The outcome of multiple sclerosis (MS), assessed according to the Kurtzke Disability Status Scale (DSS), was reviewed in 1,099 consecutive patients followed in London, Canada, between 1972 and 1984. A geographically based subgroup of 196 patients representing 90% of Middlesex County MS patients as well as a group of 197 patients seen from onset of disease were separately analysed. The clinical course was progressive from onset in 33% of the total population and in 28% of the Middlesex County subgroup. Of those with duration of 6-10 yrs, 30-40% with initially remitting disease developed progressive MS. The cross-sectional distribution of disability was bimodal with peaks at DSS 1 (no disability) and DSS 6 (assistance required for walking). Actuarial analysis showed that the median time to reach DSS 6 from onset of MS was 14.97 +/- 0.31 yrs in the total population and 9.42 +/- 0.44 yrs in the "seen from onset' subgroup. Survival was minimally altered; 87% of patients followed up to 40 yrs were still alive, although ascertainment of cases with this duration of MS was incomplete. Data describing the rate at which disability develops after the onset of a progressive phase of MS are also presented. The implications of these data in planning and interpretation of clinical therapeutic trials are discussed.

Controversy exists regarding the predictive value of the early clinical course of multiple sclerosis (MS). Three parameters often considered are the attack rate, the first interattack interval and the rate at which disability develops in the early years of the disease. We have recorded the time to reach successive levels of disability defined by the Kurtzke Disability Status Scale (DSS) in 1,099 MS patients followed at University Hospital, London, Canada between 1972 and 1984. Our population is particularly suitable because of its size, the high degree of ascertainment of cases in the community, and the regular follow-up provided. Life table analysis was used to compare survival in patients stratified according to the above three parameters using DSS 6 as end point. Significant differences were evident in the survival distributions. Despite the extensive interindividual variation in the rate at which disability developed, the early course of MS may be useful in determining the relative risk of rapid progression.

PurposeTo develop expert consensus on a suite of reporting standards for HRQL outcomes of RCTs.MethodsA Task Force of The International Society of Quality of Life Research (ISOQOL) undertook a systematic review of the literature to identify candidate reporting standards for HRQL in RCTs. Subsequently, a web-based survey was circulated to the ISOQOL membership. Respondents were asked to rate candidate standards on a 4-point Likert scale based on their perceived value in reporting studies in which HRQL was a study outcome (primary or secondary). Results were synthesized into draft reporting guidelines, which were further reviewed by the membership to inform the final guidance.ResultsForty-six existing candidate standards for reporting HRQL results in RCTs were synthesized to produce a 40 item survey that was completed electronically by 161 respondents. The majority of respondents rated all 40 items to be either ‘essential’ or ‘desirable’ when HRQL was a primary RCT outcome. Ratings changed when HRQL was a secondary study outcome. Feedback on the survey findings resulted in the Task Force generalizing the guidance to include patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The final guidance, which recommends standards for use in reporting PROs generally, and more specifically, for PROs identified as primary study outcomes, was approved by the ISOQOL Board of Directors.ConclusionsISOQOL has developed a suite of recommended standards for reporting PRO results of RCTs. Improved reporting of PROs will enable accurate interpretation of evidence to inform patient choice, aid clinical decision making, and inform health policy.

Current practice of reporting HRQL outcomes in RCTs remains highly variable, both with regard to quality of reporting and the patterns of data analysis and presentation. This variation presents challenges for clinicians to apply these data in clinical practice. Consistent reporting practices, which are interpretable by clinicians, are required, as are processes to achieve this consistency in future reports.

Fatigue occurs in a majority of patients with MS and is generally independent of measurable neurologic disability. Few options for treatment are available. We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial for each of two 4-week treatment periods. Forty-six eligible patients entered and five dropped out due to concurrent exacerbations. Nineteen patients (46.3%) experienced excellent or good relief of fatigue with pemoline, and eight patients (19.5%) with placebo (p = 0.06, Fisher's exact test). One-fourth of patients did not tolerate the drug well, and 7% had to discontinue pemoline during the study due to side effects. The most common side effects were anorexia, irritability, and insomnia. Pemoline may be an effective short-term treatment for fatigue associated with MS, but its adverse effects are not well tolerated by many patients.