No abstract

No abstract

Background Spasticity is a frequent symptom of multiple sclerosis (MS), which may negatively influence daily living activities (ADL). Objectives To (1) explore the feasibility to conduct a structured interview by specialist nurses about limitations in ADL; (2) determine the percentage of people with MS (PwMS) with limitations in ADL related to spasticity; (3) to assess the knowledge about spasticity and describe its clinical features. Design Observational, cross‐sectional, multicentre study in 16 MS units of Catalonia (Spain). Participants were recruited from the outpatient facility and day‐care hospital between July 2018 and June 2019 and met the following criteria: (1) age 18 or older, (2) diagnosis of MS according to McDonald criteria 2010 and (3) no clinical relapse in previous 30 days. Methods Specialist nurses conducted a structured interview divided in two parts: the assessment of (1) limitations in the ADL and (2) the presence of spasticity and associated symptoms. The usefulness of this intervention was requested. This study met the STROBE reporting guidelines checklist for observational studies. Results Three hundred sixty eight pwMS (244 women) with a mean age of 46 years and a median Expanded Disability Status Scale score of 2.5 (range, 0–8.5) were included. 262 (71%) pwMS had limitations in the ADL, and spasticity was reported as the most limiting symptom in 59 (23%). As a result of the interview, spasticity was observed in 199 (76%) participants; 47 (24%) of them were unaware that they had spasticity and 102 (51%) would not have reported it spontaneously. The level of the interview satisfaction was high (90%). Conclusions Spasticity is a complex and limiting symptom in MS. The structured interview conducted by specialist nurses is feasible and has good acceptance. Patient contribution Specialist nurses can be proactive in MS clinical assessment, which may help to detect symptoms with negative impact on quality of life.

Background Natalizumab (NTZ) and ocrelizumab (OCR) can be used for the treatment of relapsing–remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). In patients treated with NTZ, screening for JC virus (JCV) is mandatory, and a positive serology usually requires a change in treatment after 2 years. In this study, JCV serology was used as a natural experiment to pseudo-randomize patients into NTZ continuation or OCR. Methods An observational analysis of patients who had received NTZ for at least 2 years and were either changed to OCR or maintained on NTZ, depending on JCV serology status, was performed. A stratification moment (STRm) was established when patients were pseudo-randomized to either arm (NTZ continuation if JCV negativity, or change to OCR if JCV positivity). Primary endpoints include time to first relapse and presence of relapses after STRm and OCR initiation. Secondary endpoints include clinical and radiological outcomes after 1 year. Results Of the 67 patients included, 40 continued on NTZ (60%) and 27 were changed to OCR (40%). Baseline characteristics were similar. Time to first relapse was not significantly different. Ten patients in the JCV + OCR arm presented a relapse after STRm (37%), four during the washout period, and 13 patients in the JCV-NTZ arm (32.5%, p = 0.701). No differences in secondary endpoints were detected in the first year after STRm. Conclusions The JCV status can be used as a natural experiment to compare treatment arms with a low selection bias. In our study, switching to OCR versus NTZ continuation led to similar disease activity outcomes.