegates to Prague. Also pictured (from left): William Carroll, MD, WFN vice president, and Raad Shakir, MD, WFN president.

By Wolfgang Grisold, MD, and Steven L. Lewis, MD

The Council of Delegates of the World Federation of Neurology (WFN) met Sept. 12 during the 12th European Congress on Epileptology in Prague, Czech Republic. The meeting was opened by Emilio Perucca, MD, International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) president, who welcomed the WFN delegates to Prague and emphasized the excellent connections between the WFN and the ILAE.

The introduction was followed by a welcome from WFN President Raad Shakir, MD. Secretary General Wolfgang Grisold, MD, identified 26 voting delegates, including proxies.

Gallo Diop, MD, PhD, recently ended his period as an elected trustee, and Dr. Shakir emphasized his achievements, in particular founding of the African Academy of Neurology (AFAN). For the open trustee position, two candidates, Sarosh M. Katrak, MD, and Steven L. Lewis, MD,  applied and each gave a five-minute introduction. This was followed by voting.

The WFN Council of Delegates cast ballots, electing Steven L. Lewis, MD, as WFN trustee.

The WFN Council of Delegates cast ballots, electing Steven L. Lewis, MD, as WFN trustee.

Dr. Shakir, Vice President William M. Carroll, MD, and Dr. Grisold each spoke on the achievements and work of the past year. Dr. Shakir informed attendees that John N. Walton, MD, and Noshir H. Wadia, MD, passed away in the the last year. The president also gave the final report from the the World Congress of Neurology (WCN) 2015 in Santiago, Chile, where 3,500 attendees made the meeting a success. Sixty percent of the profit made in Santiago was dedicated to the WFN and 40 percent to the Chilean Society of Neurology, Psychiatry, and Neurosurgery.

Collaborations with the World Health Organization (e.g., the Atlas), ICD 11, the Global Neurology Network, the WFN Zika working group (chaired by John England, MD), and the efforts of the WFN to improve neurology in all regions of the world were mentioned.

Dr. Carroll reported on the development of the next WCN in Kyoto, Japan, and the structure of the Congress. Three Nobel laureates will give lectures, and the number of sessions will be 210. The site of WCN 2019 is Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Applications from Europe for WCN 2021 were accepted until the end of September 2016.

The secretary general reported on five issues:

  1. The WFN office
  2. Zika
  3. The Day of the Brain
  4. WFN publications
  5. Outlook for the Congress

The Kenes Group will be the professional conference organizer for three more congresses. The secretary general also gave the reports from the Public Awareness Committee and the Applied Research Group Committee. The 2016 World Brain Day topic was “The Aging Brain.” The Day of the Brain will be continued in 2017, and the topic will be “Stroke.”

The WFN publications have a wide-ranging presence, from the website and social media, to World Neurology and the Journal of the Neurologic Sciences, to a new electronic journal, eNS.

The next neuromuscular congress — the International Congress on Neuromuscular Diseases (ICNMD 2018) — will be held in 2018 in Vienna.

Keith Newton, who served the WFN as executive director for 17 years, has retired, and his engagement and significant contributions to the WFN were acknowledged.

Richard Stark, MD, treasurer, presented the financial situation. Subsequent to the Congress in Chile, the financial situation has remained stable. Negative trends are the reduction of interest due to the economic situation in investments. The WFN will have to maintain the policy of lean management and careful budgeting, in particular, since in the years between congresses current costs exceed the income. The auditor’s report was approved, and the auditor was selected for the next financial period.

The Membership Committee received three applications, from Nepal, Togo, and Mauritania. Formally, Mauritania fulfilled all conditions and details and was accepted as a new WFN member. The other two countries were encouraged to resubmit their applications in Kyoto. For Guatemala, there are issues with regard to the presence of two societies accredited in 2001 by the WFN. The 2001 decision by the Council of Delegates to accept two Guatemalan associations has been reversed and approved by the South American delegates.

