Background

Multiple-Sclerosis-Partners-Advancing-Technology-Health-Solutions (MSPATHS) is an international multicentre digital database that collects clinical information provided directly by patients together with standardized MRI and biomarkers.

Objectives

We identify a Benign multiple sclerosis (BMS) population using Patient-Determined-Disease-Steps (PDDS) as a proxy for EDSS. We describe its physical and non-physical characteristics, and explore the features that best discriminate BMS.

Methods

Cross-sectional study of MSPATHS patients (Feb 2019). In patients with disease duration ≥10 years, BMS was considered when PDDS score<2. We compared BMS and non-BMS in terms of (1)socio-demographic and clinical characteristics, (2)physical status (lower and upper extremity function by Neuro-QoL (LUEF-NQ) and neurological performance tests: walking speed test (WST), manual dexterity test (MDT), processing speed test (PST), contrast sensitivity test (CST)) and non-physical symptoms (anxiety, depression, fatigue, among other NQ domains), and (3)MRI (gadolinium enhancement and new T2 lesions). We built a random forest model to estimate the importance of each variable. Cohen’s d was used for descriptive statistics to categorize differences in small (d=0.2-0.5), medium (d=0.5-0.8) and large (d>0.8). A sensitivity analysis with a 1:1 matched cohort by disease duration was performed.

Results

From 15,257 patients included, 8,349 had a disease duration ≥10 years and 3,852 (46.1%) were classified as BMS. (1)BMS and non-BMS patients were similar for gender, age at disease onset and diagnosis, ethnicity, years of education and smoking status. Compared to non-BMS, BMS had small differences in disease duration (median, 17.2 (12,9-23,4) vs. 20.9 (15,1-28,8 years); d=0.39) but medium/large differences in (2)physical status (LUEF-NQ d=2.06 and 1.53, WST d=0.81, MDT d=0.97, PST d=0.82 and CST d=0.56), as well as, in all non-physical symptoms evaluated by NQ (anxiety d=0.53, depression d=0.69, fatigue d=0.84, stigma d=1.32, cognition d=0.69, social role satisfaction (SRS) d=1.11 and participation (SRP) d=1.19). (3)No differences were found on MRI activity. With 0.88 sensitivity and 0.86 specificity, LUEF-NQ was the most contributing variable for the random forest followed by stigma, SRP, WST, and SRS. The sensitivity analysis showed similar results.

Conclusions

PDDS seems to be a useful disability proxy to identify BMS when using digital technology. LUEF-NQ, stigma, SRP and SRS seem to better discriminate BMS.

Background

Rituximab (RTX) is an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, widely used as an off-label treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS). Despite well-known efficacy and safety, RTX regimen has not yet been standardized.

Objectives

We aimed to compare efficacy and safety data of two different rituximab doses at two large Catalan multiple sclerosis centres.

Methods

A two-centre ambispective study considering all MS patients that have received at least one RTX cycle until February 2020 was conducted. In Barcelona centre (BC), RTX regimen used was 2g intravenously (IV), at least during 3 cycles, followed by 1g every 6 months, while in Girona centre (GC), was 2g IV, at least the first cycle, followed by 500mg every 6 months. Patients were clinically followed every 6 months with lab tests, and brain MRI scans were performed at baseline and yearly thereafter. Baseline clinical, radiological and demographic characteristics were collected. Annual relapse rate (ARR), contrast-enhancing lesions (CELs) and new T2 lesions at one and third year on treatment, as well as EDSS changes at last follow-up visit, were evaluated. Also, the dynamics of CD19% lymphocytes and IG immunoglobulin (IgG) values in serum, as well as the incidence of adverse events (AE) were described.

Results

A total of 303 patients (249 at BC and 54 at GC) were included. Main reason to start RTX was clinical progression plus inflammatory activity (clinical, radiological or both) (45.8% BC vs 79.6% GC). No differences on age at RTX onset, gender and disease duration were found between both centres. At baseline, mean ARR was 0.37±0.6 (BC) vs. 0.33±0.5 (GC); median EDSS was 5.5 (1-9.0) (BC) vs. 6.0 (1-8.0) (GC); and proportion of MRI with CELs was 32.4% (BC) vs. 42.6% (GC). ARR decrease to 0.05 (87.5%, p<0.001) for BC vs. 0.03 (90.3%, p=0.018) for GC at first year, and to 0.08 (88.3%, p=0.016) vs. 0 (100%, p=0.172) at third year. Considering only progressive MS phenotypes, 79.4% vs. 71.4% of patients remained stable or improved the EDSS. Regarding MRI findings, percentages of patients with CELs and new T2 lesions (BC vs GC) were 2.7% vs. 8% and 19% vs. 16% at one year; and 0% vs. 0% and 12% vs. 0% at third year. AE incidence was higher at BC during the first year (14.8% vs 4.1%). No difference in the dynamics of CD19% lymphocytes was found, while IgG values decreased significantly in the BC cohort throughout the first 3 years.

