Alessandra Lugaresi

Prof. Alessandra Lugaresi

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

45Years (1982-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
15 January 2019 in JAMA
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
JBJ. William L. Brown
J. William L. Brown
ACAlasdair Coles
Alasdair Coles
DHDana Horakova
Dana Horakova
EHEva Havrdova
Eva Havrdova
GIGuillermo Izquierdo
Guillermo Izquierdo
FGfor the MSBase Study Group
for the MSBase Study Group
Importance Within 2 decades of onset, 80% of untreated patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS) convert to a phase of irreversible disability accrual termed secondary progressive MS. The association between disease-modifying treatments (DMTs), and this conversion has rarely been studied and never using a validated definition. Objective To determine the association between the use, the type of, and the timing of DMTs with the risk of conversion to secondary progressive MS diagnosed with a validated definition. Design, Setting, and Participants Cohort study with prospective data from 68 neurology centers in 21 countries examining patients with relapsing-remitting MS commencing DMTs (or clinical monitoring) between 1988-2012 with minimum 4 years’ follow-up. Exposures The use, type, and timing of the following DMTs: interferon beta, glatiramer acetate, fingolimod, natalizumab, or alemtuzumab. After propensity-score matching, 1555 patients were included (last follow-up, February 14, 2017). Main Outcome and Measure Conversion to objectively defined secondary progressive MS. Results Of the 1555 patients, 1123 were female (mean baseline age, 35 years [SD, 10]). Patients initially treated with glatiramer acetate or interferon beta had a lower hazard of conversion to secondary progressive MS than matched untreated patients (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61-0.81;P < .001; 5-year absolute risk, 12% [49 of 407] vs 27% [58 of 213]; median follow-up, 7.6 years [IQR, 5.8-9.6]), as did fingolimod (HR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.22-0.62;P < .001; 5-year absolute risk, 7% [6 of 85] vs 32% [56 of 174]; median follow-up, 4.5 years [IQR, 4.3-5.1]); natalizumab (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.43-0.86;P = .005; 5-year absolute risk, 19% [16 of 82] vs 38% [62 of 164]; median follow-up, 4.9 years [IQR, 4.4-5.8]); and alemtuzumab (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.32-0.85;P = .009; 5-year absolute risk, 10% [4 of 44] vs 25% [23 of 92]; median follow-up, 7.4 years [IQR, 6.0-8.6]). Initial treatment with fingolimod, alemtuzumab, or natalizumab was associated with a lower risk of conversion than initial treatment with glatiramer acetate or interferon beta (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.44-0.99;P = .046); 5-year absolute risk, 7% [16 of 235] vs 12% [46 of 380]; median follow-up, 5.8 years [IQR, 4.7-8.0]). The probability of conversion was lower when glatiramer acetate or interferon beta was started within 5 years of disease onset vs later (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.98;P = .03; 5-year absolute risk, 3% [4 of 120] vs 6% [2 of 38]; median follow-up, 13.4 years [IQR, 11-18.1]). When glatiramer acetate or interferon beta were escalated to fingolimod, alemtuzumab, or natalizumab within 5 years vs later, the HR was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.66-0.88;P < .001; 5-year absolute risk, 8% [25 of 307] vs 14% [46 of 331], median follow-up, 5.3 years [IQR], 4.6-6.1). Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with relapsing-remitting MS, initial treatment with fingolimod, alemtuzumab, or natalizumab was associated with a lower risk of conversion to secondary progressive MS vs initial treatment with glatiramer acetate or interferon beta. These findings, considered along with these therapies’ risks, may help inform decisions about DMT selection.

16 October 1986 in New England Journal of Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
ELElio Lugaresi
Elio Lugaresi
RMRossella Medori
Rossella Medori
PMPasquale Montagna
Pasquale Montagna
ABAgostino Baruzzi
Agostino Baruzzi
Pietro CortelliPietro Cortelli
Pietro Cortelli
PGPierluigi Gambetti
Pierluigi Gambetti
The thalamus is affected in diffuse degenerative processes of the nervous system.1 2 3 4 5 However, it has not been established whether a genetically determined degenerative disease may be limited to selected thalamic nuclei.We report here the case of a 53-year-old man who presented with progressive insomnia and dysautonomia (pyrexia, diaphoresis, miosis, and sphincter disturbances). Dreamlike status, dysarthria, tremor, and myoclonus subsequently developed and led to coma and death after nine months.6 Two sisters of the patient and many relatives over three generations had died of a similar disease. Pathological studies of the brains of the patient and one of his sisters . . .

