Untreated patients with multiple sclerosis: A study of French expert centers.
multiple sclerosis
progressive
relapsing-remitting
unmet medical needs
untreated
Journal
European journal of neurology
ISSN: 1468-1331
Titre abrégé: Eur J Neurol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9506311
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2021
06 2021
Historique:
revised:
11
02
2021
received:
17
01
2021
accepted:
25
02
2021
pubmed:
3
3
2021
medline:
13
8
2021
entrez:
2
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) have an impact on relapses and disease progression. Nonetheless, many patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) remain untreated. The objectives of the present study were to determine the proportion of untreated patients with MS followed in expert centers in France and to determine the predictive factors of nontreatment. We conducted a retrospective cohort study. Data were extracted from the 38 centers participating in the European Database for Multiple Sclerosis (EDMUS) on December 15, 2018, and patients with MS seen at least once during the study period (from June 15, 2016 to June 14, 2017) were included. Of the 21,189 patients with MS (age 47.1 ± 13.1 years; Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score 3.4 ± 2.4), 6,631 (31.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 30.7-31.9) were not receiving any DMT. Although patients with a relapsing-remitting course (n = 11,693) were the most likely to receive DMT, 14.8% (95% CI 14.2-15.4) were still untreated (6.8% never treated). After multivariate analysis among patients with relapsing-remitting MS, the main factors explaining never having been treated were: not having ≥9 lesions on brain magnetic resonance imaging (odds ratio [OR] 0.52 [95% CI 0.44-0.61]) and lower EDSS score (OR 0.78 [95% CI 0.74-0.82]). Most patients with progressive MS (50.4% for secondary and 64.2% for primary progressive MS) did not receive any DMT during the study period, while 11.6% of patients with secondary and 34.0% of patients with primary progressive MS had never received any DMT. A significant proportion of patients with MS did not receive any DMT, even though such treatments are reimbursed by the healthcare system for French patients. This result highlights the unmet need for current DMTs for a large subgroup of patients with MS.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) have an impact on relapses and disease progression. Nonetheless, many patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) remain untreated. The objectives of the present study were to determine the proportion of untreated patients with MS followed in expert centers in France and to determine the predictive factors of nontreatment.
METHODS
We conducted a retrospective cohort study. Data were extracted from the 38 centers participating in the European Database for Multiple Sclerosis (EDMUS) on December 15, 2018, and patients with MS seen at least once during the study period (from June 15, 2016 to June 14, 2017) were included.
RESULTS
Of the 21,189 patients with MS (age 47.1 ± 13.1 years; Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score 3.4 ± 2.4), 6,631 (31.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 30.7-31.9) were not receiving any DMT. Although patients with a relapsing-remitting course (n = 11,693) were the most likely to receive DMT, 14.8% (95% CI 14.2-15.4) were still untreated (6.8% never treated). After multivariate analysis among patients with relapsing-remitting MS, the main factors explaining never having been treated were: not having ≥9 lesions on brain magnetic resonance imaging (odds ratio [OR] 0.52 [95% CI 0.44-0.61]) and lower EDSS score (OR 0.78 [95% CI 0.74-0.82]). Most patients with progressive MS (50.4% for secondary and 64.2% for primary progressive MS) did not receive any DMT during the study period, while 11.6% of patients with secondary and 34.0% of patients with primary progressive MS had never received any DMT.
CONCLUSION
A significant proportion of patients with MS did not receive any DMT, even though such treatments are reimbursed by the healthcare system for French patients. This result highlights the unmet need for current DMTs for a large subgroup of patients with MS.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2026-2036Informations de copyright
© 2021 European Academy of Neurology.
Références
Brown JWL, Coles A, Horakova D, et al. Association of initial disease-modifying therapy with later conversion to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. JAMA. 2019;321(2):175-187. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.20588
Harding K, Williams O, Willis M, et al. Clinical outcomes of escalation vs early intensive disease-modifying therapy in patients with multiple sclerosis. JAMA Neurol. 2019;76(5):536-541. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2018.4905
Ontaneda D, Tallantyre E, Kalincik T, Planchon SM, Evangelou N. Early highly effective versus escalation treatment approaches in relapsing multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18(10):973-980. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30151-6
Montalban X, Gold R, Thompson AJ, et al. ECTRIMS/EAN Guideline on the pharmacological treatment of people with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Houndmills Basingstoke Engl. 2018;24(2):96-120. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458517751049
Rae-Grant A, Day GS, Marrie RA, et al. Comprehensive systematic review summary: disease-modifying therapies for adults with multiple sclerosis: report of the guideline development, dissemination, and implementation subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology. 2018;90(17):789-800. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000005345
Nørgaard M, Foch C, Magyari M, et al. Untreated Patients with Multiple Sclerosis: Prevalence and Characteristics in Denmark and in the United States (P4.2-060). Neurology. 2019;92(15 Supplement):P4.2-060.
Simacek KF, Ko JJ, Moreton D, Varga S, Johnson K, Katic BJ. The impact of disease-modifying therapy access barriers on people with multiple sclerosis: mixed-methods study. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20(10):e11168. https://doi.org/10.2196/11168
Hartung DM. Economics and cost-effectiveness of multiple sclerosis therapies in the USA. Neurother J Am Soc Exp Neurother. 2017;14(4):1018-1026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13311-017-0566-3
Vukusic S, Casey R, Rollot F, et al. Observatoire Français de la Sclérose en Plaques (OFSEP): a unique multimodal nationwide MS registry in France. Mult Scler Houndmills Basingstoke Engl. 2020;26(1):118-122. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458518815602
Confavreux C, Compston DA, Hommes OR, McDonald WI, Thompson AJ. EDMUS, a European database for multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1992;55(8):671-676.
