Skip to main content
Advertisement
  • Neurology.org
  • Journals
    • Neurology
    • Clinical Practice
    • Education
    • Genetics
    • Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • Online Sections
    • Neurology Video Journal Club
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion (DEI)
    • Neurology: Clinical Practice Accelerator
    • Practice Buzz
    • Practice Current
    • Residents & Fellows
    • Without Borders
  • Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Disputes & Debates
    • Health Disparities
    • Infographics
    • Neurology Future Forecasting Series
    • Null Hypothesis
    • Patient Pages
    • Topics A-Z
    • Translations
    • UDDA Revision Series
  • Podcast
  • CME
  • About
    • About the Journals
    • Contact Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Author Center

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Neurology.org
  • Journals
    • Neurology
    • Clinical Practice
    • Education
    • Genetics
    • Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • Online Sections
    • Neurology Video Journal Club
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion (DEI)
    • Neurology: Clinical Practice Accelerator
    • Practice Buzz
    • Practice Current
    • Residents & Fellows
    • Without Borders
  • Collections
    • COVID-19
    • Disputes & Debates
    • Health Disparities
    • Infographics
    • Neurology Future Forecasting Series
    • Null Hypothesis
    • Patient Pages
    • Topics A-Z
    • Translations
    • UDDA Revision Series
  • Podcast
  • CME
  • About
    • About the Journals
    • Contact Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Author Center
  • Home
  • Latest Articles
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Neurology Video Journal Club
  • Residents & Fellows

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Neurology
Home
The most widely read and highly cited peer-reviewed neurology journal
  • Subscribe
  • My Alerts
  • Log in
Site Logo
  • Home
  • Latest Articles
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Neurology Video Journal Club
  • Residents & Fellows

Share

June 16, 2020; 94 (24) Views & ReviewsOpen Access

The 2013 clinical course descriptors for multiple sclerosis

A clarification

View ORCID ProfileFred D. Lublin, View ORCID ProfileTimothy Coetzee, Jeffrey A. Cohen, Ruth A. Marrie, Alan J. Thompson, on behalf of the International Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials in MS
First published May 29, 2020, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000009636
Fred D. Lublin
From the Department of Neurology (F.D.L.), Corinne Goldsmith Dickinson Center for Multiple Sclerosis, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY; National Multiple Sclerosis Society (T.C.), New York, NY; Department of Neurology (J.A.C.), Mellen Center for Multiple Sclerosis Treatment and Research, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, OH; Departments of Internal Medicine (Neurology) and Community Health Sciences (R.A.M.), Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada; and Faculty of Brain Sciences (A.J.T.), University College, London, United Kingdom.
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Fred D. Lublin
Timothy Coetzee
From the Department of Neurology (F.D.L.), Corinne Goldsmith Dickinson Center for Multiple Sclerosis, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY; National Multiple Sclerosis Society (T.C.), New York, NY; Department of Neurology (J.A.C.), Mellen Center for Multiple Sclerosis Treatment and Research, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, OH; Departments of Internal Medicine (Neurology) and Community Health Sciences (R.A.M.), Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada; and Faculty of Brain Sciences (A.J.T.), University College, London, United Kingdom.
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Timothy Coetzee
Jeffrey A. Cohen
From the Department of Neurology (F.D.L.), Corinne Goldsmith Dickinson Center for Multiple Sclerosis, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY; National Multiple Sclerosis Society (T.C.), New York, NY; Department of Neurology (J.A.C.), Mellen Center for Multiple Sclerosis Treatment and Research, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, OH; Departments of Internal Medicine (Neurology) and Community Health Sciences (R.A.M.), Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada; and Faculty of Brain Sciences (A.J.T.), University College, London, United Kingdom.
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ruth A. Marrie
From the Department of Neurology (F.D.L.), Corinne Goldsmith Dickinson Center for Multiple Sclerosis, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY; National Multiple Sclerosis Society (T.C.), New York, NY; Department of Neurology (J.A.C.), Mellen Center for Multiple Sclerosis Treatment and Research, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, OH; Departments of Internal Medicine (Neurology) and Community Health Sciences (R.A.M.), Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada; and Faculty of Brain Sciences (A.J.T.), University College, London, United Kingdom.
MD, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alan J. Thompson
From the Department of Neurology (F.D.L.), Corinne Goldsmith Dickinson Center for Multiple Sclerosis, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY; National Multiple Sclerosis Society (T.C.), New York, NY; Department of Neurology (J.A.C.), Mellen Center for Multiple Sclerosis Treatment and Research, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, OH; Departments of Internal Medicine (Neurology) and Community Health Sciences (R.A.M.), Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada; and Faculty of Brain Sciences (A.J.T.), University College, London, United Kingdom.
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
From the Department of Neurology (F.D.L.), Corinne Goldsmith Dickinson Center for Multiple Sclerosis, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY; National Multiple Sclerosis Society (T.C.), New York, NY; Department of Neurology (J.A.C.), Mellen Center for Multiple Sclerosis Treatment and Research, Neurological Institute, Cleveland Clinic, OH; Departments of Internal Medicine (Neurology) and Community Health Sciences (R.A.M.), Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, Max Rady College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada; and Faculty of Brain Sciences (A.J.T.), University College, London, United Kingdom.
Full PDF
Citation
The 2013 clinical course descriptors for multiple sclerosis
A clarification
Fred D. Lublin, Timothy Coetzee, Jeffrey A. Cohen, Ruth A. Marrie, Alan J. Thompson, on behalf of the International Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials in MS
Neurology Jun 2020, 94 (24) 1088-1092; DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000009636