Conclusions

In the treatment of multiple sclerosis, low doses of rituximab seem to offer similar effectiveness with better safety profile than high doses.

Background

As the COVID-19 pandemic amplifies, efforts to minimise the risk on vulnerable people are essential. People with multiple sclerosis (MS) may be a vulnerable group due to the high proportion taking long-term immunosuppressive disease-modifying therapies (DMTs). Studies from Italy and France suggest older age, higher disability and progressive MS are associated with severe COVID-19, yet there remains uncertainty around the influence of DMTs.

Objectives

Given the many approved MS DMTs and the relatively low frequency of COVID-19 in MS patients per country, international data sharing is desirable to examine the impact of DMTs on COVID-19 severity. Here, we present the first results of the COVID-19 in MS global data sharing initiative of the MS International Federation and MS Data Alliance and many other data partners to inform MS clinical management during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Clinician-reported data from 21 countries were aggregated into a dataset of 1540 patients. Characteristics of admission to hospital, admission to intensive care unit (ICU), need for artificial ventilation, and death, were assessed in patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 infection using log-binomial regression. Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) were calculated adjusting for age, sex, MS type, and Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS).

Results

Of 1540 patients, 476 (30.9%) with suspected and 776 (50.4%) with confirmed COVID-19 were included in the analysis. Older age, progressive MS and higher EDSS were associated with higher frequencies of severe outcomes. Anti-CD20 DMTs, ocrelizumab and rituximab, were positively associated with hospital admission (aPRs=1.19 & 1.58), ICU admission (aPRs=3.53 & 4.12), and the need for artificial ventilation (aPRs=3.17 & 7.27) compared to dimethyl fumarate. Higher frequencies of all three outcomes were associated with combined anti-CD20 DMT use compared to all other DMTs (hospitalisation aPR=1.49; ICU aPR=2.55; ventilation aPR=3.05) and compared to natalizumab (hospitalisation aPR=1.99; ICU aPR=2.39; ventilation aPR=2.84). Importantly, associations persisted on restriction to confirmed COVID-19 cases and upon exclusion of each contributing data source in turn. No associations were observed between DMTs and death.

Conclusions

This study used the largest federated international cohort of people with MS and COVID19 currently available. We demonstrate a consistent association of anti-CD20 DMTs with hospitalisation, ICU admission and use of artificial ventilation suggesting their use among MS patients at risk for COVID-19 exposure may be a risk factor for more severe COVID-19 disease. To address study limitations, further research incorporating comorbidities, smoking and body mass index is required. Alternative study designs are needed to address questions on COVID-19 susceptibility among people with MS.

Background

To predict the clinical course of myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein (MOG)-antibody (Ab)-associated disease (MOGAD) is essential to guide treatment recommendations.

Objectives

We aimed to 1) compare clinical features and disease course, and 2) to evaluate the association of MOG-Ab dynamics and relapses, between children and adults with MOGAD.

Methods

Retrospective study evaluating clinical features of 98 children and 266 adults with MOGAD, between January 2014 and September 2019. To analyse relapses over the whole disease course, a Cox regression analysis for recurrent time-to-event data was performed, introducing treatment as time-dependent covariate. To evaluate dynamics, delta mean fluorescence intensity ratio signal (ΔMFIratio) of MOG-Ab was measured in patients with a minimum time elapsed between two samples of 4 months.

Results

Median age at onset of symptoms was 10.9 (interquartile range 5.4-14.3) years in children and 36.2 (27.7-47.6) in adults. Isolated optic neuritis was the most frequent clinical presentation both in children (40.8%) and adults (55.9%), p=0.013, and acute disseminated encephalomyelitis syndrome was more frequent in children (36.7% vs. 5.6%; p<0.001). Compared to adults, children displayed a better recovery (EDSS ≥3.0 at last follow-up reached only by 10 of 97 [10.3%] vs. 66/247 [26.7%], p<0.001).

In the multivariate analysis, adults were at higher risk of relapse than children (Hazard ratio 1.41, 95%Confidence interval [CI] 1.12-1.78; p=0.003). Among the 124 participants evaluated for MOG-Ab dynamics, 36.3% became seronegative, 60.5% decrease and 3.2% increase the ΔMFIratio. At two years, 64.2% (95%CI 40.9-86.5) of non-relapsing children became MOG-Ab negative compared to 14.1% (95%CI 4.7-38.3) of relapsing ones, log-rank p<0.001, with no differences observed between non-relapsing and relapsing adults, log-rank p=0.280.

Conclusions

MOGAD differs in its clinical presentation at onset, showing a progressive shift in the clinical features across age-groups. Compared to children, adults have a higher risk of relapses and a worse functional recovery. Finally, children with monophasic disease became MOG-Ab negative earlier than relapsing ones, but not in adults. Considering these differences, management and treatment guidelines should be considered independently in children and adults.