Safety, Patient-Reported Well-Being, and Physician-Reported Assessment of Walking Ability in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis for Prolonged-Release Fampridine Treatment in Routine Clinical Practice: Results of the LIBERATE Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prolonged-release fampridine (PR-FAM) 10-mg tablet twice daily is the only approved pharmacological treatment for improvement of walking ability in adults with multiple sclerosis (MS). LIBERATE assessed the safety/effectiveness of PR-FAM in the real-world. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to collect additional safety data, including the incidence rate of seizures and other adverse events (AEs) of interest, from patients with MS taking PR-FAM in routine clinical practice (including patients aged ≥ 65 years and those with pre-existing cardiovascular risk factors). Other objectives included change over time in patient-reported evaluation of physical and psychological impact of MS while taking PR-FAM, and change over time in physician-reported assessment of walking ability in MS patients taking PR-FAM. METHODS: Patients with MS newly prescribed PR-FAM were recruited (201 sites, 13 countries). Demographic/safety data were collected at enrolment through 12 months. Physician-rated Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) scores for walking ability, and Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29) were assessed. RESULTS: Safety analysis included 4646 patients with 3534.8 patient-years of exposure; median (range) age, 52.6 (21-85) years, 87.3% < 65 years, and 65.7% women. Treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were reported in 2448 (52.7%) patients, and serious TEAEs were reported in 279 (6.0%) patients, of whom 37 (< 1%) experienced treatment-emergent serious AEs (TESAEs) considered related to PR-FAM. AEs of special interest (AESI) occurred in 1799 (38.7%) patients, and serious AESI in 128 (2.8%) patients. Seventeen (< 1%) patients experienced actual events of seizure. Overall, 1158 (24.9%) patients discontinued treatment due to lack of efficacy. At 12 months, a greater proportion of patients on-treatment had improvement from baseline in CGI-I for walking ability versus those who discontinued (61% vs. 11%; p < 0.001). MSIS-29 physical impact score improved significantly for patients on-treatment for 12 months versus those who discontinued (mean change, baseline to 12 months: - 9.99 vs. - 0.34 points; p < 0.001). Results were similar for MSIS-29 psychological impact. CONCLUSION: No new safety concerns were identified in this real-world study, suggesting that routine risk-minimization measures are effective. CGI-I and MSIS-29 scores after 12 months treatment with PR-FAM treatment show clinical benefits consistent with those previously reported. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01480063.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".