Education Committee Chair Dr. Lewis provided the report of the WFN educational activities, including the awarding of 30 Junior Travelling Fellowships in 2016. In addition, attendees were provided with an update on the the WFN department visit program for four-to-six-week visits, which now includes Austria, Canada, Germany, Norway, and Turkey. The status of the WFN Teaching Center program (for fellowship or full neurologic training) also was discussed. The program now includes two African centers, Rabat (a French-speaking site), Cairo (English-speaking), the newest center in Dakar (French-speaking), and the newest center in Mexico for Central and South America (Spanish speaking). The status and current usage of the Continuum program, an important joint educational initiative of the American Academy of Neurology and the WFN, also was discussed. Dr. Lewis and Walter Struhal, MD, editors of World Neurology, also reminded attendees of a call for articles on training in neurology around the world for publication in World Neurology.

Morris Freedman, MD, presented on distance learning, and he shared details about the Canadian-African interactive video conference as an example of future international medical video conferences that could possibly be supported by the Canadian government and include WFN involvement.

Dr. Struhal gave the report for the Publications and Communications Committee. He introduced the new and impressive WFN website and reported on the successful expansion on social media, including acknowledging the efforts of the social media group members.

Regional issues were presented by representatives from these regions:

  • AFAN: WFN Trustee Riadh Gouider, MD, presented on African initiatives by the AFAN, which was founded in 2015. The first meeting together with the Pan-Arab Union will take place in March 2017.
  • Asian and Oceanian Congress of Neurology (AOCN): The Asian Initiative was reported by Ryuji Kaji, MD, PhD, who presented on Asian initiatives, including the AOCN’s August 2016 meeting in Kuala Lumpur, which was organized by the Kenes Group. In 2016, at the Japanese Society of Neurology meeting in Kobe, there were several thousand attendees. This meeting also was attended by several WFN officers. Dr. Kaji also reported on positive developments with regard to planning of the WCN in Kyoto. Dr. Kaji also presented new features of Japanese research, including rehabilitation and treatment with stem cells in spinal cord injury.
  • Pan-American Federation of Neurological Societies (PAFNS): Marco Medina, MD, presented the update from PAFNS, whose constitution and bylaws were signed during the 2015 Congress in Chile. The organization is supported by the ILAE, the World Sleep Society, and the Iberoamerican Cerebrovascular Diseases Society, and its first official meeting was scheduled to be held Oct. 30-Nov. 3, 2016, in Cancun, Mexico.

The announcement of the result of the trustee election was presented. There were 26 votes, and, according to tradition, the number of votes for each candidate were not announced. The result was that Dr. Lewis of the United States became the newly elected trustee of the WFN.

Finally, the attendees were reminded to save the dates of Sept. 16-21 for WCN 2017 in Kyoto.

Report From Recent Junior Traveling Fellowship Awardees

By Walter Struhal, MD, Steven L. Lewis, MD, and Wolfgang Grisold, MD

Dr. Vikas Dhiman, India, presents his poster at the 11th Asian-Oceanian Epilepsy Congress in May in Hong Kong.

The World Federation of Neurology (WFN) Junior Traveling Fellowships are awarded to gifted young neurologists to support attendance and scientific contributions at international meetings. This support is limited to lower income countries. The WFN is pleased to announce that 30 Junior Traveling Fellowships were awarded in 2016. A complete list of awardees is published online. The following are reports that have already come in from recent awardees of the 2016 WFN Junior Traveling Fellowships.

Vikas Dhiman
“I presented a poster on “The Role of Adenosine in Drug-Resistant Epilepsy Due to Hippocampal Sclerosis” at the Congress. This scientific gathering was a feat of knowledge. There were more than 40 platform and over 300 poster presentations. There were sessions ranging from didactic lectures to debates to practical workshops by the stalwarts in the field of epilepsy. Talks on some of the interesting topics, such as ketogenic diet in epilepsy, stereo-EEG, and brain networks, were the highlight of the Congress. This Congress gave me the opportunity to present my doctoral work at an international level. I had a productive interaction with eminent scientists and fellow clinicians in the Congress. The talks on genetics of epilepsy and brain somatic mutations were useful for me. Attending this Congress gave me new ideas, which I will pursue for my future research projects. This Congress helped me grow professionally and personally, and I want to thank the WFN once again for giving me the opportunity to attend.”

