Application of definitions for conversion to secondary progressive MS in a Danish nationwide population

Accuracy of MSBase criteria to diagnose secondary progressive multiple sclerosis in large German real-world patient cohort

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Accurate diagnosis of secondary progression in multiple sclerosis (MS) remains a challenge since standardized criteria are missing. In 2016, the MSBase registry presented an algorithm that enabled the diagnosis of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) more than three years earlier compared to diagnosis by neurologists. This work aimed to test whether this approach is equally effective in a real-world cohort of MS patients.

METHODS

This longitudinal retrospective study analyzed clinical data of outpatients with MS recorded until October 2020 in the NeuroTransData registry, a Germany-wide network of 153 certified neurologists. Patient data had been captured in time during clinical visits employing a defined standardized clinical data set in the webbased NeuroTransData patient management platform DESTINY®. The time between the diagnosis of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) to SPMS onset was compared with one determined using MSBase criteria (MSBC). Group 1 consisted of patients diagnosed with SPMS during the observation period, whereas group 2 included RRMS patients who did not convert to SPMS during the observation period.

RESULTS

Of 21,281 patients with MS included in our registry, 194 and 9506 patients were allocated to groups 1 and 2, respectively. 10.3% of patients with RRMS were diagnosed with SPMS simultaneously, whereas 60.8% were diagnosed with SPMS at least 3 months earlier by treating neurologists compared to the MSBC. In group 1, the MSBC showed a low sensitivity of 32.0% and an accuracy of 61.4% but a high specificity of 89.6%. In group 2, the MSBC identified 7.8% of patients with SPMS at some point during the observation time. Moreover, test-retest variability remains a challenge since 29.4% of patients diagnosed with SPMS by treating physicians did not fulfil the MSBC at a later point in time.

DISCUSSION

These results are inconsistent with earlier SPMS diagnosis using the MSBC compared to clinical diagnosis by treating physicians. Therefore, there remains a need for an operational, structured, and validated approach to SPMS diagnosis.

Clinical risk stratification: Development and validation of the DAAE score, a tool for estimating patient risk of transition to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

Because secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) is associated with worse prognosis, early predictive tools are needed. We aimed to use systematic literature review and advanced methods to create and validate a clinical tool for estimating individual patient risk of transition to SPMS over five years.

METHODS

Data from the Jacobs Multiple Sclerosis Center (JMSC) and the Multiple Sclerosis Center Amsterdam (MSCA) was collected between 1994 and 2022. Participants were relapsing-remitting adult patients at initial evaluation. We created the tool in four stages: (1) identification of candidate predictors from systematic literature review, (2) ordinal cutoff determination, (3) feature selection, (4) feature weighting.

RESULTS

Patients in the development/internal-validation/external-validation datasets respectively (n = 787/n = 522/n = 877) had a median age of 44.1/42.4/36.6 and disease duration of 7.7/6.2/4.4 years. From these, 12.6 %/10.2 %/15.4 % converted to SPMS (median=4.9/5.2/5.0 years). The DAAE Score was named from included predictors: Disease duration, Age at disease onset, Age, EDSS. It ranges from 0 to 12 points, with risk groups of very-low=0-2, low=3-7, medium=8-9, and high≥10. Risk of transition to SPMS increased proportionally across these groups in development (2.7 %/7.4 %/18.8 %/40.2 %), internal-validation (2.9 %/6.8 %/26.8 %/36.5 %), and external-validation (7.5 %/9.6 %/22.4 %/37.5 %).

CONCLUSION

The DAAE Score estimates individual patient risk of transition to SPMS consistently across datasets internationally using clinically-accessible data. With further validation, this tool could be used for clinical risk estimation.

Proportion and characteristics of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis in five European registries using objective classifiers

Background

To assign a course of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (MS) (SPMS) may be difficult and the proportion of persons with SPMS varies between reports. An objective method for disease course classification may give a better estimation of the relative proportions of relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) and SPMS and may identify situations where SPMS is under reported.

