Anti-inflammatory disease-modifying treatment and disability progression in primary progressive multiple sclerosis: a cohort study
Language English Country England, Great Britain Media print-electronic
Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
PubMed
30298572
DOI
10.1111/ene.13824
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- Keywords
- clinical outcomes, immunomodulation, multiple sclerosis, observational study, primary progressive,
- MeSH
- Anti-Inflammatory Agents therapeutic use MeSH
- Multiple Sclerosis, Chronic Progressive drug therapy pathology MeSH
- Adult MeSH
- Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized therapeutic use MeSH
- Cohort Studies MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Follow-Up Studies MeSH
- Persons with Disabilities MeSH
- Disability Evaluation MeSH
- Disease Progression MeSH
- Check Tag
- Adult MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Names of Substances
- Anti-Inflammatory Agents MeSH
- Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized MeSH
- ocrelizumab MeSH Browser
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Treatment options in primary progressive multiple sclerosis (PPMS) are scarce and, with the exception of ocrelizumab, anti-inflammatory agents have failed to show efficacy in ameliorating disability progression. The aim of this study was to investigate a potential effect of anti-inflammatory disease-modifying treatment on disability outcomes in PPMS. METHODS: Using MSBase, a large, international, observational database, we identified patients with PPMS who were either never treated or treated with a disease-modifying agent. Propensity score matching was used to select subpopulations with similar baseline characteristics. Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) outcomes were compared with an intention-to-treat and an as-treated approach in paired, pairwise-censored analyses. RESULTS: Of the 1284 included patients, 533 were matched (treated, n = 195; untreated n = 338). Median on-study pairwise-censored follow-up was 3.4 years (quartiles 1.2-5.5). No difference in the hazard of experiencing 3-month confirmed EDSS progression events was observed between the groups [hazard ratio (HR), 1.0; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.6-1.7, P = 0.87]. We did not find significant differences in the hazards of confirmed EDSS improvement (HR, 1.0; 95% CI, 0.6-1.6, P = 0.91) or reaching a confirmed EDSS step ≥7 (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.7-1.6, P = 0.69). CONCLUSION: Our pooled analysis of disease-modifying agents suggests that these therapies have no substantial effect on short- to medium-term disability outcomes in PPMS.
Cliniques Universitaires Saint Luc Brussels Belgium
CORe Department of Medicine University of Melbourne Melbourne VIC Australia
Department of Basic Medical Sciences Neuroscience and Sense Organs University of Bari Bari Italy
Department of Medicine University of Melbourne Melbourne VIC
Department of Neurology Box Hill Hospital Monash University Melbourne VIC
Department of Neurology John Hunter Hospital Newcastle NSW
Department of Neurology Royal Melbourne Hospital Melbourne VIC
Department of Neuroscience Central Clinical School Alfred Hospital Monash University Melbourne VIC
Department of Neuroscience Imaging and Clinical Sciences University G d'Annunzio Chieti Italy
Flinders Medical Centre Flinders University Adelaide SA Australia
Hôpital Notre Dame Montreal Quebec
Hospedale P A Micone Genova Italy
Hospital de Galdakao Usansolo Galdakao Spain
Hospital Germans Trias i Pujol Badalona Spain
Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena Seville Spain
Hôtel Dieu de Lévis Lévis Quebec Canada
Neuro Rive Sud Hôpital Charles LeMoyne Greenfield Park Quebec
Neurology Unit ASUR Marche AV3 Macerata
Nuovo Ospedale Civile S Agostino Estense Modena
Orbis Medical Center Sittard The Netherlands
School of Medicine and Public Health University of Newcastle Newcastle NSW Australia
References provided by Crossref.org