Dr. Velmurugan Jayabal, India, presents his poster at the 11th Asian-Oceanian Epilepsy Congress in May in Hong Kong.

Velmurugan Jayaba
“I attended and presented my poster at the Congress. I had valuable feedback for my research from the pioneers of the field, Prof. Akio Ikeda, Prof. Premsyl Jeruska, and Prof. Herman Stefan. I also gave my EEG certification examination during this course. I learned a lot from the basic research and cognitive aspects of patients with epilepsy.”

Bassam M. Abdulzahra Al-Fatly
“This course is a dream for any clinical neurophysiologist to meet the pioneers who introduced many of the well-known techniques to this diagnostic field. For five days, we attended theoretical lectures on every topic of neurophysiology of the peripheral nervous system starting early in the morning, followed by practical demonstrations and hands-on in the afternoon. The course was interactive between the faculty and participants. Paramount information was delivered to us on the single-fiber EMG technique from the founder Prof. Erik Stalberg. The faculty opened the door for any questions, and they took the time to answer a lot of difficult cases. Most of the participants presented patient cases. I felt privileged to be one of those who presented a case, which was on the neurophysiological diagnosis of hereditary neuropathy (Charcot Marie Tooth type I). I received a rewarding response from the faculty as well as the participant colleagues, in addition to excellent remarks on the way I presented electrophysiology results at my home institution. Among other activities, we enjoyed the social and warm welcome, which was provided by the department of neurophysiology in Uppsala University. In the end, I was honored to be among the winners of a WFN Junior Traveling Fellowship for 2016.”

Dr. Bassam M. Abdulzahra Al-Fatly, Iraq, (seated) trains in eletcrophysiology at the Training Course in EMG and Neurography in May in Uppsala, Sweden.

Dr. Bassam M. Abdulzahra Al-Fatly, Iraq, (seated) trains in electrophysiology at the Training Course in EMG and Neurography in May in Uppsala, Sweden.

The WFN Junior Traveling Fellowship program is meant to advocate young neurologists’ work, providing a chance to present their work and network at an international level.

Supporting the next generation of neurologists worldwide is a major objective of the WFN. The overwhelming positive response to this program from trainees and young neurologist colleagues is a strong sign of success of this important long-standing and continuing initiative.

The WFN encourages young neurologists to apply to this program in the future, and also to keep up the excellent spirit of reporting their experiences.

John N. Walton: Fond Memories

Front row, left to right: Charles G. Drake, John N. Walton, Vladimir Hachinski, John P Girvin, and Henry J.M. Barnett, with members of the department of clinical neurological sciences at the University of Western Ontario in London, Canada.

Front row, left to right: Charles G. Drake, John N. Walton, Vladimir Hachinski, John P. Girvin, and Henry J.M. Barnett, with members of the department of clinical neurological sciences at the University of Western Ontario in London, Canada.

My first knowledge of John N. Walton, MD, came from his reprint requests. My first papers were published as a resident (trainee in neurology). I was flattered that whatever I published was followed by a request from Professor Walton for a reprint. The requests were typed on half-page airmail envelopes and stated how much he appreciated the paper and asking for a reprint. He signed the requests individually, and I always obliged, although sometimes I would send him photocopies, since I could not afford reprints.

My next interaction related to a letter I wrote with other young stroke neurologists suggesting that the Cerebrovascular Research Group of the World Federation of Neurology (WFN) should allow for some renewal and not simply be run by the same people on the same themes with the same approaches. An appreciative and polite acknowledging letter came promptly, but action came much more slowly, due to the resistance of the Cerebrovascular Research Group leadership. In fact, it was not until my own presidency from 2009 to 2013 that we finally dissolved the lingering group in favor of the World Stroke Organization being the vascular arm of the World Brain Alliance, which we founded.

