Clinical and patient determinants of changing therapy in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (SWITCH study)

clinical factors and frequency of disease-modifying therapy (DMT) changes/interruptions in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients have not been well defined. The aim of this study was to describe reasons of MS treatment modifications in a large cohort of Italian MS patients

Patients with multiple sclerosis choose a collaborative role in making treatment decision: results from the Italian multicenter SWITCH study

Background: Clinicians are increasingly recognizing the importance of shared decision-making in complex treatment choices, highlighting the importance of the patient's rationale and motivation for switching therapies. This study aimed to evaluate the association between different modalities of changing multiple sclerosis (MS) treatments, cognitive profile and attitude and preferences of patients concerning treatment choice. Methods: This multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted at 28 Italian MS centers in the period between June 2016 and June 2017. We screened all MS patients treated with any DMT, with a treatment compliance of at least 80% of therapy administered during the 3 last months who needed to modify MS therapy because of efficacy, safety or other reasons during a follow-up visit. At the time of switching the symbol digit modalities test (SDMT) and the Control Preference Scale (CPS) were evaluated. According to the CPS, patients were classified as "active" (i.e. who prefer making the medical decision themselves), "collaborative" (i.e. who prefer decisions be made jointly with the physician), or "passive" (i.e. who prefer the physician make the decision). Results: Out of 13,657 patients recorded in the log, 409 (3%) changed therapy. Of these, 336 (2.5%) patients, 69.6% were female and with mean age 40.6 ± 10.5 years, were enrolled. According to the CPS score evaluation, a significant high percentage of patients (51.1%) were considered collaborative, 74 patients (22.5%) were passive, and 60 (18.2%) patients were active. Stratifying according to CPS results, we found a higher SDMT score among collaborative patients compared to active and passive ones (45.8 ± 12.3 versus 41.0 ± 13.2 versus 41.7 ± 12.8, p < 0.05). Conclusion: In this study, the CPS evaluation showed that more than 50% of patients who needed to change therapy chose a "collaborative" role in making treatment decision. Cognitive profile with SDMT seems to correlate with patients' preference on treatment decision, showing better scores in collaborative patients

Towards a validated definition of the clinical transition to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: A study from the Italian MS Register

Background: Definitions for reliable identification of transition from relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS) to secondary progressive (SP)MS in clinical cohorts are not available. Objectives: To compare diagnostic performances of two different data-driven SPMS definitions. Methods: Data-driven SPMS definitions based on a version of Lorscheider's algorithm (DDA) and on the EXPAND trial inclusion criteria were compared, using the neurologist's definition (ND) as gold standard, in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), Akaike information criterion (AIC) and area under the curve (AUC). Results: A cohort of 10,240 MS patients with > 5 years of follow-up was extracted from the Italian MS Registry; 880 (8.5%) patients were classified as SPMS according to the neurologist definition, 1806 (17.6%) applying the DDA and 1134 (11.0%) with the EXPAND definition. The DDA showed greater discrimination power (AUC: 0.8 vs 0.6) and a higher sensitivity (77.1% vs 38.0%) than the EXPAND definition, with similar specificity (88.0% vs 91.5%). PPV and NPV were higher using the DDA than considering EXPAND definition (37.5% vs 29.5%; 97.6% vs 94.0%). Conclusion: Data-driven definitions demonstrated greater ability to capture SP transition than neurologist's definition and the global accuracy of DDA seems to be higher than the EXPAND definition

Disease-modifying drugs can reduce disability progression in relapsing multiple sclerosis

