WATCH TIME: 24 minutes
00:05 – Introductions
00:50 – Most exciting aspects of TREAT-MS
03:30 – Observational vs prospective data on MS treatments
07:30 – Background on the biobanking substudy
08:30 – COVID-19 and multiple sclerosis, and COVID-19 substudy
11:55 – Secondary end points and outcomes
16:50 – Goals for the diversity of enrollment and participating sites
20:10 – Final thoughts
For years now, the discussion and debate about utilizing the induction or the escalation approach for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) have raged on. Literature has pointed to the benefits of both methods, and many clinicians admit that treating MS does not result in a one-size-fits-all approach. There are, however, a pair of clinical trials—TREAT-MS (NCT03500328) and DELIVER-MS (NCT03535298)—currently ongoing that are aimed at answering this very question. The trials parallel one another and seek to enroll a total of more than 1700 individuals between them.
TREAT-MS is a pragmatic trial with a primary outcome of disability progression measured by EDSS plus, a compound outcome of the 9-Hole Peg Test and Timed 25-Foot Walk Scores alongside EDSS measures. DELIVER-MS, being conducted in both the US and the UK, is parallel in its main outcomes, with secondary measures including patient-reported disability, the impact of disease, health-related quality of life, relapse recovery, imaging outcomes, clinical performance metrics, social status, and safety.
At the Consortium of MS Centers Annual Meeting in June, two of the physicians involved in the trial, Scott Newsome, DO, associate professor of neurology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, and Ellen Mowry, DO, professor of neurology and epidemiology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, sat down together to discuss these efforts at length, and share some perspectives on their importance to clinical practice.