4.7 Article

Treatment response scoring systems to assess long-term prognosis in self-injectable DMTs relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY
Volume 269, Issue 1, Pages 452-459

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-021-10823-z

Keywords

Multiple sclerosis; Treatment response; Scores

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Different treatment response scoring systems have acceptable prognostic value in predicting long-term disability in RRMS patients treated with self-injectable DMTs. Among these systems, the RoS score has the best sensitivity, the MRS score has the best specificity, and the RS score has the best accuracy in predicting long-term disability.
Background and objectives Different treatment response scoring systems in treated MS patients exist. The objective was to assess the long-term predictive value of these systems in RRMS patients treated with self-injectable DMTs. Methods RRMS-treated patients underwent brain MRI before the onset of therapy and 12 months thereafter, and neurological assessments every 6 months. Clinical and demographic characteristics were collected at baseline. After the first year of treatment, several scoring systems [Rio score (RS), modified Rio score (MRS), MAGNIMS score (MS), and ROAD score (RoS)] were calculated. Cox-Regression and survival analyses were performed to identify scores predicting long-term disability. Results We included 319 RRMS patients. Survival analyses showed that patients with RS > 1 and RoS > 3 had a significant risk of reaching an EDSS of 4.0 and 6.0 The score with the best sensitivity (61%) was the RoS, while the MRS showed the best specificity (88%). The RS showed the best positive predictive value (42%) and the best accuracy (81%). Conclusions The combined measures integrated into different scores have an acceptable prognostic value for identifying patients with long-term disability. Thus, these data reinforce the concept of early treatment optimization to minimize the risk of long-term disability.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available