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Permissions

Make Comment

See Comments

Downloads
8169

Share

This article has a correction. Please see:

  • The 2013 Clinical Course Descriptors for Multiple Sclerosis - February 01, 2022
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Disclosures
Loading

Abstract

The clinical courses of multiple sclerosis were defined in 1996 and refined in 2013 to provide a time-based assessment of the current status of the individual. These definitions have been successfully used by clinicians, clinical trialists, and regulatory authorities. Recent regulatory decisions produced variations and discrepancies in the use of the clinical course descriptions. We provide here a clarification of the concepts underlying these descriptions and restate the principles used in their development. Importantly, we highlight the critical importance of time framing the disease course modifiers activity and progression and clarify the difference between the terms worsening and progressing.

Glossary

MS=
multiple sclerosis;
PPMS=
primary progressive multiple sclerosis;
SPMS=
secondary progressive multiple sclerosis

Introduction

In 1996, the International Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials in MS (a body currently sponsored by the European Committee for Treatment and Research in MS and the US National Multiple Sclerosis Society) published an article defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis (MS).1 These definitions were subsequently updated in 2013.2 The purpose of these consensus descriptions was to standardize the terminology used to characterize the different clinical courses of MS and (in the 2013 revision) add descriptors for the current state of the patient.

Accurate, standardized clinical course descriptors are important for several reasons. First, they facilitate communication between clinicians and persons with MS. Second, they are necessary to support studies describing the natural history of MS and facilitate accurate identification of prognostic indicators by clinical course. Third, they reduce heterogeneity in the populations recruited for clinical trials and assist in the application of trial results to appropriate patient populations in clinical practice.

The current classifications of MS have been generally accepted by clinicians, researchers, sponsors, and regulators. However, recent approvals for several disease-modifying therapies, including ocrelizumab, siponimod, and cladribine, introduced variations and some discrepancies in the use of the clinical course descriptors in the associated regulatory communications.3,–,8 Variation in the application of the clinical course descriptors has the potential to create some confusion in clinical practice, the conduct of future clinical trials, and decisions by health authorities, insurers, and related entities concerning patient access to approved treatments. This situation has prompted the committee to clarify the concepts underlying these descriptions and to restate the principles used in their development.

Multiple sclerosis phenotypes

Since 2013, the phenotypes that have been used to characterize MS are clinically isolated syndrome (monophasic clinical episode typical of CNS demyelination in a patient not known to have MS), relapsing-remitting MS, primary progressive MS (PPMS), and secondary progressive MS (SPMS), and they are referenced in the recently published MS diagnostic criteria.9 The modifiers describing the current disease state are (1) assessments of activity—evidenced either by clinical relapses or imaging (gadolinium-enhancing lesions or new or unequivocally enlarging T2 lesions)—and (2) an assessment of progression—clinical evidence of disability worsening, independent of relapses, over a given period of time in patients who are in a progressive phase of the disease (i.e., PPMS or SPMS).2

A critical aspect of the 2013 addition of modifiers for activity and progression was that these terms must be framed in time.2 Although a specific time frame was not initially specified, we recommended and reaffirm that at a minimum, disease activity and progression should be evaluated annually. When used in this manner, the modifiers represent a current assessment of the disease and can enable monitoring of changes over time.

As stated in the committee's previous articles, these recommended characterizations were based on the clinician's determination of the patient's clinical course.1,2 Although these characterizations are informed by our understanding of the pathobiology underlying the clinical courses, this pathobiology is incompletely understood. There is a common view that the underlying pathology of MS involves both inflammation and neurodegeneration. However, the relationship between the clinical evolution of the disease and these mechanisms is complex and requires further characterization. Although MRI remains an incomplete indicator of disease course, it has increasing utility as a measure of activity, as discussed below.

Challenges

The phenotype characterizations are widely used, but we have observed increasing inconsistency in how they are applied, particularly by regulatory authorities. Specific areas of concern include the use of the terms activity, progression, and worsening.

