Neurol. praxi. 2019;20(4):282-286 | DOI: 10.36290/neu.2019.129

Evaluation of multiple sclerosis treatment efficacy in 21st century

MUDr. Eva Krasulová, Ph.D.
Neurologická klinika a Centrum klinických neurověd
Univerzita Karlova v Praze, 1. lékařská fakulta a Všeobecná fakultní nemocnice v Praze

Multiple sclerosis (MS) represents severe autoimmune disease of the central nervous system, typically afflicting young people in productive
age. Currently a large portfolio of modern drugs is available. These drugs are fundamentally modifying disease course, however we
are still searching for optimal treatment effectivity and prognostic markers in an individual patient. The article summarizes all markers
used in evaluation of treatment response and disease progression including composite marker NEDA (No Evidence of Disease Activity).
NEDA corresponds to absence of clinical as well as radiological disease activity and is one of the major goals in current MS treatment.

Keywords: multiple sclerosis, prognosis, treatment efficacy, NEDA

Published: September 1, 2019  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Krasulová E. Evaluation of multiple sclerosis treatment efficacy in 21st century. Neurol. praxi. 2019;20(4):282-286. doi: 10.36290/neu.2019.129.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Barkhof F. The clinico-radiological paradox in multiple sclerosis revisited. Curr Opin Neurol 2002; 15: 239-245. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    2. Cree BA, Gourraud PA, Oksenberg JR, Bevan C, Crabtree-Hartman E, Gelfand JM, Goodin DS, Graves J, Green AJ, Mowry E, Okuda DT, Pelletier D, von Büdingen HC, Zamvil SS, Agrawal A, Caillier S, Ciocca C, Gomez R, Kanner R, Lincoln R, Lizee A, Qualley P, Santaniello A, Suleiman L, Bucci M, Panara V, Papinutto N, Stern WA, Zhu AH, Cutter GR, Baranzini S, Henry RG, Hauser SL. Long-term evolution of multiple sclerosis disability in the treatment era. Ann Neurol 2016; 80: 499-510. Go to original source...
    3. De Stefano N, Stromillo ML, Giorgio A, Bartolozzi ML, Battaglini M, Baldini M, Portaccio E, Amato MP, Sormani MP. Establishing pathological cut-offs of brain atrophy rates in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2016; 87: 93-99. Go to original source...
    4. Dusankova JB, Kalincik T, Havrdova E, Benedict RH. Cross cultural validation of the Minimal Assessment of Cognitive Function in Multiple Sclerosis (MACFIMS) and the Brief International Cognitive Assessment for Multiple Sclerosis (BICAMS). Clin Neuropsychol 2012; 26: 1186-1200. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    5. Giovannoni G, Tomic D, Bright JR, Havrdová E. "No evident disease activity": The use of combined assessments in the management of patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2017; 23: 1179-1187. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    6. Havrdova E, Galetta S, Hutchinson M, Stefoski D, Bates D, Polman CH, O'Connor PW, Giovannoni G, Phillips JT, Lublin FD, Pace A, Kim R, Hyde R. Effect of natalizumab on clinical and radiological disease activity in multiple sclerosis: a retrospective analysis of the Natalizumab Safety and Efficacy in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis (AFFIRM) study. Lancet Neurol 2009; 8: 254-260. Go to original source...
    7. Hegen H, Bsteh G, Berger T. 'No evidence of disease activity' - is it an appropriate surrogate in multiple sclerosis? Eur J Neurol 2018; 25: 1107-e101. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    8. Horáková D. Registr pacientů s roztroušenou sklerózou ReMuS - kam jsme se posunuli za pět let existence registru. Neurol praxi 2018; 19: 467-472.
    9. Kuhle J, Kropshofer H, Haering DA, Kundu U, Meinert R, Barro C, Dahlke F, Tomic D, Leppert D, Kappos L. Blood neurofilament light chain as a biomarker of MS disease activity and treatment response. Neurology 2019; 92: e1007-e1015. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    10. Kurtzke JF. Rating neurological impairment in multiple sclerosis: an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Neurology 1983; 33: 1444-1452. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    11. Rotstein DL, Healy BC, Malik MT, Chitnis T, Weiner HL. Evaluation of no evidence of disease activity in a 7-year longitudinal multiple sclerosis cohort. JAMA Neurol 2015; 72: 152-158. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    12. Scalfari A, Neuhaus A, Degenhardt A, Rice GP, Muraro PA, Daumer M, Ebers GC. The natural history of multiple sclerosis: a geographically based study 10: relapses and long-term disability. Brain 2010; 133: 1914-1929. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    13. Sormani MP, Bruzzi P, Beckmann K, Wagner K, Miller DH, Kappos L, Filippi M; European Study Group on Interferon Beta-1b in Secondary Progressive MS. MRI metrics as surrogate endpoints for EDSS progression in SPMS patients treated with IFN beta-1b. Neurology 2003; 60: 1462-1466. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    14. Sormani MP, Bruzzi P, Comi G, Filippi M. MRI metrics as surrogate markers for clinical relapse rate in relapsing-remitting MS patients. Neurology 2002; 58: 417-421. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    15. Traboulsee A, Li D. Addressing Concerns Regarding the Use of Gadolinium in a Standardized MRI Protocol for the Diagnosis and Follow-Up of Multiple Sclerosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016; 37: E82-E83. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    16. Vaneckova M, Kalincik T, Krasensky J, Horakova D, Havrdova E, Hrebikova T, Seidl Z. Corpus callosum atrophy-a simple predictor of multiple sclerosis progression: a longitudinal 9-year study. Eur Neurol 2012; 68: 23-27. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    17. Vaněčková M, Seidl Z. Roztroušená skleróza a onemocnění bílé hmoty v MR zobrazení. Praha: Mladá Fronta 2018; 109.

    Return to the content


    Neurology for Practice

    Madam, Sir,
    please be aware that the website on which you intend to enter, not the general public because it contains technical information about medicines, including advertisements relating to medicinal products. This information and communication professionals are solely under §2 of the Act n.40/1995 Coll. Is active persons authorized to prescribe or supply (hereinafter expert).
    Take note that if you are not an expert, you run the risk of danger to their health or the health of other persons, if you the obtained information improperly understood or interpreted, and especially advertising which may be part of this site, or whether you used it for self-diagnosis or medical treatment, whether in relation to each other in person or in relation to others.

    I declare:

    1. that I have met the above instruction
    2. I'm an expert within the meaning of the Act n.40/1995 Coll. the regulation of advertising, as amended, and I am aware of the risks that would be a person other than the expert input to these sites exhibited

    No
    Yes

    If your statement is not true, please be aware
    that brings the risk of danger to their health or the health of others.