Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 14, 2025

The Multiple Sclerosis Performance Test MSPT: An iPad-Based Disability Assessment Tool
Published on: June 30, 2014
Personalized Treatment Response in Progressive MS: Can the Patient's Profile Influence the Outcome?
Francesca Bovis1, Ludwig Kappos2, Sophie Arnould3
1Department of Health Sciences (DISSAL), University of Genova, Genova, Italy.
Background:
Evidence from clinical trials providing average effects in populations is often used to forecast individualized patient outcomes similar to the trial patients. Multiple sclerosis (MS), known for notable heterogeneity in outcomes, makes the evaluation of potential heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) significant. Identifying factors that predict individual treatment response is crucial for optimizing patient care, and this study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility (proof of concept) of applying a statistical method to predict individual treatment response in MS trials.
Methods:
We developed an individualized response score (RS) to predict treatment response in patients with active secondary progressive MS (SPMS). The RS was a continuous combination of baseline clinical characteristics, including age, sex, previous relapses, EDSS, and disease duration. We used data from the EXPAND trial to train and validate the RS. A training dataset (70% of the data) was used to identify optimal response thresholds for four key outcomes: Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS), Timed 25 Foot Walk (T25FW), 9-Hole Peg Test (9HP), and the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT). The remaining 30% of the data served as a validation set to assess the RS's predictive performance. The continuous RS was binarized (into responder and non-responder) based on the threshold representing the top 25% versus the bottom 75% of the continuous score distribution.
Results:
Using baseline profiles, SPMS patients exhibiting varying benefits from Siponimod across different outcomes were successfully categorized as responders or non-responders. The overall effect of Siponimod on the EDSS was HR = 0.79 (95% CI: 0.65-0.95), while responders' demonstrated a HR = 0.64 (95% CI: 0.49-0.84) versus a HR = 0.97 (95% CI: 0.74-1.27) for non-responders', interaction p = 0.027. Siponimod's overall effect on SDMT progression was HR = 0.75 (95% CI: 0.63-0.88). Responders' demonstrated a HR = 0.59 (95% CI: 0.43-0.80) vs a HR = 1.00 (95% CI: 0.69-1.44) for non-responders, interaction p = 0.031. On the entire dataset, Siponimod exhibited a non-significant effect on 9HPT (HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.66-1.10) and on T25FW (HR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.81-1.12), whereas responders' demonstrated a HR = 0.68 (95% CI: 0.47-0.97) on 9HPT and a HR = 0.77 (95% CI: 0.60-0.98) for T25FW.
Conclusions:
This analysis demonstrated the ability to define responders to a therapy based on their baseline profile and evaluate the treatment effect on multiple endpoints, showing that the benefit on different outcomes can vary across patients.
More Related Videos
10:46A Method of Trigonometric Modelling of Seasonal Variation Demonstrated with Multiple Sclerosis Relapse Data
Published on: December 9, 2015
04:09Predicting Treatment Response to Image-Guided Therapies Using Machine Learning: An Example for Trans-Arterial Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Published on: October 10, 2018
Related Concept Videos
Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...
Analysis of Population Pharmacokinetic Data
Nonlinear Pharmacokinetics: Dependence of Elimination Half-Life and Dose Clearance
A study on guinea pigs examined the...
Factors Affecting Drug Response: Overview