Bender R, Lange S. Adjusting for multiple testing-when and how? J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54(4):343-349. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0895-4356(00)00314-0
Feise RJ. Do multiple outcome measures require p-value adjustment? BMC Med Res Methodol. 2002;2:8.
Krzywinski M, Altman N. Classification and regression trees. Nat Methods. 2017;14(8):757-758. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.4370
Kappos L, Freedman MS, Polman CH, et al. Effect of early versus delayed interferon beta-1b treatment on disability after a first clinical event suggestive of multiple sclerosis: a 3-year follow-up analysis of the BENEFIT study. Lancet Lond Engl. 2007;370(9585):389-397. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61194-5
Leray E, Yaouanq J, Le Page E, et al. Evidence for a two-stage disability progression in multiple sclerosis. Brain J Neurol. 2010;133(Pt 7):1900-1913. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awq076
Chalmer TA, Baggesen LM, Nørgaard M, et al. Early versus later treatment start in multiple sclerosis: a register-based cohort study. Eur J Neurol. 2018;25(10):1262-e110. https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.13692
Roux J, Guilleux A, Grimaud O, Leray E. Care-seeking of patients with multiple sclerosis over 2010-2015 in France: a nationwide study using health administrative data. ECTRIMS Online Library. P1000. Published 2018. https://onlinelibrary.ectrims-congress.eu/ectrims/2018/ectrims-2018/228842/jonathan.roux.care-seeking.of.patients.with.multiple.sclerosis.over.2010-2015.html. Accessed May 14, 2020.
Tallantyre EC, Major PC, Atherton MJ, et al. How common is truly benign MS in a UK population? J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2019;90(5):522-528. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2018-318802
Sorensen PS, Sellebjerg F, Hartung H-P, Montalban X, Comi G, Tintoré M. The apparently milder course of multiple sclerosis: changes in the diagnostic criteria, therapy and natural history. Brain J Neurol. 2020;143(9):2637-2652. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awaa145
Condé S, Moisset X, Pereira B, et al. Dimethyl fumarate and teriflunomide for multiple sclerosis in a real-life setting: a French retrospective cohort study. Eur J Neurol. 2018;26(3):460-467. https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.13839
Lahdenperä S, Soilu-Hänninen M, Kuusisto H-M, Atula S, Junnila J, Berglund A. Medication adherence/persistence among patients with active multiple sclerosis in Finland. Acta Neurol Scand. 2020;142(6):605-612. https://doi.org/10.1111/ane.13301
Brownlee WJ, Swanton JK, Altmann DR, Ciccarelli O, Miller DH. Earlier and more frequent diagnosis of multiple sclerosis using the McDonald criteria. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2015;86(5):584-585. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2014-308675
McNicholas N, Lockhart A, Yap SM, et al. New versus old: implications of evolving diagnostic criteria for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Houndmills Basingstoke Engl. 2019;25(6):867-870. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458518770088
Almusalam N, Oh J, Terzaghi M, et al. Comparison of physician therapeutic inertia for management of patients with multiple sclerosis in Canada, Argentina, Chile, and Spain. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(7):e197093. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.7093
Fox RJ, Thompson A, Baker D, et al. Setting a research agenda for progressive multiple sclerosis: the International Collaborative on Progressive MS. Mult Scler Houndmills Basingstoke Engl. 2012;18(11):1534-1540. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458512458169
Shirani A, Okuda DT, Stüve O. Therapeutic advances and future prospects in progressive forms of multiple sclerosis. Neurother J Am Soc Exp Neurother. 2016;13(1):58-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13311-015-0409-z
Montalban X, Hauser SL, Kappos L, et al. Ocrelizumab versus Placebo in Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(3):209-220. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1606468
Kappos L, Bar-Or A, Cree BAC, et al. Siponimod versus placebo in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (EXPAND): a double-blind, randomised, phase 3 study. Lancet Lond Engl. 2018;391(10127):1263-1273. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30475-6
Bonenfant J, Bajeux E, Deburghgraeve V, Le Page E, Edan G, Kerbrat A. Can we stop immunomodulatory treatments in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis? Eur J Neurol. 2017;24(2):237-244. https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.13181
Hua LH, Fan TH, Conway D, Thompson N, Kinzy TG. Discontinuation of disease-modifying therapy in patients with multiple sclerosis over age 60. Mult Scler Houndmills Basingstoke Engl. 2019;25(5):699-708. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458518765656
Michel L, Vukusic S, De Seze J, et al. Mycophenolate mofetil in multiple sclerosis: a multicentre retrospective study on 344 patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2014;85(3):279-283. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2013-305298
Goodkin DE, Rudick RA, VanderBrug Medendorp S, et al. Low-dose (7.5 mg) oral methotrexate reduces the rate of progression in chronic progressive multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol. 1995;37(1):30-40. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.410370108
Thompson AJ, Banwell BL, Barkhof F, et al. Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria. Lancet Neurol. 2018;17(2):162-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30470-2