medigraphic.com
Academia Mexicana de Neurología, A.C.

2017, Número 1

<< Anterior Siguiente >>

Rev Mex Neuroci 2017; 18 (1)


Esclerosis múltiple en América Central y el Caribe: Estado actual y recomendaciones clínicas

Gracia F, Parajeles VA, Panday A, Guirado-Romero AE, Molina KB, Treviño-Frenk I

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 53
Paginas: 76-88
Archivo PDF: 204.96 Kb.


RESUMEN

Introducción: La esclerosis múltiple (EM) es una enfermedad altamente discapacitante y costosa. El manejo médico de la EM es complejo y en regiones y países donde existen sistemas de salud con escasos recursos y limitaciones para el acceso a salud el impacto en de la EM en la salud y la sociedad es alto.
Métodos: Para comprender de una forma más adecuada las situaciones particulares relacionadas al manejo de la EM en Centroamérica y el caribe, un grupo de expertos de la región y países aledañas se reunieron para valorar el estatus de la EM y emitir recomendaciones sobre su manejo a nivel clínico e institucional.
Resultados: Posterior a una extensa revisión de la literatura, el panel concluyó que se deben de reforzar las actividades de vigilancia epidemiología en cada país de la Región debido a que la EM en muchas ocasiones está infradiagnosticada o mal diagnosticada. Además, es importante fortalecer los programas de farmacovigilancia, mejorar los programas educativos para los clínicos, mejorar el acceso a la referencia a Neurología en las comunidades y el desarrollo de guías clínicas relevantes para la Región que estén en sintonía con las recomendaciones internacionales para el diagnóstico y manejo de la EM. Adicionalmente, la disponibilidad y uso apropiado de los medicamentos modificadores de la enfermedad aprobados localmente debe de mejorar con un abordaje basado en políticas públicas.
Conclusiones: Las sociedades médicas e instituciones deben de dedicar una mayor cantidad de recursos a la educación de profesionales de la salud y a la población general sobre los aspectos de la EM. Se recomienda dedicar una mayor cantidad de recursos para mejorar el acceso a medicamentos para la EM.


REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

  1. Hafler DA. Multiple Sclerosis. J Clin Invest. 2004; 113: 788-794.

  2. Noseworthy JH, Lucchinetti C, Rodriguez M, Weinshenker BG. Multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2000; 343: 938–952.

  3. Belbasis L, Bellou V, Evangelou E, Ioannidis JPA, Tzoulaki I. Environmental risk factors and multiple sclerosis: an umbrella review of systematic revies and meta-analyses. Lancet Neurol. 2015; 14(3): 263-273.

  4. Browne P, Chandraratna D, Angwood C, et al. Atlas of Multiple Sclerosis 2013: A growing global problem with widespread inequity. Neurology. 2014; 83(11): 1022-4.

  5. Cristiano E, Rojas JI, Romano M, et al. The epidemiology of multiple sclerosis in Latin America and the Caribbean: a systematic review. Mult Scler. 2013; 19: 844–854.

  6. Gracia F, Castillo LC, Benzadon A, et al. Prevalence and incidence of multiple sclerosis in Panamá (2000–2005). Neuroepidemiology. 2009; 32: 287–293.

  7. Rivera VM. Multiple Sclerosis in Latin America. Neuroepidemiology. 2009; 32: 294-5. doi: 10.1159/000204913.

  8. Cabre P. Signate A, Olindo S, et al. Role of return migration in the emergence of multiple sclerosis in the French West Indies. Brain. 2005; 128: 2899-2910.

  9. Cabrera-Gomez JA, Santana Capote E, Echazabal-Santanta N, et al. Estado actual de la Esclerosis Multiple en Cuba. Rev Neurol. 2000; 31: 482-93.

  10. Melcon MO, Gold L, Carrá A, et al. Argentina Patagonia: Prevalence and clinical features of multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2008; 15: 656–662.

  11. Melcon M, Melcon C, Bartoloni L, et al. Towards establishing MS prevalence in Latin America and the Caribbean. Mult Scler. 2013; 19(2): 145-152.