Regulators in Europe and the United States have used different definitions of activity in recent marketing authorizations for ocrelizumab, siponimod, and cladribine. Whereas European regulators have defined activity as evidenced by relapses or imaging features of inflammatory activity, US regulators limited the definition of activity to clinical relapses; MRI criteria for activity were not mentioned. These definitions are further complicated by the absence of a time frame in the product labels, which have included the terms active SPMS or SPMS with active disease in the United States and Europe.5,–,7 Without a time frame, these terms have little meaning, as all patients with SPMS (which by definition follows a relapsing-remitting phase) experienced active disease at some point. Inclusion of a time frame is critical for effective clinical decision making. A better approach would have been for the US labels for siponimod and cladribine (and the subsequent labeling updates of other approved DMTs) to have used the full definition of activity (i.e., either clinical or MRI activity) and include a specified time period for designating activity in those who are considered active SPMS, as discussed above. This more specific characterization would be understandable based on the concepts we had proposed and could be applied readily by clinicians, health systems, and related entities. The divergence between European and US regulators in use of the clinical course descriptors is problematic as it introduces potential confusion for drug developers, researchers publishing results, clinicians, and persons with MS.8 Although a broader labeled indication may provide prescribers greater latitude in determining the indications for an agent, there is a risk that in the absence of a standardized definition, payors, health authorities, and related bodies might use this as an opportunity to restrict access to a needed medication.

For purposes of clarity, we recommend that the more general term worsening be used to describe any increase in impairment/disability irrespective of whether it has resulted from residual deficits following a relapse or increasing disability during the progressive phase of the illness. We recommend reserving the term progressing or disease progression to describe those in a progressive phase of MS (PPMS or SPMS) who are accruing disability, independent of any relapse activity.

Conclusion

In summary, the committee urges clinicians, investigators, and regulators to consistently and fully use the 2013 phenotype characterizations by (1) using the full definition of activity, that is, the occurrence of a relapse or new activity on an MRI scan (a gadolinium-enhancing lesion or a new/unequivocally enlarging T2 lesion)2; (2) framing activity and progression in time; and (3) using the terms worsening and progressing or disease progression more precisely when describing MS course. The recommended terms and relevant time frames are defined in the table.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table

Definitions and time frames referenced in this article

We recognize that terminology and classification of the MS disease course are dynamic and will require redefining and clarifications as new data and measurement approaches become available, with the goal of developing more biologically based disease course characterizations that provide clarity and avoid unintended consequences. To this end, the committee is planning for their next review of this topic for 2020 to revisit the clinical courses with a particular focus on progression and the contributors to progression.

Study funding

This work and the International Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials in MS are funded by the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis and the National Multiple Sclerosis Society.

Disclosure

F.D. Lublin discloses consulting arrangements with Biogen, EMD Serono, Novartis, Teva, Actelion, Sanofi/Genzyme, Acorda, Roche/Genentech, MedImmune/Viela Bio, Receptos/Celgene, TG Therapeutics, MedDay, Atara Biotherapeutics, Polpharma, Mapi Pharma, Innate Immunotherapeutics, Apitope, Orion Biotechnology, Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, GW Pharma, Mylan, Immunic, and Population Council. T. Coetzee has nothing to disclose. J.A. Cohen reports personal compensation for consulting for Convelo, Mylan, and Population Council and serving as an Editor of Multiple Sclerosis Journal. R A. Marrie receives funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Research Manitoba, Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada, Multiple Sclerosis Scientific Foundation, Crohn's and Colitis Canada, National Multiple Sclerosis Society, and the Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers. She is supported by the Waugh Family Chair in Multiple Sclerosis. A.J. Thompson reports personal fees paid to his institution and other from Eisai Ltd and Hoffmann-La Roche; is an editorial board member for The Lancet Neurology receiving a free subscription; is Editor-in-Chief for Multiple Sclerosis Journal receiving an honorarium from SAGE Publications; receives support for travel as Chair, Scientific Advisory Committee, International Progressive MS Alliance, and from the National MS Society (USA) as member, NMSS Research Programs Advisory Committee; and received honoraria and support for travel for lecturing from EXCEMED and Almirall. Support is acknowledged from the UCL/UCLH NIHR Biomedical Research Centre. Go to Neurology.org/N for full disclosures.

Appendix 1 Authors

Table
Table

Appendix 2 Coinvestigators

Table
Table

Footnotes

  • Go to Neurology.org/N for full disclosures. Funding information and disclosures deemed relevant by the authors, if any, are provided at the end of the article.

  • International Advisory Committee on Clinical Trials in MS coinvestigators are listed in the appendix 2 at the end of the article.

  • The Article Processing Charge was funded by the National Multiple Sclerosis Society and the European Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis.

  • Received January 22, 2020.
  • Accepted in final form April 1, 2020.
  • Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology.

