Progressive multiple sclerosis poses a considerable challenge in the evaluation of disease progression and treatment response owing to its multifaceted pathophysiology. Traditional clinical measures such as the Expanded Disability Status Scale are limited in capturing the full scope of disease and treatment effects. Advanced imaging techniques, including MRI and PET scans, have emerged as valuable tools for the assessment of neurodegenerative processes, including the respective role of adaptive and innate immunity, detailed insights into brain and spinal cord atrophy, lesion dynamics and grey matter damage. The potential of cerebrospinal fluid and blood biomarkers is increasingly recognized, with neurofilament light chain levels being a notable indicator of neuro-axonal damage. Moreover, patient-reported outcomes are crucial for reflecting the subjective experience of disease progression and treatment efficacy, covering aspects such as fatigue, cognitive function and overall quality of life. The future incorporation of digital technologies and wearable devices in research and clinical practice promises to enhance our understanding of functional impairments and disease progression. This Review offers a comprehensive examination of these diverse evaluation tools, highlighting their combined use in accurately assessing disease progression and treatment efficacy in progressive multiple sclerosis, thereby guiding more effective therapeutic strategies.

• MeSH
• Biomarkers blood   MeSH
• Multiple Sclerosis, Chronic Progressive * therapy   diagnostic imaging   MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Magnetic Resonance Imaging methods   MeSH
• Disease Progression * MeSH
• Treatment Outcome MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Review MeSH
• Names of Substances
• Biomarkers MeSH

BACKGROUND: Although Fingolimod (FGD) and Natalizumab (NTZ) appear to be effective in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), they have never been directly compared in a randomized clinical trial (RCT). METHODS AND FINDINGS: We evaluated the comparative efficacy of FGD vs. NTZ using a meta-analytical approach. Data from placebo-controlled RCTs was used for indirect comparisons and observational data was utilized for head-to-head comparisons. We identified 3 RCTs (2498 patients) and 5 observational studies (2576 patients). NTZ was associated with a greater reduction in the 2-year annualized relapse rate (ARR; SMDindirect = -0.24;95% CI: from -0.44 to -0.04; p = 0.005) and with the probability of no disease activity at 2 years (ORindirect:1.82, 95% CI: from 1.05 to 3.15) compared to FGD, while no differences between the two therapies were found in the proportion of patients who remained relapse-free (ORindirect = 1.20;95% CI: from 0.84 to 1.71) and those with disability progression (ORindirect = 0.76;95% CI: from 0.48 to 1.21) at 2 years. In the analysis of observational data, we found no significant differences between NTZ and FGD in the 2-year ARR (SMD = -0.05; 95% CI: from -0.26 to 0.16), and 2-year disability progression (OR:1.08;95% CI: from 0.77 to 1.52). However, NTZ-treated patients were more likely to remain relapse-free at 2-years compared to FGD (OR: 2.19;95% CI: from 1.15 to 4.18; p = z0.020). CONCLUSIONS: Indirect analyses of RCT data and head-to-head comparisons of observational findings indicate that NTZ may be more effective than FGD in terms of disease activity reduction in patients with RRMS. However, head-to-head RCTs are required to independently confirm this preliminary observation.

• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH