Search

Copyright of Česká a Slovenská Neurologie a Neurochirurgie is the property of Czech Medical Association of JE Purkyne and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Aims: Multiple sclerosis treatment strategies are changing in the Czech Republic. According to data from 2013-2021, the proportion of patients starting high-efficacy disease-modifying therapies is increasing. In this survey, we describe the actual data trends in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients beginning their first disease‑modifying therapies (DMTs) from 2013 to 2021. The secondary objective was to present the history, data collection, and scientific potential of the Czech National MS registry (ReMuS)., Methods: First, using descriptive statistics, we analysed the data for patients starting their first DMTs, either platform (including dimethyl fumarate) or high-efficacy DMTs (HE-DMTs), for each successive year. Second, a detailed description of the history, data collection, completeness, quality optimising procedures, and legal policies of ReMuS is provided., Results: Based on the dataset from December 31, 2021, the total number of monitored patients with MS in ReMuS increased from 9,019 in 2013 (referred from 7 of 15 MS centres) to 12,940 in 2016 (referred from all 15 Czech MS centres) to 17,478 in 2021. In these years, the percentage of patients treated with DMTs in the registry ranged from 76 to 83%, but the proportion of patients treated with HE-DMTs changed from 16.2% in 2013 to 37.1% in 2021. During the follow-up period, a total of 8,491 treatment-naive patients received DMTs. The proportion of patients (all MS phenotypes) starting HE-DMTs increased from 2.1% in 2013 to 18.5% in 2021., Conclusion: Patient registries, including ReMuS, provide an essential quality data source, especially in light of the increasing percentage of patients on HE-DMTs. Although early initiation of HE-DMT can provide considerable benefits, it also carries greater potential risks. Consistent long-term follow-up of patients in real‑world clinical practice, which only registries allow, is therefore crucial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of therapeutic strategies, for epidemiological research and to assist decision making by healthcare providers and regulatory bodies., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Background: Cladribine, a selective immune reconstitution therapy, is approved for the treatment of adult patients with highly active multiple sclerosis (MS)., Objectives: Provide experience with cladribine therapy in a real-world setting., Methods: This is a registry-based retrospective observational cohort study. First, using data from the Czech nationwide registry ReMuS, we analysed patients who initiated cladribine from September 1, 2018 to December 31, 2021. Second, we analysed a subgroup of patients who initiated cladribine between September 1, 2018 to June 30, 2020, thus possessing a follow-up period of at least 2 years. We evaluated demographic and MS characteristics including disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) before and after cladribine administration, relapses, Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), and adherence., Results: In total, 617 patients (335 with follow-up of at least 2 years) started cladribine therapy in the study period (mean age 37.0, mean disease duration 8.4 years, 74.1% females). In most cases, cladribine was administered as a second-line drug, a total of 80.7% had been escalated from a platform DMT. During 2 years before cladribine initiation, the average annualised relapse rate (ARR) was .67. Following cladribine initiation, the ARR decreased to .28 in the first year and .22 in the second year. Overall, across the entire two-year treatment period, 69.0% of patients were relapse-free and the average ARR was .25. As for EDSS development, the median baseline EDSS was 2.5 and remained stable even after 24 months. The adherence to treatment ranged of around 90%., Conclusion: This nationwide study confirms the efficacy of cladribine in real-world settings, especially in patients who are not treatment-naïve. In addition, the study shows an exceptionally high adherence rate, a finding that underscores the invaluable role of cladribine, but also the value of registry-based studies in capturing real-world clinical practice., Competing Interests: The authors declared potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article as following: PP received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme. JD has nothing to disclose. DH received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. MP received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. AM has nothing to disclose. DM has nothing to disclose. ZP received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. MV received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. ER received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. IS received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. JL received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. JM received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. PS received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. MG received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. AM received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. JA received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. PH received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. RA received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. MD received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. EKH received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag. DS received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen Cilag., (© The Author(s) 2024.)

Background: The Big Multiple Sclerosis Data (BMSD) network ( https://bigmsdata.org ) was initiated in 2014 and includes the national multiple sclerosis (MS) registries of the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Italy, and Sweden as well as the international MSBase registry. BMSD has addressed the ethical, legal, technical, and governance-related challenges for data sharing and so far, published three scientific papers on pooled datasets as proof of concept for its collaborative design., Data Collection: Although BMSD registries operate independently on different platforms, similarities in variables, definitions and data structure allow joint analysis of data. Certain coordinated modifications in how the registries collect adverse event data have been implemented after BMSD consensus decisions, showing the ability to develop together., Data Management: Scientific projects can be proposed by external sponsors via the coordinating centre and each registry decides independently on participation, respecting its governance structure. Research datasets are established in a project-to-project fashion and a project-specific data model is developed, based on a unifying core data model. To overcome challenges in data sharing, BMSD has developed procedures for federated data analysis., Future Perspectives: Presently, BMSD is seeking a qualification opinion from the European Medicines Agency (EMA) to conduct post-authorization safety studies (PASS) and aims to pursue a qualification opinion also for post-authorization effectiveness studies (PAES). BMSD aspires to promote the advancement of real-world evidence research in the MS field., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background and Purpose: We evaluated whether there was a difference in the occurrence of relapses pre- and post-COVID-19 vaccination in a nationwide cohort of Danish patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis., Methods: We conducted a population-based, nationwide cohort study with a cutoff date of 1 October 2022. We used McNemar tests to assess changes in the proportion of patients with recorded relapses within 90 days and 180 days before and after first vaccine dose, and a negative binomial regression model to compare the 90 and 180 days postvaccination annualized relapse rate (ARR) to the 360 days prevaccination ARR. Multivariate Cox regression was used to estimate relapse risk factors., Results: We identified 8169 vaccinated (87.3% Comirnaty) patients without a recorded history of a positive COVID-19 test. We did not find statistically significant changes in the proportion of patients with relapses in the 90 days (1.3% vs. 1.4% of patients, p = 0.627) and 180 days (2.7% vs. 2.6% of patients, p = 0.918) pre- and postvaccination. Also, a comparison of the ARR 360 days before (0.064, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.058-0.070) with the ARR 90 (0.057, 95% CI = 0.047-0.069, p = 0.285) and 180 (0.055, 95% CI = 0.048-0.063, p = 0.060) days after vaccination did not show statistically significant differences. Lower age, higher Expanded Disability Status Scale score, and relapse within 360 days before vaccination were associated with a higher risk of relapse., Conclusions: We did not find evidence of increased relapse activity following the administration of the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Neurology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Neurology.)