  12. Simpson S, Jr, Blizzard L, Otahal P, Van der Mei I, Taylor B. Latitude is significantly associated with the prevalence of multiple sclerosis: a meta-analysis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2011; 82: 1132–1141.

  13. Flores J, Gonzalez S, Morales X, Yescas P, Ochoa A, Corona T. Absence of Multiple Sclerosis and Demyelinating Diseases among Lacandonians, a Pure Amerindian Ethnic Group in Mexico. Mult Scler Int. 2012; 2012:292631.

  14. Aguirre-Cruz L, Flores-Rivera J, De La Cruz-Aguilera DL, Rangel-López E, Corona T. Multiple Sclerosis in Caucasians and Latino Americans. Autoimmunity. 2011; 44(7): 571-5.

  15. Ordoñez G, Romero S, Orozco L, et al. Genomewide admixture study in Mexican Mestizos with multiple sclerosis. Clin Neurol Neursurgery. 2015; 130: 55-60.

  16. Dyment DA, Ebers GC, Sadovnick AD. Genetics of multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol. 2004; 3(2): 104- 10.

  17. Dyment DA, Herrera BM, Cader MZ, et al. Complex interactions among MHC haplotypes in multiple sclerosis: susceptibility and resistance. Hum Mol Genet. 2005; 14(4): 2019-26.

  18. Ramagopalan SV, Morris AP, Dyment DA, et al. The Inheritance of Resistance Alleles in Multiples Sclerosis. PLOS Genet. 2007; 3: e150.

  19. Ebers GC, Bulman DE, Sadovnick AD, et al. A population-based twin study in multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med. 1986; 315: 1638-1642.

  20. Sadovnick AD, Baird PA, Ward RH. Multiple sclerosis: Updated risks for relatives. Am J Med Genet. 1988; 29: 533-541.

  21. Sadovnick AD, Ebers GC, Dyment DA, Risch NJ. Evdience for genetic basis of multiple sclerosis. The Canadian Collaborative Study Group. Lancet. 1996; 347: 1728-1730.

  22. Hawkes CH, Boniface D. Risk associated behavior in premorbid multiple sclerosis: A Case-control study. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2014; 3(1): 40-47.

  23. Correale J, Farez M. Association between parasite infection and immune responses in multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol. 2007; 61: 97-108.

  24. Bach, JF. The effect of infections and susceptibility to autoimmune and allergic diseases. N Engl J Med. 2002; 347: 911-920.

  25. Polman CH, Reingold SC, Banwell B, et al. Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2010 revisions to the McDonald criteria. Ann Neurol. 2011; 69: 292–302.

  26. Arrambide G, Sastre-Garriga J. Predictive markers of disease evolution after a CIS in everyday practice. J Neurol Sci. 2014; 343: 8-14.

  27. Tintore M, Rovira À, Río J, et al. Defining high, medium and low impact prognostic factors for developing multiple sclerosis. Brain. 2015; 138: 1863-74.

  28. Lublin FD, Reingold SC, Cohen JA, et al. Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: the 2013 revisions. Neurology. 2014; 83(3): 278-86. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000000560.

  29. Carrá A, Macías-Islas MÁ, Gabbai AA, et al. Optimizing outcomes in multiple sclerosis: consensus guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of multiple sclerosis in Latin America. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2011; 4(6): 349-60.

  30. Solomon AJ, Klein EP, Bourdette D. “Undiagnosing” multiple sclerosis: the challenge of misdiagnosis in MS. Neurology. 2012; 78: 1986-1991.

  31. Lennon VA, Wingerchuk DM, Kryzer TJ, et al. A serum autoantibody marker of neuromyelitis optica: distinction from multiple sclerosis. Lancet. 2004; 364(9451): 2106-12.

  32. Laule C, Vavasour IM, Moore GR, Oger J, Li DK, Paty DW. Water content and myelin water fraction in multiple sclerosis. A T2 relaxation study. J Neurol. 2004; 251(3): 284-293.

  33. Freedman MS, Comi F, De Stefano N, et al. Moving toward earlier treatment of multiple sclerosis: Findings from a decade of clinical trials and implications for clinical practice. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2014; 3(2): 147-55.

