OBJECTIVES: Disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are applied to delay or prevent disease progression in multiple sclerosis (MS). While this has mostly been proven for physical symptoms, available studies regarding long-term effects of DMTs on cognitive functions are rare and sometimes inconsistent due to methodological shortcomings. Particularly in the case of fingolimod, comprehensive data on cognitive functions are not yet available. Therefore, we set out to reliably assess cognitive functions in patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) treated with DMTs over 1 year. METHODS: Cognitive functions were assessed with eight tests at three timepoints: baseline, 6-month follow up and 12-month follow up. First, we investigated whether the stability of cognitive functions (i.e. not falling below the 5% cut-off in more than one test) over 1 year in RRMS patients (n = 41) corresponds to the stability in healthy individuals (n = 40) of a previous study. Second, we compared the percentage of declined and improved patients in the different tests. Third, we compared patients treated with fingolimod (n = 22) with patients treated with natalizumab (n = 11) with regard to cognitive stability. Fourth, based on the patient data, the Reliable Change Index was applied to compute cut-offs for reliable cognitive change. RESULTS: Approximately 75% of RRMS patients treated with DMTs remained stable over the course of 1 year. The Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT) and the Spatial Recall Test (SPART), produced improvements in 12.5% and 30.6%, respectively, probably due to practice effects. Patients treated with fingolimod did not differ from patients treated with natalizumab with regard to cognitive stability. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive functions remain relatively stable under DMT treatment over 1 year, irrespective of the type of medication. Furthermore, the tests PASAT and SPART should be interpreted cautiously in studies examining performance changes over time. The provided RCI norms may help clinicians to determine whether a difference in two measurements observed in a RRMS patient is reliable.
OBJECTIVES: Disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are applied to delay or prevent disease progression in multiple sclerosis (MS). While this has mostly been proven for physical symptoms, available studies regarding long-term effects of DMTs on cognitive functions are rare and sometimes inconsistent due to methodological shortcomings. Particularly in the case of fingolimod, comprehensive data on cognitive functions are not yet available. Therefore, we set out to reliably assess cognitive functions in patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) treated with DMTs over 1 year. METHODS: Cognitive functions were assessed with eight tests at three timepoints: baseline, 6-month follow up and 12-month follow up. First, we investigated whether the stability of cognitive functions (i.e. not falling below the 5% cut-off in more than one test) over 1 year in RRMS patients (n = 41) corresponds to the stability in healthy individuals (n = 40) of a previous study. Second, we compared the percentage of declined and improved patients in the different tests. Third, we compared patients treated with fingolimod (n = 22) with patients treated with natalizumab (n = 11) with regard to cognitive stability. Fourth, based on the patient data, the Reliable Change Index was applied to compute cut-offs for reliable cognitive change. RESULTS: Approximately 75% of RRMS patients treated with DMTs remained stable over the course of 1 year. The Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT) and the Spatial Recall Test (SPART), produced improvements in 12.5% and 30.6%, respectively, probably due to practice effects. Patients treated with fingolimod did not differ from patients treated with natalizumab with regard to cognitive stability. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive functions remain relatively stable under DMT treatment over 1 year, irrespective of the type of medication. Furthermore, the tests PASAT and SPART should be interpreted cautiously in studies examining performance changes over time. The provided RCI norms may help clinicians to determine whether a difference in two measurements observed in a RRMS patient is reliable.
Authors: Peter A Calabresi; Ernst-Wilhelm Radue; Douglas Goodin; Douglas Jeffery; Kottil W Rammohan; Anthony T Reder; Timothy Vollmer; Mark A Agius; Ludwig Kappos; Tracy Stites; Bingbing Li; Linda Cappiello; Philipp von Rosenstiel; Fred D Lublin Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2014-03-28 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: R K Heaton; N Temkin; S Dikmen; N Avitable; M J Taylor; T D Marcotte; I Grant Journal: Arch Clin Neuropsychol Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 2.813
Authors: Ludwig Kappos; Ernst-Wilhelm Radue; Paul O'Connor; Chris Polman; Reinhard Hohlfeld; Peter Calabresi; Krzysztof Selmaj; Catherine Agoropoulou; Malgorzata Leyk; Lixin Zhang-Auberson; Pascale Burtin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-01-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Christine Till; Nicole Racine; David Araujo; Sridar Narayanan; D Louis Collins; Berengere Aubert-Broche; Douglas L Arnold; Brenda Banwell Journal: Neuropsychology Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Francesco Patti; Vincenzo Brescia Morra; Maria Pia Amato; Maria Trojano; Stefano Bastianello; Maria Rosalia Tola; Salvatore Cottone; Andrea Plant; Orietta Picconi Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-08-30 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Dawn W Langdon; Davorka Tomic; Iris-Katharina Penner; Pasquale Calabrese; Gary Cutter; Dieter A Häring; Frank Dahlke; Ludwig Kappos Journal: Eur J Neurol Date: 2021-10-12 Impact factor: 6.288