Background: Treatment switching is a common challenge and opportunity in real-world clinical practice. Increasing diversity in disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) has generated interest in the identification of reliable and robust predictors of treatment switching across different countries, DMTs, and time periods., Objective: The objective of this retrospective, observational study was to identify independent predictors of treatment switching in a population of relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) patients in the Big Multiple Sclerosis Data Network of national clinical registries, including the Italian MS registry, the OFSEP of France, the Danish MS registry, the Swedish national MS registry, and the international MSBase Registry., Methods: In this cohort study, we merged information on 269,822 treatment episodes in 110,326 patients from 1997 to 2018 from five clinical registries. Patients were included in the final pooled analysis set if they had initiated at least one DMT during the relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) stage. Patients not diagnosed with RRMS or RRMS patients not initiating DMT therapy during the RRMS phase were excluded from the analysis. The primary study outcome was treatment switching. A multilevel mixed-effects shared frailty time-to-event model was used to identify independent predictors of treatment switching. The contributing MS registry was included in the pooled analysis as a random effect., Results: Every one-point increase in the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score at treatment start was associated with 1.08 times the rate of subsequent switching, adjusting for age, sex, and calendar year (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.08; 95% CI 1.07-1.08). Women were associated with 1.11 times the rate of switching relative to men (95% CI 1.08-1.14), whilst older age was also associated with an increased rate of treatment switching. DMTs started between 2007 and 2012 were associated with 2.48 times the rate of switching relative to DMTs that began between 1996 and 2006 (aHR 2.48; 95% CI 2.48-2.56). DMTs started from 2013 onwards were more likely to switch relative to the earlier treatment epoch (aHR 8.09; 95% CI 7.79-8.41; reference = 1996-2006)., Conclusion: Switching between DMTs is associated with female sex, age, and disability at baseline and has increased in frequency considerably in recent years as more treatment options have become available. Consideration of a patient's individual risk and tolerance profile needs to be taken into account when selecting the most appropriate switch therapy from an expanding array of treatment choices., Competing Interests: TSp received compensation for serving on scientific advisory boards, honoraria for consultancy and funding for travel from Biogen; and speaker honoraria from Novartis. MM has served on the scientific advisory board for Sanofi, Novartis, and Merck and has received honoraria for lecturing from Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Genzyme, and Bristol Myers Squibb. HB is an employee of Monash University and has accepted travel compensation from Merck; his institution receives honoraria for talks, steering committee activities, and research grants from Roche, Merck, Biogen, Novartis, UCB Pharma, Medical Research Future Fund Australia, NHMRC Australia, Trish MS Foundation, MS Australia, and the Pennycook Foundation. He receives personal compensation for steering group activities for the Brain Health Initiative from the Oxford Health Policy Forum and is funded by an NHMRC Australia Investigator Grant. SV received consulting and lecturing fees, travel grants, and research support from Biogen, Celgene, Genentech, Genzyme, Medday Pharmaceuticals, Merck Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi Aventis, and Teva Pharma. MT has served on scientific advisory boards for Biogen, Novartis, Roche, and Genzyme; has received speaker honoraria and travel support from Biogen Idec, Sanofi Aventis, Merck Serono, Teva, Genzyme, and Novartis; and has received research grants for her institution from Biogen Idec, Merck Serono, and Novartis. PI has served on scientific advisory boards for Biogen Idec, Bayer, Teva, Roche, Merck Serono, Novartis, and Genzyme and has received funding for travel and/or speaker honoraria from Sanofi Aventis, Genzyme, Biogen Idec, Teva, Merck Serono, and Novartis. DH was supported by the Charles University Cooperation Program in Neuroscience, the project National Institute for Neurological Research (Programme EXCELES, ID Project No. LX22NPO5107) funded by the European Union (Next Generation EU), and by the General University Hospital in Prague project MH CZ-DRO-VFN64165. She also received compensation for travel, speaker honoraria, and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck, Bayer, Sanofi Genzyme, Roche, and Teva, as well as support for research activities from Biogen Idec. FP is an employee of Biogen. RH is an employee of Biogen and holds stock. PD served on editorial boards and has been supported to attend meetings by EMD, Biogen, Novartis, Genzyme, and TEVA Neuroscience. He holds grants from the CIHR and the MS Society of Canada and has received funding for investigator-initiated trials from Biogen, Novartis, and Genzyme. JL-S received travel compensation from Novartis, Biogen, Roche, and Merck. Her institution receives honoraria for talks and advisory board commitments, as well as research grants from Biogen, Merck, Roche, TEVA, and Novartis. SS declared no competing interests. PL received honoraria for speaking and/or travel expenses from Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Roche; consulting fees from Biogen, GeNeuro, Merck, Novartis, Roche; and research support from Biogen, Merck, Novartis. None were related to this work. SE received speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck, Bayer, Sanofi Genzyme, Roche, and Teva. RAI received honoraria as a speaker and for serving on scientific advisory boards from Bayer, Biogen, GSK, Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi-Genzyme. MT received travel grants from Novartis, Bayer-Schering, Merck, and Teva; and has participated in clinical trials by Sanofi Aventis, Roche, and Novartis. MG received consulting fees from Teva Canada Innovation, Biogen, Novartis, and Genzyme Sanofi; and lecture payments from Teva Canada Innovation, Novartis, and EMD. He has also received a research grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. TK served on scientific advisory boards for MS International Federation and World Health Organization, BMS, Roche, Janssen, Sanofi Genzyme, Novartis, Merck, and Biogen; on the 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. FG received honoraria or research funding from Biogen, Genzyme, Novartis, Teva Neurosciences, and ATARA Pharmaceuticals. OS received honoraria and consulting fees from Bayer-Schering, Novartis, Merck, Biogen, and Genzyme. SK received compensation for scientific advisory board activity from Merck and Roche. BY received honoraria as a speaker and member of scientific advisory boards from Sanofi, Bayer, Biogen, Merck, Janssen, Novartis, Roche, and Aspen. MJ 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. YB received speaker honoraria/consulting fees from Merck, Biogen, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Sanofi, and Sandoz. CO-G received honoraria as a consultant on scientific advisory boards from Biogen, Celgene, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi-Genzyme, and TEVA. AA received speaker honoraria from Novartis and Alexion. SH has received unrestricted educational grants or speaking honoraria from Biogen, Merck Serono, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi Genzyme. PM received speaker fees and travel grants from Novartis, Biogen, T'évalua, and Sanofi. RAm received conference travel support from Novartis, Teva, Biogen, Bayer, and Merck and has participated in clinical trials by Biogen, Novartis, Teva, and Actelion. KdG served on scientific advisory boards for Roche, Janssen, Sanofi-Genzyme, Novartis, and Merck, received conference fees and travel support from Novartis, Biogen, Sanofi-Genzyme, Teva, AbbVie, and Merck, and received educational event support from Novartis. CM received honoraria as a consultant on scientific advisory boards for Genzyme, BMS, Janssen, Biogen, Merck, Roche, and Novartis; has received travel grants from Roche and Novartis. JP accepted travel compensation from Novartis, Biogen, Genzyme, Teva, and speaking honoraria from Biogen, Novartis, Genzyme, and Teva. NJ is a local principal investigator on commercial studies funded by Novartis, Biogen, Amicus, and Sanofi. JI declared no competing interests. FS has served on scientific advisory boards for, served as a consultant for, received support for congress participation, or received speaker honoraria from Alexion, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi Genzyme. His laboratory has received research support from Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi Genzyme. HJ declared no competing interests. PR has served on scientific advisory boards for, served as consultant for, received support for congress participation, or received speaker honoraria from Alexion, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi Genzyme. TSe received and has served on scientific advisory boards for, served as a consultant for, received support for congress participation, or received speaker honoraria from Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi. T. Sejbaeks received unrestricted research grants to his research institution from Biogen, Merck, and Roche and is currently engaged in sponsor-initiated research projects by Eisai, Lundbeck, Roche, and Sanofi. MP declared no competing interests. JC has received speaker honoraria from Biogen. MS has served on scientific advisory boards for, served as a consultant for, received support for congress participation, participated in industrial trials with, or received speaker honoraria from Bayer, Biogen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi Genzyme. JH has received honoraria for serving on advisory boards for Biogen, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Novartis and speaker's fees from Biogen, Novartis, Merck Serono, Bayer-Schering, Teva, and Sanofi-Genzyme. He has served as P.I. for projects or received unrestricted research support from BiogenIdec, Merck Serono, TEVA, Sanofi-Genzyme, and Bayer-Schering. His MS research is funded by the Swedish Research Council and the Swedish Brain Foundation. The authors declare that this study received funding from Biogen. The funder had the following involvement with the study: study design and manuscript review. The funder was not involved in the collection of data, analysis, writing of the article, or the decision to submit it for publication. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision., (Copyright © 2023 Spelman, Magyari, Butzkueven, Van Der Walt, Vukusic, Trojano, Iaffaldano, Horáková, Drahota, Pellegrini, Hyde, Duquette, Lechner-Scott, Sajedi, Lalive, Shaygannejad, Ozakbas, Eichau, Alroughani, Terzi, Girard, Kalincik, Grand'Maison, Skibina, Khoury, Yamout, Sa, Gerlach, Blanco, Karabudak, Oreja-Guevara, Altintas, Hughes, McCombe, Ampapa, de Gans, McGuigan, Soysal, Prevost, John, Inshasi, Stawiarz, Manouchehrinia, Forsberg, Sellebjerg, Glaser, Pontieri, Joensen, Rasmussen, Sejbaek, Poulsen, Christensen, Kant, Stilund, Mathiesen, Hillert and the Big MS Data Network: a collaboration of the Czech MS Registry, the Danish MS Registry, Italian MS Registry, Swedish MS Registry, MSBase Study Group, and OFSEP.)

