Search

Genome-wide association studies identified over 200 risk loci for multiple sclerosis (MS) focusing on common variants, which account for about 50% of disease heritability. The goal of this study was to investigate whether low-frequency and rare functional variants, located in MS-established associated loci, may contribute to disease risk in a relatively homogeneous population, testing their cumulative effect (burden) with gene-wise tests. We sequenced 98 genes in 588 Italian patients with MS and 408 matched healthy controls (HCs). Variants were selected using different filtering criteria based on allelic frequency and in silico functional impacts. Genes showing a significant burden (n = 17) were sequenced in an independent cohort of 504 MS and 504 HC. The highest signal in both cohorts was observed for the disruptive variants (stop-gain, stop-loss, or splicing variants) located in EFCAB13, a gene coding for a protein of an unknown function (p < 10–4). Among these variants, the minor allele of a stop-gain variant showed a significantly higher frequency in MS versus HC in both sequenced cohorts (p = 0.0093 and p = 0.025), confirmed by a meta-analysis on a third independent cohort of 1298 MS and 1430 HC (p = 0.001) assayed with an SNP array. Real-time PCR on 14 heterozygous individuals for this variant did not evidence the presence of the stop-gain allele, suggesting a transcript degradation by non-sense mediated decay, supported by the evidence that the carriers of the stop-gain variant had a lower expression of this gene (p = 0.0184). In conclusion, we identified a novel low-frequency functional variant associated with MS susceptibility, suggesting the possible role of rare/low-frequency variants in MS as reported for other complex diseases.

BACKGROUND:Depression occurs in about 50% of patients with multiple sclerosis. The aims of this study was to investigate the prevalence of depressive symptoms in a multicenter MS population using the Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI II) and to identify possible correlations between the BDI II score and demographic and clinical variables. METHODS:Data were collected in a multi-center, cross-sectional study over a period of six months in six MS centers in Italy using BDI II. RESULTS:1,011 MS patients participated in the study. 676 subjects were female, with a mean age of 34 years (SD 10.8), mean EDSS of 3.3 (0-8.5) and mean disease duration of 10.3 years (range 1-50 years). 668 (%) subjects scored lower than 14 on the BDI II and 343 (33.9%) scored greater than 14 (14 cut-off score). For patients with BDI>14 multivariate analysis showed a significant difference between EDSS and disease course. BDI II scores for subjects with secondary progressive (SP) MS were significantly different from primary progressive (PP) patients (p < 0.001) but similar to relapsing-remitting (RR) patients. Considering subjects with moderate to severe depressive symptoms (BDI II score from 20-63), in relation to disease course, 11.7% (83/710) had RR MS, 40.7% (96/236) SP and 13.6% (6/44) PP. CONCLUSIONS:Using the BDI II, 30% of the current sample had depressive symptoms. BDI II score correlates with disability and disease course, particularly in subjects with SP MS. The BDI II scale can be a useful tool in clinical practice to screen depressive symptoms in people with MS.

We report on the use of an ultracold ensemble of ^87 Rb atoms trapped in a vertical lattice as a source for a quantum force sensor based on a Ramsey–Raman type interferometer. We reach spatial resolution in the low micrometer range in the vertical direction thanks to evaporative cooling down to ultracold temperatures in a crossed optical dipole trap. In this configuration, the coherence time of the atomic ensemble is degraded by inhomogeneous dephasing arising from atomic interactions. By weakening the confinement in the transverse direction only, we dilute the cloud and drastically reduce the strength of these interactions, without affecting the vertical resolution. This allows us to maintain an excellent relative sensitivity on the Bloch frequency, which is related to the local gravitational force, of 5 × 10 ^−6 at 1 s which integrates down to 8 × 10 ^−8 after one hour averaging time.

Background: One of the most social consequences of Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is a reduction in employability that occurs early in the disease. The aim of the study is to explore the factors contributing to specific work-related difficulties, including main functions affected by MS., Methods: The study involved two Italian centers and included subjects with MS diagnosis of working age (18-65 years) and currently employed. Subjects underwent an evaluation to investigate work-related difficulties, socio-occupational data and the main clinical domain affected by MS with an impact on work-related difficulties, such as walking, balance, upper limb and cognitive functions, mood and fatigue. Linear regression analysis was used to examine the direction and size of the relationships between specific work-related difficulty and the variables examined., Results: A total of 82 subjects with MS were recruited (59.8% of females, mean age 44.0 (SD: 10.7) years, a mean EDSS score of 3.7 (SD: 2.4); mean education of 15.2 (SD: 4.2) years). The 36.6% of the sample resulted having work-related difficulties with a possible consequent risk of job lost. Our results highlighted that objective assessment of walking and balance, upper limb and cognitive functions were not significant determinants of any specific work-related difficulties. However, the key factors most strongly associated with work challenges are the presence of depressive symptoms, followed by physical and cognitive fatigue., Conclusion: Identifying the main factors related to work difficulties is a fundamental step to prevent the manifestation of these difficulties and develop tailored intervention for job retention., Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethical statement: The study was carried out following the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the local ethics committee (AO. SS Antonio e Biagio e Cesare Arrigo-Alessandria, nr.0020477). Competing interests: Authors declare no conflict of interest., (© 2025. Fondazione Società Italiana di Neurologia.)

Background: Prognostic machine learning research in multiple sclerosis has been mainly focusing on black-box models predicting whether a patients' disability will progress in a fixed number of years. However, as this is a binary yes/no question, it cannot take individual disease severity into account. Therefore, in this work we propose to model the time to disease progression instead. Additionally, we use explainable machine learning techniques to make the model outputs more interpretable., Methods: A preprocessed subset of 29,201 patients of the international data registry MSBase was used. Disability was assessed in terms of the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). We predict the time to significant and confirmed disability progression using random survival forests, a machine learning model for survival analysis. Performance is evaluated on a time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic and the precision-recall curves. Importantly, predictions are then explained using SHAP and Bellatrex, two explainability toolboxes, and lead to both global (population-wide) as well as local (patient visit-specific) insights., Results: On the task of predicting progression in 2 years, the random survival forest achieves state-of-the-art performance, comparable to previous work employing a random forest. However, here the random survival forest has the added advantage of being able to predict progression over a longer time horizon, with AUROC >60% for the first 10 years after baseline. Explainability techniques further validated the model by extracting clinically valid insights from the predictions made by the model. For example, a clear decline in the per-visit probability of progression is observed in more recent years since 2012, likely reflecting globally increasing use of more effective MS therapies., Conclusion: The binary classification models found in the literature can be extended to a time-to-event setting without loss of performance, thus allowing a more comprehensive prediction of patient prognosis. Furthermore, explainability techniques proved to be key to reach a better understanding of the model and increase validation of its behaviour., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Tomas Kalincik served on scientific advisory boards for MS International Federation and World Health Organisation, BMS, Roche, Janssen, Sanofi Genzyme, Novartis, Merck and Biogen, steering committee for Brain Atrophy Initiative by Sanofi Genzyme, received conference travel support and/or speaker honoraria from WebMD Global, Eisai, Novartis, Biogen, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, Teva, BioCSL and Merck and received research or educational event support from Biogen, Novartis, Genzyme, Roche, Celgene and Merck. Eva Kubala Havrdova received honoraria/research support from Biogen, Merck Serono, Novars, Roche, and Teva; has been member of advisory boards for Actelion, Biogen, Celgene, Merck Serono, Novars, and Sanofi Genzyme;received honoraria/research support from Biogen, Merck Serono, Novars, Roche, and Teva; has been member of advisory boards for Actelion, Biogen, Celgene, Merck Serono, Novars, and Sanofi Genzyme; and has been supported by the Czech Ministry of Education – project Cooperatio LF1, research area Neuroscience, and the project National Institute for Neurological Research (Programme EXCELES, ID project No LX22NPO5107) – funded by the European Union-Next Generation EU. Alessandra Lugaresi has received personal compensation for consulting, serving on a scientific advisory board, speaking or other activities from Alexion, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Horizon, Janssen, Merck Serono, Novartis, and Sanofi/Genzyme, and Her institutions have received research grants from Novartis and Sanofi/Genzyme. Bianca Weinstock-Guttman served as a consultant for Biogen, EMD Serono, Novartis, Genentech, Celgene/Bristol Meyers Squibb, Sanofi Genzyme, Bayer, Janssen, Labcorp, Horizon and SANA. Dr. Weinstock-Guttman also has received grant/research support from Novartis, Biogen, Horizon/Amgen. She serves in the editorial board for Children, CNS Drugs, MS International, Journal of Neurology Frontiers Epidemiology. Saloua Mrabet has received a MENACTRIMS clinical fellowship grant (2020). Patrice Lalive received honoraria for speaking and or travel expense from Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Roche; consulting fees from Biogen, GeNeuro, Merck, Novartis, Roche; research support from Biogen, Merck, Novartis. None were related to this work. Allan G Kermode received speaker honoraria and scientific advisory board fees from Bayer, BioCSL, Biogen, Genzyme, Innate Immunotherapeutics, Merck, Novartis, Sanofi, Sanofi-Aventis, and Teva. Stephen Reddel has received funds over the last 5 years including but not limited to travel support, honoraria, trial payments, research and clinical support to the institution from Alexion, Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sandoz, Sanofi. Additional interests and potential conflicts of interest include: Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation Varicella Zoster working party (unpaid). Francesco Patti received personal compensation for serving on advisory board by Almirall, Alexion, Biogen, Bristol, Janssen, Merck, Novartis and Roche. He further received research grant by Alexion, Almirall, Biogen, Bristol, Merck, Novartis and Roche and by FISM, Reload Association (Onlus), Italian Health Minister, and University of Catania. Valentina Tomassini has received consultation and speaker fees, travel grants and research support from: Biogen, Sanofi Genzyme, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Alexion, Viatris, Janssen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Almirall. Izanne Roos has served on scientific advisory boards, received conference travel support and/or speaker honoraria from Roche, Novartis, Merck and Biogen. Izanne Roos is supported by a MS Australia and the Trish Multiple Sclerosis Research Foundation. Raed Alroughani received honoraria as a speaker and for serving on scientific advisory boards from Bayer, Biogen, GSK, Merck, Novartis, Roche and Sanofi-Genzyme. Samia J. Khoury received compensation for scientific advisory board activity from Merck and Roche, and received compensation for serving on the IDMC for Biogen. Vincent van Pesch received travel grants from Merck Healthcare KGaA (Darmstadt, Germany), Biogen, Sanofi, Bristol Meyer Squibb, Almirall and Roche. His institution has received research grants and consultancy fees from Roche, Biogen, Sanofi, Merck Healthcare KGaA (Darmstadt, Germany), Bristol Meyer Squibb, Janssen, Almirall, Novartis Pharma, and Alexion. Maria José Sá received consulting fees, speaker honoraria, and/or travel expenses for scientific meetings from Alexion, Bayer Healthcare, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi and Teva. Julie Prevost