Wearable technologies to measure clinical outcomes in multiple sclerosis: A scoping review

Wearable technology refers to any sensor worn on the person, making continuous and remote monitoring available to many people with chronic disease, including multiple sclerosis (MS). Daily monitoring seems an ideal solution either as an outcome measure or as an adjunct to support rater-based monitoring in both clinical and research settings. There has been an increase in solutions that are available, yet there is little consensus on the most appropriate solution to use in either MS research or clinical practice. We completed a scoping review (using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines) to summarise the wearable solutions available in MS, to identify those approaches that could potentially be utilised in clinical trials, by evaluating the following: scalability, cost, patient adaptability and accuracy. We identified 35 unique products that measure gait, cognition, upper limb function, activity, mood and fatigue, with most of these solutions being phone applications

Understanding treatment decisions from the perspective of people with relapsing remitting multiple Sclerosis: A critical interpretive synthesis

Background: Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is a chronic inflammatory demyelinating disorder of the central nervous system that mainly affects young adults. While there is no cure for MS, disease modifying treatments (DMTs) reduce the relapse rate and partial accrual of disability. More effective DMTs may have higher risks including life-threatening infections or secondary autoimmunity. The complexity and novelty of available treatments cause challenges for clinicians when prescribing treatments and for people with MS (PwMS) when deciding what trade-offs they are willing and ready to make. / Objective: To explore the experience of people with relapsing remitting MS (PwRRMS) and their perspectives in choosing treatments. / Methods: Critical interpretive synthesis was employed to review and synthesis the published literature. Eighty-three publications were selected in a multi-step systematic process. / Results: Findings are presented in four interrelated areas: the influence of the clinical evidence-base in decision making; the meaning of DMT efficacy for PwRRMS; the influence of models of decision-making and information acquisition practices in PwRRMS; and the importance of psychosocial dimensions in DMT decision making. Synthesis of the findings revealed that alongside medical and individual reasoning, contextual circumstances play an important role in making treatment decisions. / Conclusion: This review identifies and explains the importance of diverse contextual circumstances (clinical, social, psychological) that are important for PwRRMS when making treatment decisions. The findings demonstrate the importance of eliciting, understanding and addressing such contextual factors

Association of British Neurologists: revised (2015) guidelines for prescribing disease-modifying treatments in multiple sclerosis.

In June 1999, the Association of British Neurologists (ABN) first published guidelines for the use of the licensed multiple sclerosis (MS) disease-modifying treatments (at that time β-interferon and glatiramer acetate). The guidelines were revised in 2001 and have been periodically updated since then. In 2002, following the negative assessment of these treatments by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), the MS risk-sharing scheme started, in which patients eligible according to the 2001 ABN guidelines were provided with treatment funded through the UK National Health Service (NHS), and monitored annually for up to 10 years.1 Recruitment to the risk-sharing scheme cohort is complete. Pending a future final evaluation, the UK Department of Health's instruction to NHS funders remains in place: that patients who fulfil the ABN criteria should continue to receive treatment funded through the NHS. The British neurological community has fully accepted the risk-sharing scheme for prescribing β-interferon and glatiramer acetate. Approximately 70 ‘treating centres’ have recruited >5000 patients between 2002 and 2005, and these have been monitored annually for 10 years; many more patients have received these treatments since 2005. The ABN published revised guidelines in 2007, and then again in 2009, following the licensing of natalizumab and mitoxantrone. This 2015 revised guideline replaces former versions. It includes all newly approved or licensed treatments for MS and represents a consensus concerning their use. These guidelines will require future revision as other treatments receive approval (eg, daclizumab and ocrelizumab): we suggest they are reviewed after an interval of no longer than 12 months. The guideline is not intended to provide a complete description of the possible complications and monitoring of disease-modifying treatments in MS; we refer prescribing neurologists to the relevant summaries of product characteristics.PostprintPeer reviewe

Towards a multi-arm multi-stage platform trial of disease modifying approaches in Parkinson’s disease