7 July 2016 in Brain
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JLJohannes Lorscheider
Johannes Lorscheider
KBKatherine Buzzard
Katherine Buzzard
VJVilija Jokubaitis
Vilija Jokubaitis
TSTim Spelman
Tim Spelman
EHEva Kubala Havrdová
Eva Kubala Havrdová
OGon behalf of the MSBase Study Group
on behalf of the MSBase Study Group
A number of studies have been conducted with the onset of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis as an inclusion criterion or an outcome of interest. However, a standardized objective definition of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis has been lacking. The aim of this work was to evaluate the accuracy and feasibility of an objective definition for secondary progressive multiple sclerosis, to enable comparability of future research studies. Using MSBase, a large, prospectively acquired, global cohort study, we analysed the accuracy of 576 data-derived onset definitions for secondary progressive multiple sclerosis and first compared these to a consensus opinion of three neurologists. All definitions were then evaluated against 5-year disease outcomes post-assignment of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis: sustained disability, subsequent sustained progression, positive disability trajectory, and accumulation of severe disability. The five best performing definitions were further investigated for their timeliness and overall disability burden. A total of 17 356 patients were analysed. The best definition included a 3-strata progression magnitude in the absence of a relapse, confirmed after 3 months within the leading Functional System and required an Expanded Disability Status Scale step ≥4 and pyramidal score ≥2. It reached an accuracy of 87% compared to the consensus diagnosis. Seventy-eight per cent of the identified patients showed a positive disability trajectory and 70% reached significant disability after 5 years. The time until half of all patients were diagnosed was 32.6 years (95% confidence interval 32–33.6) after disease onset compared with the physicians’ diagnosis at 36 (35–39) years. The identified patients experienced a greater disease burden [median annualized area under the disability-time curve 4.7 (quartiles 3.6, 6.0)] versus non-progressive patients [1.8 (1.2, 1.9)]. This objective definition of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis based on the Expanded Disability Status Scale and information about preceding relapses provides a tool for a reproducible, accurate and timely diagnosis that requires a very short confirmation period. If applied broadly, the definition has the potential to strengthen the design and improve comparability of clinical trials and observational studies in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis.

10 September 2015 in Brain
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TKTomas Kalincik
Tomas Kalincik
GCGary Cutter
Gary Cutter
TSTim Spelman
Tim Spelman
VJVilija Jokubaitis
Vilija Jokubaitis
EHEva Kubala Havrdová
Eva Kubala Havrdová
HBHelmut Butzkueven
Helmut Butzkueven
Prevention of irreversible disability is currently the most important goal of disease modifying therapy for multiple sclerosis. The disability outcomes used in most clinical trials rely on progression of Expanded Disability Status Scale score confirmed over 3 or 6 months. However, sensitivity and stability of this metric has not been extensively evaluated. Using the global MSBase cohort study, we evaluated 48 criteria of disability progression, testing three definitions of baseline disability, two definitions of progression magnitude, two definitions of long-term irreversibility and four definitions of event confirmation period. The study outcomes comprised the rates of detected progression events per 10 years and the proportions of the recorded events persistent at later time points. To evaluate the ratio of progression frequency and stability for each criterion, we calculated the proportion of events persistent over the five subsequent years once progression was achieved. Finally, we evaluated the clinical and demographic determinants characterising progression events and, for those that regressed back to baseline, determinants of their subsequent regression. The study population consisted of 16 636 patients with the minimum of three recorded disability scores, totalling 112 584 patient-years. The progression rates varied between 0.41 and 1.14 events per 10 years, with the length of required confirmation interval as the most important determinant of the observed variance. The concordance among all tested progression criteria was only 17.3%. Regression of disability occurred in 11–34% of the progression events over the five subsequent years. The most important determinant of progression stability was the length of the confirmation period. For the most accurate set of the progression criteria, the proportions of 3-, 6-, 12- or 24-month confirmed events persistent over 5 years reached 70%, 74%, 80% and 89%, respectively. Regression post progression was more common in younger patients, relapsing-remitting disease course, and after a smaller change in disability, and was inflated by higher visit frequency. These results suggest that the disability outcomes based on 3–6-month confirmed disability progression overestimate the accumulation of permanent disability by up to 30%. This could lead to spurious results in short-term clinical trials, and the issue may be magnified further in cohorts consisting predominantly of younger patients and patients with relapsing-remitting disease. Extension of the required confirmation period increases the persistence of progression events.

