Multiple sclerosis (OMIM 126200) is a common disease of the central nervous system in which the interplay between inflammatory and neurodegenerative processes typically results in intermittent neurological disturbance followed by progressive accumulation of disability.1 Epidemiological studies have shown that genetic factors are primarily responsible for the substantially increased frequency of the disease seen in the relatives of affected individuals;2,3 and systematic attempts to identify linkage in multiplex families have confirmed that variation within the Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC) exerts the greatest individual effect on risk.4 Modestly powered Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS)5-10 have enabled more than 20 additional risk loci to be identified and have shown that multiple variants exerting modest individual effects play a key role in disease susceptibility.11 Most of the genetic architecture underlying susceptibility to the disease remains to be defined and is anticipated to require the analysis of sample sizes that are beyond the numbers currently available to individual research groups. In a collaborative GWAS involving 9772 cases of European descent collected by 23 research groups working in 15 different countries, we have replicated almost all of the previously suggested associations and identified at least a further 29 novel susceptibility loci. Within the MHC we have refined the identity of the DRB1 risk alleles and confirmed that variation in the HLA-A gene underlies the independent protective effect attributable to the Class I region. Immunologically relevant genes are significantly over-represented amongst those mapping close to the identified loci and particularly implicate T helper cell differentiation in the pathogenesis of multiple sclerosis.

The primary clinical outcome measure for evaluating multiple sclerosis in clinical trials has been Kurtzke's expanded disability status scale (EDSS). New therapies appear to favourably impact the course of multiple sclerosis and render continued use of placebo control groups more difficult. Consequently, future trials are likely to compare active treatment groups which will most probably require increased sample sizes in order to detect therapeutic efficacy. Because more responsive outcome measures will be needed for active arm comparison studies, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society's Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials of New Agents in Multiple Sclerosis appointed a Task Force that was charged with developing improved clinical outcome measures. This Task Force acquired contemporary clinical trial and historical multiple sclerosis data for meta-analyses of primary and secondary outcome assessments to provide a basis for recommending a new outcome measure. A composite measure encompassing the major clinical dimensions of arm, leg and cognitive function was identified and termed the multiple sclerosis functional composite (MSFC). The MSFC consists of three objective quantitative tests of neurological function which are easy to administer. Change in this MSFC over the first year of observation predicted subsequent change in the EDSS, suggesting that the MSFC is more sensitive to change than the EDSS. This paper provides details concerning the development and testing of the MSFC.

Both CBT and RT appear to be clinically effective treatments for fatigue in MS patients, although the effects for CBT are greater than those for RT. Even 6 months after treatment, both treatment groups reported levels of fatigue equivalent to those of the healthy comparison group.