4.4 Article

Oral contraceptives and MS disease activity in a contemporary real-world cohort

期刊

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL
卷 24, 期 2, 页码 227-230

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1352458517692420

关键词

Hormone; estrogen; pill; oral contraceptive; multiple sclerosis

资金

  1. National Multiple Sclerosis Society [RG-4256A4/2]
  2. National Multiple Sclerosis Society (Career Transition Award)
  3. NIH K12 BIRCWH Award

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: There is uncertainty regarding the effect of oral hormonal contraceptives (OC) on multiple sclerosis (MS) course. Objective: To evaluate the hypothesis that OC use is associated with decreased risk of relapses in an observational study of women of childbearing age with new-onset MS starting a first-line injectable disease-modifying therapy (DMT). Methods: From our CLIMB longitudinal observational study, we identified 162 women with MS or CIS with known OC use who initiated injectable DMT within two years of symptom onset, and categorized OC use at DMT onset as past, ever or never. Our primary analysis was comparison of annualized relapse rate from baseline DMT start across the three OC use categories using a negative binomial regression model. Results: In this cohort of 162 women, 81 were treated with interferon therapy and 81 with glatiramer acetate. Mean ages for current-, past-, and never-OC users were 31.4 (n = 46), 40.3 (n = 66), and 37.9 (n = 50) years, respectively (p < 0.05); mean disease duration (1.0 years) and median baseline EDSS (1.0) did not differ between groups. Prior OC users had significantly lower relapse rates than never-users (p = 0.031); the lower annualized relapse rate in current-users relative to never-users was not significant (p = 0.91). Annualized relapse rate was not significantly different across the OC groups (p = 0.057, three-group comparison). Results: These observations provide reassurance for women newly diagnosed that OC use, past or current, does not appear to be associated with greater risk of relapses.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据