BACKGROUND: The initial Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC) proposal was a three-part composite of quantitative measures of ambulation, upper extremity function, and cognitive function expressed as a single composite Z-score. However, the clinical meaning of an MSFC Z-score change is not obvious. This study instead used MSFC component data to define a patient-specific disease progression event. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate a new method for analyzing disability progression using the MSFC. METHODS: MSFC progression was defined as worsening from baseline on scores of at least one MSFC component by 20% (MSFC Progression-20) or 15% (MSFC Progression-15), sustained for >or=3 months. Progression rates were determined using data from natalizumab clinical studies (Natalizumab Safety and Efficacy in Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis [AFFIRM] and Safety and Efficacy of Natalizumab in Combination With Interferon Beta-1a in Patients With Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis [SENTINEL]). Correlations between MSFC progression and other clinical measures were determined, as was sensitivity to treatment effects. RESULTS: Substantial numbers of patients met MSFC progression criteria, with MSFC Progression-15 being more sensitive than MSFC Progression-20, at both 1 and 2 years. MSFC Progression-20 and MSFC Progression-15 were related significantly to Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score change, relapse rate, and the SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) score change. MSFC Progression-20 and MSFC Progression-15 at 1 year were predictive of EDSS progression at 2 years. Both MSFC progression end points demonstrated treatment effects in AFFIRM, and results were replicated in SENTINEL. CONCLUSION: MSFC Progression-20 and MSFC Progression-15 are sensitive measures of disability progression; correlate with EDSS, relapse rates, and SF-36 PCS; and are capable of demonstrating therapeutic effects in randomized, controlled clinical studies.
BACKGROUND: The initial Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC) proposal was a three-part composite of quantitative measures of ambulation, upper extremity function, and cognitive function expressed as a single composite Z-score. However, the clinical meaning of an MSFC Z-score change is not obvious. This study instead used MSFC component data to define a patient-specific disease progression event. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate a new method for analyzing disability progression using the MSFC. METHODS: MSFC progression was defined as worsening from baseline on scores of at least one MSFC component by 20% (MSFC Progression-20) or 15% (MSFC Progression-15), sustained for >or=3 months. Progression rates were determined using data from natalizumab clinical studies (Natalizumab Safety and Efficacy in Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis [AFFIRM] and Safety and Efficacy of Natalizumab in Combination With Interferon Beta-1a in Patients With Relapsing Remitting Multiple Sclerosis [SENTINEL]). Correlations between MSFC progression and other clinical measures were determined, as was sensitivity to treatment effects. RESULTS: Substantial numbers of patients met MSFC progression criteria, with MSFC Progression-15 being more sensitive than MSFC Progression-20, at both 1 and 2 years. MSFC Progression-20 and MSFC Progression-15 were related significantly to Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score change, relapse rate, and the SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) score change. MSFC Progression-20 and MSFC Progression-15 at 1 year were predictive of EDSS progression at 2 years. Both MSFC progression end points demonstrated treatment effects in AFFIRM, and results were replicated in SENTINEL. CONCLUSION: MSFC Progression-20 and MSFC Progression-15 are sensitive measures of disability progression; correlate with EDSS, relapse rates, and SF-36 PCS; and are capable of demonstrating therapeutic effects in randomized, controlled clinical studies.
Authors: Núria Sola-Valls; Yolanda Blanco; Maria Sepúlveda; Sara Llufriu; Elena H Martínez-Lapiscina; Delon La Puma; Francesc Graus; Pablo Villoslada; Albert Saiz Journal: J Neurol Date: 2015-05-10 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Jiwon Oh; Min Chen; Kateryna Cybulsky; Suradech Suthiphosuwan; Estelle Seyman; Blake Dewey; Marie Diener-West; Peter van Zijl; Jerry Prince; Daniel S Reich; Peter A Calabresi Journal: Mult Scler Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 6.312
Authors: Santiago Ortiz-Perez; Magí Andorra; Bernardo Sanchez-Dalmau; Rubén Torres-Torres; David Calbet; Erika J Lampert; Salut Alba-Arbalat; Ana M Guerrero-Zamora; Irati Zubizarreta; Nuria Sola-Valls; Sara Llufriu; María Sepúlveda; Albert Saiz; Pablo Villoslada; Elena H Martinez-Lapiscina Journal: J Neurol Date: 2016-02-09 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Reiko E Sakai; Daniel J Feller; Kristin M Galetta; Steven L Galetta; Laura J Balcer Journal: J Neuroophthalmol Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 3.042
Authors: John N Ratchford; Shiv Saidha; Elias S Sotirchos; Jiwon A Oh; Michaela A Seigo; Christopher Eckstein; Mary K Durbin; Jonathan D Oakley; Scott A Meyer; Amy Conger; Teresa C Frohman; Scott D Newsome; Laura J Balcer; Elliot M Frohman; Peter A Calabresi Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-01-01 Impact factor: 9.910