Background: The efficacy of interferon beta (IFN beta) is well established in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS). However, the use of this drug in clinical practice is complex, especially because it is only partially effective, its long term efficacy and side effects are unknown, its efficacy may be abrogated by the development of neutralising antibodies, compliance is variable, and its cost effectiveness is controversial. Objectives and Methods: Analysis of a prospectively followed up series of 101 MS patients treated with IFN beta was undertaken to: (1) monitor the outcome of IFN beta treatment in clinical practice; (2) compare the immunogenicity of the three commercial IFN beta preparations available; (3) assess the proportion of patients fulfilling the current guidelines of the Association of British Neurologists for stopping IFN beta therapy. Results: During a median treatment period of 26 months (range 2-85), the relapse rate decreased by 41%. Although the reduction in the relapse rate was similar for all three commercial products, none of the Avonex treated patients were relapse free, compared with 19% of the Betaferon treated and 27% of the Rebif treated patients (p=0.02). Neutralising antibodies were not detected in Avonex treated patients (0 of 18), compared with 12 of 32 (38%) Betaferon treated and 10 of 23 (44%) Rebif treated patients (p=0.02). Forty of 101 (40%) patients satisfied the current (2001) Association of British Neurologists criteria for stopping IFN beta treatment at some stage during their treatment. Conclusion: IFN beta is effective in reducing the relapse rate in patients with relapsing-remitting MS in routine clinical practice. However, after a median treatment duration of 26 months, 40% of initially relapsing-remitting MS patients seem to have ongoing disease activity, presenting as disabling relapses or insidious progression.T hree large, multicentre, randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trials have demonstrated that interferon beta (IFN beta) reduces the relapse rate in patients with relapsing-remitting multipe sclerosis (MS) 1-3 and in two of these studies IFN beta slowed the rate of accumulation of disability.2 3 One of the questions that has not been answered by these trials, is for how long IFN beta treatment should continue. This issue is important, not only to prevent unnecessary treatment, but to allow patients access to other potentially efficacious therapies and to enable health authorities to plan drug provision for MS.This prospective audit describes the implementation of IFN beta therapy at a tertiary referral centre, the National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (NHNN) in London. The unblinded, observational concept carries a number of inherent limitations, such as drug selection criteria, potential unblinding effects, and patient selection criteria.The aims of the audit were therefore (1) to evaluate the efficacy of IFN beta treatment in clinical practice; (2) to establish the immunogenicity of the different products and correlate the occurre...

No abstract

In order to compare a newly established diagnostic clinic with two existing clinical settings in the management of the diagnostic phase of multiple sclerosis (MS), a retrospective audit was performed over a 12-month period comparing the length of time, adherence to recently published standards and price charged in diagnosing MS in three different clinical diagnostic settings operating within the same hospital: a specifically designed demyelinating disease diagnostic clinic (DDC), a general neurology clinic (GNC) and an inpatient investigation unit (IIU). An audit tool was created to measure the standards advocated by the UK MS Society on management of the diagnostic phase of MS. The costing tool was the price charged to health authorities. A randomized retrospective case note and referral letter review method was used. The entry criterion was a confirmed diagnosis of MS documented in the medical notes following investigation during the period April 1999-April 2001. The time between referral and first appointment favoured the DDC with a mean time of 5.9 weeks, compared to 7.7 weeks for the GNC and 10.0 weeks for the IIU. The mean times between the first appointment and receipt of results were 4.7 weeks (DDC), 18.8 weeks (GNC) and 21.2 weeks (IIU). Prices ranged from pounds sterling 395-pounds sterling 790 (DDC), pounds sterling 95-pounds sterling 380 (GNC) and pounds sterling 1940-pounds sterling 2700 (IIU). This study suggests that the UK MS Society standards are achievable in most areas without excessive additional costs and provides evidence that the DDC offers a better service than other existing models.

No abstract