After years of honoring his reprint requests, I finally met Dr. Walton and his wonderful wife, Betty, in Uruguay. A personal relationship bloomed quickly to the point that he asked me for advice. He sought my opinion about what else needed to be done in world neurology. I produced a long list. Then he asked whether we were on the right track under his presidency. I responded “absolutely” without prior thought or hesitation. He then said he had a problem. He said he thought he needed another four years as president to push forward the WFN agenda, but Betty did not wish for him to have a second term. He said if I did not mind telling her what I told him, she could change her mind. I do not know whether anything that I said had any influence on Betty; the fact is Dr. Walton was renewed as president for another four milestone years.

I looked forward to meeting the Waltons at congresses, which they attended with admirable dedication and grace. At one of the congresses, Dr. Walton said, “You gave me advice when I needed it. If I may, I would like to give you some advice, although you may not need it.” I was eager to hear the advice, but was flabbergasted when he outlined the steps that I would have to take to become president of the WFN. I am not sure if I thanked him enough at the time, because the idea of becoming president of the WFN had never crossed my mind, but I had reason to be grateful for his words when I ran for office later in my career.

Twice, when I was chair of our department of clinical neurological sciences of the University of Western Ontario in London, Canada, I had the pleasure of inviting Dr. Walton as a visiting professor and co-hosting him along with his lifelong friend H.J.M. Barnett (Barney). Both were born in the same year (1922), in the same country (United Kingdom), and the same area: Dr. Barnett in Newcastle-Upon-Tyne, and Dr. Walton nearby. Both rose to the top, not only in their areas of expertise: Dr. Walton in neuromuscular and Dr. Barnett in stroke, but of neurology itself. Dr. Walton became president of the WFN and much else, and Dr. Barnett became president of the International Stroke Society and a number of other organizations. Their careers are reminiscent of Plutarch’s “Parallel Lives” wherein he compared a Greek and a Roman. I characterized Dr. Barnett as the “robust Roman” and Dr. Walton as the “sophisticated Greek.”1 Their careers were united in recognition at the 15th World Congress of Neurology in Vancouver, Canada (1993), when Dr. Barnett was the honorary president of the Congress and Dr. Walton was president of the WFN.

As the late Frank Clifford-Rose wrote about Dr. Walton in his biography in 1992, “that there were few doctors who were legends, and very few were legends in their lifetime,”2 however one seldom has the opportunity to learn about the personal dimensions of a legend.

I had such a privilege. At the 2009 World Congress of Neurology in Bangkok, the venue of the Congress and the hotels were far apart. I sat next to Dr. Walton in a van taking us from the venue through the nightmarish Bangkok traffic, providing ample time to talk. He remarked that when he started his career most boys with Duchenne’s dystrophy died in their teens, and now they were able to live far into their 30s with a good quality of life. He said this with such quiet compassion that I fell silent.

Nothing reveals more about a person’s character than how people face death. Dr. Walton knew that his glioblastoma was incurable. In response to the overwhelming outpouring of sympathy from those who knew him, he wrote an eloquent, gracious acknowledgement and stated that regretfully he would have to give up most of his commitments, but he would continue with fundraising for his charities and the presidency of the Bamburgh Castle Golf Club.

Even in his last days, his thoughts were about what he could for do for others. He lived the golden rule. Dr. Walton was not only a legend, but he was a good man.

Vladimir Hachinski, MD, DSc, is a professor of neurology and epidemiology, at the University of Western Ontario, London, Canada.