\ua9 The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Guarantors of Brain.An increase in the efficiency of clinical trial conduct has been successfully demonstrated in the oncology field, by the use of multi-arm, multi-stage trials allowing the evaluation of multiple therapeutic candidates simultaneously, and seamless recruitment to phase 3 for those candidates passing an interim signal of efficacy. Replicating this complex innovative trial design in diseases such as Parkinson’s disease is appealing, but in addition to the challenges associated with any trial assessing a single potentially disease modifying intervention in Parkinson’s disease, a multiarm platform trial must also specifically consider the heterogeneous nature of the disease, alongside the desire to potentially test multiple treatments with different mechanisms of action. In a multi-arm trial, there is a need to appropriately stratify treatment arms to ensure each are comparable with a shared placebo/standard of care arm; however, in Parkinson’s disease there may be a preference to enrich an arm with a subgroup of patients that may be most likely to respond to a specific treatment approach. The solution to this conundrum lies in having clearly defined criteria for inclusion in each treatment arm as well as an analysis plan that takes account of predefined subgroups of interest, alongside evaluating the impact of each treatment on the broader population of Parkinson’s disease patients. Beyond this, there must be robust processes of treatment selection, and consensus derived measures to confirm target engagement and interim assessments of efficacy, as well as consideration of the infrastructure needed to support recruitment, and the long-term funding and sustainability of the platform. This has to incorporate the diverse priorities of clinicians, triallists, regulatory authorities and above all the views of people with Parkinson’s disease

Drug Repurposing: A Systematic Approach to Evaluate Candidate Oral Neuroprotective Interventions for Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis

Objective: To develop and implement an evidence based framework to select, from drugs already licenced, candidate oral neuroprotective drugs to be tested in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Design: Systematic review of clinical studies of oral putative neuroprotective therapies in MS and four other neurodegenerative diseases with shared pathological features, followed by systematic review and meta-analyses of the in vivo experimental data for those interventions. We presented summary data to an international multi-disciplinary committee, which assessed each drug in turn using pre-specified criteria including consideration of mechanism of action. Results: We identified a short list of fifty-two candidate interventions. After review of all clinical and pre-clinical evidence we identified ibudilast, riluzole, amiloride, pirfenidone, fluoxetine, oxcarbazepine, and the polyunsaturated fatty-acid class (Linoleic Acid, Lipoic acid; Omega-3 fatty acid, Max EPA oil) as lead candidates for clinical evaluation. Conclusions: We demonstrate a standardised and systematic approach to candidate identification for drug rescue and repurposing trials that can be applied widely to neurodegenerative disorders

Changing Directions: Steering science, technology and innovation towards the Sustainable Development Goals

Science, technology and innovation are failing to address the world’s most urgent sustainability challenges, according to a major new report from the STRINGS project. ‘Changing Directions: Steering science, technology and innovation towards the Sustainable Development Goals’ is the final report of an in-depth study involving collaborators from across the globe. It highlights a glaring mismatch between the priorities of the world’s scientific communities and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, which were set up to drive change across all areas of social justice and environmental issues

Second asymptomatic carotid surgery trial (ACST-2): a randomised comparison of carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy

Background: Among asymptomatic patients with severe carotid artery stenosis but no recent stroke or transient cerebral ischaemia, either carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can restore patency and reduce long-term stroke risks. However, from recent national registry data, each option causes about 1% procedural risk of disabling stroke or death. Comparison of their long-term protective effects requires large-scale randomised evidence. Methods: ACST-2 is an international multicentre randomised trial of CAS versus CEA among asymptomatic patients with severe stenosis thought to require intervention, interpreted with all other relevant trials. Patients were eligible if they had severe unilateral or bilateral carotid artery stenosis and both doctor and patient agreed that a carotid procedure should be undertaken, but they were substantially uncertain which one to choose. Patients were randomly allocated to CAS or CEA and followed up at 1 month and then annually, for a mean 5 years. Procedural events were those within 30 days of the intervention. Intention-to-treat analyses are provided. Analyses including procedural hazards use tabular methods. Analyses and meta-analyses of non-procedural strokes use Kaplan-Meier and log-rank methods. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN21144362. Findings: Between Jan 15, 2008, and Dec 31, 2020, 3625 patients in 130 centres were randomly allocated, 1811 to CAS and 1814 to CEA, with good compliance, good medical therapy and a mean 5 years of follow-up. Overall, 1% had disabling stroke or death procedurally (15 allocated to CAS and 18 to CEA) and 2% had non-disabling procedural stroke (48 allocated to CAS and 29 to CEA). Kaplan-Meier estimates of 5-year non-procedural stroke were 2·5% in each group for fatal or disabling stroke, and 5·3% with CAS versus 4·5% with CEA for any stroke (rate ratio [RR] 1·16, 95% CI 0·86–1·57; p=0·33). Combining RRs for any non-procedural stroke in all CAS versus CEA trials, the RR was similar in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients (overall RR 1·11, 95% CI 0·91–1·32; p=0·21). Interpretation: Serious complications are similarly uncommon after competent CAS and CEA, and the long-term effects of these two carotid artery procedures on fatal or disabling stroke are comparable. Funding: UK Medical Research Council and Health Technology Assessment Programme