The accepted standard treatment of relapsing multiple sclerosis consists of medications for disease symptoms, including treatment for acute exacerbations. However, currently there is no therapy that alters the progression of physical disability associated with this disease. The purpose of this study was to determine whether interferon beta-1a could slow the progressive, irreversible, neurological disability of relapsing multiple sclerosis. Three hundred one patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis were randomized into a double-blinded, placebo-controlled, multicenter phase III trial of interferon beta-1a. Interferon beta-1a, 6.0 million units (30 micrograms¿, was administered by intramuscular injection weekly. The primary outcome variable was time to sustained disability progression of at least 1.0 point on the Kurtzke Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Interferon beta-1a treatment produced a significant delay in time to sustained EDSS progression (p = 0.02). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the proportion of patients progressing by the end of 104 weeks was 34.9% in the placebo group and 21.9% in the interferon beta-1a-treated group. Patients treated with interferon beta-1a also had significantly fewer exacerbations (p = 0.03) and a significantly lower number and volume of gadolinium-enhanced brain lesions on magnetic resonance images (p-values ranging between 0.02 and 0.05). Over 2 years, the annual exacerbation rate was 0.90 in placebo-treated patients versus 0.61 in interferon beta-1a-treated patients. There were no major adverse events related to treatment. Interferon beta-1a had a significant beneficial impact in relapsing multiple sclerosis patients by reducing the accumulation of permanent physical disability, exacerbation frequency, and disease activity measured by gadolinium-enhanced lesions on brain magnetic resonance images. This treatment may alter the fundamental course of relapsing multiple sclerosis.

BACKGROUND It is unknown whether warfarin or aspirin therapy is superior for patients with heart failure who are in sinus rhythm. METHODS We designed this trial to determine whether warfarin (with a target international normalized ratio of 2.0 to 3.5) or aspirin (at a dose of 325 mg per day) is a better treatment for patients in sinus rhythm who have a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). We followed 2305 patients for up to 6 years (mean [±SD], 3.5±1.8). The primary outcome was the time to the first event in a composite end point of ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, or death from any cause. RESULTS The rates of the primary outcome were 7.47 events per 100 patient-years in the warfarin group and 7.93 in the aspirin group (hazard ratio with warfarin, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.10; P = 0.40). Thus, there was no significant overall difference between the two treatments. In a time-varying analysis, the hazard ratio changed over time, slightly favoring warfarin over aspirin by the fourth year of follow-up, but this finding was only marginally significant (P = 0.046). Warfarin, as compared with aspirin, was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of ischemic stroke throughout the follow-up period (0.72 events per 100 patient-years vs. 1.36 per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.82; P = 0.005). The rate of major hemorrhage was 1.78 events per 100 patient-years in the warfarin group as compared with 0.87 in the aspirin group (P<0.001). The rates of intracerebral and intracranial hemorrhage did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups (0.27 events per 100 patient-years with warfarin and 0.22 with aspirin, P = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with reduced LVEF who were in sinus rhythm, there was no significant overall difference in the primary outcome between treatment with warfarin and treatment with aspirin. A reduced risk of ischemic stroke with warfarin was offset by an increased risk of major hemorrhage. The choice between warfarin and aspirin should be individualized.

Over two years, we found no difference between aspirin and warfarin in the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke or death or in the rate of major hemorrhage. Consequently, we regard both warfarin and aspirin as reasonable therapeutic alternatives.

SUMMARY Thirty-one patients with ectasia of intracranial arteries were studied. The carotid system was more frequently involved than the vertebrobasilar. The condition is relatively rare and usually occurs with other vascular disease. Ectasia presents with a variety of neurological symptoms, amongst which visual disorders are common. The overall mortality was 52 %, but the prognosis was appreciably worse for the vertebrobasilar group, probably because of a higher incidence of compression of surrounding neural structures. Defects in the internal elastic lamina, with or without associated atheroma, are often found in the affected arteries.Ectasia, or pathological enlargement of the cerebral arteries is a rare, though well recognised finding at cerebral angiography. Several series of vertebrobasilar ectasia,1-4 and one of carotid ectasia5 have previously been published, but there has not been a comprehensive account of the symptomatology and the natural history of this condition. We have therefore, reviewed the experience of ectasia of cerebral arteries in the National Hospitals over the past 22 years. Material and methodsOf the approximately 40 000 carotid and 10 000 vertebral angiograms performed at the National Hospital, Queen Square between 1959 and 1980, films of those reported as showing dilatation and tortuosity of vessels were reviewed. Measurements were made of the diameter (corrected for magnification) of the major vessels as demonstrated by cerebral angiography. In addition, the course of the ectatic basilar and vertebral arteries was noted, as were the relationships of the internal carotid arteries and the termination of the basilar arteries in the sella and suprasellar regions. Thirty-two normal carotid and 18 normal vertebral angiograms of an age-matched group of patients were also examined. Ectasia was diagnosed when the diameter of the vessels was greater than normal along all or part of their course, and when they were also abnormally tortuous. Whereas the former was determined by measurement, the latter feature was

Background Dissociative seizures are paroxysmal events resembling epilepsy or syncope with characteristic features that allow them to be distinguished from other medical conditions. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) plus standardised medical care with standardised medical care alone for the reduction of dissociative seizure frequency. MethodsIn this pragmatic, parallel-arm, multicentre randomised controlled trial, we initially recruited participants at 27 neurology or epilepsy services in England, Scotland, and Wales. Adults (≥18 years) who had dissociative seizures in the previous 8 weeks and no epileptic seizures in the previous 12 months were subsequently randomly assigned (1:1) from 17 liaison or neuropsychiatry services following psychiatric assessment, to receive standardised medical care or CBT plus standardised medical care, using a web-based system. Randomisation was stratified by neuropsychiatry or liaison psychiatry recruitment site. The trial manager, chief investigator, all treating clinicians, and patients were aware of treatment allocation, but outcome data collectors and trial statisticians were unaware of treatment allocation. Patients were followed up 6 months and 12 months after randomisation. The primary outcome was monthly dissociative seizure frequency (ie, frequency in the previous 4 weeks) assessed at 12 months. Secondary outcomes assessed at 12 months were: seizure severity (intensity) and bothersomeness; longest period of seizure freedom in the previous 6 months; complete seizure freedom in the previous 3 months; a greater than 50% reduction in seizure frequency relative to baseline; changes in dissociative seizures (rated by others); health-related quality of life; psychosocial functioning; psychiatric symptoms, psychological distress, and somatic symptom burden; and clinical impression of improvement and satisfaction. p values and statistical significance for outcomes were reported without correction for multiple comparisons as per our protocol. Primary and secondary outcomes were assessed in the intention-to-treat population with multiple imputation for missing observations. This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial registry, ISRCTN05681227, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02325544.