Randomised trial of oral and intravenous methylprednisolone in acute relapses of multiple sclerosis. A randomised controlled trial comparing rehabilitation against standard therapy in multiple sclerosis patients receiving intravenous steroid treatment. A short-term randomized MRI study of high-dose oral vs intravenous methylprednisolone in MS. Methylprednisolone in multiple sclerosis: a comparison of oral with intravenous therapy at equivalent high dose.
An intravenous rather than oral course of methylprednisolone is often prescribed for treating acute relapses in multiple sclerosis (MS) despite the lack of evidence to support this route of administration. Our double-blind placebo-controlled randomised trial was designed to compare the efficacy of commonly used intravenous and oral steroid regimens in promoting recovery from acute relapses in MS.
                42 patients with clinically definite relapse in MS received oral, and 38 intravenous, methylprednisolone. Clinical measurements at entry and at 1 week, 4 weeks, 12 weeks, and 24 weeks included Kurtzke's expanded disability status scale (EDSS), Hauser's Ambulatory Index, and an arm-function index. The primary outcome criterion was a difference between the two treatment groups of one or more EDSS grades at 4 weeks.
                There were no significant differences between the two groups at any stage of the study in any measurement taken: the mean difference in EDSS at 4 weeks (adjusted for baseline level) was 0.07 grades more in those taking oral steroids (95% CI -0.46 to 0.60). The most optimistic outcome for intravenous therapy is an average benefit of less than half a grade improvement on EDSS over oral treatment.
                Since our study did not show any clear advantage of the intravenous regime we conclude that it is preferable to prescribe oral rather than intravenous steroids for acute relapses in MS for reasons of patient convenience, safety, and cost. There is evidence to support both the use of intravenous methylprednisolone (IVMP) in multiple sclerosis (MS) relapse and physiotherapy in the management of MS, but no studies have investigated the combination of steroids and rehabilitation together.
                To evaluate the benefits of IVMP with planned, comprehensive multidisciplinary team (MDT) care compared to IVMP with standard care.
                In this randomised controlled trial, patients confirmed to have had a definite MS relapse severe enough to warrant IVMP (1 g daily for three days) were randomised to two groups. The control group was managed according to the standard ward routine; the treatment group received planned coordinated multidisciplinary team assessment and treatment. Baseline assessments, including demographics and Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) were carried out on both groups. The primary outcome measures were Guy's Neurological Disability Scale (GNDS), and Amended Motor Club Assessment (AMCA). The secondary measures were the Barthel Index (BI), Human Activity Profile (HAP), and Short Form Item 36 Health Survey (SF-36). All measures have published data on reliability and validity. Measures were administered at one and three months.
                Forty subjects, including 27 females, completed data collection. There were no significant differences between the two groups at baseline. Results showed statistically significant differences in GNDS (p = 0.03), AMCA (p = 0.03), HAPM (p < 0.01), HAPA (p = 0.02), and BI (p = 0.02) at three months in favour of planned MDT care.
                This study indicates that combining steroids with planned MDT care is superior to administering them in a standard neurology or day ward setting. Further research is necessary in order to confirm this finding. To compare the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of IV methylprednisolone (IV MP) vs oral methylprednisolone (oMP) at equivalent high doses in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) experiencing a recent relapse.
                Patients with a clinical relapse within the previous 2 weeks and at least 1 gadolinium (Gd)-enhancing lesion on a screening brain MRI scan were included. Forty patients with MS were randomized to receive either 1 g/day for 5 days of oMP (20 patients) or 1 g/day for 5 days of IV MP (20 patients). Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and brain MRI (dual-echo and postcontrast T1-weighted scans) were assessed at baseline and at weeks 1 and 4. The study primary research question (endpoint) was to compare the efficacy of the 2 treatment routes in reducing the number of Gd-enhancing lesions after 1 week from treatment initiation. Secondary outcomes were safety, tolerability, and clinical efficacy profiles of the 2 routes of administration.
                The 2 groups showed a reduction of Gd-enhancing lesions over time (p = 0.002 for oMP and p = 0.001 for IV MP) with a "non-inferiority effect" between the 2 routes of administration at week 1. Both groups showed an improvement of EDSS over time (p < 0.001) without between-group difference at week 4. Both treatments were well-tolerated and adverse events were minimal and occurred similarly in the 2 treatment arms.
                Oral methylprednisolone (oMP) is as effective as IV methylprednisolone in reducing gadolinium-enhancing lesions in patients with MS soon after an acute relapse with similar clinical, safety, and tolerability profiles. This study provides class III evidence that 1 g oMP x 5 days is not inferior to 1 g IV MP x 5 days in reducing the number of gadolinium-enhancing lesions over a period of 1 week (mean difference in lesion reduction comparing IV MP to oMP is -20%, 95% confidence interval -48% to + 5%). A randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial of intravenous methylprednisolone versus oral methylprednisolone at equivalent high dose was carried out on 35 patients with an acute relapse of multiple sclerosis (MS). After baseline evaluation each was randomly allocated to oral treatment and intravenous placebo or intravenous treatment and oral placebo, receiving 500 mg of methylprednisolone for five consecutive days and with reassessment at days five and twenty-eight. There was no significant difference in response when disability or functional scores were compared in the two groups. Adverse effects were minor and equally distributed. In this study oral treatment with methylprednisolone was as effective as intravenous treatment in acute relapse of MS.
The analysis of the five included trials comparing intravenous versus oral steroid therapy for MS relapses do not demonstrate any significant differences in clinical (benefits and adverse events), radiological or pharmacological outcomes. Based on the evidence, oral steroid therapy may be a practical and effective alternative to intravenous steroid therapy in the treatment of MS relapses.