4.4 Article

Plasma neurofilament light chain levels in patients with MS switching from injectable therapies to fingolimod

期刊

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL
卷 24, 期 8, 页码 1046-1054

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1352458517715132

关键词

Multiple sclerosis; drug response biomarkers; beta-interferon; glatiramer acetate; fingolimod; neurofilament

资金

  1. Novartis
  2. national program for quality registries in health care
  3. Swedish Research Council
  4. Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Live and Welfare
  5. AFA foundation
  6. Swedish Brain Foundation
  7. Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Neurofilament light chain (NFL) is a cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) marker of neuroaxonal damage in multiple sclerosis (MS). Objective: To determine the correlation of NFL in CSF and serum/plasma, and in plasma after switching from injectable MS therapies to fingolimod. Methods: A first cohort consisted of MS patients (n=39) and neurological disease controls (n=27) where CSF and plasma/serum had been collected for diagnostic purposes. A second cohort (n=243) consisted of patients from a post-marketing study of fingolimod. NFL was determined with Single Molecule Array (Simoa) technology (detection threshold 1.95pg/mL). Results: Mean NFL pg/mL (standard deviation (SD)) was 341 (267) and 1475 (2358) in CSF and 8.2 (3.58) and 17.0 (16.94) in serum from controls and MS, respectively. CSF/serum and plasma/serum levels were highly correlated (n=66, rho=0.672, p<0.0001 and n=16, rho=0.684, p=0.009, respectively). In patients starting fingolimod (n=243), mean NFL pg/mL (SD) in plasma was reduced between baseline (20.4 (10.7)) and at 12months (13.5 (7.3), p<3x10(-6)), and levels remained stable at 24months (13.2 (6.2)). Conclusion: NFL in serum and CSF are highly correlated and plasma NFL levels decrease after switching to highly effective MS therapy. Blood NFL measurement can be considered as a biomarker for MS therapy response.

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