accepted travel compensation from Novartis, Biogen, Genzyme, Teva, and speaking honoraria from Biogen, Novartis, Genzyme and Teva. Daniele Spitaleri received honoraria as a consultant on scientific advisory boards by Bayer-Schering, Novartis and Sanofi-Aventis and compensation for travel from Novartis, Biogen, Sanofi Aventis, Teva and Merck. Pamela McCombe received speakers fees and travel grants from Novartis, Biogen, T’évalua, Sanofi. Claudio Solaro served on scientific advisory boards for Merck, Genzyme, Almirall, and Biogen; received honoraria and travel grants from Sanofi Aventis, Novartis, Biogen, Merck, Genzyme and Teva. Anneke van der Walt served on advisory boards and receives unrestricted research grants from Novartis, Biogen, Merck and Roche She has received speaker’s honoraria and travel support from Novartis, Roche, and Merck. She receives grant support from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and MS Research Australia. Helmut Butzkueven received institutional (Monash University) funding from Biogen, Roche, Merck, Alexion and Novartis; has carried out contracted research for Novartis, Merck, Roche and Biogen; has taken part in speakers’ bureaus for Biogen, Novartis, Roche and Merck; has received personal compensation from Oxford Health Policy Forum for the Brain Health Steering Committee. Guy Laureys received travel and/or consultancy compensation from Sanofi-Genzyme, Roche, Teva, Merck, Novartis, Celgene, Biogen. José Luis Sánchez-Menoyo accepted travel compensation from Novartis, Merck and Biogen, speaking honoraria from Biogen, Novartis, Sanofi, Merck, Almirall, Bayer and Teva and has participated in clinical trials by Biogen, Merck and Roche. Koen de Gans served on scientific advisory boards for Roche, Janssen, Sanofi-Genzyme, Novartis and Merck, received conference fee and travel support from Novartis, Biogen, Sanofi-Genzyme, Teva, Abbvie and Merck and received educational event support from Novartis. Abdullah Al-Asmi received personal compensation for serving as a Scientific Advisory or speaker/moderator for Novartis, Biogen, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Merck. Norma Deri received funding from Bayer, Merck, Biogen, Genzyme and Novartis. Tunde Csepany received speaker honoraria/ conference travel support from Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis and Teva. William M Carroll received travel assistance and honoraria for participation in industry sponsored meetings from and provided advice to Bayer Schering Pharma, Biogen-Idec, Novartis, Roche, Genzyme, Sanofi-Aventis, CSL, Teva, Merck and Cellgene. Csilla Rozsa received speaker honoraria from Bayer Schering, Novartis and Biogen, congress and travel expense compensations from Biogen, Teva, Merck and Bayer Schering. Bhim Singhal received consultancy honoraria and compensation for travel from Biogen and Merck. Todd A. Hardy received speaker honoraria/ conference travel support or served on advisory boards for Bayer Schering, Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, Bristol Myers Squibb and Teva. Sudarshini Ramanathan has received research funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC, Australia), the Petre Foundation, the Brain Foundation, the Royal Australasian College of Physicians, and the University of Sydney. She is supported by an NHMRC Investigator Grant (GNT2008339). She serves as a consultant on the International Steering Committee for a clinical trial led by UCB (NCT05063162). She is on the advisory board for educational activities led by Limbic Neurology. She has been an invited speaker for educational/research sessions coordinated by Biogen, Alexion, Novartis, Excemed and Limbic Neurology. She is on the medical advisory board (non-remunerated positions) of The MOG Project and the Sumaira Foundation. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2025 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pain is a common symptom of multiple sclerosis (MS). The reliability of outcome measures for pain and the accuracy of screening tools are essential for treatment purposes., Objectives: This study investigated the test-retest reliability of Neuropathic Pain Scale (NPS), Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory (NPSI), Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF), Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ), Douleur Neuropathique 4 (DN4), and painDETECT, and the accuracy of DN4 and painDETECT., Methods: 110 persons with MS were included (mean age: 45.35 ± 12.73; Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS): 3 (Interquartile range, IQR: 2.6)). The reliability (internal consistency, test-retest, measurement error) and accuracy (area under the curve (AUC), specificity, sensitivity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value) were analyzed., Results: All included pain assessment tools showed good test-retest reliability (Intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC, (95% confidence interval, CI): 0.85 (0.79-0.89)-0.89 (0.84-0.92)) and good-to-excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α: 0.73-0.93). The test-retest reliability of NMQ was moderate to substantial (Cohen's κ = 0.54-0.87). The overall accuracy of DN4 compared to the neurologist's diagnosis was acceptable (AUC = 0.762), while that of painDETECT was poor (AUC = 0.682) and demonstrated inadequate predictive ability., Conclusion: All pain outcome measures were reliable in patients with MS (pwMS). DN4 can be used to screen neuropathic pain in MS., Clinical Trial Registry Name: Reliability and Validity of Outcome Measures for Pain in MS https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/prs/app/action/SelectProtocol?sid=S000CRMD&selectaction=Edit&uid=U0006NAA&ts=2&cx=-jzvd6m Registration number: NCT05742152., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: C.Y. and M.D. have no conflict of interest. B.S. received academic travel support from Roche, Novartis, Teva, Merck, and Biogen. B.V.W. has received advisory board and speaking fees from Almirall, Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi; research support from Biogen, Merck, Novartis, and Sanofi, and contracted research from Biogen, Merck, Sanofi, Novartis, and Roche. C.S. has no conflict of interest. E.C. received the ECTRIMS Clinical Fellowship (2013–2014), ECTRIMS travel grant awards, and academic travel support from Novartis, Genzyme, Merck, Biogen, and Roche, has been a member of advisory boards at Genzyme, Biogen, Merck, and Novartis, and has received sub-investigator fees from the ISS “Social Cognition in MS” project at Teva. C.C. received academic travel support from Novartis, Genzyme, Merck, Biogen, and Roche, has been a member of advisory boards at Genzyme, Biogen, Merck, and Novartis, and has received PI fees from the ISS “Social Cognition in MS” project at Teva. P.V.A., M.C., and I.L. have no conflict of interest. P.F. provided educational lectures for Roche.

