Outcomes of a Physician Survey on the Type, Progression, Assessment, and Treatment of Neurological Disease in Mucopolysaccharidoses

Abstract The mucopolysaccharidosis (MPS) disorders are a group of rare, inherited lysosomal storage disorders. In each of the 11 MPS (sub)types, deficiency in a specific lysosomal enzyme (1 of 11 identified enzymes) leads to accumulation of glycosaminoglycans, resulting in cell, tissue, and multi-organ dysfunction. There is great heterogeneity in the clinical manifestations both between and within each MPS type. Somatic signs and symptoms include short stature, coarse facial features, skeletal and joint abnormalities, cardiorespiratory dysfunction, hepatosplenomegaly, and vision and hearing problems. In addition, patients with MPS I, II, III, and VII can have significant neurological manifestations, including impaired cognitive, language, and speech abilities, behavioral abnormalities, sleep problems, and/or epileptic seizures. Hydrocephalus is a frequent finding in patients with MPS I, II, and VI. Spinal cord compression can develop in almost all MPS disorders. Effective management and development of therapies that target these neurological manifestations warrant a profound understanding of their pathophysiology and progression in the different MPS types and best practices for evaluation and treatment. In order to obtain expert opinion addressing these topics we performed an online survey among an international group of experts with extensive experience in managing and treating MPS disorders. The results of this survey provide important insights into the management of neurological manifestations of MPS in clinical practice and are a valuable addition to current evidence.

Impact of Elosulfase Alfa on Pain in Patients with Morquio A Syndrome over 52 Weeks: MOR-008: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Pilot Study

Abstract Patients with mucopolysaccharidosis (MPS), and Morquio A syndrome (MPS IVA) in particular, often report substantial pain burden. MOR-008 was a randomized, double-blind, pilot study assessing the safety and efficacy, including impact on patient-reported pain, of 52 weeks of treatment with elosulfase alfa (at a dose of 2.0 or 4.0 mg/kg/week) in patients with Morquio A syndrome (?7 years old). Assessment of pain at baseline revealed that patients (N = 25) had a mean number of pain locations of 5.7, mean pain intensity score of 4.6 (indicative of medium pain), and a mean number of selected pain descriptors of 7.4 words. Treatment with elosulfase alfa improved subjective pain score (reduced to 3.2), pain locations (reduced by a mean of 1 location), and pain descriptor words (reduced to 4.9 words) over 1 year (52 weeks), suggesting that elosulfase alfa can reduce pain in some patients with Morquio A.

The patient's perspective: How to create awareness for improving access to care and treatment of MS patients?

BACKGROUND: There is currently no known cure for multiple sclerosis (MS). Four stakeholders play a major role in MS: healthcare professionals, regulators, payers and patients. OBJECTIVE: In Europe, patients are represented by the European Multiple Sclerosis Platform (EMSP), which aims to improve MS management and patients' quality of life. RESULTS: The EMSP has recently shown that there are major disparities in Europe in terms of access to care and treatment. Implementing the Code of Good Practice and a standardised MS nurse training may be useful in harmonising MS management across Europe. Additionally, the burden for novel therapeutic options to be approved by regulatory agencies has to decrease in order to provide faster access of treatment to patients. Data collection (e.g. national registers) also appears crucial to help research and shape the most effective policy in each country. Finally, people with MS should get appropriate (financial) support in order to complete their studies and find a job, as their active participation in society requires proper access to education and employment. Moreover, as they are the ones affected by MS, they seem to be best placed to represent themselves and their needs and should be consulted more often during decision-making processes by policy makers, regulators and payers.

The clinical perspective: How to personalise treatment in MS and how may biomarkers including imaging contribute to this?

BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a highly heterogeneous disease, both in its course and in its response to treatments. Effective biomarkers may help predict disability progression and monitor patients' treatment responses. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review was to focus on how biomarkers may contribute to treatment individualisation in MS patients. METHODS: This review reflects the content of presentations, polling results and discussions on the clinical perspective of MS during the first and second Pan-European MS Multi-stakeholder Colloquia in Brussels in May 2014 and 2015. RESULTS: In clinical practice, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measures play a significant role in the diagnosis and follow-up of MS patients. Together with clinical markers, the rate of MRI-visible lesion accrual once a patient has started treatment may also help to predict subsequent treatment responsiveness. In addition, several molecular (immunological, genetic) biomarkers have been established that may play a role in predictive models of MS relapses and progression. To reach personalised treatment decisions, estimates of disability progression and likely treatment response should be carefully considered alongside the risk of serious adverse events, together with the patient's treatment expectations. CONCLUSION: Although biomarkers may be very useful for individualised decision making in MS, many are still research tools and need to be validated before implementation in clinical practice.

The regulator's perspective: How should new therapies and follow-on products for MS be clinically evaluated in the future?