References
1. Hachinski VC. H.J.M Barnett (A Biographical Sketch). Surg Neurol 1986;26:529-531
2. Aarli JA, Shakir R. In Memoriam. World Neurology Newsletter. July 2016. Vol 41; No. 4:3

BOOK REVIEW
Landmark Papers in Neurology

By Carrie Grouse, MD

Carrie Grouse, MD

Carrie Grouse, MD

In reading Landmark Papers in Neurology, the famous quote by Sir Isaac Newton, “If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants” comes to mind as an appropriate aphorism. The sheer scale of progress made in our understanding of neurologic pathophysiology and treatment over the last few centuries, through advancements in the fields of anatomy, molecular biology, genetics, and neuroimaging, is made evident throughout this collection. Moreover, in this book, we are shown the indefatigable efforts of the scientists and clinicians, who, by a combination of tireless effort, excellent scientific method, and at times pure serendipity, managed to make these discoveries.

Divided into 16 sections encompassing many major areas of neuroscience, the contributor or contributors for each section selected 10 important papers in each field that were particularly crucial in transforming and advancing understanding and making possible further breakthroughs. The articles themselves are not included in the volume; rather they are succinctly summarized, with the bulk of attention being paid to the scientific, social, and, at times, political context in which these papers arose, as well as the impact the papers had on their respective fields.

Landmark Papers in Neurology Book CoverAlthough it is generally understood that all medical specialties constantly are growing and evolving with new scientific and technological advancements, this collection shows just how dramatically neurologic paradigms have been transformed completely through these landmark discoveries. Given the wide breadth of immunomodulatory therapies for multiple sclerosis, it is surprising to think that the first articles investigating the possibility of the use of interferon therapy in multiple sclerosis was only in the early 1980s, and treatment with interferons was only approved in the early 1990s. It seems equally surprising that in such a prevalent disease as epilepsy, so little was known about its cause until the first article describing electroencephalography in 1929, particularly given the dramatic advancements in the field of epilepsy since then.

It was fascinating to follow the progression of knowledge in the area of Parkinson’s disease, from a humble treatise written by a relatively obscure apothecary about the “shaking palsy,” to the discovery of L-dopa as a revolutionary treatment, and more recently to the development of deep brain stimulation. Equally captivating was the recounting by Peter Goadsby, MBBS, of the circuitous path that was taken toward understanding the mechanisms behind migraine, and the substantial setback to the field that was caused by the “vascular dogma” proposed in 1938, which took 50 years to fully reverse.

Some of the most compelling aspects of this collection are the details included about the social, political, and even personal backdrops in which these discoveries were made. The seminal work performed by Alan Hodgkin and Andrew Huxley in elucidating the molecular basis of neurotransmission through their experiments on giant squid axons was almost abandoned, first due to being forced to work on radar development in World War II, then due to lack of ability to successfully catch squid for their experiments. The first description of an epileptic syndrome, West Syndrome, was in a letter to the editor of The Lancet by Dr. William James West, regarding a syndrome of unusual flexor spasms along with developmental regression that he noted in his own son. I was surprised to learn that Dr. Mary Walker, a female house physician at St. Alfege’s Hospital in London, was the first physician to treat a myasthenic patient with a cholinesterase inhibitor (physostigmine) after hearing that myasthenia gravis resembled curare poisoning, which had been found to be reversed with this agent. The political maneuvering and sabotage between competing scientists, hospitals, and laboratories, and the dramatic effect this had on what was published and how quickly new ideas were embraced, was also touched on throughout this collection, and made for fascinating reading. I often found myself regretting that each article was only afforded a few pages, such that these anecdotes were cut short.

Although a relatively minor issue, it seemed that the format of 10 articles per section was a little too strictly adhered to; some topics, such as neuroimmunology or mitochondrial diseases, could have been well covered if limited to only a few of the more seminal articles, whereas in the fields of stroke and dementia it seemed that 10 articles was impossibly limiting. Overall, however, the contributors and editors did a marvelous job with the daunting task of distilling a rich body of literature spanning multiple centuries. This book is well worth the read, as an excellent and inspiring review of the huge strides that have been made in the field of neurology in the last few centuries. It is intriguing to think of how much farther we will see in the future, thanks to the continued hard work, ingenuity, and serendipity of clinicians and scientists yet to come.