Background: The study aims to examine the age and disability levels at diagnosis in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS), with and without autoimmune comorbidities (AC), and the effect of AC on NEDA-3 status and to characterize AC associated with MS, comparing also therapeutic approaches between MS patients with and without other AC., Methods: This population-based, multicentric study enrolled patients with relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) with AC (AC group) or without AC (reference group) from 14 MS centers. Demographical, clinical features, treatment information, MRI activity, EDSS, and no evidence of disease activity (NEDA-3) status were assessed at T36 (enrollment time) and T0 (36 months prior)., Results: Eight hundred seventy-three RRMS patients were included; 215 (24.7%) presented with at least one AC. The AC group was characterized by higher proportion of female patients than reference group (p = 0.008). Patients with AC, compared to reference group, exhibited older age at MS onset and MS diagnosis, and higher EDSS score at diagnosis, at T0 (all p < 0.001), and T36 (p = 0.03). The proportion of patients reaching EDSS 4 was higher in reference group than AC group (p = 0.03). People in AC group were more often treated with glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, and rituximab, whereas PwMS from reference group with interferon-beta and fingolimod at T0 and T36. The risk of losing NEDA-3 was lower in AC group (OR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.43-0.86, p = 0.005)., Conclusions: AC are common in PwMS and can be related to a delay in onset, diagnosis and higher disability at MS presentation. However, the coexistence of AC is not associated with a worse prognosis., (© 2024 The Author(s). European Journal of Neurology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Neurology.)

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) affects the cognitive and motor domains. Muscle weakness often leads to abnormal gait. Several solutions are rising, including the use of passive exoskeletons., Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of a first-ever use of a passive exoskeleton on walking ability in people with MS., Methods: We recruited 50 persons with MS. All subjects were assessed using the 2-min walking test, the timed 25-foot walk test, and a two-stage rate of perceived exertion (RPE) without the exoskeleton (T0) and with the exoskeleton (T1)., Results: The data showed a significant decrease in walking endurance while the exoskeleton is worn (2-min walking test: T0: 65.19 ± 23.37 m; T1: 59.40 ± 22.99; p < 0.0001) and a not significant difference in walking speed on a shortened distance (T0: 15.71 ± 10.30 s; T1: 15.73 ± 11.86 s; p = 0.25). No significant differences were also found for the effort perception scale (RPE: T0: 13.24 ± 3.01; T1: 13.60 ± 2.9; p = 0.3). Seventy-two percent of subjects reported a positive or neutral global perceived effect., Conclusions: The exoskeleton does not add any fatiguing or negative effects. Although the walking performance decreases, the overall perception of the subjects is positive. Further studies are needed to evaluate the effect of the exoskeleton on gait quality., (Copyright © 2023 International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics.)

