% 0期刊文章% s标志弗里德曼%一个帕特里夏·k·Coyle吉安卡洛Comi % %一个朱莉·奥尔德里奇% Kurt Marhardt % % T路德维希卡珀斯的影响存在的钆增强(Gd +)病变在没有证据表明疾病活动的基线(NEDA)状态患者皮下干扰素beta-1a (scIFNβ-1a):反射的因果分析(P6.387) % D J神经病学2018% % P P6.387 % V 90% N 15补充% X目的:评估基线Gd +病变影响NEDA使用数据从反射/反射。首页背景:scIFNβ-1a治疗后临床孤立综合征(CIS)的几率增加NEDA状态和延迟治疗后(DT) clinically-definite多发性硬化症(探测器)。设计/方法:在反射,CIS患者随机分配到scIFNβ-1a 44μg三次每周(tiw),一旦每周为24个月(qw)或安慰剂;探测器后,病人转向开放scIFNβ-1a tiw。在反射,安慰剂的病人转向tiw (DT);scIFNβ-1a病人继续他们的初始方案60个月。分析利用综合intent-to-treat反射/反射人口:tiw n = 170;qw n = 174;DT n = 170。NEDA被定义为没有复发,残疾恶化,新的Gd +病变和/扩大T2 hyperintense病变。时间第一个疾病活动(FDA)事件后105天(105 d) post-randomization计算。kaplan meier曲线和平均时间(95%可信区间[CI])。Results: In all patients, time to FDA event after 105d was shorter in those with baseline Gd+ lesions (n=213) than without (n=301): 0.5 years (0.5–0.7) vs 1.0 year (0.8–1.4), respectively. In the higher risk group with baseline Gd+ lesions, scIFNβ-1a tiw increased time to FDA (n=68; 0.7 years [0.5–1.2]) vs DT, but this was longer in those without baseline Gd+ lesions (n=102; 1.7 years [1.5–2.0]). With scIFNβ-1a qw, time differed significantly between patients with (n=72) and without (n=102) baseline Gd+ lesions: 0.7 years (0.5–0.8) vs 1.0 year (1.0–1.5). For DT, no difference was seen for time between patients with (n=73) and without (n=97) baseline Gd+ lesions: 0.5 years (0.5–0.5) vs 0.7 years (0.5–0.7). In patients without baseline Gd+ lesions, differences in time between scIFNβ-1a tiw and qw vs DT were significant.Conclusions: In CIS patients, baseline Gd+ lesions was associated with a lower chance of NEDA after the 3-month MRI vs those without baseline Gd+ lesions.Study Supported by: Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, GermanyDisclosure: Dr. Freedman has received personal compensation for activities compensation for consulting, serving on a scientific advisory board, speaking, or other activities with Actelion, Bayer Healthcare, Biogen, Canada Innovation, Chugai, Clene Nanomedicine, EMD Canada, Hoffman-La Roche, Merck Serono, Novartis, Opexa, Sanofi Aventis, Sanofi Genzyme, and Teva. Dr. Comi has received personal compensation for consulting, serving on a scientific advisory board, speaking, or other activities with Bayer Schering, Biogen Dompè, Biogen Idec, Genentech-Roche, Merck, Novartis, Receptos, Sanofi-Aventis, Serono Symposia International Foundation and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Dr. Coyle has received personal compensation for consulting, serving on a scientific advisory board, speaking, or other activities with Consulting fees (AbbVie, Accordant, Acorda, Bayer, Biogen Idec, Celgene, Genentech/Roche, Genzyme/Sanofi, Novartis, Serono, Teva). Dr. Coyle has received research support from Research support (Actelion, Alkermes, Genentech/Roche, MedDay, NINDS, Novartis, Opexa). Dr. Aldridge has received personal compensation for consulting, serving on a scientific advisory board, speaking, or other activities with EMD Serono Inc. Dr. Marhardt has received personal compensation for consulting, serving on a scientific advisory board, speaking, or other activities with Merck Gesellschaft mbH Austria. Dr. Kappos has received research support from Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd and Genentech,Novartis, Research grants from: the European Union, Roche Research Foundation, Swiss Multiple Sclerosis Society and Swiss National Research Foundation. %U