Discontinuing disease-modifying therapy in progressive multiple sclerosis: can we stop what we have started?

Abstract

Disease-modifying therapy is ineffective in disabled patients (Expanded Disability Status Scale [EDSS] > 6.5) with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (MS) without relapses, or in primary progressive MS. Many patients with secondary progressive MS who initially had relapsing MS continue to use disease-modifying therapies. The enormous associated costs are a burden to health services. Regular assessment is recommended to guide discontinuation of disease-modifying therapies when no longer beneficial, but this is unavailable to many patients, particularly in rural areas. The objectives of this study are as follows: 1. To observe use of disease-modifying therapies in patients with progressive multiple sclerosis and EDSS > 6.5. 2. To examine approaches used by a group of international MS experts to stopping-disease modifying therapies in patients with secondary progressive MS without relapses. During an epidemiological study in three regions of Ireland (southeast Dublin city, and Wexford and Donegal Counties), we recorded details of disease-modifying therapies in patients with progressive MS and EDSS > 6.5. An e-questionnaire was sent to 26 neurologists with expert knowledge of MS, asking them to share their approach to stopping disease-modifying therapies in patients with secondary progressive MS. Three hundred and thirty-six patients were studied: 88 from southeast Dublin, 99 from Wexford and 149 from Donegal. Forty-four had EDSS > 6.5: 12 were still using disease-modifying therapies. Of the surveyed neurologists, 15 made efforts to stop disease-modifying therapies in progressive multiple sclerosis, but most did not insist. A significant proportion (12 of 44 patients with progressive MS and EDSS > 6.5) was considered to be receiving therapy without benefit. Eleven of the 12 were from rural counties, reflecting poorer access to neurology services. The costs of disease-modifying therapies in this group (>170,000 yearly) could be re-directed towards development of neurology services to optimize their management.

Keywords

cost disease-modifying therapies progressive multiple sclerosis stopping criteria

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Waubant E. , Vukusic S. , Gignoux L. , et al. Clinical characteristics of responders to interferon therapy for relapsing MS. Neurology 2003; 61: 184-189.

Lublin FD , Reingold SC Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: results of an international survey. National Multiple Sclerosis Society (USA) Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials of New Agents in Multiple Sclerosis. Neurology 1996; 46: 907-911.

Kappos L. , Weinshenker B. , Pozzilli C. , et al. Interferon beta-1b in secondary progressive MS: a combined analysis of the two trials. Neurology 2004; 63: 1779-1787.

Cohen JA , Antel JP

Does interferon beta help in secondary progressive MS?

Neurology 2004; 63: 1768-1769.

Rojas JI , Romano M. , Ciapponi A. , Patrucco L. , Cristiano E. Interferon beta for primary progressive multiple sclerosis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2009; 1: CD006643. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006643.pub2.

Trojano M. , Pellegrini F. , Fuiani A. , et al. New natural history of interferon-ß- treated relapsing multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2007; 61: 300-306.

Association of British Neurologists. ABN guidelines for treatment of multiple sclerosis with β-interferon and glatiramer acetate 2007. London: Association of British Neurologists, 2007.

Goodin DS , Frohman EM , Garmany JR , et al. Disease modifying therapies in multiple sclerosis: Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology and the MS Council for Clinical Practice Guidelines. Neurology 2002; 58: 169-178.

Polman CH , O’Connor PW , Havrdova E. , et al. for the AFFIRM Investigators. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of natalizumab for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 899-910.

10.

Polman CH , Reingold SC , Edan G. , et al. Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2005 revisions to the ‘‘McDonald Criteria’’. Ann Neurol 2005; 58: 840-846.

11.

Kurtzke JF Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Neurology 1983; 33: 1444-1452.

12.

Lublin FD , Reingold SC National Multiple Sclerosis Society (USA) Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials of New Agents in Multiple Sclerosis. ( 1996). Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: results of an international survey. Neurology 1996 ; 46: 907-911.

13.

IMS data, http://www.imshealth.com, and PCRS 2007 ‘Statistical Analysis of Claims and Payments’ report, http://www.hse.ie (accessed February 2009).

14.

Farrell R. , Kapoor R. , Leary S. , et al. Neutralising anti-interferon beta antibodies are associated with reduced side-effects and delayed impact on efficacy of interferon-beta . Mult Scler 2008; 14: 212.