Carrie Grouse, MD, is an assistant professor of neurological sciences at Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.

Neurology in 2050: Are You the Next Jules Verne?

The Turkish Neurological Society calls for medical student essay submissions

Serefnur Öztürk, MD

Serefnur Öztürk, MD

By Serefnur Öztürk, MD

Our century has become the Brain Century, and it is important to keep improving on this trend.

The Turkish Neurological Society has established an international essay competition for medical students to increase awareness about improvements in neurology in the Brain Century.

Medical education has various aspects, and creativity is one of the essential skills in medical education. An essay may improve oneself in various ways, including free learning, data collection, assessment of current information, improved decision-making, writing, planning, communication, and sharing.

International_Essay_PosterWe believe we have highly talented young physicians who have the potential to become the Jules Vernes of today. We invite you to participate in our essay contest and to contribute to the future of neurology.

The subject of the contest is Neurology in Year 2050. The purpose is to raise awareness among medical students in order to attract attention to the vision of neurology in their curriculum, to raise awareness about neurology and neurological disorders in the public through the eyes of medical students, and to encourage students to study neurology as a specialty.

Our target contestants are medical students in Turkey and other countries (all World Federation of Neurology member countries).

To submit an application and access the rules, visit the World Federation of Neurology essay contest website or the Turkish Neurological Society essay contest website.

The application period is June 15 to Oct. 15, 2016. Winners will be announced Nov. 15, 2016. We look forward to receiving your creative essays. Good luck.

Serefnur Öztürk, MD, is president of Turkish Neurological Society, on the faculty of the department of neurology at Selcuk University, Konya, Turkey, and on staff at the Turkish Neurological Society.

HISTORY COLUMN
Introducing the Ophthalmoscope to British Neurologists

by Catherine E. Storey, MBBS, FRACP, MSc

Clockwise from left: May's ophthalmoscope (1935), Heine's ophthalmoscope (1995), and Morton's ophthalmoscope (1910).

Clockwise from left: May’s ophthalmoscope (1935), Heine’s ophthalmoscope (1995), and Morton’s ophthalmoscope (1910).

Hermann von Helmholtz (1821-1924), a German scientist, published the description of the first clinical ophthalmoscope in 1851. He called his invention the Augenspiegel or eye-mirror. Within a few years of his report, the ophthalmoscope became universally popular with eye specialists, many of whom attempted to make modifications and adaptations to improve the optics, illumination, and retinal image.

In Britain, one of the leading ophthalmologists of the day, Thomas Wharton Jones (1808-1891) briefly mentioned the Helmholtz ophthalmoscope in the second edition of his text, The Principles and Practice of Ophthalmic Medicine and Surgery, published in 1855. However, some 10 years later, in the third edition (1865), not only did he devote a chapter to the subject, with comprehensive illustrations to instruct on the use of the ophthalmoscope, but he hinted at the possibility of a British forerunner of the invention.

From top: Morton's ophthalmoscope (1910), May's ophthalmoscope (1935), and Heine's ophthalmoscope (1995).

From top: Morton’s ophthalmoscope (1910), May’s ophthalmoscope (1935), and Heine’s ophthalmoscope (1995).

Jones explained that he was shown a model “contrived for looking into the interior of the eye” by Charles Babbage (1791-1871), the English mathematician: “Here I ought not to omit stating that in the spring of the year 1847, Mr. Babbage showed me the model of an instrument which he had contrived for looking into the interior of the eye. The reflector was a small, plain glass mirror, with a part of the silvering rubbed off to look through.”

However, he failed to see any benefit, told Babbage that it was worthless, and, as a consequence, Babbage abandoned his prototype!

British ophthalmic surgeons embraced this new technology. A report from the Royal Ophthalmic Hospital published in The Lancet in 1855 described the contemporary position.