Introduction: Prescribing guidance for disease-modifying treatment (DMT) in multiple sclerosis (MS) is centred on a clinical diagnosis of relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). DMT prescription guidelines and monitoring vary across countries. Standardising the approach to diagnosis of disease course, for example, assigning RRMS or secondary progressive MS (SPMS) diagnoses, allows examination of the impact of health system characteristics on the stated clinical diagnosis and treatment access., Methods: We analysed registry data from six cohorts in five countries (Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Sweden and United Kingdom) on patients with an initial diagnosis of RRMS. We standardised our approach utilising a pre-existing algorithm (DecisionTree, DT) to determine patient diagnoses of RRMS or secondary progressive MS (SPMS). We identified five global drivers of DMT prescribing: Provision, Availability, Funding, Monitoring and Audit, data were analysed against these concepts using meta-analysis and univariate meta-regression., Results: In 64,235 patients, we found variations in DMT use between countries, with higher usage in RRMS and lower usage in SPMS, with correspondingly lower usage in the UK compared to other registers. Factors such as female gender ( p  = 0.041), increasing disability via Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score ( p  = 0.004), and the presence of monitoring ( p  = 0.029) in SPMS influenced the likelihood of receiving DMTs. Standardising the diagnosis revealed differences in reclassification rates from clinical RRMS to DT-SPMS, with Sweden having the lowest rate Sweden (Sweden 0.009, range: Denmark 0.103 - UK portal 0.311). Those with higher EDSS at index ( p  < 0.03) and female gender ( p  < 0.049) were more likely to be reclassified from RRMS to DT-SPMS. The study also explored the impact of diagnosis on DMT usage in clinical SPMS, finding that the prescribing environment and auditing practices affected access to treatment., Discussion: This highlights the importance of a healthcare system's approach to verifying the clinical label of MS course in facilitating appropriate prescribing, with some flexibility allowed in uncertain cases to ensure continued access to treatment., (© The Author(s), 2023.)

Introduction: The influence of breastfeeding and it´s duration on the course of multiple sclerosis (MS) is unclear. Here we analyzed a real-world data for breastfeeding women with MS and their disease course collected from a Czech national registry ReMuS., Objectives: To identify risk factors associated with not initiating breastfeeding after delivery, to analyze the impact of breastfeeding on the MS disease course, evaluate the assumption, that breastfeeding is not harmful in MS patients, and compare the disease course by breastfeeding status., Materials and Methods: Using propensity score matching we compared Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), confirmed disease worsening (CDW) and annual relapse rate (ARR) in breastfeeding and non-breastfeeding MS patients according to disease duration, disease modifying treatment (DMT) before pregnancy, last EDSS score before conception, age, and ARR during pregnancy. We also compared these parameters between breastfeeding patients not using a DMT and non-breastfeeding patients who resumed DMT within 3 months after delivery. EDSS, ARR, and CDW were collected at 12, 24, and 36 months after delivery., Results: A total of 1681 pregnancies that ended in delivery were analyzed from 2013 through 2020. Change in ARR and EDSS values and 6-months CDW did not significantly differ between the analyzed groups. Compared with non-breastfeeding women who resumed DMT early after delivery, breastfeeding women with MS did not experience worse clinical outcomes even without initiating a DMT., Discussion: Breastfeeding in Czech women with MS did not negatively affect the disease course and can be supported. Patients with MS can be treated with certain DMTs alongside breastfeeding and there is no need to stop breastfeeding, if the patient is clinically stable., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declared potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article as following: P.H. received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen cilag. O.Z. received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen cilag. P.H. has nothing to disclose. E.K.H. received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen cilag. I.W. received compensations for travel from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme and Teva. A.M. has nothing to disclose. J.D. has nothing to disclose. M.L. has nothing to disclose I.S. received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen cilag. M.V. received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen cilag. J.L. received compensations for travel and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen cilag. P.S. received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen cilag. J.A. received compensations for travel from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme and Teva. R.A. received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen cilag. M.V. received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen cilag. M.D. received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen cilag. A.M. received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen cilag. M.P. received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen cilag. J.M. received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen cilag. D.H. received compensations for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck Serono, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Teva and Janssen cilag, (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: In relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) the most common treatment strategy has been to start with low-moderate efficacy disease modifying therapy (LE-DMT) and to escalate to more efficacious treatments in cases of breakthrough disease activity. However, recent evidence suggests a better outcome in patients commencing with moderate-high efficacy DMT (HE-DMT) immediately after clinical onset., Objective: The aim of this study is to compare disease activity and disability outcomes in patients treated with the two alternative strategies using the Swedish and Czech national multiple sclerosis registries, taking advantage of the fact that the relative frequency of each strategy differs