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND), which permits downloading and sharing the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Lublin FD,
    2. Reingold SC
    . Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: results of an international survey. National multiple sclerosis society (USA) advisory committee on clinical trials of new agents in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 1996;46:907–911.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Lublin FD,
    2. Reingold SC,
    3. Cohen JA, et al
    . Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: the 2013 revisions. Neurology 2014;83:278–286.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    Food and Drug Administration (USA). Ocrelizumab Summary Review; 2017. Available at: accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2017/761053Orig1s000SumR.pdf. Accessed November 23, 2019.
  4. 4.↵
    European Medicines Agency. Summary of Opinion—Ocrevus; 2017. Available at: ema.europa.eu/en/documents/smop-initial/chmp-summary-positive-opinion-ocrevus_en.pdf. Accessed September 23, 2019.
  5. 5.↵
    European Medicines Agency. Summary of Opinion—Mayzent; 2019. Available at: ema.europa.eu/en/documents/smop-initial/chmp-summary-positive-opinion-mayzent_en.pdf. Accessed September 23, 2019.
  6. 6.↵
    Food and Drug Administration (USA). Siponimod Summary Review; 2019. Available at: accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2019/209884Orig1s000SumR.pdf. Accessed September 23, 2019.
  7. 7.↵
    Food and Drug Administration (USA). Cladribine Summary Review; 2019. Available at: accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/nda/2019/022561Orig1s000SumR.pdf. Accessed September 23, 2019.
  8. 8.↵
    1. Coetzee T,
    2. Thompson AJ
    . Unified understanding of MS course is required for drug development. Nat Rev Neurol 2018;14:191–192.
    OpenUrl
  9. 9.↵
    1. Thompson AJ,
    2. Banwell BL,
    3. Barkhof F, et al
    . Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria. Lancet Neurol 2018;17:162–173.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed

Letters: Rapid online correspondence

No comments have been published for this article.
Comment

REQUIREMENTS

You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.

Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.

If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.

Submission specifications:

  • Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
  • Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
  • Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
  • Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
  • Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.

More guidelines and information on Disputes & Debates

Compose Comment

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
NOTE: The first author must also be the corresponding author of the comment.
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. [email protected]
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Publishing Agreement
NOTE: All authors, besides the first/corresponding author, must complete a separate Publishing Agreement Form and provide via email to the editorial office before comments can be posted.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

You May Also be Interested in

Back to top
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Glossary
    • Introduction
    • Multiple sclerosis phenotypes
    • Challenges
    • Conclusion
    • Study funding
    • Disclosure
    • Appendix 1 Authors
    • Appendix 2 Coinvestigators
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Disclosures
Advertisement

Hastening the Diagnosis of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis

Dr. Brian Callaghan and Dr. Kellen Quigg

► Watch

Related Articles

  • The 2013 Clinical Course Descriptors for Multiple SclerosisA Clarification

Topics Discussed

  • Multiple sclerosis

Alert Me

  • Alert me when eletters are published

Recommended articles

  • Views & Reviews
    Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis
    The 2013 revisions
    Fred D. Lublin, Stephen C. Reingold, Jeffrey A. Cohen et al.
    Neurology, May 28, 2014
  • Articles
    Familial effects on the clinical course of multiple sclerosis
    A. E. Hensiek, S. R. Seaman, L. F. Barcellos et al.
    Neurology, January 29, 2007
  • Views and Reviews
    New perspectives in the natural history of multiple sclerosis
    Helen Tremlett, Yinshan Zhao, Peter Rieckmann et al.
    Neurology, June 14, 2010
  • Review
    Multiple Sclerosis Phenotypes as a Continuum
    The Role of Neurologic Reserve
    Timothy L. Vollmer, Kavita V. Nair, Ian M. Williams et al.
    Neurology: Clinical Practice, January 29, 2021
Neurology: 101 (22)

Articles

  • Ahead of Print
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Popular Articles
  • Translations

About

  • About the Journals
  • Ethics Policies
  • Editors & Editorial Board
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise

Submit

  • Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Information for Reviewers
  • AAN Guidelines
  • Permissions

Subscribers

  • Subscribe
  • Activate a Subscription
  • Sign up for eAlerts
  • RSS Feed
Site Logo
  • Visit neurology Template on Facebook
  • Follow neurology Template on Twitter
  • Visit Neurology on YouTube
  • Neurology
  • Neurology: Clinical Practice
  • Neurology: Education
  • Neurology: Genetics
  • Neurology: Neuroimmunology & Neuroinflammation
  • AAN.com
  • Continuum
  • Brain & Life
  • Neurology Today

Wolters Kluwer Logo

Neurology | Print ISSN:0028-3878
Online ISSN:1526-632X

© 2023 American Academy of Neurology

  • Privacy Policy
  • Feedback
  • Advertise