  34. Leray E, Vukusic S, Debouverie M, et al. Excess Mortality in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis Starts at 20 Years from Clinical Onset: Data from a Large-Scale French Observational Study. PLoS ONE. 2015; 10(7): e0132033. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0132033.

  35. Correale J, Abad P, Alvarenga R, et al. Management of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis in Latin America: Practical recommendations for treatment optimization. J Neurol Sci. 2014; 339(1-2): 196–206.

  36. Rotstein DL, Healy BC, Malik MT, Chitnis T, Weiner HL. Evaluation of no evidence of disease activity in a 7-year longitudinal multiple sclerosis cohort. JAMA Neurol. 2015; 72(2): 152-8.

  37. Stangel M, Penner IK, Kallmann BA, Lukas C, Kieseier BC. Towards the implementation of ‘no evidence of disease activity’ in multiple sclerosis treatment: the multiple sclerosis decision model. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2015; 8(1): 3-13.

  38. Rivera VM, Medina MT, Duron RM, Angel-Macias M. Multiple sclerosis care in Latin America. Neurology. 2014; 82(18): 1660-1661.

  39. Freedman MS, Selchen D, Arnold DL, et al. Treatment optimization in MS: Canadian MS Working Group updated recommendations. Can J Neurol Sci. 2013; 40(3): 307-23.

  40. Milo R. Effectiveness of multiple sclerosis treatment with current immunomodulatory drugs. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2015; 16(5): 659-73.

  41. Damal K, Stoker E, Foley JF. Optimizing therapeutics in the management of patients with multiple sclerosis: a review of drug efficacy, dosing, and mechanisms of action. Biologics. 2013; 7: 247-258.

  42. Jeannin S, Deschamps R, Chausson N, Cabre P. Response to Interferon-Beta Treatment in Afro-Caribbeans with Multiple Sclerosis. Mult Scler Int. 2011; 2011: 950126. doi: 10.1155/2011/950126.

  43. Sormani MP, Rio J, Tintore M, et al. Scoring treatment response in patients with relapsing multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2013; 19(5): 605-12.

  44. Rio J, Comabella M, Montalban X. Predicting responders to therapies for multiple sclerosis. Nat Rev Neurol. 2009; 5(10): 553-560.

  45. Le Page E, Veillard D, Laplaud DA, et al. Oral versus intravenous high-dose methylprednisolone for treatment of relapses in patients with multiple sclerosis (COPOUSEP): a randomised, controlled, double-blind, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2015 June 26. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)61137-0.

  46. Bevan C, Gelfand JM. Therapeutic management of severe relapses in multiple sclerosis. Curr Treat Options Neurol. 2015; 17(4): 345. doi: 10.1007/s11940-015-0345-6.

  47. Durelli L, Cocito D, Riccio A, et al. High-dose intravenous methylprednisolone in the treatment of multiple sclerosis: Clinical-immunologic correlations. Neurology. 1986; 36: 238–243.

  48. Gracia F, Armien B. Therapeutic armamentarium and health system coverage of multiple sclerosis in Latin America. Neuroepidemiology. 2012; 38(4): 217-8.

  49. Trisolini M, Honeycutt A, Wiener J, Lesesne S. Global Economic Impact of Multiple Sclerosis. London, UK: Multiple Sclerosis International Federation; 2010.

  50. GDP per capita (current US$). The World Bank Web site. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ NY.GDP.PCAP.CD. Accessed August 27, 2015.

  51. Macias-Islas MA, Soria-Cedillo IF, Velazquez-Quintana M, et al. Cost of care according to disease modifying therapy in Mexicans with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Acta Neurol Belg. 2013; 113: 415-420.

  52. Hartung DM, Bourdette DM, Ahmed SM, Whitham RH. The cost of multiple sclerosis drugs in the US and the pharmaceutical industry: Too big to fail? Neurology. 2015; 84(21): 2185-92.

  53. Harris C. Costello K, Halper J. Consortium of multiple sclerosis centers recommendations for care of those affected by multiple sclerosis. Int J MS Care. 2003; 5(3): 67-68.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com