Background There is no data regarding COVID-19 in Multiple Sclerosis (MS) and neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) patients in Latin America. Objective The objective of this study was to describe the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients included in RELACOEM, a LATAM registry of MS and NMOSD patients infected with COVID-19. Methods RELACOEM is a longitudinal, strictly observational registry of MS and NMOSD patients who suffer COVID-19 and Dengue in LATAM. Inclusion criteria to the registry were either: (1) a biologically confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis based on a positive result of a COVID-19 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test on a nasopharyngeal swab; or (2) COVID-19–typical symptoms (triad of cough, fever, and asthenia) in an epidemic zone of COVID-19. Descriptive statistics were performed on demographic and clinical variables. The cohort was later stratified for MS and NMOSD and univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify variables associated with hospitalizations/intensive critical units (ICU) admission. Results 145 patients were included in the registry from 15 countries and 51 treating physicians. A total of 129 (89%) were MS patients and 16 (11%) NMOSD. 81.4% patients had confirmed COVID-19 and 18.6% were suspected cases. 23 (15.8%) patients were hospitalized, 9 (6.2%) required ICU and 5 (3.4 %) died due to COVID-19. In MS patients, greater age (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.05 – 1.25) and disease duration (OR 1.39, 95%CI 1.14-1.69) were associated with hospitalization/ICU. In NMOSD patients, a greater age (54.3 vs. 36 years, p=<0.001), increased EDSS (5.5 vs 2.9, p=0.0012) and disease duration (18.5 vs. 10.3 years, p=0.001) were significantly associated with hospitalization/ICU. Conclusion we found that in MS patients, age and disease duration was associated with hospitalization and ICU admission requirement, while age, disease duration and EDSS was associated in NMOSD.

Background: Therapeutic inertia (TI) is a common phenomenon among physicians who care for patients with chronic conditions. We evaluated the efficacy of the traffic light system (TLS) educational intervention to reduce TI among neurologists with MS expertise. Methods: In this randomised, controlled trial, 90 neurologists who provide care to MS patients were randomly assigned to the TLS intervention ( n = 45) or to the control group ( n = 45). The educational intervention employed the TLS, a behavioral strategy that facilitates therapeutic choices by facilitating reflective decisions. The TLS consisted in a short, structured, single session intervention of 5-7 min duration. Participants made therapeutic choices of 10 simulated case-scenarios. The primary outcome was a reduction in TI based on a published TI score (case-scenarios in which a participant showed TI divided by the total number of scenarios where TI was possible ranging from 0 to 8). Results: All participants completed the study and were included in the primary analysis. TI was lower in the TLS group (1.47, 95% CI 1.32-1.61) compared to controls (1.93; 95% CI 1.79-2.08). The TLS group had a lower prevalence of TI compared to controls (0.67, 95% CI 0.62-0.71 vs. 0.82, 95% CI 0.78-0.86; p = 0.001). The multivariate analysis, adjusted for age, specialty, years of practice, and risk preference showed a 70% reduction in TI for the TLS intervention compared to controls (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.10-0.89). Conclusions: In this randomized trial, the TLS strategy decreases the incidence of TI in MS care irrespective of age, expertise, years for training, and risk preference of participants, which would lead to better patient outcomes.

Background and PurposeInformation processing speed is one of the most impaired cognitive functions in multiple sclerosis (MS). There are two tests widely used for evaluating information processing speed: the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) and the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT). To analyze the relationship between processing speed and the clinical and social support variables of patients with MS.MethodsA group of 47 patients with relapsing-remitting MS was studied, 31 were women and 16, men. Age: 39.04±13.17, years of schooling: 13.00±3.87, Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS): 2.78±1.81, and disease evolution: 8.07±6.26. Instruments of measure; processing speed: SDMT, PASAT, clinical variables: EDSS, Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), Beck's Depression Inventory II (BDI-II), and social support: Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey (MOS).ResultsSignificant correlations were found between information processing speed and psychiatric, motor disability and social support variables. The SDMT correlated significantly and negatively with BDI-II, FSS, EDSS, and MOS (p<0.05), whereas the PASAT correlated negatively with FSS and positively with MOS (p<0.05). Information processing speed appeared as the performance predictor of these variables. The SDMT produced significant changes in EDSS (R2=0.343, p=0.000); FSS (R2=0.109, p=0.031); BDI-II (R2=0.124, p=0.018), and MOS (R2=between 0.212 and 0.379, p<0.05).ConclusionsInformation processing speed has influence on the clinical variables and the social support of patients with MS. These aspects are important to bear in mind for therapeutic approach.