“It may appear at first to be a mere plaything, as did the stethoscope or microscope; but it is destined to play a very important part in the interpretation of eye cases before long. This very useful instrument continues to be more and more used and valued every year.”

If the British ophthalmologists were quick to employ the ophthalmoscope, how then was this device introduced to British (and Commonwealth) neurologists?

Three British neurologists promoted the value of the ophthalmoscope in clinical neurology:

Thomas Clifford Allbutt (1836-1925)
Thomas Clifford Allbutt (later Sir Thomas) was a well-known physician at the Leeds General Infirmary from 1861 to 1889. Although he published case reports on the value of the ophthalmoscope in medical practice from 1868, it was his text, On the Use of the Ophthalmoscope in Diseases of the Nervous System and of the Kidneys; Also in Certain Other General Disorders, published in 1871, that influenced other physicians, including William Richard Gowers. Allbutt commented in his 1868 text that “… the number of physicians, who are working with the ophthalmoscope in England may, I believe, be counted upon the fingers of one hand … it would seem that the same reproach cannot attach to our Continental neighbours … .”

John Hughlings Jackson (1835-1911)
Jackson joined the staff of the Royal London Ophthalmic Hospital (Moorfields) as early as 1859 and to the National Hospital for the Paralyzed and Epileptic, Queen Square in 1862. Jackson later reported that he learned to use the ophthalmoscope at Moorfields in 1863 and from that time urged his readers to be aware of the benefits of the instrument. He frequently claimed that it was impossible to investigate neurological disorders without using the ophthalmoscope. He drew attention to cases of optic neuritis (as papilledema was then known) when florid signs could be seen even in the presence of preserved visual acuity. He was adamant that the ophthalmic examination should never be omitted with “severe and continued headache.” Although Jackson is well known for many different facets of neurological practice, between 1877 and 1889, he devoted many of his invited lectures to medical ophthalmoscopy.

William Richard Gowers (1845-1915)
Gowers (later Sir William) was appointed to the National Hospital for the Paralyzed and Epileptic, Queen Square in 1870, and a contemporary of Jackson. He too published numerous individual case reports in which the use of the ophthalmoscope was paramount. Although best known for his Manuals, published in 1886 and 1888, Gowers’ text on medical ophthalmoscopy, A Manual and Atlas of Medical Ophthalmoscopy published in 1879, was perhaps equally influential in its time. Gowers, with his superb clinical acumen and extraordinary artistic ability, delivered a valuable resource for neurologists and other physicians, and in doing so promoted the incorporation of the ophthalmoscope into a routine neurological examination.

Commonly Used Ophthalmoscopes
Andrew Stanford Morton (1848-1927), an ophthalmologist at University College, London, and Moorfields Eye Hospital, published a small pamphlet in 1884 in which he introduced his new “improved student’s ophthalmoscope.” Although his device still relied on an external source of illumination, this small compact model now incorporated a series of 29 separate lenses propelled by a driving wheel. This mechanism provided a much improved acuity and ease of use. The Morton ophthalmoscope became one of the most popular models for the next 40 years.

Charles May (1861-1943), an ophthalmologist working in New York, is best known for the Manual of Diseases of the Eye, published in 1900. The book became a classic text and atlas of ophthalmology, going through 23 editions between 1900 and 1963. The May ophthalmoscope, with an internal illumination source, similarly went through many editions and proved to be popular in routine practice.

Catherine E. Storey, MBBS, FRACP, MSc, is a clinical associate professor at the University of Sydney School of Medicine, Australia. Peter J. Koehler, MD, PhD, FAAN, is the editor of this history column. He is neurologist at Zuyderland Medical Centre, Heerlen, the Netherlands. Visit his website at http://www.neurohistory.nl/.

