Literature DB >> 10506095

The natural history of multiple sclerosis: a geographically based study. 7. Progressive-relapsing and relapsing-progressive multiple sclerosis: a re-evaluation.

M Kremenchutzky1, D Cottrell, G Rice, W Hader, J Baskerville, W Koopman, G C Ebers.   

Abstract

Classifications of multiple sclerosis subtypes have been largely based on clinical phenomenology. Nevertheless, definitions of relapse, remission and progression have been imprecise. Recently an international consensus group, as part of a reclassification of disease subtypes, recommended dropping the term 'relapsing-progressive' (RP) and retaining the term 'progressive-relapsing' (PR) multiple sclerosis. The term 'RP' multiple sclerosis had been applied when the early course combined both relapses and progression and was believed to identify some patients with a worse than average outcome. The PR group consisted of patients with primary progressive disease who later in their course developed relapses. Since the terminology has been largely arbitrary, we have evaluated the validity of the terms 'RP' and 'PR' multiple sclerosis in the context of long-term outcome within a large population-based cohort of progressive multiple sclerosis patients seen at the London Multiple Sclerosis Clinic (Canada) between 1972 and 1984. Mean follow-up of the entire cohort was 25 years. Designation of RP multiple sclerosis did identify a more rapidly progressive subgroup. To realign these natural history data with consensus recommendations, these patients were reassigned to secondary progressive (SP) or to primary progressive (PP) multiple sclerosis, with progression defined as at least 1 year of progressive deterioration. PP multiple sclerosis patients with relapses after a year were designated as having PR multiple sclerosis. Relapses in primary progressive multiple sclerosis occurred in 27.8% of patients at some point even two to three decades after onset. In general these relapses were mild and remitting, but served to blur the distinction between progressive and relapsing-remitting disease. The long-term outcomes of time to Kurtzke disability scores (DSS) of 3, 6, 8 and 10 were compared among the progressive subtypes. Times to these disability end-points and to death were not different between PR and PP multiple sclerosis. Survival curves for progressive patients have been amended to incorporate the reassignment of PR multiple sclerosis patients into the PP group and the RP multiple sclerosis patients into the PP and SP subgroups. The time to reach DDS 3, 6, 8 and 10 for a population-based cohort of primary and secondary progressive patients resulting from the elimination of the categories of RP multiple sclerosis and PR multiple sclerosis has been established. These results provide justification for retaining only PP and SP multiple sclerosis as the subgroups of progressive disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10506095     DOI: 10.1093/brain/122.10.1941

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain        ISSN: 0006-8950            Impact factor:   13.501


  32 in total

1.  Problems with UK government's risk sharing scheme for assessing drugs for multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Cathie L M Sudlow; Carl E Counsell
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-02-15

2.  Relapses and disability accumulation in progressive multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  M Mateo Paz Soldán; Martina Novotna; Nuhad Abou Zeid; Nilufer Kale; Melih Tutuncu; Daniel J Crusan; Elizabeth J Atkinson; Aksel Siva; B Mark Keegan; Istvan Pirko; Sean J Pittock; Claudia F Lucchinetti; Brian G Weinshenker; Moses Rodriguez; Orhun H Kantarci
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2014-11-14       Impact factor: 9.910

3.  Clinical characteristics of multiple sclerosis in Västerbotten County in northern Sweden.

Authors:  P Sundström; A Svenningsson; L Nyström; L Forsgren
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 10.154

Review 4.  Prognostic factors for multiple sclerosis: the importance of natural history studies.

Authors:  George C Ebers
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 4.849

5.  European validation of a standardized clinical description of multiple sclerosis.

Authors:  Maria Pia Amato; Jerome Grimaud; Iuliana Achiti; Maria Letizia Bartolozzi; Patrice Adeleine; Hans-Peter Hartung; Ludwig Kappos; Alan Thompson; Maria Trojano; Sandra Vukusic; Christian Confavreux
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.849

Review 6.  Clinical prognostic factors in multiple sclerosis: a natural history review.

Authors:  Alexandra Degenhardt; Sreeram V Ramagopalan; Antonio Scalfari; George C Ebers
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 42.937

7.  Multiple sclerosis in Finland: incidence trends and differences in relapsing remitting and primary progressive disease courses.

Authors:  M-L Sumelahti; P J Tienari; M Hakama; J Wikström
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 10.154

8.  Multiple sclerosis with a progressive course from onset in Lorraine-Eastern France.

Authors:  M Debouverie; S Louis; S Pittion-Vouyovitch; T Roederer; H Vespignani
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2007-06-25       Impact factor: 4.849

9.  The natural history of multiple sclerosis: a geographically based study 10: relapses and long-term disability.

Authors:  Antonio Scalfari; Anneke Neuhaus; Alexandra Degenhardt; George P Rice; Paolo A Muraro; Martin Daumer; George C Ebers
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2010-06-09       Impact factor: 13.501

10.  Estimating Time to Event From Longitudinal Categorical Data: An Analysis of Multiple Sclerosis Progression.

Authors:  Micha Mandel; Susan A Gauthier; Charles R G Guttmann; Howard L Weiner; Rebecca A Betensky
Journal:  J Am Stat Assoc       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 5.033

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.