Materials and methods

Data were obtained for 61,900 MS patients from MS registries in the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Sweden, and the United Kingdom (UK), including date of birth, sex, SP conversion year, visits with an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score, MS onset and diagnosis date, relapses, and disease-modifying treatment (DMT) use. We included RRMS or SPMS patients with at least one visit between January 2017 and December 2019 if ≥ 18 years of age. We applied three objective methods: A set of SPMS clinical trial inclusion criteria ("EXPAND criteria") modified for a real-world evidence setting, a modified version of the MSBase algorithm, and a decision tree-based algorithm recently published.

Results

The clinically assigned proportion of SPMS varied from 8.7% (Czechia) to 34.3% (UK). Objective classifiers estimated the proportion of SPMS from 15.1% (Germany by the EXPAND criteria) to 58.0% (UK by the decision tree method). Due to different requirements of number of EDSS scores, classifiers varied in the proportion they were able to classify; from 18% (UK by the MSBase algorithm) to 100% (the decision tree algorithm for all registries). Objectively classified SPMS patients were older, converted to SPMS later, had higher EDSS at index date and higher EDSS at conversion. More objectively classified SPMS were on DMTs compared to the clinically assigned.

Conclusion

SPMS appears to be systematically underdiagnosed in MS registries. Reclassified patients were more commonly on DMTs.

Diagnosis and treatment of progressive multiple sclerosis: A position paper

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an unpredictable disease characterised by a highly variable disease onset and clinical course. Three main clinical phenotypes have been described. However, distinguishing between the two progressive forms of MS can be challenging for clinicians. This article examines how the diagnostic definitions of progressive MS impact clinical research, the design of clinical trials and, ultimately, treatment decisions.

METHODS

We carried out an extensive review of the literature highlighting differences in the definition of progressive forms of MS, and the importance of assessing the extent of the ongoing inflammatory component in MS when making treatment decisions.

RESULTS

Inconsistent results in phase III clinical studies of treatments for progressive MS, may be attributable to differences in patient characteristics (e.g., age, clinical and radiological activity at baseline) and endpoint definitions. In both primary and secondary progressive MS, patients who are younger and have more active disease will derive the greatest benefit from the available treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend making treatment decisions based on the individual patient's pattern of disease progression, as well as functional, clinical and imaging parameters, rather than on their clinical phenotype. Because the definition of progressive MS differs across clinical studies, careful selection of eligibility criteria and study endpoints is needed for future studies in patients with progressive MS.

Treatment of Patients with Multiple Sclerosis Transitioning Between Relapsing and Progressive Disease

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic autoimmune demyelinating and neurodegenerative disease of the central nervous system with a wide variety of clinical phenotypes. In spite of the phenotypic classification of MS patients, current data provide evidence that diffuse neuroinflammation and neurodegeneration coexist in all MS forms, the latter gaining increasing clinical relevance in progressive phases. Given that the transition phase of relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) to secondary progressive MS (SPMS) is not well defined, and widely accepted criteria for SPMS are lacking, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) specifically designed for the transition phase have not been conducted. This review summarizes primary and secondary analyses and reports derived from phase III prospective clinical RCTs listed in PubMed of compounds authorised through the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of MS. The best data are available for interferon beta-1a (IFNb-1a) subcutaneous (s.c.), IFNb-1b s.c., mitoxantrone and siponimod, the latter being the most modern compound with likely the best risk-to-effect ratio. Moreover, there is a labels discrepancy for many disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) between the FDA and EMA, which have to be taken into consideration when opting for a specific DMT.

Secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: A national consensus paper on diagnostic criteria

BACKGROUND

In clinical practice, the diagnosis of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) is often delayed, retrospective and non-reproducible, as there are no consensus criteria that define the advent of SPMS. Early identification of SPMS is essential to improve patient care.