Background: Disability progression is a key milestone in the disease evolution of people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS). Prediction models of the probability of disability progression have not yet reached the level of trust needed to be adopted in the clinic. A common benchmark to assess model development in multiple sclerosis is also currently lacking., Methods: Data of adult PwMS with a follow-up of at least three years from 146 MS centers, spread over 40 countries and collected by the MSBase consortium was used. With basic inclusion criteria for quality requirements, it represents a total of 15, 240 PwMS. External validation was performed and repeated five times to assess the significance of the results. Transparent Reporting for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD) guidelines were followed. Confirmed disability progression after two years was predicted, with a confirmation window of six months. Only routinely collected variables were used such as the expanded disability status scale, treatment, relapse information, and MS course. To learn the probability of disability progression, state-of-the-art machine learning models were investigated. The discrimination performance of the models is evaluated with the area under the receiver operator curve (ROC-AUC) and under the precision recall curve (AUC-PR), and their calibration via the Brier score and the expected calibration error. All our preprocessing and model code are available at https://gitlab.com/edebrouwer/ms&#95;benchmark, making this task an ideal benchmark for predicting disability progression in MS., Findings: Machine learning models achieved a ROC-AUC of 0⋅71 ± 0⋅01, an AUC-PR of 0⋅26 ± 0⋅02, a Brier score of 0⋅1 ± 0⋅01 and an expected calibration error of 0⋅07 ± 0⋅04. The history of disability progression was identified as being more predictive for future disability progression than the treatment or relapses history., Conclusions: Good discrimination and calibration performance on an external validation set is achieved, using only routinely collected variables. This suggests machine-learning models can reliably inform clinicians about the future occurrence of progression and are mature for a clinical impact study., Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing non-financial interests but the following competing financial interests: - Dana Horakova received speaker honoraria and consulting fees from Biogen, Merck, Teva, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, and Novartis, as well as support for research activities from Biogen and Czech Minsitry of Education [project Progres Q27/LF1]. - Francesco Patti received speaker honoraria and advisory board fees from Almirall, Bayer, Biogen, Celgene, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme and TEVA. He received research funding from Biogen, Merck, FISM (Fondazione Italiana Sclerosi Multipla), Reload Onlus Association and University of Catania. - Guillermo Izquierdo received speaking honoraria from Biogen, Novartis, Sanofi, Merck, Roche, Almirall and Teva. - Sara Eichau received speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck, Bayer, Sanofi Genzyme, Roche and Teva. - Marc Girard received consulting fees from Teva Canada Innovation, Biogen, Novartis and Genzyme Sanofi; lecture payments from Teva Canada Innovation, Novartis and EMD. He has also received a research grant from Canadian Institutes of Health Research. - Alessandra Lugaresi has served as a Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi/ Genzyme and Teva Advisory Board Member. She received congress and travel/accommodation expense compensations or speaker honoraria from Biogen, Merck, Mylan, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi/Genzyme, Teva and Fondazione Italiana Sclerosi Multipla (FISM). Her institutions received research grants from Novartis and Sanofi Genzyme. - Pierre Grammond has served in advisory boards for Novartis, EMD Serono, Roche, Biogen idec, Sanofi Genzyme, Pendopharm and has received grant support from Genzyme and Roche, has received research grants for his institution from Biogen idec, Sanofi Genzyme, EMD Serono. - Tomas Kalincik served on scientific advisory boards for BMS, Roche, Janssen, Sanofi Genzyme, Novartis, Merck and Biogen, steering committee for Brain Atrophy Initiative by Sanofi Genzyme, received conference travel support and/or speaker honoraria from WebMD Global, Eisai, Novartis, Biogen, Sanofi-Genzyme, Teva, BioCSL and Merck and received research or educational event support from Biogen, Novartis, Genzyme, Roche, Celgene and Merck. - Raed Alroughani received honoraria as a speaker and for serving on scientific advisory boards from Bayer, Biogen, GSK, Merck, Novartis, Roche and Sanofi-Genzyme. - Francois Grand’Maison received honoraria or research funding from Biogen, Genzyme, Novartis, Teva Neurosciences, Mitsubishi and ONO Pharmaceuticals. - Murat Terzi received travel grants from Novartis, Bayer-Schering, Merck and Teva; has participated in clinical trials by Sanofi Aventis, Roche and Novartis. - Jeannette Lechner-Scott travel compensation from Novartis, Biogen, Roche and Merck. Her institution receives the honoraria for talks and advisory board commitment as well as research grants from Biogen, Merck, Roche, TEVA and Novartis. - Samia J. Khoury received compensation for participation in the Novartis Maestro program. - Vincent van Pesch has received travel grants from Merck, Biogen, Sanofi, Bristol Myers Squibb, Almirall and Roche; his institution receives honoraria for consultancy and lectures and research grants from Roche, Biogen, Sanofi, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, Almirall and Novartis Pharma. - Radek Ampapa received conference travel support from Novartis, Teva, Biogen, Bayer and Merck and has participated in a clinical trials by Biogen, Novartis, Teva and Actelion. - Daniele Spitaleri received honoraria as a consultant on scientific advisory boards by Bayer-Schering, Novartis and Sanofi-Aventis and compensation for travel from Novartis, Biogen, Sanofi Aventis, Teva and Merck. - Claudio Solaro served on scientific advisory boards for Merck, Genzyme, Almirall, and Biogen; received honoraria and travel grants from Sanofi Aventis, Novartis, Biogen, Merck, Genzyme and Teva. - Davide Maimone served on scientific advisory boards for Bayer, Biogen, Merck, Sanofi-Genzyme, Novartis, Roche, and