Search

Background and aims: Most patients with multiple sclerosis presenting with a relapsing–remitting disease course at diagnosis transition to secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS) 1–2 decades after onset. SPMS is characterized by predominant neurodegeneration and atrophy. These pathogenic hallmarks result in unsatisfactory treatment response in SPMS patients. Therefore, early diagnosis of SPMS is necessary for prompt treatment decisions. The aim of this review was to assess neurophysiological and fluid biomarkers that have the potential to monitor disease progression and support early SPMS diagnosis. Methods: We performed a systematic review of studies that analyzed the role of neurophysiological techniques and fluid biomarkers in supporting SPMS diagnosis using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses statement. Results: From our initial search, we selected 24 relevant articles on neurophysiological biomarkers and 55 articles on fluid biomarkers. Conclusion: To date, no neurophysiological or fluid biomarker is sufficiently validated to support the early diagnosis of SPMS. Neurophysiological measurements, including short interval intracortical inhibition and somatosensory temporal discrimination threshold, and the neurofilament light chain fluid biomarker seem to be the most promising. Cross-sectional studies on an adequate number of patients followed by longitudinal studies are needed to confirm the diagnostic and prognostic value of these biomarkers. A combination of neurophysiological and fluid biomarkers may be more sensitive in detecting SPMS conversion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Neurofilament proteins have been extensively studied in relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis, where they are promising biomarkers of disease activity and treatment response. Their role in progressive multiple sclerosis, where there is a particularly urgent need for improved biomarkers, is less clear. The objectives of this systematic review are to summarise the literature on neurofilament light and heavy in progressive multiple sclerosis, addressing key questions. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Scopus identified 355 potential sources. 76 relevant sources were qualitatively reviewed using QUADAS-2 criteria, and 17 were identified as at low risk of bias. We summarise the findings from all relevant sources, and separately from the 17 high-quality studies. Results: Differences in neurofilament light between relapsing–remitting and progressive multiple sclerosis appear to be explained by differences in covariates. Neurofilament light is consistently associated with current inflammatory activity and future brain atrophy in progressive multiple sclerosis, and is consistently shown to be a marker of treatment response with immunosuppressive disease-modifying therapies. Associations with current or future disability are inconsistent, and there is no evidence of NFL being a responsive marker of purportedly neuroprotective treatments. Evidence on neurofilament heavy is more limited and inconsistent. Conclusions: Neurofilament light has shown consistent utility as a biomarker of neuroinflammation, future brain atrophy and immunosuppressive treatment response at a group level. Neither neurofilament light or heavy has shown a consistent treatment response to neuroprotective disease-modifying therapies, which will require further data from successful randomised controlled trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]