Editor’s Update and Selected Articles From the Journal of the Neurological Sciences

By John D. England, MD

John D. England

John D. England, MD

As with any journal, changes in the editorial staff are necessary from time to time. Two of our associate editors, Nicolas Bazan, MD, PhD, and Bruce Ovbiagele, MD, MSc, have stepped down. Both of them did an outstanding job in ensuring the continuing success of our journal. Dr. Bazan will continue as an Editorial Board member, and he will continue his role as the director of the Neuroscience Center at Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center (LSUHSC) School of Medicine in New Orleans. He will remain as an indispensable resource for basic neuroscience. Dr. Ovbiagele is now the editor-in-chief of our sister publication, eNeurologicalSci (eNS), and is the new chair of the Program Committee for the International Stroke Conference. He also continues to serve as chair of the department of neurology at the Medical University of South Carolina.

I am delighted to welcome two outstanding individuals as our new associate editors. I am confident that both of them will do an outstanding job to improve our journal and enhance the review process.

JNSJanHamilton Farris, PhD, is the new associate editor for basic science. He is associate professor of neuroscience, cell biology and anatomy, and otolaryngology at the LSUHSC School of Medicine in New Orleans, Louisiana. He has over 24 years of experience in the fields of neuroscience, bioacoustics, and animal behavior. He has active research projects examining the evolution, ecology, and neurophysiology of sensory processing. He is the director of the medical neuroscience course, the co-director of the neuroscience PhD program, and assistant dean of student affairs for the LSUHSC School of Medicine.

Salvador Cruz-Flores, MD, is the new associate editor for outcomes research and cerebrovascular disease. He is professor and chair of neurology at Texas Tech University in El Paso. He is an internationally renowned expert in cerebrovascular disease and critical care neurology. He also holds a degree in public health (epidemiology). He has been a leader on several guidelines on cerebrovascular disease and is chair of the LATAM initiative, which was launched under the auspices of the World Stroke Organization and the American Stroke Association. He helped organize the Declaration of Santiago (La Carta de Santiago), which comprises several Latin American stroke societies.

In our ongoing attempt to inform readers of important and interesting new developments in the journal, the editorial staff has selected two new free-access articles. Both of these deal with potential adverse effects of using recreational marijuana. Marijuana is the most frequently used illicit drug, and many individuals believe that it has few adverse effects. In the United States, 25 states and the District of Columbia have laws legalizing marijuana in some form, and four states and the District of Columbia have legalized marijuana for recreational use. Most likely, this trend for legalization will spread. Such initiatives have contributed to the belief of many individuals that marijuana is a safe recreational medication. As such, all of us need to be reminded that there are potential serious adverse outcomes associated with marijuana use.

1) Kavelin Rumalla, Adithi Reddy, and Manoj Mittal investigated the relationship between marijuana use and hospitalization for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) by performing a retrospective cohort analysis of the U.S. Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) from 2004 to 2011. The incidence of AIS hospitalization in marijuana users and non-marijuana users was compared. After adjustment for other confounders, they found that marijuana use was independently associated with a 17 percent increased likelihood of hospitalization for AIS. Not surprisingly, the likelihood of AIS hospitalization increased when marijuana use was combined with tobacco (31 percent) or cocaine (42 percent). The authors bring up the question of whether all patients with AIS should be queried regarding marijuana use.Recreational Marijuana Use and Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Population-Based Analysis of Hospitalized Patients in the United States, J. Neurol. Sci. 364 (2016) 191-196. http://www.jns-journal.com/article/S0022-510X(16)30066-1/fulltext.

2) David Rose from the University of South Florida provides an editorial, which summarizes the above article and provides a more general perspective on recreational marijuana use and its potential adverse effects. He also adds enlightening commentary on the potential adverse effects of synthetic marijuana (eg, “Spice” or “K2”), which may be more dangerous than regular recreational marijuana.
What a Downer: The Dark Side of Cannabis, J. Neurol. Sci. 364 (2016) 189-190. http://www.jns-journal.com/article/S0022-510X(16)30147-2/fulltext.

John D. England, MD, is editor-in-chief of the Journal of the Neurological Sciences.