Short-term impact of fampridine on motor and cognitive functions, mood and quality of life among multiple sclerosis patients

Pavsic, Katja; Pelicon, Katarina; Ledinek, Alenka Horvat; Šega, Saša

doi:10.1016/j.clineuro.2015.08.023

Cited by 50 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(2013) and Pavsic et al. (2015) reported an improvement in quality of life measures in dalfampridine‐treated patients, the improvement in walking ability in our patient cohort was not paralleled by significant improved quality of life scores. This difference may be explained by the fact that the quality of life measures in the study by Limone et al.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 60%

“…In line with reports by Pavsic et al. (2015), we observed an effect of dalfampridine on the severity of depression. In our cohort, this effect was independent of the responder status, suggesting that the improved depression score may be independent of improved physical disability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

“…(2014) did not improve in their performance in the 9‐HPT following dalfampridine treatment. Other studies, though, have reported improvements in the 9‐HPT in dalfampridine‐treated patients (Allart et al., 2015; Jensen et al., 2014; Lo et al., 2015; Pavsic et al., 2015) while Savin et al. (2016) detected positive effects of dalfampridine treatment only on the dominant hand.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(2016) and Pavsic et al. (2015) who reported quality of life improvements after 4‐ or 12‐week treatment periods. Thus, the 2 weeks treatment and observation period applied in our study may have been too short to identify significant changes in quality of life measures.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, regarding the assumed effects on conduction, action‐potentials, and synaptic and neuromuscular transmission, it would be very likely that the compound also has an effect on other parts of the central nervous system and therefore on other neurological functions such as vision, fatigue, or cognition (Kim, Goldner, & Sanders, 1980; Shi & Blight, 1997; Smith, Felts, & John, 2000). Indeed, studies investigating whether or not dalfampridine or 4‐aminopyridine exert beneficial effects on other neurological function in MS patients described positive effects on measures of cognitive function, upper limb function, fatigue, and vision (Horton et al., 2013; Jensen, Ravnborg, Mamoei, Dalgas, & Stenager, 2014; Limone, Sidovar, & Coleman, 2013; Magnin et al., 2015; Pavsic, Pelicon, Ledinek, & Sega, 2015; Prugger & Berger, 2013; Rossini et al., 2001; Ruck et al., 2014). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Dalfampridine effects on cognition, fatigue, and dexterity

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesDalfampridine exerts beneficial effects on walking ability in a subgroup of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). These patients are termed “responders”. Here, we investigated whether the responder status with respect to mobility measures would determine whether dalfampridine treatment exerts a beneficial effect on other MS symptoms. We therefore assessed walking ability, upper limb function, cognition, fatigue, visual evoked potentials (VEPs), depression, and quality of life in patients before and after dalfampridine treatment.MethodsPatients with MS and impaired mobility were recruited. Maximal walking distance, timed 25 Foot Walk, nine hole peg test, paced auditory serial addition test (PASAT), fatigue severity scale (FSS), VEPs, Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), EuroQol five dimensional questionnaire, and quality of life visual analogue scale were determined before and after 12–14 days of dalfampridine treatment. Repeated measures analysis of variance was applied to determine the effect of dalfampridine treatment.ResultsOf the 34 patients who completed the study, 22 patients were responders and 12 patients nonresponders, according to their performance in mobility measures. Treatment effects for the entire patient cohort were observed for PASAT (p = .029) and BDI (p = .032). Belonging to the responder cohort did not predict the response to treatment in these tests. For the FSS, response to dalfampridine treatment was dependent on the responder status (p = .001) while no effects in the total patient cohort were observed (p = .680). Other neurological functions remained unaltered. For VEP latencies, no significant improvements were detected.ConclusionIn this study, we observed beneficial effects of dalfampridine on cognition, depression, and fatigue. These effects were not limited to patients who responded to dalfampridine with improved mobility measures. These findings underscore the need to assess the beneficial effects of dalfampridine on neurological deficits in MS patients in additional randomized clinical trials.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 60%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%