markedly between these two countries., Methods: Adult RRMS patients who initiated their first-ever DMT between 2013 and 2016 and were included in the Swedish MS register were compared with a similar cohort from the MS register of the Czech Republic using propensity score overlap weighting as a balancing method. The main outcomes of interest were time to confirmed disability worsening (CDW), time to achieve an expanded disability status scale (EDSS) value of 4, time to relapse, and time to confirmed disability improvement (CDI). To support the results, a sensitivity analysis focusing solely on patients from Sweden starting with HE-DMT and patients from the Czech Republic starting with LE-DMT was performed., Results: In the Swedish cohort, 42% of patients received HE-DMT as initial therapy compared to 3.8% of patients in the Czech cohort. The time to CDW was not significantly different between the Swedish and Czech cohorts (p-value 0.2764), with hazard ratio (HR) of 0.89 and a 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.77-1.03. Patients from the Swedish cohort exhibited better outcomes for all remaining variables. The risk of reaching EDSS 4 was reduced by 26% (HR 0.74, 95%CI 0.6-0.91, p-value 0.0327), the risk of relapse was reduced by 66% (HR 0.34, 95%CI 0.3-0.39, p-value <0.001), and the probability of CDI was three times higher (HR 3.04, 95%CI 2.37-3.9, p-value <0.001)., Conclusion: The analysis of the Czech and the Swedish RRMS cohorts confirmed a better prognosis for patients in Sweden, where a significant proportion of patients received HE-DMT as initial treatment., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: T. Hrnciarova has nothing to disclose. J. Drahota has nothing to disclose. T. Spelman received compensation from serving on scientific advisory boards and steering comittees from Biogen and consultancy fees from Hartmann and Abbvie. J. Hillert received honoraria for serving on advisory boards for Biogen, Bristol-Myers-Squibb/Celgene, Janssen, Merck KGaA, Sandoz and Sanofi-Genzyme and speaker...s fees from Biogen, Janssen, Novartis, Merck, Teva, Sandoz and Sanofi-Genzyme. He has served as P.I. for projects sponsored by, or received unrestricted research support from, Biogen, Bristol-MyersSquibb/Celgene, Janssen, Merck KGaA, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi-Genzyme. His MS research is funded by the Swedish Research Council and the Swedish Brain foundation. J. Lycke has received travel support and/or lecture honoraria and has served on scientific advisory boards for Alexion, Almirall, Biogen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Roche and Sanofi; and has received unconditional research grants from Biogen and Novartis, and financial support from Sanofi for an investigator-initiated study. E. Kubala Havrdova has received honoraria/research support from Biogen, Merck Serono, Novartis, Roche, and Teva; has served as a member of advisory boards for Actelion, Biogen, Celgene, Merck Serono, Novartis, and Sanofi Genzyme; 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. E. Recmanova has nothing to disclose. J. Adamkova has nothing to disclose. J. Mares has nothing to disclose. J. Libertinova reported receiving grants, personal fees and funding for travel from Merck, Roche, Novartis, Biogen Inc, Sanofi Genzyme. Z. Pavelek reports personal fees from Biogen, Eli Lilly, Genzyme, Merck Serono, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Teva Pharma. P. Hradilek received speakers honoraria and travel compensations from Biogen, Merck, Teva, Sanofi, Roche, Novartis and Janssen Cilag. R. Ampapa received conference travel support from Roche, Sanofi, Biogen and Merck and has participated in clinical trials by Biogen, Novartis, Sanofi, Merck and Roche. I. Stetkarova received compensation for travel and speaker honoraria from Biogen Idec, Merck, and Roche. M. Peterka has received personal compensation for consulting, serving on a scientific advisory board, speaking, or other activities with Merck, Novartis, Biogen, Sanofi-Genzyme, Jansse-Cilag, Teva, Roche. A. Martinkova has nothing to disclose. P. Stourac has nothing to disclose. M. Grunermelova has nothing to disclose. M. Vachova received compensation for travel, conference fees, consulting fees and speaker honoraria from Biogen, Lundbeck, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Teva. M. Dufek has nothing to disclose. D. Horakova was supported by the Charles University: Cooperatio Program in Neuroscience, by the project National Institute for Neurological Research (Programme EXCELES, ID Project No. LX22NPO5107) - Funded by the European Union Next Generation EU, and by General University Hospital in Prague project MH CZ-DRO-VFN64165. She also received compensation for travel, speaker honoraria and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck, Bayer, Sanofi Genzyme, Roche, and Teva, as well as support for research activities from Biogen Idec., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: To assign a course of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (MS) (SPMS) may be difficult and the proportion of persons with SPMS varies between reports. An objective method for disease course classification may give a better estimation of the relative proportions of relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) and SPMS and may identify situations where SPMS is under reported., Materials and Methods: Data were obtained for 61,900 MS patients from MS registries in the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Sweden, and the United Kingdom (UK), including date of birth, sex, SP conversion year, visits with an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score, MS onset and diagnosis date, relapses, and disease-modifying treatment (DMT) use. We included RRMS or SPMS patients with at least one visit between January 2017 and December 2019 if ≥ 18 years of age. We applied three objective methods: A set of SPMS clinical trial inclusion criteria ("EXPAND criteria") modified for a real-world evidence setting, a modified version of the MSBase algorithm, and a decision tree-based algorithm recently published., Results: The clinically assigned proportion of SPMS varied from 8.7% (Czechia) to 34.3% (UK). Objective classifiers estimated the proportion of SPMS from 15.1% (Germany by the EXPAND criteria) to 58.0% (UK by the decision tree method). Due to different requirements of number of EDSS scores, classifiers varied in the proportion they were able to classify; from 18% (UK by the MSBase algorithm) to 