4.3 Article

Natural history of secondary-progressive multiple sclerosis

Journal

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL
Volume 14, Issue 3, Pages 314-324

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1352458507084264

Keywords

disease progression; multiple sclerosis; natural history; secondary-progressive; survival analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To examine prognosis and risk factors for progression to and from secondary-progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS). Methods Patients with definite relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS), onset before July 1988, attending a British-Columbian MS clinic before July 1998, and at least one Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores were selected from the population-based database. Time to SPMS (from onset and birth) and the subsequent time to EDSS 8 were examined, as were potential risk factors. Results In all, 2484/2837 (87.6%) were relapsing-remitting (RR) at onset, with 1445/2484 (58.2%) reaching SPMS, taking a median 18.9 years (95% CI: 18.2-19.7). Those younger at onset took longer to reach SPMS (P < 0.0005), but did so at a younger age (P < 0.0005). Males reached SPMS more rapidly from onset and at a younger age (P < 0.0005), but were around the same age as females at EDSS 8 (P = 0.975). Characteristics at SPMS onset associated with a longer time from SPMS to EDSS 8 and an older age at EDSS 8 were: longer disease duration (P < 0.02), older age (P < 0.01) and lower EDSS (P < 0.0005). Onset symptoms had little influence on time to SPMS or subsequent progression. Conclusions The RR phase lasted on average almost two decades, being shorter for males and those older at onset of MS. However, neither were necessarily unfavorable predictors as those older at onset were typically older at SPMS and eventually males and females reached EDSS 8 at around the same age. A longer RR phase was a favorable predictor of disease progression in SPMS. Furthermore, reaching SPMS at an older age or lower EDSS did not necessarily confer a worse outcome.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available