International consensus diagnostic criteria for neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders.

Neuromyelitis optica (NMO) is an inflammatory CNS syndrome distinct from multiple sclerosis (MS) that is associated with serum aquaporin-4 immunoglobulin G antibodies (AQP4-IgG). Prior NMO diagnostic criteria required optic nerve and spinal cord involvement but more restricted or more extensive CNS involvement may occur. The International Panel for NMO Diagnosis (IPND) was convened to develop revised diagnostic criteria using systematic literature reviews and electronic surveys to facilitate consensus. The new nomenclature defines the unifying term NMO spectrum disorders (NMOSD), which is stratified further by serologic testing (NMOSD with or without AQP4-IgG). The core clinical characteristics required for patients with NMOSD with AQP4-IgG include clinical syndromes or MRI findings related to optic nerve, spinal cord, area postrema, other brainstem, diencephalic, or cerebral presentations. More stringent clinical criteria, with additional neuroimaging findings, are required for diagnosis of NMOSD without AQP4-IgG or when serologic testing is unavailable. The IPND also proposed validation strategies and achieved consensus on pediatric NMOSD diagnosis and the concepts of monophasic NMOSD and opticospinal MS.consensus development conferencejournal articlepractice guidelineresearch support, non-u.s. gov't2015 Jul 142015 06 19importe

Comparative efficacy of fingolimod vs natalizumab: A French multicenter observational study

International audienceOBJECTIVE: To compare natalizumab and fingolimod on both clinical and MRI outcomes in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) from 27 multiple sclerosis centers participating in the French follow-up cohort Observatoire of Multiple Sclerosis. METHODS: Patients with RRMS included in the study were aged from 18 to 65 years with an Expanded Disability Status Scale score of 0-5.5 and an available brain MRI performed within the year before treatment initiation. The data were collected for 326 patients treated with natalizumab and 303 with fingolimod. The statistical analysis was performed using 2 different methods: logistic regression and propensity scores (inverse probability treatment weighting). RESULTS: The confounder-adjusted proportion of patients with at least one relapse within the first and second year of treatment was lower in natalizumab-treated patients compared to the fingolimod group (21.1% vs 30.4% at first year, p = 0.0092; and 30.9% vs 41.7% at second year, p = 0.0059) and supported the trend observed in nonadjusted analysis (21.2% vs 27.1% at 1 year, p = 0.0775). Such statistically significant associations were also observed for gadolinium (Gd)-enhancing lesions and new T2 lesions at both 1 year (Gd-enhancing lesions: 9.3% vs 29.8%, p \textless 0.0001; new T2 lesions: 10.6% vs 29.6%, p \textless 0.0001) and 2 years (Gd-enhancing lesions: 9.1% vs 22.1%, p = 0.0025; new T2 lesions: 16.9% vs 34.1%, p = 0.0010) post treatment initiation. CONCLUSION: Taken together, these results suggest the superiority of natalizumab over fingolimod to prevent relapses and new T2 and Gd-enhancing lesions at 1 and 2 years. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with RRMS, natalizumab decreases the proportion of patients with at least one relapse within the first year of treatment compared to fingolimo

Comparative efficacyof fingolimod versus natalizumab in multiple sclerosis: a prospective multicenter observational study

International audienceno abstrac

Comparative efficacyof fingolimod versus natalizumab in multiple sclerosis: a prospective multicenter observational study

International audienceno abstrac

Immunization and multiple sclerosis: Recommendations from the French Multiple Sclerosis Society

International audienceObjectives: To establish recommendations on immunization for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS).Background: Vaccines have been suspected in the past to trigger MS and relapses. With the extension of the immunoactive treatment arsenal, other concerns have been raised more recently about an increased risk of infection or a decreased effectiveness of immunization in immunosuppressed patients.Methods: The French Group for Recommendations into Multiple Sclerosis (France4MS) performed a systematic search of papers in Medline and other university databases (January 1975-June 2018). The RAND/UCLA appropriateness method was chosen to review the scientific literature and to formalize the degree of agreement among experts on 5 clinical questions related to immunization and MS. Readers from the steering committee conducted a systematic analysis, wrote a critical synthesis and prepared a list of proposals that were evaluated by a rating group of 28 MS experts. The final version of the recommendations was finally reviewed by a reading group of 110 health care professionals and classified as appropriate, inappropriate or uncertain.Results: Neurologists should verify the vaccination status as soon as MS is diagnosed and before disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) are introduced. The French vaccination schedule applies to MS patients and seasonal influenza vaccination is recommended. In the case of treatment-induced immunosuppression, MS patients should be informed about the risk of infection and the vaccination standards of the French High Council of Health should be applied. Live attenuated vaccines are contra-indicated in patients recently treated with immunosuppressive drugs, including corticosteroids; other vaccines can be proposed whatever the treatment, but their effectiveness may be partly reduced with some drugs.Conclusion: Physicians and patients should be aware of the updated recommendations for immunizations of patients with MS