100% (the decision tree algorithm for all registries). Objectively classified SPMS patients were older, converted to SPMS later, had higher EDSS at index date and higher EDSS at conversion. More objectively classified SPMS were on DMTs compared to the clinically assigned., Conclusion: SPMS appears to be systematically underdiagnosed in MS registries. Reclassified patients were more commonly on DMTs., Competing Interests: The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Lars Forsberg has nothing to disclose. Tim Spelman has received compensation for serving on the scientific advisory board for Biogen and speaker honoraria from Novartis. Pernilla Klyve has nothing to disclose. Ali Manouchehrinia is supported by the Margaretha af Ugglas Foundation. Ryan Ramanujam has nothing to disclose. Elena Mouresan has nothing to disclose. Jiri Drahota has nothing to disclose. Dana Horakova was supported by the Czech Ministry of Education (project Cooperatio LF1, research area Neuroscience). She also received compensation for travel, speaker honoraria, and consultant fees from Biogen Idec, Novartis, Merck, Sanofi, Roche, and Teva, as well as support for research activities from Biogen Idec. Hanna Joensen has received honoraria for an advisory board from Biogen. Luigi Pontieri has nothing to disclose. Melinda Magyari has served on the scientific advisory board, served as a consultant for, received support for congress participation, and received speaker honoraria from Biogen, Sanofi, Roche, Novartis, Merck, Abbvie, and Alexion. The Danish MR Registry received research support from Biogen, Genzyme, Roche, Merck, and Novartis. David Ellenberger has nothing to disclose. Alexander Stahmann has no personal pecuniary interests to disclose, other than being the lead of the German MS Registry, which receives funding from a range of public and corporate sponsors, recently including The German Innovation Fund (G-BA), The German MS Trust, German MS Society, Biogen, Celgene (Bristol-Myers Squibb), Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi. None resulted in a conflict of interest. Jeff Rodgers has nothing to disclose. The UK MS Register is funded by the MS Society. James Witts has nothing to disclose. The UK MS Register is funded by the MS Society. Rod Middleton has nothing to disclose. The UK MS Register is funded by the MS Society. Richard Nicholas has received support from advisory boards from Roche and Biogen. He has grant support from the UK MS Society and Berkeley Foundation and is a vice chair of a NICE HTA committee. Vladimir Bezlyak is an employee of Novartis Pharma AG. Nicholas Adlard is an employee of Novartis Pharma AG. Thomas Hach is an employee of Novartis Pharma AG. Carol Lines is an employee of Novartis Pharma AG. Sandra Vukusic has received grants, personal fees, unrestricted research grants, and nonfinancial support from Biogen, BMS-Celgene, Genzyme, Janssen, Merck Serono, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Teva. Merja Soilu-Hanninen has received congress fee covering and lecture and consultation fees by Biogen, Celgene, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Teva. Anneke van der Walt served on advisory boards and receives unrestricted research grants from Novartis, Biogen, Merck, Alexion, NervGen, and Roche. She has received speaker's honoraria and travel support from Novartis, Roche, Biogen, and Merck. She receives grant support from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and MS Research Australia. Helmut Butzkueven's institution (Monash University) has received compensation for his services on scientific advisory boards and as a speaker from Biogen, Novartis, Roche, Merck, and UCB. He serves on steering committees for trials conducted by Biogen, Merck, and Novartis, and his institution has received research support from Roche, Merck, Novartis, and Biogen. Pietro Iaffaldano has received advisory board membership, speaker honoraria, and travel support from Almirall, Bayer Shering, Biogen, Genzyme, Merck, Novartis, Sanofi, Roche, Teva, and their local affiliates. Maria Trojano received advisory board membership, speaker honoraria, travel support and research grant from Almirall, Bayer Shering, Biogen, Genzyme, Merck, Novartis, Sanofi, Roche, Teva, and their local affiliates. Anna Glaser has received research support from Novartis. Jan Hillert has received honoraria for serving on advisory boards for Biogen, Celgene, Sanofi-Genzyme, Merck KGaA, Novartis, and Sandoz and speaker's fees from Biogen, Novartis, Merck KGaA, Teva, and Sanofi-Genzyme. He has served as PI for projects or received unrestricted research support from Biogen, Celgene, Merck KGaA, Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi-Genzyme. His MS research was funded by the Swedish Research Council and the Swedish Brain foundation., (© The Author(s), 2023.)

Background: COVID-19 vaccination and infection are speculated to increase the activity of immune-mediated diseases, including multiple sclerosis (MS) and neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD). The aim of this study was to evaluate a short-term risk of relapse after COVID-19 vaccination and COVID-19 infection in patients with these demyelinating disorders of the central nervous system and to determine disease exacerbation risk factors., Methods: Data in this retrospective, observational cohort study was collected via the Czech nationwide registry ReMuS from March 1, 2020, to October 30, 2021. We compared the proportion of patients with at least one clinical relapse in the 90 days following vaccination or infection to the 90-day intervals during the year before. For the evaluation of the risk factors of relapse, a comparison between groups with and without relapses after COVID-19 vaccination or infection was made., Results: We identified 1661 vaccinated (90.11% BNT162b2) patients with MS without a history of COVID-19 and 495 unvaccinated patients with MS who experienced COVID-19. A mild increase in the proportion of patients with at least one clinical relapse (-360 to -270 days: 4.46%; -270 to -180: 4.27%; -180 to -90: 3.85%; -90 to 0: 3.79% vs. 0 to +90 days: 5.30%) after vaccination in patients with MS was observed, as well as a rise in the proportion of patients with at least one clinical relapse after COVID-19. Lower age was associated with MS relapse after vaccination or infection. Although there were only 17 vaccinated and eight post-COVID-19 patients with NMOSD, the results were broadly consistent with those of patients with MS., Conclusion: There is a mild increase in the relapse incidence after the COVID-19 vaccination. The risks, however, need to be balanced against the risks of COVID-19 itself, also leading to the rise in relapse rate and particularly to morbidity and mortality., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: When the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) appeared, concerns about its course in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) arose. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence, severity and risk factors of the more severe COVID-19 course among MS and NMOSD patients., Methods: From March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021, 12 MS centres, representing 70% of the Czech MS and NMOSD population, reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases via the Czech nationwide register of MS and NMOSD patients (ReMuS). The main outcome was COVID-19 severity assessed on an 8-point scale with a cut-off at 4 (radiologically confirmed pneumonia) according to the World Health Organisation´s (WHO) COVID-19 severity assessment., Results: We identified 958 MS and 13 NMOSD patients, 50 MS and 4 NMOSD patients had pneumonia, 3 MS and 2 NMOSD patients died. The incidence of COVID-19 among patients with MS seems to be similar to the general Czech population. A multivariate logistic regression determined that higher body mass index (BMI [OR 1.07, 95% CI, 1.00-1.14]), older age (OR per 10 years 2.01, 95% CI, 1.41-2.91), high-dose glucocorticoid treatment during the 2 months before COVID-19 onset (OR 2.83, 95% CI, 0.10-7.48) and anti-CD20 therapy (OR 7.04, 95% CI, 3.10-15.87) were independent variables associated with pneumonia in MS patients. Increase odds of pneumonia in anti-CD20 treated MS patients compared to patients with other disease-modifying therapy (same age, sex, BMI, high-dose glucocorticoid treatment during the 2 months before COVID-19 onset, presence of pulmonary comorbidity) were confirmed by propensity score matching (OR 8.90, 95% CI, 3.04-33.24). Reports on COVID-19 infection in patients with NMOSD are scarce, however, data available up to now suggest a high risk of a more severe COVID-19 course as well as a higher mortality rate among NMOSD patients. In our cohort, 4 NMOSD patients (30.77%) had the more severe COVID-19 course and 2 patients (15.39%) died., Conclusion: The majority of MS patients had a mild COVID-19 course contrary to NMOSD patients, however, higher BMI and age, anti-CD20 therapy and high-dose glucocorticoid treatment during the 2 months before COVID-19 onset were associated with pneumonia. Based on this study, we have already started an early administration of anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibodies and preferential vaccination in the risk group of patients., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Playa wetlands in Nebraska provide globally important habitats for migratory waterfowl. Inundation condition is an important indicator of playa wetland functionality. However, there is a lack of long-term continuous monitoring records for playa wetlands. The objective of this study was to determine a suitable index for Landsat images to map the playa inundation status in March and April during 1985-2015. Four types of spectral indices-negative normalized vegetation index, Normalized Difference Water Index (NDWI), modified NDWI, and Tasseled Cap Wetness-Greenness Difference (TCWGD)-were evaluated to detect playa inundation conditions from Landsat images. The results indicate that the TCWGD is the most suitable index for distinguishing playa inundation status. By using Landsat images and Google Earth Engine, we mapped the spring inundation condition of Nebraska playas during 1985-2015. The results show that the total inundated areas were 176.79 km 2 in spring migratory season, representing 18.92% of the total area of playa wetlands. There were 9898 wetlands inundated at least once in either March or April during the past 30 years, representing 29.41% of a total of 33,659 historical wetlands. After comparing the historical hydric soil footprints and the inundated areas, the results indicate that the hydrological conditions of the majority of playas in Nebraska have changed. The inundated wetlands are candidates for protection and/or partial restoration, and the un-inundated wetlands need more attention for wetland restoration. Wetlands in areas enrolled in conservation easements had a significantly high level of playa inundation status than non-conserved wetlands during spring migratory seasons in the past decades.These conservation easements only count for 4.29% of the total footprint areas, but they have contributed 20.82% of the inundation areas in Nebraska during the past 30 years.

From July 2009 to date, a leishmaniosis outbreak has occurred in the south-west of the Madrid region (Spain) and has already accounted for more than 450 human cases in an area that comprises a population of approximately 500,000. The causative agent is Leishmania infantum and the main vector in the area is Phlebotomus perniciosus. Although canine leishmaniosis prevalence in the focus is not higher than the average in the Madrid region, a wild reservoir - the hare - has been implicated. In this study, we examined the exposure of Leishmania reservoirs in the area: dogs, hares, and wild rabbits to sand fly bites using the detection of specific IgG antibodies against P. perniciosus salivary gland homogenate or recombinant salivary proteins. Hares collected in a green park adjacent to the focus (n=59) showed positive exposure to P. perniciosus bites in comparison to hares from a non-endemic area (Czech Republic, n=18). A significant positive correlation was found between IgG response to yellow protein rSP03B and salivary gland homogenate (r=0.902) and between apyrase rSP01B and salivary gland homogenate (r=0.710). Wild rabbits captured in the study area (n=21) presented higher anti-saliva antibody levels than negative control sera and their IgG response against recombinant salivary proteins were positively correlated with salivary gland homogenate (rSP03B: r=0.710; rSP01B: r=0.666). All sera of dogs from the focus (n=34) showed higher anti-saliva IgG levels than that of non-exposed dogs. Moreover, dogs protected against sand fly bites through the use of topical insecticides and sleeping indoors showed significantly lower antibody levels than the non-protected ones. Antibody response to all three recombinant salivary proteins tested showed positive correlation with salivary gland