Almirall; received honoraria and travel grants from Sanofi Genzyme, Novartis, Biogen, Merck, and Roche. - Gerardo Iuliano (retired - no PI successor but has approved ongoing use of data) had travel/accommodations/meeting expenses funded by Bayer Schering, Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Sanofi Aventis, and Teva. - Bart Van Wijmeersch received research and travel grants, honoraria for MS-Expert advisor and Speaker fees from Bayer-Schering, Biogen, Sanofi Genzyme, Merck, Novartis, Roche and Teva. - Tamara Castillo Triviño received speaking/consulting fees and/or travel funding from Bayer, Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme and Teva. - Jose Luis Sanchez-Menoyo accepted travel compensation from Novartis, Merck and Biogen, speaking honoraria from Biogen, Novartis, Sanofi, Merck, Almirall, Bayer and Teva and has participated in clinical trials by Biogen, Merck and Roche - Guy Laureys received travel and/or consultancy compensation from Sanofi-Genzyme, Roche, Teva, Merck, Novartis, Celgene, Biogen. - Anneke van der Walt served on advisory boards and receives unrestricted research grants from Novartis, Biogen, Merck and Roche She has received speaker’s honoraria and travel support from Novartis, Roche, and Merck. She receives grant support from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and MS Research Australia. - Jiwon Oh has received research funding from the MS Society of Canada, National MS Society, Brain Canada, Biogen, Roche, EMD Serono (an affiliate of Merck KGaA); and personal compensation for consulting or speaking from Alexion, Biogen, Celgene (BMS), EMD Serono (an affiliate of Merck KGaA), Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi-Genzyme. - Ayse Altintas received speaker honoraria from Merck, Alexion,; received travel and registration grants from Merck, Biogen - Gen Pharma, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme. - Yara Fragoso received honoraria as a consultant on scientific advisory boards by Novartis, Teva, Roche and Sanofi-Aventis and compensation for travel from Novartis, Biogen, Sanofi Aventis, Teva, Roche and Merck. - Tunde Csepany received speaker honoraria/ conference travel support from Bayer Schering, Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis and Teva. - Suzanne Hodgkinson received honoraria and consulting fees from Novartis, Bayer Schering and Sanofi, and travel grants from Novartis, Biogen Idec and Bayer Schering. - Norma Deri received funding from Bayer, Merck, Biogen, Genzyme and Novartis. - Bruce Taylor received funding for travel and speaker honoraria from Bayer Schering Pharma, CSL Australia, Biogen and Novartis, and has served on advisory boards for Biogen, Novartis, Roche and CSL Australia. - Fraser Moore participated in clinical trials sponsored by EMD Serono and Novartis. - Orla Gray received honoraria as consultant on scientific advisory boards for Genzyme, Biogen, Merck, Roche and Novartis; has received travel grants from Biogen, Merck, Roche and Novartis; has participated in clinical trials by Biogen and Merck. - Csilla Rozsa received speaker honoraria from Bayer Schering, Novartis and Biogen, congress and travel expense compensations from Biogen, Teva, Merck and Bayer Schering. - Allan Kermode received speaker honoraria and scientific advisory board fees from Bayer, BioCSL, Biogen, Genzyme, Innate Immunotherapeutics, Merck, Novartis, Sanofi, Sanofi-Aventis, and Teva. - Magdolna Simo received speaker honoraria from Novartis, Biogen, Bayer Schering; congress/travel compensation from Teva, Biogen, Merck, Bayer Schering. - Todd Hardy has received speaking fees or received honoraria for serving on advisory boards for Biogen, Merck, Teva, Novartis, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Sanofi-Genzyme, is Co-Editor of Advances in Clinical Neurosciences and Rehabilitation, and serves on the editorial board of Journal of Neuroimmunology and Frontiers in Neurology. - Nikolaos Grigoriadis received honoraria, consultancy/lecture fees, travel support and research grants from Biogen Idec, Biologix, Novartis, TEVA, Bayer, Merck Serono, Genesis Pharma, Sanofi – Genzyme, ROCHE, Cellgene, ELPEN and research grants from Hellenic Ministry of Development., (Copyright: © 2024 De Brouwer et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Treatment options for secondary progressive MS (SPMS) are limited, especially considering that the new drugs recently approved are licensed for actively relapsing patients. We aimed to compare the disability progression in a real-world cohort of SPMS patients treated with natalizumab (NTZ) or interferon beta-1b (IFNb-1b). This multicenter retrospective enrolled patients with a diagnosis of SPMS according to 2014 Lublin criteria, who received NTZ or IFNb-1b for at least 48 months between the 1st June 2012 and the 15th May 2018 ​at 33 Italian MS centers contributing to the Italian MS Registry NTZ or IFNb-1b. Confirmed Expanded Disability Status Scale worsening (CEW) and progression independent of relapse (PIRA) were evaluated. In order to correct for non-randomization, a propensity score matching of the groups was performed. Out of 5206 MS patients identified at the time of data extraction, 421 SPMS patients treated with NTZ (224 [53.2%] females, mean age 45.3 ​± ​25.4 years) and 353 with IFNb-1b (133 [37.8%] females, mean age 48.5 ​± ​19.8 years) were enrolled. After applying the matching procedure, 102 patients were retained in the NTZ group and 98 in the IFNb-2b group. The proportion of patients who reached the 48-month 1-point CEW was significantly higher in IFNb-1b compared to NTZ group (58.2% versus 30.4%, p ​= ​0.01). The proportion of patients who developed PIRA at 48 months were significantly higher in IFNb-1b compared to NTZ (72.4% versus 40.2%, p ​= ​0.01). EDSS before treatment initiation and SPMS duration were risk factors for disability progression in terms of PIRA (HR 2.54, 25%CI 1.67-5.7; p ​= ​0.006 and HR 2.04, 25%CI 1.22-3.35; p ​= ​0.01, respectively). Patients treated with IFNb-1b were 1.64 times more to likely to develop PIRA (HR 1.64, 25%CI 1.04-4.87; p ​= ​0.001). Treatment with NTZ in SPMS patients showed more favorable disability outcomes compared to IFNb-1b with beneficial effects over 48 months., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest CGC has received grants to attend scientific congresses or