Impact of methodological choices in comparative effectiveness studies: application in natalizumab versus fingolimod comparison among patients with multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Natalizumab and fingolimod are used as high-efficacy treatments in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Several observational studies comparing these two drugs have shown variable results, using different methods to control treatment indication bias and manage censoring. The objective of this empirical study was to elucidate the impact of methods of causal inference on the results of comparative effectiveness studies. METHODS: Data from three observational multiple sclerosis registries (MSBase, the Danish MS Registry and French OFSEP registry) were combined. Four clinical outcomes were studied. Propensity scores were used to match or weigh the compared groups, allowing for estimating average treatment effect for treated or average treatment effect for the entire population. Analyses were conducted both in intention-to-treat and per-protocol frameworks. The impact of the positivity assumption was also assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 5,148 relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients were included. In this well-powered sample, the 95% confidence intervals of the estimates overlapped widely. Propensity scores weighting and propensity scores matching procedures led to consistent results. Some differences were observed between average treatment effect for the entire population and average treatment effect for treated estimates. Intention-to-treat analyses were more conservative than per-protocol analyses. The most pronounced irregularities in outcomes and propensity scores were introduced by violation of the positivity assumption. CONCLUSIONS: This applied study elucidates the influence of methodological decisions on the results of comparative effectiveness studies of treatments for multiple sclerosis. According to our results, there are no material differences between conclusions obtained with propensity scores matching or propensity scores weighting given that a study is sufficiently powered, models are correctly specified and positivity assumption is fulfilled.

French validation of the Brief International Cognitive Assessment for Multiple Sclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment is important to consider in the assessment of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. A short battery of cognitive assessment, the Brief International Cognitive Assessment for Multiple Sclerosis (BICAMS), has been developed to address the need for rapid assessment by combining 3 tests assessing the main cognitive spheres reached in MS. OBJECTIVES: To establish regression-based norms of the BICAMS in French speaking healthy subjects (HS) and validate its use in persons with multiple sclerosis (PwMS). METHODS: In all, 123 PwMS including 40 with relapsing-remitting MS, 41 patients with secondary progressive MS and 42 with primary progressive MS and 276 HS were evaluated by the BICAMS including 3 tests, the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT), the French Verbal learning test (FVLT) a French-adapted memory test, (or the California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT) at retesting) and the Brief Visuo-Spatial Memory Test (BVMT-R). The standards for these tests were established in the healthy population using a multiple regression technique. Validity in MS was measured. RESULTS: Regression-based norms of BICAMS tests have been established in the HS population. 50.4% of PwMS have impairment for at least one BICAMS test (-1.5SD on the Z-score). The most common pathological test was the FVLT altered in 36.6% of patients, followed by the SDMT and the BVMT-R. The re-test reliability was good for the various BICAMS tests, 0.891 for SDMT, 0.781 for FVLT/CVLT and 0.669 for BVMT-R. CONCLUSION: This study establishes the validity of the BICAMS as a short and easy to apply battery for a brief assessment of the speed of information processing and episodic memory in MS.

[Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy]. / Carrefour des spécialités : autogreffe de cellules souches hématopoïétiques périphériques pour la prise en charge thérapeutique des polyradiculonévrites inflammatoires démyélinisantes chroniques.

Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP) is a dysimmune neuropathy with sensory and/or motor symptoms due to destruction of the myelin sheat secondary to an auto-immune attack. A quarter to a third of patients do not respond to immunomodulatory first line recommended therapies. No second line treatment has shown its effectiveness with a sufficient level of evidence. Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) is a promising therapy for autoimmune disease, especially for CIDP in recent works. We present in this article an update on the diagnosis of CIDP, its conventional treatments as well as the results of AHSCT in this indication, which was the subject of French recommendations under the aegis of the SFGMTC and neuromuscular disease french faculty (FILNEMUS) as a third line therapy after failure of two first-line and one second-line treatments.