extract (rSP03B: r=0.858; rSP01: r=0.864; and rSP01B: r=0.861). Data confirmed the exposure of hares, rabbits and dogs to P. perniciosus bites in the context of an outbreak of human leishmaniosis in Spain, highlighting their involvement in Leishmania transmission by supporting their role as potential reservoirs. This novel methodology represents a promising tool for further epidemiological studies that would help to design better strategies for the control of leishmaniosis in this area and other foci., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Phlebotomus perniciosus is the main vector in the western Mediterranean area of the protozoan parasite Leishmania infantum, the causative agent of canine and human visceral leishmaniases. Infected dogs serve as a reservoir of the disease, and therefore measuring the exposure of dogs to sand fly bites is important for estimating the risk of L. infantum transmission. In bitten hosts, sand fly saliva elicits a specific antibody response that reflects the intensity of sand fly exposure. As screening of specific anti-saliva antibodies is limited by the availability of salivary gland homogenates, utilization of recombinant salivary proteins is a promising alternative. In this manuscript we show for the first time the use of recombinant salivary proteins as a functional tool for detecting P. perniciosus bites in dogs., Methodology/principal Findings: The reactivity of six bacterially-expressed recombinant salivary proteins of P. perniciosus, yellow-related protein rSP03B, apyrases rSP01B and rSP01, antigen 5-related rSP07, ParSP25-like protein rSP08 and D7-related protein rSP04, were tested with sera of mice and dogs experimentally bitten by this sand fly using immunoblots and ELISA. In the immunoblots, both mice and canine sera gave positive reactions with yellow-related protein, both apyrases and ParSP25-like protein. A similar reaction for recombinant salivary proteins was observed by ELISA, with the reactivity of yellow-related protein and apyrases significantly correlated with the antibody response of mice and dogs against the whole salivary gland homogenate., Conclusions/significance: Three recombinant salivary antigens of P. perniciosus, yellow-related protein rSP03B and the apyrases rSP01B and rSP01, were identified as the best candidates for evaluating the exposure of mice and dogs to P. perniciosus bites. Utilization of these proteins, or their combination, would be beneficial for screening canine sera in endemic areas of visceral leishmaniases for vector exposure and for estimating the risk of L. infantum transmission in dogs.

Background: Phlebotomine sand flies are blood-sucking insects transmitting Leishmania parasites. In bitten hosts, sand fly saliva elicits specific immune response and the humoral immunity was shown to reflect the intensity of sand fly exposure. Thus, anti-saliva antibodies were suggested as the potential risk marker of Leishmania transmission. In this study, we examined the long-term kinetics and persistence of anti-Phlebotomus papatasi saliva antibody response in BALB/c and C57BL/6 mice. We also tested the reactivity of mice sera with P. papatasi salivary antigens and with the recombinant proteins., Methodology/principal Findings: Sera of BALB/c and C57BL/6 mice experimentally bitten by Phlebotomus papatasi were tested by ELISA for the presence of anti-saliva IgE, IgG and its subclasses. We detected a significant increase of specific IgG and IgG1 in both mice strains and IgG2b in BALB/c mice that positively correlated with the number of blood-fed P. papatasi females. Using western blot and mass spectrometry we identified the major P. papatasi antigens as Yellow-related proteins, D7-related proteins, antigen 5-related proteins and SP-15-like proteins. We therefore tested the reactivity of mice sera with four P. papatasi recombinant proteins coding for most of these potential antigens (PpSP44, PpSP42, PpSP30, and PpSP28). Each mouse serum reacted with at least one of the recombinant protein tested, although none of the recombinant proteins were recognized by all sera., Conclusions: Our data confirmed the concept of using anti-sand fly saliva antibodies as a marker of sand fly exposure in Phlebotomus papatasi-mice model. As screening of specific antibodies is limited by the availability of salivary gland homogenate, utilization of recombinant proteins in such studies would be beneficial. Our present work demonstrates the feasibility of this implementation. A combination of recombinant salivary proteins is recommended for evaluation of intensity of sand fly exposure in endemic areas and for estimation of risk of Leishmania transmission.

Background: Phlebotomine sand flies are blood-sucking insects that can transmit Leishmania parasites. Hosts bitten by sand flies develop an immune response against sand fly salivary antigens. Specific anti-saliva IgG indicate the exposure to the vector and may also help to estimate the risk of Leishmania spp. transmission. In this study, we examined the canine antibody response against the saliva of Phlebotomus perniciosus, the main vector of Leishmania infantum in the Mediterranean Basin, and characterized salivary antigens of this sand fly species., Methodology/principal Findings: Sera of dogs bitten by P. perniciosus under experimental conditions and dogs naturally exposed to sand flies in a L. infantum focus were tested by ELISA for the presence of anti-P. perniciosus antibodies. Antibody levels positively correlated with the number of blood-fed P. perniciosus females. In naturally exposed dogs the increase of specific IgG, IgG1 and IgG2 was observed during sand fly season. Importantly, Leishmania-positive dogs revealed significantly lower anti-P. perniciosus IgG2 compared to Leishmania-negative ones. Major P. perniciosus antigens were identified by western blot and mass spectrometry as yellow proteins, apyrases and antigen 5-related proteins., Conclusions: Results suggest that monitoring canine antibody response to sand fly saliva in endemic foci could estimate the risk of L. infantum transmission. It may also help to control canine leishmaniasis by evaluating the effectiveness of anti-vector campaigns. Data from the field study where dogs from the Italian focus of L. infantum were naturally exposed to P. perniciosus bites indicates that the levels of anti-P. perniciosus saliva IgG2 negatively correlate with the risk of Leishmania transmission. Thus, specific IgG2 response is suggested as a risk marker of L. infantum transmission for dogs.