speaker honoraria from Biogen, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi/Genzyme, Teva. UA reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. MPA has received grants to attend scientific congresses or speaker honoraria from Biogen, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi/Genzyme, Teva. RB reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. AB has received grants to attend scientific congresses or speaker honoraria from Biogen, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi/Genzyme, Teva. SB served as speaker and/or advisory board fee, and/or travel grant from Novartis, Teva, Sanofi-Genzyme, Roche, Biogen-Idec, Merck-Serono. VBM received fees for consultancies or public speaking from Merck, Novartis, Biogen, Roche, Genzyme and Biogen. PC has served as an advisory board member for Almirall, Biogen, Merck-Serono, Sanofi-Genzyme, Roche, Teva; she has received grants to attend scientific congresses or speaker honoraria from Biogen, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi/Genzyme, Teva. EC reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. AC reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. SC has received grants to attend scientific congresses or speaker honoraria from Biogen, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi/Genzyme, Teva. GDL reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. ADS reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. MF is Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Neurology; received compensation for consulting services and/or speaking activities from Biogen Idec, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries; and receives research support from Biogen Idec, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Roche, Italian Ministry of Health, Fondazione Italiana Sclerosi Multipla, and ARiSLA(Fondazione Italiana di Ricerca per la SLA). AG reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. CG reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. FG received grants to attend scientific congresses or speaker honoraria from Biogen, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi/Genzyme, Teva. GL reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. DM reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. GTM has received grants to attend scientific congresses or speaker honoraria from Biogen, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi/Genzyme, Teva. GAM has served as an advisory board member and received speaker honoraria, congress, travel and accommodation expense compensations from Merck, Teva, Mylan, Bayer, Novartis, Roche, Almirall, Biogen and Sanofi Genzyme. LM reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. DP has received grants to attend scientific congresses or speaker honoraria from Biogen, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi/Genzyme, Teva. IP reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. PR reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. MR received travel grants and fees for consulting and public speaking from Almirall, Biogen, Genzyme-Sanofi, Merck Serono, Mylan and Novartis. GS has received grants to attend scientific congresses or speaker honoraria from Biogen, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi/Genzyme, Teva. CS has received grants to attend scientific congresses or speaker honoraria from Biogen, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi/Genzyme, Teva. RT reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. ST reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. MT has received grants to attend scientific congresses or speaker honoraria from Biogen, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi/Genzyme, Teva. MV reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. VL reports no disclosures relevant to the manuscript. MZ has received grants to attend scientific congresses or speaker honoraria from Biogen, Merck-Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi/Genzyme, Teva. FP has received honoraria for speaking activities by Almirall, Bayer Schering, Biogen Idec, Merck Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, and TEVA; he also served as advisory board member the following companies: Bayer Schering, Biogen Idec, Merck Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, and TEVA; he was also funded by Pfizer and FISM for epidemiological studies; he received grants for congress participation from Almirall, Bayer Shering, Biogen Idec, Merck Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, and TEVA., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: A comprehensive assessment of upper limb (UL) function is mandatory in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS), and the use of multiple objective and subjective measures is advisable. Findings on the role of cognitive impairment on the assessment of UL function are scant and inconclusive. The present study investigated the influence of cognitive function on the distribution of objective and subjective UL measures and on their association., Methods: In the cross-sectional study, subjects with a diagnosis of MS, age ≥ 18 years, right-hand dominance, no presence of orthopedic UL impairment, or other neurological diseases were recruited. The assessment protocol included the Nine-Hole Peg Test (9-HPT), Box and Block Test (BBT), and hand grip strength (HGS), a validated PROM (MAM-36), and the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT)., Results: Two hundred forty-six PwMS were recruited (158 females, mean age = 51.65 ± 13.45 years; mean EDSS = 5.10 ± 1.88) Subject with mild-to-moderate cognitive impairment (SDMT ≤  - 2 SD of normative values) scored lower on the 9-HPT and higher on the BBT and MAM-36 when compared with subject with no cognitive impairment. Cognitive impairment showed a small but significant effect on the association between 9-HPT scores and the MAM-36., Discussion: Findings suggest that cognitive impairment is associated with subjects' performance on 9-HPT, BBT, and MAM-36 (but not HGS), resulting in scores indicating a poorer UL function. Interestingly, cognitive impairment slightly affected the congruence between subjective and objective UL measures, although only minor differences in the correlation pattern across groups reporting different cognitive performances emerged., (© 2024. Fondazione Società Italiana di Neurologia.)

