Search

Altres ajuts: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The workshop on which the manuscript is based was supported in its entirety by the European Committee on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ECTRIMS). The natural history of multiple sclerosis (MS) is highly heterogeneous. A subgroup of patients has what might be termed aggressive MS. These patients may have frequent, severe relapses with incomplete recovery and are at risk of developing greater and permanent disability at the earlier stages of the disease. Their therapeutic window of opportunity may be narrow, and while it is generally considered that they will benefit from starting early with a highly efficacious treatment, a unified definition of aggressive MS does not exist and data on its treatment are largely lacking. Based on discussions at an international focused workshop sponsored by the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ECTRIMS), we review our current knowledge about treatment of individuals with aggressive MS. We analyse the available evidence, identify gaps in knowledge and suggest future research needed to fill those gaps. A companion paper details the difficulties in developing a consensus about what defines aggressive MS.

Altres ajuts: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article: The workshop on which the manuscript is based was supported in its entirety by the European Committee on Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ECTRIMS). While the major phenotypes of multiple sclerosis (MS) and relapsing-remitting, primary and secondary progressive MS have been well characterized, a subgroup of patients with an active, aggressive disease course and rapid disability accumulation remains difficult to define and there is no consensus about their management and treatment. The current lack of an accepted definition and treatment guidelines for aggressive MS triggered a 2018 focused workshop of the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ECTRIMS) on aggressive MS. The aim of the workshop was to discuss approaches on how to describe and define the disease phenotype and its treatments. Unfortunately, it was not possible to come to consensus on a definition because of unavailable data correlating severe disease with imaging and molecular biomarkers. However, the workshop highlighted the need for future research needed to define this disease subtype while also focusing on its treatment and management. Here, we review previous attempts to define aggressive MS and present characteristics that might, with additional research, eventually help characterize it. A companion paper summarizes data regarding treatment and management.

Open-label extensions [studies SP516 (NCT00501969) and SP715 (NCT00594386)] of the CLEOPATRA-PD and PREFER studies were conducted to evaluate the safety, tolerability and efficacy of the dopaminergic agonist, rotigotine, over several years of follow-up in patients with advanced Parkinson’s disease (PD). Eligible subjects completing the double-blind trials received open-label adjunctive rotigotine (≤16 mg/24 h) for up to 4 and 6 years in Studies SP516 and SP715, respectively. Safety and tolerability were assessed using adverse events, vital signs and laboratory parameters, and efficacy assessed using the unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale (UPDRS). Of the 395 and 258 patients enrolled in the SP516 and SP715 studies, 48 and 45 % completed, respectively. Adverse events were typically dopaminergic effects [e.g., somnolence (18–25 %/patient-year), insomnia (5–7 %/patient-year), dyskinesias (4–8 %/patient-year) and hallucinations (4–8 %/patient-year)], or related to the transdermal application of a patch (application site reactions: 14–15 %/patient-year). There were no clinically relevant changes in vital signs or laboratory parameters in either study. Mean UPDRS part II (activities of daily living) and part III (motor function) total scores improved from double-blind baseline during dose titration, then gradually declined over the maintenance period. In study SP516, mean UPDRS part II and III total scores were 0.8 points above and 2.8 points below double-blind baseline, respectively, at end of treatment. In study SP715, mean UPDRS part II and III total scores were 4.1 points above and 0.2 points below baseline, respectively, at end of treatment. In these open-label studies, adjunctive rotigotine was efficacious with an acceptable safety and tolerability profile in patients with advanced PD for up to 6 years.