Association of NEDA-4 With No Long-term Disability Progression in Multiple Sclerosis and Comparison With NEDA-3: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

IF 7.5
Dalia Rotstein, Jacqueline M Solomon, Maria Pia Sormani, Xavier Montalban, Xiang Y Ye, Dina Dababneh, Alexandra Muccilli, Georges Saab, Prakesh Shah
{"title":"Association of NEDA-4 With No Long-term Disability Progression in Multiple Sclerosis and Comparison With NEDA-3: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.","authors":"Dalia Rotstein,&nbsp;Jacqueline M Solomon,&nbsp;Maria Pia Sormani,&nbsp;Xavier Montalban,&nbsp;Xiang Y Ye,&nbsp;Dina Dababneh,&nbsp;Alexandra Muccilli,&nbsp;Georges Saab,&nbsp;Prakesh Shah","doi":"10.1212/NXI.0000000000200032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>No evidence of disease activity (NEDA)-4 has been suggested as a treatment target for disease-modifying therapy (DMT) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). However, the ability of NEDA-4 to discriminate long-term outcomes in MS and how its performance compares with NEDA-3 remain uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate (1) the association between NEDA-4 and no long-term disability progression in MS and (2) the comparative performance of NEDA-3 and NEDA-4 in predicting no long-term disability progression.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>English-language abstracts and manuscripts were systematically searched in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane databases from January 2006 to November 2021 and reviewed independently by 2 investigators. We selected studies that assessed NEDA-4 at 1 or 2 years after DMT start and had at least 4 years of follow-up for determination of no confirmed disability progression. We conducted a meta-analysis using random-effects model to determine the pooled odds ratio (OR) for no disability progression with NEDA-4 vs EDA-4. For the comparative analysis, we selected studies that evaluated both NEDA-3 and NEDA-4 with at least 4 years of follow-up and examined the difference in the association of NEDA-3 and NEDA-4 with no disability progression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five studies of 1,000 patients (3 interferon beta and 2 fingolimod) met inclusion criteria for both objectives. The median duration of follow-up was 6 years (interquartile range: 4-6 years). The prevalence of NEDA-4 ranged from 4.2% to 13.9% on interferon beta therapy and 24.9% to 25.1% on fingolimod therapy. The pooled OR for no long-term confirmed disability progression with NEDA-4 vs EDA-4 was 2.14 (95% confidence interval: 1.36-3.37; I<sup>2</sup> = 0). We did not observe any significant difference between NEDA-4 and NEDA-3 in the comparative analyses.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>In patients with RRMS, NEDA-4 at 1-2 years was associated with 2 times higher odds of no long-term disability progression, at 6 years compared with EDA-4, but offered no advantage over NEDA-3.</p>","PeriodicalId":520720,"journal":{"name":"Neurology(R) neuroimmunology & neuroinflammation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/e3/ac/NXI-2022-200038.PMC9558627.pdf","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology(R) neuroimmunology & neuroinflammation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1212/NXI.0000000000200032","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Background and objectives: No evidence of disease activity (NEDA)-4 has been suggested as a treatment target for disease-modifying therapy (DMT) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). However, the ability of NEDA-4 to discriminate long-term outcomes in MS and how its performance compares with NEDA-3 remain uncertain. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate (1) the association between NEDA-4 and no long-term disability progression in MS and (2) the comparative performance of NEDA-3 and NEDA-4 in predicting no long-term disability progression.

Methods: English-language abstracts and manuscripts were systematically searched in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane databases from January 2006 to November 2021 and reviewed independently by 2 investigators. We selected studies that assessed NEDA-4 at 1 or 2 years after DMT start and had at least 4 years of follow-up for determination of no confirmed disability progression. We conducted a meta-analysis using random-effects model to determine the pooled odds ratio (OR) for no disability progression with NEDA-4 vs EDA-4. For the comparative analysis, we selected studies that evaluated both NEDA-3 and NEDA-4 with at least 4 years of follow-up and examined the difference in the association of NEDA-3 and NEDA-4 with no disability progression.

Results: Five studies of 1,000 patients (3 interferon beta and 2 fingolimod) met inclusion criteria for both objectives. The median duration of follow-up was 6 years (interquartile range: 4-6 years). The prevalence of NEDA-4 ranged from 4.2% to 13.9% on interferon beta therapy and 24.9% to 25.1% on fingolimod therapy. The pooled OR for no long-term confirmed disability progression with NEDA-4 vs EDA-4 was 2.14 (95% confidence interval: 1.36-3.37; I2 = 0). We did not observe any significant difference between NEDA-4 and NEDA-3 in the comparative analyses.

Discussion: In patients with RRMS, NEDA-4 at 1-2 years was associated with 2 times higher odds of no long-term disability progression, at 6 years compared with EDA-4, but offered no advantage over NEDA-3.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

NEDA-4与多发性硬化症患者无长期残疾进展的相关性以及与NEDA-3的比较:一项系统综述和荟萃分析
背景和目的:没有证据表明疾病活动性(NEDA)-4被建议作为复发-缓解型多发性硬化症(RRMS)疾病修饰治疗(DMT)的治疗靶点。然而,NEDA-4鉴别多发性硬化症长期预后的能力以及与NEDA-3相比其表现如何仍不确定。我们进行了一项系统回顾和荟萃分析,以评估(1)NEDA-4与MS无长期残疾进展之间的关系;(2)NEDA-3和NEDA-4在预测无长期残疾进展方面的比较表现。方法:从2006年1月至2021年11月在MEDLINE、Embase和Cochrane数据库中系统检索英文摘要和手稿,并由2名研究者独立审查。我们选择了在DMT开始后1年或2年评估NEDA-4的研究,并进行了至少4年的随访,以确定没有确认的残疾进展。我们使用随机效应模型进行了荟萃分析,以确定NEDA-4与EDA-4无残疾进展的合并优势比(OR)。为了进行比较分析,我们选择了对NEDA-3和NEDA-4进行至少4年随访的研究,并检查了NEDA-3和NEDA-4与无残疾进展的相关性的差异。结果:5项1000例患者的研究(3例干扰素β和2例芬戈莫德)符合两个目标的纳入标准。中位随访时间为6年(四分位数范围:4-6年)。干扰素治疗组NEDA-4的患病率为4.2% - 13.9%,芬戈莫德治疗组为24.9% - 25.1%。NEDA-4与EDA-4无长期确认残疾进展的合并OR为2.14(95%可信区间:1.36-3.37;I2 = 0)。我们在比较分析中没有观察到NEDA-4和NEDA-3之间有任何显著差异。讨论:在RRMS患者中,1-2年的NEDA-4与6年无长期残疾进展的几率比EDA-4高2倍,但与NEDA-3相比没有优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信