Objectives: Implementation of advance care planning (ACP) in people with progressive multiple sclerosis (PwPMS) is limited. We aimed to involve users (PwPMS, significant others, and healthcare professionals involved in PwPMS care) in the evaluation and refinement of a booklet to be used during the ACP conversations., Methods: This qualitative study consisted of cognitive interviews with PwPMS and significant others and a focus group with healthcare professionals from three Italian centers. We analyzed the interviews using the framework method and the focus group using thematic analysis., Results: We interviewed 10 PwPMS (3 women; median age 54 years; median Expanded Disability Status Scale score 6.0) and three significant others (2 women; 2 spouses and one daughter). The analysis yielded three themes: booklet comprehensibility and clarity, content acceptability and emotional impact, and suggestions for improvement. Twelve healthcare professionals (7 neurologists, 3 psychologists, one nurse, and one physiotherapist) participated in the focus group, whose analysis identified two themes: booklet's content importance and clarity and challenges to ACP implementation. Based on analysis results, we revised the booklet (text, layout, and pictures) and held a second-round interviews with two PwPMS and one significant other. The interviewees agreed on the revisions but reaffirmed their difficulty in dealing with the topic and the need for a physician when using the booklet., Conclusions: Appraisal of the booklet was instrumental in improving its acceptability and understandability before using it in the ConCure-SM feasibility trial. Furthermore, our data reveal a lack of familiarity with ACP practice in the Italian context., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: COVID-19 vaccines have been recommended to people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) and, to ensure durable immunity, a third booster dose has been administered in several countries. Data about potential risks associated with the third booster dose in pwMS, such as vaccine-triggered disease exacerbations, are still scarce., Objective: To investigate whether the administration of a third booster dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines was associated with an increased risk of short-term disease reactivation in a large cohort of pwMS., Methods: We retrospectively selected 1265 pwMS who received a third booster dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. Demographic and clinical data were collected, including the presence, number and characteristics of relapses in the 60 days prior to and after the third booster dose., Results: In the selected cohort, the relapse rate in the two months after administration of the third booster dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines did not increase when compared with the prior two months. Indeed, the percentage of pwMS experiencing relapses in the 60 days following the administration of the third booster dose was 2.1%, similar to the percentage recorded in 60 days prior to vaccination, which was 1.9%., Conclusions: The third booster dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines appeared to be safe for pwMS., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Aim: To evaluate the real-world comparative effectiveness and the cost-effectiveness, from a UK National Health Service perspective, of natalizumab versus fingolimod in patients with rapidly evolving severe relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RES-RRMS)., Methods: Real-world data from the MSBase Registry were obtained for patients with RES-RRMS who were previously either naive to disease-modifying therapies or had been treated with interferon-based therapies, glatiramer acetate, dimethyl fumarate, or teriflunomide (collectively known as BRACETD). Matched cohorts were selected by 3-way multinomial propensity score matching, and the annualized relapse rate (ARR) and 6-month-confirmed disability worsening (CDW6M) and improvement (CDI6M) were compared between treatment groups. Comparative effectiveness results were used in a cost-effectiveness model comparing natalizumab and fingolimod, using an established Markov structure over a lifetime horizon with health states based on the Expanded Disability Status Scale. Additional model data sources included the UK MS Survey 2015, published literature, and publicly available sources., Results: In the comparative effectiveness analysis, we found a significantly lower ARR for patients starting natalizumab compared with fingolimod (rate ratio [RR] = 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.73) or BRACETD (RR = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.42-0.53). Similarly, CDI6M was higher for patients starting natalizumab compared with fingolimod (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.25; 95% CI, 1.01-1.55) and BRACETD (HR = 1.46; 95% CI, 1.16-1.85). In patients starting fingolimod, we found a lower ARR (RR = 0.72; 95% CI, 0.65-0.80) compared with starting BRACETD, but no difference in CDI6M (HR = 1.17; 95% CI, 0.91-1.50). Differences in CDW6M were not found between the treatment groups. In the base-case cost-effectiveness analysis, natalizumab dominated fingolimod (0.302 higher quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs] and £17,141 lower predicted lifetime costs). Similar cost-effectiveness results were observed across sensitivity analyses., Conclusions: This MSBase Registry analysis suggests that natalizumab improves clinical outcomes when compared with fingolimod, which translates to higher QALYs and lower costs in UK patients with RES-RRMS.

Introduction: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) was associated with cognitive alterations affecting everyday life activities. These need input integration of both motor and cognitive systems. The study aim is to evaluate cognitive-motor interference phenomenon in previously independent patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 (PwMCOVID-19) compared with healthy controls (HC), through dual-task (DT) paradigm., Methods: PwMCOVID-19 were included if being independent at home, had no previous referred cognitive impairment, mechanical ventilation or oxygen need. They were assessed at admission and after 6 months with a motor-cognitive DT test (counting backward by twos while walking 2 min). HC were enrolled as control group. Differences between single-task (ST) and DT performance, DT effect (DTE) and task prioritization amongst groups and during time points were analyzed., Results: One-hundred PwMCOVID-19 [mean age=67.32(12.08) years; 53 M/47 F] and 39 HC [mean age=63.11(9.90) years; 20 M/19 F] were recruited. Upon T0, PwMCOVID-19 showed lower cognitive and motor DT performances than ST and HC. Mutual interference pattern was predominant in PwMCOVID-19. At T1, 41 PwMCOVID-19 were examined [mean age=64.85(10.75); 22 M/19 F]. They had a worse DT performance compared to ST, although DT improved at T1. A stronger cognitive ST-DT difference was present at T0, compared to ST-DT difference at T1, while motor ST-DT difference was unchanged over time in PwCOVID-19., Conclusion: In PwMCOVID-19, there is an impairment of DT counting while walking at baseline and after 6 months from hospitalization, with a more pronounced DT mutual interference pattern at T0. After 6 months, the motor and cognitive ST and DT performances ameliorated, not reaching the HC level., (© 2023. Fondazione Società Italiana di Neurologia.)