BACKGROUND: Although there is still no cure for multiple sclerosis (MS), the introduction of several innovative drugs with modes of action different from that of the existing drug arsenal and the progress in monitoring disease progression by imaging and using biomarkers are currently causing a knowledge surge. This provides opportunities for improving patient disease management. New therapies are also under development and pose challenges to the regulatory bodies regarding the optimal design of clinical trials with more patient-focused clinical endpoints. Moreover, with the upcoming patent expiry of some of the key first-line MS treatments in Europe, regulatory bodies will also face the challenge of recommending marketing authorisation for generic and abridged versions based on appropriate requirements for demonstrating equality/similarity to the innovator's product. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this article is to improve the understanding of the relevant guidance documents of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) on clinical investigation of medicinal products and to highlight the issues that the agency will need to clarify regarding follow-on products of first-line MS treatments. CONCLUSION: Today, it is clear that close collaboration between patients, healthcare professionals, regulatory bodies and industry is crucial for developing new safe and effective drugs, which satisfy the needs of MS patients.

The payer's perspective: What is the burden of MS and how should the patient's perspective be integrated in health technology assessment conducted for taking decisions on access to care and treatment?

BACKGROUND: In Europe, there exists considerable variability in access to care and treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS). OBJECTIVES: To improve this situation, we identified key issues payers should take into account when making decisions on access to care and treatment for MS. We also give an overview of the different dimensions determining total MS burden and discuss why it is key to integrate the patient's perspective in estimating this burden. RESULTS: The total burden of MS relates to three dimensions: clinical, humanistic and economic. Although the clinical burden is extensively studied, crucial information is still missing about MS pathophysiology, how MS-related symptoms will develop during the disease course and which patients will progress more rapidly. With regard to the humanistic burden, information on patient-reported quality of life systematically collected in clinical trials for registration purposes is still scarce. Early engagement between pharmaceutical companies, the European Medicines Agency and health technology agencies to prospectively identify key evidence needs for the regulatory and reimbursement processes is required as a first step towards more equal access to care and treatment in MS in Europe. Patients' expectations regarding treatment outcomes should be better researched and integrated into decision-making and patients should be counselled in this process.

Relationship Between Patient-Reported Outcomes and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Morquio A Syndrome

Abstract This cross-sectional analysis assessed the correlation between patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and clinical outcomes in 24 German patients with Morquio A. Clinical outcomes included 6-minute walk test (6MWT), 3-minute stair climb (3MSC) test, and joint range of motion as measures for endurance/mobility, forced vital capacity (FVC) and maximum voluntary ventilation (MVV) as measures for respiratory function, and height as an important manifestation. The PROs included the EuroQoL (EQ) 5D-5L (EQ5D-5L), to measure health-related QoL (HRQoL), and patients' rating of their ability to walk, climb, or breathe. In adults, endurance and pulmonary function measures and height showed strong and statistically significant correlation with the patients' EQ5D-5L (6MWT: R = .884, 3MSC test: R = .852, FVC: R = .815, MVV: R = .825, height: R = .842). The adult patients' rating of their ability to walk and climb also correlated strongly with 6MWT (R = .839) and 3MSC test (R = .700) results. Improvements in these clinical outcomes may be robust surrogate parameters of a better EQ5D-5L/HRQoL in patients with Morquio A.

Biopsy and treatment decisions in the initial management of prostate cancer and the role of PCA3; a systematic analysis of expert opinion.

PURPOSE: The Prostate CAncer gene 3 (PCA3) assay may guide prostate biopsy decisions and predict prostate cancer (PCa) aggressiveness. This study explored the appropriateness of (1) PCA3 testing; (2) biopsy; (3) active surveillance (AS) and the value of the PCA3 Score for biopsy and AS decisions. METHODS: Using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method, 12 urologists assessed the appropriateness of PCA3, biopsy and AS for theoretical patient profiles, constructed by combining clinical variables. They individually scored the appropriateness for all profiles using a 9-point scale. Based on the median score and extent of agreement, the appropriateness for each profile was calculated. RESULTS: The PCA3 Assay was mainly considered appropriate in men with ≥1 negative biopsy, PSA ≥ 3 ng/mL and life expectancy (LE) ≥10 years. A LE < 10 years, ≥2 negative biopsies and PCA3 Score <20 decreased biopsy appropriateness, while PSA ≥ 3 ng/mL and PCA3 Score >50 increased it. In men without a prior biopsy, LE ≥ 10 years and a suspicious DRE, PCA3 did not affect biopsy appropriateness. In other men, a PCA3 Score <20 discouraged biopsy, while a value ≥35 supported biopsy. AS was mainly considered appropriate if LE < 10 years, T1c PCa, ≤20% positive cores and PSA < 3 ng/mL. A PCA3 Score <20 pleads for and higher scores (particularly >50) against AS. CONCLUSIONS: These findings illustrate in which men PCA3 can be of additional value when taking biopsy and treatment decisions in clinical practice.