METHODS

Eight regional board meetings in France involving 56 multiple sclerosis (MS) experts (neurologists) were convened to discuss diagnostic criteria for SPMS. Subsequently, a national board meeting of 13 neurologists (with an expert representing each geographical region) was held to review points of convergence or divergence between regions and to develop a national consensus document.

RESULTS

Based on the discussions from the regional boards, the MS experts at the national board retained the worsening of the EDSS score, with compatible clinical features, as the only consensus criterion for the diagnosis of SPMS in clinical practice. The patient should have experienced during at least the previous 6 months and in the absence of any relapse, a worsening in the EDSS score of +1.0 point (if the previous EDSS was≤5.0) or of +0.5 point (if the previous EDSS was≥5.5), with a pyramidal or cerebellar functional system score≥2 and without setting a minimum EDSS score; or, in case of a stable EDSS score≥4.0, a worsening of a functional score. This worsening should be confirmed within 3 to 6 months. According to the MS experts, the patient's age, duration of illness and a minimal threshold EDSS score are only risk factors for transition to SPMS. Patient reports during consultation and cognitive impairment are important warning signs, which should trigger an objective assessment with specific tests or closer monitoring. Clinical relapse and/or MRI activities are non-discriminatory for making the diagnosis of SPMS.

CONCLUSIONS

The experts defined precise diagnostic criteria adapted to clinical practice for earlier identification of SPMS, paving the way for better management of this stage of the disease.

Towards a validated definition of the clinical transition to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: A study from the Italian MS Register

BACKGROUND

Definitions for reliable identification of transition from relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS) to secondary progressive (SP)MS in clinical cohorts are not available.

OBJECTIVES

To compare diagnostic performances of two different data-driven SPMS definitions.

METHODS

Data-driven SPMS definitions based on a version of Lorscheider's algorithm (DDA) and on the EXPAND trial inclusion criteria were compared, using the neurologist's definition (ND) as gold standard, in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), Akaike information criterion (AIC) and area under the curve (AUC).

RESULTS

A cohort of 10,240 MS patients with ⩾5 years of follow-up was extracted from the Italian MS Registry; 880 (8.5%) patients were classified as SPMS according to the neurologist definition, 1806 (17.6%) applying the DDA and 1134 (11.0%) with the EXPAND definition. The DDA showed greater discrimination power (AUC: 0.8 vs 0.6) and a higher sensitivity (77.1% vs 38.0%) than the EXPAND definition, with similar specificity (88.0% vs 91.5%). PPV and NPV were higher using the DDA than considering EXPAND definition (37.5% vs 29.5%; 97.6% vs 94.0%).

CONCLUSION

Data-driven definitions demonstrated greater ability to capture SP transition than neurologist's definition and the global accuracy of DDA seems to be higher than the EXPAND definition.

Interrogating large multiple sclerosis registries and databases: what information can be gained?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although substantial progress has been made in understanding the natural history of multiple sclerosis (MS) and the development of new therapies, many questions concerning disease behavior and therapeutics remain to be answered. Data generated from real-world observational studies, based on large MS registries and databases and analyzed with advanced statistical methods, are offering the scientific community answers to some of these questions that are otherwise difficult or impossible to address. This review focuses on observational studies published in the last 2 years designed to compare the effectiveness of escalation vs. induction treatment strategies, to assess the effectiveness of treatment in pediatric-onset and late-onset MS, and to identify the clinical phenotype of secondary progressive (SP)MS.

RECENT FINDINGS

The main findings originating from real-world studies suggest that MS patients who will qualify for high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) should be offered these as early as possible to prevent irreversible accumulation of neurological disability. Especially pediatric patients derive substantial benefits from early treatment. In patients with late-onset MS, sustained exposure to DMTs may result in more favorable outcomes. Data-driven definitions are more accurate in defining transition to SPMS than diagnosis based solely on neurologists' judgment.

SUMMARY

Patients, physicians, industry, and policy-makers have all benefited from real-world evidence based on registry data, in answering questions of diagnostics, choice of treatment, and timing of treatment decisions.