Impact of rituximab in Mexican patients with Multiple Sclerosis-A single-center retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is a chronic autoimmune disease of the central nervous system (CNS). B cells have an essential role in the disease pathogenesis and therefore selective B-cell depletion are commonly used to treat the disease. Rituximab (RTX), a chimeric anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody had demonstrated reduced inflammatory activity and radiological activity in MS patients. Due to economic constrains and treatment access limitations, RTX is often used as a treatment alternative in these patients. Here, we described our center experience in RTX -treated MS patients. METHODS: A single-center observational retrospective study was conducted in a Mexican cohort MS during 2010 to 2020. All patients had a confirmed MS diagnosis.All patients received fixed scheme involving induction with 1 g on day one and day 15, followed by 500 mg-1 g every six months for maintenance. Annual Relapse Rate (ARR), Progression index (PI), Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and MRI activity of the disease were evaluated. Comparison between naïve and non-naïve patients was also conducted. RESULTS: A total of 85 patients were included. The mean age at diagnosis was 33.13 (±8.90) years with 73 (85.9%) being RRMS. 39 (34.1%) were treatment-naïve. While treated with RTX, 62(72.9%) patients reached a free-of-relapse status, with statistically significant decrease in the mean ARR from 0.82 to 0.36 [0.14 (95%CI: 0.09-0.20), p = 0.0001 and EDSS [0.25 CI 0-0.5 (p = 0.034)] and a decrease in their T1 Gd-enhancing MRI lesions (1.64 vs. 0.12 CI 0.70-2.30, p = 0.004. 29 (29.4%) patients achieved NEDA-3. Among all patients, only 2 (2.4%) experienced infusion-related mild adverse events. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: We found significant clinical and radiological improvement in naïve and non-naïve MS patients treated with RTX.

Increased non-attendance at epilepsy clinic in patients with neuropsychiatric comorbidities: A prospective study.

BACKGROUND: In patients with epilepsy, regular follow-up is vital for adequate seizure control, antiseizure drugs' (ASDs) side effects, psychiatric comorbidities, and planning for epilepsy surgery. Non-attendance creates barriers to adequate patient care, inefficient allocation of resources, loss of income, and unnecessary emergency department visits due to lack of seizure control. This study aimed to determine the causes and sociodemographic characteristics of the non-attendant population at the Epilepsy Clinic. METHODS: A prospective and observational study was carried out on patients treated at the Epilepsy Clinic of the National Institute of Neurology and Neurosurgery (NINN) in Mexico from August 2015 to June 2016. A phone interview was made with all those patients who did not attend the epilepsy consultation. This call incorporated ad hoc questions to meet the objectives of this study. RESULTS: During the study period, 1299 patients had an appointment at the epilepsy clinic, where 233 (17.9%) patients missed their consultation, 123 (52.8%) were male, mean age was 35.9 ±â€¯14.42 years. The most frequent cause of non-attendance was forgetfulness of the appointment in 62 patients (26.6%). Two patients died; no patient was reported to have experienced SUDEP. Non-attendant patients showed statistically significant overall prevalence of psychiatric comorbidities (41.6%), particularly depression, anxiety, and interictal psychosis. CONCLUSION: Information on non-attendance at various specialist consultations is scarce, and to our knowledge, this is the first study to address non-attendance in patients with epilepsy in Latin America. Improving hospital protocols to reduce non-attendance can increase patient adherence to follow-up, ultimately improving the quality of care in the epilepsy clinic.

A comparison of waiting times for assessment and epilepsy surgery between a Canadian and a Mexican referral center.

Objective: To provide a comprehensive transnational overview of wait times for epilepsy surgery in Canada and Mexico. Methods: We reviewed all cases referred for epilepsy surgery between 2007 and 2015 at the Saskatchewan Epilepsy Program Royal University Hospital (SEP) (n = 70; Saskatoon, Canada) and the National Institute of Neurology and Neurosurgery (NINN) (n = 76; Mexico City, Mexico) and compared wait times, calculated as the time from diagnosis of epilepsy on assessment at an epilepsy center to epilepsy surgery. Results: Mean wait times were similar across centers. Mean patient age was 37.4 ± 9 years (NINN) and 36.7 ± 13.2 years (SEP). The mean time from epilepsy diagnosis to referral was 18.9 (NINN) and 16.9 years (SEP), p = 0.30; first consult with the epileptologist, 19.7 (NINN) and 17.4 years (p = 0.23); neuropsychology consult, 21.4 (NINN) and 17.9 years (SEP); video electroencephalogram (video-EEG) telemetry, 21.1 (NINN) and 18.6 months (SEP); initial neurosurgical consult, 21.9 (NINN) and 19.1 years (SEP) (p = 0.35); and epilepsy surgery, 19.7 (NINN) and 19.6 years (SEP) (p = 0.29). Significance: This is the first study to compare wait times between Canada and Mexico. Despite disparity in their health delivery systems and financial resources, surgical wait times appeared to be protracted in both nations, confirming that delayed treatment is a universal problem that requires collaborative scrutiny.