An ever-expanding number of disease-modifying drugs for multiple sclerosis have become available in recent years, after demonstrating efficacy in clinical trials. In the real-world setting, however, disease-modifying drugs are prescribed in patient populations that differ from those included in pivotal studies, where extreme age patients are usually excluded or under-represented. In this multicentre, observational, retrospective Italian cohort study, we evaluated treatment exposure in three cohorts of patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis defined by age at onset: paediatric-onset (≤18 years), adult-onset (18-49 years) and late-onset multiple sclerosis (≥50 years). We included patients with a relapsing-remitting phenotype, ≥5 years follow-up, ≥3 Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) evaluations and a first neurological evaluation within 3 years from the first demyelinating event. Multivariate Cox regression models (adjusted hazard ratio with 95% confidence intervals) were used to assess the risk of reaching a first 12-month confirmed disability worsening and the risk of reaching a sustained EDSS of 4.0. The effect of disease-modifying drugs was assessed as quartiles of time exposure. We found that disease-modifying drugs reduced the risk of 12-month confirmed disability worsening, with a progressive risk reduction in different quartiles of exposure in paediatric-onset and adult-onset patients [adjusted hazard ratios in non-exposed versus exposed >62% of the follow-up time: 8.0 (3.5-17.9) for paediatric-onset and 6.3 (4.9-8.0) for adult-onset, P < 0.0001] showing a trend in late-onset patients [adjusted hazard ratio = 1.9 (0.9-4.1), P = 0.07]. These results were confirmed for a sustained EDSS score of 4.0. We also found that relapses were a risk factor for 12-month confirmed disability worsening in all three cohorts, and female sex exerted a protective role in the late-onset cohort. This study provides evidence that sustained exposure to disease-modifying drugs decreases the risk of disability accumulation, seemingly in a dose-dependent manner. It confirms that the effectiveness of disease-modifying drugs is lower in late-onset patients, although still detectable

COVID-19 outbreak in Italy: an opportunity to evaluate extended interval dosing of ocrelizumab in MS patients

Introduction During the COVID-19 pandemic, ocrelizumab (OCR) infusions for MS patients were often re-scheduled because of MS center's disruption and concerns regarding immunosuppression. The aim of the present study was to assess changes in OCR schedule during the first wave of pandemic in Italy and to evaluate the effect of delayed infusion on clinical/radiological endpoints.Methods Data were extracted from the Italian MS Register database. Standard interval dosing was defined as an infusion interval <= 30 weeks, while extended interval dosing was defined as an infusion interval > 30 weeks at the time of the observation period. Clinico-demographics variables were tested as potential predictors for treatment delay. Time to first relapse and time to first MRI event were evaluated. Cumulative hazard curves were reported along their 95% confidence intervals. A final sample of one-thousand two patients with MS from 65 centers was included in the analysis: 599 pwMS were selected to evaluate the modification of OCR infusion intervals, while 717 pwRMS were selected to analyze the effect of infusion delay on clinical/MRI activity.Results Mean interval between two OCR infusions was 28.1 weeks before pandemic compared to 30.8 weeks during the observation period, with a mean delay of 2.74 weeks (p < 0.001). No clinico-demographic factors emerged as predictors of infusion postponement, except for location of MS centers in the North of Italy. Clinical relapses (4 in SID, 0 in EID) and 17 MRI activity reports (4 in SID, 13 in EID) were recorded during follow-up period.Discussion Despite the significant extension of OCR infusion interval during the first wave of pandemic in Italy, a very small incidence of clinical/radiological events was observed, thus suggesting durable efficacy of OCR, as well as the absence of rebound after its short-term suspension

PML risk is the main factor driving the choice of discontinuing natalizumab in a large multiple sclerosis population: results from an Italian multicenter retrospective study

Background: Natalizumab (NTZ) is an effective treatment for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). However, patients and physicians may consider discontinuing NTZ therapy due to safety or efficacy issues. The aim of our study was to evaluate the NTZ discontinuation rate and reasons of discontinuation in a large Italian population of RRMS patients. Materials and methods: The data were extracted from the Italian MS registry in May 2018 and were collected from 51,845 patients in 69 Italian multiple sclerosis centers. MS patients with at least one NTZ infusion in the period between June 1st 2012 to May 15th 2018 were included. Discontinuation rates at each time point were calculated. Reasons for NTZ discontinuation were classified as "lack of efficacy", "progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) risk" or "other". Results: Out of 51,845, 5151 patients, 3019 (58.6%) females, with a mean age of 43.6 ± 10.1 years (median 40), were analyzed. Out of 2037 (39.5%) who discontinued NTZ, a significantly higher percentage suspended NTZ because of PML risk compared to lack of efficacy [1682 (32.7% of 5151) vs 221 (4.3%), p < 0.001]; other reasons were identified for 99 (1.9%) patients. Patients discontinuing treatment were older, had longer disease duration and worse EDSS at the time of NTZ initiation and at last follow-up on NTZ treatment. The JCV index and EDSS at baseline were predictors for stopping therapy (HR 2.94, 95% CI 1.22-4.75; p = 0.02; HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.18-5.41; p = 0.04). Conclusions: Roughly 60% of MS patients stayed on NTZ treatment during the observation period. For those patients in whom NTZ discontinuation was required, it was mainly due to PML concerns