The emergence of novel Coronavirus 2019 and the subsequent pandemic are presenting a challenge to neurologists managing patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). The clinical management has dramatically altered and it was necessary to change and/or adapt it to the new situation. Regarding relapses management, the use of intravenous corticosteroids and hospitalization during MS relapses increase the risk of viral exposure. Objective: To review the efficacy and safety of high dose oral corticosteroids in acute relapses treatment compared to intravenous corticosteroids. Methods: Descriptive review of the utility of high dose oral corticosteroids for MS relapses treatment was performed. We searched the literature available on PubMed and Scientific Electronic Library Online (Scielo). We focused on different trials comparing the use of high dose intravenous vs oral corticosteroids. Results: Five studies were selected. One hundred and eighty two patients receiving treatment with high dose oral corticosteroids were included. The most frequent schedule was oral methylprednisolone 1000 mg (over three days). There were no significant differences between both routes of corticosteroids administration. Conclusion: Neurologists should be aware of the current evidence on the similar efficacy of both oral and intravenous corticosteroids for MS relapses. Using oral steroids during the pandemic would be a safe option for patients.

Importance: The prescription of generic (non-proprietary) compared to brand-name drugs is increasing worldwide. In many developing and emerging countries, generics companies market products at similar costs as brand-name competitors benefiting from more flexible compliance rules and regulations for marketing their products in the health system. Together, this phenomenon may influence prescriber's behavior (e.g., maintaining the same treatment despite guideline's recommendations or despite evidence of disease progression).Objectives: To compare the prevalence of therapeutic inertia (TI) between primary prescription of brand-name vs. generic drugs in the management of MS in Argentina.Design: We conducted a population-based online study comprising 117 neurologists with expertise in MS. Participants answered questions regarding their clinical practice, most commonly prescribed disease modifying agents, and therapeutic choices of 10 simulated case-scenarios that assessed TI. Inertia was defined as the lack of treatment initiation or escalation despite evidence of clinical and radiological activity (8 case-scenarios, 720 individual responses). We created the generic-brand name score (GBS) according to the 5 most frequently prescribed generic (n = 16) vs. brand-name (n = 9) drugs for MS, where scores higher than 1 indicated higher prescription of generic drugs and scores lower than 1 indicated higher prescription of brand-name agents. Candidate predictors of prescribing generic drugs included demographic data, MS specialist vs. general neurologist, practice setting, years of practice, volume of MS patients, risk preferences, costs of annual treatment.Participants and setting: population-based prospective study using including neurologists who care for patients with multiple sclerosis across Argentina.Exposure: prescription of generic vs. brand-name MS drugsMain outcome of interest: Therapeutic inertia (TI), defined as lack of treatment escalation when goals are unmet. Secondary outcomes included factors associated with generic drug prescription and costs of MS treatment.Results: Ninety participants completed the study (completion rate 76.9%). TI was observed in 153 (21.3%) of participants' responses. The evaluation of aggregate responses revealed a mean GBS score (SD) of 3.44 (2.1), with 46 (51.1%) participants having a GBS equal to or higher than 1. Older age (OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.00–1.42), being a general neurologist (OR 3.91; 95% CI 1.19–12.8), and being more willing to take risks in multiple domains (SOEP score OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01–1.12) were associated with higher prescription of generic drugs in MS care. Costs of treatment were not associated with prescribing generic drugs. There was no difference in the annual costs of MS treatment for primary prescribers of brand-name vs. generic drugs (67,500 US$ vs. 67,496 US$; p = 0.99).The evaluation of individual responses revealed that participants with higher prescription of generics—reflected by a higher GBS—had higher incident risk of TI (mean GBS 3.61 for TI vs. 2.96 for n...

No abstract

Publisher's note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Background: Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) misdiagnosis (i.e. the incorrect diagnosis of patients who truly have NMOSD) remains an issue in clinical practice. We determined the frequency and factors associated with NMOSD misdiagnosis in patients evaluated in a cohort from Latin America. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with NMOSD, according to the 2015 diagnostic criteria, from referral clinics in six Latin American countries (Argentina, Chile, Paraguay, Colombia, Ecuador, and Venezuela). Diagnoses prior to NMOSD and ultimate diagnoses, demographic, clinical and paraclinical data, and treatment schemes were evaluated. Results: A total of 469 patients presented with an established diagnosis of NMOSD (73.2% seropositive) and after evaluation, we determined that 56 (12%) patients had been initially misdiagnosed with a disease other than NMOSD. The most frequent alternative diagnoses were multiple sclerosis (MS; 66.1%), clinically isolated syndrome (17.9%), and cerebrovascular disease (3.6%). NMOSD misdiagnosis was determined by MS/NMOSD specialists in 33.9% of cases. An atypical MS syndrome was found in 86% of misdiagnosed patients, 50% had NMOSD red flags in brain and/or spinal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and 71.5% were prescribed disease-modifying drugs. Conclusions: NMOSD misdiagnosis is relatively frequent in Latin America (12%). Misapplication and misinterpretation of clinical and neuroradiological findings are relevant factors associated with misdiagnosis.