10 March 2015 in Neurology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
GMGiovanni L. Mancardi
Giovanni L. Mancardi
MSMaria P. Sormani
Maria P. Sormani
FGFrancesca Gualandi
Francesca Gualandi
ASAlbert Saiz
Albert Saiz
ECEric Carreras
Eric Carreras
M(Marrow Transplantation (Ebmt)
Marrow Transplantation (Ebmt)
Objective: To assess in multiple sclerosis (MS) the effect of intense immunosuppression followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cells transplantation (AHSCT) vs mitoxantrone (MTX) on disease activity measured by MRI. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, phase II, randomized trial including patients with secondary progressive or relapsing-remitting MS, with a documented increase in the last year on the Expanded Disability Status Scale, in spite of conventional therapy, and presence of one or more gadolinium-enhancing (Gd+) areas. Patients were randomized to receive intense immunosuppression (mobilization with cyclophosphamide and filgrastim, conditioning with carmustine, cytosine-arabinoside, etoposide, melphalan, and anti-thymocyte globulin) followed by AHSCT or MTX 20 mg every month for 6 months. The primary endpoint was the cumulative number of new T2 lesions in the 4 years following randomization. Secondary endpoints were the cumulative number of Gd+ lesions, relapse rate, and disability progression. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. Twenty-one patients were randomized and 17 had postbaseline evaluable MRI scans. Results: AHSCT reduced by 79% the number of new T2 lesions as compared to MTX (rate ratio 0.21, p = 0.00016). It also reduced Gd+ lesions as well as the annualized relapse rate. No difference was found in the progression of disability. Conclusion: Intense immunosuppression followed by AHSCT is significantly superior to MTX in reducing MRI activity in severe cases of MS. These results strongly support further phase III studies with primary clinical endpoints. The study was registered as EUDRACT No. 2007-000064-24.

5 June 2015 in PLOS ONE
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
KRKaren Ann Ribbons
Karen Ann Ribbons
PMPatrick McElduff
Patrick McElduff
CBCavit Boz
Cavit Boz
MTMaria Trojano
Maria Trojano
GIGuillermo Izquierdo
Guillermo Izquierdo
JLJeannette Lechner-Scott
Jeannette Lechner-Scott
Multiple Sclerosis is more common in women than men and females have more relapses than men. In a large international cohort we have evaluated the effect of gender on disability accumulation and disease progression to determine if male MS patients have a worse clinical outcome than females. Using the MSBase Registry, data from 15,826 MS patients from 25 countries was analysed. Changes in the severity of MS (EDSS) were compared between sexes using a repeated measures analysis in generalised linear mixed models. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to test for sex difference in the time to reach EDSS milestones 3 and 6 and the secondary progressive MS. In relapse onset MS patients (n = 14,453), males progressed significantly faster in their EDSS than females (0.133 vs 0.112 per year, P<0.001,). Females had a reduced risk of secondary progressive MS (HR (95% CI) = 0.77 (0.67 to 0.90) P = 0.001). In primary progressive MS (n = 1,373), there was a significant increase in EDSS over time in males and females (P<0.001) but there was no significant sex effect on the annualized rate of EDSS change. Among registrants of MSBase, male relapse-onset patients accumulate disability faster than female patients. In contrast, the rate of disability accumulation between male and female patients with primary progressive MS is similar.