Evaluation of drivers of treatment switch in relapsing multiple sclerosis: a study from the Italian MS Registry

Background Active relapsing-remitting (RR) and secondary progressive (SP) multiple sclerosis (MS) are currently defined as "relapsing MS" (RMS). The aim of this cross-sectional study was to assess drivers of treatment switches due to clinical relapses in a population of RMS patients collected in the Italian MS and Related Disorders Register (I-MS&RD).Methods RRMS and SPMS patients with at least one relapse in a time window of 2 years before of data extraction were defined as RMS. Factors associated with disease-modifying therapy (DMT) switching due to clinical activity were assessed through multivariable logistic regression models in which treatment exposure was included as the last recorded DMT and the last DMT's class [moderate-efficacy (ME), high-efficacy (HE) DMTs and anti-CD20 drugs].Results A cohort of 4739 RMS patients (4161 RRMS, 578 SPMS) was extracted from the I-MS&RD. A total of 2694 patients switching DMTs due to relapses were identified. Switchers were significantly (p < 0.0001) younger, less disabled, more frequently affected by an RR disease course in comparison to non-switcher patients. The multivariable logistic regression models showed that Alemtuzumab (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.02-0.37), Natalizumab (0.48, 0.30-0.76), Ocrelizumab (0.1, 0.02-0.45) and Rituximab (0.23, 0.06-0.82) exposure was a protective factor against treatment switch due to relapses. Moreover, the use of HE DMTs (0.43, 0.31-0.59), especially anti-CD20 drugs (0.14, 0.05-0.37), resulted to be a protective factor against treatment switch due to relapses in comparison with ME DMTs.Conclusions More than 50% of RMS switched therapy due to disease activity. HE DMTs, especially anti-CD20 drugs, significantly reduce the risk of treatment switch

White Paper of Italian Gastroenterology: Delivery of services for digestive diseases in Italy: Weaknesses and strengths

In 2011 the three major Italian gastroenterological scientific societies (AIGO, the Italian Society of Hospital Gastroenterologists and Endoscopists; SIED, the Italian Society of Endoscopy; SIGE, the Italian Society of Gastroenterology) prepared their official document aimed at analysing medical care for digestive diseases in Italy, on the basis of national and regional data (Health Ministry and Lombardia, Veneto, Emilia-Romagna databases) and to make proposals for planning of care. Digestive diseases were the first or second cause of hospitalizations in Italy in 1999-2009, with more than 1,500,000 admissions/year; however only 5-9% of these admissions was in specialized Gastroenterology units. Reported data show a better outcome in Gastroenterology Units than in non-specialized units: shorter average length of stay, in particular for admissions with ICD-9-CM codes proxying for emergency conditions (6.7 days versus 8.4 days); better case mix (higher average diagnosis-related groups weight in Gastroenterology Units: 1 vs 0.97 in Internal Medicine units and 0.76 in Surgery units); lower inappropriateness of admissions (16-25% versus 29-87%); lower in-hospital mortality in urgent admissions (2.2% versus 5.1%); for patients with urgent admissions due to gastrointestinnal haemorrhage, in-hospital mortality was 2.3% in Gastroenterology units versus 4.0% in others. The present document summarizes the scientific societies' official report, which constitutes the "White paper of Italian Gastroenterology". © 2014 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l